Ezekial, The Lep is right, it wasn't a problem from day one, though when GG was forced to pull out it had to be corrected, it was, the budget was adjusted and even with the reduction in prize monies, it was going to work as the new plan and sponsorship/backing had come on stream (The Lep can support me on this). The club had moved away from a single benefactor support to a more sustainable business plan (cutting cloth etc) and everything from the person hired in to be the Commercial manager to the Dalymount move to the new shareholders, it was all going to work, albeit at a lower and sustainable cost. However the Council admin acted without forethought (I stick to backside covering pre-election) and this damaged it. The full truth will come out in time and we'll see what has been lost.
I am very dubious about this.Originally Posted by Spudulika
Whether the model was a sustainable one from the outset (day one) is very debatable - but I take your point that the GG cash was there at that time to support it initially.
Moving to a "more sustainable business plan" ? This supports my point above.
Based on the players who were contracted and "signings" such as Ken Oman on €50k+ and Gary O'Neill on 52 week contract (another 50k?) does not indicate "cutting the cloth". There must have been a huge ammount of money "waiting in the wings". Can you enlighten us?
Obviously I am unable to go into too much depth, however the basics were this. What was going to come in was going to match what was going out. There was one sponsor (a London-based Financial company) who stepped back, however the replacement was ready and waiting and stepped in. The transfer of the old company shares out of GG's name was complete and the shares (apart from 26% held by FCC) had 50.1% sold (enough to cover any shortfall in the club) plus the remaining minority share was already sold. Funding was in place to keep the club going however the 2 main principals in the club (admin and football sides) were shocked by being handed letters of termination before the FCC signed over the shares to the new buyers. As soon as this took place there was even an attempt made to take 100% of the shares on (removing the FCC completely from liability and shareholding) however they refused to do this and shut it all down, since they had to allocate the shares there was nothing that could be done.
The new signings were on less than you'd suggest, the playing budget (with the new and re-signed players) was shockingly small - from what is known about 5th in the league. It would have been a year of mid-table consolidation with cup aspirations or another run to 3rd/4th place.
Initially, which we'd all agree on, it was not a business plan, there was a lump given in and the club worked with it, coming in on or under budget. There was no mad excess and the only elephant in the room was if the benefactor was to disappear. However this was seen coming down the line and accounted for. A proper business plan was in place, sponsors recruited and being recruited, and a far more (I hate to say this) intelligent model in place. Though again, something happened between December 23rd (when the FCC were on board, lauding the club and all for it) and the day before they gave out the termination letters. In that time it was all systems go, which is why I firmly believe pre-election backside covering came into play.
Ultimately players got on with playing, staff can find new jobs, but the programs built alongside the club have been hit and this is what gets to me. Anyone from the Mulhuddart-Blakestown area will know what I'm on about.
"This will be the cheapest bailout in the world"
"We've turned the corner"
"This is an international credit crisis"
"Lehman Brothers"
"Sporting Fingal are sustainable"
No club in any league is sustainable, if they don't get their plan right. However the club had gotten it together for the new season, that the FCC chose not to proceed with the project is just symptomatic of Irish governance. At least it moved Waterford one place closer back to a return to the top flight, so you should be happy.
Well said in all posts Spud.
On a positive note, with the Sporting Fingal name still running with the Special Olympics side and the Powerchair soccer side , there is scope there for a League side again sometime down the road with or without the council's backing.
What programme got hit Spud? Im from the area and i havent read anything about any community programmes that was running being affected in any way. It would be a shame if the council pulled the plug on any just because of the football folding.
Lep, I'm delighted to know the name is still alive, not many people recognised the depth of the work being done (far better to be negative and destructive, not just for LOI fans but the media and public in general) - the fact that the powerchair and Special Olympics sides played in the same gear as the senior side was a really positive statement and I'm glad this hasn't gone by the wayside.
The programs I'd referred to were the football in the community (especially the TESOL one) had been put on ice, from what I'd been told. Also the use of the players in the programmes was a big boost, though that's gone now.
It would be good to see a club rise in it's place, though just to have a senior league club in the area would be good.
The North County Leader has an interesting story in it (which seems to have been leaked for a reason) about Sporting Fingal. The usual shouters (Daly and Coppinger) were to the fore acting as attack dogs and it looks like the FCC's messing about has backfired. It almost feels like an episode from Yes Minister where the truth will never come out, somebody will retire sideways and the work that had been done will be remembered in decades to come. From a football point of view I'd hope the FCC know they scored a major og.
Take off the blinkers Spiduka + co!
Why did GG get involved in the first place?
Were all the sponsorships deals done on a commercial basis?
Still cant understand why e.g. Anglo would they spend a fortune to be sleeve sponsors of one team when they coulda been main sponsors of a few clubs in the same divisions for the same money!?
Bucko shoulda took his time and built the club up slowly from scratch signing all the best young kids he could find, instead his ego ran away with him and 100's of 1000's was wasted signing high profile players there was no need for.
I heard via a player that Bucko called a meeting before xmas to tell all the players that he was sorry the early Dec wages were a week late, he told all the players that they'd be getting paid in the next few days and there would a bit of a bonus to apologise for the late wages and that the Jan wages would be payed before Christmas too. He also said new backers were lined up and full time funding for the next three years was lined up. The players were all delighted and the wages did come through.
But what he was really doing was using the Euro money to buy time till the first week in Feb to try to get another backer on board.
And they all lived happily ever after ...
Last edited by Mario; 05/04/2011 at 7:58 PM.
Unlike yourself Mario I've the blinkers definitely removed, and a long time ago. It's interesting to hear how the old "an informed source" seems to be the main mode of information sharing, yet you don't know the figures of deals or the situation regarding "backers". However this kind of attitude is exactly what the FCC are hoping for, bury the real story under a pile of manure, half-truths, "someone told me" etc - this way the guilt can be poured off onto one or 2 individuals. The full truth will come out in short time, especially if the FCC try to push more buttons, though for some such biased spinning will always be the way forward.
If you have all the inside information then why ask questions Mario? Sounds like wumming or journo digging to me.
Property developers and dodgy banks,
Local government with hands out in thanks,
Brown paper envelopes filled up with cash, rezone that land, we'll go out on the lash.
Spud - These comments could easily be aimed at you based on what you have posted recently
You appear to indicate that you know the "full truth". If so, why not spill it out
If you have the "inside information" why be so coy?
spud the model was a microcosm of the ireland of the time ,unstastainable and built ona false premise. I believed from day one it was wrong and never changed my opinion but your point about a possible A champoinship side is telling ,that is starting far to high why not start at the bottom at grassroots level and build from there then you will have a club inbuild into the community
I wish i did not know then what I dont know now
No, sounds like a fan speculating based on what he was told. I've been told similar by a ex Fingal player.
The Fingal thread on boards.ie was pretty interesting. A guy employed by the club was asked about sponsorship deals and he said most sponsorships weren't just sponsorships, but investments, and the sponsors were getting more than just exposure. Seeing as you are clearly involved with Fingal, can you expand on this?
54,321 sold - wws will never die - ***
---
New blog if anyone's interested - http://loihistory.wordpress.com/
LOI section on balls.ie - http://balls.ie/league-of-ireland/
Spiduka
> Why did GG get involved in the first place?
I am asking this coz Ive no idea why? Loads of rumours on this but if you cant answer it go ahead!
> Were all the sponsorships deals done on a commercial basis? Still cant understand why e.g. Anglo would they spend a fortune to be sleeve sponsors of one team when they coulda been main sponsors of a few clubs in the same divisions for the same money!?
This Q was raised about a year ago in some newspaper article or council meeting after Anglo were nationalised and was discussed here at the time!
>I heard via a player that Bucko called a meeting before xmas to tell all the players that he was sorry the early Dec wages were a week late, he told all the players that they'd be getting paid in the next few days and there would a bit of a bonus to apologise for the late wages and that the Jan wages would be payed before Christmas too. He also said new backers were lined up and full time funding for the next three years was lined up. The players were all delighted and the wages did come through.
I heard this via one of the players. I have no idea who the backers (if any ever existed) were or the sums involved. If you know spill the beans, but I cant see why anyone would "invest" (inject is a better word) money into a LOI club in the current climate, especially a club with a small support base who have been living beyond their means and burning cash for three years previous.
> But what he was really doing was using the Euro money to buy time till the first week in Feb to try to get another backer on board.
This is my guess at what was going on given when I heard from the former player.
Meh. I don't put any faith in final league position dictating what division a team will play in so I don't see how we benefit. I'm expecting Salthill to be in the Premier Division next year. Alternatively, you could take the view that Waterford would possibly already have been in the Premier Division if Sporting Fingal hadn't assembled a massively expensive squad while they were in the First Division. Either way, I took no pleasure in Fingal folding (apart from anything, these bye-weeks in the First Division are terrible), but it was always going to happen at some stage. Surprised it was so soon.
Mario thanks for that, I do appreciate the clarification as you know how it gets with journo's on planting or looking for stories, and in this case there's an innocent party being scapegoated when there should be a few higher heads rolling, or at least admitting they messed up. You're right to surmise as you did, but I can assure you it wasn't the case, it was just the way in which the club was transitioning from being led by one person's money to being a proper business. And you are doubly right, inject is right, because no club in Ireland can get a return on investment, they're incapable of it (unless you're laundering money or some such).
Dodge, aren't all sponsors looking for something in return, if not then it's not sponsorship but a gift. I think that what you refer to is that one of GG's companies were also a sponsor, though this was a separate matter and was dealt with openly as a pure sponsorship (it had to be kept different from investment or capital injection), it was a smaller amount than other sponsors hence they were given commensurate space on the shirts etc. One thing that wasn't done in the time until the transfer of ownership began was to have a proper marketing strategy, or even a push to really get (for example) match day sponsors, players sponsors etc, that contribute something close to 8% of a LOI's budget. Small revenue streams were not exploited or even explored in some cases, which is why they took your man on to rectify it. I can't divulge the name of a certain gent (of Dundalk provenance) who wanted to come on board with the club some time back (it was before I or our company had anything to do with them so I'm not comfortable elaborating) though he was able to point out glaring gaps in the club's fundraising and commercial structures. It was when this was finally nailed down that the FCC did an about face and the heads of the FCC acted without guidance from the councillors, for which there is major fall out now.
passerby, while I agree it was a bit of hubris, many clubs start with one person, one group, one company propping them up, it's the next step that was to be crucial, unfortunately that was blocked and dropped so it's just a case of, we'll never know. And of course there has to be a head to chop and they're trying to get it. And I'm sure that there was enough will to restart at A level, though the manner in which the original was dealt with sickened more than a few.
Ezekial, I've not been coy, please re-read my posts on the matter and you'll see I've been quite open about it. There's no reason to hide anything as it will come out shortly in full technicolour (including some parts I missed before I or our company had any dealings with them) and I think I've laid out pretty much what happened. So no coyness or word mixing there. I'll summarise it (in case you don't want to re-read) - in late-October/early-November GG was told he'd to pull out, 74% of the club was up for sale, before any buyer or party was to come in a full audit (KPMG) and overhaul (us) was carried out to make it a viable product. A much lower budget was put together, a proper commercial plan put in place with experienced people brought on board, local and foreign stakeholders came forward and committed and the day before the letters of termination were issued by the FCC all systems were go (despite one sponsor pulling out) and that was that. Nothing untoward, illegal or immoral was done by any member of the club, the FCC did what they did and now they're in trouble with players, staff and are trying to cast about for someone to chop, they think they have one however legally, ethically and sensibly he'd been correct, followed procedures and so it will all come out further down the line that there was a viable option which was destroyed in an act of backside covering with an election on the way. Simples (as the ad goes).
'Scuse my ignorance, but on what authority did the Council terminate the club? They didn't control the board. They would had to have had agreement from the other directors, no?
How much (ballpark) were those players on?The new signings were on less than you'd suggest, the playing budget (with the new and re-signed players) was shockingly small - from what is known about 5th in the league. It would have been a year of mid-table consolidation with cup aspirations or another run to 3rd/4th place.
I can't, obviously, discuss matters that will end up in a Labour tribunal thanks to the short sightedness of the FCC, though I do know that Gary O'Neill had re-signed for slightly less than what we has on the year before - or the same amount Shamrock Rovers offered. Karl Sheppard was offered roughly the same as what he is on at Rovers, he made the choice because he wanted to go to the top team. Ken Oman was going on slightly less than he's on now at Rovers. The wage budget was low, ranking (from what I can make out) mid table.
A couple of players who were to come in (foreign players) were on somewhere between 300-400 a week gross, however an apartment and car would have been included. One of these players still plays in the top Czech League and has been capped all the way up to under-21's. He was coming to try move over to England via Ireland, mad as that sounds.
Find the bit above (embolded and underlined) totally incredulous to be honest. Actually believe that if the SF model was studied properly it could prove very interesting and food for thought for all LOI clubs. Unfortunately the process envisaged here is more likely to be an ass covering exercise for council officials.
Most models are a combinaton of good and bad and a proper detailed study or SF (or any other club) model woud make interesting reading and address many of the points raised in this thread..
Posting Permissions
Quote
Bookmarks