Hadnt thought of that.
It would make sense, theyd most likely be getting a better deal now that Bohs are desperate than if they waited the two years and Bohs had gotten themselves on an even keel again.
It would be a real shame to see Tolka laying empty if that happened especially when there are grounds in this country of a far lesser standard.
Isn't that what it's like most Friday nights anyway?Originally Posted by theneutral
Bohs would've just sold it again anyway to guarantee benefit
The Model Club
Tell all the Bohs you know
that we've gone and won two-in-a-row
and it's not gonna be three
and it's not gonna be four
it's more likely to be 5-1.
There is an economic theory/truism that land will always revert to its highest value use.
Let's face it - no-one values LOI football. And not just in economic terms either...
Builders don't take the punt - they just build. It's developers who take the punt. And in fairness - for a developer who has cash, it may seem a relatively sensible idea.
Now isn't a good time to sell apartments - but it's a good time to be building them if you have independent financing. The construction industry is at rock-bottom, so you could pretty much name your own price to get a builder. It'd take two or more years before any of the properties were ready to sell (is there even any planning permission in-place for the Tolka site ?), by which time you would reasonably hope the housing market would have regained at least some of its confidence (even if prices hadn't increased). If things haven't improved in two years time - at least in terms of mood/confidenece, if not also in availability of borrowing - then we're all in serious trouble.
The alternative option for a developer with access to cash would be to leave it in the bank, where it would earn nothing for the foreseeable future. Developers like to develop properties.
So I could see some method in their apparent madness. Though the key questions is surely whether any PP is in place ?
The country is over-stocked with appartments, net emigration for the first time since 1995, there's nobody left to buy or occupy them.
this ground will be taken over by NAMA, give it a year and you'll get it off them for 2d 6. even if its in paper that they have to move out keep playing there what develper is gonna get off his arse to remove squatters on a mama site??? personally id like to see a merger between two dublin first division clubs one with history and a few fans the other with money and no fans and do a ground share in a new stadium out their side of town. q the rant of these two clubs fans but its just my opinion
Re the above and someone asked about planning permission to build apartments on the Tolka Park site:
The current Dublin City Development Plan 2005 - 2011 contains a proviso preventing Tolka Park from being rezoned for any other use other than sporting, unless Shels have found a permanent home elsewhere. The City Manager put in place to prevent another Rovers Milltown 20 year situation happening again.
The new 2011 - 2017 Plant has just begun to be drafted and the preliminary Managers Report states - "Good to retain Tolka Park as a sports facilty" at the bottom of page 138.
http://www.dublincity.ie/Planning/Du...s%20Report.pdf
Shels are looking for a permanent new base. They're not going to complete the sale of Tolka Park and draw down the final 3 or 4 million of the sale price until they've done the deal on the new permanent home.
From what I heard last night they're hoping to get this sorted by 2011 meaning Shels will have at least one more year in Tolka.
Presumably the new owners/developers are in no great rush in the current economic climate to start building in the immediate short term -even if they could.
I hope this clears up some of misconceptions in this thread.
A transient, horrible, fantastic dream,
Wherein is nothing yet all things do seem:
From which we're wakened by a friendly nudge
Of our bedfellow Death, and cry: "O fudge!"
Ambrose Bierce
This means the developer has a vested interest in helping find Shels a new home, which can only be good for the club.
Nonesense. If the price is right, an apartment will sell - no matter what the financial conditions. There's plenty of people renting who want to own their own home at some point.
Plus - do you expect things to have not changed at all in 2-3yrs time ?
Of course, they'll be even worse.
On what basis ?
Of course things will be better. There are Green Shoots. Green Shoots!
Green Scores!!!
Sorry, couldn't resist
There are plenty of empty apartments within spitting distance of Tolka as the moment. Can't see anything being built for at least 2 years.
Always look on the bright side of life
Jaysus that's poorIsn't that what it's like most Friday nights anyway?
Shels supporters may be small in number but they are extremely loyal which, to be fair, is more than can be said for your support. I find it quite pathetic that fans of other LOI clubs regularly jeer our crowds considering the fact that attendances are very poor across the board (with one obvious exception).
Back on topic, I think the general concensus amongst Shels supporters is that this move is a step in the wrong direction. It's fair to say that we are now paying dearly for past 'indiscretions'. We will never be able to build anything in Phibsboro'. Worrying times for the club, on and off the pitch.
Get a life, it was clearly a joke.Jaysus that's poor
Shels supporters may be small in number but they are extremely loyal which, to be fair, is more than can be said for your support. I find it quite pathetic that fans of other LOI clubs regularly jeer our crowds considering the fact that attendances are very poor across the board (with one obvious exception).
Is this a definate?? I dont want to see Bohs go bust but surely the FAI letting them use it as income for 2009 is just making the hole bigger in D7. Will they let them stick down 120k next season? Surely sticking down 30k in next seasons budget and the four budgets after that while trying to work with some sort of realism is a demand from the FAI to Bohs??
I'm no Accountant, but normal convention surely dictates that the sum should be amortised/represented equally across the full period of the occupancy it relates to.
Does the FAI stipulate what sort of Accounting conventions can be used in the wage cap calculations, or can it literally be made up to the benefit of each individual club ?
The flip side of Bohs treating it all as income this year is that Shels would therefore have to treat it all as expenditure this year as well. Would that then impact their own 65% situation ? (I suspect not, as it doesn't impact turnover, but still worth asking).
You're correct in this: it doesn't affect Shels' compliance with the 65% rule at all.
On the other points you raise, I don't know. Pineapple Stu can answer the first, but the second is probably known only to the FAI, a cabal of club accountants and a telepathic florist who can be found begging at the Abbey Street Luas stop on Tuesdays.
You can't spell failure without FAI
Posting Permissions
Quote
Bookmarks