Printable View
and here was me thinking that licensing would decide who would play in the prem, first and A div silly me .after bringing in that shambols that was genisis he still cant get the league makeup he wants.
he should not have made such a statement prior to licensing
john o rourke, top man and quality footballer, shame his career was cut short, he was the sam allardyce of ramblers, given no time to turn things around
Profit to debt is an irrelevant ratio. If their debt is reducing, even at small levels, consistently over the last 2/2½ years, then it's clearly manageable. It'll just take longer to clear it. Turnover to debt is more important - how much cash they could have to clear the debt if they suddenly needed to.Quote:
Originally Posted by dcfcsteve
I think it's significant that the debt seems to be from a capital expenditure (the stand). It's clubs making losses on wages and other normal expenditure which are in the most danger.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
Yeah, thats him. I was thinking O'Riordan but knew that wasn't it. Now there's a guy who got a raw deal.Quote:
Originally Posted by ramsfan
I'd say they would do well if they play in the First Division, have a lot of money which is being spent on full time players.Quote:
Originally Posted by drummerboy
All speculationQuote:
Originally Posted by DmanDmythDledge
I know you're an Accountant and I'm not, but I can't agree with you here.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
Ratio of profit to debt is important in terms of your ability to pay off the debt in any meaningful sort of time-span.
You're suggesting that all that matters in relation to debt is turnover - i.e. how much cash-flow thery have to pay off any debt that is called-in at short notice. It is in terms of ensuring they don't go bust if faced with a debt recall. But given that their profit is way below their ongoing debts, using turnover in that way that would just be switching old debt for new debt. In otherwords, nothing would change - it'd still take them an age to pay their debt off.
I understand the concept of manageable debt, and don't buy into the idea that all debt is 'bad' - but with KCFC operating at such a low profit level (that could easily drop to a negative figure in any given season), the propensity for them to remain in debt in-effect for perpetuity appears high. Only profit (or donations, which would be treated effectively as such any way) will enable them to change that scenario.
Par for the course anyway.Quote:
Originally Posted by dcfcsteve
The problem with your argument is that it isn't usually necessary to actually pay off your debt. If, for example, the debt is a loan that you're paying off gradually, people will generally be happy with that and won't look for anything further. If Kilkenny are steadily making profits (more than most eL clubs) and steadily paying off their debt, it's manageable. Unless, of course, their one-man committee takes ill.
Consider two companies. A Ltd has turnover of E80k, profits of E10k and debt of E50k. B Ltd has turnover of E800k, profits of E10k and debt of E50k. Which is healthier? B, obviously. If it needs to pay off its debt quickly, there's greater scope for cost savings; there's also a greater cash flow so it's easier to move your debt around. That's why turnover is more important than profit here.
The irony is that it appears that neither turnover nor profit may be enough bto save Kilkenny anyway - such is the danger of being a one-man-band.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
I'll take that as being as close as you'll ever get to admitting you're wrong. ;)
Quote:
Originally Posted by dcfcsteve
I don't get all this one man band thing.....
You obviously haven't been following me that closely on here, as I've happily held my hands up on a number of occassions ... :)Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
I guess that as a UCD fan you just have to look for a victory in anything.... :D
You know, Den - guy with a bass drum strapped to his back, a suspended harmonica in his mouth and a set of cymbols in his hands. Was an entertainments staple back in the 1950's.....Quote:
Originally Posted by Den Perry
Got talking to one of the new Sporting Fingal players and the plans Liam Buckley and his men have are supposedly "out of this World" , something never seen in Ireland before and my contact says WHEN they get into the League they will shock a lot of people and Clubs with their professional spproach and way of doing business.....interesting times....:ball:
In fairness - how many clubs and people have said the same thing over the years, and all have come to nought !Quote:
Originally Posted by Spoons
Just look at Wexford Youths - joined the league boasting that they would be run completely different and would actually "show other clubs the way".
Twelve months later they're struggling with debt and in danger of going bang.
I don't see anything different with regards Sporting Fingers.
Plus ca change....
:DQuote:
Originally Posted by dcfcsteve
No need when we can beat youz twice a season.Quote:
I guess that as a UCD fan you just have to look for a victory in anything.... :D
Ahhh...remember football?
Eh, no. Something never seen in Ireland since Dublin City FC.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spoons
Heard the moneyman behind Sporting Fingal is a developer named Gannon, the guy who completed the deal with Malahide for their former ground.
dfscsteve, where the flippin' heck did you hear that the Youths were struggling. The only problem we have is that the 'officials' are slowing down what is our onward march to a top rated community (I didn't say title winning) based club. Facts please????????
Listening to Jim Rhattigan on Newtalk last night there's no might about it - Kilkenny will not be in First Division next season, and possibly not in the A league. He said there would be a press release at some stage today.