St Pats Take over.

**kdjaC** · 15/03/2007, 12:19 PM

Originally Posted by Billy Lord

Could you explain this, please?

Fans in a general sense should never be allowed run a club they dont think with their heads (barca perfect example). If a club is a commercial entity then someone with a good head should run it. If the pats thing works out and tallaght is sorted for Rovers only who would be the next ideal club for someone with a few quid to buy?

Would rovers fans allow some rich dude to pump money into them developing the stadium, academy? Assuming the guy is genuine about Rovers? Is there someone waiting in the wings?

kdjac

**Billy Lord** · 15/03/2007, 12:34 PM

Originally Posted by kdjaC

Fans in a general sense should never be allowed run a club they dont think with their heads (barca perfect example). If a club is a commercial entity then someone with a good head should run it. If the pats thing works out and tallaght is sorted for Rovers only who would be the next ideal club for someone with a few quid to buy?

Would rovers fans allow some rich dude to pump money into them developing the stadium, academy? Assuming the guy is genuine about Rovers? Is there someone waiting in the wings?

kdjac

When Rovers was last in private hands the club ran up debts of 3 million+, lost ownership of the stadium in Tallaght and was virtually bankrupt. Under the fans' ownership the club pays its bills, is 100% tax-compliant, won promotion last year while also making a profit.
There is nothing wrong, and everytghing right, about fans owning their club. Unless, of course, the fans are idiots.

**chippie0001** · 15/03/2007, 12:38 PM

Ireland is the perfect reason why fans should own clubs. How many grounds have Pats/Rovers and Shels played in over the years? How many have Bohs used in that same time. As Billy Lord says look at what happened recently to Rovers in private hands and also look even more recently at Shels.

Membership has its flaws no doubt about it, but as other have said I would far prefer it and its drawbacks to having a sugar daddy that to this point has had no interest in football or the league. If a rich Pats fan took over the club thats a whole different matter.

**Dodge** · 15/03/2007, 12:38 PM

Which, we all know, most are

**WeAreRovers** · 15/03/2007, 12:40 PM

As ever the general rule applies here - if Rovers and Bohs agree on something then it's true. Simple.

KOH

**BohsPartisan** · 15/03/2007, 12:42 PM

Originally Posted by kdjaC

Fans in a general sense should never be allowed run a club they dont think with their heads.

Which is why Bohs members demanded that the playing budget should be secondary to paying debts and establishing a youth acadamy?

**Dodge** · 15/03/2007, 12:49 PM

Two wrongs don't make a right, WaR... Simple school logic dictates that

Oh and Bohs fans demanded nothing, you're told what to do by the committee, when was the last time anything was voted down by the membership?

**kdjaC** · 15/03/2007, 12:57 PM

Originally Posted by Billy Lord

When Rovers was last in private hands the club ran up debts of 3 million+, lost ownership of the stadium in Tallaght and was virtually bankrupt. Under the fans' ownership the club pays its bills, is 100% tax-compliant, won promotion last year while also making a profit.
There is nothing wrong, and everytghing right, about fans owning their club. Unless, of course, the fans are idiots.

But Rovers cant move forward without major investment, something only a sugar daddy can bring. Rovers when they get tallaght would be the only possible EL team could make a profit but only with some investment.

Chippie is correct about ireland being the only place where a club could "survive" with fan ownership but in Rovers case if was fans actually going to the club from 90ish onwards that kept them surviving now the same fans own the club.

Question still stands would Rovers fans turn down a sugar daddy who was a Rovers fan?

kdjac

**chippie0001** · 15/03/2007, 1:23 PM

Originally Posted by Dodge

Oh and Bohs fans demanded nothing, you're told what to do by the committee, when was the last time anything was voted down by the membership?

Just to show you are not 100% right, we voted down membership increases about 3 years back, that were proposed by the board. See we can oppose things when it suits us.

The membership also opposed the Shels groundshare which is probablu or more significance and most of the changes to our structure and rules have been brought about my ordinary members and not the board. On the playing side we generally sit back and take it.

**WeAreRovers** · 15/03/2007, 1:45 PM

Originally Posted by kdjaC

But Rovers cant move forward without major investment, something only a sugar daddy can bring. Rovers when they get tallaght would be the only possible EL team could make a profit but only with some investment.

Chippie is correct about ireland being the only place where a club could "survive" with fan ownership but in Rovers case if was fans actually going to the club from 90ish onwards that kept them surviving now the same fans own the club.

Question still stands would Rovers fans turn down a sugar daddy who was a Rovers fan?

kdjac

Jaysus, you've bought into this big time.

To answer your question - it would be up to the members to decide (will Pats fans get a say in their club?) but after the debacles under private ownership in the past, including under so-called Rovers fans, I'd imagine it would be a resounding no.

The fan-owned model operates successfully all over Europe, no reason why not here. In fact fan-owned clubs don't lose football grounds or go out of business. Clubs owned by suggar daddies, on the other hand, become homeless and go bust all the time.

I suggest you buy the Guardian on Wednesdays and read David Conn's stuff or else just carry-on cheerleading for 'Pats fan' Kelleher's property play. Whichever suits.

KOH

**wws** · 15/03/2007, 1:48 PM

Originally Posted by kdjaC

Question still stands would Rovers fans turn down a sugar daddy who was a Rovers fan?

kdjac

they're 50% owned by a sugar daddy already - or certainly were when they took over from the last regime. I'd urge people just to take a step back and wait and see what the pats owner delivers - he'll be judged on that - all the above in this thread is nonsense speculation and cringe inducing scaremongering.

**Dodge** · 15/03/2007, 1:55 PM

Apologies Chippie.

**BohsPartisan** · 15/03/2007, 1:56 PM

Originally Posted by chippie0001

On the playing side we generally sit back and take it.

Excluding Bohemian Bob's Farrelly Out Petition!

**kdjaC** · 15/03/2007, 2:18 PM

Originally Posted by WeAreRovers

Jaysus, you've bought into this big time.

Bought into what?

We either get new ground or dont atm we have a hole of a ground and possible move to tallaght,so we really have nothing to lose. Its whats called win win, i dont like the idea of moving to talllght but it will always remain a possibility until theres a new ground in richmond.

We still playing good football and get revenue from a pub, have our house in order and manager playing to a budget. Its not us buying into it its others being sceptical due their own previous issues.

kdjac

**blackholesun** · 15/03/2007, 2:51 PM

Look at the sat map ...

http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&z=17...08186&t=k&om=1

He now has supposedly has the ground, McDowells, some houses on emmet road and the warehouse directly to the west.

If he has also snapped alot of the old houses along the Inchicore Road to the North and can get the rest and get access through these or the through the park to the west then he controls a huge bowl shaped piece of land where he can build quite a few high story blocks of apts with the stadium and training facilities in there somewhere too. I wouldnt be surprised if the stadium ended up say rotated by 90 degrees even or who knows what.

The only minor problem with the site is the Camac but that could be rerouted easily enough and probably turned into a feature through the middle of the apts.

I was initially taken in by the "social conscience" stuff but the more I think about it, the more and more it looks like Kelleher will make good money on it, and fair play to him, Ive no problem with that, he makes money, new stadium for Pats, everyone a winner ... , I wonder though would he be willing at the end of it all to sign the stadium over a fans trust or the O'Callaghans. Doubt it!

But in the long term I think Bohs should have more money to burn each year on players than Pats. Cant see Kelleher throwing in a million or two every year to allow Pats to keep up with Bohs.

bhs

ps. btw wws "they're 50% owned by a sugar daddy already" Ray Wilson coughed up ~250K to help save Rovers, his shareholding is continously being diluted as more monthly members subscriptions roll in. He didnt do to make or profit or even get his more back and has said that once he is happy that the club is on a sound footing, he'll hand any whatever % remains back to the members club, so Rovers will be 100% owned by the members in the end.

**wws** · 15/03/2007, 2:54 PM

Originally Posted by blackholesun

ps. btw wws "they're 50% owned by a sugar daddy already" Ray Wilson coughed up ~250K to help save Rovers, his shareholding is continously being diluted as more monthly members subscriptions roll in. He didnt do to make or profit or even get his more back and has said that once he is happy that the club is on a sound footing, he'll hand any whatever % remains back to the members club, so Rovers will be 100% owned by the members in the end.

fair play to him, i applaud any and every investment in irish soccer as oppossed to sunderland. whats his holding now as a matter of interest ?

**WeAreRovers** · 15/03/2007, 2:59 PM

Originally Posted by wws

fair play to him, i applaud any and every investment in irish soccer as oppossed to sunderland. whats his holding now as a matter of interest ?

Details were furnished at our AGM.

KOH

**Danny** · 15/03/2007, 3:05 PM

Originally Posted by WeAreRovers

Details were furnished at our AGM.

KOH

so what your saying is, ask Dr Hoopdub ?

**kdjaC** · 15/03/2007, 3:12 PM

Originally Posted by blackholesun

But in the long term I think Bohs should have more money to burn each year on players than Pats. Cant see Kelleher throwing in a million or two every year to allow Pats to keep up with Bohs.

Personally i would rather we kept up signing promising LSL players and local lads coming tru the academy than buying success. Atm we have 7 from either Crumlin Belgrove Cherry orchard or in house. To me i would rather see the come good than buy whats left of Drogs next season.

kdjac