View Full Version : Revenue After Shels Again
Dodge
14/08/2006, 11:05 AM
OOOhhh is wws's secret identity about to be revealed? Dun dun dun...
chippie0001
14/08/2006, 11:20 AM
shamrock rovers employ all tehir players as sub contractors or something so they dont handle players tax at all now
its up to their own players to sort themselves out
maybe the way to go now?
That same rumour floats about for Shels. There is no way it is true, I looked into it at Bohs and its 100% illegal. Maybe for part time players with other jobs you can make a case, for full time players not a hope in hell.
That same rumour floats about for Shels. There is no way it is true, I looked into it at Bohs and its 100% illegal. Maybe for part time players with other jobs you can make a case, for full time players not a hope in hell.
sorry chippie
you're right - it is for part time players in other employ as well as football
manic da hoop
14/08/2006, 11:45 AM
Sorry, but could someone please explain to me what an earth is "historical" debt? Either you owe someone money or you don't! Does calling it "historical" kind of make it alright if you haven't bothered to pay them? If so, why don't I try defaulting on my mortgage repayments and just say to my bank when they eventually come knocking, "ah, sure it's just historical - you gave me my mortgage ages ago, didn't you? I'll get back to you with my repayments when I'm good and ready."....eh, I don't think so:o
Dodge
14/08/2006, 12:02 PM
In fairness not sure Revenue accept that as an excuse, just gullible fans.
Schumi
14/08/2006, 12:09 PM
hopefully thats the last we hear of shels from now on
i look forward to the arguments on here on what we should do with theie "expunged" results.
Thankfully Pats thought ahead and lost to them earlier in the season
I think we may have overdone it though.
passerrby
14/08/2006, 12:17 PM
thanks btid.
i think option 2 seems the more likely but that's just speculation.
Thankfully I'm working right next to the four courts and would enjoy nothing more than to be present if Shels/Accolade are wound up.
Im half way around the world but i think its our duty to all make it home for any wind up order involving ollie
TonyD
14/08/2006, 12:20 PM
sorry chippie
you're right - it is for part time players in other employ as well as football
Irrespective of whether a player is part-time or full time, there is no way a club could get away with deeming a player a sub-contractor. I've some experience with this(though it does go back a number of years.) It's fairly common practice in the building industry, but not applicable to a football club. Players are employees of clubs - full stop. If any club tried the sub-contractor angle it would go to Revenue/Social Welfare for a determination and they wouldn't stand a chance of getting away with it.
pineapple stu
14/08/2006, 12:37 PM
In fairness not sure Revenue accept that as an excuse, just gullible fans.
Speaking of gullible fans, check out the Shels board (http://forum.shelbournefc.ie/chat/viewtopic.php?t=6429&start=0) where one fan (and in fairness to them, it is just one fan this time - the rest seem to have a resigned silence, probably tinged with hope that ploughing money into Shelbourne FC Ltd, a dormant company, will save them) reckons that, as fans and therefore creditors of Accolade, all they have to do is turn up and oppose the winding up petition like the notice says. :D:D
I can't see how it could be historical debt though - would have thought the initial settlement would have included all back debt.
paudie
14/08/2006, 12:45 PM
Paying an "estimate" of tax based on the overall net wage bill is a ridiculous and embarassing procedure for a company to admit to be doing, not to mention in contravention of the law, yet here was a chairman of a "big" club happily saying in to a National newspaper that "this is the way its done".
I'd imagine City are/were paying a monthly PAYE/PRSI Direct Debit figure to Revenue with the balance being payable in January each year. It's a very standard practice for any business.
Obviously at the start of the year you have to estimate what the monthly figure will be so it won't be same as the "Exact" monthly figure. This is what Lennox meant I imagine, though he didn't expalin it very well.
I presume City's monthly Direct Debit for 2005 was too small(possibly deliberately), and they were left with a big balance for 2005, didn't pay it in Jan 2006 so the Revenue came after them.
I'm sure Revenue demanded a more realistic monthly DD be paid in 2006.
paudie
14/08/2006, 12:48 PM
Stato
Shels have already done a deal on the Tolka lease and have been receive cash from the developer over the past few years. There are rumours circulating that Shels have to be out of Tolka very soon [I heard it from a Shels fan to begin with].
The lease may have been worth a lot once but its only a few months since Ollie had to stump up over 300k to the revenue so I wonder how he got that? My guess is he got it from the developer who in turn will give Ollie 400k less when the time comes to settle up on the lease.
That's what I thought too.
Aren't Shels likely to be in Santry next season?
pineapple stu
14/08/2006, 12:48 PM
paudie - You would then monitor the DDs and ensure they are adequate, increasing them if necessary.
You also wouldn't leave historic debt there - you'd settle it with your annual P35.
Bottom line - Cork's method of paying their tax was a disgrace and their attempt to fob it off on their accountants even more. Ultimately, the accountants advise the company, but the directors are responsible. And it's responsibility which Lennox was trying to drop.
I presume City's monthly Direct Debit for 2005 was too small(possibly deliberately), and they were left with a big balance for 2005, didn't pay it in Jan 2006 so the Revenue came after them.
This, unfortunately, is too simplistic. First off, if you pay monthly by DD, you only make one PAYE return, which is your P35, filed in February after the year end. Second off, it doesn't explain why there was historical debt going back three and more years. Third off, the tax charge would be roughly the same each month; even less in December if there are players on contract just for the season. So if the December payment was well low, the others would have been far lower. WHich would have given the club time to spot that something was wrong and to sort it.
chippie0001
14/08/2006, 12:56 PM
Lads,
The bottom line is the revenue do not seek to wind up a company for underpaying a DD etc. They do so when repeated attempts to solve the matter have failed. If is usually the revenue's last course of action as if the company is wound up they won't get all their money so it is not in their interests.
The Shels one again baffles me, love to know how they owe money again only 3/4 months later. Obviously Ollie goes for any pr is better than no pr.
paudie
14/08/2006, 12:57 PM
City would be far from the first business I've come across to try and use the Revenue a method of financing ie put off paying them as long as you can get away with it.
If you're lucky you can get away with it for a while but EL clubs have been targetted by the Revenue since Rovers went under so City got caught big time this year.
Not saying its right but this stuff happens in business. Hopefully City, having got their fingers burned, will cop on in the future.
bad mongo
14/08/2006, 12:57 PM
Not necessarily. They're taking a big gamble but one day it might just pay off.
Why own an asset that's earning you very little money. Turn that asset into hard cash that can be used to fund a team capable of reaching the group stages of the Champions League and you'll have sufficient income thereafter to keep you on top a la Rosenborg.
It doesn't cost much to rent a ground, I'm open to correction but I think Rovers have been paying between €50,000 and €75,000 a year, hardly worth keeping an asset worth maybe 100 or 200 times that to avoid that cost every year (assuming you manage and use the money properly).
That's the theory, it could very well prove to be true but it's a win-or-die gamble at the end of the day.
Stato you're arriving very late to this debate. Good insights but suffice to say the Shels' well is down to its last dribbles of muddy water, there is nothing thirstier than a megalomaniacal convict with squanderlust.
Dodge
14/08/2006, 12:58 PM
It'd be a Standing Order, not a direct debit as a DD would be set up Revenue (on this case) and they would decide how much was to come out. if you pay any bill by DD they take the whole amount out. I'm not sure but I doubt Revenue would accept to be paid by Standing Order.
pineapple stu
14/08/2006, 1:00 PM
It's called a DD by Revenue on their forms I think, but it is a set amount each month. Set by the company.
green-blood
14/08/2006, 1:12 PM
"EL clubs have been targetted by the Revenue since Rovers went under"
just for the record Branvard the company trading as SRFC never "went under"
It's called a DD by Revenue on their forms I think, but it is a set amount each month. Set by the company.
Which is exactly what a standing order is...
Bohs are selling a capital asset of high value to build a cheaper replacement. Shels are effectively selling parts of the vlaue of their Tolka Park lease to pay for day to day running costs - this is a stupid way to run any business. At the rate Shels are going they will have feck all left from sale of the lease when they eventually leave Tolka. I believe estimates of value of the lease are around 5m to maximum of 10m. Running an annual lose of 1m will eat into this very quickly.
Clubs with fulltime players will always have larger tax bills whereas clubs with part-time players probably pay no employer PRSI or employee PAYE so less likely to get into trouble.
bohs til i die
14/08/2006, 2:01 PM
Bohs are selling a capital asset of high value to build a cheaper replacement. Shels are effectively selling parts of the vlaue of their Tolka Park lease to pay for day to day running costs - this is a stupid way to run any business. At the rate Shels are going they will have feck all left from sale of the lease when they eventually leave Tolka. I believe estimates of value of the lease are around 5m to maximum of 10m. Running an annual lose of 1m will eat into this very quickly.
Clubs with fulltime players will always have larger tax bills whereas clubs with part-time players probably pay no employer PRSI or employee PAYE so less likely to get into trouble.
Bohs are selling a crumbling wreck of an asset to build something modern, It is also a way of raising cash to set up proper infrastrucxture and revenue streams. Its not ideal but if done right it will be a very good move.
Drogheda are selling up as well and Harps are moving soon. Athlone are in the process of building a new ground as well arent they?
Which is exactly what a standing order is...
the diff between em is that YOU control your standing order amounts
a DD is a mandate to a third party to take money out of your a/c
they can change the amounts to pay the bill, sometimes with notice dependin on the terms
you couldnt pay an esb bill with an SO as its always differeing amounts so u set up a DD
Clubs with fulltime players will always have larger tax bills whereas clubs with part-time players probably pay no employer PRSI or employee PAYE so less likely to get into trouble.
Not neccesarily true. Full time players will have tax credits etc and of course the majority of the pay (on most players) will be at 20%, where as all part time players will be 40% rate with no tax credits to speak of
manic da hoop
14/08/2006, 2:27 PM
Bohs are selling a crumbling wreck of an asset to build something modern, It is also a way of raising cash to set up proper infrastrucxture and revenue streams. Its not ideal but if done right it will be a very good move.
That site earmarked for Bohs over by the West Link will never have a stadium built on it.
bad mongo
14/08/2006, 5:05 PM
That site earmarked for Bohs over by the West Link will never have a stadium built on it.
I wouldn't disagree. There will be twists and turns re: Bohs relocation yet.
bad mongo
14/08/2006, 5:06 PM
Was just thumbing through a copy of Finbar Flood's autobiography in Waterstones. There is a passage in it where he claims to have secured the rezoning of Tolka for the precise purpose of raising funds to build/develop a stadium for Shels at another location and all cash raised from this sale is supposed to be held in trust and used for that purpose only
Stato you're arriving very late to this debate. Good insights but suffice to say the Shels' well is down to its last dribbles of muddy water
Not true, their lease could potentially be worth €10m to €12m (bear in mind that any developer is going to try to get as many units on it as possible and each extra unit is extra money for Shels). Even if they've eaten into about €2.5m over the last couple of years they've still a large chunk to eat into before it's all gone (bear in mind too that Ollie is looking for a cheap option on a ground, think it was €5m for 49% of Dalymount, also looked at renting Tallaght apparently).
You've also got to bear in mind that the lowest tv money payment to any club in the Champions League in 2004 was €2m, not to mention the extra gate receipts that would be generated. That's a big carrot to aim for.
Again, I'm not suggesting it's the right thing to do, it's the Russian Roulette gamble. There's no room for failure but they have a few years left to try to achieve it.
Poor Student
14/08/2006, 5:27 PM
Again, I'm not suggesting it's the right thing to do, it's the Russian Roulette gamble. There's no room for failure but they have a few years left to try to achieve it.
To suggest it's Russian Roulette with one empty chamber doesn't do the narrowness of the odds any justice.
bad mongo
14/08/2006, 5:33 PM
It's been covered in a thread here before Stato. The high density apartment bonanza is not on the cards. Tolka Pk. is part of an integrated plan for the whole Richmond Road area and there will be considerable parkland and cycle/pedestrian access planned. No doubt some residential development will traverse the Tolka Park floodplain on stilts though. A Shels boswell put up a copy of the city manager's report previously on this board. Considering their debts and other individuals due a piece of the lease pie Shels will be leaving Tolka with enough cash to pay their wage bill for another 2 seasons, after that it's hail mary all the way to windswept Morton.
WeAreRovers
14/08/2006, 5:43 PM
Stato - You're theories are all fine and dandy except for one small thing, Ossie Kilkenny and his fellow developers already have a charge over Tolka.
In other words, one phone call from Ossie to Ollie and Shels are out on there ears immediately.
Ollie has already received a huge chunk of cash from Kilkenny and co. (who paid off the last €300,000 owed to the Revenue?) and won't be leaving Tolka with anything like the figures you suggest.
KOH
passerrby
14/08/2006, 5:58 PM
corks debt was historical shels is hysterical
WAR, a charge doesn't give an automatic right to evict, that can only happen if the tennant is in breach of the terms of the agreement. It also doesn't give an automatic right to take full owenership of the asset.
It's highly likely that the loans so far advanced have only to be repaid on a sale of the lease. It's is also highly likely that there is a time limit, hence Shels' desire to move to Dalymount or Morton (given Tallaght's current problems and the fact that a decision won't come from the High Court until just before Christmas implies that Shels deadline is before then).
€300K isn't much if you've still potentially got another €7m coming to you.
Bad Mongo, developers have gotten around these problems in the past. Dublin City Council like the idea of private apartment blocks beside public areas as it is what I think they refer to as "passive security", reducing the risk of problems in those areas.
I'm not supportive of what their trying to do, I believe it will ultimately end in failure, but there is quite a bit more time to run on this one than most people on this forum think.
Dr.Nightdub
14/08/2006, 6:47 PM
Baffled and all as I am by the appeal of baseball (basically rounders played in builders' hard hats), they do have one rule that we could do worse than adopt - three strikes and you're out.
bohs til i die
14/08/2006, 7:42 PM
WAR, a charge doesn't give an automatic right to evict, that can only happen if the tennant is in breach of the terms of the agreement. It also doesn't give an automatic right to take full owenership of the asset.
It's highly likely that the loans so far advanced have only to be repaid on a sale of the lease. It's is also highly likely that there is a time limit, hence Shels' desire to move to Dalymount or Morton (given Tallaght's current problems and the fact that a decision won't come from the High Court until just before Christmas implies that Shels deadline is before then).
€300K isn't much if you've still potentially got another €7m coming to you.
Bad Mongo, developers have gotten around these problems in the past. Dublin City Council like the idea of private apartment blocks beside public areas as it is what I think they refer to as "passive security", reducing the risk of problems in those areas.
I'm not supportive of what their trying to do, I believe it will ultimately end in failure, but there is quite a bit more time to run on this one than most people on this forum think.
Stato
Rumour I know, but it is widely believed that Ossie Kilkenny has forwarded Shelbourne FC a considerable sum over the last few years. Remember when Shels played Deportivo, Finbarr Flood was in the papers saying the club's debts would be down to a more manageable figure, I think he said €700k.
Thats 2 years ago. In the mean time Shelbourne have established one of the most expensive squads ever assembled and income has obviously fallen away.
Shels may still have a considerable enough sum to come when the time comes to leave Tolka but the lease is only worth about €10-€12 million. Subtract €2-€3 million and you are left with the figure which was widely believed to be what they needed to get half of Dalymount.
Bottom line is the money required to get set up elsewhere after debts are paid, and I reckon they have fairly sizeable debts [i know Bohs have debts before anyone throws that into the equation]. When they are paid off they will be left with enough to keep them going for a few years and if they dont hit the jackpot in that time then they are rightly fukked
Longfordian
14/08/2006, 8:14 PM
Brian McEniff the hotelier/developer was spotted at their game v. Sunderland.Being treated very respectfully by the Shels hierarchy apparently. Didn't know he was a Shels fan..
Didn't know he was even an association football fan at all! he does own a hotel quite close to Tolka though.
Bottom line is the money required to get set up elsewhere after debts are paid, and I reckon they have fairly sizeable debts [i know Bohs have debts before anyone throws that into the equation]. When they are paid off they will be left with enough to keep them going for a few years and if they dont hit the jackpot in that time then they are rightly fukked
It's highly unlikely that Shels have sizeable debts. Firstly, banks don't want to touch eircom League clubs and certainly not to lend money to so their debt to financial institutions cannot be significant. Revenue are now employing a get tough policy and so their debt to them is probably six to eight months PAYE/PRSI at a maximum. Given that other costs of running a football club (light, heat, rates, telephones etc) are probably no more than €250K a year and that a lot of the suppliers of these services will use a get tough policy too (especially given the fact that it's public knowledge that Shels have cashflow difficulties), their overall creditors cannot be that high.
The only significant debts Shels could have would be to current and/or previous board members and shareholders. Most of them will have written that amount off as they wrote the cheque.
The other assumption you make is that they'll have to pay out a large amount to get a new stadium. That's not the case if they're going to be renting.
All those little creditors add up (as was the case with Rovers). If they owe a printer €20K and a kit supplier €15K, it'll hurt. I take your point totally though
CharlesThompson
14/08/2006, 10:00 PM
I don't think it's as highly unlikely that they have sizeable debts that you think Stato. The banks have been throwing money at people for the last 6-7 years. With the great press that Shels got over their European campaign and winning the leagues they have done recently, add in the fact that they have sold their lease on Tolka Park - what was to stop Oily going down to the AIB in Drumcondra looking for a short term loan here and a short term loan there "because of a little cashflow problem we have at the moment" - and that it will be paid back as soon as the Uefa money comes in.
It's easily done and the way Oily has been managing that clubs business for the last ten years or so who's to say that this scenario is an impossibility or even an improbability? I know it's all conjecture, but if anybody seriously thinks that with the crowds that Shels pull in and a commercial revenue stream of €300k per annum at best, that they have been able to pay a wage bill in excess of €30k per week based on these figures plus the paltry sum clubs get for TV and prize money then they are sadly deluded. The money has to have come from somewhere, unfortunatly for Oily not enough of it and it's coming back to nite him on the bum!
Stato
14/08/2006, 11:31 PM
The banks have been throwing money at people to buy assets i.e. property. They've been doing it once you can show the ability to make the repayments with a consistent annual income. If Shels were borrowing, it wasn't to buy an asset and it wasn't with accounts showing regular annual profits.
Banks haven't been throwing money at businesses to fund their daily expenses. If they did extend facilities on the basis of something like the UEFA money they would have withdrawn the facility once that money came in. The type of scenario that the late Charlie Haughey got away with happened in the 1980s, not in this decade. It's because of what happened in the 1980s that the banks centrallised all major lending decisions (over €50K for most banks) rather than allow the local manager make the decision.
True, the amounts Shels will have earned in the past will not have been close to what they've spent but then if they hadn't kept all their accounting records in cardboard boxes on the lowest floor in the ground they wouldn't have been destroyed by that flood and we might have some real idea of the figures.
The future might be a little different though. Consider that the league champions are now picking up €225,000 prize money. For each round they participate in Champions League qualifiers they get another €100,000 (if they don't make the group stages), and if they get to round 3 and get beaten they get €70,000 for playing one round in the UEFA Cup. That's what happened Shels a couple of years ago, if they do it next year that's a total of €595,000 income, not to mention the gate receipts. Starts to become a different scenario then.
Again, I'll repeat, it's a win or die gamble though.
bohs til i die
15/08/2006, 7:28 AM
It's highly unlikely that Shels have sizeable debts. Firstly, banks don't want to touch eircom League clubs and certainly not to lend money to so their debt to financial institutions cannot be significant. Revenue are now employing a get tough policy and so their debt to them is probably six to eight months PAYE/PRSI at a maximum. Given that other costs of running a football club (light, heat, rates, telephones etc) are probably no more than €250K a year and that a lot of the suppliers of these services will use a get tough policy too (especially given the fact that it's public knowledge that Shels have cashflow difficulties), their overall creditors cannot be that high.
The only significant debts Shels could have would be to current and/or previous board members and shareholders. Most of them will have written that amount off as they wrote the cheque.
The other assumption you make is that they'll have to pay out a large amount to get a new stadium. That's not the case if they're going to be renting.
Stato
I believe they have significant debts. They have failed to produce a programme on a number of occasions this season including two home games they had against Bohs.
I get the Bohs accounts every year as a member. I see the costs in running a football club. If Shels vacate Tolka and rent say Dalymount or Richmond, they will still have to fund a training setup etc. I dont believe the money they will get will significantly increase the chances of them landing the European Jackpot in the few years they will have the moneyto give it a go.
As for the costs of running a football club, well there is home match expenses, away match travel and food, training facilities, insurance to name but a few. Shels will also need an office of some description to run the club from. They will also lose some income from bars/kiddy disco's etc. Commercial income may drop off significantly as well.
There is still some substantial costs involved. Bohs spend about €500k a year on top of the first team squad so how long will it take Shels to go through a few million with no sustainable income streams?
You seem to think/believe that Shels will get the few million[5/7.5/10 or whatever] and it will be used to land group stage of the champions league.
The way I see it, if Shels end up renting from another organisation, they lose income streams and the windfall will be making up an even bigger annual deficit unless they curb the spending.
This is all speculation here as no one knows what the situation is at Shels. I know most City fans were a bit concerned with our tax bill when first came out but then actually happy had come out into the public domain as at least we knew that should be the limit of the tax bill. The Revenue are or have invested every club in the league.
I think to have a go at the CL group stages Shels would need to invest a lot more on a yearly basis which would not seem to be possible now.
bad mongo
15/08/2006, 10:24 AM
[QUOTE=pete;515924]This is all speculation here as no one knows what the situation is at Shels. I know most City fans were a bit concerned with our tax bill when first came out but then actually happy had come out into the public domain as at least we knew that should be the limit of the tax bill. The Revenue are or have invested every club in the league.
Bohs' members are privy to a lot of Shels financial constraints due to the offer put on the table for the Dalyer groundshare. That combined with some educated guesswork and media leaks would suggest Shels will exit Tolka with anything between 3-8M spondools, depending on debts and asset strippers. I would believe it's the lower figure, or maybe even less.
Stato: I assume we share a similiar professional background in built environment matters judging by your educated responses on this thread.
Shels cash input on the Dalyer groundshare deal was predicated on the density of residential development at the rezoned Tolka. i.e more cash available if higher density development was getting the go ahead at Tolka.
Reading between the lines of the City manager's report Tolka will be redeveloped at medium density, thus reducing the value of Shels' asset. Tolka park is subject to a draft local Area Plan, which as you may know will have considerable policy clout when it comes to planning decisions made by the likes of An Bord Pleanala, and would also be a material consideration at local authority level. The whole LAP area also covers land belonging to Stella Maris FC and a hospital situauted across the road will be subject to a comprehensive urban design framework. This will be an indicative template of what developers can expect to get away with building in the area. The city manager's report states that the higher density of residential development is prefered to take place on the other site mentioned along Richmond Road. Add to that the potential objectors from the granny flats and the popensity for flooding at Tolka and you arrive at the conclusions stated...
WeAreRovers
15/08/2006, 11:19 AM
Stato - I should have explained myself better re. Ossie Kilkenny's charge on Tolka. Kilkenny and co. have been bankrolling Shels since March 2003. That's a lorra lorra cash. And if Shels can't make any demanded repayments then the charge comes into effect.
It's a simple case of smart developers/speculators vs. dim football administrators. A tale as old as the game itself.
Bad Mongo - You who I assume you to be?
KOH
bad mongo
15/08/2006, 11:33 AM
Stato - I should have explained myself better re. Ossie Kilkenny's charge on Tolka. Kilkenny and co. have been bankrolling Shels since March 2003. That's a lorra lorra cash. And if Shels can't make any demanded repayments then the charge comes into effect.
It's a simple case of smart developers/speculators vs. dim football administrators. A tale as old as the game itself.
Bad Mongo - You who I assume you to be?
KOH
;) some rovers dufus beat me to my preferred handle on this MB:(
WeAreRovers
15/08/2006, 12:12 PM
;) some rovers dufus beat me to my preferred handle on this MB:(
In fairness, that's his real name. ;)
KOH
pineapple stu
15/08/2006, 12:40 PM
It's highly unlikely that Shels have sizeable debts. Firstly, banks don't want to touch eircom League clubs and certainly not to lend money to so their debt to financial institutions cannot be significant.
Surely if Shels have an asset worth, let's say, E10m (i.e. Tolka), then the bank will lend them a good chunk of that on the basis that the worst case scenario is Shels go broke, their asset is sold and the bank recoup their loan from the E10m. Shels being in business isn't going to affect the value of the ground. So Shels' debts could certainly be up to 50%, 60%, maybe 70% of the value of their lease, depending. E5m to E7m. (That's a possible maximum debt, not a stab at their actual debt obviously). Though I don't know how much of the value of a lease a bank will mortgage for you.
Poor Student
15/08/2006, 12:42 PM
Has any paper reported on this yesterday or today? I only had a glance at yesterday's Herald and I didn't see anything.
passerrby
15/08/2006, 7:30 PM
yes i read in this mornings paper that shels were folding and all the players were free agents and that tolka park was been turned into a new superhighway to dalymount and that ollie had started a life sentence in grange gorman :**** it was only a dream ,why did you wake me
anto eile
15/08/2006, 10:46 PM
Not true, their lease could potentially be worth €10m to €12m (bear in mind that any developer is going to try to get as many units on it as possible and each extra unit is extra money for Shels). Even if they've eaten into about €2.5m over the last couple of years they've still a large chunk to eat into before it's all gone (bear in mind too that Ollie is looking for a cheap option on a ground, think it was €5m for 49% of Dalymount, also looked at renting Tallaght apparently).
You've also got to bear in mind that the lowest tv money payment to any club in the Champions League in 2004 was €2m, not to mention the extra gate receipts that would be generated. That's a big carrot to aim for.
Again, I'm not suggesting it's the right thing to do, it's the Russian Roulette gamble. There's no room for failure but they have a few years left to try to achieve it.
youre realy joining this deabte months too late
weve been thru the whole housing on tolka thing. the amount of housing isnt going to be huge. shels chunk of their lease is worth roughly E7M according to the sunday business post a few months ago.thats areliable source.
the champions league dream is what shels have already tried, and failed. the CL dream is over simplistic cloud cuckoo land stuff.
get realistic.theres n omagic solution to clubs problems. it will take years of hard work building clubs up in their local community with investment in schoolboys, coaching and developement facilities. yes its damn long hard work but its the only relaistic choice. waffling on about throwing money at a champions leage pipedream is what has gotten shels into the state their in.
an unremarkable man learns form his own mistakes
a clever man learns from the mistakes of others
now..who wants to learn from shels mistakes?? and who wants to learn from their own?
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.2 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.