WTF? Developer gets elected for Wexford who owes €40,000,000

Dublin_Gunner

alejandro1977 wrote: »

He admitted he hasn't been paying the interest.(1) Therefore even a financial genius you can see his debts must have grown. Perhaps if he was in the habit of filing his accounts on time there would be more information available to the public.

Yes he was democratically elected. (That's the whole point of this thread!) By a bunch of gombeen fools (2). As was Bertie, CJH, Ray Burke, Liam Lawlor, Michael Lowry, John Ellis and other hypocrites. This is why the country is FUBAR'd

Calling someone ignorant when you are incapable of supplying, or analysing facts is really juvenile. Read the balance sheet if you are bored.

1. 2008.

2. I'm sure the Wexford people on this thread, and everywhere, will take exception to you calling them all 'gombeen fools'.

He is democratically elected, therefore deserves his seat in the Daíl, regardless of what you personally think of him for whatever your reasons are.

alejandro1977

Dublin_Gunner wrote: »

1. 2008.

2. I'm sure the Wexford people on this thread, and everywhere, will take exception to you calling them all 'gombeen fools'.

He is democratically elected, therefore deserves his seat in the Daíl, regardless of what you personally think of him for whatever your reasons are.

If he is declared bankrupt then he won't be entitled to his seat. Regardless of what you or the other bar room Che Guevaras think.

Presumably there are people in Wexford who think he's a joke too, so gombeen doesn't apply to them. Maybe the gombeen fools who voted for Bertie/CJH/Ray Burke/Liam Lawlor/Lowry etc. will take offence at being called gombeen fools but that's what they are. It's a fact.

How can he vote to change the bankruptcy laws, lease laws etc when he has a conflict of interests?

You don't get it. I'm well aware that 2008->2009->2010=>2011

unless he found a crock of gold in one of his many ****e development sites in the meantime then he is still up sh1t creek without a paddle.

scout353

Saw him on news last night and to paraphrase......

"I don't own a suit or a tie. I hear they have an archaic dress code but I'm sure I'll find something.

I might even have a shower!"

And this is supposed to be a person in whom we can trust to look forward to our national recovery!

Don't think so!

Dublin_Gunner

alejandro1977 wrote: »

If he is declared bankrupt then he won't be entitled to his seat. Regardless of what you or the other bar room Che Guevaras think.

Presumably there are people in Wexford who think he's a joke too, so gombeen doesn't apply to them. Maybe the gombeen fools who voted for Bertie/CJH/Ray Burke/Liam Lawlor/Lowry etc. will take offence at being called gombeen fools but that's what they are. It's a fact.

How can he vote to change the bankruptcy laws, lease laws etc when he has a conflict of interests?

You don't get it. I'm well aware that 2008->2009->2010=>2011

unless he found a crock of gold in one of his many ****e development sites in the meantime then he is still up sh1t creek without a paddle.

He won't be declared bankrupt. So you're basing your opinion on hypothetical situations.

How can he have a conflict of interest when he doesn't agree with them in the first place? Are you saying a TD cannot vote on banking laws if they have a bank account?? lol

From 2008 to present, he has paid money. This money has gone off his interest payments. These interest payment are mostly to non-Irish banks.

Could you please outline, specifically, what your problem is with Wallace? You seem to merely think that because he's a developer, who has loans, that he must be bad.

Mint Sauce

By running for election he has basically applied for a job. By being elected he has passed the job interview. Are we saying that people who owe money, should not be allowed to apply for a job. Regardless of his policies, background, atleast now he might be able to pay some of those loans back.

alejandro1977

Dublin_Gunner wrote: »

Could you please outline, specifically, what your problem is with Wallace?

For starters:

He's greedy man who tried to make millions for himself by borrowing other people's money and engaging in highly leveraged, speculative real estate developments at the height of a property bubble.

He's not a monk or an ascetic; in fact he paid himself a quarter of a million a year and was swanning around in an S-Class Mercedes (with an X5 for the wife).

Now he wants to tell me how to run my life and decide how much I should pay in taxes and how my money should be spent.



Claiming he's not as bad as other developers is whataboutery.

alejandro1977

irish-stew wrote: »

By running for election he has basically applied for a job. By being elected he has passed the job interview. Are we saying that people who owe money, should not be allowed to apply for a job. Regardless of his policies, background, atleast now he might be able to pay some of those loans back.

Do you know how much the interest on 42,000,000 is?

His Dail salary won't pay it.

He bought a site for 7,000,000 and now claims it's worth 3,000,000 - (the bank says 1,000,000). Either way, interest on 4,000,000 is about 200,000 per annum at 5%.

If you can't pay the interest on a loan, the interest is added to the loan and it snowballs...!

His Dail salary comes from the Taxpayer. Some of loans are with AIB
see: http://www.scribd.com/doc/49176911/Wallace-Charges

if he wants to payback his loans he should get a job abroad and send the money back to AIB/Taxpayer

Mint Sauce

alejandro1977 wrote: »

Do you know how much the interest on 42,000,000 is?

His Dail salary won't pay it.

He bought a site for 7,000,000 and now claims it's worth 3,000,000 - (the bank says 1,000,000). Either way, interest on 4,000,000 is about 200,000 per annum at 5%.

Only way he will pay it back if there is a huge upturn in the ecomomy again, or if he wins the lotto, and even then, it wont cover it.

But my point is, if someone owes money, does that limit the types of job people can go for.

alejandro1977

irish-stew wrote: »

Only way he will pay it back if there is a huge upturn in the ecomomy again, or if he wins the lotto, and even then, it wont cover it.

But my point is, if someone owes money, does that limit the types of job people can go for.

If you're bankrupt you can't practice as a solicitor or barrister IIRC (+ accountant)

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/solicitors-not-able-to-repay-euro80m-anglo-loan-2559016.html

FOUR solicitors have stepped down as partners at a prominent law firm after running up millions in personal bank debt through exposure to a failed property company

Surely those who make the laws should be held to the same standard as those who make a living in law?

Dublin_Gunner

alejandro1977 wrote: »

Do you know how much the interest on 42,000,000 is?

His Dail salary won't pay it.

He bought a site for 7,000,000 and now claims it's worth 3,000,000 - (the bank says 1,000,000). Either way, interest on 4,000,000 is about 200,000 per annum at 5%.

If you can't pay the interest on a loan, the interest is added to the loan and it snowballs...!

His Dail salary comes from the Taxpayer. Some of loans are with AIB
see: http://www.scribd.com/doc/49176911/Wallace-Charges

if he wants to payback his loans he should get a job abroad and send the money back to AIB/Taxpayer

Do you? Do you know what specific deals he has in place with his loan providers?

Pretty sure his company is limited, so therefore only the company can be sued, or declared bankrupt. None of the owners or shareholders can be. They will lose their interest in the company yes - thats the risk you take as a shareholder.

And yes, a small amount of his loans are with AIB - we all know that. I have loans with an Irish bank, most people I know do. Does that mean we can't run in an election???? Nope.

JJJJNR

Everyone deserves a second chance, k

alejandro1977

Dublin_Gunner wrote: »

Do you? Do you know what specific deals he has in place with his loan providers?

Pretty sure his company is limited, so therefore only the company can be sued, or declared bankrupt. None of the owners or shareholders can be. They will lose their interest in the company yes - thats the risk you take as a shareholder.

A.

While his company is Limited, plenty of Limited Liability company directors signed personal guarantees with the banks, voiding that protection. In fact it was the norm for AIB in the property development sector.


Did you look though the charges for Wallace?

http://www.scribd.com/doc/49176911/Wallace-Charges

"ALLIED IRISH BANKS PLC" is AIB by the way

And yes, a small amount of his loans are with AIB - we all know that. I have loans with an Irish bank, most people I know do. Does that mean we can't run in an election???? Nope

great comeback

Dublin_Gunner

alejandro1977 wrote: »

While his company is Limited, plenty of Limited Liability company directors signed personal guarantees with the banks, voiding that protection. In fact it was the norm for AIB in the property development sector.


Did you look though the charges for Wallace?

http://www.scribd.com/doc/49176911/Wallace-Charges

"ALLIED IRISH BANKS PLC" is AIB by the way




great comeback

No way!!!!!

RichieC

How does one manage to even have a pot to piss in when owing such an incredible amount of money?


Shows exactly how unequal our monetary system is.

lostwallet

Dublin_Gunner wrote: »

No way!!!!!

To be fair, reading back over thread it wouldn't be particularly clear that you understood.

Dublin_Gunner

lostwallet wrote: »

To be fair, reading back over thread it wouldn't be particularly clear that you understood.

Really? How so?

I wasn't aware I posted anything that would suggest I would not know that Allied Irish Banks PLC was in fact AIB.

Enlighten me.

alejandro1977

Dublin_Gunner wrote: »

Really? How so?

I wasn't aware I posted anything that would suggest I would not know that Allied Irish Banks PLC was in fact AIB.

Enlighten me.

a small amount of his loans are with AIB

the fact that you refer to the loans as Small would suggest you either don't understand the charge document or didn't realise that AIB = "Allied Irish Banks PLC".

I'm inclined to accept the former TBH.

lostwallet

I wouldn't get into a tit for tat with someone who is capable of making a statement like this.

Dublin_Gunner wrote: »

42m to me personally, is huge. For a developer, its well below mediocre.

Bertienomics at its finest.

alejandro1977

lostwallet wrote: »

I wouldn't get into a tit for tat with someone who is capable of making a statement like this.



Bertienomics at its finest.

It's why "we are where we are".

Fighting Irish

HE DIDN'T ELECT HIMSELF!!!!

alejandro1977

Fighting Irish wrote: »

HE DIDN'T ELECT HIMSELF!!!!

thanks.

Fighting Irish

alejandro1977 wrote: »

thanks.

So what's all the uproar about, every politician in this country is elected by the people

alejandro1977

Fighting Irish wrote: »

So what's all the uproar about, every politician in this country is elected by the people

This is news to me. Please, do tell. /sarcasm

Fighting Irish

alejandro1977 wrote: »

This is news to me. Please, do tell.

:rolleyes:

Dublin_Gunner

alejandro1977 wrote: »

a small amount of his loans are with AIB

the fact that you refer to the loans as Small would suggest you either don't understand the charge document or didn't realise that AIB = "Allied Irish Banks PLC".

I'm inclined to accept the former TBH.

Nope. His loans ARE small in the grand scheme of things. And still, I don't get how that would mean I don't know who AIB are lol

I haven't even read the charge document. I've already stated that.

This is news to me. Please, do tell.

You know that vote we had on Friday.. Oh wait - were you eligible?

alejandro1977

Dublin_Gunner wrote: »

I haven't even read the charge document. I've already stated that.

So you're happy to spend time defending someone yet you can't be arsed to inform yourself of his situation.

I thought you said you knew plenty about NAMA and the banking crisis.

I should have known better who thinks

Dublin_Gunner wrote: »

Hence the term 'entrepreneur'. Wallace is the personification of that term.

Wrong. Property Speculation != Entrepreneurship

Dublin_Gunner wrote: »

Get a clue. Seriously. 40m is NOTHING for a big developer. One medium sized residential site would have financed that no problem, if the bubble didn't burst.

And Wallace, in fairness, is paying back his loans, and I believe his sites are earning profit. (if you take monthly income v loan repayment into account). He hasn't dumped his sites and ran off, leaving nama to pick up the deficit, and the rest of us paying the bill for an unfinished site and massive loan.

I've wasted too much time outlining how this

Dublin_Gunner wrote: »

(if you take monthly income v loan repayment into account)

is completely bogus. You clearly can't read a balance sheet or P&L statement. You don't want to accept that his business is not profitable and will never pay back its loans.


and as for this gem

Dublin_Gunner wrote: »

if the bubble didn't burst.

Next you're going to blame Lehman Brothers. Are you Bertie Ahern?

WalterMitty

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2011/0301/1224291080489.html

Dublin_Gunner

Alejandro - keep posting as much as you like to attempt to discredit anything I've said. Go for it.

Doesn't change the fact that:

A) Wallace is elected to the Dáil.
His debts haven't been burdened on the tax payer
C) He's still solvent (at the moment)
D) He's a relatively small property developer who's not in favour with FF
E) He hasn't run away from any of his commitments.
F) Has done plenty for his local community in Wexford

Exactly how much of Wexford Youths is speculation?

He is an entrepreneur - sure, he specialises in building, but that does not take away this fact. Speculation goes hand in hand with being an entrepreneur. To think otherwise is stupid.

I do know plenty of NAMA and the banking crisis - to say I don't know the ins and outs of every single case against every bad debtor does not change this fact - just because I couldn't read your link on scribby whatever site it was.

And once again, you're reading balance sheets and information from 2008. At least attempt to be current.

You don't like Wallace for whatever reason fine. But stop attempting to discredit the man for no other reason.

I don't know him from Adam, but can't stand people trying to oust someone for no reason whatsoever.

Now I think we should just put this to bed, as I'm getting bored reading your regurgitated rubbish.

Go ahead and have the last say though.

ronaneire

alejandro1977 you clearly can't stand the man, you keep saying the same stuff over and over again. He has not done anything wrong, he is still in business and I am sure he employs quite a few people in his different business.
No matter what business he or anyone is in he is entitled to stand for election once he is not bankrupt.
I assume there are many more just like him in the Dail who have business interests? Do we know if they owe large sums of money.

Get down of your bloody high horse and give the man a chance.

alejandro1977

Dublin_Gunner wrote: »

Alejandro - keep posting as much as you like to attempt to discredit anything I've said. Go for it.

Doesn't change the fact that:

A) Wallace is elected to the Dáil.
His debts haven't been burdened on the tax payer
C) He's still solvent (at the moment)
D) He's a relatively small property developer who's not in favour with FF
E) He hasn't run away from any of his commitments.
F) Has done plenty for his local community in Wexford

Exactly how much of Wexford Youths is speculation?

He is an entrepreneur - sure, he specialises in building, but that does not take away this fact. Speculation goes hand in hand with being an entrepreneur. To think otherwise is stupid.

I do know plenty of NAMA and the banking crisis - to say I don't know the ins and outs of every single case against every bad debtor does not change this fact - just because I couldn't read your link on scribby whatever site it was.

And once again, you're reading balance sheets and information from 2008. At least attempt to be current.

You don't like Wallace for whatever reason fine. But stop attempting to discredit the man for no other reason.

I don't know him from Adam, but can't stand people trying to oust someone for no reason whatsoever.

Now I think we should just put this to bed, as I'm getting bored reading your regurgitated rubbish.

Go ahead and have the last say though.

You think he's better than all the other property speculators who have bankrupted this country. I think he's no different.

You refuse to read his accounts because they are from 2008 - and casually dismiss the scribd repository. His business has deteriorated since then.

You claim he is solvent. He's up to his eyes in debt - incurred as a result of trying to grown his business far too quickly and recklessly trying to make himself a fortune. You refuse to differentiate between reckless, leveraged speculation and an entrepreneur who grown his own business and risks his own money.

As for Wexford Youths - a vanity project using other peoples money. He has funded WY using company money - i.e. a foreign bank's money

MJ Wallace subsidiary Wexford Youths FC Ltd had a €170,716 interest-free loan from its parent at the end of November 2009, according to its latest accounts, and free use of its parent’s Ferrycarrig Park in Wexford.

In fairness it's obviously paid off for him as plenty of numerically challenged yokels in Wexford have voted for him on that basis.

You might think his debts with AIB are small. If they're so small why doesn't he pay them back.

I don't know him from Adam either. He's no different tot he other greedy developers except he's better at getting the bar stool Che Guevaras and football supporting types to cheer for him.


BTW : Just answer me one question.
Did you vote for Bertie in the previous election. 'Cos you sound like the type who did.