Niculae

[SMEE]

ME :021:

[Scotty]

I could have deleted that last post and claimed 400 for myself .... but as this saga is not yet over, I will content myself on trying to be #500 !!

[Council Juice]

I could also have beaten you but decided as opposed to putting down three posts in a row i thought i'd journey around and leave it to chance.

Wonder what would have happened had i said nought?! :023:

[SMEE]

I actually thought your inner funk monkey might have done just that Scotty. But ex Dalneigh boys dont do that to each other!

If it hadnt been mentioned, it would have gone right over my head. Its not often i reach milestones in life. Dont deny me the glory of this :021:

[caleyboy]

I actually thought your inner funk monkey might have done just that Scotty. But ex Dalneigh boys dont do that to each other!

If it hadnt been mentioned, it would have gone right over my head. Its not often i reach milestones in life. Dont deny me the glory of this :021:

Now come on Smee - once a Dalneigh boy - ALWAYS a Dalneigh Boy - and PROUD of it too!  :021:

[CaleyD]

From reading, seeing and hearing from people this whole saga smacks of Orion v Tulloch with a football player and a club caught in the middle.

Which is what I and others have been saying since day one of this whole sorry mess.

Alan Savage was in the chair when a deal was brokered to bring Marius to the club and not only did he pull off a transaction which made the player affordable, he invested money to offset that cost....ok, so some might not have agreed with giving a player such a large percentage of any fee from his sale, but the truth of the matter is, without that then we would not have got the player and we would not have been in a position to sell him and make a single penny for the club.

We didn't have all the facts at the time and even though we were lead to believe his wages were far higher than they were, most fans accepted what looked like a risky piece of business because it showed some welcome ambition.

Everything was going fine then until Alan Savage resigned as Chairman.  Initially he stepped down quietly citing pressure of work, but for whatever reason Sutherland couldn't let it lie and started having a go at Alan Savages integrity suggesting that he'd ran out on us leaving a ?500,000 hole in the accounts caused by the signing of Marius Niculae.  It was only then that Alan Savage decided to speak up in his own defence to set the record straight and give his real reasons for resigning.

IMO. Sutherland wanted to "get at" Alan Savage, and the best way he could see of doing that was if he could make the whole Niculae deal look like a huge mistake from the start....and, in the minds of a good few people he has achieved just that and it can be seen by those who post things like "this was just a sorry mess from the start and glad it's over"....well, not only did it not have to be the mess it has, it did not have to be over.  Marius was happy in Inverness playing for ICT and it is my strong belief that he would have happily signed an extension to extend his stay here and ensure the club didn't lose out as a result.

As for it being over....I don't believe for a second that it's anything like over.  Aside from the fact that their still seems to be a few money issues to be resolved, there's still the issue of accountability and the fact that those making decisions at ICT have once again, IMO, been incompetent and need to be brought to task over it.  I will not accept the "it's over now, let's just forget it and move on"...that's happened too often in the past and so long as it remains unchecked we run the risk that the next situation might just be the one that mortally wounds OUR club.

[caley100]

We are unfortunatley, being made to look like amateurs once again, i also agree that this issue aint over yet.

And i will be surprised if Mariusgate will ever become transparent for the fans view, he will i'm sure get some compensation from ICT,  a lot more than we anticipated, probably due to a complete lack of detail from those in charge.

[CaleyD]

The elusive Chairman, Mr George Fraser, will be giving his tuppence worth on MFR at 5pm

[andyp85]

CaleyD - you are spot on with your post before last.  It's about Sutherland wanting to exercise his control.  Savage was never going to have been allowed to have been seen to do anything good for the club.  Unfortunately Marius was pawn in this sorry saga and was always going to be shown the door once Sutherland or his puppets were at the helm again.

[CaleyD]

Thanks George....how about you tell us something we didn't know?

Far from being concluded it sounded like nothing more than ICT re-positioning themselves to argue their case for not paying Marius what he claims they are due on a whole different argument.

[AJS]

You all realise we are never going to sign a High Profile player again that breaks our wage structure if this is what we have to put up with.  :017:

[MissICT]

this has all been bad news!

:007:!

[SMEE]

Marius's "Advisor" has just been on North Today stating ICT are owing Niculae 100,000 euros as part of his signing on fee due last month (July) AND 30% of the transfer fee. If this is true, It hasnt been worth taking him here in the first place! I think a lot of this has been orchestrated by the player himself, and may have taken us for a ride!

[CaleyD]

Asking for what he is due is taking us for a ride how?

[MissICT]

What a waste of money.

that will teach us not to buy a player that demands a high wadge again!

[SMEE]

Asking for what he is due is taking us for a ride how?

Call it a gut feeling!

[MissICT]

this is going to far!

being taken to court for what?

[SMEE]

He is thinking about court, as the claim is he is owed 100 000 euros AND 30% of the transfer fee. Cant be a kick in the arse of ?180 000 :024:

So all in all, how much has it cost us to bring a player who didnt help us make any progress in any way shape or form, and will probably cost us a pretty penny or two in the near future?

[CaleyD]

What would you do if you believed your ex-employer owed you that amount of money?

The fact is...we couldn't afford and weren't prepared to pay the initial asking wage of Marius Niculae and a contract was negotiated to bring that wage cost down and in order to do that it would seem that certain "sweeteners" were added to make it an acceptable proposition for him to come to ICT.

The fact that such a condition exists is not in doubt and is backed up by ICT themselves by way of the quote in the press from Grassa saying that the Marius "is entitled to a percentage of it".  Why did that all of a sudden change?

ICT have also been claiming in the last few days that the Transfer was not complete and would not be complete until they had all the necessary documents in place and that they were still waiting on Niculae to sign and return the waiver....yet out of the blue last night it's suddenly a "done deal" and the release papers are signed....yet we know that ICT have not received the Waiver they were seeking!!!  Is it possible that it was pointed out to them that they were on shaky ground by not releasing the player and were, in fact, in breach of laws/regulations by taking the stance they were?

Then we have a press conference today where it appears that ICT are repositioning themselves to defend their right to refuse payment to Niculae from a different angle.  Why the need?  Surely if they had the cast iron case they were leading us all to believe they had then they would not need to jostle around looking for a new angle.?

The story from Dinamo and Niculaes representative has been the same from day 1....I've lost count of which re-write ICT are on.

Simple as this....if ICT didn't want to hand over 30% of the transfer fee then they should never have agreed to it in the contract to begin with.  If they weren't willing to pay the player the second instalment of his signing fee, they should never have agreed to it in the first place.

When the contracts were signed 12 months ago I'm sure the opinion was that 70% of something is better than 100% of feck all....so what's changed?  If this 100,000 Euros is second part payment of his signing fee then I assume it would have been due regardless of whether he had moved on or not...so why now refuse to pay it?

And finally....let's not forget that it was ICT who made the choice to put the player on the market...something we were all aware of before he went off to the Euros....so any suggestions that the player has gone out and brokered a deal then forced the club to sell him are, IMO, ill founded nonsense and desperate spin on the part of ICT to cover up the real reasons for the sale of Niculae and the fact that they've made one screw up after the another in the handling of it.

[Guest birdog]

You know what is funny? CaleyD you have been on here shouting about how the myths of Niculae getting payed ?4k per week were well and truly put to bed but it would seem that if you add on his signing on fee to what we have already paid him, ?2k per week was your guesstimate I believe, it would seem that when you divide it over the year ?4k per week is not far from the mark.

[Yngwie]

All in all it probably works out at over ?7k per week (salary ?100k + 2 sign-on instalments of say ?70k each + cut of transfer ?130k)

CaleyyD, I didn't hear what the club said today. Are they no longer arging that Marius agreed to waive his cut if we accepted the lower offer from Dinamo?

Whatever it is, ICT lost their main bargaining chip when they eventually had to condede on transferring the registration. The only remaining bargaining chip is that we are currently in possession of the money he wants. Normally that puts us in a strong negotiating position, but with it now seeming to be an employment law matter, there will only be one winner.

[CaleyD]

Birdog....my Guestimate was based on a simple division of what came out when Alan Savage resigned as the costs for Marius for the 2 years divided by 104 weeks which also included a punt at what he might have received as a signing fee.

From what Alan Savage said in his statement and from the statements that followed from ICT we could conclude that the ?270,000 covered the costs of bringing Marius here for 2 years.  The amount is the same, it just appears that it's divided up differently than what I took a punt at....ie. a higher lumps sum and a lower weekly wage.

[CaleyD]

All in all it probably works out at over ?7k per week (salary ?100k + 2 sign-on instalments of say ?70k each + cut of transfer ?130k)

Whichever way you slice it up, the club have still made a profit....a profit they would not have made if they hadn't signed the player and a profit they could yet find themselves p!ssing away on lawyers.

CaleyyD, I didn't hear what the club said today. Are they no longer arging that Marius agreed to waive his cut if we accepted the lower offer from Dinamo?

No, they never really mentioned that at all directly.  What they said was that they had agreed to the signing of the release papers....what I take from that is that they have been advised or have come to the conclusion themselves that the "verbal agreement" which may or may not exist, was not cause enough for them to hold on to his registration.

A statement was also made suggesting that perhaps the correct procedures hadn't been followed....it seemed to be out of context to everything else that was said and just made me think that perhaps they might now try and come at their defence for not paying from that angle....who knows, it's just my feelings on what was said and how it came across.

Whatever it is, ICT lost their main bargaining chip when they eventually had to condede on transferring the registration. The only remaining bargaining chip is that we are currently in possession of the money he wants. Normally that puts us in a strong negotiating position, but with it now seeming to be an employment law matter, there will only be one winner.

Totally...and as much as I want to see ICT come out as well off as possible in any deal, that doesn't come at "any cost" and it certainly doesn't mean that we should use any underhand methods to achieve it or we could find ourselves far worse off than we might be at the moment....not only financially, but in terms of damage done to the name of the club and the knock on effects of that.

Right now I get the feeling that certain people in the background really don't give a toss about the money or the name of the club and that satisfying their ego takes precedence over all of that.....it really is the only rational I can come up with which explains why this has turned in to such a mess and continues to get worse.

[Guest birdog]

Birdog....my Guestimate was based on a simple division of what came out when Alan Savage resigned as the costs for Marius for the 2 years divided by 104 weeks which also included a punt at what he might have received as a signing fee.

From what Alan Savage said in his statement and from the statements that followed from ICT we could conclude that the ?270,000 covered the costs of bringing Marius here for 2 years.  The amount is the same, it just appears that it's divided up differently than what I took a punt at....ie. a higher lumps sum and a lower weekly wage.

Yes CaleyD but your guesstimate was used to berate posters on occasions where a figure of ?4k per week was banded about. I just find it amusing how your long meandering posts over analysing every little piece of information you have to belittle posts made by others turn out to be so far from the mark but you still cannot see that on occasion you might just sometimes be wrong.

Like I say I am amused.

[CaleyD]

And I still will argue that his wages were nowhere in the region of ?4000 a week.....it's not possible for it to have been that based on what we know about the cost of Marius to the club for the 2 year period which he signed up for.

?4000 * 104 = ?416,000

Doesn't quite fit into the 2 year cost of ?270,000....does it?

I've never once stated that I knew for fact that Marius was receiving X amount per week, and if you look through ANY post I've made analysing it you will see that I've always based my guess around the figure of ?270,000 invested by Orion to cover his 2 year contract, a figure acknowledged by the club after Alan Savage resigned and re-enforced by the statement they made saying that his wages were in the budget for 2008/09.

Unless the club are going to come out with yet another story on how much he was actually costing and throwing that whole argument up in the air again (and nothing would surprise me right now) then I fail to see where your coming from.