Bohs in financial trouble

**Charlie Darwin** · 17/02/2011, 7:10 PM

Originally Posted by SkStu

i think we need to organise "A Night With... Bohemians"

we can charge you all in and you can ask all your questions and boo and throw rotten tomatoes at the club and stuff. e5 a head reasonable? Should cover our wages through 2013.

We pay three times that twice a year to get into Dalyer and yous can't even cover your wages for one year

**SkStu** · 17/02/2011, 7:19 PM

Originally Posted by Charlie Darwin

We pay three times that twice a year to get into Dalyer and yous can't even cover your wages for one year

thats cos we have to clean the place up and steam hose it after you filthy animals come for a visit!

any truth to the rumours that Rovers board were looking to boycott Dalymount this season by the way?

**SwanVsDalton** · 17/02/2011, 7:26 PM

Originally Posted by Jicked

Do Bohemian FC have a PRO?

Originally Posted by SkStu

i think we need to organise "A Night With... Bohemians"

we can charge you all in and you can ask all your questions and boo and throw rotten tomatoes at the club and stuff.

Event organisation and crisis spin - it appears to be Stu.

**dfx-** · 17/02/2011, 7:27 PM

Originally Posted by SkStu

...we have to clean the place up and steam hose it....

News to me, but at least once would be nice...

Maybe we could lend some spare trophy polish to help out...

**SkStu** · 17/02/2011, 7:30 PM

some filth is impossible to get out though no matter how many times dfx!!

**Nedser** · 17/02/2011, 11:48 PM

Originally Posted by pineapple stu

I'm confused here - why is there a charge for the grant so?

Surely if the money was used for the correct purpose, there should be no charge? And similarily, if there is a charge, then Bohs clearly haven't used the facility for the purpose stated?

I think the problem is that you don't seem to understand the term "charge" as used in this context. Hint: it doesn't mean "fee".

**Nedser** · 18/02/2011, 12:29 AM

Just to put the grants received by Bohs in context ��.

Bohs received 2 grants:
� �400k in 1999 (which paid for about 35% of the cost of the Jodi)
� �100k in 2002 (to repair the floodlights?)

There is no question that money was put to good use, and the improved facilities have been in use for 9-12 years already. The implication that this money was somehow used to fund Bohs excessive wages in recent years is laughable. The improvements partly funded by the grants have not just benefitted Bohs, as Dalyer has been used as a home ground by 3 LOI clubs since then (including rovers!). Several clubs have also used it for European games, which they would not have been allowed to host at their own grounds. I don�t think anyone can claim that the taxpayers money was not used as intended, or that the taxpayer is somehow owed money by Bohs at this stage. I assume that is why the govt is happy to waive their first charge over the title at this point in time.

In terms of the amount of money involved here, people should bear in mind that the govt routinely shells out upwards of �50million per year on these grants (mainly to rural GAA clubs, strangely enough).

**pineapple stu** · 18/02/2011, 8:57 AM

Originally Posted by Nedser

I think the problem is that you don't seem to understand the term "charge" as used in this context. Hint: it doesn't mean "fee".

Eh, no. I'm quite aware of what the word "charge" means. Your non-snotty post, however, was much more informative; thanks.

**dfx-** · 18/02/2011, 9:41 AM

Originally Posted by SkStu

some filth is impossible to get out though no matter how many times dfx!!

Yeah I've been in the Jodi too

**marinobohs** · 18/02/2011, 10:17 AM

Originally Posted by Nedser

Just to put the grants received by Bohs in context ……….

Bohs received 2 grants:
• �400k in 1999 (which paid for about 35% of the cost of the Jodi)
• €100k in 2002 (to repair the floodlights?)

There is no question that money was put to good use, and the improved facilities have been in use for 9-12 years already. The implication that this money was somehow used to fund Bohs excessive wages in recent years is laughable. The improvements partly funded by the grants have not just benefitted Bohs, as Dalyer has been used as a home ground by 3 LOI clubs since then (including rovers!). Several clubs have also used it for European games, which they would not have been allowed to host at their own grounds. I don’t think anyone can claim that the taxpayers money was not used as intended, or that the taxpayer is somehow owed money by Bohs at this stage. I assume that is why the govt is happy to waive their first charge over the title at this point in time.

In terms of the amount of money involved here, people should bear in mind that the govt routinely shells out upwards of €50million per year on these grants (mainly to rural GAA clubs, strangely enough).

No queston what the funds were used for - there for all to see - I think the issue relates to conditions attached to grants which the Department has taken much more seriously especially since money granted for completion of a certain stadium in South Dublin was "diverted". Rumour at the time had it that FAI had to repay monies granted (although never heard this confirmed). eason for the condition(s) is to ensure that the community (rightly) get some return on the money and that club(s) dont just use it to tart up a ground to sell on or having spent the money sell off the ground for redevelopment.
Most (if not all) clubs have availed of the grants either to develp or maintain grounds and, as far as I know, conditions apply to all. Conditions are usually time related (ie for a specific period) but not sure what period in the case of Dalymount. as nedser pointed out the main monies received were in early 90's so I expect the conditions would not have long to expire anyway.

**Ezeikial** · 18/02/2011, 10:43 AM

Originally Posted by marinobohs

as nedser pointed out the main monies received were in early 90's so I expect the conditions would not have long to expire anyway.

So why make the waiving or downgrading of this charge a condition of the loan scheme at all?

**Dodge** · 18/02/2011, 11:15 AM

Originally Posted by Ezeikial

So why make the waiving or downgrading of this charge a condition of the loan scheme at all?

I don't think thats the case.

I think Bohs can't use dalymount as collateral for anything without the consent of those who have a charge on it (including the D/TSC)

**horton** · 18/02/2011, 11:45 AM

At the risk of being ridiculed, can anyone explain to me the whole thing with Bohs/Zurich/that car park or point me to somewhere that can explain it?

**poster** · 18/02/2011, 11:54 AM

Originally Posted by dfx-

Maybe we could lend some spare trophy polish to help out...

We could do with more of that, first batch ran out last month.

**Longfordian** · 18/02/2011, 12:00 PM

Originally Posted by horton

At the risk of being ridiculed, can anyone explain to me the whole thing with Bohs/Zurich/that car park or point me to somewhere that can explain it?

As far as I can tell Zurich gave Bohs a loan or overdraft of 4 or 5 million I think and as security Bohs put up the car park which they're renting to the Mater. Im open to correction but that's my understanding.

**marinobohs** · 18/02/2011, 1:24 PM

Originally Posted by Longfordian

As far as I can tell Zurich gave Bohs a loan or overdraft of 4 or 5 million I think and as security Bohs put up the car park which they're renting to the Mater. Im open to correction but that's my understanding.

Yea, thats about it Longfordian. car park (right hand corner of St peters Rd (Des kelly stand) end of the ground for those not familiar) was actually the best earner due to car parking deal done with Mater Hospital and it was that portion of the ground that was put up as collateral for the loan facility from Zurich.
In reality, it is well nigh impossible to see that loan repaid except in the context of a sale of Dalymount although it is not impossible to see the terms extended beyond the original timeframe.