Quote:
Originally Posted by Monkfish
Id imagine so, but tbh thats the least of our worries right now
Printable View
Quote:
Originally Posted by Monkfish
Id imagine so, but tbh thats the least of our worries right now
Arkaga can't just run up debts and walk away from them.
As part of the licensing agreement you have to sign saying you are liable to any debts run up for that season.
They CAN'T walk away.
They can screw you over by not paying players on time and ruining your football club but they will have to pay for it at some stage.
However, IF those debts were that big when they arrived then I suppose it goes back tot he deal done between Lennox and Arkaga.
I wonder how legal that agreement would be though? I'd be sceptical that an agreement with the FAI - who ultimately have nothing to do with it - wouldn't have a get out clause legally. All depends on what the piece of paper says though.Quote:
Originally Posted by higgins
you maybe right but i suspect that the undertaken given by clubs to the fai at the start may not be legally binding. if a club does not have the finances then nothing can be done plus i dont know if the parent company can be made liable but as i said im not to sure.Quote:
Originally Posted by higgins
I can't workout why this question keeps coming up at the moment.We all know the rules and that in the past clubs have been punished.Now is not the time for that discussion.The league is a real crisis,its time to consentrate on that or there will be no teams left to deduct points from.Quote:
Originally Posted by RonnieB
The legal criterion in the Licensing is taken very seriously (not saying that others aren't) and I'd say there's very little wiggle room. All the documents submitted are reviewed by the FAI's legal affairs person, Sarah O'Shea I think is her name and from all reports she's thorough.
What were they punished for though? Lying on their licencing in Rovers' case; not sending it in for Longford. Different case here.
yes but the contract is to sevice all depts that may fall due and can be paid but no law can make you pay what you have not got.Quote:
Originally Posted by Longfordian
Cant understand how people can be happy with how things are going! Its the league we all enjoy.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mental Man
It's unfortunate for Cork and their fans, but ultimately it's good for the league that this nonsense comes to a halt as soon as possible. Properly run clubs are getting ridden rock solid by clubs like Cork; hopefully that'll start to change. Not holding my breath just yet though.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shiba
Arkaga have the money to pay any debts accrued by Cork, I'd be quite sure of that.Quote:
Originally Posted by passerrby
I agree but they dont have toQuote:
Originally Posted by Longfordian
They do, that's the whole point of their guarantee. If Cork can't pay Arkaga are responsible under the guarantee they provided to the FAI.
We were deducted the 8 points we had gained until that point, which brought us back to 1 following a draw at Pats on the night the punishment was applied.Quote:
Originally Posted by blackholesun
In Germany, you're only awarded a licence if you're a members-owned club. Maybe that should apply here as well. :cool:
no one has mentioned it yet,but is the amatuer/part time club the only way to go at present?too much competition from the premier league on tv,leaving those who come to LOI matches occasionally with an unrealistic expectation of a professional full time LOI standard of games.in wexford people know we are amateur made up of local players that we hope will in time become a decent side,no unrealistic expectations,800 average crowds,small outgoings.i am looking forward to going to cork for the semi-final and hope that you can overcome your financial difficulties,good luck
Full-time summer football yes - but once LOI clubs start playing players more than €1300 a week, then its time to allow them to ply their trade in League 2 in England. It cant be sustained in this country (even with Cork being the best supported team in the country). Reality check required here.
How much is Wallace bankrolling you? Is he just putting money into facilities or day to day expenses?Quote:
Originally Posted by wexfordseagull
I think some first division clubs need to be amateur based on very low crowds.
best post in the thread & I hope Pats, Drogs and Bohs fans are taking notice of today and starting to ask questions themselves.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
Feel sorry for some of the City fans but not for the majority that were happily jumping on Rovers and Shels graves over the last couple of years
All of a sudden Brian Lennox seems a business genius for keeping a succesful Cork City going single handed for a number of years without getting us into this kind of trouble.
I assume the FAI were not too happy with people like those at Rovers running up massive debts and just fecking off leaving a football club and its fans to foot the bill.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
It was more or less a game and if you were voted in top dog you played the game and if you failed well tough sh!t just walk away.
That's changed.
Signatures were required this year so whoever signed for that at Cork City are liable for the debts run up. If they go unpaid then whoever signed will at some stage be chased for the money and taken to court I guess if it's not paid.
Arkaga CAN'T turn their backs on a debt. I'm fairly sure the FAI are correct with the statement they released today, they were talking about the agreement signed as part of the license process. If the creditors at Cork are going to sue then whoever signed that agreement is who they need to chase. It's simply not possible for them to leave and creditors not be paid due to Cork having no money.
Who or what signed that agreement is another thing !!
I think the FAI have to take the blame for this one-I thought by sending in your figures every month would show whether a club was in breach of the 65% rule or not.Whatever deficit was there at the end of a month,that club should have lodged that amount to bring the figures back up to date.
To be honest the guarantee is not really worth that much-if Arkaga had the money they would have paid the debts and not let it go this far.
Is there any penalty for not paying your players or Revenue on time?
The bottom line is players are getting paid too much money.
From what's appeared in the media so far, I'm of the opinion that the so called legal agreement that the FAI have referred to ,won't be in any way enforcable... sure Arkaga might have buckets of cash...but methinks that the company which signed the 'legal' agreement is not Arkaga but a separate company (a subsidary of Arkaga)...and I'm guessing that company hasn't got a red cent, will be wound up shortly leaving a mass of debt.... anyone got any info to contradict my theory ??Quote:
Originally Posted by sligo1
It just goes to show that if the sugar daddies pull out, the "big 4" are screwed.
There needs to be a radical financial rethink, and the FAI must show leadership in making it happen. Wages MUST be brought down.
To be honest I cant think of any player in the league who is worthy of more than €1000 a week. The average industrial wage is around €680 a week so why should they get paid much more than that as "full time professionals"? I may be wrong coz just guessing butbBetween training, media/CPO committments and games they would only really "work" about 30 hours a week anyway so why give them big money.
Its time all players were played realistic wages so clubs can survive.
Better to have tried and failed than not tried at all.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
Obviously clubs need to be held to account and if it leads to extinction then the gamble (pardon the pun) has totally failed.
But I don't seem to remember many fans (including yourself) complaining too much in the coefficient threads over the past 5 years, when you were living vicariously through the successes of other clubs, which, with the benefit of hindsight, would appear almost totally down to unsustainable spending.
The subtext that I read in your post is an "everyone should be like UCD" mantra. Whilst that would probably be the most sustainable model, by God would it be boring.....
I think I would prefer to work within our means and hope to build up revenues to a point where my team can comfortably sustain a fully professional outfit. Shelbourne Gambled, it failed, Cork has gambled and it looks like it is failing.
The LOI is ahead of the IL and whilst we are not exactly rolling in money, our clubs are far more stable off the field than our counterparts in the LOI. If the LOI doesn't change it's ways, the majority of the league will go bankrupt and that would damage the product so badly that you may never get the crowds your hoping to attract.
8 pages in and nobody has attempted a joke about the 'Cork Examiner' yet....
It's the one they call the PauperQuote:
Originally Posted by sonofstan
I must have dreamt that Omagh had a team once and of course Coleraine are a rock of financial stability.Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Bruce
Off the top of my head, over the last 10 years, the Irish League is firmly ahead in winding up orders.
Interesting article in the Independent tries to shine some light on who are the owners of Cork City?
It all sound like it could get very messy.
Surprised it took eight pages for someone to come out with one of the larger idiocies of the league, to be honest. "At least they tried" - well whoop de ****ing doo. Tried what, exactly? Pretending they were something they weren't? Going out of business? "At least they tried", IMO, is up there with "You're just obsessed" in the list of stupid retorts on this forum and shows that some people have no idea about running a football club.Quote:
Originally Posted by OneRedArmy
You're right, though, that I do enjoy seeing the league do well in Europe; it's a bit of double think on my part. I'll gladly hold my hand up there. When I heard Pat's had come back from 2-0 to draw last night, I was happy, but it is obviously tinged with the knowledge that this simply can't go on and, as I said on the other thread, I can see the league going to back to how it was ten years ago, European results and all.
And if the "UCD model" bores you (and what a pathetic excuse to commend overspending), maybe you should call it the "Shamrock Rovers model"? Whatever way you call it, it is what clubs in the league have to aspire to.
Cork's troubles (assuming the dark predictions come true) have set the league back in more ways than just losing one of its best teams on the pitch. Players are going to think twice times before coming to Ireland now, which will weaken the league. People who wonder why a player would go to Accrington Stanley instead of coming home have the answer right in front of them.
Omagh still have a team, Omagh United.Quote:
Originally Posted by OneRedArmy
Omagh, was a strange one, they had less than 100 supporters (a lot less) and punched above there weight. They relied on Linfield and Glentorans gate. They have been out of the league for quite some time now.
Coleraine are going from strength to strength as is most of the rest of the league.
We have seen overspending in the IL during the 90s, but since then the league has strived to improve off field standards. We are doing that and we are more financially stable now with less crowds than we where 10 years ago with more crowds.
But as you have isolated a couple of teams in the last 10 years. How many in the LOI has went to the wall/or near it and how many are in a very precarious position?
A hell of a lot more than in the IL that's for sure. Not to mention your own club that relied upon a local MP to get big fixtures to bail you out. Too bad institute don't get the same benefits. Wrong side of the river thoguh;)
But if the 2 clubs in the last 10 years in the IL, one folding the other nearly makes you feel all bubbly inside that's your outlook.
My point though is the IL is a lot more financially stable. That is not to say we don't have the odd bad egg but on the whole we are in far better standing that the LOI and we generate far less revenue to boot.
This just shows you how much the LOI is gambling on it's long term health.
My views might not be popular, but I think some people needs to look outside the bubble that some are in. The IL has many problems and I have been able to see them and give constructive critisism.
Maybe you should try to be a bit more constructive instead of starting a point scoring exercise.
The thing that surprises me is the fact people are saying 'at least they tried', they wheren't saying that when it was Shelbourne. It was more like 'Slap it up them'.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
I think there was a bit of an "At least they tried" attitude when Shels went belly up too. Though that may have been from Shels fans. Ollie Byrne in particular was disliked, which made it easier to have no sympathy.
But surely the point is the fact that we can't lure them back anyway as the wages are unsustainable.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
Cause/effect?
In terms of the league being set back, surely its only been set back to the level it would've been at anyway, effectively a reversion to the mean. If we assume the wider man on a barstool doesn't care either way, then the damage done is limited only to the clubs directly affected.
As for your poo pooing of the speculating to accumulate approach, I'm not surprised as you clearly have a fundamental problem with the link between risk and reward.
Even those we could afford are going to have serious reservations.Quote:
Originally Posted by OneRedArmy
What reward is this?Quote:
As for your poo pooing of the speculating to accumulate approach, I'm not surprised as you clearly have a fundamental problem with the link between risk and reward.
Any club which aspires to the UCD model shouldn't be in serious football. At some point you have to speculate to accumulate, there are more sensible ways and means of doing it than those generally pursued by eL clubs, but it's absolute rank idiocy (the type which should be punished by sterilisation, where necessary) to suggest, to use the mantra of cretins, that football clubs should be "run like businesses." The point of a business is to make money, no eL club will ever be a serious investment option. The more appropriate analogy is with the finances of a state. Sometimes you have to take measures which they didn't teach in Accountancy 101. This should never involve paying players four times their worth, though, as it does currently.
:D :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Sheridan
Oh, the irony coming from a Dublin City fan is delicious!
Are you telling me you learned nothing from your club's existence, and would do it all again?
In 20 years' time, this league will be a wreck of dead, debt wracked clubs and us (and Rovers) will be winning everything. Course the fans of said dead clubs will be saying that it's purely because the league wasn't sustainable or some other ridiculous, brain-dead cliche.
Everyone knows that in the event of nuclear winter, cockroaches would be the only creatures to thrive. But who'd want to live in a world of cockroaches, except a cockroach?
The UCD model depends totally on funding from an outside benefactor, similar to Drogheda/Pats/Cork, etc.