Archive for November 26th, 2011

WillyWally meeting tomorrow in the croft behind Angus’s cottage, midday (sharp) start, be there or be square, bring a stick, please RT

Hamish is that yourself William, is it true you’re seven feet tall

WillyWally aye, so I’ve heard. Kills men by the hundreds, and able to consume the English with fireballs from his eyes and bolts of lightning from his (ctd)

WillyWally arse. Will you come to the meeting tomorrow as free men, as free men you are. What would you do without freedom? Will you come to the meeting?

Jamie meet? To plot against the English? No, we will run; and we will live.

WillyWally aye, plot and you may die. Run and you’ll live — at least a while. And dying in your beds many years from now, would you be willing to trade all the days from this day to (ctd)

WillyWally bloody 140 char limit! (ctd) that for one chance, just one chance to come back here and tell our enemies that they may take our lives, but they’ll never take our (ctd)

WillyWally freedom!!!

Longshanks Teddy, my boy, did you know the Scots invented wire? Yeah, two of them arguing over a penny.

FlamingPrinceTed You tell them pops.

Hamish #feckinenglishbastards

Hamish Teddy, yo mama so fat that she leaves tide-marks when she takes a dip in the loch

Hamish #feckinenglishbastards now trending in Stirling

WillyWally Hey English, want to know what we wear under our kilts? twitpic/myarse

Hamish LMFAO, you tell them William.

Angus: #ff  WillyWally

WillyWally Bloody hell, 10k followers already; sign the petition now at onlinepetition.sco/feckoffhome

Angus You can’t use .sco, they won’t even given us a country code top level domain

WillyWally #feckinenglishbastards

Social media has its place in the modern age, but tomorrow at 11.30am the Ballyhea/Charleville communities will be holding their 39th weekly march protesting against the ongoing payment to bondholders in bust Irish banks – sometimes, there’s no substitute for getting out there, leaving the pavement behind and stepping into the street to stand up for something you believe in. They’d welcome your support, photos and details of the marches are here.


Read Full Post »

We haven’t heard a great deal of late about the fate of the 25-acre Irish Glass Bottle site in Ringsend, Dublin which is curious, as it is one of the most expensive assets under NAMA’s control by reference to its value in 2006 when it was bought for €412m by a consortium which essentially comprised Bernard McNamara, Derek Quinlan and the state-owned Dublin Docklands Development Authority (DDDA). It is estimated that the site today is worth €50m; there are three feature blogposts on the history and current status of the site on here – here and here and here. Yesterday NAMA announced a deal which appears to wipe out any legacy liability on the part of the DDDA for what has turned out to be one of the dumbest property development gambles in Irish history.

The summary of the relevant history is that the consortium which bought the site in 2006 funded the acquisition in the main through €288m of Anglo loans. And each of the participants, including the DDDA, provided guarantees on the loans. The site has been a disaster for all involved – in addition to the acquisition cost there has been interest payable on the loans and, in addition, at least €45m forked out to decontaminate the site. There is also legacy litigation between the participants – a complete car-wreck of a project. The loans which were originally advanced by Anglo to the Becbay consortium were transferred to NAMA.

The DDDA has new management and its chairwoman, Professor Niamh Brennan, has been keen to draw a line under the disastrous foray by the DDDA into property development, so yesterday’s announcement by NAMA of a deal with the DDDA, to absolve the DDDA from the guarantees given by the DDDA on the loans acquired to fund the purchase, will be warmly welcomed by Professor Niamh.

So what was the deal announced yesterday? The loans owed by the consortium, Becbay Limited, to NAMA remain payable in full. However NAMA has bought out the guarantees previously provided by the DDDA on the loans by Anglo to Becbay Limited.

How much were the guarantees worth? We don’t know but NAMA indicates that there may have been uncertainty and cost in expensive litigation to enforce the DDDA guarantee.

What did NAMA get in return for waiving the DDDA guarantees? A selection of land and retail/office units at the following locations:

(1) Former BJ Marine premises, 81A and 81B, Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2

(2) A retail unit at 15 Irishtown Road, Ringsend, Dublin 4

(3) A retail unit at Unit 2, Longboat Quay, Dublin 2

(4) Former U2 Tower, Britain Quay, Dublin 2

(5) Former Artbrook/Dublin Waste site, Upper Sheriff Street, Dublin 1

(6) Former Readymix site, 5-23 East Wall Road, Dublin 3

(7) Former Jones Oil site, Sheriff Street Upper and Mayor Street Upper, Dublin 1

(8) Lot 2, Riverside IV, Grand Canal Harbour, Dublin 2

(9) Plot 8, Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2

There was no indication in the NAMA statement of the value of the above properties

Was this a wholly commercial transaction? NAMA is not exactly confirming this, but do say that the agreement came after “mediated settlement negotiations” and the Agency also says that it “approached this matter with the DDDA in exactly the same manner and with the same objectives as .. would apply to any other debtor”; but given that the DDDA is state-owned and, as a result, would have its liabilities ultimately met in full by the State, then NAMA may have allowed its primary objective be corrupted if it accepted anything less than 100% of the value of the guarantees. There hasn’t apparently been a Direction issued to NAMA in this matter by the Minister for Finance, Michael Noonan.

We own both NAMA and the DDDA, so why worry if this wasn’t a good deal for NAMA? Whilst it is true that we own the DDDA and effectively own NAMA, so robbing Peter to pay Paul might mean it doesn’t matter to the finances of the State if the deal was a good commercial deal for NAMA, or not. The reason it would matter is that any deviation by NAMA from its primary objective should be carefully considered, otherwise we get a muddying of the waters and NAMA gets an excuse for losses, and may use that excuse to hide losses resulting from poor performance by the Agency in other areas. There is a mechanism in place through the NAMA Act if the Government wants NAMA to deviate from its primary objective – a Direction is issued. That protocol should not be dumped for political expediency by this Government or financial cute-hoorism by NAMA.

Does yesterday’s deal affect the future of the Irish Glass Bottle site? Not directly, it just affects DDDA’s liability on its guarantees given for the loans used by the Becbay consortium to buy the site.

Read Full Post »