Financial Implications of Euro Exit for Bohs

Printable View

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

26/07/2010, 2:27 PM
Ezeikial

Quote:

Originally Posted by marinobohs

...... and cue tired, hackneyed rubbish about "going broke" "relegation" "denied throphy if they win it" etc etc. In fact make it simpler by providing a link to the same nonsence posted last year.

There certainly is a feeling of deja vu alright.

The "relegation" and "denied trophy if they win it" stuff that the Bohs forum was also full of last year, should only get another run if it became apparent that Bohs were in danger of falling foul of the SCP again. For most clubs a brush with this in one year would mean that greater prudence in ensuring compliance the following year. With Bohs though....you just never know (the original budgets being rejected by the FAI do not give any great confidence)

Quote:

Originally Posted by marinobohs

Bohs difficulties accrued over a number of years and will, have to be addressed over a number of years. The sale of Dalymount will be the fulcrum on which the clubs future will be decided but there is also need for more frugal outlays going forward (this has commenced with the wage bill almost halved in little over a year).

The budget may have been reduced (it would be almost impossible to do otherwise in a decling player market), but the fact that Bohs still have the largest budget in the league speaks its own truth.

Your sterling defence of all things Bohemian is admirable to an extent. But part of the problem at Bohs is the refusal to see the reality and to take appropriate action. This responsibility rests with the board, members and supporters in varying degrees
26/07/2010, 3:19 PM
SkStu

just a couple of things - prior to TNS we were running at about 50%-55% of the SCP. I dont see how this will have changed drastically considering we rightly werent allowed to budget for Euro progression or winning the title.

We have a long term debt issue. Its considerable. It has been an issue longer than 3-4 years. More like 7-8 but it became worse after the deal to sell Dalymount to Carroll fell apart.

The crux of the issue is how to go about servicing the long term debt. Do we continue to try to make money out of Europe or do we cut our cloth somewhat and build a more sustainable model? The decision has been made a lot easier in a lot of respects by the TNS result (as MB says, the board were considering all options anyway). Moving away from D7 is part of the solution unfortunately. And yes, it is sickening that our ground has been gambled away by fools chasing glory.

We might not win things for a few years and will have to do some things that will hurt but long story short is that we'll be here for the long term and we'll be challenging again.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roo69

And i gave my opinion about Bohs too, whats the problem?

it was more about Bray's woes at the start of the season, no?

Dong, the post was a p!sstake. And one that gave me a laugh in an otherwise miserable week.

Ezekial, despite a near 50% reduction from last year, we may still have the highest budget this year, im not sure, but i would guess that Fingal and Shamrock Rovers are not a million miles behind, despite what you would think. And, the reaason for having the high budget is not from our new signings but from our older big money signings who are still in contract. We will be able to slash the budget again next year, thankfully, as they will be out of contract.
26/07/2010, 3:51 PM
Ezeikial

Quote:

Originally Posted by SkStu

Ezekial, despite a near 50% reduction from last year, we may still have the highest budget this year, im not sure, but i would guess that Fingal and Shamrock Rovers are not a million miles behind, despite what you would think. And, the reaason for having the high budget is not from our new signings but from our older big money signings who are still in contract. We will be able to slash the budget again next year, thankfully, as they will be out of contract.

Rubbish - this is part of the reason (same as it was last year, and the year before, and the year before that too). Can you not see that the signings of Cretaro, Greene, Gray, Higgins, McGlynn, Quigley, Murphy, and O'Connor had a little influence on this?
26/07/2010, 4:14 PM
SkStu

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ezeikial

Rubbish - this is part of the reason (same as it was last year, and the year before, and the year before that too). Can you not see that the signings of Cretaro, Greene, Gray, Higgins, McGlynn, Quigley, Murphy, and O'Connor had a little influence on this?

Ah FFS, would you cop on - im not saying that its the only reason. Or at least thats not what i meant it to say.

Glen Crowe - lets say he was on e2000 per week at Bohs. He then leaves Bohs and we sign Cretaro, Quigley and Murphy on e700 per week. Now we have 3 players costing about the same amount of money as one player previously cost. Brian Murphy was another high earner.

What im saying is, if you take the highest earners out of the equation, then our budget falls into line with other teams. Is it better to keep those players or terminate and pay out on their contract? Its better to keep them obviously, as its going to cost you the same either way and keeping them allows you to absorb the hit over the term of their contract and not in a lump sum.

On another note, does anyone know for definite who has the highest budget in the league this year? It probably is us, id just be interested to see who else is spending what.
26/07/2010, 4:16 PM
poster

Quote:

Originally Posted by SkStu

On another note, does anyone know for definite who has the highest budget in the league this year?

Longford, they just haven't used half of it yet.
26/07/2010, 4:24 PM
Longfordian

I know Shamrock Rovers' budget is definitely over a million but how that compares to the rest I don't know.
26/07/2010, 4:26 PM
Lim till i die

Quote:

Originally Posted by Longfordian

I know Shamrock Rovers' budget is definitely over a million but how that compares to the rest I don't know.

I would estimate that it is at least 11% bigger than Limericks
26/07/2010, 4:49 PM
Ezeikial

Quote:

Originally Posted by SkStu

Ah FFS, would you cop on - im not saying that its the only reason.

You called it the reason - and it's the only one you gave!

Quote:

Originally Posted by SkStu

And, the reaason for having the high budget is not from our new signings but from our older big money signings who are still in contract.

b

Quote:

Originally Posted by SkStu

What im saying is, if you take the highest earners out of the equation, then our budget falls into line with other teams.

Falls in line with other teams? Are you for real?

Maybe you mean after you take out the top 15 earners?

Quote:

Originally Posted by SkStu

On another note, does anyone know for definite who has the highest budget in the league this year? It probably is us, id just be interested to see who else is spending what.

I am sure you know that it is not published by the FAI, and I am sure you know that it is Bohs
26/07/2010, 4:53 PM
galwayjames

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ezeikial

I am sure you know that it is not published by the FAI, and I am sure you know that it is Bohs

Wasn't it revealed at the end of last season that Pats spent almost 3 million on players in 2008? Maybe the FAI don't publish them but somebody does know what the figures are.
26/07/2010, 5:09 PM
dfx-

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lim till i die

I would estimate that it is at least 11% bigger than Limericks

There's Bohs fans who would've taken the opportunity to use 4%...
26/07/2010, 5:15 PM
Knappagh Red

Quote:

Originally Posted by SkStu

Glen Crowe - lets say he was on e2000 per week at Bohs. He then leaves Bohs and we sign Cretaro, Quigley and Murphy on e700 per week. Now we have 3 players costing about the same amount of money as one player previously cost. Brian Murphy was another high earner.
.

If you really believe Cretaro took a pay cut to move to Dublin you are fooling yourself, or maybe Bohs are paying players under the counter
26/07/2010, 5:44 PM
SkStu

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ezeikial

You called it the reason - and it's the only one you gave!

b

Falls in line with other teams? Are you for real?

Maybe you mean after you take out the top 15 earners?

I am sure you know that it is not published by the FAI, and I am sure you know that it is Bohs

well then you can pretty much say whatever you want about Bohs' or any other clubs budget because no one has the knowledge to counter otherwise. So its all just speculation. Knock yourself out.

regarding the reason i didnt think you would take it so literally that i meant it was the only reason. Do you really think i intended that or that i even thought i would get away with making such a claim? It was just badly written.
26/07/2010, 6:21 PM
galwayjames

Quote:

Originally Posted by Knappagh Red

If you really believe Cretaro took a pay cut to move to Dublin you are fooling yourself, or maybe Bohs are paying players under the counter

I doubt cretaro would've got any bonuses at Sligo....and now that Bohs are out of Europe he won't be getting at Bohs either.
26/07/2010, 8:00 PM
Derry

Quote:

Originally Posted by marinobohs

Yep, winning the League by 19 points with the 4th highest budget (and that was before Derrys creative accounting came to light ) sure proves it.:confused:
Do you really want to get into a debate about players and second contracts ?:rolleyes:

At least you haven't denied that Bohs are paying some of their players for jobs other than playing football. The only difference is the FAI threw the book at Derry and rightly so, but they hadn't the balls to do the same with Bohs.

Didn't Ritchi Sadlier tell Fran Gavan that other clubs were doing dual contracts, but Gavan didn't want to know about it. Who do you think he was talking about?
26/07/2010, 8:09 PM
SkStu

Quote:

Originally Posted by Derry

At least you haven't denied that Bohs are paying some of their players for jobs other than playing football. The only difference is the FAI threw the book at Derry and rightly so, but they hadn't the balls to do the same with Bohs.

Didn't Ritchi Sadlier tell Fran Gavan that other clubs were doing dual contracts, but Gavan didn't want to know about it. Who do you think he was talking about?

we're not paying our players dual contracts. The FAI conducted a thorough investigation of our accounts at Shamrock Rovers request in the off season and nothing untoward was uncovered. The Derry saga would have given the perfect excuse to the FAI to make examples out of Bohemians if they had found anything.

And i guess if Sadlier says it, it must be true.
26/07/2010, 8:16 PM
Mr A

Quote:

Originally Posted by Derry

The only difference is the FAI threw the book at Derry and rightly so, but they hadn't the balls to do the same with Bohs.

The only difference?

Bohs have overspent, but they have a massive asset and will be able to cover it. They may be selling out their future, but that's their prerogative. Derry massively overspent with no such asset and systematically cheated to cover the fact.

There's a feckin ocean of difference between the two.
26/07/2010, 8:59 PM
sligo23

Quote:

Originally Posted by poster

Longford, they just haven't used half of it yet.

They're using it to feed John Lester...
26/07/2010, 9:11 PM
De Town

Quote:

Originally Posted by sligo23

They're using it to feed John Lester...

He's half the man he used to be, definitely lost some poundage since the start of the season.
26/07/2010, 9:16 PM
Longfordian

Crowds are down, everyone suffers.
26/07/2010, 9:32 PM
outspoken

John lester is a top quality player and a top class bloke. He receives alot of stick from away supporters because of his so called weight but imo John Lester is not fat he is very muscley and well built and he would be a massive loss to the Town if he were to go.

He commands the midfield even when hes playing center half!!!! he's a premier division player no doubt!!!

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page