Bohs in financial trouble - FAI Licencing called into question again?

If they finish thrid they'll start a round earlier in Europe, though be seeded. I think Prize money is 90k for appearance, same for the 2nd round of qualifying, then it ramps up, so they might have a tidy run, unless they shed a load of players. I was told before I came away by a friend of my colleague who's a Bohs fan (disaffected) that the players refused to travel to Wales without their bonuses being paid. I scarcely believe it to be more than a rumour, however I just thought, have Bohs always paid on time, which means that at least they're being a professional club - regardless of borrowed monies etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pineapple stu

Cost of running the underage teams rose by E40k to E170k
Sundry costs were E70k (E35k last year).
Repairs were E85k (E37k last year).

---

170k for running the underage teams and sundry costs doubled to a whopping 70k and yet Bohs fans still insist they don't cook the books to get within the SCP...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spudulika

I just thought, have Bohs always paid on time, which means that at least they're being a professional club - regardless of borrowed monies etc.

---

I don't think paying wages on time is the sole criterion for determining whether a club acts professionally or not.

HulaHoop - there's no evidence to suggest the sundry costs increased because of wages being dumped in there. The underage coaching you could question alright, but unless there's any evidence on the other one, I don't think it's admissable at all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pineapple stu

I don't think paying wages on time is the sole criterion for determining whether a club acts professionally or not.

HulaHoop - there's no evidence to suggest the sundry costs increased because of wages being dumped in there. The underage coaching you could question alright, but unless there's any evidence on the other one, I don't think it's admissable at all.

---

Me either, it's just a departure from the norm for the LOI (that they've been meeting wages as it seems that apart from unsecured creditors players and staff are the first to get hit).

On the issue of underage teams, how many do Bohs run, and does this include the A squad? I could see a large underage structure costing in excess of 150k alright, put in travel, coaches, insurance etc, though how much do kids pay in subs each week does anyone know?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spudulika

Me either, it's just a departure from the norm for the LOI (that they've been meeting wages as it seems that apart from unsecured creditors players and staff are the first to get hit).

---

I think the main difference between Bohs and the other clubs is that we can see things happen in much more detail - so there were these kind of rumblings at other clubs before the wages were cut (and obviously without the benefit of a ground to sell in most cases).

But yeah, I see your point alright.

Always bad to see the Tribune taking an interest in the league: http://www.tribune.ie/article/2010/s...for-dalymount/

Spudulika- there is a separate entry for the A team of 21k.

There is 72k income from the schoolboys though.

Still, that's massive expenditure on the youth section.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mr A

Cheers for that. Is there a figure for total debts?

Also,... Bohs must have some serious youth teams for that sort of money....

---

Losses for last year totalled €1,881,037. Accumulated losses carried forward is €5,621,065

Legal and professional fees went up from €64,155 in 2008 to €820,448 in 2009.

Admin and ground staff rose from 3 employees to 9 yet the wage bill dropped from €212,000 down to €202,000:confused:

At least fundraising costs dropped from €94k in '08 to €16k last year:D

They still value the car park at €6,075,000, (they're own valuation mind) must be the only piece of property in the country that hasn't depreciated.

God only knows what sort of losses they've incurred this year with the fall off in attendances. The first instalment on the Zurich loan I believe is due in January, €350-400k, so it would seem quite possible they could forfeit and Zurich will take the car park as their own which would leave boez tangible assets at just under €2 million if this happens.

There's a note saying they're repaying the earlier money to Albion, yet Albion are down as paying 150k for the option to buy when Danniger go into liquidation.. seems a bit of a weird set up!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mr A

Always bad to see the Tribune taking an interest in the league: http://www.tribune.ie/article/2010/s...for-dalymount/

---

And with a large "Death notices" prominently at the top of the page. :tremble:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GGAJD

The first instalment on the Zurich loan I believe is due in January, €350-400k, so it would seem quite possible they could forfeit and Zurich will take the car park as their own which would leave boez tangible assets at just under €2 million if this happens.

---

Wouldn't the rest of Dalymount we worth way more than that even without the car park?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mr A

Wouldn't the rest of Dalymount we worth way more than that even without the car park?

---

In the accounts it just states part of their tangible assets as 'freehold of land' at 7.7 million. With the market as it is I don't think the ground is worth a whole lot more than that, but obviously I'm just summising.

Is it just me or is the first page of the Notes on Accounts missing from the scans? Note 1.2 is said to contain the new re-valuation of the car park.

It makes for grim reading in any case.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LaayJVYtK5...tylaundry3.jpg

Some of those figures bring up more questions than give answers, like if they are under the SCP (which they appear to be), and there is a drop off in revenue etc for next season, will they have to get rid of players in order to bring things in line, especially with coaching staff wages being counted in.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spudulika

Some of those figures bring up more questions than give answers, like if they are under the SCP (which they appear to be), and there is a drop off in revenue etc for next season, will they have to get rid of players in order to bring things in line

---

Clearly they'll have to get rid of players. There's no way they won't

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dodge

Clearly they'll have to get rid of players. There's no way they won't

---

That's what I thought right away, but then wondered if players won't move (ie they'll need to take pay cuts to join other clubs) or nobody wants them, the club are stuck, thus they go over the SCP. What happens then? I mean, if somebody has 2 years left on a contract worth, for eg, 50k per year, that means to get rid of him you're down 100k right away, 4-5 players like that and you're up to half a million. I know it's scaremongering, but if players stick it out and the club can't pay.....

The club would have to buy out their contracts. Assuming few contracts in the LOI run more than two years* and that none have been renewed since the start of this season, the club would be able to make a settlement with the player for less than his expected salary for the year. I'm not familiar with the ins and outs of the SCP, but I would be reasonably confident the club could declare it as a trading expense rather than staff costs.

* I don't know how valid an assumption this is but it is the impression I've been given in the past, though Bohs may operate differently. Perhaps someone with a better understanding could confirm or otherwise.

Thanks Charlie, I just was wondering as I've had experience of trying to negotiate with players with regards to contraction termination or wage reduction and I wonder will there be a realistic attitude taken or, in one case I deal with, a player demanded to be paid in full, including a monthly travel and living allowance - legally he was right as the contract bore out.

If I remember correctly, the reason (given on here at least, so its validity is questionable) that Bohs didn't reduce wages by more at the end of last season was that a few of their players had a year left on their contract and it had to be paid or bought out. At the same time it was claimed that at the end of this season, this wouldn't be as big a stumbling block to reducing costs (multi-year contracts ending and new contracts being for only a year) so Bohs hoped to reduce wages more significantly by losing players on big wages.

Bohs have a liability of 600k for ten players contracts next year (as per their last EGM/info meeting)