Tweedy Group - The Aftermath

Ledger

dayshah wrote: »

What is this based on?

I can't see a basis for how Tweedy will have any stake in the company. Why would creditors agree to Tweedy keeping 25% if they only get 10c in the Euro (even if that).

A new investor has to deal with the receiver. If they offer more than the value of the liquidated company (and there are no better offers) then it will be accepted. Why would an investor give Tweedy the gift of a 25% stake?

In effect, its the creditors that own the group now, not Bob.

This is information i got from a guy working in masons


Ledger

Adyx

There does seem to be a lot of misinformation going around so here's how it is: Basically as of Tuesday the Tweedy Group is no longer owner of Muldoons or Ruby's. The Tweedy Group was the parent company of these two companies. It is these two companies which were in examinership and now receivership, not the Tweedy Group itself.

Regards Bob and Bolster, Bob would not be retaining a 25% stake but rather investing with Bolster with a 25% / 75% split. I don't know if that partnership still stands however. There are a number of other interested groups at the moment.

Both venues are still open for business for the foreseeable future.

Hoffmans

25% of what ? an 11million debt
that tweety grp oversaw
shouldnt they have looked for investors when say they were a million in debt rather than leaving it run so far into the ground and jeporadise so many well paid foreign nationals jobs....and a few locals to boot..

Adyx

Hoffmans wrote: »

25% of what ? an 11million debt
that tweety grp oversaw
shouldnt they have looked for investors when say they were a million in debt rather than leaving it run so far into the ground and jeporadise so many well paid foreign nationals jobs....and a few locals to boot..

I don't understand what you're trying to say with that first sentence and at least 2/3 of the staff in Muldoon's and Ruby's are Irish - not that has anything to with anything.

dayshah

Adyx wrote: »

Regards Bob and Bolster, Bob would not be retaining a 25% stake but rather investing with Bolster with a 25% / 75% split. I don't know if that partnership still stands however. There are a number of other interested groups at the moment.

But where could Bob get the money for investing 25%?

No bank will loan money to him to buy a stake in a company that he already owes money to the banks for.

Also, given the guarantees, the Tweedys can't have a lot of personal cash left.

blackstufflad

It was , is a cash business. And generally you will find in these sorts of business that the accounts arent what they should be , now I dont know about Mr t's accounting methods . But if you read the times on saturday you will see that there was 125k in the safe, which according to the examiner Mr t took 35k for needs and 25k to pay another company he owns.
So you do that over a period of time and you can accumulate a fair bit . And of course according to a local newspaper add for hes wife's new yoga business they went all over the world sampling spas before they set up the new business just before Xmas when the other companies were in examinership.
So my point is there is probably money tucked away for a rainy day. How much is anybodys guess ?????

dayshah

blackstufflad wrote: »

It was , is a cash business. And generally you will find in these sorts of business that the accounts arent what they should be , now I dont know about Mr t's accounting methods . But if you read the times on saturday you will see that there was 125k in the safe, which according to the examiner Mr t took 35k for needs and 25k to pay another company he owns.
So you do that over a period of time and you can accumulate a fair bit . And of course according to a local newspaper add for hes wife's new yoga business they went all over the world sampling spas before they set up the new business just before Xmas when the other companies were in examinership.
So my point is there is probably money tucked away for a rainy day. How much is anybodys guess ?????

Even if he had saved for a rainy day, there is still the personal guarantee to the banks for previous loans. He will have to satisfy them before he can have cash for investing in the business.

giles lynchwood

When Robert wanted to buy the kananagh brother's share of mason's,he had trouble raising the cash back then,so he approached the cork group who owned the three ship's bar at the time and proposed that they buy mason's and he would lease it back from them. .The reason most publician's want to charge addmission fee it's almost tax free,especially if you have two Q-entry machine's,overhead's,exstension's etc,etc are just a smoke screen.Cash in hand;)

Hoffmans

safes ,cash,leases smokescreens sounds like a right soap opera.....

dayshah

No real new information in this, but it is authoritative and a nice summary of how things stand.
http://insolvencyjournal.ie/news/10-03-10/Receiver_appointed_to_Tweedy_group.aspx

blackstufflad

mpaQUOTE=giles lynchwood;64895868]When Robert wanted to buy the kananagh brother's share of mason's,he had trouble raising the cash back then,so he approached the cork group who owned the three ship's bar at the time and proposed that they buy mason's and he would lease it back from them. .The reason most publician's want to charge addmission fee it's almost tax free,especially if you have two Q-entry machine's,overhead's,exstension's etc,etc are just a smoke screen.Cash in hand;)[/QUOTE]


You mention Masons, but Masons and Oscars are not part of the business that was put into examinership or now recievership . So does this mean that they are safe . Or are creditors ie banks pushing ahead to get their money back from these ventures. As I understood the debt to be nearer 10 milion as opposed to 6.8. My understanding from the company accounts published was that these were running showing a loss.

abouttobebanned

Imagine a house of cards...Imagine that Rubys and Muldoons are the foundation of this house of cards...imagine taking them out of the house of cards...

dayshah

Tis all very confusing, what with all the separate companies.

However, the Tweedys gave a personal guarantee to Bank of Ireland. So if Muldoons and Rubys are sold off, BoI can come after them for the remainder (but normal creditors can't).

Suppose the Tweedys end up having to pay €2 or €3 million from their back pocket. I think this is a fair guess. Then the Tweedys would probably have to at least sell a big stake in Masons or whatever they own. Given the value of Masons has dropped a lot, it will have to be a very big stake, probably all of it, and if that doesn't cover the debt then they could lose even more.

blackstufflad

Understand about the house of cards etc. But are masons and oscars in seperate companies or the same under the same company.Obviously they are seperate from muldoons and rubys.But will the house come crashing down if the creditors come after them. And is this only all about Mr t , as his sister is a director as well.

dayshah

blackstufflad wrote: »

Understand about the house of cards etc. But are masons and oscars in seperate companies or the same under the same company.Obviously they are seperate from muldoons and rubys.But will the house come crashing down if the creditors come after them. And is this only all about Mr t , as his sister is a director as well.

Both Mr T and his sister made the personal guarantee to Bank of Ireland.

So far its only the Rubys/Woodman and Muldoons/Oxygen businesses that are in receivership.
The personal guarantees are the key as to what will happen. If the Tweedys can't pay what is due to BoI from the proceeds of the sale of Rubys and Muldoons then they will have to sell something to raise the cash.

blackstufflad

I did see in one of the threads that Mr T had tried to get a third party to buy masons and lease it back . If this was the case then this would not be an asset that he could barter with . Was this the case or did he have to come up with the money ( well the bank ) or are there other partners involved in oscars and masons.

blackstufflad

Well it looks like my question was answered by the press. As now it would appear that bank of scotland is after some money as well as BOI. So is Masons safe or are there other loans from other banks or other parties on this ????? And will there be buyers at a high enough price to clear the debt of the other bars . Who would be interested ??? Was rubys and muldoons busy on the weekend ???

Musicman2000

Maybe the people that own the Dinn Ri in Carlow, I was out myself Sat night and it was quiet enough, maybe thats before the band holiday weekend, but as one person said to me Waterfords night life is well and truley ******

dayshah

Well from the article it looks like he is just running Masons until April 7. Then a decision on what to do with it will be made.

http://www.independent.ie/business/irish/tweedy-group-to-be-liquidated-after-failed-examinership-2114080.html

I think this is probably the worst outcome for Mr. T.

However, it looks ok so far for the workers. This is as the individual businesses are likely to be sold off as going concerns rather than actual liquidating them (ie selling off all the stock and furniture and buildings).

abouttobebanned

Probably because Waterford has the highest increase in unemployment in Ireland. Nobody has a penny.

And yet I still see bar owners and promoters running events with a large door charge.

Actually...what i was about to post is a bit off topic..will moce to another thread,..

Musicman2000

Couldnt agree more, and as you said people dont have the money, and the price of drink is still ridiculous

abouttobebanned

Could it be like the price of houses? Take for example, my house...bought for 255, 000...now selling at 170,000. They got away with charging 255 in the hey day, but yet they are now able to sell for 85 thousand less. Can bars now afford to seel drinks at a more affordable price?

EDIT: Sorry...am off topic again

Ledger

blackstufflad wrote: »

Was rubys and muldoons busy on the weekend ???

going on the deliveries which we have due for rubys, masons and muldoons tomorrow they either had a busy week or have a busy week facing them. Needless to say they are both recieving large deliveries.



Ledger

dayshah

Ledger wrote: »

going on the deliveries which we have due for rubys, masons and muldoons tomorrow they either had a busy week or have a busy week facing them. Needless to say they are both recieving large deliveries.



Ledger

Are those deliveries on credit?

It will be a long weekend with Easter (though omit Friday).
Doesn't matter a huge amount to Mr T now, apart from Masons, the receivers are running the show.

Adyx

Ledger wrote: »

going on the deliveries which we have due for rubys, masons and muldoons tomorrow they either had a busy week or have a busy week facing them. Needless to say they are both recieving large deliveries.



Ledger

Friday was very busy in Muldoon's but don't know about Ruby's. Saturday was decent too. Bank holiday weekends are always going to be relatively busy and Oxygen will be open an extra night from the week after next I think.

Ledger

Well the usual arrangement is that payment is made at the end of the month but given the circumstances im not sure what the set up is regarding payment

goat2

Ultimate Chin wrote: »

It genuinely amazes me how such a monopoly could be achieved in the 1st place

does not amaze me
guess it was all got on borrowed money

dayshah

In fairness, was it really a monopoly?

It certainly wasn't regarding pubs.

For late bars there was Harveys, and for nightclubs the Forum and then the place in Revolution came along (plus the Reginald from time to time I think).

I do think he had too much of the nightclub market to be good for Waterford, but that just gave space for Mr Flash to open his place.

seanwindle22

wel if u ask me is a joke that a business can still trade and owe substancial debts and basically mr t will get off with no worries.
i see when the examiner was appointed he took 125k out of the woodman for personal reasons. the examiner also said mr t have no interest in saving the company. looks like to me another case of the law favouring the rich

Adyx

seanwindle22 wrote: »

wel if u ask me is a joke that a business can still trade and owe substancial debts and basically mr t will get off with no worries.
i see when the examiner was appointed he took 125k out of the woodman for personal reasons. the examiner also said mr t have no interest in saving the company. looks like to me another case of the law favouring the rich

What? If The Tweedy Group or Bob Tweedy owes money than that's their (his) problem not the two businesses in question. I'd suggest you look up what receivership means.

Secondly what the examiner said about Bob taking 125k out of the Woodman was a barefaced lie. In absolutely no circumstances would that kind of cash be kept on the premises. This is a fact. To suggest otherwise is very dangerous imo. If Bob did get 125k from somewhere it wasn't from any of the businesses.