Why did they have to sell to Tony O'Reilly?!?!?!

Yurmasyurda · 12-06-2001 11:54am

Originally posted by dahamsta:
Well, since Koopa and Gerry seem to want me to run through it, I will. I still maintain, however, that it's one of the worst written pieces of garbage I've ever seen.

"dahamsta i do not give a flying Fuc*K what you think to be to tell the truth."

Great start.

"what the hell are you talking about "back then" this is just about 10 years ago ?"

Can you say "tribunal"? I believe there's two currently still running. I also believe that the allegations made against DOB were a direct result of one of those tribunals? Please, correct me if I'm wrong.

"And what do you want to prove some thing ?"

In english now....

"OB said he got the other company to give FF 50 grand, the telphone company said that they gave the 50 grand, FF said they got 50 grand from DOB, what more do you want ?"

So now you're refuting your own allegation? You're telling me DOB *didn't* bribe the government. And wasn't it FG? What do I want? A legible sentence would be a good start...

"If i gave you 50 grand a week before your going to pick the next moblie phone company, what do you call that ?"

I call it bribery. But you didn't give me fifty grand, and I'm not going to pick the next mobile phone company, and again, DOB didn't do that either. Telenor - or so we are led to believe - gave FG the money.

"What did you think was going to happen? the government (FF same people who got the 50 grand) were going to investagate this ? even when it came out in the papers ? no there not."

I hasten to bring the word "tribunal" to your weak little memory again. Whitewash, yes, but still a tribunal.

"How much proof do you want that he gave a bribe ???????????"

I don't want or need any. I don't give a toss if DOB bribed the government, or Telenor bribed the government, or the Pope bribed the government. If you read my posts properly, you'd see that. I know there's something fishy about it all, but I don't care. It's fifty grand for gods sake, and like I said, that's the way things were done "back then". Ten years is a long time in politics. Five years in fact.

"I did not say that i would not give a bribe if i could to get a market like that, who wouldn't."

Again, english please.

"But thats a different thing to being in the best interest of Ireland and the people of Ireland."

Makes no difference to me. Did it make a difference to you? Please, tell me how it made a diffence to you...

"By the way i did not libel him. infact, all i have said is what he did, even he said he did it."

No, no, I'm sorry, you did in fact libel him. You said, and I quote: "Denis O'Brien is a lieing cheeting scumbag he bribed the gov of the time with a £50,000 bribe to give him the 2th moblie rights for ireland". That, dear boy, is defamation of character, plain and simple. I'd like to see you say that to his face. Or to his lawyer. He'd take every penny you own. And worse, in the post I'm responding to, you flip around completely and say that he didn't bribe the government, Telenor did. Which is it to be Coyote? I think you should skip the Debating Society.

"The companys and FF admitted it happened, and did not denied it .... it happened."

No, they admitted a sum of money was "donated" to the government. Do you honestly think a multinational company or a multi-millionaire is going to say "yes, I bribed the government"? Grow up for gods sake.

"Just because the government does not care and wants it to just dissapear from the public eye is not my fault. that doesn't make it libel."

Again, I beg to differ. Calling someone a "lieing cheeting scumbag" (sic) is about as libellous as it comes. Saying they bribed the government, well, that's just asking for trouble. If you said it to me, I'd have you in court before you could blink. Do you know why? Because if I knew your identity, it'd be an open-and-shut case. Course, that'd be where Denis would run into trouble. I wish him the best of luck though.

"As for him milking the lease line busness. He owned the damn company, he ran it for years, you think that he just walked out of a 2 billon pound company without putting someone that would do just what he wanted before he left ????"

He "owned" - he didn't in fact own the company by any manner of means - the company about two years ago. As to him "milking the lease line business" (sic), for a start he didn't have a big enough network to "milk" anything. For seconds, so what? It's not as if there was anything there as an alternative. In case you hadn't noticed, the local loop still isn't unbundled...? What did you want him to do, sell air?

"He was milking it then, and they have not changed there tone even after he left."

And what exactly is he supposed to do about that? Send them flowers and ask them to be nice? In case you haven't noticed, I /detest/ the fixed line section of Esat. Do you expect me to defend them or something?

"What makes you think that he will not try to use eircom lease lines to pay back all the debt that he ran up buying eircom ???"

Now you're imagining things, pulling rabbits out of hats. Nothing makes me think that, and I never said anything of the sort. I /think/ that there is a good chance that DOB will push to get the local loop unbundled, because he's a cute hoor, but that's just what I think. There's also a chance that he'll lock LLU out even longer and try and bleed ISDN and leased lines even further. Both possibilities also run with Valentia, and everyone and anyone else who's showed even the slightest interest in Eircom. However, I /believe/ that there's a better chance of DOB opening the loop and banging into broadband and always-on than there is with the Valentia Consortium.

"The % of profit he makes from lease lines is about 400% more that in the UK or other markets, thats fine he can charge what he likes thats up to him, it's his company."

I don't think I even mentioned leased lines, did I? No, I believe that was you. I *know* what's going on with leased lines and ISDN. I *know* they're overpriced, I *know* the network is in a right state. Jesus, I wore an t-shirt with "Eircon, working with wet string since 1985" on it for a month when I was under fire from Eircom for my eircon.org website. Overpriced leased lines and the non-availablility of broadband, always-on and flat-rate connections are directly hurting my business. The loss of SNL could take my business out. Again, do you expect me to stick up for these greedy, money-grubbing little assh0les? I detest the Irish telco's. Talk about stating the fupping obvious Coyote!

"But, Do i want the other larger telphone company sold to him? NO."

So you'd prefer it to go to Tony O'Reilly? God help us all. Do you read his newspapers? Have you read the Phoenix in the past, oh, ten years? I'll tell you this much, he gets a hell of a lot more column inches in the Phoenix than DOB does. But of course that doesn't prove anything. Maybe "Sir Anthony" *will* be a stand-up guy and unbundle the local loop. Maybe he will get broadband into all our homes. Or maybe he'll be bullied into it - at last - by the Irish government, and we'll have the same result anyway. But *my* belief is that DOB would be a hell of a lot better at the helm of Eircom. That's my belief, it's the judgement I've made from watching the telco market and the business pages for a few years, from the sidelines. You think I'm going to change my mind because of the bluff and blunder and plain-jane inaccuracies you come out with? You've gotta be kidding me man!

"And why am i confusing people over things?"

You're confusing people because although you have an idea of what you're taking about some of the time, you go off the wall with allegations, straight out *wrong* commentary and accusations, and complete bluff a good portion of the time. The correct stuff mixed in with the rubbish confuses people and leads them to believe that you know what you're talking about. And some of the time you do. But you're misleading people at every turn.

"All I have said is the truth, you can get a 1GB Fiber optic line in to any major city in the US for $10,000 a year."

No you can't, and I'm willing to bet you know that just as well as I do.

"I'm writing gibberish am I, well what am I writing that you can not understand ? as most people can understand it fine."

The post I'm responding to is a case in point. It was all over the shop. It was almost surreal reading it.

"and if I'm confusing why do you not try and tell them what is happing in ireland then, all you have been doing is running down any thing i say,
i have not heard any real facts from you about what is happing, all you do is tell others there wrong."

The reason I run down *most* of the stuff you say is because *most* of it is rubbish. And I don't just "tell others they're wrong", and you'd know that if you read my posts.

But you got your way, little man, I won't be responding again in this thread, and I won't be responding to your comments again. It's obviously a waste of both my time and yours. You just go on telling yourself you're right in your mind, and keep misleading people with your garbage.

adam

dahamsta you have too much time on your hands what a f&^king reply...

Yurmasyurda · 12-06-2001 1:34pm

Originally posted by NinjaBart:
and you quoted the whole thing for a one line reply. muppet.

True

Coyote · 12-06-2001 6:55pm

Originally posted by dahamsta:

"what the hell are you talking about "back then" this is just about 10 years ago ?"
Can you say "tribunal"? I believe there's two currently still running. I also believe that the allegations made against DOB were a direct result of one of those tribunals? Please, correct me if I'm wrong.

Yes I can say Tribunal but there not any thing to do with this.

In english now....

Well fine you just be your beinging rude and insulting, I have Dyslexia so why don’t you just give me a brake about my spelling and grammar ok.

"DOB said he got the other company to give FF 50 grand, the telephone company said that they gave the 50 grand, FF said they got 50 grand from DOB, what more do you want ?"
So now you're refuting your own allegation? You're telling me DOB *didn't* bribe the government. And wasn't it FG? What do I want? A legible sentence would be a good start...

As I said leave me alone about my English, I point you to this thread about that type of reply picking on peoples English. http://www.boards.ie/bulletin/Forum15/HTML/000428.html
Now what I said was what happened, telnor gave the party in power 50 grand on behalf of DOB, as he did not have the cash at the time. Esat on behalf of DOB then paid this back to telnor when he got the 2nd mobile phone licence. What I said is what happened.

"If i gave you 50 grand a week before your going to pick the next moblie phone company, what do you call that ?"
I call it bribery. But you didn't give me fifty grand, and I'm not going to pick the next mobile phone company, and again, DOB didn't do that either. Telenor - or so we are led to believe - gave FG the money.

Well what do you call the company that owns 49% of Esat giving FF/FG 50 grand a few weeks before they give Esat the 2nd mobile phone licence. Now Telnor said that they gave the money on behalf of DOB, and he paid them back, now whatever way you want to call it either Telnor gave the money or DOB did now either way they both owned a min of 49% of Esat the company getting the 2nd mobile phone licence.

"What did you think was going to happen? the government (FF same people who got the 50 grand) were going to investagate this ? even when it came out in the papers ? no there not."
I hasten to bring the word "tribunal" to your weak little memory again. Whitewash, yes, but still a tribunal.

So now you’re insulting my memory. Well no I know about the Tribunals and they had nothing to do with this, this might have come out because of them but they are not investigating this so they do not count.

"How much proof do you want that he gave a bribe???????????"
I don't want or need any. I don't give a toss if DOB bribed the government, or Telenor bribed the government, or the Pope bribed the government. If you read my posts properly, you'd see that. I know there's something fishy about it all, but I don't care. It's fifty grand for gods sake, and like I said, that's the way things were done "back then". Ten years is a long time in politics. Five years in fact.

Well you said that I libelled him, so I proved that I did not, as others had proved it that he gave a bride. IE that means I did not libel him. You asked for proof. Then you back me up.

"I did not say that i would not give a bribe if i could to get a market like that, who wouldn't."
Again, english please.

Again back to insulting me. As I said if I had the chance of getting the 2nd mobile phone licence by giving a bride I would have as well

"But that’s a different thing to being in the best interest of Ireland and the people of Ireland."
Makes no difference to me. Did it make a difference to you? Please, tell me how it made a diffence to you...

yes it had the price of phone calls is much more that it should have been for years, some of the other companies that were trying to get licence were going to have cheaper rates.

"By the way i did not libel him. infact, all i have said is what he did, even he said he did it."
No, no, I'm sorry, you did in fact libel him. You said, and I quote: "Denis O'Brien is a lieing cheeting scumbag he bribed the gov of the time with a £50,000 bribe to give him the 2th moblie rights for ireland". That, dear boy, is defamation of character, plain and simple. I'd like to see you say that to his face. Or to his lawyer. He'd take every penny you own. And worse, in the post I'm responding to, you flip around completely and say that he didn't bribe the government,

well as for saying someone lied, you can not prove that he has never lied in his life, so that is like trying to prove that you can use a black hold to travel in time you can not prove it one way or the other.
As for cheating I thing that, had been proven all ready that he did by getting the 50 grand to be given.
then there is me calling him a scumbag, well to tell the truth I’m not 100% sure on what way that works out, as he would have to prove that that was Defanation of character, the same way that XXXXXXXXX had to when the Sunday times printed it’s story about him. It’s very very very hard to prove.

Telenor did. Which is it to be Coyote? I think you should skip the Debating Society.

again with you insulting me is that all you do, both of them did it and if you know as much about it as you clam you would know that.

"The companies and FF admitted it happened, and did not denied it .... it happened."
No, they admitted a sum of money was "donated" to the government. Do you honestly think a multinational company or a multi-millionaire is going to say "yes, I bribed the government"? Grow up for gods sake.

What I said they admitted was that they got the money, if it was just honestly donated money then why they give it back ?????
and again you insult me.

"Just because the government does not care and wants it to just disappear from the public eye is not my fault. That doesn't make it libel."
Again, I beg to differ. Calling someone a "lieing cheeting scumbag" (sic) is about as libellous as it comes. Saying they bribed the government, well, that's just asking for trouble. If you said it to me, I'd have you in court before you could blink. Do you know why? Because if I knew your identity, it'd be an open-and-shut case. Course, that'd be where Denis would run into trouble. I wish him the best of luck though.

if he wanted to know my identity he could fine it out in about 20min it’s not that hard. Just looking at all the posts of someone on the boards gives you a good idea about who they are and what they do.
and I think that I have proved that it’s a very hard case to prove that I libelled him.

"As for him milking the lease line business. He owned the damn company, he ran it for years, you think that he just walked out of a 2 billon pound company without putting someone that would do just what he wanted before he left????"
He "owned" - he didn't in fact own the company by any manner of means - the company about two years ago. As to him "milking the lease line business" (sic), for a start he didn't have a big enough network to "milk" anything. For seconds, so what? It's not as if there was anything there as an alternative. In case you hadn't noticed, the local loop still isn't unbundled...? What did you want him to do, sell air?

What are you talking about him not having a big enough network?
the Esat network for the last 5 years has been just fine, if they were in anyway like the why they talk about them self’s (IE were fighting eircom to make it cheaper for you the customer), they could drop the price of a lease line in half.

"He was milking it then, and they have not changed there tone even after he left."
And what exactly is he supposed to do about that? Send them flowers and ask them to be nice? In case you haven't noticed, I /detest/ the fixed line section of Esat. Do you expect me to defend them or something?

Well as someone paying the price of a new car ever year for lease line’s I hate it even more that you do.

"What makes you think that he will not try to use eircom lease lines to pay back all the debt that he ran up buying eircom ???"
Now you're imagining things, pulling rabbits out of hats. Nothing makes me think that, and I never said anything of the sort. I /think/ that there is a good chance that DOB will push to get the local loop unbundled, because he's a cute hoor, but that's just what I think. There's also a chance that he'll lock LLU out even longer and try and bleed ISDN and leased lines even further. Both possibilities also run with Valentia, and everyone and anyone else who's showed even the slightest interest in Eircom. However, I /believe/ that there's a better chance of DOB opening the loop and banging into broadband and always-on than there is with the Valentia Consortium.

Well DOB is a cute hoor, and the best way for him to make money is.
not to spend 100mill pounds on DSL and then lose a very larger part of eircom’s income. If he just buys eircom and dose not spend any money buying in new hardware and training new staff. He will make more money.
What will happen is he will be as slow as he can bringing in DSL.

"But, Do i want the other larger telphone company sold to him? NO."
So you'd prefer it to go to Tony O'Reilly? God help us all. Do you read his newspapers? Have you read the Phoenix in the past, oh, ten years? I'll tell you this much, he gets a hell of a lot more column inches in the Phoenix than DOB does. But of course that doesn't prove anything. Maybe "Sir Anthony" *will* be a stand-up guy and unbundle the local loop. Maybe he will get broadband into all our homes. Or maybe he'll be bullied into it - at last - by the Irish government, and we'll have the same result anyway. But *my* belief is that DOB would be a hell of a lot better at the helm of Eircom. That's my belief, it's the judgement I've made from watching the telco market and the business pages for a few years, from the sidelines. You think I'm going to change my mind because of the bluff and blunder and plain-jane inaccuracies you come out with? You've gotta be kidding me man!

Again you start insulting me. Not one thing I have said is inaccurate.
But it is your choose who you would like, I do not thing that TOR is all that great but I do think that at lease Courst even if there messed up doing it is trying to bring in broadband.

"And why am i confusing people over things?"
You're confusing people because although you have an idea of what you're taking about some of the time, you go off the wall with allegations, straight out *wrong* commentary and accusations, and complete bluff a good portion of the time. The correct stuff mixed in with the rubbish confuses people and leads them to believe that you know what you're talking about. And some of the time you do. But you're misleading people at every turn.

I do know what I’m talking about. And what allegations have I made that can not be backed up well?
You have not made one point all you do is insult me and say I’m wrong. Well start telling people the truth then. I have been following DSL for the last 5 years, I happen to have friends who buy bandwidth in the 10mb+ type of lines, do yes I do get to find out info that is not in the general info and papers.

"All I have said is the truth, you can get a 1GB Fiber optic line in to any major city in the US for $10,000 a year."

No you can't, and I'm willing to bet you know that just as well as I do.

Yes you can I will find the link in the next day or so and post it, I have it around some where.

"I'm writing gibberish am I, well what am I writing that you can not understand ? as most people can understand it fine."
The post I'm responding to is a case in point. It was all over the shop. It was almost surreal reading it.

Well koopa and Gerry could read it fine.
"and if I'm confusing why do you not try and tell them what is happing in ireland then, all you have been doing is running down any thing i say,

i have not heard any real facts from you about what is happing, all you do is tell others there wrong."
The reason I run down *most* of the stuff you say is because *most* of it is rubbish. And I don't just "tell others they're wrong", and you'd know that if you read my posts.

you see that is the diff I have not said any thing bad about you I have not run you down, I have not said you’re a “little man” or told you to read up on politics, or any thing like that I have tried to have a polite argument, you have done nothing but run down my spelling and grammar (so what I’m dyslexic) and be nothing but rude.

But you got your way, little man, I won't be responding again in this thread, and I won't be responding to your comments again. It's obviously a waste of both my time and yours. You just go on telling yourself you're right in your mind, and keep misleading people with your garbage.

See your doing it again, well I’m not going to be rude even though I find what you say about my grammar and spelling very very very rude and hurtful.
All I have said is why I do not like DOB and Esat and I have a lease line from them. Mind I hate Eircom more, DOB set-up that company and he made the type of company that it was going to be, IE they could have been a forward looking company trying to get high bandwidth out there (they could have done it with the wireless licence they have but they have not) but Esat were and still are the same as Eircom there not looking to bring DSL or any thing like it to the market.

Coyote

You try to be smarter,
And I will try to be nicer

[This message has been edited by Coyote (edited 13-06-2001).]

NinjaBart · 13-06-2001 12:41am

and you quoted the whole thing for a one line reply. muppet.

DeVore · 15-06-2001 8:47pm

More light.
Less Heat.
No flames especially about spelling and grammar.

DeVore.

dahamsta · 15-06-2001 11:31pm

Actually, I meant to post again but the thread disappeared off me radar:- Coyote, if you are in fact dyslexic, then I apologise sincerely for taking the ****. On everything else, I remain steadfast.

adam

Coyote · 16-06-2001 1:58am

That’s your right to think I’m lying, I know I’m not that’s all that matters to me.
But as for your "Coyote, if you are in fact dyslexic" that just sounds like your saying I’m lying again, yes I am Dyslexic.
But I do not go around with a sign on my head with “I’m Dyslexic” on it.

If you know or do not know I’m Dyslexic I still think that some of the other things you said were still out of line (IE “to your weak little memory again” “I think you should skip the Debating Society” “You just go on telling yourself you're right in your mind, and keep misleading people with your garbage”) not one of them had any thing to do with my spelling or with any of the points, I just think you were out of line, you were rude in argument.

I willing to forgive what you said but not forget.

Coyote

You try to be smarter,
And I will try to be nicer

jmcc · 16-06-2001 5:33am

Originally posted by Coyote:
You have to be jokeing right.
Denis O'Brien is a lieing cheeting scumbag

Exactly the kind of operator you need to deal with the scum in Eircom management. (Dick Spring - a fscking politician who would not even buy Eircom shares.)

what will Tony O'Reilly do with eircom who knows but wiht luck he might try to turn it in to a company that is leading the way in to the next gen of telcoms compansy instead of eircom's draging there feet.

Eircom is going to get broken up. O'Reilly does *not* know enough about telco operations and is only a front for US VC banks and Soros. Eircom has too many employees and these lusers cannot be eliminated now. O'Brien would have dealt with the problem by firing the lusers. The best solution would be do to what Franco did with the electricians strike in Spain in the 1930s - put them in the army. Then when they decided not to follow orders, Franco shot a few of them. Hell with the number of people who hate Eircom, you could sell tickets to these executions and pay back all the Eircom shareholders who have been ripped off.

Regards...jmcc

alastair · 16-06-2001 10:53am

that's what's needed here. some reasoned and considered solutions. :-)

dahamsta · 16-06-2001 1:46pm

But as for your "Coyote, if you are in fact dyslexic" that just sounds like your saying I’m lying again, yes I am Dyslexic.

I wasn't accusing you of lying, I was making a conditional apology. I don't actually know if you're dyslexic or not, I just know that you say you are, and other people on boards.ie say you are because you told them you are. That hardly constitutes proof. You could be telling the truth, you could be fibbing, I don't know. If I was to believe everything I was told on boards.ie, I'd be a very confused man indeed. But if you are in fact dyslexic, then I apologise. Either way, I won't take the mick out of you again for your spelling and grammer in future.

But I do not go around with a sign on my head with “I’m Dyslexic” on it.

And I don't go around trying to guess which people on boards.ie are dyslexic and which are morons trying to pretend they know something. I'm willing to bet the the latter far outweighs the former.

I still think that some of the other things you said were still out of line (IE “to your weak little memory again” “I think you should skip the Debating Society” “You just go on telling yourself you're right in your mind, and keep misleading people with your garbage”) not one of them had any thing to do with my spelling or with any of the points, I just think you were out of line, you were rude in argument.

Like I said, I don't have any problem with the rest of my posts. The reference to your weak memory relate to your conveniently forgetting (or not even reading) points I had already covered. The reference to the debating society relate to your not being able to argue effectively. The references to garbage relate to the comments of yours that were spoof. In my opinion, a lot of the stuff you came out with was pure horseputty, and I was angered by the fact that you could be misleading people who wouldn't know better. That's my opinion, and I understand that the Irish Constitution still allows me to have one.

If you can't handle my arguments, either argue more effectively or just ignore me completely. If you think I'm noise, squelch me. If you think I'm rude and obnoxious - I am, no doubt about that - turn down the gain. But stop acting like a girl and telling mammy that the rude man is being nasty to you. If you think I'm such a bad man, ask the moderators to boot me or adjust my karma. I'd do the same for you, but it doesn't bother me so much, because I'm right and you're wrong. LOL

Or, to sum it up in age-old fashion: "If you can't take the heat, stay out of the kitchen."

adam

jd · 17-06-2001 1:07am

Originally posted by dahamsta:
Coupld of things:

1) *If* DoB gave a bribe to get a licence in Ireland, I can't blame him - like I said before, that's the way business was done in Ireland back then. I wouldn't be at all surprised if he did, given that he probably wouldn't have had a snowballs chance in hell of getting the licence without it. Carpe Diem. However, whether he did or not hasn't been PROVED yet. So you libelled him.

ok
my on tuppence on it
This whole thing on selling eircom back into private hands makes no sense at all.
1) it is a public company- Alfie Kane and the rest of the executive management don't own the company-if shareholders don't feel they are up to running the company they should be replaced-the company should *not* be sold on to new owners who will install their own management team where all the potential upside will lie with the new owners-not the original shareholders.

2) as an aside to that -i feel that Shane Ross is an opportunist( a not particularly successful politician with an election coming up within a year ( bear in mind he has only ever got elected in tcd where his W**t B**t attitudes still find favour in certain quarters)), milking into the fears of a lot of first time buyers into the stock exchange-for all the faults of eircom (of which there are buckets) it has still outperformed on the stock exchange european telecom shares by 10%

3) I am unsure about this information where the blame for the poor performance of esats Land Line business can be laid at the hands of the (allegedly Ex TE) employees Which Employees- the Engineers? Customer Service? Technicians? I doubt DOB would have employed TE operators in Customer Care /Services where he could have set up a call centre employing people where the most highly qualified people are generally arts grads filling in time for a few months till they can get a suitable permanent job -for about 11-13k a year. A te op wouldn't jump for that.

following on from all this the most successful part of esat was the mobile phone operation- which Barry Moloney ran. interestingly-Barry said he couldn't understand why eircom were getting rid of eircell and entering talks with private investors (though of course that could have been to get at DOB- anybody following the newspapers for the last year or so will understand they had a major fall out at some stage).
talking about the dealings with Lowry, i have posted an article from the sunday times-which give maybe a little more light into the whole affair
jd
btw I'm sure some posters to the board know that i work for an Eircom Company-my own position is that as a member of ESOT I will be voting NO to selling out the company to private ownership-whoever that may be.
(also in case anybody thinks I'm some mad left wing ideologue-I'm not-(but neither am I a member of the obnoxious nouveau-right lets party brigade, or for that matter the CWU , who have recommended their members accept the Valentia deal))

Sunday times uses frames-so a full link may not work too well

http://www.sunday-times.co.uk/

The case against Denis O'Brien stems from a casual remark to his old college friend, writes Brian Dowling

Best of enemies

Pat Kenny gushed over the ludicrous wealth of his star guest on The Late Late Show. It was January last year, and Denis O'Brien, his robust frame clad in smart navy blue and his sandy hair carefully parted, brushed off breathless queries about how he would spend his £250m fortune.

Funny, irreverent and rich, O'Brien was the media's darling. Against the odds, and with his company on the verge of bankruptcy, the young Dubliner and a motley crew of businessmen had snatched the country's second mobile phone licence from under the nose of international consortiums. That daring coup was followed by a David-and-Goliath battle with Telecom Eireann, the big, bad monopoly that gave birth to Eircom. O'Brien achieved cult status. Thanks to the likes of him, a new Ireland had been born.

Having purchased the licence for £15m, O'Brien had just sold the business to British Telecom for £2.2 billion, walking away with a private fortune. Having heaped praise on the swashbuckling businessman, Kenny asked: "Have you just pulled the fastest one of all time?" Twelve months later, that question has taken on a resonance that nobody could have expected.

Last week, O'Brien found himself on stage again, but this time he was being grilled.

Revelations about financial transactions between O'Brien and Michael Lowry, the communications minister when the licence was issued, were followed last week by sensational allegations that bribes may have been paid. In the hot-house atmosphere of the Moriarty tribunal, O'Brien's customary calm appeared to desert him.

Perhaps more galling than anything is the fact that Esat Telecom's former boss may be the architect of his own downfall. A casual conversation with a close friend is likely to prove central to any case against him.

Barry Maloney was among O'Brien's best mates in college. Early in 1995, Maloney, who was working with Xerox in California, came back to Ireland on holiday. During his stay, he helped O'Brien draft his bid for the licence. "I took a few days off and did it, very much in the role of a friend," he explained. "There was no agreement or anything that if the company won the licence, I would come home to run it."

But that is how the story unfolded. O'Brien, who had made some money by running 98FM radio, had borrowed £3m to set up his telecoms business in 1993. Two years later, the second mobile phone licence was up for grabs. O'Brien pulled together a consortium that included International Investment Underwriting, the investment business of Dermot Desmond.

Although his company was teetering on the edge of collapse, all seemed to go in O'Brien's favour. Initially supposed to be awarded by auction, Lowry announced that the licence would be sold for a maximum of £15m. It was an astonishing decision, one that would transform O'Brien from a rank outsider to a runner. O'Brien later said he had asked a nun to pray for him during the nail-biting contest. Thanks to her entreaties, or not, O'Brien won the licence against the odds.

Now back in America, Maloney got a call from his college pal asking him to run the mobile end of the business. Months later, Maloney was back in Dublin and Esat Digifone was up and running. From early on, though, the relationship showed signs of strain.

Maloney says he was in his office in October 1996 when O'Brien dropped by. Their friendly banter quickly turned tetchy when Maloney complained that people had been queuing up for "success fees" for which there was no paperwork. Maloney said he would happily pay the fees, but only if invoices for the services could be provided.

Amused by his friend's penchant for procedure, O'Brien joked that he had had to pay £100,000 to Lowry and a further £100,000 to an unnamed person. It was a serious error. Maloney was horrified.

In March 1997, Maloney wrote a letter of resignation. "I had taken the action not because the job was tough, but because I valued my friendship with Denis so highly and I didn't want to threaten it," he later explained. Desmond, who was a minority shareholder, and O'Brien talked Maloney out of leaving.

His concerns were only temporarily assuaged. In September 1997, the government agreed to set up the Moriarty tribunal to investigate payments to Lowry and Charles Haughey. Within a week, the tribunal heard, O'Brien stopped by Maloney's office again. Remember that conversation we had last year, he asked? Well thank God, the money never went through, he said. The chief executive of Esat Digifone thought the conversation strange but let it rest. But O'Brien could not.

Within a fortnight, he was back, reassuring Maloney once again that no payments had been made. When he broached the subject for the third time in a month, Maloney could take no more.

Esat Telecom was due to be floated on the Nasdaq exchange and if anything was amiss, he and his fellow directors would be exposed to legal suits by disgruntled investors.

On October 8, Maloney went to see O'Brien. He pleaded with his friend to delay the initial public offering until after the tribunal. O'Brien refused. Five days later, he tried again but O'Brien was not for turning. The following day, Maloney called Desmond for advice. The financier said it was incumbent upon him, as chief executive, to ensure that Esat Digifone was fully protected.

Maloney had little choice. Days later he shared the content of his conversations with O'Brien with other directors of Esat Digifone. These included representatives from Telenor, the Norwegian company that owned 45% of the mobile phone company. By now there was no way of containing it.

On October 22, O'Brien, accompanied by Aidan Phelan, his accountant, went to see Owen O'Connell, his solicitor. He wanted to give his version of events, and swore he would refute Maloney "in the box" if necessary. On October 30, O'Connell arranged another meeting between Phelan and two directors. As O'Brien was in America, preparing for the flotation, O'Connell was given a statement from O'Brien, recounting a conflicting version of his conversation with Maloney.

"Early on a Saturday morning in October, 1996, I was running up in Roundwood, Co Wicklow, with Barry Maloney," the statement read. "Barry was complaining about invoices received by Esat Digifone from consultants and lobbyists in relation to the bid. I wanted him to pay them because they were from people I had recruited. This was 12 months after the bid had succeeded and many of them had still not been paid. I indicated that if the company reneged, I was honour bound to make the payments, and I added [falsely] that: 'If you think you have got problems, I have already paid £200,000 to other people'." He denied naming Lowry as one of those he had paid. O'Connell flew to Boston to meet O'Brien. The others were insisting that O'Brien swear an affidavit. During his flight, the lawyer prepared a detailed memo on the conflicting accounts of what happened, and the implications of each for the company. He pondered the second £100,000 payment and noted: "No obvious suspect," adding: "Who would come to mind?"

He also considered O'Brien's statement that he did, at one stage, plan to make a payment to Lowry, through an intermediary, but the money became "stuck" at the Woodchester Bank. O'Connell wondered how a payment could get "stuck": "Did another intermediary keep [steal] the money, if so, why no action taken?," he noted in a memo. There were six questions O'Brien had to answer. His response to the first - on the nature of his conversation with Maloney - was blunt: "My recollection of the conversation is that it was non-serious, that is, two very old pals bull****ting about business, sport and out on a run one Sunday morning.

"Frankly, we spoofed a lot. Barry and I had been friends for 20 years and often talked about sport, business, money-making, women, and other things with fantasy and reality equally mixed. At least half of what we said was bravado."

Could such potentially serious comments really have been inspired by bravado?

O'Brien replied: "Yes, anyone who knows me knows that I will laugh about anything. I just do not take myself or life in general too seriously. I have known Barry for 22 years, we had had the most extraordinary experiences. Nothing is sacred between us and there was nothing that could not be joked about."

In later exchanges with lawyers, O'Brien described how, during that mountain run, he was thinking about the fact that he wanted to help Lowry, another pal, out of his financial difficulties. The minister had been forced to resign because of payments he received from Ben Dunne, the supermarket magnate, and was facing a huge tax bill.

"All of this was on my mind at the time of my conversation with Barry on the mountainside. I pretended that I had already made the payment and I doubled it for effect. However, shortly afterwards I realised that the payment, if I had made it, would be misunderstood. Thank God I saw sense and did nothing about it."

O'Connell later established that no payments had been made by Woodchester, and was told by O'Brien's accountant that there were no other significant accounts from which such a payment could have been made.

Despite the misgivings, the IPO went ahead after directors of Esat Telecom accepted O'Brien's affidavit stating that he never made the two payments. A note of the work of the tribunal was noted in the flotation prospectus, although this was deemed to be not of enormous risk to the company. The strength of that affidavit is to be determined by the tribunal. Either way, it served as a fig leaf. Everyone expected that it would be the end of the matter and, remarkably, details of the conversation never leaked to the press.

Now it appears that Phelan may not have been candid with O'Connell. The Moriarty tribunal established that in 1996, sums of £100,000 and £50,000 were transferred on O'Brien's behalf from offshore accounts in the Isle of Man and the Channel Islands to David Austin, a wealthy Fine Gael fundraiser, and from there to Lowry's offshore account in the Isle of Man. Later, Phelan helped Lowry with two property transactions worth close to £650,000 in Britain. There was also a £33,000 donation to Fine Gael in 1996, which Telenor claims O'Brien asked it to contribute on his behalf. O'Brien says he had nothing to do with the payments.

In hindsight, the falling out of two college pals seems easy to understand. Given the backdrop, it is no longer surprising that Maloney backed a hostile bid for Esat Telecom against O'Brien's wishes, and that months later his erstwhile friend had his revenge by denying Maloney the top job at Esat Telecom, after it was bought by British Telecom.

In the witness box last week, O'Brien's performance was nothing short of extraordinary. He bristled when tribunal lawyers asked about his financial transactions. Unlike Haughey, a master of appearing courteous and helpful, O'Brien could not help but be truculent. But if that bellicose spirit won him plaudits during Esat's fight for a share of Eircom's market, it may not gain him friends in the tribunal. Justice Moriarty, after all, is not Alfie Kane.

[This message has been edited by jd (edited 17-06-2001).]

[This message has been edited by jd (edited 17-06-2001).]

[This message has been edited by jd (edited 17-06-2001).]

DadaKopf · 17-06-2001 1:25am

I haven't even read most of the topic but there's one thing that's shone through all the news articles - by getting Eircom, Tony O'Reilly constitutes a breech in trade fairness regulations, anti-trust, whatever. Also, Mary Hearney has referred the matter to a committee for further evaluation which, most of us know already, should come down against O'Reilly.

Still, Ireland being Ireland, somebody's going to get paid off to let him almost single handedly own the communications infrastructure of the country among many, many other things.

And people wonder why there are riots in Gothenburg.

jd · 17-06-2001 1:43am

Originally posted by DadaKopf:
And people wonder why there are riots in Gothenburg.

To be honest, part of it is because we are here preoccupied about a number of wealthy businessmen eyeing a relativey small company while there a lot of people getting shat on in different parts of the world..

dahamsta · 17-06-2001 2:36am

Is the latter three-quarters of your post an article? It seems like it, but I'm not entirely sure. If it is, post the source and a link if you can please. Anyway, I'm not going to comment on the article just yet, because the first couple of paragraphs strike me as editorialising. That said, the rest of it comes across as fairly factual, so I'll look at it again when I have the time (read "when I'm sober"). Anyway...

This whole thing on selling eircom back into private hands makes no sense at all. 1) it is a public company- Alfie Kane and the rest of the executive management don't own the company-if shareholders don't feel they are up to running the company they should be replaced-the company should *not* be sold on to new owners who will install their own management team where all the potential upside will lie with the new owners-not the original shareholders.

I agree, and although many may have gotten a different impression, you're right, it's ultimately up to the shareholders, including the employees. Which is why I posted here (or possibly in another thread (or even on another forum!)) that if what I am led to believe is true, I'm suprised at the short-sightedness of the Eircom employees and shareholders. Grudges are all well and good - I hold quite a few myself, as is evident - but logic should always win through at the finishing post. The facts are that eIsland offered more money; offered better incentives to shareholders; and offered better incentives to employees. These are unrefutable facts. Backing the Valentia bid, and going against the facts, is simply illogical. If not plain stupid...

2) as an aside to that -i feel that Shane Ross is an opportunist( a not particularly successful politician with an election coming up within a year ( bear in mind he has only ever got elected in tcd where his W**t B**t attitudes still find favour in certain quarters)), milking into the fears of a lot of first time buyers into the stock exchange-for all the faults of eircom (of which there are buckets) it has still outperformed on the stock exchange european telecom shares by 10%

I'm treading on dangerous turf here, but again, I agree with you. I've talked to "Senator" Shane Ross personally, and he struck me as an arrogant, faux-upper-class opportunist with his head so far up his own **** he was still able to bring the phone to his ear. His whole attitude was embarassing to me as an Irishman -- if this is what (purportedly) represents me, I'd prefer not to be represented. But I still have to concede that himself and Grumpy brought the Eircom debacle to the eyes of the Irish, and I can't fault him or Grumpy for that. Unfortunately, it was probably seen as self-serving and editorialising by many Irish people - which it no doubt was - but (also unfortunately) who is going to tell us the truth? It's certainly not going to be Alfie Kane and it's definitely not going to be Ray MacSharry.

3) I am unsure about this information where the blame for the poor performance of esats Land Line business can be laid at the hands of the (allegedly Ex TE) employees Which Employees- the Engineers? Customer Service? Technicians? I doubt DOB would have employed TE operators in Customer Care /Services where he could have set up a call centre employing people where the most highly qualified people are generally arts grads filling in time for a few months till they can get a suitable permanent job -for about 11-13k a year. A te op wouldn't jump for that.

Now I'm editorialising - and speculating - and I'll admit that, but let me be clear: I'm not saying (and didn't say) that Esat's fixed-line business failed or didn't fail per se. I'm saying the people I talked to and dealt with in Esat's fixed line business pretty much sucked, both in sales and support. Bear with me while I speculate: Eircom had a monopoly in the telecommunication market - still have in my opinion - up until they were privatised. Part of the privatisation agreement was that most Eircom employees could not be laid off - there was a defined plan for layoffs, which basically meant that no-one could be sacked, they had to leave of their own volition. But Esat was there to take up some of the slack, and they took some of the Eircon peeps. And the Eircon peeps were coming out of civil service, which we all know is jammy. QED, Esat support and sales sucked.

Ok, it's loose, but it works for me. That said, I want to make one thing clear - I'm talking about "customer support" and sales here. From my experience, former and current Eircom engineers and technicians are a solid bunch, and I have absolutely no argument with them. And in my opinion, they're pretty much what's holding the company together. Take away the linemen and techies, and there's nothing left but the brand and a few politicians. Literally.

That's enough for now.

adam

Renton · 17-06-2001 3:02am

Lads to be perfectly honest

I reckon this is all a bit confusin, so heres my two cents

Coyote

killed dahamsta

with a headshot from AK47

Illustrated .. here

that is all.

RentZ

[This message has been edited by Renton (edited 17-06-2001).]

DadaKopf · 17-06-2001 11:45am

Personally

, I think Eircom offers a top notch service

.

The prices are GREAT and their after sales service can't be beat!

I love you Tony O'Reilly!

red_ice · 17-06-2001 11:56am

Well the times i used eircom in my shatty 56k days, i lagged in games n stuff, so i h8 em.... maybe eircom will pick up, TBH i think its dahamsta's evil doings..

and i think its all his fault

..
now im on NTL cable and its all hunky dorie

Kaidos · 17-06-2001 1:51pm

I concur renton !

On the other hand i find it very strange

that you could post so many l33t smilies on a post like this.

However, i may be wrong.

Or i could be right.

Kaidos · 17-06-2001 1:53pm

My god, its like world war 3 out there !!

TacT · 17-06-2001 3:06pm

LOL!

Kali · 17-06-2001 3:24pm

I really couldn't be arsed deleting all that ****e but continue it and i'll gladly close this topic, interesting as it was

[This message has been edited by Kali (edited 17-06-2001).]

Why did they have to sell to Tony O'Reilly?!?!?!

Comments