D-Day for Rovers

Can someone from Rovers explain how the 400 club are going to run the club?

Are you going to have any fulltime people involved in the club and is there a board of directors now? Who sits on this or what way is it made up.

I like the idea of fans running a club but is it practical. Ther is only so many times you can ask people to cough up 2,500 euro. Where will the funding come from in future when all the 2,500's are spent.

I wish you the best and really hope it works but Im a little confused as to how its working?

Also you should be sent to Div 1 having cleared all your debts after overspending your way to a place in the premier the last couple of seasons but thats another story.

Yes, it's great to have a club run by the fans. Better than having one run by a football hooligan.

In Rovers case you can get the best of both worlds

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sam Savic

Yes, it's great to have a club run by the fans.

---

I hope all pans out OK .... i have a feeling that the hard work is only about to start but kinda have a 'quietly confident' feeling in the last while.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sam Savic

Better than having one run by a football hooligan.

---

Hear hear (sp??)

I wont claim to know what had/is/will be going on at Rovers but will say that no matter how long yer'man was at the reigns, the job was always going to be up hill.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by higgins

I like the idea of fans running a club but is it practical.

---

There's loads of clubs owned and run by fans. Longford and Bohs are members clubs for starters. Harps are a co-op, and probably the most sensibly run club in the division.

Trouble flares on Rovers' returns

Sunday July 24th 2005


NICK WEBB

LATER this week the High Court will be asked to approve what many experts on small business believe to be an "extraordinary and precedent-making deal" with the Revenue Commissioners.

The Revenue will almost certainly agree to write off €1.34m in unpaid taxes, more than 95 per cent of the tax bill owed to it by the company that up to now has run Shamrock Rovers Football Club.

The club, currently managed by Roddy Collins, went into examinership a couple of months ago, owing more than €3.5m. The court-appointed examiner, Neil Hughes of Hughes Blake Accounts, spent the intervening period negotiating with creditors.

He returned a little over a week ago with an extraordinary settlement formula that suggested the principal creditors would be prepared to settle for a payout of 4.2¢ in the euro. The club could them continue in business.

During the meeting of creditors, the Revenue abstained on the settlement vote. But there was an understanding that if all the other creditors were happy to take a hit, the Revenue would not oppose it.

However, the move has had a number of contradictory responses. The football community appeared relieved that Rovers had been rescued from a grim financial future. However, the reaction of the small business sector has been circumspect and has questioned the Revenue's generosity.

Pat Delaney from IBEC's Small Firms Association said the decision was very unusual. He said it would be extraordinary for a small company to be allowed to get off the hook as Rovers had done.

"Because the Revenue are super-creditors they usually want to get it all, he said.

Mark Fielding, the head of the country's other small business umbrella body, ISME, agreed that it was a very good commercial deal for Rovers, and he added that he hoped it would set a precedent.

"I'll be asking questions about whether this sets a precedent for those in normal business, and if it doesn't I'd like to know why."

© Irish Independent
http://www.unison.ie/irish_independent/ & http://www.unison.ie/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sam Savic

Yes, it's great to have a club run by the fans. Better than having one run by a football hooligan.

---

As opposed to 400 of them? :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ringo

"I'll be asking questions about whether this sets a precedent for those in normal business, and if it doesn't I'd like to know why."

---

Because most businesses going bust have some assets (e.g stock, equipment) but Rovers had no assets. Even "super-creditors" get nothing when there is nothing to give. 4.2c per €1 is better than zero per €1 if they didn't take the deal and Rovers folded. :ball: And this guy is in business. :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LFC in Exile

And this guy is in business. :rolleyes:

---

No he's not, probably tried once, but now he's a full time union official*.

[SIZE=1]*Always call IBEC and ISME business unions gets the right wing dicks noses. :D [/SIZE]

correct me if i'm wrong but aren't the players on Rovers' books considered assets? I'm surprised that they weren't forced to sell any players that might get a decent price. This could be a tricky situation for the club to negotiate, as it does set a precedent alright.

On another note, I hope that the 400 club make a success of running the club, wouldn't mind that kind of support in Waterford. I still think that the points deduction was a light penalty to pay after what went on under the previous management, but I'd lay a lot of the blame for that at the feet of the FAI who should have copped on a lot sooner to what was going on. It will be interesting to see if Bob Breen gives any real answers to the questions surrounding the licensing scheme and how clubs (Rovers as an example) were given a license when the directors were clearly making no effort to fulfill the criteria.

Anyway, for Rovers, the sooner the season is over and they can start rebuilding (in whichever division, hopefully not premier at our expense though!) the better for everyone so that this whole chapter in the club's history can be put to bed finally.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bigmac

correct me if i'm wrong but aren't the players on Rovers' books considered assets?

---

Probably not. They are only assets if they are bought (e.g. for Man United, Ferdinand is an asset but Scholes is not) - and their value diminshes as they near the end of their contracts. There is a rule I think in eL that if a player is not paid wages for a certain number of weeks (2?) then he is a free agent. Many players not signed on long term contracts. In any event the Revenue would not be able to realise the value of these assets without a lot of hassle. That's why 4.2c is a good deal for them. :ball: