Financial Fair Play

[Ozyhibby]

Lucky we are not interested in fair play up here or one or two of clubs would be looking at point deductions.
https://www.skysports.com/football/n...nability-rules


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Fuzzywuzzy]

The rangers not about £23,000,000 in the hole at the moment

[HoboHarry]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

The rangers not about £23,000,000 in the hole at the moment

A good deal of that amount are soft loans so they don't count as debt. Owe it to themselves? Ahem.

[cocteautwin]

If the rules existed in Scotland one does wonder if the limits would be lowered and would HMFC and their anonymous £8,800,000 be caught by it?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Aim Here]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

If the rules existed in Scotland one does wonder if the limits would be lowered and would HMFC and their anonymous £8,800,000 be caught by it?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Almost certainly the reverse - getting free no-strings-attached money (or with easily affordable strings attached like not forcing the Jambo sugar daddy in question to wear a tie in the boardroom) is just another income source that makes their club more sustainable, not less. It would only be a problem if they were doing something like racking up bills or debts with the assumption that these anonymous donations would keep going indefinitely.

I mean, it's a bizarre state of affairs, and you do have to wonder who can afford to throw all this money at the club year after year (I dunno if your £8 million includes their Save the Children sponsorship, which is effectively a laundered donation to Hearts too), but, on the face of it, it's probably not an FFP issue.

[cocteautwin]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Almost certainly the reverse - getting free no-strings-attached money (or with easily affordable strings attached like not forcing the Jambo sugar daddy in question to wear a tie in the boardroom) is just another income source that makes their club more sustainable, not less. It would only be a problem if they were doing something like racking up bills or debts with the assumption that these anonymous donations would keep going indefinitely.

I mean, it's a bizarre state of affairs, and you do have to wonder who can afford to throw all this money at the club year after year (I dunno if your £8 million includes their Save the Children sponsorship, which is effectively a laundered donation to Hearts too), but, on the face of it, it's probably not an FFP issue.

Ah, I see the difference now. Birmingham actually racked up the recorded losses in their P&L. Why doesn’t the Birmingham owner just make donations to eliminate the losses?

The £8.8m is the round sum donations only. STC sponsorship is an extra £2m+


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[green day]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Ah, I see the difference now. Birmingham actually racked up the recorded losses in their P&L. Why doesn’t the Birmingham owner just make donations to eliminate the losses?

The £8.8m is the round sum donations only. STC sponsorship is an extra £2m+


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I dont claim to understand FFP rules, but if making donations were a simple way to circumvent it then surely the owners of Man City and PSG would do the same?

[Future17]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I dont claim to understand FFP rules, but if making donations were a simple way to circumvent it then surely the owners of Man City and PSG would do the same?

FFP is different to Profitability and Sustainability Rules - which is what Birmingham have been caught out on.

[Ozyhibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Ah, I see the difference now. Birmingham actually racked up the recorded losses in their P&L. Why doesn’t the Birmingham owner just make donations to eliminate the losses?

The £8.8m is the round sum donations only. STC sponsorship is an extra £2m+


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Probably because they have proper monitoring in England.
In Scotland, borrowing to the point of administration is rewarded. All the prizes you win on the way you get to keep.
It’s Sevco doing it just now and they were rewarded with European participation this season. Will Hearts follow soon? Who knows but why not really if it gets them some silverware or European football. There is no downside.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[cocteautwin]

One thing that I’ve been wondering is, if FoH are to gain ownership of HMFC on repayment of the £2.4m Bidco loan, why didn’t the anonymous donor send 1/5th of his contributions to FoH instead of piling it all in to HMFC? The fans could have had ownership by now instead of some indeterminate date in the future.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[CropleyWasGod]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

One thing that I’ve been wondering is, if FoH are to gain ownership of HMFC on repayment of the £2.4m Bidco loan, why didn’t the anonymous donor send 1/5th of his contributions to FoH instead of piling it all in to HMFC? The fans could have had ownership by now instead of some indeterminate date in the future.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

1. Because there is more than one donor.

2. Because none of the donors are interested in fan ownership.

[greenginger]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

1. Because there is more than one donor.

2. Because none of the donors are interested in fan ownership.

Did Budge not say some of the big donors were FoH contributors too ?

[CropleyWasGod]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Did Budge not say some of the big donors were FoH contributors too ?

She may have; I don't recall her saying that. But the point stands 😉

[HoboHarry]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

She may have; I don't recall her saying that. But the point stands 😉

Don't see you post for long periods but the minute money is mentioned you're on here quicker than a rat up a drainpipe

[cocteautwin]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

1. Because there is more than one donor.

2. Because none of the donors are interested in fan ownership.

1. Has there been any reference at all to the donor(s) aside from the one person who wanted access to the directors box in dress down? There can’t be more than one rich lunatic surely?

2. The donor doesn’t have any say on fan ownership, it’s going ahead regardless of what he/she/they say.

The overall effect is only one of timing:

£10m thrown at the club now and £2.4m repayment of the loan in the future by FoH would be, give or take 18 months, the same as:

£7.6m thrown at the club now, £2.4m repayment of Bidco loan now, and £2.4m from FoH that would be thrown at the club by FoH if no need to repay Bidco loan.

It’s just odd that the donor would delay the future certain aim of the club being fan owned.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[CropleyWasGod]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

1. Has there been any reference at all to the donor(s) aside from the one person who wanted access to the directors box in dress down? There can’t be more than one rich lunatic surely?

2. The donor doesn’t have any say on fan ownership, it’s going ahead regardless of what he/she/they say.

The overall effect is only one of timing:

£10m thrown at the club now and £2.4m repayment of the loan in the future by FoH would be, give or take 18 months, the same as:

£7.6m thrown at the club now, £2.4m repayment of Bidco loan now, and £2.4m from FoH that would be thrown at the club by FoH if no need to repay Bidco loan.

It’s just odd that the donor would delay the future certain aim of the club being fan owned.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The club, Budge and the accounts have consistently referred to donors. Plural.

Had the donors been more interested in fan ownership than the purposes they donated to, they would have gone through FOH.

[Keith_M]

Hearts are not in any financial danger. Quite the contrary, in fact.

The Rangers, on the other hand...

[Since452]

Hearts finances are more than fine. We need to stop kidding ourselves. Sevco on the other hand......