Sure I suppose in the worst case scenario, if they can't pay their way they can always regroup in the first division a la Cork and Derry anyways.
Seemed to work out okay for both of them. All you have to do if you're a fan is close your eyes and believe its still the same club.
But the difference with Cork was the fans had no previous control. Bohs fans have been in control and have stood over all this that has happened. How many board members have they been through at this stage from their ranks. If there's only 1,400 regular fans, would they really have enough qualified and capable members left after a purge to run the club on a sound basis?Quote:
Originally Posted by dong
It does now seem (going by GypoWeb at least) that most Bohs fans have given up the idea of just winning the league/setanta/euro progress to get by and are now in survival mode as dodge said. That's to be commended, but perhaps if they did that last year and regrouped ala Pats instead of getting Johnny Logan to try keep the show on the road for one more crack at it, they might be in a better state.
Cork and Derry didn't own their grounds. So there is a difference there in that a First Division Bohs either sell Dalymount to cover their debts and end up homeless, ot they stay in Dalymount, run out of cash to meet loan repayments and get wound up. They'd be actually even worse off than Shels, who at least have sold their ground and, it seems, paid off many of their debts. They're now mid-table in their fourth year in the graveyard and going backwards (in terms of finishing positions anyway - second place, just 30 seconds away from the title, second place, losing the title two games out and beaten in the play-off semi, and now 5th)Quote:
Originally Posted by dong
They (and every other club) need a qualified, full time off-the-field management team. It'd be of more benefit to the club than paying an extra bench-warming striker and journeyman full back in the long run.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jicked
So if Bohs are well under the 65% rule, what is it that they are spending the money on?
Barmen and groundsmen?Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr A
Blinkhorn and Boco??Quote:
Originally Posted by peadar1987
Ouch.
I take your point though Peadar.
You saw my post above about buying back and re-selling the same part of their ground?Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr A
care to prove that or are you just WUMMING ?Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
There was a thread on here about it a while back. I'll have a look see if I can dig it up.
Edit - here we go. schumi straight after gives a good possible summation. I'm not saying that it's what happened, but it'd certainly allow for Bohs to be under the SCP but yet screwed for cash.
http://foot.ie/threads/130064-Bohs-S...=1#post1298468Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
I wasn't talking about any player or club in particular, but now you mention it... :pQuote:
Originally Posted by dong
And on the clubs circumventing the 65% rule, wasn't there some post on here a while back saying that, say, Bohs could buy a carpet from Des Kelly for 10 million quid, and then Des Kelly sponsor them for, say 10,100,000 (I don't know how much the sponsorship deal is actually worth!). No more money has actually changed hands, but Bohs have an extra 10 million income to play with when the 65% is being calculated*
*I'm not making any accusations here, just saying how the cap could be beaten
There's a similar thing to that shortly after in the same thread above, where the possibility of Bohs renting DCU for their underage team for - say - E100k and receiving E90k back in sponsorship for the teams was mooted. That'd also help boost the SCP level while not helping cash.
selling an OPTION to purchase same as selling "the same part of the ground" ? Know where not to look for an accountant :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Schumi
See the link just above. I don't think it was ever clarified whether that would work but I can't be bothered reading through a 23 page thread to check!Quote:
Originally Posted by peadar1987
That's just a technicality. The deal perfectly answers the question of how Bohs could meet the SCP while being screwed for cash. That was the question asked. I've not said that it's what's happened.Quote:
Originally Posted by marinobohs
back payments to revenue? Loan repayments? I'd imagine there are a fair few large outgoings possibleQuote:
Originally Posted by Mr A
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jicked
whats another year .i ll get my coat
As we are not in breach of the SCP the issue has no relevance (apart from regurgitated claims by various shams and assosiates). long way from just a technical difference but no point as its irrelevant to the topic.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
It's utterly central to the question that was asked.