Share Transfers Agreed/Cooling off period

[GreenLake]

A more practical issue is that we aren't going have a chance to beat them for years (unless we draw them in the cups) as we'll be in different leagues.

And a more pleasant one too. :agree:

[Onion]

As CWG says, it is possible for someone to buy the ground and rent it back to the yams, but I don't think that paying an economic rent on the PBS is part of their business plan. Although they own the stadium they are , so far as I understand, in reality squatters, as it is mortgaged and they don't pay anything towards the mortgage. If this was a house it would have repossessed long ago. It would need a sugar daddy or mommy to buy it and let them live rent free.

I wonder whether the distillers next door who have bought the school are doing a bit of land assembly with a view to moving their existing premises and selling a larger site including PBS for housing, same as S&N did with the brewery in Fountainbridge

The Holy Trinity of outcomes for the Yams is :

1. Relegation
2. Start-up as Newco in lower leagues
3. Lose their Home Ground.

They've accepted and can survive 1 and probably 2, but 3 would be like LOSING THEIR SOUL. Their club as we know it would be effectively DEAD. That's why every effort will be made to keep them at the PBS.

[GreenLake]

I think they could but they wont. It would ruin the business plan that Budge and the FOH set up, but there is nothing to stop them selling 1000 season tickets tomorrow.

They won't know if 1000 season tickets will exceed the capacity of the ground they are playing in next season.

[greenpaper55]

The thing is, if the Liths were going to sell they would have done it by now unless there is a way of screwing more cash from Budge and Co ?. That is if they are able to sell which might be the real reason, for the first time i think they are friar Tucked !.

[GreenLake]

He also then went on to say this though:

Jamie Borthwick ‏@jamiekborthwick (https://twitter.com/jamiekborthwick) 48m (https://twitter.com/jamiekborthwick/status/451331833490571264) My feeling is the problem is mostly going to be another delay. That's as good as a rejection as liquidation is very likely in that scenario.

Yes, and it's going to be damp if it rains.

[jacomo]

The yams have moved on to discussing what league they want their new club to play in next year. Current favourite is the English leagues.
:-)

http://www.hmfckickback.co.uk/index.php?/topic/138663-worrying-news-from-lithuania/page__st__1100#entry4117664

That aside, a lot of unprecedented realism on that thread. Some even seem to think that HMFC are in deep trouble. I suppose credit is due for the penny dropping eventually.

[BIGK]

Am I right in saying that the ground would have to be sold to pay back the Lith's if they go breasts up? No dodgy ground rent possible?

[Jack]

Futher to Bajillions recent post about BDO PR:

May I have a Ureaka moment?

The frozen shares DONT matter. So long as UKIO and UBIG agree to the sale and purchase.

BDO are going down the same Portsmouth road, adapted to Scotland.

BDO PR
Look we've done our best within the letter law and have even applied as much political, even ambassadorial pressure as we dare. The yam creditors are happy with what has been offered and in normal circumstances that would be enough to see my client emerge positively from administration. Everything has been achieved within the spirit of the legal and sporting regulations.

The legal situation in Lithuania with the frozen shares, see Portsmouth delays, is not relevant, a red herring, outwith the normal legal and sporting laws in Scotland and the UK. The companies and individuals involved are not UK based, it is entirely an Lithuanian issue in which we have no influence.

The yams are already subject to a sporting relegation. It would be unfair in the circumstances to subject us, I mean, them to an insolvency relegation, or exclusion, which is beyond the spirit of the regulations.

Thoughts?

[dangermouse]

You clearly have not been reading since Day 1 of TRFC-the Meltdown. My vocation as Ron Jeremy's fluffer will continue.

Not really something to post on a public message board unless you are looking for more of that sort of work :wink:

[jacomo]

Futher to Bajillions recent post about BDO PR:

May I have a Ureaka moment?

The frozen shares DONT matter. So long as UKIO and UBIG agree to the sale and purchase.

BDO are going down the same Portsmouth road, adapted to Scotland.

BDO PR
Look we've done our best within the letter law and have even applied as much political, even ambassadorial pressure as we dare. The yam creditors are happy with what has been offered and in normal circumstances that would be enough to see my client emerge positively from administration. Everything has been achieved within the spirit of the legal and sporting regulations.

The legal situation in Lithuania with the frozen shares, see Portsmouth delays, is not relevant, a red herring, outwith the normal legal and sporting laws in Scotland and the UK. The companies and individuals involved are not UK based, it is entirely an Lithuanian issue in which we have no influence.

The yams are already subject to a sporting relegation. It would be unfair in the circumstances to subject us, I mean, them to an insolvency relegation, or exclusion, which is beyond our the spirit of the regulations.

Thoughts?

You need a resolution to this situation don't you? The sporting regulations are a set of extra criteria to try and ensure a level playing field. The main issue is that a company is in administration because it couldn't pay its debts and needs to come out of it one way or the other.

[Hibee87]

Futher to Bajillions recent post about BDO PR:

May I have a Ureaka moment?

The frozen shares DONT matter. So long as UKIO and UBIG agree to the sale and purchase.

BDO are going down the same Portsmouth road, adapted to Scotland.

BDO PR
Look we've done our best within the letter law and have even applied as much political, even ambassadorial pressure as we dare. The yam creditors are happy with what has been offered and in normal circumstances that would be enough to see my client emerge positively from administration. Everything has been achieved within the spirit of the legal and sporting regulations.

The legal situation in Lithuania with the frozen shares, see Portsmouth delays, is not relevant, a red herring, outwith the normal legal and sporting laws in Scotland and the UK. The companies and individuals involved are not UK based, it is entirely an Lithuanian issue in which we have no influence.

The yams are already subject to a sporting relegation. It would be unfair in the circumstances to subject us, I mean, them to an insolvency relegation, or exclusion, which is beyond the spirit of the regulations.

Thoughts?

They need the shares though, without knowing to muc hwhat im talking about - pORTSMougth were liquidated, and a new company set up ala rangers, however rules in englad state themembership can be transfered to a new club with no real punishment (dropping to the lowest division) whereas scotlands rules are different. no shares mean liquidation, and re applying to the bottom division - even if they bought tyncastle to continue playing there......i think thats correct

[Mikey09]

Could someone please tell me this?? When the yams say the creditors should accept this CVA because if they don't they get nothing.... Is this true?? Or do the creditors have the PBS to sell off?? Apologies for my dumbness....

[Hibee87]

Could someone please tell me this?? When the yams say the creditors should accept this CVA because if they don't they get nothing.... Is this true?? Or do the creditors have the PBS to sell off?? Apologies for my dumbness....

If hearts are liquidated, and the liquidator sells the PBS all proceed up to the tune of 7.9million are given to UKIO creditiors

[CropleyWasGod]

If hearts are liquidated, and the liquidator sells the PBS all proceed up to the tune of 7.9million are given to UKIO creditiors

9/10 :greengrin

£6.8m, after the liquidator takes his cut.

[GreenLake]

If hearts are liquidated, and the liquidator sells the PBS all proceed up to the tune of 7.9million are given to UKIO creditiors

I thought it was 7.0million and 6.2million after fees.

[GreenLake]

More competition for Budge buying the PBS if liquidation forces sale. Interesting to see the value of Upton Park and imagine Tottenham playing at the PBS.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2594888/REVEALED-Tottenham-failed-ambitious-bid-buy-Upton-Park-West-Ham.html

Tottenham Hotspur failed with an ambitious bid to buy Upton Park from West Ham earlier this year.
Spurs chairman Daniel Levy wanted to purchase the ground for the 2016-17 season, when the Hammers relocate to the Olympic Stadium.

But Levy's offer was rejected and West Ham instead sold to property developers Galliard - raising less than the stadium's value of £71.2million.







Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2594888/REVEALED-Tottenham-failed-ambitious-bid-buy-Upton-Park-West-Ham.html#ixzz2xkDcY2tX
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter (http://ec.tynt.com/b/rw?id=bBOTTqvd0r3Pooab7jrHcU&u=MailOnline) | DailyMail on Facebook (http://ec.tynt.com/b/rf?id=bBOTTqvd0r3Pooab7jrHcU&u=DailyMail)

[JeMeSouviens]

They need the shares though, without knowing to muc hwhat im talking about - pORTSMougth were liquidated, and a new company set up ala rangers, however rules in englad state themembership can be transfered to a new club with no real punishment (dropping to the lowest division) whereas scotlands rules are different. no shares mean liquidation, and re applying to the bottom division - even if they bought tyncastle to continue playing there......i think thats correct

They are different, but they are actually more flexible. It is left to the discretion of the SPFL board. In the Hun saga, they passed the buck onto a vote of all member clubs.

So there would be nothing to stop Hearts trying to pull this stunt and indeed the SPFL officials led by Doncaster and Topping tried to pull off an even worse one (transfer of share without even a creditor agreement) in the case of the Huns.

Luckily the Hun precedent will stop any attempt this time. :wink:

[Mikey09]

Ok. So the bottom line is the yams and BDO are telling porkies again as the creditors would end up with way more than they are being offered just now... Thanks.

[HFC 0-7]

They need the shares though, without knowing to muc hwhat im talking about - pORTSMougth were liquidated, and a new company set up ala rangers, however rules in englad state themembership can be transfered to a new club with no real punishment (dropping to the lowest division) whereas scotlands rules are different. no shares mean liquidation, and re applying to the bottom division - even if they bought tyncastle to continue playing there......i think thats correct

I dont think BDo expect to get the shares, I think they will still be hoping the CVA is agreed so they can keep the PBS. Budge was probably at Tynie on Friday to discuss funding options if they are in the bottom tier.

It will be much easier to start up a new team and company in the bottom tier with a stadium than without. The flumps will still flock back to the PBS in the bottom tier but I wouldnt be so sure many would turn up to see thenm in the bottom tier and in a different stadium.

Many will argue they are still the same team if they are liquidated but still keep their stadium, it will be difficult if they are liquidated, new company and sharing a stadium somewhere!

Its also all about timing now, they need something to happen either way very soon. They wont want to stay in admin into the summer as if they did get liquidated weeks before the season starting it will be very difficult to start a new company up and get admitted to the league. Having a season out wont be an option as by that time the new pyramid structure will be in place and they will need to start in a very low league.

I would say its a case of now or never for them.

[Weststandwanab]

We should start registering potential names for them at companies house:greengrinSome of us have already started


New H****s, still thieving c's..... Indeed


In my humble uneducated opinion, I believe they will be liquidated to ensure the brand is protected and I also think they will play at Tynecastle next season. Simply because what is the point having a sports ground (said with tongue firmly in cheek) lying unused in the city centre? I think the Lith admin will rent it back to them until it is sold. I'm sure there will be a lot of prep to be done before any decision is made therefore better making something than not on the thing! Not possible.

[CropleyWasGod]

I dont think BDo expect to get the shares, I think they will still be hoping the CVA is agreed so they can keep the PBS. Budge was probably at Tynie on Friday to discuss funding options if they are in the bottom tier.

It will be much easier to start up a new team and company in the bottom tier with a stadium than without. The flumps will still flock back to the PBS in the bottom tier but I wouldnt be so sure many would turn up to see thenm in the bottom tier and in a different stadium.

Many will argue they are still the same team if they are liquidated but still keep their stadium, it will be difficult if they are liquidated, new company and sharing a stadium somewhere!

Its also all about timing now, they need something to happen either way very soon. They wont want to stay in admin into the summer as if they did get liquidated weeks before the season starting it will be very difficult to start a new company up and get admitted to the league. Having a season out wont be an option as by that time the new pyramid structure will be in place and they will need to start in a very low league.

I would say its a case of now or never for them.

If the shares aren't transferred, the CVA fails.

[HFC 0-7]

If the shares aren't transferred, the CVA fails.

Is that actually part of the CVA, to get the UBIG shares? I thought the CVA only related to the UKIO shares.

[CropleyWasGod]

Is that actually part of the CVA, to get the UBIG shares? I thought the CVA only related to the UKIO shares.

The CVA is a deal with the creditors, in this case UKIO, but it is based on the premise that the bidders can actually take possession of the shares, both UKIO's and UBIG's.

If the shares can't be acquired, there is nothing to buy, and the CVA fails.

[Weststandwanab]

To save CWG doing it again, and I night be wrong, HMFC own swine castle if they liquidate it goes on general sale, if they don't liquidate it remains an asset of HMFC, the admins will never "own" it to rent it back to them:confused: I think thats they way it is anyways.:greengrin Excellent.

Does this constitute an application to join us Bean Counters ?


Jamie Borthwick ‏@jamiekborthwick 45m (https://twitter.com/jamiekborthwick/status/451331415805009921) It's positive noise from Ukio and UBIG's admins and it is hoped that Siauliu have been persuaded to vote in favour too. But no guarantees.


seen this on twitterSpeculation.

[Weststandwanab]

BJ is an accountant, therefore very cautious. When he said "the end of March", my instinct was to think "the end of the season".

You'll rarely see an accountant in a bookie's.

Oh, wait....http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2594254/KPMG-director-earning-100-000-falsely-claimed-45-000-expenses-fund-gambling-addiction.html On the wrong Turf CWG.


But it is possible that a property developer could buy Tynecastle and rent it to 'The Hearts' on a short-term basis while planning permission and building regulation issues were sorted out.

I think that Tynecastle would be a millstone around the necks of any Hearts Newco starting at the bottom. The running costs and maintenance on the old stand would be horrendous. It is not worth spending the sort of money that is needed to keep it as a SPFL ground. The pitch is too small. Even the 'new' stands are looking very seedy now. It is 'not fit for purpose as the Pieman pointed out ten years ago.

They would be better off renting Livingston's ground and then looking for a new ground. You mean someone like Bidco or STF ?


The yams have moved on to discussing what league they want their new club to play in next year. Current favourite is the English leagues.
:-)

http://www.hmfckickback.co.uk/index.php?/topic/138663-worrying-news-from-lithuania/page__st__1100#entry4117664 Excellent I would support this.

[Hermit Crab]

Jamie Borthwick ‏@jamiekborthwick 45m (https://twitter.com/jamiekborthwick/status/451331415805009921) It's positive noise from Ukio and UBIG's admins and it is hoped that Siauliu have been persuaded to vote in favour too. But no guarantees.


seen this on twitter

Wind and pish with no actual source on the noise

[HFC 0-7]

The CVA is a deal with the creditors, in this case UKIO, but it is based on the premise that the bidders can actually take possession of the shares, both UKIO's and UBIG's.

If the shares can't be acquired, there is nothing to buy, and the CVA fails.

Does it actually state anything about the ubig shares, I know at the time it stated in the press that it was ubig shares but we know how the press can be with facts.

At at this stage if they are resigned to not getting out of admin all they would be caring about would be the stadium, which they would get in the result of the cva agreed with ukio?

[StevieC]

They hate us wee hate them, let them disappear of the face of the earth so wee can have the biggest party Leith has ever seen.

Was that deliberate, or a Freudian slip? :greengrin

[Weststandwanab]

They need the shares though, without knowing to muc hwhat im talking about - pORTSMougth were liquidated, and a new company set up ala rangers, however rules in englad state themembership can be transfered to a new club with no real punishment (dropping to the lowest division) whereas scotlands rules are different. no shares mean liquidation, and re applying to the bottom division - even if they bought tyncastle to continue playing there......i think thats correct Roughly correct.


9/10 :greengrin

£6.8m, after the liquidator takes his cut. And now a perfect 10.

[CropleyWasGod]

Does it actually state anything about the ubig shares, I know at the time it stated in the press that it was ubig shares but we know how the press can be with facts.

At at this stage if they are resigned to not getting out of admin all they would be caring about would be the stadium, which they would get in the result of the cva agreed with ukio?

They can't get out of admin without the CVA being agreed.

If they don't get out of admin, they are liquidated, and the PBS goes on the open market.

[Keith_M]

- Portsmouth were liquidated, and a new company set up ala rangers, however rules in englad state themembership can be transfered to a new club with no real punishment (dropping to the lowest division) whereas scotlands rules are different. no shares mean liquidation, and re applying to the bottom division - even if they bought tyncastle to continue playing there......i think thats correct


I realise that's been stated on here a few times but, is that actually the case?


Have a look at THIS (http://www.theguardian.com/football/2013/apr/10/portsmouth-future-fratton-park-ownership) article in the Guardian, from May of last year.

"Amid celebratory scenes in the high court from the fans who will now become its owners, Portsmouth Football Club has been saved from liquidation after an 11th hour deal between its administrators and the former owner of the club.."

[weonlywon6-2]

If the shares aren't transferred, the CVA fails.

fingers and toes are crossed !

[HFC 0-7]

They can't get out of admin without the CVA being agreed.

If they don't get out of admin, they are liquidated, and the PBS goes on the open market.

yeah, I know they need to get the cva agreed to be out of admin, but, is there anything concrete that states (in the current cva proposal) that they need the ubig shares? Can ukio agree to the cva, pass them their 29% of shares and write off the rest of their debt?

At that point hearts are out of admin but will then need to liquidate because of the ubig shares? But they can then start up with a stadium.

[weonlywon6-2]

They can't get out of admin without the CVA being agreed.

If they don't get out of admin, they are liquidated, and the PBS goes on the open market.

maybe hibs.net should by swynie,that would pee them off big time !!

[Kato]

So did our lovely council sell Tynecastle School off on the cheap to deflate the land prices in the area. Seems it went for a very low price.

[Mikey09]

They can't get out of admin without the CVA being agreed.

If they don't get out of admin, they are liquidated, and the PBS goes on the open market.

So the PBS goes on the open market to pay UKIO as they have security on it?? How much would land in Edinburgh go for then? Surely a far better option for the creditors CWG, no??

[WindyMiller]

So did our lovely council sell Tynecastle School off on the cheap to deflate the land prices in the area. Seems it went for a very low price.


It was sold on the open market.

[Kato]

It was sold on the open market.

Still seems like a pittance given what Cala were willing to pay for a site a third larger. I know times have changed since then but it went for a song.

[WindyMiller]

Still seems like a pittance given what Cala were willing to pay for a site a third larger. I know times have changed since then but it went for a song.

I think a telling factor was the closeness of the school to the "blast-zone".

[Kato]

I think a telling factor was the closeness of the school to the "blast-zone".

Tynie was in the blast zone when Cala were coughing up millions for it. Weird.

Still, now that the distillers are going to remove the dngerous aspects away Tynie's price will sky rocket. BOOM!

[JeMeSouviens]

Tynie was in the blast zone when Cala were coughing up millions for it. Weird.

Still, now that the distillers are going to remove the dngerous aspects away Tynie's price will sky rocket. BOOM!

Which I think is a key part of the Budgie strategy. Get Tiny now on the chirpy cheep, sell it in a few years and move out of town. They've next to no chance of finding the cash for a new Tiny any other way, imo.

[CropleyWasGod]

yeah, I know they need to get the cva agreed to be out of admin, but, is there anything concrete that states (in the current cva proposal) that they need the ubig shares? Can ukio agree to the cva, pass them their 29% of shares and write off the rest of their debt?

At that point hearts are out of admin but will then need to liquidate because of the ubig shares? But they can then start up with a stadium.

No they wouldn't be out of admin. They need the UBIG shares for that.
If they liquidate, the stadium gets sold.

[StevieC]

Tynie was in the blast zone when Cala were coughing up millions for it.

Only one corner of the site is affected by the blast zone. Cala could easily have designated this area for parking/landscaping and concentrated the residential development in the safe areas.

There is a diagram floating about somewhere (possibly even on this thread) that shows the blast zone.

[Danderhall Hibs]

No they wouldn't be out of admin. They need the UBIG shares for that.
If they liquidate, the stadium gets sold.

Definite? I've heard them say 2 nights in a row now that if the cva doesn't go through the Lithuanians get nothing. Based on what you're saying that's a blatant lie.

[Bristolhibby]

Definite? I've heard them say 2 nights in a row now that if the cva doesn't go through the Lithuanians get nothing. Based on what you're saying that's a blatant lie.

It's spin. Of course someone will buy Tynie. However they play down the value, play up the dismantling costs and play up the buggerance factor (listed building, blast zone, etc).

They are just saying "a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush"

J

[The Falcon]

I think a telling factor was the closeness of the school to the "blast-zone".

I'm sure I read Distillers will be removing the problem as part of the redevelopment of the old high school.

[Jim44]

Futher to Bajillions recent post about BDO PR:

May I have a Ureaka moment?

The frozen shares DONT matter. So long as UKIO and UBIG agree to the sale and purchase.

BDO are going down the same Portsmouth road, adapted to Scotland.

BDO PR
Look we've done our best within the letter law and have even applied as much political, even ambassadorial pressure as we dare. The yam creditors are happy with what has been offered and in normal circumstances that would be enough to see my client emerge positively from administration. Everything has been achieved within the spirit of the legal and sporting regulations.

The legal situation in Lithuania with the frozen shares, see Portsmouth delays, is not relevant, a red herring, outwith the normal legal and sporting laws in Scotland and the UK. The companies and individuals involved are not UK based, it is entirely an Lithuanian issue in which we have no influence.

The yams are already subject to a sporting relegation. It would be unfair in the circumstances to subject us, I mean, them to an insolvency relegation, or exclusion, which is beyond the spirit of the regulations.

Thoughts?


Initial thoughts? What the hell does this mean? The title of this thread has constantly included STILL FROZEN, inferring I thought that this was a really significant fact and a major stumbling block for them. Our learned friends and others have also referred to this as an on-going and very significant problem. Your Eureka moment claims that 'frozen' is irrelevant. Does this mean, that if UBIG and UKIO agree to the Jambos buying the shares, they will very soon after that, come out of administration, progress their CVA, and start to operate 'normally' albeit in the Championship. I hope my 'ignorant' interpretation is way off the mark.

[CropleyWasGod]

Definite? I've heard them say 2 nights in a row now that if the cva doesn't go through the Lithuanians get nothing. Based on what you're saying that's a blatant lie.

I think it's spin, as mentioned above.

The suggestion is that, on the open market, the PBS will go for much less than the £2.5m. After liquidators' fees, UKIO would get very little and UBIG nothing.

[Hibernia&Alba]

Can I just say the fact the thread title has been amended to 'preparing for liquidation' excites me to the brink of sexual arousal.

[CapitalGreen]

I realise that's been stated on here a few times but, is that actually the case?


Have a look at THIS (http://www.theguardian.com/football/2013/apr/10/portsmouth-future-fratton-park-ownership) article in the Guardian, from May of last year.

"Amid celebratory scenes in the high court from the fans who will now become its owners, Portsmouth Football Club has been saved from liquidation after an 11th hour deal between its administrators and the former owner of the club.."

The deal being celebrated was an asset transfer to a newco set up by a Portsmouth Fans Trust. (Players, stadium, league membership etc)

The The Rangers/Sevco precedent has shown this would not be possible in Scotland without rejoining in the bottom tier. However, the Rangers precedent also had a Plan B built into the CVA to allow an easy/cheap asset transfer in the result of it being rejected.

[inglisavhibs]

Only one corner of the site is affected by the blast zone. Cala could easily have designated this area for parking/landscaping and concentrated the residential development in the safe areas.

There is a diagram floating about somewhere (possibly even on this thread) that shows the blast zone.
Cala had agreed a deal with North British to clear the offending warehouse for a sum of around £1m. If that deal is done with any new buyer then there is no problem building and the site is worth much more than the £2.5m on offer!

[Eyrie]

One scenario that worries me if the Yams get liquidated.

A property developer outbids Budge for the PBS, then offers NewYamCo the use of it rent free for three years in exchange for their support with the housing application. NewYamCo couldn't afford to turn this down as the savings on rental costs would be huge as they start their climb up the leagues, and the only downside for them is needing to find a new home when that period is up.

Someone reassure me that this won't happen and they'll have the cost of renting from Livingston or Cowdenbeath to further drain their budget.

[WindyMiller]

I'm sure I read Distillers will be removing the problem as part of the redevelopment of the old high school.

That's what I understand too ,but anyone else buying it would've needed to have paid the Distillers to remove the tanks.

[WindyMiller]

one scenario that worries me if the yams get liquidated.

A property developer outbids budge for the pbs, then offers newyamco the use of it rent free for three years in exchange for their support with the housing application. Newyamco couldn't afford to turn this down as the savings on rental costs would be huge as they start their climb up the leagues, and the only downside for them is needing to find a new home when that period is up.

Someone reassure me that this won't happen and they'll have the cost of renting from livingston or cowdenbeath to further drain their budget.

wtf!

[HFC 0-7]

No they wouldn't be out of admin. They need the UBIG shares for that.
If they liquidate, the stadium gets sold.


Cool, thanks for that. Just a guy I know (he works in the media) is adamant that the ubig shares were not a condition of the cva. He is sure that the cva can be accepted by ukio without the ubig shares.

[DC_Hibs]

One scenario that worries me if the Yams get liquidated.

A property developer outbids Budge for the PBS, then offers NewYamCo the use of it rent free for three years in exchange for their support with the housing application. NewYamCo couldn't afford to turn this down as the savings on rental costs would be huge as they start their climb up the leagues, and the only downside for them is needing to find a new home when that period is up.

Someone reassure me that this won't happen and they'll have the cost of renting from Livingston or Cowdenbeath to further drain their budget.

Mate, if HoMFC are liquidated, end up bottom tier and the Saviledome is no more after 3 years then you are being greedy "worrying" that they get to stay there for 3 years. Calm yersel doon to a panic as they will likely still wriggle out of this somehow.

[CropleyWasGod]

Cool, thanks for that. Just a guy I know (he works in the media) is adamant that the ubig shares were not a condition of the cva. He is sure that the cva can be accepted by ukio without the ubig shares.

Okay, let me work through that logic, so that you can put it to him.

By his way of thinking, the CVA is accepted and FOH pay UKIO £2.5m. At that point, what do they own? At best, 29.9% of the shares of HMFC, ie the UKIO bit. UBIG still own 49.9%.

What would the point be in that? Owning less than 30% of the shares.?

Yamanomics :greengrin

[jonty]

http://www1.skysports.com/football/news/11790/9245522/neil-patey-fears-the-creditors-of-hearts-may-try-and-sell-off-the-stricken-clubs-tynecastle-ground?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

Patey fears creditors may try and sell the ground.

Good.

[Kato]

One scenario that worries me........

Mind you don't worry too much, there there.

[CapitalGreen]

http://www1.skysports.com/football/news/11790/9245522/neil-patey-fears-the-creditors-of-hearts-may-try-and-sell-off-the-stricken-clubs-tynecastle-ground?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

Patey fears creditors may try and sell the ground.

Good.

Not Good. Patey has been wrong in nearly every opinion he has given on both the Rangers and Hearts cases.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2157407/Rangers-backed-seal-CVA-deal.html

[nribs]

http://www1.skysports.com/football/news/11790/9245522/neil-patey-fears-the-creditors-of-hearts-may-try-and-sell-off-the-stricken-clubs-tynecastle-ground?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

Patey fears creditors may try and sell the ground.

Good. That isn't a very well written or informative report at all.

[littleplum]

Okay, let me work through that logic, so that you can put it to him.

By his way of thinking, the CVA is accepted and FOH pay UKIO £2.5m. At that point, what do they own? At best, 29.9% of the shares of HMFC, ie the UKIO bit. UBIG still own 49.9%.

What would the point be in that? Owning less than 30% of the shares.?

Yamanomics :greengrin

Besides which it's quite clearly stipulated in the CVA document that was posted a hundred or so pages back iirc

[Weststandwanab]

So did our lovely council sell Tynecastle School off on the cheap to deflate the land prices in the area. Seems it went for a very low price. That thought crossed my mind too.


That isn't a very well written or informative report at all. I do not think the article is that good.

[BarneyK]

In the face of everything that is being reported at the moment, every slant that is being given, it's easy to imagine that maybe we've got it all wrong, that there are no frozen shares at all. That come this time next week all will have been agreed and barring a twenty day cooling off period it will be an exit from administration at the end of this month, with club and stadium, if not perhaps reputation intact. If this does pan out to be the case, the one thing that still bothers me is why no denial of frozen shares?

[CropleyWasGod]

In the face of everything that is being reported at the moment, every slant that is being given, it's easy to imagine that maybe we've got it all wrong, that there are no frozen shares at all. That come this time next week all will have been agreed and barring a twenty day cooling off period it will be an exit from administration at the end of this month, with club and stadium, if not perhaps reputation intact. If this does pan out to be the case, the one thing that still bothers me is why no denial of frozen shares?

I'm not aware that the question has been asked.

#JustAsk,Guys

[BarneyK]

In the face of everything that is being reported at the moment, every slant that is being given, it's easy to imagine that maybe we've got it all wrong, that there are no frozen shares at all. That come this time next week all will have been agreed and barring a twenty day cooling off period it will be an exit from administration at the end of this month, with club and stadium, if not perhaps reputation intact. If this does pan out to be the case, the one thing that still bothers me is why no denial of frozen shares?

I'm not aware that the question has been asked.

#JustAsk,Guys

It's certainly not being pushed, which I do find very odd.

[CropleyWasGod]

[QUOTE=CropleyWasGod;3953987]

It's certainly not being pushed, which I do find very odd.

I don't.

It's in line with the inability of the MSM to ask the important questions.

http://threedeevision.blogspot.co.uk/2014/03/just-ask-guys-just-ask.html

[hibbymick]

Who owns the stadium ?

[greenpaper55]

In the face of everything that is being reported at the moment, every slant that is being given, it's easy to imagine that maybe we've got it all wrong, that there are no frozen shares at all. That come this time next week all will have been agreed and barring a twenty day cooling off period it will be an exit from administration at the end of this month, with club and stadium, if not perhaps reputation intact. If this does pan out to be the case, the one thing that still bothers me is why no denial of frozen shares?

Then why all the hanging about if it's all so cut and dried ?, it does not add up unless the Liths think there is more cash to be had from the ground, i Think Patey is correct but if he is it will be the first time!.

[CropleyWasGod]

who owns the stadium ?

hmfc(ia)

[Glory Lurker]

Who owns the stadium ?


Hearts do.

[Jamesie]

Hearts do.

Do they own it outright i.e. without any mortgage?

[BarneyK]

[QUOTE=BarneyK;3953996]

I don't.

It's in line with the inability of the MSM to ask the important questions.

http://threedeevision.blogspot.co.uk/2014/03/just-ask-guys-just-ask.html

Aye but - putting aside how generally off the mark he is - why is Neil Patey suggesting that should the CVA be agreed it'll then be plain sailing? You would think he would know what may be lurking in the background.

[hibbymick]

hmfc(ia)

I would never have known :greengrin

[CropleyWasGod]

Do they own it outright i.e. without any mortgage?

:greengrin

They have a security on it of £6.8m.

They do own it, though.

[CropleyWasGod]

[QUOTE=CropleyWasGod;3954014]

Aye but - putting aside how generally off the mark he is - why is Neil Patey suggesting that should the CVA be agreed it'll then be plain sailing? You would think he would know what may be lurking in the background.

Why would he, though?

It hasn't been reported in the Scottish MSM, only Bloomberg AFAIK. Bloomberg... one of THE financial media outlets in the world.

I'm not a fan, as you can tell. :greengrin

[lapsedhibee]

Bloomberg
Bitter hobos.

[BarneyK]

Bitter hobos.

:greengrin

[EastCalderHibby]

Tynie was in the blast zone when Cala were coughing up millions for it. Weird.

Still, now that the distillers are going to remove the dngerous aspects away Tynie's price will sky rocket. BOOM!

could someone let the liths know this :greengrin

[brog]

Willie Miller & Michael Stewart both talked tonight as if Yams were doomed. Interestingly, in the little I heard neither expressed much sympathy for Yams predicament. Similarly in today's DR 4/4 letter writers basically said GIRFUY to Yams, so much for this love for them from other teams.

[Rocky]

Something about recent goings on didn't add up to me i.e. it seems that it's UBIG that's trying to put a spanner in the works yet their 50% holding really is worthless if HMFC are liquidated.

However I hadn't realised that UBIG were actually the majority shareholder in UKIO. So, effectively, their major creditor (Saulius?) is pulling the strings of both UBIG and UKIO. This makes sense of a few comments that have been made that say that the UKIO and UBIG shares have been combined for negotiation purposes.

So, how's this for a scenario:
- UKIO admins provisionally agree the CVA (UBIG abstain)
- Subsequently UBIG admins get it together, the state insurance thing works its way through, and Saulius emerge as the major creditor
- Saulius doesn't fancy the look of the whole cosy CVA arrangement
- Saulius pulls rank on the whole thing as it thinks it can get more for the land on the open market

Does that add up or is the shareholding of UBIG in UKIO irrelevant now that UKIO is being wound up?

[Gus Fring]

Do they own it outright i.e. without any mortgage?

Mortgage? It's almost as old as the castle!

[Waxy]

Something about recent goings on didn't add up to me i.e. it seems that it's UBIG that's trying to put a spanner in the works yet their 50% holding really is worthless if HMFC are liquidated.

However I hadn't realised that UBIG were actually the majority shareholder in UKIO. So, effectively, their major creditor (Saulius?) is pulling the strings of both UBIG and UKIO. This makes sense of a few comments that have been made that say that the UKIO and UBIG shares have been combined for negotiation purposes.

So, how's this for a scenario:
- UKIO admins provisionally agree the CVA (UBIG abstain)
- Subsequently UBIG admins get it together, the state insurance thing works its way through, and Saulius emerge as the major creditor
- Saulius doesn't fancy the look of the whole cosy CVA arrangement
- Saulius pulls rank on the whole thing as it thinks it can get more for the land on the open market

Does that add up or is the shareholding of UBIG in UKIO irrelevant now that UKIO is being wound up?thats it.Two paracetamols and off to bed early.

[CropleyWasGod]

Something about recent goings on didn't add up to me i.e. it seems that it's UBIG that's trying to put a spanner in the works yet their 50% holding really is worthless if HMFC are liquidated.

However I hadn't realised that UBIG were actually the majority shareholder in UKIO. So, effectively, their major creditor (Saulius?) is pulling the strings of both UBIG and UKIO. This makes sense of a few comments that have been made that say that the UKIO and UBIG shares have been combined for negotiation purposes.

So, how's this for a scenario:
- UKIO admins provisionally agree the CVA (UBIG abstain)
- Subsequently UBIG admins get it together, the state insurance thing works its way through, and Saulius emerge as the major creditor
- Saulius doesn't fancy the look of the whole cosy CVA arrangement
- Saulius pulls rank on the whole thing as it thinks it can get more for the land on the open market

Does that add up or is the shareholding of UBIG in UKIO irrelevant now that UKIO is being wound up?

Too late for this old man....but CG said the other day that he thought SB could now be pulling the strings.

[Rocky]

Too late for this old man....but CG said the other day that he thought SB could now be pulling the strings.

How d'you mean too late?

Also, what else can be the explanation for the two shareholdings being combined for negotiation? Or do we not believe that to be true?

[SloopJB]

How d'you mean too late?

Also, what else can be the explanation for the two shareholdings being combined for negotiation? Or do we not believe that to be true?
Think he has clocked off his shift for tonight. Must be starting again around 02:00.

[VivaHiberña]

Willie Miller & Michael Stewart both talked tonight as if Yams were doomed. Interestingly, in the little I heard neither expressed much sympathy for Yams predicament. Similarly in today's DR 4/4 letter writers basically said GIRFUY to Yams, so much for this love for them from other teams.

Any chance of posting a link/ photo of the paper? I'm always curious about other teams' supporters' take on all this.

[Ozyhibby]

Picked up a yam in my cab tonight and asked him how he had enjoyed the game.
He had indeed enjoyed the game but went on to tell me that he had been in hospitality and had been told stuff that was breaking his heart. Didn't get any more info than that, other than he had all his fingers crossed that something would change and they would be alright on Monday.
I was of course full of sympathy (no one tips a w******).

[HFC 0-7]

Okay, let me work through that logic, so that you can put it to him.

By his way of thinking, the CVA is accepted and FOH pay UKIO £2.5m. At that point, what do they own? At best, 29.9% of the shares of HMFC, ie the UKIO bit. UBIG still own 49.9%.

What would the point be in that? Owning less than 30% of the shares.?

Yamanomics :greengrin

Thats exactly what he is saying, basically 2.5 million and they own the pbs. He said as there is a growing concern that liquidation will happen, they could find themselves in the bottom tier with no stadium. If there is no chance of getting those 50% shares, and a worry that liquidation could take time and raise the price of the pbs beyond 2.5 million it does make sense!

[Criswell]

I think it is safe to assume that no-one on this thread is an expert on Lithuanian company law. I still think it it odd that the question of frozen shares has never been raised directlly with BDO in all the press conjecture. On one hand you could surmise that it is obviously not an issue, on the other, why have BDO not kicked the idea into touch? It remains for me the elephant in the room.

[gorgie greens]

I think it is safe to assume that no-one on this thread is an expert on Lithuanian company law. I still think it it odd that the question of frozen shares has never been raised directlly with BDO in all the press conjecture. On one hand you could surmise that it is obviously not an issue, on the other, why have BDO not kicked the idea into touch? It remains for me the elephant in the room.

BDO have to do everything they can to keep HMFC going and try to get the CVA approved and only if the CVA is kicked in to touch by the Lith's or they are unable to get the frozen shares (Portsmouth situation)or more importantly they run out of money .
The way things are going I think the lack of funds could seal there destiny,

[Caversham Green]

I think it is safe to assume that no-one on this thread is an expert on Lithuanian company law. I still think it it odd that the question of frozen shares has never been raised directlly with BDO in all the press conjecture. On one hand you could surmise that it is obviously not an issue, on the other, why have BDO not kicked the idea into touch? It remains for me the elephant in the room.

I think it has been mentioned by BDO on numerous occasions, it's just that they don't use the term 'frozen', instead they talk about getting the transfer ratified by the court. I would doubt if that's a standard practice in Lithuania or anywhere else since it would produce a significant logjam in all non-contentious cases.

As to how easy or difficult it would be to get the ratification, I doubt if anyone really knows since it would depend on a court hearing but there's no point in BDO making it an issue at this stage since there are serious doubts about whether it will ever get to the stage of applying for ratification.

[Caversham Green]

Something about recent goings on didn't add up to me i.e. it seems that it's UBIG that's trying to put a spanner in the works yet their 50% holding really is worthless if HMFC are liquidated.

However I hadn't realised that UBIG were actually the majority shareholder in UKIO. So, effectively, their major creditor (Saulius?) is pulling the strings of both UBIG and UKIO. This makes sense of a few comments that have been made that say that the UKIO and UBIG shares have been combined for negotiation purposes.

So, how's this for a scenario:
- UKIO admins provisionally agree the CVA (UBIG abstain)
- Subsequently UBIG admins get it together, the state insurance thing works its way through, and Saulius emerge as the major creditor
- Saulius doesn't fancy the look of the whole cosy CVA arrangement
- Saulius pulls rank on the whole thing as it thinks it can get more for the land on the open market

Does that add up or is the shareholding of UBIG in UKIO irrelevant now that UKIO is being wound up?

As SergeyWasBajilions says, I made a similar comment on the PM board. My take on it was:

- We know that both Ukio and UBIG owe substantial amounts to Saulius.
- The 'good' bits of Ukio were transferred to Saulius. That might include a call on the PBS security since land is one of the safest securities you can get and the £6.8m was presumably the market value at the time the security was raised.
- It's possible that Saulius don't hold enough of Ukio's total debt to influence the outcome of a vote, but it seems they do have enough of UBIG's.
- Thus, Saulius would block the sale of UBIG's shares and force liquidation of HoMFC (IA). In doing that they would lose a share of the £50k (or £100k) but gain a share of the correct market value of the PBS - if my second point is correct they'd gain the full £6.8m if it was sold for more than that.

I'm not saying that's how it is but it does seem like a possible scenario to me.

[Craig_in_Prague]

As SergeyWasBajilions says, I made a similar comment on the PM board. My take on it was:

- We know that both Ukio and UBIG owe substantial amounts to Saulius.
- The 'good' bits of Ukio were transferred to Saulius. That might include a call on the PBS security since land is one of the safest securities you can get and the £6.8m was presumably the market value at the time the security was raised.
- It's possible that Saulius don't hold enough of Ukio's total debt to influence the outcome of a vote, but it seems they do have enough of UBIG's.
- Thus, Saulius would block the sale of UBIG's shares and force liquidation of HoMFC (IA). In doing that they would lose a share of the £50k (or £100k) but gain a share of the correct market value of the PBS - if my second point is correct they'd gain the full £6.8m if it was sold for more than that.

I'm not saying that's how it is but it does seem like a possible scenario to me.

Sounds lovely jubbly.

[Weststandwanab]

CG I think you are spot on and that is where the game is going unless there is a major U turn on Monday in Lithland.

Personally I do outthink there will be because the Liths know there is every chance the "court will not ratify the transfer" or plug the Micro Wave.

[Onion]

I think it has been mentioned by BDO on numerous occasions, it's just that they don't use the term 'frozen', instead they talk about getting the transfer ratified by the court. I would doubt if that's a standard practice in Lithuania or anywhere else since it would produce a significant logjam in all non-contentious cases.

As to how easy or difficult it would be to get the ratification, I doubt if anyone really knows since it would depend on a court hearing but there's no point in BDO making it an issue at this stage since there are serious doubts about whether it will ever get to the stage of applying for ratification.

The problem with BDO's language is that "ratified by the courts" sounds like a quick, simple, routine, rubber stamp job. All the concern/effort/emphasis has been on getting the CVA approved with the clear impression it would be green lights all the way after that for Budgie to take control. IMHO the term "frozen" creates a completely different perception.

With just days of cash left, I'd be astonished if BDO have misjudged the court ratification process or know that they've almost no chance of getting the shares unfrozen. If that's the case, at this stage, BDO get what they deserve. Yes, they will have done their job, but IMHO they will also have misled Hearts fans by not being open/honest about the court approval hurdle.

[Mr White]

Yes, they will have done their job, but IMHO they will also have misled Hearts fans by not being open/honest about the court approval hurdle.

So it's win win then :greengrin shiny gold stars for BDO

[Onion]

CG I think you are spot on and that is where the game is going unless there is a major U turn on Monday in Lithland.

Personally I do outthink there will be because the Liths know there is every chance the "court will not ratify the transfer" or plug the Micro Wave.

If the Liths know that, and BDO are cosy with the Lith Admins, why are BDO not making more of the court hurdle to manage expectations. The impression BDO has created is that the CVA approval is the last major hurdle. No one is talking about the court ratification being a show-stopper... with only days of cash left in the kitty.

[greenpaper55]

C G's take on things makes a lot of sense, if there was no more cash to be had if you believe BDO then why not take it and move on ?, on the other hand if the shares are frozen why not take a punt on selling the land in the future as the only way is up for land prices in the Burgh.

[Gustavo Fring]

Picked up a yam in my cab tonight and asked him how he had enjoyed the game.
He had indeed enjoyed the game but went on to tell me that he had been in hospitality and had been told stuff that was breaking his heart. Didn't get any more info than that, other than he had all his fingers crossed that something would change and they would be alright on Monday.
I was of course full of sympathy (no one tips a w******).

i would have said , sod the tip . locked all the doors and gave him a few verses of the hearts are going bust

[Rocky]

As SergeyWasBajilions says, I made a similar comment on the PM board. My take on it was:

- We know that both Ukio and UBIG owe substantial amounts to Saulius.
- The 'good' bits of Ukio were transferred to Saulius. That might include a call on the PBS security since land is one of the safest securities you can get and the £6.8m was presumably the market value at the time the security was raised.
- It's possible that Saulius don't hold enough of Ukio's total debt to influence the outcome of a vote, but it seems they do have enough of UBIG's.
- Thus, Saulius would block the sale of UBIG's shares and force liquidation of HoMFC (IA). In doing that they would lose a share of the £50k (or £100k) but gain a share of the correct market value of the PBS - if my second point is correct they'd gain the full £6.8m if it was sold for more than that.

I'm not saying that's how it is but it does seem like a possible scenario to me.

Thanks Cav, that sounds braw

[littleplum]

Thats exactly what he is saying, basically 2.5 million and they own the pbs. He said as there is a growing concern that liquidation will happen, they could find themselves in the bottom tier with no stadium. If there is no chance of getting those 50% shares, and a worry that liquidation could take time and raise the price of the pbs beyond 2.5 million it does make sense!

I see what you mean (even though they're currently telling us that the land is next to worthless and £2m is overpaying if anything).

Paragraph 5.3 of the CVA proposal says "The offer is subject to the FoH entering into a formal Sale and Purchase Agreement (SPA) with the majority shareholders (BAB UB and UBIG) for the transfer of the majority shareholdings to FoH, and the terms of the said SPA are acceptable to the Secured Creditor. If any material change in the circumstances arises (outside the scope of this CVA), then any party to the agreement will be entitled to withdraw from the proposed SPA."

That seems to me to say that you can't have the CVA without UBIG's shares.

[CyberSauzee]

BDO have to do everything they can to keep HMFC going and try to get the CVA approved and only if the CVA is kicked in to touch by the Lith's or they are unable to get the frozen shares (Portsmouth situation)or more importantly they run out of money .
The way things are going I think the lack of funds could seal there destiny,

Weststanwanabe posted up a link in this thread back on 5th Feb:

http://www.hibs.net/showthread.php?158395-Financial-Meltdown-UBIG-shares-STILL-FROZEN-More-Delays-BDO-Preparing-For-Liquidation&p=3898103&viewfull=1#post3898103

It's the admin's progress report dated 30 Jan 2014. The link:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/204800547/2014-01-31-BDO-Creditors-Report

Scroll down to the third scanned page and you'll see:


The delivery of shareholdings held by BAB Ukio Bankas and UBIG may also be dependent on the approval of the respective creditors of each of the bankrupt estates and/or the Lithuanian Court, under the law of Lithuania

[CropleyWasGod]

I see what you mean (even though they're currently telling us that the land is next to worthless and £2m is overpaying if anything).

Paragraph 5.3 of the CVA proposal says "The offer is subject to the FoH entering into a formal Sale and Purchase Agreement (SPA) with the majority shareholders (BAB UB and UBIG) for the transfer of the majority shareholdings to FoH, and the terms of the said SPA are acceptable to the Secured Creditor. If any material change in the circumstances arises (outside the scope of this CVA), then any party to the agreement will be entitled to withdraw from the proposed SPA."

That seems to me to say that you can't have the CVA without UBIG's shares.

Absolutely.

What would be the point otherwise?

[Ozyhibby]

I see what you mean (even though they're currently telling us that the land is next to worthless and £2m is overpaying if anything).

Paragraph 5.3 of the CVA proposal says "The offer is subject to the FoH entering into a formal Sale and Purchase Agreement (SPA) with the majority shareholders (BAB UB and UBIG) for the transfer of the majority shareholdings to FoH, and the terms of the said SPA are acceptable to the Secured Creditor. If any material change in the circumstances arises (outside the scope of this CVA), then any party to the agreement will be entitled to withdraw from the proposed SPA."

That seems to me to say that you can't have the CVA without UBIG's shares.

The fact that Budge or BIDCO are not mentioned here is also a possible reason for scuppering the deal.

[greenginger]

The fact that Budge or BIDCO are not mentioned here is also a possible reason for scuppering the deal.


Not in practical terms. The CVA would transfer Yam ownership to FoH and immediately they would make a transfer to Bidco when they would release the funds to the Lith. admin.

Where it could have come apart is the idea that it was OK for the Lith. admin to give a special reduced cost deal to a not for profit fans group but would baulk at doing the deal with a Multi-Millionaire like Anne Budge.

[littleplum]

Absolutely.

What would be the point otherwise?

I think HFCDaveA is saying the journalist is suggesting it as a way of securing the stadium before liquidation rather than letting it go on the open market.

But it would appear that for once a journalist seems to have got his facts wrong...

[Mikey09]

The fact that Budge or BIDCO are not mentioned here is also a possible reason for scuppering the deal.

BOLLOCKS!!!! That was gonna be my first decent post on all of this as I don't have the brain power of CWG, Bajillions, Sergey etc and you beat me to it! Away to greet.....

[scott7_0(Prague)]

They Deid Yet?

[bighairyfaeleith]

They Deid Yet?

nope, that fine grand old slag of scottish football appears to still be making the odd wriggling movement, another good hard kick and it should be over though!!

[greenginger]

Passed by the PBS earlier this morning and Budgie's car was in the Yam car park, two hours later its still there.

Big business , or was on the pash last night and had to leave her wheels. :greengrin

[greenpaper55]

Passed by the PBS earlier this morning and Budgie's car was in the Yam car park, two hours later its still there.

Big business , or was on the pash last night and had to leave her wheels. :greengrin

She's moving her stuff out of the office before it gets sold off !.

[CyberSauzee]

Passed by the PBS earlier this morning and Budgie's car was in the Yam car park, two hours later its still there.

Big business , or was on the pash last night and had to leave her wheels. :greengrin


Was the purple one drinking from the purple tin last night? Pishhy Breeks must have put her on to them. I saw him this morning as I passed by Parliament Square. I've no idea if his sombre demeanour was through drink or despair?

12345

[Brunswickbill]

Passed by the PBS earlier this morning and Budgie's car was in the Yam car park, two hours later its still there.

Big business , or was on the pash last night and had to leave her wheels. :greengrin

Probably got this thread up on a big screen in their board room and working on their Plan B(asement)

[MurrayfieldHibs]

They Deid Yet?

No they are like that last turd floater that you keep on flushing but it never goes down the u-bend.

[Sergey]

It was only a matter of time until June was mentioned...


A Roaster wrote

We won't be exiting administration on 28th April. Assuming Monday's meeting goes our way, there is a 20 day cooling off period. At that point we will be closer to exiting administration but not quite there. The paperwork for the deal between BIDCO and Ukio will have to be finalised, money will have to change hands and all the legal niceties will have to be completed. However BDO should be in a position to put STs up for sale and FoH can start funding the working capital from that date.

Even after that, BDO will have to petition the Court of Session to enable us to formally exit administration. I'm not sure of the timescales but it will probably be well into May or the start of June before the club is free to trade normally. I'd guess that BDO's (and Ukio's) aim will be to exit administration by 18th June at the latest, as that is when BDO's fixed fee deal expires.

[Mikey]

Apologies for the delay. Here is the reply, copied verbatim!

___________

It is delayed but nothing other than Lithuanian Authorities being slow in doing things.

That BALLOONS OR WHATEVER HE IS called is a pure BS. Trust me. Him and Sergey are making out that there is trouble over in Lithuania when all it is that in the scheme of things Hearts are not a big priority to sort in the overall mess.

I was at a meeting 2 weeks ago where it was leaked by Bryan Jackson (not sure why it couldn’t be announced) that it will be April but not sure if start or the end of April. We have enough money to last until May without season tickets but FOH have £1.3m in the bank that they are willing to use.

Bryan Jackson was in Lithuania last week trying to speed things along.


The Lithuanians are slow in doing things? Aye, it's always someone else's fault :greengrin

What happens if they're so slow that the money dries up, the FOH money dries up, the season ticket money dries up and they start next season on minus 15?

As for his latest timescales, I've put this in the diary for April 30th :wink:

Cheers for that :aok:


It was only a matter of time until June was mentioned...

That doesn't sound good for our pal. I wonder how good he is at organising boycotts :dunno:

[Dashing Bob S]

It was only a matter of time until June was mentioned...

Again, I'm sensing bet-hedging. The year has not been specified.

I've a more sensible plan: exit administration this month.


(Through liquidation, of course.)

[Keith_M]

There has been a lot of talk on what would and would not be allowed to be built on the site of Tynecastle. Some Hearts fans are clinging to "but it's in a blast zone, so there'd be no planning permission for flats" or "Edinburgh Council wouldn't allow a change of use".


One simple solution to answer this query would surely be to guage the opinion of the council on this matter, so let's do that, as they've already produced a rather detailed document on the matter :wink:

----------------------------------

"A number of significant redevelopment opportunities exist in the Gorgie area as a result of the possible reorganisation and relocation of various activities."

....Who could they be referring to, I wonder

"The Plan’s policies generally support new housing on sites suitable for redevelopment and covered by this designation, as well as business uses, compatible with a housing area,"

...Hmmmm.

"Archaeology
4.3 While there is considered to be little of archaeological interest in the area,"

.....I wouldn't say that, what about Tynecastle Main Stand, and the attitudes of its residents?

"Control of Major Accident Hazards (COMAH)
4.5 New development within the area, including changes of use, is constrained by the industrial operations of NBDC and Macfarlan Smith Ltd."

....Oh dear, a spanner in the works? No re-development allowed?

"The CDs associated with the operations of Macfarlan Smith presently extend 440m around each of the 3 installations located within their site. The effect of which is to impose constraints on new development on sites within the distillery, on part of the football stadium and most of Tynecastle High School"

...sorry, did you say MOST of the High school but only PART of the stadium? You mean there could be a possible difference in value of both plots of land, explaining why the school sold for a very low price?

Could you explain the difference?

"....the existing high school (inner zone), the majority of the football stadium (inner, middle and outer zones), and...."

Sorry, did you mention zones? For example, what wouldn't be allowed in the inner zone?

"developments for use by the general public, vulnerable people (hospitals, nursing homes, crèches and schools) and large and sensitive developments, including large sports stadia."

....Sports stadia not allowed? Surely not!

What about what would be allowed in the middle and outer zones, most of the current stadium land, in terms of housing? Middle Zone first...

"as inner zone, plus developments for use by the general public: including houses/flats – of up to and including 30 dwelling units and at a density of no more than 40 per hectare. Retail, community & adult education and assembly and leisure use"

....retail, housing and flats? really?

....what about the outer zone?

"as inner and middle zones, plus qualified support for institutional accommodation and education"

....institutional Accomodation you say? Like Old Folks Homes or high density student flats, perhaps?

I just read an article that mentioned that any site close to the new Tram Line could rocket in value. Just how close IS this area to that line?

"Tram Line 2 passes within 500m of the area covered by the development brief."

....Wow! That IS close!

If hearts DID leave the site, and it is re-developed, what provision would have to be made in such an event? For example, to remove all trace of the previous inhabitants?

"...a broader approach to the provision of water and drainage facilities may be required, including consideration of a combined on-site treatment facility to serve the wider area prior to discharge to combined sewers."

Amen to that Brother!

----------------------------

Full Document available HERE (http://www.edinburgh.gov.uk/downloads/file/1886/tynecastle)

[HibeeMassive]

There has been a lot of talk on what would and would not be allowed to be built on the site of Tynecastle. Some Hearts fans are clinging to "but it's in a blast zone, so there'd be no planning permission for flats" or "Edinburgh Council wouldn't allow a change of use".


One simple solution to answer this query would surely be to guage the opinion of the council on this matter, so let's do that, as they've already produced a rather detailed document on the matter :wink:

----------------------------------

"A number of significant redevelopment opportunities exist in the Gorgie area as a result of the possible reorganisation and relocation of various activities."

....Who could they be referring to, I wonder

"The Plan’s policies generally support new housing on sites suitable for redevelopment and covered by this designation, as well as business uses, compatible with a housing area,"

...Hmmmm.

"Archaeology
4.3 While there is considered to be little of archaeological interest in the area,"

.....I wouldn't say that.

"Control of Major Accident Hazards (COMAH)
4.5 New development within the area, including changes of use, is constrained by the industrial operations of NBDC and Macfarlan Smith Ltd."

....Oh dear, a spanner in the works? No re-development allowed?

"The CDs associated with the operations of Macfarlan Smith presently extend 440m around each of the 3 installations located within their site. The effect of which is to impose constraints on new development on sites within the distillery, on part of the football stadium and most of Tynecastle High School"

...sorry, did you say MOST of the High school but only PART of the stadium? You mean there could be a possible difference in value of both plots of land, explaining why the school sold for a very low price?

Could you explain the difference?

"....the existing high school (inner zone), the majority of the football stadium (inner, middle and outer zones), and...."

Sorry, did you mention zones? For example, what wouldn't be allowed in the inner zone?

"developments for use by the general public, vulnerable people (hospitals, nursing homes, crèches and schools) and large and sensitive developments, including large sports stadia."

....Sports stadia not allowed? Surely not!

What about what would be allowed in the middle and outer zones, most of the current stadium land, in terms of housing? Middle Zone first...

"as inner zone, plus developments for use by the general public: including houses/flats – of up to and including 30 dwelling units and at a density of no more than 40 per hectare. Retail, community & adult education and assembly and leisure use"

....retail, housing and flats? really?

....what about the outer zone?

"as inner and middle zones, plus qualified support for institutional accommodation and education"

....institutional Accomodation you say? Like Old Folks Homes or high density student flats, perhaps?

I just read an article that mentioned that any site close to the new Tram Line could rocket in value. Just how close IS this area to that line?

"Tram Line 2 passes within 500m of the area covered by the development brief."

....Wow! That IS close!

If hearts DID leave the site, and it is re-developed, what provision would have to be made in such and event? For example, to remove all trace of the previous inhabitants?

"...a broader approach to the provision of water and drainage facilities may be required, including consideration of a combined on-site treatment facility to serve the wider area prior to discharge to combined sewers."

Amen to that Brother!

----------------------------

Full Document available HERE (http://www.edinburgh.gov.uk/downloads/file/1886/tynecastle)


:greengrin I'm sensing you enjoyed putting that post together

[Keith_M]

:greengrin I'm sensing you enjoyed putting that post together


What makes you say that?


:greengrin

[greenginger]

That development brief is dated May 2004 and there has been a lot of Litas down the drain since then.

The extent of the COMAH zone has already been reduced by the construction of a blast wall by the Distillery. This was confirmed to me yesterday by the City Estates Department, but they could not give me an up-to-date plan.

The recent purchase of the old Tynecastle school by the Distillery to be developed as their admin. offices will also involve the relocation of the ethanol tanks to the other side of their site.

This could result in the entire PBS being outside the Zone.

I don't think any Yams would be keen on this information coming into the open in the near future. :greengrin

[Moulin Yarns]

[QUOTE=keekaboo;3954758]
One simple solution to answer this query would surely be to guage the opinion of the council on this matter, so let's do that, as they've already produced a rather detailed document on the matter :wink:

Funnily enough, I was talking about this with my manager, a Planner, this morning. I said about the value of the prime site close to Edinburgh City Centre, but he countered with the Scottish Planning Policy that sports facilities would not be removed "Provided there is shown to be a need for them". Now, we could argue all day that there isn't a need for Tynecastle in the Lower levels of Scottish Football, but then Sevco kept Ibrox and there was seen to be a need for it. It would require The Newhearts, if they exist, to have another home before the piggery could be developed, although, I asked, what about Meadowbank, which apparently is not much smaller capacity than the piggery.

I don't want to be negative, but there may well be obstacles to developing Tynecastle while they still exist.

[green glory]

That development brief is dated May 2004 and there has been a lot of Litas down the drain since then. The extent of the COMAH zone has already been reduced by the construction of a blast wall by the Distillery. This was confirmed to me yesterday by the City Estates Department, but they could not give me an up-to-date plan. The recent purchase of the old Tynecastle school by the Distillery to be developed as their admin. offices will also involve the relocation of the ethanol tanks to the other side of their site. This could result in the entire PBS being outside the Zone. I don't think any Yams would be keen on this information coming into the open in the near future. :greengrin

They probably wouldn't be too keen if you accidentally copied and pasted that info and it accidentally found its way to another European country, I dunno, say Lithuania?

[Sergey]

They probably wouldn't be too keen if you accidentally copied and pasted that info and it accidentally found its way to another European country, I dunno, say Lithuania?

It's already been done weeks ago.

[Keith_M]

That development brief is dated May 2004 and there has been a lot of Litas down the drain since then.

The extent of the COMAH zone has already been reduced by the construction of a blast wall by the Distillery. This was confirmed to me yesterday by the City Estates Department, but they could not give me an up-to-date plan.

The recent purchase of the old Tynecastle school by the Distillery to be developed as their admin. offices will also involve the relocation of the ethanol tanks to the other side of their site.

This could result in the entire PBS being outside the Zone.

I don't think any Yams would be keen on this information coming into the open in the near future. :greengrin


Very true, and you would have thought some enterprising journalist would have found it by now, considering its relevance to Hearts future.

The point is, it clearly establishes the long held viewpoint of the council as to what would and would not be allowed on the site. The only material difference in the intevening years is that development has become less restricted, due to the changes you mention.


However, I already know the answers of the Ostriches (my replies included):


That document's auld, disnae apply anymore -- Prove it!

The land value has plummeted in the 10 years since -- Nowhere in the document does it mention land value, only what would and would not be allowed to be built. It still kills your 'Nae development allowed' argument.

But, but, dangerous gas explosions! -- I'm not interested in your personal problems mate.

Jealous Hobo, Wee team, 1902, 5-1 --You just lost the argument, ya plum!

[Sergio sledge]

There has been a lot of talk on what would and would not be allowed to be built on the site of Tynecastle. Some Hearts fans are clinging to "but it's in a blast zone, so there'd be no planning permission for flats" or "Edinburgh Council wouldn't allow a change of use".


One simple solution to answer this query would surely be to guage the opinion of the council on this matter, so let's do that, as they've already produced a rather detailed document on the matter :wink:

----------------------------------

"A number of significant redevelopment opportunities exist in the Gorgie area as a result of the possible reorganisation and relocation of various activities."

....Who could they be referring to, I wonder

"The Plan’s policies generally support new housing on sites suitable for redevelopment and covered by this designation, as well as business uses, compatible with a housing area,"

...Hmmmm.

"Archaeology
4.3 While there is considered to be little of archaeological interest in the area,"

.....I wouldn't say that.

"Control of Major Accident Hazards (COMAH)
4.5 New development within the area, including changes of use, is constrained by the industrial operations of NBDC and Macfarlan Smith Ltd."

....Oh dear, a spanner in the works? No re-development allowed?

"The CDs associated with the operations of Macfarlan Smith presently extend 440m around each of the 3 installations located within their site. The effect of which is to impose constraints on new development on sites within the distillery, on part of the football stadium and most of Tynecastle High School"

...sorry, did you say MOST of the High school but only PART of the stadium? You mean there could be a possible difference in value of both plots of land, explaining why the school sold for a very low price?

Could you explain the difference?

"....the existing high school (inner zone), the majority of the football stadium (inner, middle and outer zones), and...."

Sorry, did you mention zones? For example, what wouldn't be allowed in the inner zone?

"developments for use by the general public, vulnerable people (hospitals, nursing homes, crèches and schools) and large and sensitive developments, including large sports stadia."

....Sports stadia not allowed? Surely not!

What about what would be allowed in the middle and outer zones, most of the current stadium land, in terms of housing? Middle Zone first...

"as inner zone, plus developments for use by the general public: including houses/flats – of up to and including 30 dwelling units and at a density of no more than 40 per hectare. Retail, community & adult education and assembly and leisure use"

....retail, housing and flats? really?

....what about the outer zone?

"as inner and middle zones, plus qualified support for institutional accommodation and education"

....institutional Accomodation you say? Like Old Folks Homes or high density student flats, perhaps?

I just read an article that mentioned that any site close to the new Tram Line could rocket in value. Just how close IS this area to that line?

"Tram Line 2 passes within 500m of the area covered by the development brief."

....Wow! That IS close!

If hearts DID leave the site, and it is re-developed, what provision would have to be made in such an event? For example, to remove all trace of the previous inhabitants?

"...a broader approach to the provision of water and drainage facilities may be required, including consideration of a combined on-site treatment facility to serve the wider area prior to discharge to combined sewers."

Amen to that Brother!

----------------------------

Full Document available HERE (http://www.edinburgh.gov.uk/downloads/file/1886/tynecastle)

:aok: I'll add what I posted in post #15619 (http://www.hibs.net/showthread.php?158395-Financial-Meltdown-UBIG-shares-STILL-FROZEN-More-Delays-BDO-Preparing-For-Liquidation&p=3618011&viewfull=1#post3618011) in this thread.


the report produced for HoMFC and the council states:

"Under this site specific risk assessment of the ethanol storage, the majority of the site falls out with the consultation zones arising from a major event in the ethanol storage tanks. Our assessment concludes that the effects of a major accident hazard in the ethanol storage tanks to be acceptable and should not therefore place a restriction on any re-development of the majority of the site. It is recommended that the club officials discuss the findings of this report with the local planning authority."

Basically, whilst the exclusion zone covers most of Tynecastle at present, this is based on the zone being taken from the edge of the distillery site, and not the specific risk within the distillery site (the ethanol tanks) if the zone is taken from the risk within the distillery site, then the majority of Tynecastle is out with the exclusion zone and could be redeveloped for any use. This could be used by a developer to support any development they wanted. At the time of this report, HoMFC themselves stated that the site would be worth around £8m-£10m on the open market, so I would imagine the administrator of UKIO will be looking to fully satisfy the £6.8m security they have over the ground. The FOH or whoever wishes to bid will have to come up with at least that much to get the club.

Also this post contains a bit more info from the report: #15664 (http://www.hibs.net/showthread.php?158395-Financial-Meltdown-UBIG-shares-STILL-FROZEN-More-Delays-BDO-Preparing-For-Liquidation&p=3618316&viewfull=1#post3618316)

You can read the full joint CEC and HOMFC report on stadium redevelopment here (http://www.edinburgh.gov.uk/downloads/file/6125/report_on_stadium_options_for_heart_of_midlothan_f %20ootball_club) in case anyone wants to.

[Sergey]

You can read the full joint CEC and HOMFC report on stadium redevelopment here (http://www.edinburgh.gov.uk/downloads/file/6125/report_on_stadium_options_for_heart_of_midlothan_f %20ootball_club) in case anyone wants to.

Excellent, Sergio - That document has a COMAH restrictions map that I've been asked for. I couldn't find it anywhere :aok:

[JeMeSouviens]

:aok: I'll add what I posted in post You can read the full joint CEC and HOMFC report on stadium redevelopment here (http://www.edinburgh.gov.uk/downloads/file/6125/report_on_stadium_options_for_heart_of_midlothan_f %20ootball_club) in case anyone wants to.



Key pic- site specific assessment of the COMAH zone. The COMAH zone in the 2004 pic covers most of the site, not so in the 2011 version. :wink:

http://home2.btconnect.com/anniviers/tiny.jpg

[Just Alf]

Key pic- site specific assessment of the COMAH zone. The COMAH zone in the 2004 pic covers most of the site, not so in the 2011 version. :wink:

http://home2.btconnect.com/anniviers/tiny.jpg

Yes. This is the one I've shared a couple of times... A couple of other things to take into account.

This plan is as it stood when the south tank was in use. And also the current plan is to shift the north tank which is currently in use to allow full development of the old school site.

[Just Alf]

What I'm trying to say is that even this small impact is actually already reduced and will disappear totally in future.

[StevieC]

http://home2.btconnect.com/anniviers/tiny.jpg

I hadn't realised there was that much land. Looks to be an excellent development opportunity if it became available, especially with good access available at both sides of the land.

That said, there probably would be a lot of hurdles to overcome for change of use, and I can't see there being too many bids whilst HoMFC are still resident.

[green glory]

I hadn't realised there was that much land. Looks to be an excellent development opportunity if it became available, especially with good access available at both sides of the land. That said, there probably would be a lot of hurdles to overcome for change of use, and I can't see there being too many bids whilst HoMFC are still resident.

I know there's a cracking view of the castle from the top of the Roseburn Stand, about level with where my future balcony might be.

Lovely in the summer with an ice cold Crabbie's.

:-)

[Moulin Yarns]

I hadn't realised there was that much land. Looks to be an excellent development opportunity if it became available, especially with good access available at both sides of the land.

That said, there probably would be a lot of hurdles to overcome for change of use, and I can't see there being too many bids whilst HoMFC are still resident.

As my manager (Town Planner) hinted at, there is a presumption that sports facilities would be retained under the Scottish Planning Policy while there is shown to be a need for them. However, if the club dies, so does the need for the facility. In my mind it will depend on how quickly the ground can be sold and how soon the phoenix can rise from the ashes.

Phoenix rises first then the ground might survive, but if the ground can be sold before the phoenix rises then the obstacle would be removed.

[Waxy]

I know there's a cracking view of the castle from the top of the Roseburn Stand, about level with where my future balcony might be.

Lovely in the summer with an ice cold Crabbie's.

:-)There is also a cracking view of the castle from the skyline restaurant at the top of the new main stand.

[Ozyhibby]

Any news on whether these meetings are going ahead on Monday?

[Hibby Kay-Yay]

As my manager (Town Planner) hinted at, there is a presumption that sports facilities would be retained under the Scottish Planning Policy while there is shown to be a need for them. However, if the club dies, so does the need for the facility. In my mind it will depend on how quickly the ground can be sold and how soon the phoenix can rise from the ashes.

Phoenix rises first then the ground might survive, but if the ground can be sold before the phoenix rises then the obstacle would be removed.

One point, how would said Phoenix acquire the stadium?

[Moulin Yarns]

One point, how would said Phoenix acquire the stadium?


If the phoenix rises and the ground is still on the market then it could be bought by them..

[Just Alf]

As my manager (Town Planner) hinted at, there is a presumption that sports facilities would be retained under the Scottish Planning Policy while there is shown to be a need for them. However, if the club dies, so does the need for the facility. In my mind it will depend on how quickly the ground can be sold and how soon the phoenix can rise from the ashes.

Phoenix rises first then the ground might survive, but if the ground can be sold before the phoenix rises then the obstacle would be removed.

GF he's no a yam by any chance?

That particular planning rule applies to sports facilities used by the community (to keep us all fit etc) so protects public parks etc etc, it's pivotal in the arguments around the new Porty high school. Unfortunately for the yams I don't think they hire the pitch out.... Oh well. :D

[Hibby Kay-Yay]

If the phoenix rises and the ground is still on the market then it could be bought by them..

Would the ground be on the open market purely as a Sports Arena or could it be sold on a different class? Giving that Cala Homes came close to acquiring it previously.

[Moulin Yarns]

GF he's no a yam by any chance?

That particular planning rule applies to sports facilities used by the community (to keep us all fit etc) so protects public parks etc etc, it's pivotal in the arguments around the new Porty high school. Unfortunately for the yams I don't think they hire the pitch out.... Oh well. :D


A saint Johnstone fan. I know!!

[Just Alf]

A saint Johnstone fan. I know!!

:D

[Moulin Yarns]

I haven't looked at the Local Development Plan for Edinburgh but it will be more up to date than when Cala almost bought the Piggery. My boss was heavily involved with the ldp for Perth so has a better idea of the Planning law.

[Seveno]

As my manager (Town Planner) hinted at, there is a presumption that sports facilities would be retained under the Scottish Planning Policy while there is shown to be a need for them. However, if the club dies, so does the need for the facility. In my mind it will depend on how quickly the ground can be sold and how soon the phoenix can rise from the ashes.

Phoenix rises first then the ground might survive, but if the ground can be sold before the phoenix rises then the obstacle would be removed.

Would the definition of sporting facilities not refer to facilities for public use i.e. participation rather than spectating ?

[The Falcon]

Not in practical terms. The CVA would transfer Yam ownership to FoH and immediately they would make a transfer to Bidco when they would release the funds to the Lith. admin.

Where it could have come apart is the idea that it was OK for the Lith. admin to give a special reduced cost deal to a not for profit fans group but would baulk at doing the deal with a Multi-Millionaire like Anne Budge.


Just to recap


FOH purchase HMFC (lock stock) from the Lithuanians (using BIDCO's £2.5m (less fees)) then immediately transfer ownership to BIDCO having already agreed to purchase club back from BIDCO in installments totaling £6.3m?

Why on earth would the Lith's not go for that? No brainer.

[Waxy]

Just to recap


FOH purchase HMFC (lock stock) from the Lithuanians (using BIDCO's £2.5m) then immediately transfer ownership to BIDCO having already agreed to purchase club back from BIDCO in installments totaling £6.3m?

Why on earth would the Lith's not go for that? No brainer.It really does look like the big L.They must only blame themselves.

[Col2]

So 24 hours until end of business week and therefore all things in place (or not) for Monday.......one of he most important moments in HOMFC history......

....and what are the most popular and recent threads on Kickback? Well the top 12 have no mention of Lithuanian events and in fact are dedicated to Boycott ER, Ben Williams, Garry Oconner, new home strip, various stuff.

JayJay (chief spanner) has popped up from hiding to tell everyone that its in the bag, BDO playing a blinder, its all a front etc etc etc. Trumpets. Hope your ****ty little club dies and you have to start again.

[Ronniekirk]

So 24 hours until end of business week and therefore all things in place (or not) for Monday.......one of he most important moments in HOMFC history......

....and what are the most popular and recent threads on Kickback? Well the top 12 have no mention of Lithuanian events and in fact are dedicated to Boycott ER, Ben Williams, Garry Oconner, new home strip, various stuff.

JayJay (chief spanner) has popped up from hiding to tell everyone that its in the bag, BDO playing a blinder, its all a front etc etc etc. Trumpets. Hope your ****ty little club dies and you have to start again.

It's either supreme confidence that all will be Barry when the rubber stamp gets to work on Monday and green for go texts start circulating as the Famous Memorandum of Understanding becomes Something more and they outline process and timescale to come out of admin with defrosted shares or Thier in complete Denial and have taken an oath not to mention it as they further Delude themselves Let's see what Next Tuesday brings As by then they could be Relegated and heading for the Big L

[Jim44]

So 24 hours until end of business week and therefore all things in place (or not) for Monday.......one of he most important moments in HOMFC history......

....and what are the most popular and recent threads on Kickback? Well the top 12 have no mention of Lithuanian events and in fact are dedicated to Boycott ER, Ben Williams, Garry Oconner, new home strip, various stuff.

JayJay (chief spanner) has popped up from hiding to tell everyone that its in the bag, BDO playing a blinder, its all a front etc etc etc. Trumpets. Hope your ****ty little club dies and you have to start again.

There's very little of consequence being discussed over there because they're all over here, either seething at what we're saying or getting some reliable slant on the situation. :na na:

[happiehibbie]

o 24 hours until end of business week and therefore all things in place (or not) for Monday.......one of he most important moments in HOMFC history......

....and what are the most popular and recent threads on Kickback? Well the top 12 have no mention of Lithuanian events and in fact are dedicated to Boycott ER, Ben Williams, Garry Oconner, new home strip, various stuff.

JayJay (chief spanner) has popped up from hiding to tell everyone that its in the bag, BDO playing a blinder, its all a front etc etc etc. Trumpets. Hope your ****ty little club dies and you have to start again.




I heard the exact same thing said to me its all a front its in the bag

[johnrebus]

I haven't looked at the Local Development Plan for Edinburgh but it will be more up to date than when Cala almost bought the Piggery. My boss was heavily involved with the ldp for Perth so has a better idea of the Planning law.


If you're boss's initials are TK, then he used to be a Hibbie......,


:cb

[bighairyfaeleith]

So if the vote on Monday goes against them, or gets delayed they are basically liquidated. So BDO are going to have to spin it somehow to justify continuing on until the end of the season.

By rights should they not just liquidate them on tuesday?

[The Falcon]

If you're boss's initials are TK, then he used to be a Hibbie......,


:cb


Like a lot on this board...............................:stirrer:

[Seveno]

I can imagine them in a year's time, climbing over the wall to get into an even more decrepit PBS, sitting in their old seat and looking down at a field of long grass and weeds. In their tiny minds, the Famous are out there playing Barcelona in the Champions League.

[clerriehibs]

I can imagine them in a year's time, climbing over the wall to get into an even more decrepit PBS, sitting in their old seat and looking down at a field of long grass and weeds. In their tiny minds, the Famous are out there playing Barcelona in the Champions League.

Actually, going by the state of Cathkin Park, the piggery might actually improve with a bit of neglect ...



12347

[Brunswickbill]

From Scottish Planning Policy

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2010/02/03132605/0


Playing Fields


156. Playing fields are an important resource for sport and should be provided in sufficient quantity, quality and accessibility to satisfy current and likely future community demand. Local authorities are expected to develop a playing fields strategy in consultation with sportscotland as part of the wider open space strategy. Playing fields, including those within educational establishments, which are required to meet existing or future needs should be identified in the local development plan. Playing fields and sports pitches should not be redeveloped except where:


the proposed development is ancillary to the principal use of the site as a playing field,
the proposed development involves a minor part of the playing field which would not affect its use and potential for sport and training,
the playing field which would be lost would be replaced by a new playing field of comparable or greater benefit for sport and in a location which is convenient for its users, or by the upgrading of an existing playing field to provide a better quality facility either within the same site or at another location which is convenient for its users and which maintains or improves the overall playing capacity in the area, or
a playing field strategy prepared in consultation with sportscotland has demonstrated that there is a clear excess of sports pitches to meet current and anticipated future demand in the area, and that the site could be developed without detriment to the overall quality of provision.


157. Where a playing field is no longer required for formal sports use, planning authorities should consider whether the site has other recreational, amenity, landscape or biodiversity value which would warrant its retention as open space. Circular 7/2007 sets out the circumstances under which SportScotland should be consulted on planning applications.


158. Where, through a local facility strategy or playing field strategy, a need has been identified for new indoor or outdoor sports or recreation facilities in an area, the local development plan should identify sites where they can be located. For many sports and recreation developments locations within or close to residential areas will be the most appropriate.


It's primarily aimed at public sports pitches but it could be used to stand in the way of redevelopment. particularly by yam councillors on the planning committee. Not insurmountable IMHO

[Iggy Pope]

From Scottish Planning Policy

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2010/02/03132605/0


Playing Fields


156. Playing fields are an important resource for sport and should be provided in sufficient quantity, quality and accessibility to satisfy current and likely future community demand. Local authorities are expected to develop a playing fields strategy in consultation with sportscotland as part of the wider open space strategy. Playing fields, including those within educational establishments, which are required to meet existing or future needs should be identified in the local development plan. Playing fields and sports pitches should not be redeveloped except where:


the proposed development is ancillary to the principal use of the site as a playing field,
the proposed development involves a minor part of the playing field which would not affect its use and potential for sport and training,
the playing field which would be lost would be replaced by a new playing field of comparable or greater benefit for sport and in a location which is convenient for its users, or by the upgrading of an existing playing field to provide a better quality facility either within the same site or at another location which is convenient for its users and which maintains or improves the overall playing capacity in the area, or
a playing field strategy prepared in consultation with sportscotland has demonstrated that there is a clear excess of sports pitches to meet current and anticipated future demand in the area, and that the site could be developed without detriment to the overall quality of provision.


157. Where a playing field is no longer required for formal sports use, planning authorities should consider whether the site has other recreational, amenity, landscape or biodiversity value which would warrant its retention as open space. Circular 7/2007 sets out the circumstances under which SportScotland should be consulted on planning applications.


158. Where, through a local facility strategy or playing field strategy, a need has been identified for new indoor or outdoor sports or recreation facilities in an area, the local development plan should identify sites where they can be located. For many sports and recreation developments locations within or close to residential areas will be the most appropriate.


It's primarily aimed at public sports pitches but it could be used to stand in the way of redevelopment. particularly by yam councillors on the planning committee. Not insurmountable IMHO

If it is indeed a playing field does anyone fancy a 10-21 on it?
Sunday. Half 2. Tims against Billys.

[Waxy]

Actually, going by the state of Cathkin Park, the piggery might actually improve with a bit of neglect ...



12347This football ground is where Hibs became the first Edinburgh club to lift the Scottish cup in 1887. Early morning fact.

[dangermouse]

From Scottish Planning Policy

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2010/02/03132605/0


Playing Fields


156. Playing fields are an important resource for sport and should be provided in sufficient quantity, quality and accessibility to satisfy current and likely future community demand. Local authorities are expected to develop a playing fields strategy in consultation with sportscotland as part of the wider open space strategy. Playing fields, including those within educational establishments, which are required to meet existing or future needs should be identified in the local development plan. Playing fields and sports pitches should not be redeveloped except where:


the proposed development is ancillary to the principal use of the site as a playing field,
the proposed development involves a minor part of the playing field which would not affect its use and potential for sport and training,
the playing field which would be lost would be replaced by a new playing field of comparable or greater benefit for sport and in a location which is convenient for its users, or by the upgrading of an existing playing field to provide a better quality facility either within the same site or at another location which is convenient for its users and which maintains or improves the overall playing capacity in the area, or
a playing field strategy prepared in consultation with sportscotland has demonstrated that there is a clear excess of sports pitches to meet current and anticipated future demand in the area, and that the site could be developed without detriment to the overall quality of provision.


157. Where a playing field is no longer required for formal sports use, planning authorities should consider whether the site has other recreational, amenity, landscape or biodiversity value which would warrant its retention as open space. Circular 7/2007 sets out the circumstances under which SportScotland should be consulted on planning applications.


158. Where, through a local facility strategy or playing field strategy, a need has been identified for new indoor or outdoor sports or recreation facilities in an area, the local development plan should identify sites where they can be located. For many sports and recreation developments locations within or close to residential areas will be the most appropriate.


It's primarily aimed at public sports pitches but it could be used to stand in the way of redevelopment. particularly by yam councillors on the planning committee. Not insurmountable IMHO

But the piggery is not a local authority owned piece of land. It is owned by a business that could soon be liquidated so the liquidators will be within their rights to flog it off to whoever wants to buy it be that another football club or a property developer.

[Winston Ingram]

Key pic- site specific assessment of the COMAH zone. The COMAH zone in the 2004 pic covers most of the site, not so in the 2011 version. :wink:

http://home2.btconnect.com/anniviers/tiny.jpg

Does anyone else not find it a little strange that if these tanks were so dangerous, why on earth were kids allowed to attend a school right next to it for years?:confused:

[Greencore]

Is tynecastle a public listed building?

[Kato]

Is tynecastle a public convenience?

Yes

[Jim44]

Does anyone else not find it a little strange that if these tanks were so dangerous, why on earth were kids allowed to attend a school right next to it for years?:confused:

I'm guessing that it's the daft way that health and safety regulations work. The sometimes over-zealous and OTT regulations make a mockery of previous regulations and only appy to newbuild. How many times has a tradesmen or, say, a gas engineer, told you that something was nowadays technically illegal yet didn't have to be ripped out until redeveloped or replaced.

[Moulin Yarns]

But the piggery is not a local authority owned piece of land. It is owned by a business that could soon be liquidated so the liquidators will be within their rights to flog it off to whoever wants to buy it be that another football club or a property developer.


The Edinburgh Local Development Plan is the thing to read.

The relevant section http://217.174.251.127/dev/plans/eclp/chap5.htm#OS1


It says:

Policy Os 1 - Open Space Protection

Proposals involving the loss of open space will not be permitted unless it is demonstrated that:


there will be no significant impact on the quality or character of the local environment
the open space is a small part of a larger area or of limited amenity or leisure value and there is a significant over-provision of open space serving the immediate area and
the loss would not be detrimental to the wider network including its continuity or biodiversity value and either
there will be a local benefit in allowing the development in terms of either alternative equivalent provision being made or improvement to an existing public park or other open space or
the development is for a community purpose and the benefits to the local community outweigh the loss.


The policy seeks to protect all open spaces, both public and privately owned, which contribute to the amenity of their surroundings and the city, which provide or are capable of providing for the recreational needs of residents and visitors or which are an integral part of the city’s landscape and townscape character and its biodiversity. Many of the open spaces identified on the Proposals Map are covered by more than one designation, depending on their environmental quality and value to the community. It will be more important to protect open spaces in the future, as the population of parts of the city increases and brings added pressure on existing resources. The Council will only consider limited releases of open space to development in exceptional circumstances, where the loss would not result in detriment to the overall network or provision in the locality, and there are compensatory circumstances, such as scope for improving the quality of provision elsewhere in the network. Amenity areas in housing which have been provided with no clear purpose or sense of ownership might be considered for development, especially if a more comprehensive redevelopment of a wider area is in prospect and the resulting open space would be smaller in area but better in quality and usefulness.

Policy Os 2 - Playing Fields Protection

In addition to the requirements of Policy Os 1, the loss of some or all of a playing field or sports pitch will be permitted only where one of the following circumstances applies:


the proposed development is ancillary to the principal use of the site as a playing field
the proposed development involves a minor part of a playing field and would not adversely affect the use or potential of the remainder for sport and training
an alternative playing field is to be provided of at least equivalent sporting value in a no less convenient location, or existing provision is to be significantly improved to compensate for the loss
the Council is satisfied that there is a clear excess of sports pitches to meet current and anticipated future demand in the area, and the site can be developed without detriment to the overall quality of provision.


Playing field provision must be considered as a city-wide resource and in terms of its contribution to local needs. The Council’s assessment of provision in the city as a whole has concluded that the amount of pitches, whether or not in public ownership or publicly accessible, is equivalent to the need. However, about one third are substandard and would need to be improved. On this evaluation, the loss of pitches to development cannot be justified in principle. However, the loss might be acceptable if alternative equivalent provision is to be made in an equally convenient location. Development has been allowed where other pitches serving the local community are to be equipped with all-weather playing surfaces.

[Weststandwanab]

Is tynecastle a public listed building? Building is pushing it a bit


Yes I would not do a 1 or 2 there.

[lapsedhibee]

The Edinburgh Local Development Plan is the thing to read.

The relevant section http://217.174.251.127/dev/plans/eclp/chap5.htm#OS1


It says:

Policy Os 1 - Open Space Protection

Proposals involving the loss of open space will not be permitted unless it is demonstrated that:


there will be no significant impact on the quality or character of the local environment
the open space is a small part of a larger area or of limited amenity or leisure value and there is a significant over-provision of open space serving the immediate area and
the loss would not be detrimental to the wider network including its continuity or biodiversity value and either
there will be a local benefit in allowing the development in terms of either alternative equivalent provision being made or improvement to an existing public park or other open space or
the development is for a community purpose and the benefits to the local community outweigh the loss.


The policy seeks to protect all open spaces, both public and privately owned, which contribute to the amenity of their surroundings and the city, which provide or are capable of providing for the recreational needs of residents and visitors or which are an integral part of the city’s landscape and townscape character and its biodiversity. Many of the open spaces identified on the Proposals Map are covered by more than one designation, depending on their environmental quality and value to the community. It will be more important to protect open spaces in the future, as the population of parts of the city increases and brings added pressure on existing resources. The Council will only consider limited releases of open space to development in exceptional circumstances, where the loss would not result in detriment to the overall network or provision in the locality, and there are compensatory circumstances, such as scope for improving the quality of provision elsewhere in the network. Amenity areas in housing which have been provided with no clear purpose or sense of ownership might be considered for development, especially if a more comprehensive redevelopment of a wider area is in prospect and the resulting open space would be smaller in area but better in quality and usefulness.

Policy Os 2 - Playing Fields Protection

In addition to the requirements of Policy Os 1, the loss of some or all of a playing field or sports pitch will be permitted only where one of the following circumstances applies:


the proposed development is ancillary to the principal use of the site as a playing field
the proposed development involves a minor part of a playing field and would not adversely affect the use or potential of the remainder for sport and training
an alternative playing field is to be provided of at least equivalent sporting value in a no less convenient location, or existing provision is to be significantly improved to compensate for the loss
the Council is satisfied that there is a clear excess of sports pitches to meet current and anticipated future demand in the area, and the site can be developed without detriment to the overall quality of provision.


Playing field provision must be considered as a city-wide resource and in terms of its contribution to local needs. The Council’s assessment of provision in the city as a whole has concluded that the amount of pitches, whether or not in public ownership or publicly accessible, is equivalent to the need. However, about one third are substandard and would need to be improved. On this evaluation, the loss of pitches to development cannot be justified in principle. However, the loss might be acceptable if alternative equivalent provision is to be made in an equally convenient location. Development has been allowed where other pitches serving the local community are to be equipped with all-weather playing surfaces.

Would the PBS really be classed as "Open Space"? Anything but imo. (The reason that it has the best atmosphere in Europe is that it's poky and cramped.) I think if you can't see the grass from the road then it's a stretch to think of it as open space.

[Moulin Yarns]

Would the PBS really be classed as "Open Space"? Anything but imo. (The reason that it has the best atmosphere in Europe is that it's poky and cramped.) I think if you can't see the grass from the road then it's a stretch to think of it as open space.

ECC LDP says it is. For clarity, it applies to Easter Road, and all cemeteries as well.

[Jim44]

Is tynecastle a public listed building?

I don't know. Is it or did THIS (http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/hearts-fans-bid-give-tynecastle-2472901) go any further?

[lapsedhibee]

ECC LDP says it is. For clarity, it applies to Easter Road, and all cemeteries as well.

Ta. Cemeteries I get. PBS can shirley only be so classified as a result of historic yam presence in the decision-making. And ER shouldn't be protected on those grounds either imo.

[RickyS]

Would the PBS really be classed as "Open Space"? Anything but imo. (The reason that it has the best atmosphere in Europe is that it's poky and cramped.) I think if you can't see the grass from the road then it's a stretch to think of it as open space.


really?

[Off the bar]

really?

yeah and Celtic have the worlds best fans, a Celtic fan told me that.

[lapsedhibee]

really?

Whatever you think of the football club, with its shielding of beasts and poppy thieving, you can't deny that Tynecastle's a great sporting venue.

[RickyS]

Whatever you think of the football club, with its shielding of beasts and poppy thieving, you can't deny that Tynecastle's a great sporting venue.

each to their own mate but i ****ing hate the place, 100 stadiums i would rather go to (maybe thats green tinted glasses tho i dinny ken)

[Thecat23]

Whatever you think of the football club, with its shielding of beasts and poppy thieving, you can't deny that Tynecastle's a great sporting venue.

It's an absolute hole of a ground. Bar the derby games that place is a morgue and that's coming from my mate who is a season ticket holder. For example..ER was rocking last derby but it's far from a place with a good atmosphere. Trust me don't believe the hype about that shed.

[Leithenhibby]

Whatever you think of the football club, with its shielding of beasts and poppy thieving, you can't deny that Tynecastle's a great sporting venue.

You said "best in Europe" ;-)

My fat ar%e it is.......

[greenginger]

Whatever you think of the football club, with its shielding of beasts and poppy thieving, you can't deny that Tynecastle's a great sporting venue.


It would help if it was big enough to comply with UEFA standards.

[Albanian Hibs]

Whatever you think of the football club, with its shielding of beasts and poppy thieving, you can't deny that Tynecastle's a great sporting venue.

A great sporting venue haha! how do you come to that conclusion? And to whoever said it was the best n europe for the atmosphere...away ye go, its not even in the top 100. Its a dull, boring *****hole.

[Geo_1875]

Whatever you think of the football club, with its shielding of beasts and poppy thieving, you can't deny that Tynecastle's a great sporting venue.

I used to like going to Tynie even when they introduced segregation as it did have an atmosphere. However, what they now call atmosphere is bile and hatred hurled at close range to opposition players and management. Horrible place nearly filled with horrible people.

[Just Alf]

Is tynecastle a public listed building?

Nope.

There are no restrictions in place regarding knocking it down. The only thing any demolisher is required to do is to do a full photographic and measurement survey of the main stand prior to demolition.

edit: if that's what you meant... reading the following posts makes me think it might not be (what you meant) ! :confused:

[madsen5]

I used to like going to Tynie even when they introduced segregation as it did have an atmosphere. However, what they now call atmosphere is bile and hatred hurled at close range to opposition players and management. Horrible place nearly filled with horrible people.
It's a poisonous cesspit .

[Dashing Bob S]

Has Monday's creditors meeting actually been confirmed as taking place, (or even confirmed as cancelled?). Surely there would be some publicly available notice to either effect?

[Waxy]

Whatever you think of the football club, with its shielding of beasts and poppy thieving, you can't deny that Tynecastle's a great sporting venue.

Naaaaa it's a hole

[Kato]

Jambo myth being spread on that Mail story's comments that it was Hearts fans who stood up to Mercer to stop him shutting Hibs down.

Liars these people, just can't help themselves and don't even realise they are doing so.

[Waxy]

Jambo myth being spread on that Mail story's comments that it was Hearts fans who stood up to Mercer to stop him shutting Hibs down.

Liars these people, just can't help themselves and don't even realise they are doing so.Hearts fans didn't do nothing. Can't blame Hibbys for trying to put a spoke in their wheels. Payback.

[brog]

Jambo myth being spread on that Mail story's comments that it was Hearts fans who stood up to Mercer to stop him shutting Hibs down.

Liars these people, just can't help themselves and don't even realise they are doing so.

And just how did they do that, by buying shares in Hibs? That was the only way David Rowland & his puppet Mercer were defeated, because he failed to get the 65 or 70% vote ( I forget the exact number ) of the shareholders necessary to approve the deal. I will always be appreciative of John Robertson standing up at the Usher Hall & the many decent Yams who attended Hands Off Hibs rally at ER &/or signed the petition but the circumstances were very different. Hearts are being punished for years of cheating but will continue to exist, in one form or another. We were being put to death for nothing to do with football but purely to allow a noxious multi-millionaire to make even more money from our demise.

[brog]

Hearts fans didn't do nothing. Can't blame Hibbys for trying to put a spoke in their wheels. Payback.

Em, a pedant writes, that means they did do something! :wink:

[StevieC]

However, what they now call atmosphere is bile and hatred hurled at close range to opposition players and management. Horrible place nearly filled with horrible people.

The practice, from those at the front of the Wheatfield, of throwing the ball away from opposition players at throw-ins is one of the many things that you highlight above. Even the ball boys are trained to do it!

[Waxy]

Em, a pedant writes, that means they did do something! :wink:
Yes that's what i was meaning :)

[Weststandwanab]

Has Monday's creditors meeting actually been confirmed as taking place, (or even confirmed as cancelled?). Surely there would be some publicly available notice to either effect? I am going on the basis that no news is good news, if you catch my drift.


And just how did they do that, by buying shares in Hibs? That was the only way David Rowland & his puppet Mercer were defeated, because he failed to get the 65 or 70% vote ( I forget the exact number ) of the shareholders necessary to approve the deal. I will always be appreciative of John Robertson standing up at the Usher Hall & the many decent Yams who attended Hands Off Hibs rally at ER &/or signed the petition but the circumstances were very different. Hearts are being punished for years of cheating but will continue to exist, in one form or another. We were being put to death for nothing to do with football but purely to allow a noxious multi-millionaire to make even more money from our demise. 75%.

The circumstances are dramatically different. GGTTH

[StevieC]

And just how did they do that, by buying shares in Hibs? That was the only way David Rowland & his puppet Mercer were defeated, because he failed to get the 65 or 70% vote ( I forget the exact number ) of the shareholders necessary to approve the deal. I will always be appreciative of John Robertson standing up at the Usher Hall & the many decent Yams who attended Hands Off Hibs rally at ER &/or signed the petition but the circumstances were very different. Hearts are being punished for years of cheating but will continue to exist, in one form or another. We were being put to death for nothing to do with football but purely to allow a noxious multi-millionaire to make even more money from our demise.

Spot on. The only thing that prevented the "takeover" was David Duff refusing to sell his shareholding (and taking a financial hit in the process). He may have been instrumental (along with Gray) in getting us into that vulnerable position, but he deserves credit for digging his heels in at the 11th hour.

[Hibs07p]

I think Sheila Rowland ( matrimonial disharmony), who held a percentage of her husbands shares, was also instrumental in WM failing to get the required shares to kill off Hibs. WM would have killed us off in a heartbeat if given the chance, he didn't succeed, and it was nothing to do with romanticised pleas from the Hear7s support.
Are they deid yet.

GGTTH

[smurf]

Spot on. The only thing that prevented the "takeover" was David Duff refusing to sell his shareholding (and taking a financial hit in the process). He may have been instrumental (along with Gray) in getting us into that vulnerable position, but he deserves credit for digging his heels in at the 11th hour.

His name is dirt to many within our support however he took a huge financial hit by refusing to sell. On the rally day at Easter Road he was crying his eyes out. Our club meant something to David Duff.

[Dashing Bob S]

At this stage the best policy is just to agree with them.

* Hearts fans saved Hibs and we're showing our gratitude by treacherously destroying their club.

* Hearts saved the Lithuanian investors and tax payers millions of pounds and now they show their gratitude by letting the club die.

* Hearts saved the British taxpayer and charities and local businesses millions of pounds, and now our government stand by idly and watch the club head for liquidation.

:violin::violin::violin::violin:

[Winston Ingram]

each to their own mate but i ****ing hate the place, 100 stadiums i would rather go to (maybe thats green tinted glasses tho i dinny ken)

I can't really get what's great about it. Their old stand is a death trap and the new one look 50 rather than 20 years old. The atmosphere is decent but it's nowhere near the best i've experienced in Scotland

[Kato]

At this stage the best policy is just to agree with them.

* Hearts fans saved Hibs and we're showing our gratitude by treacherously destroying their club.

* Hearts saved the Lithuanian investors and tax payers millions of pounds and now they show their gratitude by letting the club die.

* Hearts saved the British taxpayer and charities and local businesses millions of pounds, and now our government stand by idly and watch the club head for liquidation.

:violin::violin::violin::violin:

Having worked in a few psychiatric institutions in my time, you're right, this is the best policy when dealing with the delusional. However. These "case studies" are being cared for "in the community" and a cold, harsh dose of reality, although sometimes dangerous and cruel, is also on occasion warranted.

Prognosis - imbecilic. Prescription - patient(s) to wear a remedial baseball cap with a contraption that dangles a sign before their eyes baring the motto "hertz ur cattled".


Cap to be worn in public at all times, report to a doctor if recurrent twitch becomes uncontrollable.

[Keith_M]

From Scottish Planning Policy

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2010/02/03132605/0


Playing Fields


156. Playing fields are an important resource for sport and should be provided in sufficient quantity, quality and accessibility to satisfy current and likely future community demand. Local authorities are expected to develop a playing fields strategy in consultation with sportscotland as part of the wider open space strategy. Playing fields, including those within educational establishments, which are required to meet existing or future needs should be identified in the local development plan. Playing fields and sports pitches should not be redeveloped except where:

..................


It's primarily aimed at public sports pitches but it could be used to stand in the way of redevelopment. particularly by yam councillors on the planning committee. Not insurmountable IMHO


Please have a look at the EDC Document (http://www.edinburgh.gov.uk/downloads/file/1886/tynecastle) on the subject. What you have quoted is completely irrelevant, as they have already stated (as far back as ten years ago) they would allow housing and retail on the site. The blast zone mentioned in the document is now even less relevant, as it now only covers the north west corner (http://www.hibs.net/showthread.php?158395-Financial-Meltdown-UBIG-shares-STILL-FROZEN-More-Delays-BDO-Preparing-For-Liquidation&p=3954860&viewfull=1#post3954860) of the stadium ,much less than it did ten years ago.


If you want a brief summary of the relevant parts, please read my (admittedly sarcastic) post (http://www.hibs.net/showthread.php?158395-Financial-Meltdown-UBIG-shares-STILL-FROZEN-More-Delays-BDO-Preparing-For-Liquidation&p=3954758&viewfull=1#post3954758) on it.

[Jim44]

Is tynecastle a public listed building?

It's more likely a listing building.

[Aldo]

If it is indeed a playing field does anyone fancy a 10-21 on it? Sunday. Half 2. Tims against Billys.

Ten twenty wanner.... Not heard that for ages. Mind and bring yur jumpers for goalposts. ;-)

[StevieC]

Ten twenty wanner.... Not heard that for ages. Mind and bring yur jumpers for goalposts. ;-)

The goalposts are already there .. just mind and bring them away with you afterwards :wink:

[greenginger]

I think Sheila Rowland ( matrimonial disharmony), who held a percentage of her husbands shares, was also instrumental in WM failing to get the required shares to kill off Hibs. WM would have killed us off in a heartbeat if given the chance, he didn't succeed, and it was nothing to do with romanticised pleas from the Hear7s support.
Are they deid yet.

GGTTH

Sheila Rowland played a part alright, but I think as a director. Her vote against the takeover along with Duff and Grey outvoted the other 2 David Rowland stooges.

I think it went on to a share count which we could have lost as well ,but Kenny Waugh who had sold out to Duff and Grey originally paid about £ 250,000 for a share holding that tipped the balance in our favour.

Waugh lost all that money with the parent company administration.

There were a few big players below the radar but the Yam hoards are not amongst them.

[dangermouse]

The Edinburgh Local Development Plan is the thing to read.

The relevant section http://217.174.251.127/dev/plans/eclp/chap5.htm#OS1


It says:

Policy Os 1 - Open Space Protection

Proposals involving the loss of open space will not be permitted unless it is demonstrated that:


there will be no significant impact on the quality or character of the local environment
the open space is a small part of a larger area or of limited amenity or leisure value and there is a significant over-provision of open space serving the immediate area and
the loss would not be detrimental to the wider network including its continuity or biodiversity value and either
there will be a local benefit in allowing the development in terms of either alternative equivalent provision being made or improvement to an existing public park or other open space or
the development is for a community purpose and the benefits to the local community outweigh the loss.


The policy seeks to protect all open spaces, both public and privately owned, which contribute to the amenity of their surroundings and the city, which provide or are capable of providing for the recreational needs of residents and visitors or which are an integral part of the city’s landscape and townscape character and its biodiversity. Many of the open spaces identified on the Proposals Map are covered by more than one designation, depending on their environmental quality and value to the community. It will be more important to protect open spaces in the future, as the population of parts of the city increases and brings added pressure on existing resources. The Council will only consider limited releases of open space to development in exceptional circumstances, where the loss would not result in detriment to the overall network or provision in the locality, and there are compensatory circumstances, such as scope for improving the quality of provision elsewhere in the network. Amenity areas in housing which have been provided with no clear purpose or sense of ownership might be considered for development, especially if a more comprehensive redevelopment of a wider area is in prospect and the resulting open space would be smaller in area but better in quality and usefulness.

Policy Os 2 - Playing Fields Protection

In addition to the requirements of Policy Os 1, the loss of some or all of a playing field or sports pitch will be permitted only where one of the following circumstances applies:


the proposed development is ancillary to the principal use of the site as a playing field
the proposed development involves a minor part of a playing field and would not adversely affect the use or potential of the remainder for sport and training
an alternative playing field is to be provided of at least equivalent sporting value in a no less convenient location, or existing provision is to be significantly improved to compensate for the loss
the Council is satisfied that there is a clear excess of sports pitches to meet current and anticipated future demand in the area, and the site can be developed without detriment to the overall quality of provision.


Playing field provision must be considered as a city-wide resource and in terms of its contribution to local needs. The Council’s assessment of provision in the city as a whole has concluded that the amount of pitches, whether or not in public ownership or publicly accessible, is equivalent to the need. However, about one third are substandard and would need to be improved. On this evaluation, the loss of pitches to development cannot be justified in principle. However, the loss might be acceptable if alternative equivalent provision is to be made in an equally convenient location. Development has been allowed where other pitches serving the local community are to be equipped with all-weather playing surfaces.

But it's not an open space nor a playing field. Still not convinced the Yams could use this to their advantage.

[dangermouse]

Whatever you think of the football club, with its shielding of beasts and poppy thieving, you can't deny that Tynecastle's a great sporting venue.

I agree, it's the best sporting venue in Gorgie.

[Moulin Yarns]

But it's not an open space nor a playing field. Still not convinced the Yams could use this to their advantage.

Beleive me, that is straight out of the Edinburgh LDP. I work amongst Planners and my manager put me onto this info.

http://www.edinburgh.gov.uk/info/178/local_and_strategic_development_plans/1019/the_development_and_structure_plans

[Ozyhibby]

So long as we get a 'NO' vote on Monday then I don't give a hoot if it's a playing field or not.

[greenginger]

Beleive me, that is straight out of the Edinburgh LDP. I work amongst Planners and my manager put me onto this info.

http://www.edinburgh.gov.uk/info/178/local_and_strategic_development_plans/1019/the_development_and_structure_plans


Its a big document, what page is applicable ?

[Spike Mandela]

I agree, it's the best sporting venue in Gorgie.

Nah, what about the bowling club?

[Geo_1875]

I agree, it's the best sporting venue in Gorgie.

Wrong!!!!

Gorgie Mills Bowling Club, while still a ****hole, is a vastly superior sporting venue.

[davcar]

Nah, what about the bowling club?

Aye Gorgie Mills, Bainfield, even Ardmillan or Fountain Brewery or North British Distillery Bowling Clubs!!

[Leith Mo]

At this stage the best policy is just to agree with them.

* Hearts fans saved Hibs and we're showing our gratitude by treacherously destroying their club.

* Hearts saved the Lithuanian investors and tax payers millions of pounds and now they show their gratitude by letting the club die.

* Hearts saved the British taxpayer and charities and local businesses millions of pounds, and now our government stand by idly and watch the club head for liquidation.

:violin::violin::violin::violin:

Now, now, Lest we Forget and all that - what about one Jack Alexander's claims that they "single-handedly saved football as we know it" and won World War One as well?

One thing I'm sure of - LEST WE FORGET - HMFC DIN NOT PAY FOR THEIR POPPIES!! - let them die (as painfully as possible, but please just them f*** off and die). THE CLUB WITH NO SHAME.

[Moulin Yarns]

The Edinburgh Local Development Plan is the thing to read.

The relevant section http://217.174.251.127/dev/plans/eclp/chap5.htm#OS1


It says:

Policy Os 1 - Open Space Protection

Proposals involving the loss of open space will not be permitted unless it is demonstrated that:


there will be no significant impact on the quality or character of the local environment
the open space is a small part of a larger area or of limited amenity or leisure value and there is a significant over-provision of open space serving the immediate area and
the loss would not be detrimental to the wider network including its continuity or biodiversity value and either
there will be a local benefit in allowing the development in terms of either alternative equivalent provision being made or improvement to an existing public park or other open space or
the development is for a community purpose and the benefits to the local community outweigh the loss.


The policy seeks to protect all open spaces, both public and privately owned, which contribute to the amenity of their surroundings and the city, which provide or are capable of providing for the recreational needs of residents and visitors or which are an integral part of the city’s landscape and townscape character and its biodiversity. Many of the open spaces identified on the Proposals Map are covered by more than one designation, depending on their environmental quality and value to the community. It will be more important to protect open spaces in the future, as the population of parts of the city increases and brings added pressure on existing resources. The Council will only consider limited releases of open space to development in exceptional circumstances, where the loss would not result in detriment to the overall network or provision in the locality, and there are compensatory circumstances, such as scope for improving the quality of provision elsewhere in the network. Amenity areas in housing which have been provided with no clear purpose or sense of ownership might be considered for development, especially if a more comprehensive redevelopment of a wider area is in prospect and the resulting open space would be smaller in area but better in quality and usefulness.

Policy Os 2 - Playing Fields Protection

In addition to the requirements of Policy Os 1, the loss of some or all of a playing field or sports pitch will be permitted only where one of the following circumstances applies:


the proposed development is ancillary to the principal use of the site as a playing field
the proposed development involves a minor part of a playing field and would not adversely affect the use or potential of the remainder for sport and training
an alternative playing field is to be provided of at least equivalent sporting value in a no less convenient location, or existing provision is to be significantly improved to compensate for the loss
the Council is satisfied that there is a clear excess of sports pitches to meet current and anticipated future demand in the area, and the site can be developed without detriment to the overall quality of provision.


Playing field provision must be considered as a city-wide resource and in terms of its contribution to local needs. The Council’s assessment of provision in the city as a whole has concluded that the amount of pitches, whether or not in public ownership or publicly accessible, is equivalent to the need. However, about one third are substandard and would need to be improved. On this evaluation, the loss of pitches to development cannot be justified in principle. However, the loss might be acceptable if alternative equivalent provision is to be made in an equally convenient location. Development has been allowed where other pitches serving the local community are to be equipped with all-weather playing surfaces.


Its a big document, what page is applicable ?
The link is at the top

[GlasgowHibee]

Arguing with a yam at my work, he is absolutely certain that the shares aren't frozen and once they "breeze" through Monday's meeting - his words, not mine - then they just have to wait for the cooling period.

Please tell me this twat isn't correct.

[Brunswickbill]

Please have a look at the EDC Document (http://www.edinburgh.gov.uk/downloads/file/1886/tynecastle) on the subject. What you have quoted is completely irrelevant, as they have already stated (as far back as ten years ago) they would allow housing and retail on the site. The blast zone mentioned in the document is now even less relevant, as it now only covers the north west corner (http://www.hibs.net/showthread.php?158395-Financial-Meltdown-UBIG-shares-STILL-FROZEN-More-Delays-BDO-Preparing-For-Liquidation&p=3954860&viewfull=1#post3954860) of the stadium ,much less than it did ten years ago.


If you want a brief summary of the relevant parts, please read my (admittedly sarcastic) post (http://www.hibs.net/showthread.php?158395-Financial-Meltdown-UBIG-shares-STILL-FROZEN-More-Delays-BDO-Preparing-For-Liquidation&p=3954758&viewfull=1#post3954758) on it.


Only trying to provide information to help with the discussion. Afraid you're wrong about it being irrelevant. Scottish Planning Policy, as it's name suggests, provides the policy background for all planning in Scotland, hence why the Edinburgh LDP reflects the text. It would be taken into account along with LDP if there is a proposal to redevelop.

I haven't been able to find any reference to Tynecastle being a listed building although the old school appears to have a couple of listings.

You can have look yourself http://data.historic-scotland.gov.uk/pls/htmldb/f?p=2200:10:0

This a side issue to the ongoing financial shenanigans so apologies for boring people.

[robinp]

Its a big document, what page is applicable ?

Tynecastle isn't listed by the council in their list of fields/venues etc in their 2010 report:

http://www.edinburgh.gov.uk/downloads/file/2016/open_space_strategy (http://www.edinburgh.gov.uk/downloads/file/2016/open_space_strategy)

[Ozyhibby]

Arguing with a yam at my work, he is absolutely certain that the shares aren't frozen and once they "breeze" through Monday's meeting - his words, not mine - then they just have to wait for the cooling period.

Please tell me this twat isn't correct.

I'm confident they were frozen but less confident on the procedure for unfreezing.
Could be that a 'yes' vote on Monday automatically unfreezes them or it could take a year long court procedure.
Nobody has managed to give a definite answer to that yet.

[greenginger]

Only trying to provide information to help with the discussion. Afraid you're wrong about it being irrelevant. Scottish Planning Policy, as it's name suggests, provides the policy background for all planning in Scotland, hence why the Edinburgh LDP reflects the text. It would be taken into account along with LDP if there is a proposal to redevelop.

I haven't been able to find any reference to Tynecastle being a listed building although the old school appears to have a couple of listings.

You can have look yourself http://data.historic-scotland.gov.uk/pls/htmldb/f?p=2200:10:0

This a side issue to the ongoing financial shenanigans so apologies for boring people.


The PBS is definitely NOT listed.

It is noted as a building of Architectural Interest which offers virtually no protection.

[emerald green]

Whatever you think of the football club, with its shielding of beasts and poppy thieving, you can't deny that Tynecastle's a great sporting venue.

I keep hearing and reading about PBS being a great place to play, great atmosphere etc. I just don't agree. It's a total s***hole, with a nasty horrible atmosphere. I've said for a long time, particularly as the yaks get more & more angry and the chip on their shoulders gets bigger by the day, that a player from an opposition club - probably Hibs or Celtic - could be seriously assaulted or injured there. I really really hope I'm wrong.

[Kaiser1962]

Sheila Rowland played a part alright, but I think as a director. Her vote against the takeover along with Duff and Grey outvoted the other 2 David Rowland stooges.

I think it went on to a share count which we could have lost as well ,but Kenny Waugh who had sold out to Duff and Grey originally paid about £ 250,000 for a share holding that tipped the balance in our favour.

Waugh lost all that money with the parent company administration.

There were a few big players below the radar but the Yam hoards are not amongst them.

Waugh sold his shareholding to Mercer late in the game.

Mercer had enough shares but had set himself a target over an above that required which, because Duff did not sell him his shareholding, he failed to meet. Defeated by his own ego.

[littleplum]

I keep hearing and reading about PBS being a great place to play, great atmosphere etc. I just don't agree. It's a total s***hole, with a nasty horrible atmosphere. I've said for a long time, particularly as the yaks get more & more angry and the chip on their shoulders gets bigger by the day, that a player from an opposition club - probably Hibs or Celtic - could be seriously assaulted or injured there. I really really hope I'm wrong.

Most places have a good atmosphere when they're close to capacity (Hampden is an exception to this). No-one will convince me that Tynecastle is capable of generating a better atmosphere than that we saw at ER in the January game against them.

[jgl07]

On the subject of planning protection for sporting venues, there is no real precedent in Edinburgh. Old Meadowbank was bulldozed, admittedly to build the current white elephant. Powderhall went the same way in 1999 for a residential development despite being on a flood plain. Marine Gardens was flattened to build a bus depot in 1962.

Outside of Edinburgh Carfin dog track was demolished in 1999.

Strangely West Lothian Council refused planning permission for Sainsbury to build a supermarket on the site of Armadale Stadium. This was largely because the planning department favoured another site for retail on Council-owned land near the station. They did cite as an additional reason to protect the stadium for use by Edinburgh Monarchs speedway team. This was rather unwelcome as Monarchs had been offered enough cash by Sainsbury to build a new track nearby in return for support in the planning application.

I can't think why the City of Edinburgh Council would want to block development of a stadium that is not 'fit for purpose' according to a former Hearts chairman. The Council are strapped for cash and could net a tidy sum from the developers given the proximity of the tram line.

[emerald green]

Most places have a good atmosphere when they're close to capacity (Hampden is an exception to this). No-one will convince me that Tynecastle is capable of generating a better atmosphere than that we saw at ER in the January game against them.

:agree: We just need a winning team on the pitch and the fans will return in big numbers and create a brilliant atmosphere at ER.

[TrinityHibs]

On the subject of planning protection for sporting venues, there is no real precedent in Edinburgh. Old Meadowbank was bulldozed, admittedly to build the current white elephant. Powderhall went the same way in 1999 for a residential development despite being on a flood plain. Marine Gardens was flattened to build a bus depot in 1962.

Outside of Edinburgh Carfin dog track was demolished in 1999.

Strangely West Lothian Council refused planning permission for Sainsbury to build a supermarket on the site of Armadale Stadium. This was largely because the planning department favoured another site for retail on Council-owned land near the station. They did cite as an additional reason to protect the stadium for use by Edinburgh Monarchs speedway team. This was rather unwelcome as Monarchs had been offered enough cash by Sainsbury to build a new track nearby in return for support in the planning application.

I can't think why the City of Edinburgh Council would want to block development of a stadium that is not 'fit for purpose' according to a former Hearts chairman. The Council are strapped for cash and could net a tidy sum from the developers given the proximity of the tram line.

Midlothian Council granted planning consent for a supermarket on the Arniston Rangers pitch. Sportscotland supported it but only if a new pitch was provided elsewhere. They are a community team however.

For what its worth I don't think PBS is open space but I do think the Council would say it was a pitch that needed to be replaced., Possibly an all weather pitch at Saughton. Scottish Planning Policy is just one of many documents that are considered when determining an application. The Local Development Plan should reflect the SPP but tailored towards Edinburgh. Housing, student accommodation, hotel, hostel, retail offer and a multitude of other uses would be acceptable at Tiny subject to addressing technical standards including the COMAH regulations.

If you want to see abuse of the COMAH regulations look at the blast zone for Grangemouth and how miraculously the zones bend around the Falkirk ground. Brockville is now a Morrisons so it can be done. Muirton Park is now an Asda.

[QMU-1875]

Hasn't Spartans old ground been sold to developers?

[Aldo]

The PBS is definitely NOT listed. It is noted as a building of Architectural Interest which offers virtually no protection.

Might not be listed but defo listing!! ;-)

[hibeerealist]

Waugh sold his shareholding to Mercer late in the game.

Mercer had enough shares but had set himself a target over an above that required which, because Duff did not sell him his shareholding, he failed to meet. Defeated by his own ego.

Kaiser

So KW purchased 250k worth of shares in HFC then sold them to WM - at a profit I wonder?

[greenpaper55]

Sorry if someone has posted on this already but it seems things are getting tighter at tynecastle.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/26889183

[Waxy]

Sorry if someone has posted on this already but it seems things are getting tighter at tynecastle.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/26889183Working without pay? He'll be strugglin.

[Saorsa]

Sorry if someone has posted on this already but it seems things are getting tighter at tynecastle.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/26889183He surely disnae need the money anyway, he's been places and done things. :agree: Anyway maybe he's like McGlynn and his wife works. :greengrin

[ACLeith]

Sorry if someone has posted on this already but it seems things are getting tighter at tynecastle.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/26889183
Presumably he's on a performance-related contract and he's had his annual review?

[greenginger]

Kaiser

So KW purchased 250k worth of shares in HFC then sold them to WM - at a profit I wonder?


I have never heard it said that KW sold his shares to Mercer.

It was an investment fund that had them originally and their investment would have been toast if they did not sell.

Mercer needed the shares for takeover to proceed ( needed 75% or 90% ) but Waugh matched Mercers offer. If KW had sold the shares on we would have been history.

At least, that is the way I remember it.

[Moulin Yarns]

Hasn't Spartans old ground been sold to developers?

Spartans have a nice new sports centre that negates the need for the old ground.

[greenpaper55]

He surely disnae need the money anyway, he's been places and done things. :agree: Anyway maybe he's like McGlynn and his wife works. :greengrin

:faf: Maybe he's "the first of the few" or maybe the first of the many !.

[Ozyhibby]

Spartans have a nice new sports centre that negates the need for the old ground.

And the yams are no longer welcome. :-)

[Waxy]

Is mondays meeting still on?

[jacomo]

Is mondays meeting still on?

Good work. It's getting a bit confused on here... this thread has turned to memories of the Hands off Hibs campaign, while a separate thread is now speculating on the influence of pesky Hibbys in scuppering HMFC's rescue plan.

If Sergey (who it seems is not a Jambo after all, who knew?) does destroy Hearts, can I phone a Jambo and say "Youse died. We ended you"? :wink:

[clerriehibs]

Good work. It's getting a bit confused on here... this thread has turned to memories of the Hands off Hibs campaign, while a separate thread is now speculating on the influence of pesky Hibbys in scuppering HMFC's rescue plan.

If Sergey (who it seems is not a Jambo after all, who knew?) does destroy Hearts, can I phone a Jambo and say "Youse died. We ended you"? :wink:

It's mandatory to make those calls.

[nribs]

Good work. It's getting a bit confused on here... this thread has turned to memories of the Hands off Hibs campaign, while a separate thread is now speculating on the influence of pesky Hibbys in scuppering HMFC's rescue plan.

If Sergey (who it seems is not a Jambo after all, who knew?) does destroy Hearts, can I phone a Jambo and say "Youse died. We ended you"? :wink:
Someone on nowayback has mentioned that they are hearing from a source within FOH it's been postponed. Personally don't think they have been told jot.

[Ozyhibby]

Is mondays meeting still on?

Nobody knows.

[Onceinawhile]

Personally I think it'll go ahead. The cva will be approved and kickback will go mental whilst everyone here slits their wrists. 20 days will pass for the cooling off period with no appeals. People will moan about them getting away with it.

Then when it comes to getting a court date, a date will be set. Then moved, then moved again, probably postponed enough to have them liquidated.

[Golden Bear]

This thread has provided much more entertainment than Hibernian FC of late.

There's surely the makings of a best selling novel in here somewhere!

[Jim44]

Is mondays meeting still on?

Who knows? It's hilarious tho', as over on throbbingsphincter.com they're even starting to wind each other up. Some geezer has posted that Monday's meeting has been postponed and that FOH has more or less said the games up. Might be a naughty Hibby but seems more like a Jambo as normally their first instinct is to cry Hobo. Either way it's being taken kind of seriously by quite a few of them.

[FranckSuzy]

Sheila Rowland played a part alright, but I think as a director. Her vote against the takeover along with Duff and Grey outvoted the other 2 David Rowland stooges.

I think it went on to a share count which we could have lost as well ,but Kenny Waugh who had sold out to Duff and Grey originally paid about £ 250,000 for a share holding that tipped the balance in our favour.

Waugh lost all that money with the parent company administration.

There were a few big players below the radar but the Yam hoards are not amongst them.


Waugh sold his shareholding to Mercer late in the game.

Mercer had enough shares but had set himself a target over an above that required which, because Duff did not sell him his shareholding, he failed to meet. Defeated by his own ego.


Kaiser

So KW purchased 250k worth of shares in HFC then sold them to WM - at a profit I wonder?


I have never heard it said that KW sold his shares to Mercer.

It was an investment fund that had them originally and their investment would have been toast if they did not sell.

Mercer needed the shares for takeover to proceed ( needed 75% or 90% ) but Waugh matched Mercers offer. If KW had sold the shares on we would have been history.

At least, that is the way I remember it.

:agree: Sorry but the bit in bold is incorrect. I know KW well and he's told me what happened at that very worrying time. That is a grossly unfair and untrue claim, IMHO.

[big gogs]

I seem to remember Kenny Waugh paid £250,000 for shares to ensure mercer could not get them,

[Keith_M]

Is mondays meeting still on?


Yep, the CVA will be ratified, Hearts will be out of Administration by the end of May and Rudi will sign in time for the new season, where he'll tear up the Championship single handed and they'll be back to torment us the following season.


Is everybody clear on that?





:wink:

[Kaiser1962]

Kaiser

So KW purchased 250k worth of shares in HFC then sold them to WM - at a profit I wonder?

He had sold his shareholding to Duff three years earlier for £700k


I have never heard it said that KW sold his shares to Mercer.

It was an investment fund that had them originally and their investment would have been toast if they did not sell.

Mercer needed the shares for takeover to proceed ( needed 75% or 90% ) but Waugh matched Mercers offer. If KW had sold the shares on we would have been history.

At least, that is the way I remember it.

Mercer wanted 75% and the trio of Waugh, Harrison (whose role is often overlooked) and Farmer were buying shares to block the takeover with Farmer, in particular, working on a "just enough" basis with no intention of taking over. Harrison was far more aggresive. They had, with Duff's shareholding, Mercer pegged back when Waugh sold his shareholding to Mercer in June 1990 although it appears to have been part of a deal that would allow Mercer to take the club's property assets and AN Other (Waugh?) to buy the clubs name, badge, players etc allowing the football club to continue.

That gave Mercer a 64% share (he claimed 66%) and took Harrison/Farmer by surprise leaving David Duff, with his 11% stake, standing between the club and shutdown. Duff did not sell, at great personal cost, and the rest, as they say, is history. There would have been a lot of "what if's" if he had sold.

That Farmer did end up owning the club is as much down to the very persuasive Kenny MacLean as any other factor. It is unlikely anyone else at that time had the cahoonas to go nose to nose with David Rowland and come out on top. What is often forgotten it was Farmer who took the club into administration a year later to ditch Rowland.

[stoneyburn hibs]

If Mondays meeting is still on then what do the guys in the know on .net think will be the outcome ?

I'm getting a wee bit nervous that it won't be the big L for them.

[Keith_M]

If Mondays meeting is still on then what do the guys in the know on .net think will be the outcome ?

I'm getting a wee bit nervous that it won't be the big L for them.


Without the aid of a Crystal Ball, nobody could possibly know that.

Don't believe anybody that tells you they know for a fact that "it's in the bag" or "it's definitely being rejected".


Anyway, why are you so nervous about the prospect of them not being Liquidated? What's the big deal?

:confused:

[matty_f]

Any more info on whether or not the meeting's been postponed? :dunno:

[stoneyburn hibs]

Without the aid of a Crystal Ball, nobody could possibly know that.

Don't believe anybody that tells you they know for a fact that "it's in the bag" or "it's definitely being rejected".


Anyway, why are you so nervous about the prospect of them not being Liquidated? What's the big deal?


:confused:

Want them gone, wiped.

[Mikey]

Any more info on whether or not the meeting's been postponed? :dunno:

Any more info on whether it was actually scheduled in the first place :dunno:

[Green Blood]

Liquidated or not they are ****ed whatever the outcome is! It will be more enjoyable watching all the in-fighting and the journey to their next administration!!