South County GC Closed

Gambino

This is all third hand but I was told that the club removed the equipment to safe storage because it is legally responsible for it. I don't know if this is true or if it was to keep it out of the hands of the landlords.

I can think of a few toxic folk I want to avoid as well. Not all Board members either.

thegen

Gambino, you must be close to tge board. It appears you know more than most whats gone on.

Alrite Chief

We should do a poll. Who's side are you on. The board or the landlords. Option c could be neither because they are all in bed sleeping with each other.

If the club was to ever recover I think it will be better for all of what's went on. However that can't happen until there is transparency and honesty prevails. Right now I'm too suspicious of how this has been done between board and landlords. Stinks!!!

fennetec

Gambino wrote: »

This is all third hand but I was told that the club removed the equipment to safe storage because it is legally responsible for it. I don't know if this is true or if it was to keep it out of the hands of the landlords.

I can think of a few toxic folk I want to avoid as well. Not all Board members either.

Am I correct in saying you are referring to myself?

Alrite Chief

thegen wrote: »

Gambino, you must be close to tge board. It appears you know more than most whats gone on.

Well whoever he is to be fair to him he is doing more communicating than the board.

GreeBo

Gambino wrote: »

DT - South County was a members owned course but that only works if you have sensible members.

If its a members owned club then who are (were?) South Country 2004 ltd?

bustercherry

GreeBo wrote: »

If its a members owned club then who are (were?) South Country 2004 ltd?

A shower of .....

Golfingfanatic

Gambino wrote: »

This is all third hand but I was told that the club removed the equipment to safe storage because it is legally responsible for it. I don't know if this is true or if it was to keep it out of the hands of the landlords.

Yes, that's the story they're putting about; ensuring that the equipment could be sold to pay staff redundancies etc. This is BS. Even if the landlord had used the equipment to maintain the course, ownership of the equipment would have indisputable and the liquidator would have had no problem in getting possession of it. They were looking after their own skins, not the members and shareholders who made the mistake of trusting them with the company. There was absolutely no need to do what they did with the alacrity they demonstrated. Apparently the bank pulled the overdraft on Tuesday and they panicked in case they were personally charged with reckless trading. They would have had no issue with calling an emergency meeting first or to take a few days to try alternative financing, but they continued as they were, no regard for the members and look after themselves.


It was a sad day when they appointed a BS specialist who knew nothing about golf to manage the facility. The process of lowering standards and prices to an unsustainable level started the race to the bottom which they won with ease! Well done lads!

I hope Pat Kavanagh gets the place up and running again. I understand his predicament and although I've paid in full up front, I'm happy to pay the €10 a time to play if it helps him achieve survival. If, however, any of the board are even considered for membership of the new entity, I'll walk immediately and never step foot on it again.

fennetec

At the request of Pat Kavanagh, the meeting arranged for Monday night is now changed to:

Tuesday, 15th May 2012 at Avon Ri, Blessington, Co. Wicklow.

bustercherry

fennetec wrote: »

At the request of Pat Kavanagh, the meeting arranged for Monday night is now changed to:

Tuesday, 15th May 2012 at Avon Ri, Blessington, Co. Wicklow.

What's the agenda?

Gambino

thegen wrote: »

Gambino, you must be close to tge board. It appears you know more than most whats gone on.

Nope, I hardly know any of them. I just try to keep my ears (as well as my mind) open.

Gambino

bustercherry wrote: »

What's the agenda?

I don't know but I assume he plans to tell members what he hopes to do with the place. Call him and ask.

Gambino

fennetec wrote: »

Am I correct in saying you are referring to myself?

That would depend on who you are but if you are one of those who was prepared to sink the club rather than help it survive, then yes - I probably am.

fennetec

bustercherry wrote: »

What's the agenda?

Just bring your cheque book. Look, I just took the inititive this morning to arrange a meeting for the following reasons;

I thought that by doing so we, as a group of members could save the club but in order to do so it would be too late if we lkeft it for any longer than the next few days.

I thought that many members including myself who had paid up front would rather stick pins in their eyes than pay €10 to play on an uninsured course and outside the bounds of GUI and that this would result in many joining other clubs which is already happening.

I thought that whether we stay or go that whatever decision we come to we should, in as far as possible, come to that decision together, we are stronger as a group. As I said in a previous post, if South County was a recognised Failte Ireland Golf club yesterday it can still be one tomorrow.

I thought that there were some undercurrents about whether the old board were coming back under a new name and this needs to be put to bed one way or the other with a clear indication of what exact proposal Pat Kavanagh has for the club.

I now understand that the board will attend the meeting and I welcome this because we all need answers to questions that will never be resolved without their attendance. I am ready to meet anyone who is a member as I am only a wet day in the club with a view to preparing some proposals. I do feel that the meeting should be chaired by a member and not dominated by the Board or the owner of the land.

I am sorry if I cant give a more definitive response regarding the agenda and I am aware that there are views in earlier posts that some are critical of this. However, if I dont get assistance from ordinary members, shareholders I will prepare an Agenda before tomorrow evening. Hopefully Shareholders will submit questions and ordinary Joe's like me will have a few more and who knows, we could all walk out of there as happy as we were a week ago.:)

Dtoffee

Quote: Originally Posted by Gambino
DT - South County was a members owned course but that only works if you have sensible members.

If its a members owned club then who are (were?) South Country 2004 ltd?


Gambino ........ who are the Kavanaghs? its my understanding from posts that they own the course / land. As you can see from Greenbo's comment, it would appear it was a members owned 'club' and basically thats all.

So am I wrong or is Gambino wrong ??????

Gambino

Dtoffee wrote: »

Quote: Originally Posted by Gambino
DT - South County was a members owned course but that only works if you have sensible members.

If its a members owned club then who are (were?) South Country 2004 ltd?


Gambino ........ who are the Kavanaghs? its my understanding from posts that they own the course / land. As you can see from Greenbo's comment, it would appear it was a members owned 'club' and basically thats all.

So am I wrong or is Gambino wrong ??????

Forgive my sloppiness. Of course I should have said members owned club.

vikingdub

Gambino wrote: »

DT - South County was a members owned course but that only works if you have sensible members.

Are you referring to the people who dragged the club out of the mess caused by the "investors"? The people who lent money and worked hard to do a deal with the banks to avert disaster a few years ago? Perhaps you are right, it might have been more sensible for them to cut and run at that time.

vikingdub

fennetec wrote: »

I have called up to the club and asked that all members be notified of the meeting on Monday evening from the database on the clubs computer and while Mr Diskin was there I was informed that this could only be done by another board member. I wrote out the meeting details and was told they would be forwarded to the person concerned for circulation but as yet this has not happened.

http://www.southcountygolf.ie/mysitecaddy/site3/currentnews.htm?item=14257

The above is rubbish and does not excuse certain actions. <mod edit>. There is an air of " I own the club now" about the land owner, and he is welcome to it but if he wants to own the members as well he is going to have to make allowances for those who have paid in advance and who have been stung. I would discourage anyone from paying €10 to play. If he had any sense at all he would allow free golf to those who were paid up members until after meeting us as a group, otherwise he will sink as fast as a slice into the Lisheen river. He must meet all the members and if both parties think that there will be no objection to their preferred liquidator as opposed to a hostile one who will have our interests in mind then they are mistaken. The creditors meeting for shareholders and a seperate one for creditors are one thing but unless they meet us as a group I will be the one sending out debt collectors to their homes for the return of my money.

I would be concerned about the comment "anyone using the facilities does so at their own risk", presumably that means that the insurance lapsed with the closure of the club. Is it legal to run a golf club without appropriate insurance in place?

GreeBo

Gambino wrote: »

Forgive my sloppiness. Of course I should have said members owned club.

I think you are missing my point. If its a members owned club then why is there a ltd company involved?

My club is a members owned club. If the club was sold tomorrow, each member would get a percentage of the (hopefully!) profits. There is no 3rd party involved. There is a manager who is employed by the club (i.e. committee and members)
There is no one else involved at any level. No landlord, no management company, no owner, just members.

I dont know the history of SCGC but it appears that in 2004 *something* changed, so Im asking again, how is it a members owned club?

Sandwlch

GreeBo wrote: »

I think you are missing my point. If its a members owned club then why is there a ltd company involved?

Cant answer your question (it is an interesting one), but just for information, some fully member owned clubs do form ltd companies these days. AFAIK it is the recommended structure for new clubs these days.

SCGC was surely not a member owned club, if the main asset of a golf club, the land, was not owned by the members.

Pedro D

pinkdoubleeagle wrote: »

Redzah wrote: »

Just as an FYI guys. The audit report was signed on the 12th of April 2012 and I have the following issues with it;

Although it contained an emphasis of matter paragraph regarding going concern being contingent on continued support of the members the accounts were prepared on the going concern basis. This means that the auditors expressed reasonable assurance that the company would be trading 12 months from the audit report date (12th April). However less than 1 month later it ceases trading . The auditors would have had to have been presented with detailed forecasts and future cash flow statements as well as future funding requirements to sign off the audit report for this basis of preparation and would have had to stress test these so it could have possibly been professional negligence on their part or extremely misleading from SC management or most likely a mixture of both.

In my professional opinion all the factors point to accounts that should have been prepared on a break up basis (i.e. that the company would cease trading in the next 12 months) which would given anybody who could not interpret the financial statements the red flags necessary to know the financial position.

Who are the auditors?

A perfect synopsis

Pedro D

Pedro D wrote: »

pinkdoubleeagle wrote: »

Redzah wrote: »

Just as an FYI guys. The audit report was signed on the 12th of April 2012 and I have the following issues with it;

Although it contained an emphasis of matter paragraph regarding going concern being contingent on continued support of the members the accounts were prepared on the going concern basis. This means that the auditors expressed reasonable assurance that the company would be trading 12 months from the audit report date (12th April). However less than 1 month later it ceases trading . The auditors would have had to have been presented with detailed forecasts and future cash flow statements as well as future funding requirements to sign off the audit report for this basis of preparation and would have had to stress test these so it could have possibly been professional negligence on their part or extremely misleading from SC management or most likely a mixture of both.

In my professional opinion all the factors point to accounts that should have been prepared on a break up basis (i.e. that the company would cease trading in the next 12 months) which would given anybody who could not interpret the financial statements the red flags necessary to know the financial position.

Who are the auditors?

A perfect synopsis

Some facts: club made €70k loss last yr; 60+ members did not renew; bank wouldn't negotiate; landlord wouldn't negotiate; board called it a day as key people on board fought this fight before but not again. Q: would it be right to support the landlord now since he in part contributed to the closure?

Sandwlch

Are 'landlord' based clubs just a disaster waiting to happen?
They came about when members couldnt afford land due to the Celtic bubble, and as long as the false liquidity was washing through the Irish economy, they were OK, and landlords could earn an income from them. But now that we have returned to earth with a bump, their unsustainablity is being exposed and they just cannot survive - either for the member or the landlord.

Gambino

vikingdub wrote: »

Are you referring to the people who dragged the club out of the mess caused by the "investors"? The people who lent money and worked hard to do a deal with the banks to avert disaster a few years ago? Perhaps you are right, it might have been more sensible for them to cut and run at that time.

I am referring to the people who - after overcoming the challenges you describe - chose to throw it all away by engaging in a pointless and self-defeating war with the board that resulted in the events of last Tuesday.

Golf156

Dtoffee wrote: »

My only input for those of you unfortunate enough to have lost your investments ........ DONT MAKE THE SAME MISTAKE AGAIN.

Rest assured theres plenty of clubs out there willing to take advantage of you in the very same way again. Join a members owned course if you want some security, its the oldest piece of advice I got and its still relative today.

Any course offering too much free smells of desperation to me.

Well said DT

Just back from Hols and read through the whole 30 pages, SHOCKING.
Terrible situation for all the staff and members.
But what I find flabbergasting is South County members willing to part with more hard earned cash to clubs that may end up the same dead end ! ! !
If they are well run they will still be there in 2013.

• The golfing world is extremely volatile, especially for clubs with large debt and big overheads.
• Realistically there is only 6 months of competitive golf left this year.

If it was me, I would 100% look at either the country club option or join one of the cheaper clubs in the area.
That way you get Medals, Capt's Day, President prizes and get to keep your handicap + play in interclub competitions next year and play opens, whichever club you choose !
FACT: The deals will only get better in Feb,Mar 2013.

Gambino

Sandwlch wrote: »

Are 'landlord' based clubs just a disaster waiting to happen?
They came about when members couldnt afford land due to the Celtic bubble, and as long as the false liquidity was washing through the Irish economy, they were OK, and landlords could earn an income from them. But now that we have returned to earth with a bump, their unsustainablity is being exposed and they just cannot survive - either for the member or the landlord.

I haven't done the research but it is my impression that the great majority of clubs established in the last 20 years are privately owned and run on a commercial, rather than mutual basis. Having seen the dogs dinner that the members of South County have made of it, I have to think that it mightn't be the worst option.

Quite a few such clubs are doing OK. Sure, the members don't run the show but they get to play golf, without the drama. We have had enthusiastic but amateur administrators, dealing with amateur and - in my humble view - often dysfunctional members. If the landlords bring in professional managers and run the show as a benign dictatorship, could it be any worse?

Pedro D

Gambino wrote: »

Sandwlch wrote: »

Are 'landlord' based clubs just a disaster waiting to happen?
They came about when members couldnt afford land due to the Celtic bubble, and as long as the false liquidity was washing through the Irish economy, they were OK, and landlords could earn an income from them. But now that we have returned to earth with a bump, their unsustainablity is being exposed and they just cannot survive - either for the member or the landlord.

I haven't done the research but it is my impression that the great majority of clubs established in the last 20 years are privately owned and run on a commercial, rather than mutual basis. Having seen the dogs dinner that the members of South County have made of it, I have to think that it mightn't be the worst option.

Quite a few such clubs are doing OK. Sure, the members don't run the show but they get to play golf, without the drama. We have had enthusiastic but amateur administrators, dealing with amateur and - in my humble view - often dysfunctional members. If the landlords bring in professional managers and run the show as a benign dictatorship, could it be any worse?

AIB have a property with a €2m debt sitting in an inaccessible field. It will pass hands for a song so someone will end up with great assets and no debt

moycullen14

Sandwlch wrote: »

Are 'landlord' based clubs just a disaster waiting to happen?
They came about when members couldnt afford land due to the Celtic bubble, and as long as the false liquidity was washing through the Irish economy, they were OK, and landlords could earn an income from them. But now that we have returned to earth with a bump, their unsustainablity is being exposed and they just cannot survive - either for the member or the landlord.

+1
a high rent is unsustainable in this climate. Maybe the landowners only choice ia to run it as a pay per play. Maybe that's the way golf is going to go with member clubs restricted to the seriously wealthy?

Bonnamassa

fennetec wrote: »

At the request of Pat Kavanagh, the meeting arranged for Monday night is now changed to:

Tuesday, 15th May 2012 at Avon Ri, Blessington, Co. Wicklow.

3 days later and I'm still trying to rise above the initial anger and now the increasing disappointment of our lost club.

Regarding Pat Kavanagh's request that the meeting be deferred to Tuesday night, I'd be interested in any views any of you might feel like sharing with regard to what possible proposals he might put forward. Does anyone hold out any hope that a phoenix might rise of the ashes? I need to hear something positive!

moycullen14

Pedro D wrote: »

Gambino wrote: »

Sandwlch wrote: »

Are 'landlord' based clubs just a disaster waiting to happen?
They came about when members couldnt afford land due to the Celtic bubble, and as long as the false liquidity was washing through the Irish economy, they were OK, and landlords could earn an income from them. But now that we have returned to earth with a bump, their unsustainablity is being exposed and they just cannot survive - either for the member or the landlord.

I haven't done the research but it is my impression that the great majority of clubs established in the last 20 years are privately owned and run on a commercial, rather than mutual basis. Having seen the dogs dinner that the members of South County have made of it, I have to think that it mightn't be the worst option.

Quite a few such clubs are doing OK. Sure, the members don't run the show but they get to play golf, without the drama. We have had enthusiastic but amateur administrators, dealing with amateur and - in my humble view - often dysfunctional members. If the landlords bring in professional managers and run the show as a benign dictatorship, could it be any worse?

AIB have a property with a €2m debt sitting in an inaccessible field. It will pass hands for a song so someone will end up with great assets and no debt

But that's the problem. How do you make a return on it? Even if the land was free, a golf club can barely break even. Unless you have some form of competitive or cost advantage, it's hard to see how you get a return on the capital investment required to run a golf club.