You Boys in Green Homepage YBIG Shop
Forum Home Forum Home : International : Republic Of Ireland
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - FAI Finances thread
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login


FAI Finances thread

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12345 19>
Author
Message
Bunny Munro View Drop Down
Ronnie Whelan
Ronnie Whelan
Avatar

Joined: 27 Nov 2014
Status: Offline
Points: 31
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Bunny Munro Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 Dec 2014 at 4:57pm

Also downloaded the accounts from the CRO. Not much to be gotten from them given they’re summary accounts but a few things that were interesting:

If the FAI put in the same financial performance this year, they will be under severe pressure to pay the finance charges let alone pay off any of the debt. They are under obligation to pay off €1m of the debt this year and €2m next year (see further below).

The FAI received the following grant aid in 2013:

Dept of Environment:    €42,990

Dept of Children & Youth Affairs:              €349,242

Irish Sports Council:        €2,842,932

Dept of Foreign Affairs: €42,000

Total wages and salaries were €7,738,249 with an average number of employees of 152. 2012 was €9,559,536 and 156. I believe JD takes his pay as director’s remuneration and wouldn’t be included in this figure. This puts the average salary, not including JD, at around €51k versus €61k in 2012. It is likely to be higher than €51k since there were redundancy and payroll restructuring costs of €1,125,763 suggesting the final number of staff was lower by the year end so full year salaries wouldn’t have been paid to everyone.  Assuming there is quite a big range across the 150 or so employees, there are likely some other well paid individuals.

The €11.7m debt restructuring is net of costs to restructure of €791,436. It probably won’t be known what the new debt servicing costs are until this year’s accounts are filed late next year. Or unless JD actually answers that question – or any question.

Before the debt was restructured, the main debt of about €58m was repayable between two and five years. This arrangement was probably because JD initially assumed he’d get a windfall from the Vantage scheme and pay off the debt in the short term. Under the new arrangement, the debt is repayable as follows:

1 year:  €1m

1-2 years:            €2m

2-5 years:            €20m

After 5 years:     €26.5m

This suggests they were under severe pressure to pay off National Irish Bank/Danske so had to pull the restructuring with the Americans “Corporate Capital Trust” together before the year end. This pressure and the likely terms they were forced to agree to is probably why JD is so reluctant to share details. Presumably their ‘business plan’ is to pay off half by 2020 and the other half when the stadium naming rights and 10 year tickets are renewed. Given recent financial performance, that could be very ambitious.

Also available on the CRO, are details of the charges filed by initially National Irish Bank around 2009/2010 and more recently by Corporate Capital Trust and Bank of Ireland to secure their debts (BOI provide their overdraft). I’ve only skimmed through them but what’s kind of alarming is that the charge initially filed in relation to the NIB debt mainly related to financial assets like bank accounts and interests in the stadium. The new charge filed last year in favour of Corporate Capital Trust is much more far reaching.

They hold a charge over pretty much all the FAI’s assets including land/buildings, bank accounts, interest in the stadium, intellectual property, goodwill, revenue generating contracts, future revenue including ticket revenue, insurance policies and everything else down to JD’s ties. I’m assuming here that land and buildings would include the only owned land and buildings listed on the FAI’s 2013 accounts which are the football grounds in Drogheda and Cobh but probably also extends to the FAI’s interest in the AUL complex. But in other words, if they cannot meet their repayment obligations, the FAI and everything associated with it could be wiped out and Irish football would be jettisoned back 50 years. That could be the final cost of JD cocking up the 10 year ticket scheme.



Edited by Bunny Munro - 01 Dec 2014 at 9:58pm
Back to Top
Sponsored Links


Back to Top
Saint Tom View Drop Down
Jack Charlton
Jack Charlton


Joined: 03 Jan 2009
Location: Ireland
Status: Online
Points: 9979
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Saint Tom Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 Dec 2014 at 6:31pm
Thanks for the summary
My destination inchicore my next stop being kilmainham
Where patriots and super saints are the topics of conversation
Back to Top
The GerK View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group

Razor you wanna pint?...2 minutes later

Joined: 09 Feb 2007
Status: Online
Points: 20309
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote The GerK Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 Dec 2014 at 8:39pm
Excellent insight and knowledge here folks

Munro, I just edited one little bit of your post above. Just being over careful but I think I made a total arse of itEmbarrassed
Back to Top
BrenC View Drop Down
Davey Langan
Davey Langan
Avatar

Joined: 21 Oct 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 856
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote BrenC Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 Dec 2014 at 8:52pm
Looking at the CRO accounts, other thing that jumps out is trade creditors growing to +9million. Much higher than debtors . Looks like overdraft has been reduced but that reduction has been funded by extending creditors. Wonder did the bank insist on that?

While they are generating a decent net cash flow they are not very liquid and fairly susceptible to a sudden drop in income IMO - such as if sponsors decided they didn't want to involve themselves with an organisation which issues legal threats to international media!

I wonder how much second sale of stadium naming rights are? Are aviva required to buy then again?

Edited by BrenC - 01 Dec 2014 at 8:53pm
Team Emmet
Back to Top
irelandshirts View Drop Down
Ray Houghton
Ray Houghton
Avatar
I love Ireland jerseys

Joined: 02 Apr 2010
Location: Jersey
Status: Offline
Points: 4416
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote irelandshirts Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 Dec 2014 at 8:58pm
would the FAI get €20 million out of naming rights?last deal rumoured to be between €40-45 million.
WWW.IRELANDSOCCERSHIRTS.COM

Back to Top
savo01 View Drop Down
Liam Brady
Liam Brady
Avatar

Joined: 14 Feb 2013
Location: South Armagh
Status: Offline
Points: 1893
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote savo01 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 Dec 2014 at 9:00pm
They should start smuggling diesel and fags!  Plenty of money in it.  Cheap roses and quality street tins too!  Make a killing this time of year! 
Jackie Charlton, Eoin Hand
Johnny Giles. Ireland
Mick McCarthy, Stephen Staunton
Cascarino
Tony Galvin, Niall Quinn
Packie doesn't let em in
North of Ireland
South of Ireland
Only one can go
Back to Top
Bunny Munro View Drop Down
Ronnie Whelan
Ronnie Whelan
Avatar

Joined: 27 Nov 2014
Status: Offline
Points: 31
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Bunny Munro Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 Dec 2014 at 9:02pm
Originally posted by The GerK The GerK wrote:

Excellent insight and knowledge here folks

Munro, I just edited one little bit of your post above. Just being over careful but I think I made a total arse of itEmbarrassed

Understand your reasoning there, makes sense. I've reposted it above without what I think is the one bit you edited out. If I missed anything and it needs another edit, have another go at making an arse of it Smile.


Edited by Bunny Munro - 01 Dec 2014 at 9:59pm
Back to Top
BrenC View Drop Down
Davey Langan
Davey Langan
Avatar

Joined: 21 Oct 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 856
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote BrenC Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 Dec 2014 at 9:12pm
Originally posted by irelandshirts irelandshirts wrote:

would the FAI get €20 million out of naming rights?last deal rumoured to be between €40-45 million.


You would imagine if it went to someone other than aviva it aint worth that much. Hardly gonna start calling it McDonald's arena or something . Look at the Point - no one surely will ever actually call it the 3 arena.

Edited by BrenC - 01 Dec 2014 at 9:13pm
Team Emmet
Back to Top
greengooner View Drop Down
Liam Brady
Liam Brady
Avatar

Joined: 03 Apr 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 1376
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote greengooner Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Dec 2014 at 9:03am
Originally posted by Bunny Munro Bunny Munro wrote:

Also downloaded the accounts from the CRO. Not much to be gotten from them given they’re summary accounts but a few things that were interesting:

If the FAI put in the same financial performance this year, they will be under severe pressure to pay the finance charges let alone pay off any of the debt. They are under obligation to pay off €1m of the debt this year and €2m next year (see further below).

The FAI received the following grant aid in 2013:

Dept of Environment:    €42,990

Dept of Children & Youth Affairs:              €349,242

Irish Sports Council:        €2,842,932

Dept of Foreign Affairs: €42,000

Total wages and salaries were €7,738,249 with an average number of employees of 152. 2012 was €9,559,536 and 156. I believe JD takes his pay as director’s remuneration and wouldn’t be included in this figure. This puts the average salary, not including JD, at around €51k versus €61k in 2012. It is likely to be higher than €51k since there were redundancy and payroll restructuring costs of €1,125,763 suggesting the final number of staff was lower by the year end so full year salaries wouldn’t have been paid to everyone.  Assuming there is quite a big range across the 150 or so employees, there are likely some other well paid individuals.

The €11.7m debt restructuring is net of costs to restructure of €791,436. It probably won’t be known what the new debt servicing costs are until this year’s accounts are filed late next year. Or unless JD actually answers that question – or any question.

Before the debt was restructured, the main debt of about €58m was repayable between two and five years. This arrangement was probably because JD initially assumed he’d get a windfall from the Vantage scheme and pay off the debt in the short term. Under the new arrangement, the debt is repayable as follows:

1 year:  €1m

1-2 years:            €2m

2-5 years:            €20m

After 5 years:     €26.5m

This suggests they were under severe pressure to pay off National Irish Bank/Danske so had to pull the restructuring with the Americans “Corporate Capital Trust” together before the year end. This pressure and the likely terms they were forced to agree to is probably why JD is so reluctant to share details. Presumably their ‘business plan’ is to pay off half by 2020 and the other half when the stadium naming rights and 10 year tickets are renewed. Given recent financial performance, that could be very ambitious.

Also available on the CRO, are details of the charges filed by initially National Irish Bank around 2009/2010 and more recently by Corporate Capital Trust and Bank of Ireland to secure their debts (BOI provide their overdraft). I’ve only skimmed through them but what’s kind of alarming is that the charge initially filed in relation to the NIB debt mainly related to financial assets like bank accounts and interests in the stadium. The new charge filed last year in favour of Corporate Capital Trust is much more far reaching.

They hold a charge over pretty much all the FAI’s assets including land/buildings, bank accounts, interest in the stadium, intellectual property, goodwill, revenue generating contracts, future revenue including ticket revenue, insurance policies and everything else down to JD’s ties. I’m assuming here that land and buildings would include the only owned land and buildings listed on the FAI’s 2013 accounts which are the football grounds in Drogheda and Cobh but probably also extends to the FAI’s interest in the AUL complex. But in other words, if they cannot meet their repayment obligations, the FAI and everything associated with it could be wiped out and Irish football would be jettisoned back 50 years. That could be the final cost of JD cocking up the 10 year ticket scheme.

NERD ALERT - FINANCIALLY STUFF HERE...!!!
Bunny thanks a mill for that a couple of things and maybe you can help me on them. I have questions (don't I always!!)
 
My understanding of all things CRO is that these accounts are the FULL accounts (I kid you not!!) rather than the summary accounts. The only difference that I can see between what I got from CRO and what is on the annual reports are the "Notes" - but my sources tell me that FULL accounts are supposed to be posted to CRO by legislation. 
 
 
That said there are a couple of things whcih don't add up (sorry about teh pun...!!)
 
Why is there no breakdown of Income into appropriate areas -
Matchday, Ticketing, Sponsorship, corporate, Grants ?
(A glance at the IRFU annual report shows full breakdown into respective areas)
 
Why is there no breakdown of "Cost of sales" of 23.7 Million? What was the 23.7 million spent on? It's a lot of expenditure but no information to explain it.
 
Salaries cost is 9.5 Million but Admin Expenses (where you normally put Salaries) is only 8.3 Million -why the difference? Is the Salaries figuer included in "Cost of Sales"? If so, what is in the 8.3 Million for Admin expenses- thats a lot of photo copying, phone calls and toner cartridges...!!)
 
The Directors remuneration Note 7 shows 360,000 (which might be for JD)
It also shows another 55,000 for Officers emoluments (salary by any other name) - who got that 55k?
Is this 415,000 included in the Salries Cost, or even the Admin Expenses Figure?
 
Why is this note 7 flagged against a Total figure, and not an Expenditure figure in the Income and Expenditure account (you would have expected to see this note listed against Salaries, or Cost of Sales, or Admin Expenses)? - I can't understand this at all - Note 7 bears no relationship to the Income And Expendituer account from what I can see??
 
 1.1 Million was spent as a "once off" measure in reducing the staffing number by 4 - that implies a retirement package of about 250k per person. Would that be about the normal amount?
 
Note 23 Pensions - NIL was paid into the Pension Fund by the Employer in 2013, with NIL being owed at the end of 2013. I dont understand this. I thought Employers had to pay pension contributions for staff, regardless of whether it is a defined Benefit or Defined cotnribution scheme?? But again, I may be wrong here.
 
I didn't see the bank stuff on CRO but your last paragraph should be sent to the Sunday Business Post. Perhaps they might be able to make sense of the Accounts and discover what agreeement the FAI have reached with the banks agreed in respect of the debt the Association is saddled with.
 
The last thing anyone wants is for the FAI logo to become F(AIB) (for instance) as a result of defaulting on it's debts.
Platini are you listening
You'd better keep your trophy glistening
Cos we'll be over next year
To drink all your beer,
Walking in an Irish Wonderland.
Back to Top
Bunny Munro View Drop Down
Ronnie Whelan
Ronnie Whelan
Avatar

Joined: 27 Nov 2014
Status: Offline
Points: 31
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote Bunny Munro Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Dec 2014 at 1:09pm

Yeah, this stuff is a lot more boring than what’s going on over in the Delaney Out thread.  Will try and add anything I can in relation to those questions based on my limited accounting knowledge:

Quote My understanding of all things CRO is that these accounts are the FULL accounts (I kid you not!!) rather than the summary accounts. The only difference that I can see between what I got from CRO and what is on the annual reports are the "Notes" - but my sources tell me that FULL accounts are supposed to be posted to CRO by legislation.

 The accounts are supposed to be the full accounts to the extent they should reflect all the top line numbers but they don’t have to be detailed accounts insofar as breaking those numbers down.  I believe technically speaking they are the “abridged accounts” that must be filed.

I understand also that a company must present the accounts filed with the CRO at their AGM which is why they’d be the same, the difference being only the main accounts without the notes were obviously presented by the FAI at the AGM.

Quote That said there are a couple of things whcih don't add up (sorry about teh pun...!!)

Why is there no breakdown of Income into appropriate areas -

Matchday, Ticketing, Sponsorship, corporate, Grants ?

(A glance at the IRFU annual report shows full breakdown into respective areas)

 Why is there no breakdown of "Cost of sales" of 23.7 Million? What was the 23.7 million spent on? It's a lot of expenditure but no information to explain it.

As above, because they’re not obliged to.

Quote Salaries cost is 9.5 Million but Admin Expenses (where you normally put Salaries) is only 8.3 Million -why the difference? Is the Salaries figuer included in "Cost of Sales"? If so, what is in the 8.3 Million for Admin expenses- thats a lot of photo copying, phone calls and toner cartridges...!!)

I’d guess that salaries are spread across Cost of Sales and Admin. Some salaries could probably be directly attributed to sales such as match related staff while other staff is probably purely admin and included under admin expenses. This doesn’t tell you what their real non payroll admin expenses are, including travel expenses, entertainment expenses etc.

Quote The Directors remuneration Note 7 shows 360,000 (which might be for JD)

It also shows another 55,000 for Officers emoluments (salary by any other name) - who got that 55k?

Is this 415,000 included in the Salries Cost, or even the Admin Expenses Figure?

Yeah, you’d have to assume the €360k is JD since that’s his claimed salary for the past year or so. The €55k is presumably payments to other directors in the FAI some of whom probably just fulfil an honorary/part-time type role.

I believe these costs strictly speaking shouldn’t be in the salaries section but they could then be under the Admin costs in the P&L.

Quote Why is this note 7 flagged against a Total figure, and not an Expenditure figure in the Income and Expenditure account (you would have expected to see this note listed against Salaries, or Cost of Sales, or Admin Expenses)? - I can't understand this at all - Note 7 bears no relationship to the Income And Expendituer account from what I can see??

The P&L all adds up so I’m assuming that these figures are pulled out into a different note because there is an obligation to state those specific figures separately (director’s remuneration, depreciation etc.)

Quote 1.1 Million was spent as a "once off" measure in reducing the staffing number by 4 - that implies a retirement package of about 250k per person. Would that be about the normal amount?

Actually one “employee” that may or may not be included in the salaries is Trapattoni. If he is included then the redundancy costs could be partly related to his payoff. I would have expected him to be an independent contractor as such as opposed to an Irish salaried employee but who knows. The numbers of employees are just averages over the year so by the end of the year they could have made more than four redundancies and had to make redundancy payments accordingly. The statutory redundancy a company must pay is roughly two weeks’ pay for every year worked.

Quote Note 23 Pensions - NIL was paid into the Pension Fund by the Employer in 2013, with NIL being owed at the end of 2013. I dont understand this. I thought Employers had to pay pension contributions for staff, regardless of whether it is a defined Benefit or Defined cotnribution scheme?? But again, I may be wrong here.

 As far as I know there is no obligation for employers to contribute to a defined contribution scheme, it is normally done as an additional benefit. With cut backs, maybe the FAI stopped contributing in 2013.

Quote I didn't see the bank stuff on CRO but your last paragraph should be sent to the Sunday Business Post. Perhaps they might be able to make sense of the Accounts and discover what agreeement the FAI have reached with the banks agreed in respect of the debt the Association is saddled with.

Good idea. The fact the FAI have effectively signed over everything down to the kitchen sink is headline material in itself.

One interesting aspect of this just occurred to me because JD’s “debt write down” explanation never added up, especially in the absence of answers to related questions. In early 2013 I heard rumours the FAI were on the brink of financial collapse, then in mid 2013 this story was reported – http://www.irishmirror.ie/sport/soccer/soccer-news/uefa-steps-assist-football-association-1942285

I was surprised at the time that the media didn’t pick up on it more but we all know how much of the media in Ireland works in relation to the FAI. This was huge news because it meant the FAI had been bailed out and has massive implications for the future of Irish football. What I’m wondering is, did UEFA make this payment directly to Danske Bank which was reported at the AGM by JD as a “debt write down”. If this is correct, this would be a huge lie to tell at an AGM.

Back to Top
roverstillidie View Drop Down
Jack Charlton
Jack Charlton
Avatar
Bohs number 1 fan

Joined: 25 Jun 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 8529
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote roverstillidie Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Dec 2014 at 1:22pm
Originally posted by greengooner greengooner wrote:

That's inaccurate, sorry.
 
If any corporate or charitable body receives public monies then the Government of the day has the right and as far as i'm aware the responsibility to ensure that the money being given to them is being used responsibly.
 
Where your inaccuracy lies is possibly if the Government were to insist on appointing someone as Centre Forward, or manager, or appoint a CEO. Then and only then could there be accusations of government interference.
 
Public money is owned by the public, and the Dail are responsible for safeguarding it's use.
 
  
That is a naively simplistic way to look at it.
 
If the FAI get x grant to do y but spend it on z, then yes, they are going to be lashed. But there is no allegation that this is the case.
 
What you want is the PAC to give out to JD on unspecified grounds because you don't understand the audited accounts. That is a different story altogether.
Back to Top
BabbsBalls View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
Avatar

Joined: 12 Feb 2009
Location: Ireland
Status: Offline
Points: 10223
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote BabbsBalls Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Dec 2014 at 1:38pm
Good thread this
l hear you are a racist now, father ?
Back to Top
Bunny Munro View Drop Down
Ronnie Whelan
Ronnie Whelan
Avatar

Joined: 27 Nov 2014
Status: Offline
Points: 31
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote Bunny Munro Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Dec 2014 at 1:45pm
Originally posted by roverstillidie roverstillidie wrote:

Originally posted by greengooner greengooner wrote:

That's inaccurate, sorry.
 
If any corporate or charitable body receives public monies then the Government of the day has the right and as far as i'm aware the responsibility to ensure that the money being given to them is being used responsibly.
 
Where your inaccuracy lies is possibly if the Government were to insist on appointing someone as Centre Forward, or manager, or appoint a CEO. Then and only then could there be accusations of government interference.
 
Public money is owned by the public, and the Dail are responsible for safeguarding it's use.
 
  
That is a naively simplistic way to look at it.
 
If the FAI get x grant to do y but spend it on z, then yes, they are going to be lashed. But there is no allegation that this is the case.
 
What you want is the PAC to give out to JD on unspecified grounds because you don't understand the audited accounts. That is a different story altogether.

There are valid points on both sides. As it stands, the PAC could probably only investigate the FAI based on concerns over how public money was being used and that's certainly not the type of government interference that would be frowned on. They can't necessarily start looking into their other expenditure unless it can be linked to public spending. But the PAC has a history of probing in a more wide ranging manner once they have a reason to call somebody before it.

This doesn't really have much to do with the audited accounts because they don't tell the full story but looking at them does highlight the important numbers like how much grant aid was received.

To have the PAC investigage the FAI, there probably needs to be a clear indication public funds were misused. One area that's worth considering is the security the FAI have given. The government put significant funds into the stadium and the FAI have signed over certain aspects of their stadium rights. Likewise, if grant aid was intended for example to help improve facilities at AUL and the FAI has used it to guarantee a debt...

I haven't fully studied the filed charges but they do raise questions worth further investigation.
Back to Top
Devrozex View Drop Down
Jack Charlton
Jack Charlton
Avatar

Joined: 23 Oct 2010
Location: Dublin
Status: Online
Points: 7672
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Devrozex Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Dec 2014 at 2:02pm

Originally posted by Bunny Munro Bunny Munro wrote:

One interesting aspect of this just occurred to me because JD’s “debt write down” explanation never added up, especially in the absence of answers to related questions. In early 2013 I heard rumours the FAI were on the brink of financial collapse, then in mid 2013 this story was reported – http://www.irishmirror.ie/sport/soccer/soccer-news/uefa-steps-assist-football-association-1942285

I was surprised at the time that the media didn’t pick up on it more but we all know how much of the media in Ireland works in relation to the FAI. This was huge news because it meant the FAI had been bailed out and has massive implications for the future of Irish football. What I’m wondering is, did UEFA make this payment directly to Danske Bank which was reported at the AGM by JD as a “debt write down”. If this is correct, this would be a huge lie to tell at an AGM.
 
Don't remember seeing that reported at the time but it looks a little worrying!
Back to Top
wicklowrunner View Drop Down
Davey Langan
Davey Langan


Joined: 13 Nov 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 763
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote wicklowrunner Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Dec 2014 at 2:17pm
Originally posted by Devrozex Devrozex wrote:


<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 1.5pt 0.75pt" =Msonormal><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; COLOR: black; FONT-SIZE: 9pt; mso-fareast-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-bidi-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-ansi-: EN; mso-fareast-: EN-IE" lang=EN>
Originally posted by Bunny Munro Bunny Munro wrote:

One interesting aspect of this just occurred to me because JD’s “debt write down” explanation never added up, especially in the absence of answers to related questions. In early 2013 I heard rumours the FAI were on the brink of financial collapse, then in mid 2013 this story was reported – http://www.irishmirror.ie/sport/soccer/soccer-news/uefa-steps-assist-football-association-1942285





<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 1.5pt 0.75pt" =Msonormal><?: prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p></SPAN>

<SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; COLOR: black; FONT-SIZE: 9pt; mso-fareast-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-bidi-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-ansi-: EN; mso-fareast-: EN-IE" lang=EN>I was surprised at the time that the media didn’t pick up on it more but we all know how much of the media in Ireland works in relation to the FAI. This was huge news because it meant the FAI had been bailed out and has massive implications for the future of Irish football. What I’m wondering is, did UEFA make this payment directly to Danske Bank which was reported at the AGM by JD as a “debt write down”. If this is correct, this would be a huge lie to tell at an AGM.

</SPAN><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; COLOR: black; FONT-SIZE: 9pt; mso-fareast-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-bidi-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-ansi-: EN; mso-fareast-: EN-IE" lang=EN></SPAN> 

<SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; COLOR: black; FONT-SIZE: 9pt; mso-fareast-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-bidi-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-ansi-: EN; mso-fareast-: EN-IE" lang=EN>Don't remember seeing that reported at the time but it looks a little worrying!<o:p></o:p></SPAN>

Was the Debt write down not the loan re-negotiated? ie Debt write off and remainder on lower interest on longer term?
Back to Top
Bunny Munro View Drop Down
Ronnie Whelan
Ronnie Whelan
Avatar

Joined: 27 Nov 2014
Status: Offline
Points: 31
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Bunny Munro Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Dec 2014 at 2:28pm
Quote Was the Debt write down not the loan re-negotiated? ie Debt write off and remainder on lower interest on longer term?

Well that's how it was presented to the AGM. But if all €11m was "written off" by the bank, where did the UEFA money reported to have been used to bail the FAI go if it didn't go directlly to Danske Bank? It doesn't appear to have been received by the FAI according to their accounts. I doubt it's hidden in the turnover figure as the figure is around what you'd expect from previous years.


Edited by Bunny Munro - 02 Dec 2014 at 2:29pm
Back to Top
greengooner View Drop Down
Liam Brady
Liam Brady
Avatar

Joined: 03 Apr 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 1376
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote greengooner Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Dec 2014 at 3:03pm
Originally posted by roverstillidie roverstillidie wrote:

Originally posted by greengooner greengooner wrote:

That's inaccurate, sorry.
 
If any corporate or charitable body receives public monies then the Government of the day has the right and as far as i'm aware the responsibility to ensure that the money being given to them is being used responsibly.
 
Where your inaccuracy lies is possibly if the Government were to insist on appointing someone as Centre Forward, or manager, or appoint a CEO. Then and only then could there be accusations of government interference.
 
Public money is owned by the public, and the Dail are responsible for safeguarding it's use.
 
  
That is a naively simplistic way to look at it.
 
If the FAI get x grant to do y but spend it on z, then yes, they are going to be lashed. But there is no allegation that this is the case.
 
What you want is the PAC to give out to JD on unspecified grounds because you don't understand the audited accounts. That is a different story altogether.
RTID, I'm not sure if you're trying to derail this thread, but my comments are neither naieve nor simplistic -
Anyway,
1.  Where did I ask the PAC to give out to JD on any grounds?
2.  What has 1 above got to do with my understanding of Audited accounts - they're two different things. 
3. Ok to re-iterate
 
a. When you get public funds, they are given to you for a stated reason.
b. you have to use those public funds for that stated reason
c. The people who give you those public funds retain the right to find out if those public funds have been used for that stated reason
 
In 2013, the FAI got 3.3 Million Euro from public funds from various bodies/Departments for various reasons.
 
How that 3.3 Million was spent is accountable to the bodies in question who are, in turn answerable to their Departments, who are in turn answerable to the Dail, and any committees set up by the Dail. (Committee on Sport/PAC/Seanad committee/whatever) - they are legally OBLIGED to ensure public money is spent properly.
 
That's the way it works. Even the FAI have to operate under these conditions if they receive public funds.
 
FIFA/UEFA have no remit in this respect unless, for instance, Enda Kenny decided he wanted to play Centre Forward for ireland and held back funding from the FAI until he was put on the pitch.  THen there WOULD be a case for FIFA/UEFA to become involved.
 


Edited by greengooner - 02 Dec 2014 at 3:10pm
Platini are you listening
You'd better keep your trophy glistening
Cos we'll be over next year
To drink all your beer,
Walking in an Irish Wonderland.
Back to Top
roverstillidie View Drop Down
Jack Charlton
Jack Charlton
Avatar
Bohs number 1 fan

Joined: 25 Jun 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 8529
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote roverstillidie Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Dec 2014 at 3:19pm
But what grounds have you to state the FAI need to appear in front of anyone to answer for their use of public funds? The Department have no such suspicions, this is just assinine mud slinging.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12345 19>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.00
Copyright ©2001-2018 Web Wiz Ltd.