The John Delaney Thread

[backstothewall]

I'm no fan of him but the story is a bit thin imho. We all know the FAI are in a lot of debt. It's little surprise this sort of bridging loan is needed from time to time.

That being the case there would be an obvious conflict of interest if he was doing this for profit, but he hasn't done that. He has given the FAI a zero interest loan they simply would not have been offered on the open market.

[pineapple stu]

We don't know it was zero interest I think

It's also interesting that Delaney says it was a cheque - but they take five days to clear, so are hardly an ideal way to deal with a short-term cash flow issue?

Geysir's question as to how it all leaked is very pertinent too

Certainly possible that there's more to this than meets the eye.

[backstothewall]

The report I read in the Irish Times said the FAI accounts show a payment of 100k being received and a payment for the same amount going the other way a few months later.

https://www.irishtimes.com/sport/soccer/john-delaney-says-he-lent-fai-100-000-due-to-cash-flow-issue-1.3829205?mode=amp&utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

[geysir]

The report I read in the Irish Times said the FAI accounts show a payment of 100k being received and a payment for the same amount going the other way a few months later.

https://www.irishtimes.com/sport/soccer/john-delaney-says-he-lent-fai-100-000-due-to-cash-flow-issue-1.3829205?mode=amp&utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
I'd do it myself if I had the spare cash but why spend a small fortune of FAI funds to go to the courts to suppress the reporting of it? People ask questions when there's no transparency and especially where there's a concerted attempt to conceal accounting matters.
It's just so obvious the FAI accounts should be published as part of the annual report. Members have a right to know what's what.

'

[Eminence Grise]

How did they avoid a scenario where a salaried employee had financial leverage over the board of directors? Cashflow is one thing, but governance is another - and that's where I'd be looking if this was leaked to damage Delaney.

[pineapple stu]

Couple of little facts to note -

At 31 Dec 2016, the FAI's accounts showed 900k in the bank

In March 2017, 50k attended a home game v Wales. Surely that had positive cash flows?

Yet a month later, the FAI was so stuck for cash it had to take a cheque from Delaney and wait 5 days for it to clear?

It was then repaid a week after the next home game v Austria

The Sunday Times article says Delaney suggests this first emerged in his case with his ex-wife.

[geysir]

Delaney payment a real issue (https://www.irishtimes.com/sport/soccer/lack-of-transparency-over-delaney-payment-a-real-issue-for-the-fai-1.3829669)

Emmet Malone reports that the "loan" was not accounted for in the annual accounts.
'There was none (no account) in the annual accounts that followed for the period – not even, somewhat bewilderingly, an acknowledgement that it happened – and there is still none now.'
That could be a part of explanation why the FAI took the (Delaney inspired?) decision to waste thousands of euros in the high court trying to suppress the story.

[jbyrne]

the FAIs 2016 turnover was reported to be €50m (a record high at the time).
I therefore cant believe for 1 second that they needed that €100,000 a few months later. Surely an organisation with such a high turnover would have no problem obtaining or extending a bank overdraft in anycase?

[pineapple stu]

This has parallels with the recent Lowry case, where he put money in to his own company (though didn't take it back later) to redress taking personal payment of an invoice a few years earlier.

Lowry got a fine and a directorship ban. And that was about fair I thought.

A directorship ban was largely irrelevant to Lowry in his own company - but would it be more meaningful to the CEO of an organisation like the FAI?

[geysir]

I suppose a bit of proof, such as a copy of the bank statement for that month that the FAI were allegedly in desperate need of cash, is out of the question?

[Charlie Darwin]

Delaney payment a real issue (https://www.irishtimes.com/sport/soccer/lack-of-transparency-over-delaney-payment-a-real-issue-for-the-fai-1.3829669)

Emmet Malone reports that the "loan" was not accounted for in the annual accounts.
'There was none (no account) in the annual accounts that followed for the period – not even, somewhat bewilderingly, an acknowledgement that it happened – and there is still none now.'
That could be a part of explanation why the FAI took the (Delaney inspired?) decision to waste thousands of euros in the high court trying to suppress the story.
The case was taken by Delaney and not the FAI, according to the Sunday Times journalist,

[geysir]

That's even more bizarre. Going to the courts is just a trail of tears.

It's unlikely, but in the off chance that Delaney has to quit, would that mean he loses his peachy UEFA position?

[Charlie Darwin]

That's even more bizarre. Going to the courts is just a trail of tears.

It's unlikely, but in the off chance that Delaney has to quit, would that mean he loses his peachy UEFA position?
There's no requirement that you are employed by an association to sit on the executive, as far as I know.

[gufct]

https://www.sportireland.ie/Media/Latest_News/Sport%20Ireland%20Statement%20on%20FAI.html

[geysir]

Does 'the money was only resting in the account' argument not hold weight anymore?

[geysir]

No evidence of that, so far. I'm not sure about legal position but I would presume such an unusual transaction should have been noted in the F.A.I. accounts ? at least in the notes ? Given the amount of public money allocated to the FAI a high level of transparency should be a given. clearly its not.
also, why was an injunction sought ? and who paid the legal costs ?
The accounts that matter are the annual accounts and the FAI's annual accounts would be bound by company law to record such a transaction.
Reported in an indo article (https://www.independent.ie/sport/soccer/international-soccer/fai-undertaking-full-review-of-executive-governance-and-senior-management-structures-in-wake-of-delaney-loan-37927070.html) 'There no mention of the April 2017 bridging loan of €100,000 in the audited accounts presented in 2018 though the loan had been repaid by the year end´.

But is the omission that serious? money in, same money out.

Could JD be a saint .... in the disguise of a rogue?
From Emmet Malone's article (https://www.irishtimes.com/sport/soccer/john-delaney-says-he-lent-fai-100-000-due-to-cash-flow-issue-1.3829205?mode=amp&utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter) the FAI statement (last sunday) 'said the chief executive had donated back his €160,000 earnings from Uefa to the FAI.'

At last, the (alleged) whistleblower emerges (https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/news/alleged-whistleblower-sends-letter-to-dil-committee-on-fai-governance-37928690.html)
'The Oireachtas Transport and Sport Committee will seek legal advice on the contents of a letter from an alleged whistleblower it has received in relation to the FAI.

The letter makes a number of allegations regarding governance at the organisation.
It's understood members of the committee will seek advice on the letter today.'

[pineapple stu]

Interesting. Sport Ireland also want to investigate. https://www.sportireland.ie/Media/Latest_News/Sport%20Ireland%20Statement%20on%20FAI.html

Hopefully the whistleblower has something more substantial and hasn't gone all in too early

[NeverFeltBetter]

Delaney is due to sit before an Oireachtas Committee on April 10th, which has already delayed before. Some awkward questions are going to be asked.

[Kingdom]

Delaney is due to sit before an Oireachtas Committee on April 10th, which has already delayed before. Some awkward questions are going to be asked.

They need to be specific questions. If you're an obfuscator, then you can dodge awkward questions. Specific questions, requiring specific answers are what will kill him. The Oireachtas committee are unlikely to get rid of him, but they can force answers that will make it impossible for the FAI to retain him.

[jbyrne]

heard a member of the committee on the radio yesterday. most of the interview was the TD saying how great jd is and it was only his dedication to the fai that prompted the "loan". also said that jd needed to clarify the loan but you get the jist as to how it will go in front of the committee....

[paul_oshea]

So Delaneys not a director right. My first assumption on this was that its a form of Directors loans, where they are trying to avoid a higher tax bill. My second assumption is still similar thinking but not putting it up here.

THere is nothing sinister or pertinent about leakage. Mark is a fairly smart fella and did some good investigative journalism. Although it might be difficult to get tickets in the future :D

As I've said before this will have little affect on JD or the FAI. There's little appetite to replace JD and even less to find someone remotely capable.

The only way is if UEFA find him in disrepute. And i can't see that happening either. That or he murders someone :D

[Real ale Madrid]

As I've said before this will have little affect on JD or the FAI. There's little appetite to replace JD and even less to find someone remotely capable.


I can think of a half a dozen people that post here that would be more capable than Delaney.

[geysir]

So Delaneys not a director right. My first assumption on this was that its a form of Directors loans, where they are trying to avoid a higher tax bill. My second assumption is still similar thinking but not putting it up here.

THere is nothing sinister or pertinent about leakage. Mark is a fairly smart fella and did some good investigative journalism. Although it might be difficult to get tickets in the future :D

As I've said before this will have little affect on JD or the FAI. There's little appetite to replace JD and even less to find someone remotely capable.

The only way is if UEFA find him in disrepute. And i can't see that happening either. That or he murders someone :D
Delaney is a connected person to the FAI and a responsible part of the management.

Section 238 company act - loan that has been made by a director (or connected person) to a company or its holding company

[NeverFeltBetter]

heard a member of the committee on the radio yesterday. most of the interview was the TD saying how great jd is and it was only his dedication to the fai that prompted the "loan". also said that jd needed to clarify the loan but you get the jist as to how it will go in front of the committee....

Committee also includes Ruth Coppinger, Imelda Staunton and Catherine Murphy, the last of which has already been on media making pointed comments about Delaney's actions. There are plenty of people on it who won't toe the "Ah sure he's grand" line that has sometimes been made around JD.

[pineapple stu]

Delaney is a connected person to the FAI and a responsible part of the management.

Section 238 company act - loan that has been made by a director (or connected person) to a company or its holding company
How is he a connected party? (S220 of the same Act). Does he have more than 50% voting power (as in, himself; ignore his lackies)

[pineapple stu]

In any event, he is a director of the FAI. Or certainly, he's described as such in the annual return of the stadium company

[geysir]

How is he a connected party? (S220 of the same Act). Does he have more than 50% voting power (as in, himself; ignore his lackies)

Fair enough, then he's a CEO aka managing director of a top 1000 company :)

[SkStu]

I can think of a half a dozen people that post here that would be more capable than Delaney.

it would be tough from Canada, RAM. Thanks though.

[Diggs246]

[QUOTE=pineapple stu;1995574]How is he a connected party? (S220 of the same Act). Does he have more than 50% voting power (as in, himself; ignore his lackies)[/QUOT
If your deemed a shadow director, which he is, regardless of what's on the CRO. Your responsibile

[geysir]

In any event, he is a director of the FAI. Or certainly, he's described as such in the annual return of the stadium company
I haven't a clue but it doesn't sound such a serious omission to me from a company accounts point of view, the accountant omitted to mention it in the report, but nothing devious (according to the accountant).
A mild slap on the wrist from the revenue inspector?

Of course there may other motives involved, as well as with the 150k free gift but I'd say that's outside the brief of these 2 committees. About the only smoking gun would be the a bank account statement from the time the FAI were supposedly on its knees and desperate for 100k.

[SkStu]

How is he a connected party? (S220 of the same Act). Does he have more than 50% voting power (as in, himself; ignore his lackies)
If your deemed a shadow director, which he is, regardless of what's on the CRO. Your responsibile

isn't shadow directorship a matter for Courts to determine? From what I recall on the law on this, it is also a particularly high threshold to prove.

[SkStu]

I haven't a clue but it doesn't sound such a serious omission to me from a company accounts point of view, the accountant omitted to mention it in the report, but nothing devious (according to the accountant).
A mild slap on the wrist from the revenue inspector?

Of course there may other motives involved, as well as with the 150k free gift but I'd say that's outside the brief of these 2 committees. About the only smoking gun would be the a bank account statement from the time the FAI were supposedly on its knees and desperate for 100k.

I have to agree generally with you on this. I just do not see a whole lot here that puts Delaney in jeopardy. That is not to say that there isn't more dirt to be unearthed or whistleblown on but, as it stands, this wont do it.

[pineapple stu]

Fair enough, then he's a CEO aka managing director of a top 1000 company :)
CRO doesn't care about CEOs or Managing Directors. If you're one of those but not a director, then disclosure rules don't apply. But I think he is a director, which moves it on to point 2.



I haven't a clue but it doesn't sound such a serious omission to me from a company accounts point of view, the accountant omitted to mention it in the report
The accountant doesn't prepare the accounts. If the FAI didn't tell the accountants something, that's the FAI's fault, not the accountants'

That's why I referenced the Lowry case as a possible comparison - I agree it all looks relatively minor right now, but Lowry got a 5-year ban from being a director. That didn't hurt him, but it may hurt Delaney

[geysir]

The accountant doesn't prepare the accounts. If the FAI didn't tell the accountants something, that's the FAI's fault, not the accountants'

That's why I referenced the Lowry case as a possible comparison - I agree it all looks relatively minor right now, but Lowry got a 5-year ban from being a director. That didn't hurt him, but it may hurt Delaney
Then it's the FAI as an association would be responsible for the omission, not just Delaney?

I don't know the ins and out of the Lowry case but I'd say it included much more serious accounting issues.

[Diggs246]

isn't shadow directorship a matter for Courts to determine? From what I recall on the law on this, it is also a particularly high threshold to prove.

No. Any investigating power can determine that he is a de facto director ( shadow) i.e. a liquidator or ODCE inspector etc . He could argue it in court etc but he wouldn't have a hope.

[pineapple stu]

Then it's the FAI as an association would be responsible for the omission, not just Delaney?.
Its directors. Of which Delaney is one. (And probably really just Delaney as it was his transaction)

The Lowry case involved him putting money back into his own company. Similar to here, albeit that we don't yet know the background (ie the reason) to this case.

[geysir]

Its directors. Of which Delaney is one. (And probably really just Delaney as it was his transaction)

The Lowry case involved him putting money back into his own company. Similar to here, albeit that we don't yet know the background (ie the reason) to this case.
The Lowry case involved much more serious accounting issues, something similar to a non declaration of income , a deception which went on for 5 or so years and an attempted (botched) cover up after the fact was known.

I see now that the FAI as an association have stood up to fill in the breach, take responsibility and the flak, meanwhile Delaney takes cover. That's the smart sporting move.
Take the credit when your team wins, but struggles are a club issue.

[pineapple stu]

My point is we don't yet know what the Delaney case involves.

Maybe it's similar, maybe it's not. If it is similar, then the question is what damage would Lowry's penalty do Delaney? If it's not similar, I can only imagine the Delaney case is less serious, and so any penalty would be too.

The only mitigating factor in that is the difference between Lowry's company (owned by him) and the FAI (a public body)

[paul_oshea]

Quote all the acts you want. There is no difference.

No implications for either party as it was a simple interest free loan. No reporting obligations either. Once all completed within the following company accounts year.

Lowry's case was completely different.

[pineapple stu]

You've ignored the first part of my post though - we don't know what the Delaney case is about

If it was a simple interest-free loan for quick cash flow - paid by cheque because that's naturally the quickest way of getting money into your account to deal with a short-term cash flow issue - then yes, it's completely different. Then the questions arise as to is the FAI insolvent and why would you renew O'Neill's contract before a play-off? And it should still be disclosed in the accounts; it doesn't matter that the balance at year-end was nil

But if there's some element of tax evasion in whatever arrangement was entered into, then no, it's not completely different. And it's worth someone checking that out because a 50m turnover company shouldn't have its easiest, quickest cash source as being a cheque from the director

[paul_oshea]

If there is anything more about it than this 100k i.e. some other payments then yes you are right there could be some issues. However that's not what has been spoken about.

[pineapple stu]

But the whole point here is that this whole thing is asking more questions than it's answering - geysir has posted a good list. So to take Delaney's explanation as gospel would be just wrong

[geysir]

Quote all the acts you want. There is no difference.

No implications for either party as it was a simple interest free loan. No reporting obligations either. Once all completed within the following company accounts year.

Lowry's case was completely different.

The consensus (of people who know their stuff) is that the FAI are required under the company law to account for the transaction in the annual accounts.

[paul_oshea]

WHoever those people are you speak of must be very knowledgeable on common knowledge :D You misunderstood what I said. No tax reporting, but disclosed in the FAI accounts, only if he is a Director.

[pineapple stu]

He is a director

[pineapple stu]

Noel Rock TD says Delaney should resign (https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/john-delaney-should-quit-his-fai-role-claims-td-37939889.html).


"We pay a Rolls-Royce salary, €360,000 a year, for John Delaney. Do we get a Rolls-Royce performance out of that? I'm not sure," he added.

Mr Rock claimed there were "clear issues of governance, of competence and of finance" within the FAI after reports emerged about the loan Mr Delaney paid to the association.

Rock is a member of the Oireachtas committee Delaney faces next month. Makes that meeting slightly more juicy at least.

[Stuttgart88]

Committee also includes Ruth Coppinger, Imelda Staunton and Catherine Murphy, the last of which has already been on media making pointed comments about Delaney's actions. There are plenty of people on it who won't toe the "Ah sure he's grand" line that has sometimes been made around JD.Is John O’Mahony still on the Committtee? He used to be Chair. I think he’sa Senator now, not a TD.

I wrote to him a few years ago and hounded him on Twitter asking for a FAI governance review. No reply.

I wrote to Leo Varadkar when he was minister for Transport, Tourism & Sport. He replied that FAI’s governance wasn’t really for him to get involved with.

[wonder88]

Would many agree with Noel Rock that this loan story will influence how the team will perform against Gibraltar? Really
Also I think he voted full support for Simon Harris, in relation to his handling of the Children's hospital project, just a short time ago.
His ticket-touting bill is in my view is a waste of Dail time, when you have Health service and housing issues that badly need sorting.
Understand and agree that politicans must investigate when public money is involved, but lets wait until we find out more.

[jbyrne]

Would many agree with Noel Rock that this loan story will influence how the team will perform against Gibraltar?

probably not but i think most fans are sick of the build up to every international we play being dominated by side shows such as delaneys loan, alleged bust ups and player availability / declaration issues

[pineapple stu]

https://mobile.twitter.com/Quinner61/status/1109504249048825861?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcam p%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet