Nowhereman Posted July 13, 2021 Share Posted July 13, 2021 It had disappeared briefly earlier, definitely. I had left a nice comment which was deleted [emoji23] Eta - Heaney has edited the article Thought it was slightly different. The quotes from Sweeney are new arent they? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nowhereman Posted July 13, 2021 Share Posted July 13, 2021 Mr Heaney has serious form too when it comes to Dumbarton FC. Always happy to wax about the good old days and the good old boys at Boghead, he was not shy in shitstirring when editor of the Lennox Herald. His football allegiances lie elsewhere and he is no true supporter of DFC - it is a worrying situation but everyone should consider that.Aye. Remember having a run in with him when I criticised him in the club programme. At best he never seemed at all interested in his local club. At worst he was very negative about Sons which was odd for the editor of the local paper 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neilly Posted July 13, 2021 Share Posted July 13, 2021 51 minutes ago, FifeSons said: Looked like a blatant offside for their first goal, would like to see it back. Also, enjoyed the bald guy on the Stenny backroom staff getting very worked up over nothing on the touchline. Odd behaviour. Was definitely offside I was pretty much in line with it. However, take nothing away from the strike that was a bit special. Dumbarton were the better team first half but once we got our actual right back on at half time it gave the whole team a lift and in the end were deserved winners and probably should have had a few more. Best of luck for the season guys. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Moonster Posted July 14, 2021 Share Posted July 14, 2021 8 hours ago, Nowhereman said: Thought it was slightly different. The quotes from Sweeney are new arent they? Aye, and those quotes certainly clear up what is being alleged. This could get very, very messy. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BallochSonsFan Posted July 14, 2021 Share Posted July 14, 2021 The new version of the story just gets messier and messier. Essentially: - Andy Hosie took Andrew Sweeney for £2million in the Bet Butler shambles. - Sweeney is alleging that Hosie made some kind of promise to the effect that Sweeney would get £2million and that this was the value of Hosie's 28% of Brabco. - Hosie got round this by setting up a new company, transferring Barbco's ownership of Dumbarton to the newco and then selling the newco to the Norwegians. It still doesnt sound particularly true given that 28% of Babco was never going to be worth £2mil. That values Brabco at about £7.1million. I can well believe that Stainton, Wilson and the others thought that they'd be making that kind of money from the deal eventually but theres no way that Brabco was worth that given the massive risk and uncertainty around Youngs Farm. If Hosie did have a 28% stake in Brabco then again it's Brabco who own any assets and not Andy Hosie. Hosie could promise Sweeney his shares in Brabco. He could promise him any share of profits that would be payable on the ultimate completion of Youngs Farm. He couldn't grant any kind of security or other legal control over Brabco assets without the agreement of the Brabco directors. Stainton and Wilson would never have agreed to that. And even if Hosie did own 28% of Brabcos shares, the other shareholders could vote against him by simple majority. Hosie would appear to be in serious trouble. I have no problems believing that he's promised the world to some of his Bet Butler victims. Much like Bet Butler, the issue would be that Hosie can't actually deliver any of it. He can't promise more than his shares in Brabco. Brabco owned the controlling stake in Dumbarton FC and as a legal entity it's for the directors of Brabco to make decisions on any asset transfer or security. Hosie can only make promises on his individual shareholding in Brabco. Sweeney may be able to successfully claim Hosie's Brabco shares but that only really means that he would be entitled to Hosie's share of the price paid by the Norwegians. The Norwegians didnt pay £7.1 million for Dumbarton FC. Sweeney wouldn;t have been in a position to block the Norwegian takeover because he wouldn't control enough of Brabco's shares to win any vote. Sweeney will make this difficult for sure. It's worth a lot of money to him. Ultimately I don't see him getting anywhere. He's been conned twice by Andy Hosie - once with Bet Butler and again with promises of Brabco money or control over Brabco assets (and ultimately Dumbarton FC via Brabco's controlling interest). That wasnt within Hosie's power to do without agreement by the Brabco board and an almost certain vote of the Brabco shareholders. Hosie simply couldn't have won that vote because the likes of Stainton and Wilson would not vote to give control of a significant asset to one of Andy Hosie's Bet Butler victims. Hosie is screwed here. The mysterious Vaugh may well catch up with him but its more likely that it'll be the police and that he'll face charges of fraud. Sweeney is screwed here because as much as Hosie might have promised him the world, it wasn't within Andy's power to actually do any of it. He'll make it very difficult and very unpleasant but ultimately Andrew Sweeney is on to plums. At best he might be able to get whatever Hosie made from the sale of the club to the Norwegians. The Norwegians are going to be frustrated because until this is resolved it'll create uncertainty around the club. It'll definitely have a negative impact for as long as it remains unsettled. All we can do is try to carry on regardless and let Andrew Sweeney chase Andy Hosie for whatever he can. That won't be Dumbarton and it won't make the Norwegian buy-out void, but the uncertainty will add to the existing pressures that the football club board face in keeping things going at the Rock. 10 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boghead ranter Posted July 14, 2021 Share Posted July 14, 2021 That's what I was kinda thinking - Sweeney has been the equivalent of the American tourist who's been sold Tower Bridge by a spiv. He's laid out money based on expecting something that will never be delivered to him, and can't even take a legal route to get it. All he can due is pursue the spiv to get his money back. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silverton End Posted July 14, 2021 Share Posted July 14, 2021 9 hours ago, Nowhereman said: Thought it was slightly different. The quotes from Sweeney are new arent they? Yes. Added a pic of J Steele & "Andrew Sweeney today contacted the Democrat....." Bill's doing his best to stir things 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FifeSons Posted July 14, 2021 Share Posted July 14, 2021 Football club ownership is like moths to a flame for dodgy characters. I don’t really understand why, either. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Moonster Posted July 14, 2021 Share Posted July 14, 2021 I thought the "28% to the value of £2 million" was mental but I'm no financial expert and thought I must be missing something. What BSF says makes a lot of sense and if it comes to be true then I'd expect this will be the last time Hosie avoids jail for his antics. One question though - if Hosie transferred Brabco's ownership of Dumbarton to a new company, then sold that to the Norwegians, would that not be recorded on Companies House? How can a guy who isn't a registered director of Brabco transfer it's asset to another company? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BallochSonsFan Posted July 14, 2021 Share Posted July 14, 2021 8 minutes ago, The Moonster said: I thought the "28% to the value of £2 million" was mental but I'm no financial expert and thought I must be missing something. What BSF says makes a lot of sense and if it comes to be true then I'd expect this will be the last time Hosie avoids jail for his antics. One question though - if Hosie transferred Brabco's ownership of Dumbarton to a new company, then sold that to the Norwegians, would that not be recorded on Companies House? How can a guy who isn't a registered director of Brabco transfer it's asset to another company? He can't. He can tell Sweeney that Brabco has agreed to his suggestion, but Hosie himself can't do any of it. He also couldn't do anything without authorisation from the Brabco directors. I don't see Stainton and Wilson (or the other investors we never discovered the identities of) being party to something that risks the sale of their stake in Brabco. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lorenzo71 Posted July 14, 2021 Share Posted July 14, 2021 1 hour ago, BallochSonsFan said: He can't. He can tell Sweeney that Brabco has agreed to his suggestion, but Hosie himself can't do any of it. He also couldn't do anything without authorisation from the Brabco directors. I don't see Stainton and Wilson (or the other investors we never discovered the identities of) being party to something that risks the sale of their stake in Brabco. So what I can gather from all of this is that- Sweeney and Hosie have a personal problem which cannot affect DFC directly. But all these marshy going-ons are detrimental to the running of the FC in the short to long term? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BallochSonsFan Posted July 14, 2021 Share Posted July 14, 2021 (edited) 6 minutes ago, lorenzo71 said: So what I can gather from all of this is that- Sweeney and Hosie have a personal problem which cannot affect DFC directly. But all these marshy going-ons are detrimental to the running of the FC in the short to long term? Pretty much. It's going to get messy between Sweeney and Hosie. Theres no way that Hosie would have been able to do anything that Sweeney has claimed without the knowledge and agreement of Brabco (regarding Brabco matters) or the club board (regarding club assets). That doesnt mean that the uncertainty until the dispute is resolved will do anything but frustrate the club and the new owners. Edited July 14, 2021 by BallochSonsFan 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BallochSonsFan Posted July 14, 2021 Share Posted July 14, 2021 2 hours ago, FifeSons said: Football club ownership is like moths to a flame for dodgy characters. I don’t really understand why, either. It's easier to for dodgy people to do dodgy things with football clubs. There's little regulation to protect clubs specifically as important community assets and by the time the dodgy character has done their dodgy deeds then it's too late for the football authorities to start talking about fit and proper people. We really need better protection for football clubs in the UK. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the snudge Posted July 14, 2021 Share Posted July 14, 2021 If this was a mafia movie, we'd most likely see it ending with Hosie chopped up and being fed to some pigs. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Moonster Posted July 14, 2021 Share Posted July 14, 2021 The positive is that none of this should really affect Faz or the team. It's essentially a legal (or perhaps illegal) battle between two dodgy characters and whilst we need to keep an eye on what transpires, I fail to see any way in which our continued existence is "a distant possibility". 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bring Back Paddy Flannery Posted July 14, 2021 Share Posted July 14, 2021 When the facts are being laid out in simple terms you really have to laugh at that bum Heaney’s blog post or whatever the f**k it is. The only thing spreading through the town like wildfire is that Bill Heaney is a grade A turd. 8 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C'mon_the_Sons Posted July 14, 2021 Share Posted July 14, 2021 27 minutes ago, The Moonster said: The positive is that none of this should really affect Faz or the team. It's essentially a legal (or perhaps illegal) battle between two dodgy characters and whilst we need to keep an eye on what transpires, I fail to see any way in which our continued existence is "a distant possibility". Our certified accounts also dispel the myth that Dumbarton FC Ltd are a struggling business. ‘Healthy’ is the word used from recollection. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boghead ranter Posted July 14, 2021 Share Posted July 14, 2021 16 minutes ago, Bring Back Paddy Flannery said: Bill Heaney is a grade A turd. This is so not news it could feature on Dumbarton Democrat. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boghead ranter Posted July 14, 2021 Share Posted July 14, 2021 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thommo90 Posted July 14, 2021 Share Posted July 14, 2021 How many fans are we letting into the rangers colts games? Some rangers fans think they will be getting 2000. Not a chance 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.