Bohs in financial trouble - FAI Licencing called into question again?

[pineapple stu]

Had the bubble held out a bit longer they might just have gotten away with it. Or if they hadn't ballsed things up with Albion.

The thing is that they have actually gotten plenty of money from Danninger. They managed to lose a million a year after receiving a million a year from the sale of the ground. That's retarded. If they'd pocketed and spent the million just, they'd have had some good days and now would actually be perfectly ok. It's the loan that's killing them, not the deal going bang.

Also Dodge - don't forget Cork did go bust and reformed. I think that's exactly what Bohs will do. They haven't a hope in hell of raising the money, or of continuing to meet repayments into next season.

[Brusher]

I've been on here once or twice before, and been put off to say the least when people "have a go". So one last time I will say it ! Why does everybody revel in other clubs misfortunes (whether these misfortunes are through stupidity or else) ? The only people that we as LOI fans should be having issues with are the FAI who should be promoting the game and indeed the clubs. By promoting, I do of course mean in a serious manner. Take for example in an international match programme, why not have a questionnaire for those people in the ground as to why they don't go to a match in their own league, but have this in every international match, where it gets under peoples skin ! They could have a prize of a season ticket for these bar stoolers ! Many years ago, there was National League United set up to work against Wimbledon relocating here, that's precisely what is needed now, where opposition fans can have a voice, but I would like to see this set up by the FAI and maybe a link put up on their web site so they would have to take notice.

[White Horse]

I've been on here once or twice before, and been put off to say the least when people "have a go". So one last time I will say it ! Why does everybody revel in other clubs misfortunes (whether these misfortunes are through stupidity or else) ?

One ot two may revel in the mistakes made by rivals.

However, the tone of this thread is marvel at the stupidity of Bohs and frustration at the futility of the FAI licencing process.

[Macy]

I've been on here once or twice before, and been put off to say the least when people "have a go". So one last time I will say it ! Why does everybody revel in other clubs misfortunes (whether these misfortunes are through stupidity or else)?

That's because you are misrepresenting questioning, and concern, for people revelling in the misfortune. Most posters would prefer none of this to happen, but that doesn't mean that we should all shut up and only wish bohs well and but on faux sympathy when they've clearly made a balls of things. If you don't try and learn from history, you're bound to repeat it. Plus it highlights the total failure of licencing, yet again.

don't forget Cork did go bust and reformed. I think that's exactly what Bohs will do. They haven't a hope in hell of raising the money, or of continuing to meet repayments into next season.

Difference is, Bohs have an asset to be liquidated. Is it as easy and (relatively) straight forward to go bust and reform when the club owns the ground?

[Schumi]

Difference is, Bohs have an asset to be liquidated. Is it as easy and (relatively) straight forward to go bust and reform when the club owns the ground?

I presume anyone can go bust if they want and anyone can set up a new club. The only problem I'd see is that there mightn't be a ground waiting for the new club to play in.

[White Horse]

I presume anyone can go bust if they want and anyone can set up a new club. The only problem I'd see is that there mightn't be a ground waiting for the new club to play in.

Any "new club" would need to buy the ground from the liquidator. This would be time-consuming and difficult due to the complex legal issues surrounding Dalymount.

It is more likely that the new club would rent a ground and will receive any profit left over when the liquidator finally sells Dalymount and settles exisitng liabilities.

[Schumi]

Any "new club" would need to buy the ground from the liquidator. This would be time-consuming and difficult due to the complex legal issues surrounding Dalymount.

More importantly, totally unaffordable.

[OneRedArmy]

I might be missing something but I'm not sure how licensing is supposed to solve Bohs problem?

By putting them out of business last year instead of this year?

Licensing can't save clubs who are hell bent on obliterating themselves (Bohs, Derry, Cork and Shels spring to mind, i.e. all had in common that the writing was on the wall and plain to see well in advance).

Not unlike the current national debate about apportioning blame for the country's problems, if a members club democratically destroys itself, why should a third party be responsible for saving them?!

Its akin to the old suicide being illegal debate IMO.....

[mediahack]

I presume anyone can go bust if they want and anyone can set up a new club. The only problem I'd see is that there mightn't be a ground waiting for the new club to play in.

I remember a few years ago that in the wake of the Shamrock Rovers debacle, Waterford were looking at options to restructure and they were told in no uncertain terms that they would have to start at the very beginning again (in the Munster Senior League) and work their way back to the national league.

Fast forward to last year and you have a club that is thrown out of the league altogether and 24 hours later are accepted back into the First Division without a word. Another club pushed the limits of everybody and eventually succumbed after a disastrous owner, yet all that happened was they were reconstituted and re-emerged in the First Division.

So really, all it proves is that (a) The FAI treat clubs differently depending on location and size and (b) the Licensing Process is a complete waste of time.

[BonnieShels]

And that some of us still have debts to pay off.

[Macy]

Not unlike the current national debate about apportioning blame for the country's problems, if a members club democratically destroys itself, why should a third party be responsible for saving them?!

As with the national situation, it's a problem with the regulation that implements governing policy. Licencing is supposed to stop this from happening, there is budget approval, there is even supposed to be ongoing oversight. Why did licencing not pick up the issues? It's a fair question imo, even if that doesn't absolve blame from Bohs.

At this stage, is there any bloody point of the financial side of licencing. Either by fudge or design it's incapable of preventing problems.

[OneRedArmy]

Licencing is supposed to stop this from happening,

Is it? Really?

[pineapple stu]

I might be missing something but I'm not sure how licensing is supposed to solve Bohs problem?

I don't think it's unreasonable for licencing to see this coming in advance (losses of a million a couple of years ago were a warning) and put a stop to it. Got a bank loan of over half a mill? Sanction - points penalty or relegation. Owe back tax? Sanction. Miss wages? Sanction. Nip things in the bud, and be harsh about it.

If Bohs genuinely haven't broken anything in licencing and have still gone broke, then it must follow that licencing is a waste of time, surely?

Difference is, Bohs have an asset to be liquidated. Is it as easy and (relatively) straight forward to go bust and reform when the club owns the ground?

Company A goes bust. It'd take time for the liquidation to complete obviously; the ground would have to be sold for starters. Nothing at all to stop Company B forming in the meantime and taking over control of the club. I'd imagine they could rent Dalyer while the sale was being completed.

[Macy]

Is it? Really?

Why have the financial side, including pre approval of budgets, and monthly submitting of management accounts? Just for the fun of it?

[MariborKev]

Stu,

Few points

1. If you are servicing a historic bank loan of over €500k, why should you be sanctioned? Same goes for agreements with Revenue over tax etc.
2. Did Bohs not have a transfer embargo and budget rejections before.

Licensing is a framework. If the clubs don't respect it, the only way you'll absolutely ensure compliance will be franchise/centrally run football.

[OneRedArmy]

Why have the financial side, including pre approval of budgets, and monthly submitting of management accounts? Just for the fun of it?

But whats the sanction? Tell people to stop? Transfer ban? Relegation?

All been tried, both with Bohs and other clubs.

Hasn't worked. There has to be personal responsibility at some stage and as a members club, Bohs only have to look at themselves.

[Ezeikial]

Licensing is a framework. If the clubs don't respect it, the only way you'll absolutely ensure compliance will be franchise/centrally run football.

All the indications are that Bohs have treated licensing with complete disdain.

Witness the strange "cheque swapping" deals with Albion and other dubious arrangements that appear to have been designed to increase turnover, presumably as a ruse to conform with the SCP requirements.

[pineapple stu]

Stu,

Few points

1. If you are servicing a historic bank loan of over €500k, why should you be sanctioned? Same goes for agreements with Revenue over tax etc.
2. Did Bohs not have a transfer embargo and budget rejections before.

Licensing is a framework. If the clubs don't respect it, the only way you'll absolutely ensure compliance will be franchise/centrally run football.

They're vague ideas, not meant to be exact rules. Check see where clubs are at the moment and tailor the ideas to the reality. So if you're servicing an existing loan of E500k, then fair enough, but sanction if it increases substantially maybe.

Bohs had budget rejections; we've seen that's not a sanction - it's pretty much useless. They go back to Excel, change a few numbers and then ignore them entirely. The transfer embargo was mainly outside the transfer window as I recall - they still managed to sign lots of players in the last while.

Absolutely clubs should be responsible for their actions. But many of the people running clubs are idiots and need strong external guidance to protect them from themselves as much as anything else. I don't see why licencing can't be expected to help in that regard. Instead, it's sat back and watched.

[Dodge]

There has to be personal responsibility at some stage and as a members club, Bohs only have to look at themselves.

I don't think anyone is saying the FAI are to blame. rather just pointing out that their early warning system that is Licensing is a complete and utter failure.

As far as I can see nobody, bar Bohs, is claiming that its anybody's fault but their own.

[peadar1987]

I've been on here once or twice before, and been put off to say the least when people "have a go". So one last time I will say it ! Why does everybody revel in other clubs misfortunes (whether these misfortunes are through stupidity or else) ? The only people that we as LOI fans should be having issues with are the FAI who should be promoting the game and indeed the clubs. By promoting, I do of course mean in a serious manner. Take for example in an international match programme, why not have a questionnaire for those people in the ground as to why they don't go to a match in their own league, but have this in every international match, where it gets under peoples skin ! They could have a prize of a season ticket for these bar stoolers ! Many years ago, there was National League United set up to work against Wimbledon relocating here, that's precisely what is needed now, where opposition fans can have a voice, but I would like to see this set up by the FAI and maybe a link put up on their web site so they would have to take notice.

I'm not revelling in Bohs' misfortune, but I'm hoping for the FAI to enforce their own rules, and I would be happy if they did so, in the hope that it would stop clubs going the same way in the future.