Printable View
Why should we? Your the one making the claim, its up to you to prove it or retract.Quote:
Originally Posted by Celdrog
Quote:
Originally Posted by Foot.ie rules
More lies Celdrog,Quote:
Originally Posted by Celdrog
http://www.dundalkfc.com/News/080319_GerryMatthews.asp
So there is proof that we could in fact pay our players. So your telling more lies.
Won't open for me.Quote:
Originally Posted by Louth4sam
http://www.independent.ie/sport/socc...f-1324083.html
Sure it was a misunderstanding .....As was only 4 years ago.
Only point I'm making is just make sure you are not in the glass house. I'm not trying to deflect attention away from us or condon what we did(or well, didn't do). A few Drogs laughed at Cork when they went into examinership, egg on face time now.
It was a misunderstanding Celdrog between the players and Management over their first pay date. Should of been nipped in the bud until McGuinness stuck his two cents in. A storm in a tea cup was all it was.Quote:
Originally Posted by Celdrog
While I don't claim to know inside knowledge of our clubs financial situation I am of the impression that no news is good news where our club is concerned and you where quite unfair in your accusation of our chairman and our board, who have made sure that our club lives within its means and don't threathen its long term objective of serving the community of Dundalk for short term gains.
While you brought the debacle that we had 4 years ago you must agree that we are a completely different now from what we where. I think you can credit our chairman with that
Would agree totally with that. Gerry Matthews has been very good for Dundalk.Quote:
Originally Posted by jinxy lilywhite
We had a bigger debacle five years ago, Vincent Hoey came in (again) and turned it around. Didn't work out though.
Celdrog
Its been said that Hoey, Byrne and O'Connor invested 12m or 8m (depending on who you listen to) over 4 years.
Surely to goodness the three guys could reasonably be expected to pay off the 500k that is owed to the Revenue. Thats approximately 5% of what is claimed to have been invested. Why won't they do that given their previous investment and given the fact that they over-looked the payments.
I think Drogs fans are being too grateful for their own good.
I'd agree with that. Seems almost a bit too simple though doesn't it! I think thats maybe why some Drogs fans seem a bit easy going about the whole debacle. The thinking being that the 3 lads maybe still have something up their sleeve! But as always the info coming from the club is pathetic, leaving the fans in limbo - some thinking its a good idea to get active now and get a trust going, others not so sure.Quote:
Originally Posted by SMorgan
The question remains as to whether the "3 lads" invested their own money or money they had borrowed. There could be a long chain that leads back to the banks.Quote:
Originally Posted by WindmillWarrior
How could it possibly be a bad idea to get a Trust going? If things go tits up you might be in a position to save the club, if ultimately the Trust isn't needed you'll have a bit of cash to investin the club/give to the club. Seriously, now is the time to get active.Quote:
Originally Posted by WindmillWarrior
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/...625124602.html
Revenue set to oppose McCarthy
THE Revenue Commissioners will this morning oppose the confirmation of Kieran McCarthy's appointment as examiner to Hinge Trading Limited, effectively Drogheda United, claiming that the company has little chance of survival, reports Emmet Malone .
McCarthy is due to report at the hearing on his work since being appointed on an interim basis last week and it is expected that he will reveal that there hav been two significant expressions of interest in the club.
----
More trouble for Drogheda
Wow. It says a lot when even the revenue want you gone.
In fairness Revenue were annoyed when Rovers "got away" with paying so little, and opposed the examiner's recommendation on the Cork settlement so now they're trying to stop it even getting that far...
The Revenue are probably the worst people to owe money to but generally the courts will give a business, especially a football club, every chance they realistically can to get themselves out of it. I'd still expect the examiner to be appointed.
Examiner was appointed this morning despite objection from the revenue.
Aside from the Revenue Commissioners who do Drogs owe money to?
All the creditors we had were all linked to the club which is why I feel they were willing to wait for their cash. Hummel, Pubs, MFA etc... all of which would benefit from CCFC existence & indirect business from fans. The type of creditor you have I think has a big impact on what they are willing to accept.
The Drogs situation confuses me as clearly they have the money to pay the Examiner in the short term whose fee could be 1/3 of all the debts.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pete
They owe Bohs nearly 10k for renting Dalymount during the summer for their CL games
was that not wiped off when you kept the money from the ticket sales recently?
Yeah, I thought that was why Drogs wouldn't give Bohs tickets to sell, but eventually it was agreed to send 8k (or some other value) worth of tickets as settlement?Quote:
Originally Posted by Dodge
they still owe sligo rovers 50% of fazs transfer fee.Quote:
Originally Posted by pete
>they still owe sligo rovers 50% of fazs transfer fee.
Debts seem to be scattered through the league, doesnt look good!
Have to say that the Drogs situation looks to be way worse than Cork or Rovers ever was. Id expect to NewDrogs09 FC in the first division or A league next season at best at this stage.
bhs
Agree. Think it's pointing to them fighting tooth and nail in this case too, especially with no cushy sell-on clauses available. All of which leads to bhs' conclusion...Quote:
Originally Posted by Dodge
And all for want of half a million when 8m has already been pumped in. Seems ridiculous.
Depends how serious the "serious expressions of interest" are really. If they can come up with a decent package for creditors they can get out of it despite the Revenue's objections.
> And all for want of half a million when 8m has already been pumped in. Seems ridiculous.
????????????? The whole Drogs "investment" was a property play using the club as a lever with the council ect for PP.
I dont think it was ever about the football club, ok it might have been in Hoey's head, but sure wasnt he at the whims of the developers all along?
By accepting their money to blow on the team, Hoey put the cart before the horse and most of the mess is his fault if you ask me! They coulda developed the stadium idea without "investing" in the team at the same time!
bhs
True. Though how serious has any "serious expressions of interest" ever been in this league?Quote:
Originally Posted by Longfordian
Not very. Particularly any ones involving Mr. R Collins and any of his friends.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
If they have any football related debt (wages, tansfer fees etc) and don't have agreements in place, they won't get a premier license AFAIk
True Dodge. Don't think they are supposed to get a First Division one either though most clubs and players will be amenable to an agreement.
Do you think Sligo will be if its the difference between them in europe or not?Quote:
Originally Posted by Longfordian
Teams in examinership within the past three years can't enter Europe under UEFA rules anyway so it's no difference to Sligo really.
Really? That's the first I've heard of that. That'd mean if Cork win the league next year, no Champions League place?Quote:
Originally Posted by Longfordian
If that's confirmed...Quote:
Originally Posted by Longfordian
Has it not been confirmed yet? Wasn't sure on that one, I knew it was proposed anyhow.
I think it's that it hasn't been tested yet.Quote:
Originally Posted by Longfordian
Are you sure it isn't "having been bankrupt in the last 3 years"?
Bearing in mind that examinership is specific to Ireland and bankruptcy legislation differs in each country I'd be surprised if it relates specifically to examinership.
I'd imagine it's up to the individual association to word it according to the practice in their country such as Administration in England, Examinership here etc. You have to obtain a UEFA Licence through your Association and presumably that regulation comes into play then.
That is the rumour but already mentioned never been used yet. 3 years would be very harsh. No doubt Uefa have one rule for big clubs and another for the smaller countries again.Quote:
Originally Posted by Longfordian
With stadium looking like a distant dream can't see any one wanting to "invest" in Drogs. Best they hope for is white knight.
Nobody knows whats going on at the club or what the boards intentions are bar the 3 lads - but I genuinely dont think the 3 lads see it as a 'distant dream' just yet.Quote:
Originally Posted by pete
There could be a few more twists and turns with this over the next couple of months!!
Well Coleraine were barred for 3 years. They'd be treated the same way as English or Scottish clubs (with the similar bankruptcy laws)Quote:
Originally Posted by pete
3 years doesn't sound too harsh to me BTW
Absolutely, it wouldn't seem harsh to me either. Examinership/Administration (in UK) should be a process of last resort to keep your club alive, not seen as a small bit of breathing space from your creditors. Three years without European football should be a sacrifice you're willing to make.
http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/sp...-13876128.html
"It is with regret that the Management Committee of Coleraine FC announces that the club will not be able to play in the UEFA Cup in 2008/09 season," said a statement issued by the club.
"This is due to a failure to meet specific UEFA requirements in respect of the UEFA Licence application and is as a result of the clubs period of Administration falling within a 3 year criteria period prior to application.
Any latest Drogs Fans on your examinership? I hear there is a supporters meeting soon.
Best of Luck