Bohs SCP discussion

[marinobohs]

In terms of the bigger picture, it reads like Bohs absolutely need someone (Albion, Danniger or otherwise) to complete the purchase of the ground pre-2012 in order to pay off the €4m loan facility.

Unless Albion is going to fund the purchase from cash, I'd say fairly confidently that no bank is going to touch a property deal in 2010.

For Danninger, read NAMA. If Danniger and their bankers aren't irrevocably committed, they won't be buying the land as the decision is in NAMA's hands, not Danningers.

Whilst Phisboro isn't a field in Mullingar, in the current market it may as well be. To have value you need both a seller and a willing buyer and it sounds like Albion are the only show in town. I'd be surprised if Bohs get 30% of the terms of the original Danninger deal. That will obviously still be enough to guarantee survival, if not the world domination that was previously predicted.

At present bohs have a deqal with Danninger RE the purchase of Dalymount (as widely known). That was held up due to a seperate contract dispute with Albion which has now been resolved.
It is now a matter of Danninger and Bohs executing the original contract as agreed, if either party are not in a position to do so or do not wish to do so then they may seek to exit the contract.
In the event, and only then, that the contract in voided Bohs may seek an alternative buyer and Albion have indicated an interest. How that would pan out finance wise is in the lap of the Gods, although Dalymount is still a valuable site given the zoning of the area everyone knows property values have plummeted.
Incidentally the NAMA legislation allows the Agency to loan additional money to allow completion of certain projects to maximise the value therefore it is not definite that any project transferred to NAMA is not followed through (a budget of 6 Billion was talked about for such investments but I am not sure what is in the bill).
Lots and lots of impoderables, including the possibility of renegotiating the repayment date for the 4 million loan due in 2012 so lots of fun ahead for those seemingly facinated by the machinations of Bohs accounts

[passerrby]

ya there are two options that bohs will look at
A. the points deductions should only apply to the 2008 season as the mistakes/errors occured under the old regime or
B. they be given a 10 points deduction but they be given 11 points for some other reason thereby starting with 1 point netgain.

[Réiteoir]

I'm starting a sweep on how many points Bohs start next season without. I'm taking 10. :D

And they'll still finish higher than Shamrock Rovers...

[de bowez]

The point is that there's no money involved in giving Albion E1m and getting E1m straight back off them. But it could help you spend E650k more on wages and not fall foul of the SCP.


1. We are paying out 1.1m and getting 1m back. 2. We do not have an extra 650k to throw away on wages.



In terms of the bigger picture, it reads like Bohs absolutely need someone (Albion, Danniger or otherwise) to complete the purchase of the ground pre-2012 in order to pay off the €4m loan facility.

Unless Albion is going to fund the purchase from cash, I'd say fairly confidently that no bank is going to touch a property deal in 2010.

For Danninger, read NAMA. If Danniger and their bankers aren't irrevocably committed, they won't be buying the land as the decision is in NAMA's hands, not Danningers.

Whilst Phisboro isn't a field in Mullingar, in the current market it may as well be. To have value you need both a seller and a willing buyer and it sounds like Albion are the only show in town. I'd be surprised if Bohs get 30% of the terms of the original Danninger deal. That will obviously still be enough to guarantee survival, if not the world domination that was previously predicted.

Albion have a deal to redevelop the Phibsoro shopping centre and the Dalymount land has been rezoned nicely for them. The land is worth a lot of money for them and any deal is gtd to come with a new stadium within a certain area. As for the €4m loan if there is money coming Zurich will be happy to wait a bit longer and take more interest.

[Jicked]

Albion have a deal to redevelop the Phibsoro shopping centre and the Dalymount land has been rezoned nicely for them. The land is worth a lot of money for them and any deal is gtd to come with a new stadium within a certain area. As for the €4m loan if there is money coming Zurich will be happy to wait a bit longer and take more interest.

Do you not wonder why Albion would build Bohs a new stadium? Bohs are in a horrible bargaining position, yet you expect Albion to gift them a multi-million euro stadium in the current climate, despite knowing Bohs would bite their hand off for pretty much anything that keeps the club in existence in five years time?

[pineapple stu]

1. We are paying out 1.1m and getting 1m back. 2. We do not have an extra 650k to throw away on wages.
Under the SCP, an extra E1m in income means you can spend an extra E650k on wages without breaking the SCP. Bohs have shown that not having the cash isn't exactly a problem with them, as they've just borrowed it in the last couple of years. However, without the E1m from Danninger in 2008, Bohs would not have met the SCP for 2009 and would have been punished for their excess spending.

Ceteris paribus (and the extra fundraising and what have you is noted), the E1m from this deal would allow you to spend an extra E650k on wages without FAI sanctions. Alternatively, you could in 2011 pay back the E1m, enter into a new E1m deal and be allowed to spend an extra E650k on wages without FAI sanctions.

[OneRedArmy]

Albion have a deal to redevelop the Phibsoro shopping centre and the Dalymount land has been rezoned nicely for them. The land is worth a lot of money for them and any deal is gtd to come with a new stadium within a certain area. As for the €4m loan if there is money coming Zurich will be happy to wait a bit longer and take more interest.Do Albion have funding in place for the development?

That notwithstanding, when you only have one possible buyer for a property and a seller that needs to sell, that has a significant impact on the price.

There's no doubt there's still value in Dalymount, but its significantly less than the previous agreement with Danninger and unless Albion have already funded it its hard to see anything happening imminently.

[Schumi]

1. We are paying out 1.1m and getting 1m back. 2. We do not have an extra 650k to throw away on wages.

Take a hypothetical situation. Club X has an income of €2.5m from gate receipts, sponsorship, fundraising, merchandise sales and wherever else clubs get money from. They managed to only spend €200k on running the club outside of wages so they have €2.3m that they could spend on wages but are only allowed to spend €1.95m.

Club X then pays €1.1m to company Y and in a separate deal receives €1m from company Y. Their income is now €3.5m and they have €2.2m available to spend on wages (having spent €100k net on the deals with company Y) and are allowed to spend all of it.

My question is: is this allowed under the SCP? If it is, it looks like a big loophole to me.


I am not claiming the Bohs are doing anything like this to circumvent licensing, I'm merely interested in whether this is allowed.

[de bowez]

Do Albion have funding in place for the development?

That notwithstanding, when you only have one possible buyer for a property and a seller that needs to sell, that has a significant impact on the price.

There's no doubt there's still value in Dalymount, but its significantly less than the previous agreement with Danninger and unless Albion have already funded it its hard to see anything happening imminently.

As far as I know the council and Tesco are heavily involved as far as funding goes.

While Albion definitely hold all the cards they do need the land, it made sense for all concerned to drop the legal case and renegotiate. I would guess any deal will be worth around 50% less than the Carroll one. A new stadium and clearing the debts would be a good outcome. Obviously it would also be easier for Albion to build us a stadium than give us cash with the way things are at the moment.

[Schumi]

I would assume not, as 1.1m out and 1m in is a net negative on turnover.

Assuming its all booked in the same season though.....

That's what i would have thought but the Sun article quoted here (http://foot.ie/forums/showthread.php?p=1298468#post1298468) seems to say different.

[Jicked]

As far as I know the council and Tesco are heavily involved as far as funding goes.

While Albion definitely hold all the cards they do need the land, it made sense for all concerned to drop the legal case and renegotiate. I would guess any deal will be worth around 50% less than the Carroll one. A new stadium and clearing the debts would be a good outcome. Obviously it would also be easier for Albion to build us a stadium than give us cash with the way things are at the moment.

But why would Albion agree to that? Why wouldn't their new position be to (for example) offer to clear your debts, and not build the stadium. Bohemians would surely still have to bite their hand off, so what do Albion gain by offering a new stadium?

[de bowez]

But why would Albion agree to that? Why wouldn't their new position be to (for example) offer to clear your debts, and not build the stadium. Bohemians would surely still have to bite their hand off, so what do Albion gain by offering a new stadium?

Because it ends a legal challenge, because they make far more out of it, 1st option is good for them, due to the rezoning someone else would come in with a better offer if they only offered peanuts.

Obviously best case scenario is still that Carroll wins every euromillions draw for the next year and we pay Albion 10m but I still havent seen anything to make me not trust the new board.

[marinobohs]

But why would Albion agree to that? Why wouldn't their new position be to (for example) offer to clear your debts, and not build the stadium. Bohemians would surely still have to bite their hand off, so what do Albion gain by offering a new stadium?

All the arguments here are predicated on Albion as the only party interested in Dalymount - made by the same people who told us for months NOBODY would buy Dalymount !
As I outlined at present we have a deal with Danninger and as such require no other interested party.
In the possible event that Danninger seek to exit the deal we have a back up option (surely good business sense for once) - Albion - wishing to open discussions, this does not rule out a third or more parties showing an interest (that is as yet unclear). wishful thinking by opposition fans does not a business plan make.......

[Jicked]

I think the wishful thinking is being done by the Bohemians fans if you're even considering the possibility of Danninger fulfilling the deal, let alone talk of sparking a bidding war.

[marinobohs]

I think the wishful thinking is being done by the Bohemians fans if you're even considering the possibility of Danninger fulfilling the deal, let alone talk of sparking a bidding war.

No, of course not. Nobody is interested in buying Dalymount and we do not have a contract with Danninger. Really, it was all a dream....:rolleyes:

[pineapple stu]

That's not what he said. He was talking about Danninger - a bankrupt company - fulfilling the contract.

[marinobohs]

That's not what he said. He was talking about Danninger - a bankrupt company - fulfilling the contract.

I am not aware that Danninger have withdrawn from the contract ??????? perhaps you know more about that. In the event that it does occur the club have at least one back up option even at this early stage, not sure what the problem is - but keep pointing out possible worst scenario if thats all you are interested in :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

[Jicked]

I am not aware that Danninger have withdrawn from the contract ??????? perhaps you know more about that.

I know other fans, especially Rovers fans, get lambasted by bohs fans for supposing to know more than Bohemians own fans when it comes to affairs at that club, or appearing to pontificate, but seriously how can you expect people not to seriously question what planet you're living on, even if Bohs fans dont want to, when you're talking about Danninger going through with that deal.

[pineapple stu]

I am not aware that Danninger have withdrawn from the contract ???????
Again, who said they'd withdrawn from the contract?

Stop making things up and reply to the points made if you're going to reply at all.

[marinobohs]

I know other fans, especially Rovers fans, get lambasted by bohs fans for supposing to know more than Bohemians own fans when it comes to affairs at that club, or appearing to pontificate, but seriously how can you expect people not to seriously question what planet you're living on, even if Bohs fans dont want to, when you're talking about Danninger going through with that deal.

Nobody said Danninger would complete the deal (as somebody said "stop making things up"). I said Bohs had a legal contract with Danninger - this is a fact.
In the event that, at some point, Danninger do not wish or are unable to fulfill the contract then Bohs could seek compensation or renegotiate the deal with Danninger OR agree a release from the contract and seek interested parties elsewhere (one such party has already indicated an interest - Albion).
As stated earlier NAMA does have a provision to complete contracts so the position RE Danninger is unclear. Feel free to speculate but do try and bring some balance to the discussion.

[pineapple stu]

In the event that, at some point, Danninger do not wish or are unable to fulfill the contract then Bohs could seek compensation or renegotiate the deal with Danninger
Sorry - you reckon (a) you could get compensation or renegotiate with Danninger in the event that they are unable to fulfill the contract (because they're bankrupt)? Good luck with that.

(b) Danninger are surely the ones entitled to compensation from you for wasting their time selling them something that wasn't yours to sell?

[marinobohs]

[QUOTE=BYCTWD;
Best case, Danninger withdraw formally and Albion step in. You cover your current debts and possibly a bit more and have a few years to try and find a new stadium and pray to Queen Victoria that DIT move into Grangegorman and yourself and Shels groundshare.[/QUOTE]

.........And I am making things up !

[marinobohs]

that.

(b) Danninger are surely the ones entitled to compensation from you for wasting their time selling them something that wasn't yours to sell?

basis for that please, or are we in "make it up land" again ?

[Mr A]

Because Bohs made a deal with them when they already had agreed to sell part of the land to Albion?

[pineapple stu]

And it's a question. I obviously can't provide a source for a question, otherwise I wouldn't have to ask the question.

But it seems logical, based on Mr A's observation.

[marinobohs]

Because Bohs made a deal with them when they already had agreed to sell part of the land to Albion?

I understand that there is no question of Bohs breaching any part of the contract with Danninger, the recent arrangement with Albion ensures that such a possibility will not aise (that was the reason for the arrangement). Whatever possibilities about Danninger not completing the contract (and we are all aware of them) suggesting Bohs are in beach contract is without any basis in fact.

[HulaHoop]

I understand that there is no question of Bohs breaching any part of the contract with Danninger, the recent arrangement with Albion ensures that such a possibility will not aise (that was the reason for the arrangement). Whatever possibilities about Danninger not completing the contract (and we are all aware of them) suggesting Bohs are in beach contract is without any basis in fact.

Ehhh have you forgotten the High Court judgement that Bohs lost?

[pineapple stu]

In fairness, what he's saying is that by sorting out the problem with Albion (which caused the High Court ruling), they'll then be free to carry out the contract with Danninger.

[pineapple stu]

.... and if they can't carry out the contract with Danninger, Albion will offer the same terms......
Absolutely, but at least that isn't hindered by the High Court ruling.

[marinobohs]

Technically, of course not.

But the reality is the future of their club is in the hands of people who had to go to the High Court to get Bohs to even admit they had a deal in place, of which they had drawn down money unknown to members.

My point is that they are unlikely to do Bohs any favours. Put another way, how good do you think relations are between Albion and the two Gerry's?


Bohs are not the club that spend their time looking for "favours" ;). Albion, Danninger or whoever will do a deal with Bohs because they believe they can make money on it, simple as that.
There is currently NO legal action involving Bohs and Albion OR Danninger
The options on the future sale are as outlined.
The future of the club is in the hands of the members of Bohemian FC,
If you prefer to believe we will be ground sharing in Grangegorman with Shels then fine, but don't pretend this wild speculation is based on anything apart from your view on the club involved (unless you can produce facts to substansiate it) :rolleyes:.

[marinobohs]

Ehhh have you forgotten the High Court judgement that Bohs lost?

Contract with DANNINGER. High Court case with ALBION, try and keep up :rolleyes:

[pineapple stu]

There is currently NO legal action involving Bohs and Albion OR Danninger
Incidentally, as you repeat that, have you a link to show that Bohs have dropped their Supreme Court appeal?

[passerrby]

i think its a case of a lot of wishful thinking .... on both sides
Incidently does a deal have to be completed before the financial submissions deadline

[Dalymountrower]

i think its a case of a lot of wishful thinking .... on both sides
Incidently does a deal have to be completed before the financial submissions deadline

You can be forgiven for concluding that the previous few pages relate to the SCP, they don`t.
The potential "deal " with Albion has no impact on the 2009 SCP or on financial projections for the 2010 SCP . It may however have future financial benefit for the club in that it would ensure that the Danninger deal is unencumbered and can proceed if Danninger has the funds (unlikely as that might be.) In the event that Danninger cannot proceed it will be a matter for the club to consider other offers, one of which may be from Albion.

[pineapple stu]

You can be forgiven for concluding that the previous few pages relate to the SCP, they don`t.
Not what the article posted by debowez previously in the thread says -


The vote also ensures Bohs will comply with the Salary Cost Protocol which dictates players' wages must not exceed 65 per cent of revenue.

They will achieve that by drawing down a portion of a €1m payment due from Albion.

[micls]

To answer Micls question in the original post, the accounts were presented on the 21st of Dec and recommendations forwarded to the Licencing Committee on the 22nd, so its safe to assume that Bohs aren't immedialtely and unambigiously in the clear on the SCP which they are under sanction for breaching.

So, no, it isn't a mere formaility that it will be lifted.

But Bohs will know either way. They'l be well aware of money in and money out and it's a fairly straightforward thing to calculate 65% of it and know if your under.

[Dalymountrower]

Not what the article posted by debowez previously in the thread says -


"The Sun" is hardly the paper of record, there was absoloutely no connecton with the SCP made by those club officials proposing a settlement with Albion. There may, if an arrangement is concluded with Albion, be consequential income to be taken into account in future calculations of future SCP`s.

Through the hard work and financial contributions made by members supporters players and club employees and stunning successes on the field of play, we just about made it under the wire on the 65%. Get over it.

As for next season, I would say that meeting the new SCP arrangement will be difficult for us but will be acheivable. If there is some arrangement finalised with a purchaser of Dalymount which can legitimately be counted as income in accordance with the SCP in 2010,then obviously that will make acheiving the SCP a lot easier.

[pineapple stu]

"The Sun" is hardly the paper of record
Ah now. The tabloids are usually very good with regards LoI rumours. I don't think you can dismiss an article just because it's in The Sun. If you have other reasons, feel free to put them out there, but you can't dismiss things just like that. Or are you accusing the paper of deliberately misrepresenting the Bohs EGM?

[Dalymountrower]

Ah now. The tabloids are usually very good with regards LoI rumours. I don't think you can dismiss an article just because it's in The Sun. If you have other reasons, feel free to put them out there, but you can't dismiss things just like that. Or are you accusing the paper of deliberately misrepresenting the Bohs EGM?

No, I`m just stating that they mistakenly mixed up two quite seperate matters. Admittedly its a complex set of issues which at times has confused even the most assiduous posters on the topic on this site;)
I would agree that the Sun does have a track record of reporting rumours as facts.
I attended the said EGM and know what was proposed.

[marinobohs]

Incidentally, as you repeat that, have you a link to show that Bohs have dropped their Supreme Court appeal?
Sorry Stu, don't have a link (and not aware of one) but it was mentioned at the EGM that the new arrangement would take away the need for an appeal (Thank God, judging on our form in the Courts :() I expect it would be included in the terms of the agreement with Albion when finalised.

[micls]

But thats self evidently not true, as they are under sanction. They got it wrong already this season.


I doubt very much they 'got it wrong'. Id imagine they chose to ignore it and subsequently got punished.

This time however, if they choose to ignore it, the embargo wont (shouldnt) be lifted therefore theyll be paying money to players that cant play.

None of that means they dont know one way or another, its still quite easy to work out 65%.

1) They know they are under the 65% therfore are signing players
2) They know they are over the 65% are signing players anyway in a show of financial recklessness Tom Coughlan would be proud of and hoping for the best.

Either way they know one way or another if there accountants(or anyone with a calculator) can count.

[osarusan]

When will the FAI decide if teams were under the 65% SCP for the season just finished? And when will/did the relevant paperwork have to be submitted? Is/was it possible to alter/amend the paperwork after the deadline has passed?

[Doomofman]

I'm pretty sure there's a meeting coming up on Monday to do with some aspect of licensing.... Could be wrong though

[micls]

How about option 3? They have put a fix/fudge in place and hope the FAI will accept it. They clearly haven't (straight off at least), hence the embargo not being lifted last year as predicted by de bowezzz on here....

That comes under 2.

Have the FAI even sat down to discuss this mess yet? Last years SCP etc?

[CMcC]

How about option 3? They have put a fix/fudge in place and hope the FAI will accept it. They clearly haven't (straight off at least), hence the embargo not being lifted last year as predicted by de bowezzz on here....

Do you know when the embargo was to be lifted? Is there some sort of meeitng the FAI have to pour over the books to come to that decision? If so when is/was that scheduled please? And when are announcements of their findings scheduled to be made public?

[SkStu]

what recommendations did the league make on the 22nd of December and to whom? And can you disclose the nature of the recommendations made on the 22nd of December and if you could provide a link that would be great too.

Also, you were coming out with this definitive line (embargo will not be lifted for Bohs) well prior to December 22nd so was that all a big steaming pile of sh**e too like the rest of the guff you spout?

[pineapple stu]

Linky. (http://www.eleven-a-side.com/bohemians/news.asp?n=37829)

*Waits for some manner of apologies from Bohs fans...*

[SkStu]

so where does that say that the embargo will not be lifted for Bohemians which is BY's claim?

[pineapple stu]

BYCTWD's claim is that the embargo hasn't been lifted. He's correct, it seems.

The link doesn't say it won't be lifted, but it does a hell of a lot more to back up his posts on the topic so far than Bohs fans'.

[SkStu]

no, his claim has always been that Bohemians will not have the transfer embargo lifted.

And the link itself doesnt amount to much - importantly there are no quotes from the FAI. Maybe the Star article goes into more detail, gives sources and quotes, i dont know.

What would be interesting is if any other clubs who were placed under transfer embargo (im pretty sure we werent the only ones) have had theirs lifted. Then i would start to get concerned as to whether we were in trouble after all.