Mary Wilson vs Michael McNamara

JonathanAnon

I thought she was very unfair. She's got her cushy civil service job and is giving out to this guy, who is taking personal liability for the money he owes. She's treating him like a criminal.

Sorry his name is Bernard McNamara.

FlutterinBantam

So you got two things wrong

She's not civil service
and His name.


start again

JonathanAnon

well public servant then. And the company name is Michael Mcnamara. Did you even listen to it or are you just riding around on your pedantic high horse?

FlutterinBantam

No, not public service either.

Now now no personal animosity:p

ronken505

Mary Wilson works for a semi state which is owned by the goverment. civil / public / semi state, whatever you call it Mary Wilson has a goverment backed job with a rolls royce pension. I think thats the point JonathanAnon was making.

hard to say if she was hard on him. very hard to say how Bernard McNamara will fare out of all this. Im sure he is no fool and has money hidden away from personal guarntees.Just speculating, but id be very surprised to see a guy who accumulated so much let it all slip away from him so easily.

JonathanAnon

ronken505 wrote: »

hard to say if she was hard on him. very hard to say how Bernard McNamara will fare out of all this. Im sure he is no fool and has money hidden away from personal guarntees. Just speculating, but id be very surprised to see a guy who accumulated so much let it all slip away from him so easily.

I thought she was discrespectful.. She made some remark about his sitting room / swimming pool, alluding to how extravagant it was and said "will you lose that".. I just didnt like her attitude, it seemed like she was gloating at his misfortune.

There are a lot of builders who are hiding behind their personal assets, and moving business assets in to their wives' names etc etc If he is prepared to stand over his debts and do his best to repay them, then he is to be respected. imo

rugbyman

JonathanAnon wrote: »

I thought she was discrespectful.. She made some remark about his sitting room / swimming pool, alluding to how extravagant it was and said "will you lose that".. I just didnt like her attitude, it seemed like she was gloating at his misfortune.

There are a lot of builders who are hiding behind their personal assets, and moving business assets in to their wives' names etc etc If he is prepared to stand over his debts and do his best to repay them, then he is to be respected. imo

Jonathan, i think you are somewhat right about the ladys attitude, but only a little.
However, I found the man quite impressive, certainly willing to talk straight. It will be intersting to see how it pans out.
Regards Rugbyman

Kristopherus

Well, I just watched on Six-One. Sob, sob type of effort. I'm sure he has covered every corner before he embarked on his current charm offensive. Hell will freeze before his family home is re-possessed. I have to say I have very little sympathy for him or his ilk.

ronken505

yeah....but is he prepared to back up his debts with his personal assets? i think that talk is cheap and only time can tell how his debts are handled.

Im very very sceptical that any builder / property developer (personal guarntees or not) will end up back as a paye schmuck working in admin somewhere. i just dont see that happening in this country. these guys have the best accountants working full time to ensure that the personal assets are not taken.

JonathanAnon

ronken505 wrote: »

yeah....but is he prepared to back up his debts with his personal assets? i think that talk is cheap and only time can tell how his debts are handled.

He said specifically that he would move out of his house if that was what was called for. if he is sincere in this then he has greater moral values than most builders I know.

A local builder went bust in my area, a friend of mine in fact owing lots of money. .. only owed me 400, but owed another mutual friend 50k. Put the company into liquidation and everyone only got 2.5% of what they were owed. He still lives in his fancy big house.

humberklog

The guy's a straight talker and adressed his short comings well. She really was ragging it and considering that he's one of the few (only?) people in such a position to come into a radio station after getting a pretty severe kick in the roundies and all on his 60th birthday too to just tell the story as he sees it.

He spoke very well a few year ago when Marrion had him on to explain the O'Devaney Gardens PPP cock up. As opposed to p!ssing the guy off perhaps they should be schmoozing him a little in order to get an honest and different angle when the whole vietNAMA comes chugging down the tracks and confusing the bejayzuz out of slighly daft people like myself.

The guy was calling it as he felt it and Mary went chasing the wrong tail. I would have liked to have heard more of the threats and romours of physical violence towards him. She asked the question (ish), he was willing to talk about it and then she went off on a tangent.
Poor job on some possibly quality material.
These guys don't put their heads up much and when they do I think we deserve better questions to get better answers.
Badly missed opportunity there.

Derryleigh

Kristopherus wrote: »

Well, I just watched on Six-One. Sob, sob type of effort. I'm sure he has covered every corner before he embarked on his current charm offensive. Hell will freeze before his family home is re-possessed. I have to say I have very little sympathy for him or his ilk.

He is a human being. Dont be so nasty. Why are we so full of a morbid wish to see anyone people like that hanged. He didnt single handedly set out to ruin the country or himself or his family for that matter I am sure.

He came across as contrite and honest and the fact that he was willing to put himself up for a grilling when he didnt have to says alot too. What was he meant to do during the boom, stop building because he was suddenly making money? Can you show me the posts Kris where you foresaw all this, where you were critical of McNamara and "his ilk (pardon me)", borrowing money on the back or personal gurantees?

The greed of some builders and bankers was a disgrace and any who broke laws should be tried for it but I think there are others who took great personal risks with bank borrowings etc and as McNamara said to expand their businesses, look around and you will see alot of fine buldings as a result.

Any builder or business person for that matter, given the opportunity to make money legitimately in furthering their careers or businesses during the boom would have been mad not to take it. Or is there anyone on this forum, including media people, who turned down a pay rise over the past ten years or a good offer for their homes, out of a sense of not wanting to be part of the boom? Without these guys taking risks and employing, as in McNamaras case 1100 people, where would we be.

(sorry if gone slightly off topic but it all ties into the race by the media and radio presenters to give anyone with a trowel and a cement mixer a hard interview usually directed towards murderers.)

trishasaffron

Oh come on - gimme a break! Bernard was no better than the rest - sure he comes across as a more intelligent type but really and truly - he bought one house in Ailesbury Road and since one wasn't big enough bought another and then knocked them together - installed heated swimmming pool etc. Very modest behaviour indeed:rolleyes: Did he think he was playing Monopoly and mabe two Ailesburies trumped one Shrewsbury?

IMO its well deserved hubris. Given the fact that its this kind of carry on that brought the country to its knees I really don't see why we can't complain, and moan and bitch and...........

humberklog

trishasaffron wrote: »

Oh come on - gimme a break! Bernard was no better than the rest - sure he comes across as a more intelligent type but really and truly - he bought one house in Ailesbury Road and since one wasn't big enough bought another and then knocked them together - installed heated swimmming pool etc. Very modest behaviour indeed:rolleyes: Did he think he was playing Monopoly and mabe two Ailesburies trumped one Shrewsbury?

IMO its well deserved hubris. Given the fact that its this kind of carry on that brought the country to its knees I really don't see why we can't complain, and moan and bitch and...........

Sure no better but he was one side of the coin ( the losing side at that) and yet he still had the metal to come onto the show. What of the victors in this case? Where were they to explain themselves? They're the reason moreso for this abortion of a crisis and where are they? Sure they won, they're right in the eyes of the court...my arse. Far more venal and disturbing is their absense than his presence.
As I said, RTE and the listeners would have had far more to gain if they'd prepared more incisive quetions rather than simply sticking him on the ropes over a bleedin' gaff. How wiser are we over this situation (and the further ramifications of a case like this) after RTE fluffed this interview? None the wiser, that's what. Other than one bloke had a pretty crap 60th birthday.

imme

JonathanAnon wrote: »

I thought she was very unfair. She's got her cushy civil service job and is giving out to this guy, who is taking personal liability for the money he owes. She's treating him like a criminal.

Sorry his name is Bernard McNamara.

*yawns*
oh is it time for PS bashing again. Oh and maybe you could have gotten McNamara's name right, it's kind of important.
McNamara comes across as a man of his word, a decent guy.
He seems to have over extended himself and paid too much for a lot of over-priced land.
He didn't come out of the Dublin City Council flat regeneration plan well either.

banchang

Well done Mary

Don't stop

You asked all the right questions - these are the questions the people want to be asked

I wouldn't change anything - not one thing

JonathanAnon

imme wrote: »

*yawns*
oh is it time for PS bashing again. Oh and maybe you could have gotten McNamara's name right, it's kind of important.

Well Michael McNamara is the name of the company that owns the money, so the thread title is legitimate. Must have taken over the family business or something.

My point on the PS is basically, this guy took a risk and created jobs for other people. He's lost pretty much everything (assuming that we believe him), He now has no pension and no money after his year's of no doubt hard work. Mary Wilson hasnt created any jobs for other people, is in an organisation that is impossible to get fired from, and she will no doubt have a great pension. I think it's very unfair of her to hit an entrepreneur like McNamara with low blows, because things turned bad for him. She was
very smug, the way she asked the questions.

I really wish they would give PBH the DriveTime job.. He's sooo much better. mary just cant ask the questions with the right emphasis, tone, respect.. She just pisses people off.. Anyone remember when she pissed off Gay Mitchell with her intro alone?

ronken505

posters here seem to be supposing that McNamara is a loser in all this. the only thing he has lost is the momentum of his business.

He still lives in a massive house and his family will have lived the past 10 years like millionaires and will most likely continue to do so. just becuase he is insolvent means nothing in this country as we know.....

if he has to move out of his residence i will change my tune, but for now this controversy over mcnamara is a storm in a teacup. builders and developers like mcnamara (such as fleming in cork) have gone bust over and over again over the past 30 years.

its what these guys do!! they keep repeating the trick becuae they know their personal assets cant be touched. mcnamaras have yet to be touched. even in todays papers the line on his personal assets is that they "may be taken".

Slideshowbob

Interesting at some stage in an interview with RTE yesterday McNamara mentioned the Professional Indemnity insurance of valuers who were involved with purchases he made. Anyone know if they are liable, and to what extent? If not, why not?

Also, he or Mary briefly mentioned threats made to him? I heard such rumours before? Anyone got any more detail?

Kristopherus

Derryleigh wrote: »

He is a human being. Dont be so nasty. Why are we so full of a morbid wish to see anyone people like that hanged. He didnt single handedly set out to ruin the country or himself or his family for that matter I am sure.

He came across as contrite and honest and the fact that he was willing to put himself up for a grilling when he didnt have to says alot too. What was he meant to do during the boom, stop building because he was suddenly making money? Can you show me the posts Kris where you foresaw all this, where you were critical of McNamara and "his ilk (pardon me)", borrowing money on the back or personal gurantees?

The greed of some builders and bankers was a disgrace and any who broke laws should be tried for it but I think there are others who took great personal risks with bank borrowings etc and as McNamara said to expand their businesses, look around and you will see alot of fine buldings as a result.

Any builder or business person for that matter, given the opportunity to make money legitimately in furthering their careers or businesses during the boom would have been mad not to take it. Or is there anyone on this forum, including media people, who turned down a pay rise over the past ten years or a good offer for their homes, out of a sense of not wanting to be part of the boom? Without these guys taking risks and employing, as in McNamaras case 1100 people, where would we be.

(sorry if gone slightly off topic but it all ties into the race by the media and radio presenters to give anyone with a trowel and a cement mixer a hard interview usually directed towards murderers.)

If you knew him as well as I do, then your attitude would be very different, I can assure you. I'll leave it at that, or I'll get banned:mad:

maxwell smart

Slideshowbob wrote: »

Also, he or Mary briefly mentioned threats made to him? I heard such rumours before? Anyone got any more detail?

I heard that he has/had 2 bodyguards with him 24/7 for some reason:eek:

As an aside, he was smart when paying suppliers. If a bill was due on Friday, he'd write the cheque after 6pm on the Friday and it would be ready for collection Monday.....obviously the old cheques have started to bounce for this personal stuff!

humberklog

Kristopherus wrote: »

If you knew him as well as I do, then your attitude would be very different, I can assure you. I'll leave it at that, or I'll get banned:mad:

Not much of an assurance though is it really?


I noticed the interview getting a few mentions over the weekend on a couple of shows. Not much mention of the quality of interview or any facts revealed, just general talk on the man's reaction to his lot.