The IDA last week announce there is an impending shortage of office space large enough to take a Google type of investment. Little bitty moles in the wall of one to seven thousand square feet are not of much value to large inward investors. Trust that answers your question.

I’m assuming that you assume that there are no checks and balances. You may be right, I don’t know. But you may also be wrong. I don’t mean to attack your comment, and I thank you from framing your first line as a question rather than as a statement of fact, I’m personally concerned about the level of despondency in the majority of political comments here, which I feel boils down to “everything is bad, every plan is doomed to fail, every politician is inherently corrupt and self-serving, there is no hope”. Without envisioning a better future, and the possibility of a workable strategy to get there, we s

Excellent comment Karswell.
There are so many cliche’s written in the comment section of this and other sites, it’s difficult to scan through to get a sensible comment.
The most typical cliche’s are politicians are corrupt, builders are evil, solicitors are evil. Why don’t we through out a few new ones sometimes, like all refuse workers smell of aftershave or anything else.
The constant drone in these comment pages of the exact same cliche’s is enough to drive away a lot of regular reader.

I would not commission a rapist to provide rape counselling, but I would definitely consider commission a hacker to provide and assess system security.

But this would be giving the hacker full control of said company not a advisory role. The developers should bring the asset controller up to speed or go to prison.

Absolutely. Keeping the developers completely out of the loop would be cutting off your own nose to spite your face, as they are, sad to say, the most knowledgable about the properties held by NAMA, but I’m in no way saying they should be trusted. this constant framing of the details of the economic more as binary opposites; black/white, good/evil, left/right, hero/villain, it really isn’t turning out to be effective. A middle way is needed, pragmatic but distrustful.

@Karswell. Sorry but I don’t think not paying someone upto €200,000 is keeping them out of the loop. They can be compelled to assist NAMA as part of the agreement to manage the assists through NAMA. There is nobody anywhere stating that the assets cannot be managed without them. They do not hold specialist skills requiring their presence. Schematics, construction documentation, safety certification et al are always available from others or they can be compelled to hand it over. I’m at a loss to find a strict requirement for their presence. Any suggestions?

As for the good/evil comment they are not altruists, they didn’t do any of this for anyone but themselves, honestly who would, but for the many of us paying a price for their behaviour, some with their lives in this crisis, a NAMA developer still with a private helicopter, cars etc is the visual reality which contrasts starkly with their own struggle on a daily basis. I’m not arguing with you regards avoiding blanket black/white standpoints but what NAMA is is a laundering operation protecting and often employing the people who caused the problem it was established to resolve. The only thing transparent in NAMA is its expensive glass front door. There’s a reason for that and it’s not to benefit the people paying for it.

I did not state that a €200,000 payment was justified. The distasteful truth, however, is that if a consultant charges € 200,000 for his/her services, and his/her services can be shown to have added more than € 200,000 of value to an organisation, then the fee is justified. If the value cannot be objectively defined, or if the value is less than € 200,000, then the fee is not justified. It then becomes a matter of evaluation, not a matter of ethics. I for one will always choose solutions rather than continuously decrying possible future failures.

Unlike the Quinn case where it was private bank VS 45 year old private company.

This time, its private banks VS/(in bed with)
private flyby night cowboy builders,
who never paid anyone (even in the good times),
namely the Galway tent crew.
Question is
What stupid politician made it the public’s problem?
and why is there no developer media witchhunt??
Developers wouldn’t be getting (taxpayer funded) media protection from NAMA and IBRC??
Would they??

Curious about Quinn VS Developers case??

Media empires run by 2 wealthy tax exiles, slates and witchhunts family who created huge employment and paid hundreds of millions of Euro in Irish taxes but unfortunately is scammed (tbc) out of everything by corrupt builderbanker and a ponzi bank .

One of the wealthy tax exiles flys his corrupt builderbanker friend around in his private jet to football matches, in spite of the fact that corrupt builderbanker runs up debts to the Irish taxpayer of €32 Billion and counting.
Wealthy tax exile maintains that corrupt builderbanker friend is a ”good guy”
Wealthy tax exile (who meets politicians in pubs) then buys utilities company from government well below what other bidders were willing to pay for it.
Wealthy tax exile then gets huge utilities contracts from Irish government.
Wealthy tax exile opens New York stock exchange with Taoiseach and gets invited to Farmleigh to advise government.

Other wealthy tax exile gets Knighthood and closes down business leaving employees with little or nothing.

Irish Media??

These Cowboy Builders wouldn’t be getting a soft time from our ”unbiased” media because of the 100′s of millions of euros of advertisement revenue they gave them in the property boom??
Would they??

Ahh, the good old days of glossy property supplements that were thicker than the newspaper itself.

Just to point out that this is just an observation and I bear no favoritism to neither Quinns nor to the developers.

Martin that’s trolling in the extreme and seriously insulting to all of the employees in NAMA who are trying very hard to recover taxpayers monies and you call them all corrupt.