Share Transfers Agreed/Cooling off period

[Liberal Hibby]

Anyone clued up on Lithuanian politics? Sergey perhaps? not sure if this is good or bad but my guess is it doesn't sound good for Vlad.......

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-20113840

Don't think it makes a lot of difference - but certainly won't harm his interests give the election winning parties are more pro-Russian than the previous government. Lithuania's economic problems stem from the fact that people can always make more money working in other EU countries than in Lithuania (unless it's playing for Hearts :wink:), so they have seen a massive decline in their population.

[Jack Hackett]

According to Fedovotas at the weekend, the Board "believes" they made a profit last year, without the need for debt forgiveness. As you say Cav, strange that this is only a belief when the year end was four months ago. I would be very interested to understand how they've made a profit, as they had an £8m shortfall the previous year.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/20115241

"The cost of the squad that won silverware [the Scottish Cup] last season is £8m and our income is just short of £7m. Also, we need to speak about the cost of running the business, running Tynecastle - that adds to the gap and there are no realistic chances of covering this gap by normal income. We've exhausted pretty much all possibilities."


:fibber:

[HUTCHYHIBBY]

I've been wanting this since that FTB tried tae kill Hibs. I'll never forgive or forget that. I'm no fussed about the half dozen that turned up at HOH, 99% of them wanted tae see Hibs gone. I want them tae get everything that's coming their way and then some.


**** h****s

My feelings exactly.

[Treadstone]

Can anyone get me up to date exactly with what they owe and why they are on the brink? Or even point me in the direction of something that can tell me. I never kept up to with rangers but want to with this

As Caversham Green says however I suggest opening this link and reading page 18.

http://view.vcab.com/?vcabid=gheSelgegScajnegn&count=25/10/2012%2015:19:02-6

[Bad Martini]

Rangers ****ed.

Hearts going the same way.

In hope this is our ground hog day.

ENDOF

[supershotmo]

If their 400,000 worldwide fanbase cough up £5.00 each they will have £250k left.

[PatHead]

I know the tax tribunal meet next month but how long will it take for them to issue a decision and how many appeals will Hearts have? The Rangers one seems to have gone on for ages.

[Peevemor]

http://www.scotsman.com/edinburgh-evening-news/sport/hearts-insist-fans-cash-won-t-be-used-to-pay-tax-bill-1-2603765

:fibber:

[The_Sauz]

http://i46.tinypic.com/2qnxuhd.jpg

All it needs is R.I.H at the bottom :wink:

[Gatecrasher]

http://www.scotsman.com/edinburgh-evening-news/sport/hearts-insist-fans-cash-won-t-be-used-to-pay-tax-bill-1-2603765

:fibber:

Hearts must think their fans are zipped up the back.....oh wait :cb

[matty_f]

http://www.scotsman.com/edinburgh-evening-news/sport/hearts-insist-fans-cash-won-t-be-used-to-pay-tax-bill-1-2603765

:fibber:



Assuming the club is successful in relation to the HMRC case referred to above, the offer, if fully subscribed, should provide the club with sufficient working capital to achieve its goals for the 2012/2013 season without requiring additional funding. However, if the HMRC case goes against the club and/or the offer is not fully subscribed, the Club may have insufficient working capital to achieve its goals for the 2012/2013 season and may have to seek additional sources of funding.

How does that sit with the insistance that the share issue won't cover the tax bill?

[Malthibby]

How does that sit with the insistance that the share issue won't cover the tax bill?

Strangely enough, it doesn't.
Starting to believe that the end is truly nigh.
GG

[JeMeSouviens]

How does that sit with the insistance that the share issue won't cover the tax bill?

It says that if the share issue is a success they might just have enough to last the season but if the tax case hits they'll be f***ed anyway. :na na:

... and the EEN says this is "reassuring". :confused:

Well, I suppose it's reassuring for us. :wink::aok:

[Twiglet]

Maybe one of the financial whizzes will be able to answer this.
Just had a wee look at the brochure out of interest and I noticed that they're offering incentives to buy shares, like free tickets to matches, hospitality, signed shirts and free season tickets. Are they allowed to do this?
In financial services there's rules about gifts in return for business, could this be viewed in the same way?

[21.05.2016]

Those jokers have been living way beyond their means for years, playing players that they could nowhere near afford and they have gotten away with this cheating for years. Finally its caught up with them and they deserve everything they get. We have the same carry on with hearts every year and now its time something is actually done about it.

I wont miss them. I want them to go the exact same way as their pals from Glasgow did.

Rot in hell jambos :fenlon:giruy:

Tick Tock . . .

:brokenyam:

[HoboHarry]

Also for the financial gurus out there. There is a lot of talk of admin and Vlad leasing Tynecastle back to the new entity. Given that it seems clear that Ukio/Ubig need cash quickly, why would admin be better than liquidation and selling the ground? They may not get the full asking price but they would get a lump sum now.

[Phil MaGlass]

:faf::faf::faf:

[Golden Bear]

If their 400,000 worldwide fanbase cough up £5.00 each they will have £250k left.

Not sure if you have the facts correct there Mo.

I was lead to understand that the 400,000 fans related to those in the Edinburgh area alone and their worldwide fan base will be many, many times in excess of that.

Let's not forget that they really are a BIG team.

:rolleyes:

[CropleyWasGod]

Also for the financial gurus out there. There is a lot of talk of admin and Vlad leasing Tynecastle back to the new entity. Given that it seems clear that Ukio/Ubig need cash quickly, why would admin be better than liquidation and selling the ground? They may not get the full asking price but they would get a lump sum now.

IMO, administration is very unlikely. If there is one, the administrators will come to a very quick decision that there is no alternative to liquidation.

[HoboHarry]

IMO, administration is very unlikely. If there is one, the administrators will come to a very quick decision that there is no alternative to liquidation.
Thank you, pretty much what I thought and I really don't understand why they are not seeing that themselves unless it is blind emotion/optimism.

[Phil MaGlass]

Thank you, pretty much what I thought and I really don't understand why they are not seeing that themselves unless it is blind emotion/optimism.

:ostrich:

[Kaiser1962]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/20115241

"The cost of the squad that won silverware [the Scottish Cup] last season is £8m and our income is just short of £7m. Also, we need to speak about the cost of running the business, running Tynecastle - that adds to the gap and there are no realistic chances of covering this gap by normal income. We've exhausted pretty much all possibilities."


:fibber:

As Cav has already pointed out they do not seem to be able to produce up to date figures. He is saying, in one breath, that they have made a profit last season without the requirement of debt forgiveness and in another he is spouting figures which make no sense. If he is telling us that last season they spent £8m on wages that would be an increase from 2011 (£7.121m) despite their cost cutting. Income "just short of £7m" sounds suspiciously like the £6.915m they managed in 2010-2011.

I would expect that by now he would have accurate figures to hand and, if the figures provided by Fedovatas are remotely accurate then there is not a hope in hell they made a profit in 2011-2012 without considerable outside assistance.

[Twa Cairpets]

As Cav has already pointed out they do not seem to be able to produce up to date figures. He is saying, in one breath, that they have made a profit last season without the requirement of debt forgiveness and in another he is spouting figures which make no sense. If he is telling us that last season they spent £8m on wages that would be an increase from 2011 (£7.121m) despite their cost cutting. Income "just short of £7m" sounds suspiciously like the £6.915m they managed in 2010-2011.

I would expect that by now he would have accurate figures to hand and, if the figures provided by Fedovatas are remotely accurate then there is not a hope in hell they made a profit in 2011-2012 without considerable outside assistance.

The brochure also lists operating costs of just over £3million.
So:
Turnover: £7M
Squad Costs: £8M
Operating costs: £3M
Possible back tax bill: £1 3/4M
Bank Says "No more"

Now, I'm no financial genius, but I think this means they're royally, truly, hilariously rodgered to the hilt. Death approaches. I'm looking forward to some of the Vlad outbursts, and also to seeing just how long the Vlad loyalists over on ostrichback still worship at the alter of Mr Romanov.
Popcorn oot.

[Jim44]

If it came to a CVA, I wonder if they would be asked to pay 51p in the pound. :-)

[Caversham Green]

Maybe one of the financial whizzes will be able to answer this.
Just had a wee look at the brochure out of interest and I noticed that they're offering incentives to buy shares, like free tickets to matches, hospitality, signed shirts and free season tickets. Are they allowed to do this?
In financial services there's rules about gifts in return for business, could this be viewed in the same way?

I think this is slightly different. Buying the shares makes them part-owners of the club so the incentives are just giving the owners preferential treatment - the existing small shareholders might have grounds for complaint if they don't get the same perks but I don't think there are any significant legal implications. If the shareholders were also directors or employees there may be some tax implications, but they aren't so there's not.


IMO, administration is very unlikely. If there is one, the administrators will come to a very quick decision that there is no alternative to liquidation.

I think that's the killing argument, but one thing that crossed my mind regarding the tax liability.

Tynie is covered by a fixed charge so couldn't be sold without the consent of UBIG and that part of UBIG's debt wouldn't fall into the CVA vote. If the balance of UBIG's debt did stand as an ordinary creditor they might have enough to vote through a CVA thereby reducing the tax liability to pennies in the pound. It would reduce UBIG's debt as well but that is irrecoverable in any case. It probably wouldn't work as things are currently arranged, but....

[StevieC]

IMO, administration is very unlikely. If there is one, the administrators will come to a very quick decision that there is no alternative to liquidation.

Are you sure?
The biggest issue in the Rangers situation was that HMRC were owed the majority of the debt, and as such their rejection of the CVA was what resulted in liquidation.
In this case UKIO are owed the majority of the debt (probably close to £40m by now) so if they accepted a CVA would HMRC have to abide by it?
The CVA could include a bid of £15m for the assets from a little known (Lituanian) businessman.
After the CVA goes through you suddenly find Hearts receiving a £15m loan from UKIO (with Tynecastle as security) and the merry-go-round begins again.

Obviously UKIO would have to write-off at least half of their debt, but there's usually a "debt forgiveness" write off each season anyway.

[Kaiser1962]

The brochure also lists operating costs of just over £3million.
So:
Turnover: £7M
Squad Costs: £8M
Operating costs: £3M
Possible back tax bill: £1 3/4M
Bank Says "No more"

Now, I'm no financial genius, but I think this means they're royally, truly, hilariously rodgered to the hilt. Death approaches. I'm looking forward to some of the Vlad outbursts, and also to seeing just how long the Vlad loyalists over on ostrichback still worship at the alter of Mr Romanov.
Popcorn oot.

:agree:

Over the last three years published accounts, even if they had paid £0 wages, they would still have lost £100k. Their running costs, not including wages, are almost £8m per season.

[Caversham Green]

Are you sure?
The biggest issue in the Rangers situation was that HMRC were owed the majority of the debt, and as such their rejection of the CVA was what resulted in liquidation.
In this case UKIO are owed the majority of the debt (probably close to £40m by now) so if they accepted a CVA would HMRC have to abide by it?
The CVA could include a bid of £15m for the assets from a little known (Lituanian) businessman.
After the CVA goes through you suddenly find Hearts receiving a £15m loan from UKIO (with Tynecastle as security) and the merry-go-round begins again.

Obviously UKIO would have to write-off at least half of their debt, but there's usually a "debt forgiveness" write off each season anyway.

The drawback is that UBIG's debt is secured by a fixed charge. That makes them a preferred creditor and takes them out of a CVA vote. If they have been planning for an administration any debt incurred since 30 June 2011 might be due to another company and be unsecured, giving them a vote. The real problem though, is that HoMFC are not a going concern without UBIG's support so an exit from administration would prove difficult.

[Hermit Crab]

I think we should carry a coffin to tynie before the next derby just like what the Celtic fans did when they went to ibrox. That would be hilarious. There is a YouTube video of it 👍 http://youtu.be/NtDVTBTKvuk

[bingo70]

:agree:

Over the last three years published accounts, even if they had paid £0 wages, they would still have lost £100k. Their running costs, not including wages, is over amost £8m per season.

That's absolutely bonkers considering they still need to build a new stand and don't own there own training ground.

[fatbloke]

If it came to a CVA, I wonder if they would be asked to pay 51p in the pound. :-)

:faf:

[StevieC]

The drawback is that UBIG's debt is secured by a fixed charge. That makes them a preferred creditor and takes them out of a CVA vote.

If they are due £30m+ but only £18m is secured (and even that is hopeful for Tynecastle and land) would the outstanding £12m+ not put them as a creditor in a CVA attempt?

Not questioning your knowledge, just curious as to how a company due £30m+ would be ignored in a CVA attempt.

[Caversham Green]

If they are due £30m+ but only £18m is secured (and even that is hopeful for Tynecastle and land) would the outstanding £12m+ not put them as a creditor in a CVA attempt?

Not questioning your knowledge, just curious as to how a company due £30m+ would be ignored in a CVA attempt.

Question away, because I don't know this one for sure. The way I see it though, is that the asset doesn't have a set value until it's sold and the debt keeps moving so the arrangement is that the whole of the debt is secured on the whole of the asset and if the creditor is daft enough to let the debt exceed the value of the asset then that excess is at risk. In administration, if HoMFC were keeping Tynie both the asset and the debt would be kept out of the picture completely. If they were to sell Tynie then the unpaid balance of the debt would fall into the unsecured creditors pot, but at that stage continuation would seem unlikely since their main asset was gone so a CVA wouldn't apply.

[StevieC]

If they were to sell Tynie then the unpaid balance of the debt would fall into the unsecured creditors pot, but at that stage continuation would seem unlikely since their main asset was gone so a CVA wouldn't apply.

Could they sell Tynie as a "going concern" with guaranteed rental income though, in the way you might sell any other rented property? The sale of Tynie would be deducted from UBIG debt (lets say £30m-£15m sale) and they would then become an unsecured creditor in a CVA attempt. The CVA would be £15m-£1.75m in UBIG favour on the remaining assets (players etc.).

[greenginger]

The Ukio Bankas (as opposed to UBIG ) have just announced losses of 44 million Litas about £11 million for the first 9 months of 2012.

Don't look like the Bank is going to bail the Yams out.

[greenginger]

Question away, because I don't know this one for sure. The way I see it though, is that the asset doesn't have a set value until it's sold and the debt keeps moving so the arrangement is that the whole of the debt is secured on the whole of the asset and if the creditor is daft enough to let the debt exceed the value of the asset then that excess is at risk. In administration, if HoMFC were keeping Tynie both the asset and the debt would be kept out of the picture completely. If they were to sell Tynie then the unpaid balance of the debt would fall into the unsecured creditors pot, but at that stage continuation would seem unlikely since their main asset was gone so a CVA wouldn't apply.

But if UBIG has a standard security over the stadium and a floating charge over all the Company assets would'nt UBIG be the first to get their debts settled leaving nothing for HMRC or any other mugs , sorry, creditors.

[HoboHarry]

Hats off to you lot that understand all this stuff. I would rather set myself on fire than take the time to learn it.....

[Glory Lurker]

But if UBIG has a standard security over the stadium and a floating charge over all the Company assets would'nt UBIG be the first to get their debts settled leaving nothing for HMRC or any other mugs , sorry, creditors.

They'd theoretically be able to sell all the company's assets (assuming buyers could be found for the whole lot), but that would only recoup part of their exposure. That's as far as their priority goes - they would have to claim for the balance as unsecured creditors, just like all the others, so I suppose it depends how ready a market there is for the assets as to whether they will simply go down this "closing the door" route.

[#FromTheCapital]

This whole share issue is just wrong imo. Vladimir Romanov - a millionaire is asking a bunch of peasants from gorgie to give him money and has basically admitted that anyone who invests will not get a penny back. Surely if people have any disposable income they should be giving it to a charity, not some bent crook from Easter Europe who already has millions. There's more important things in life.

Had a look over on broke back and they've started a thread for people who have bought shares already. Congratulating each other on being belters. One guy says that he's already bought some and will be buying more for his family as Christmas presents. I seriously don't know whether to laugh or cry. "Here kids look what I got you for Christmas! **** all and it cost me hundreds!!" Fudd

[Moulin Yarns]

Shoot me down if this rubbish, but are shareholders not liable financially for any debts incurred by a plc?

Could that mean the 400,000 shareholders will be asked to stump up in the future?

[Part/Time Supporter]

Shoot me down if this rubbish, but are shareholders not liable financially for any debts incurred by a plc?

Could that mean the 400,000 shareholders will be asked to stump up in the future?

No, unless they've provided some sort of guarantee for the debts.

[itchy07]

Shoot me down if this rubbish, but are shareholders not liable financially for any debts incurred by a plc?

Could that mean the 400,000 shareholders will be asked to stump up in the future?


No, unless they've provided some sort of guarantee for the debts.E

Hope the investing:lolyam::lolyam: yams have read the small print

[greenginger]

One things for sure these share offer brochures were not cheap. I wonder if the printer got cash up front.

Also, they would have taken some time to put together so its been some months in the planning. The late wages was a ploy to concentrate Yam minds.

[greenginger]

http://wck2.companieshouse.gov.uk/abaf6617cb3a42ead2b6a3141bbfbf48/compdetails

Just noticed the Company that is looking for supporters cash can't even keep up to date with their annual returns.Should have been lodged at companies house by 19th September.

Its a 2 minute job with a £ 13 lodging fee,that is if you know who is willing to be listed as a company director of that lot.

Can you make a share offer if your statutory returns are out of date ? :confused:

[CropleyWasGod]

http://wck2.companieshouse.gov.uk/abaf6617cb3a42ead2b6a3141bbfbf48/compdetails

Just noticed the Company that is looking for supporters cash can't even keep up to date with their annual returns.Should have been lodged at companies house by 19th September.

Its a 2 minute job with a £ 13 lodging fee,that is if you know who is willing to be listed as a company director of that lot.

Can you make a share offer if your statutory returns are out of date ? :confused:

Yes, you can. However, were you a potential investor, would you invest in a company that couldn't keep its statutory duties?:greengrin

[jgl07]

Shoot me down if this rubbish, but are shareholders not liable financially for any debts incurred by a plc?


No. They key is PLC (Public Limited Liability Company). Shareholders are only liable to the value of their shares.

In any event Hearts are no longer a PLC since Vlad took them off the London Stock Exchange if I recall correctly. The same provision applies to an Ltd (Limited Liability Company).

Since according to the Accounts, UBIG are financially backing Hearts so they could have some liability in the vent of a liquidation. I would not fancy the chances of any cereditor getting any cash.

[CropleyWasGod]

No. They key is PLC (Public Limited Liability Company). Shareholders are only liable to the value of their shares.

In any event Hearts are no longer a PLC since Vlad took them off the London Stock Exchange if I recall correctly. The same provision applies to an Ltd (Limited Liability Company).

Since according to the Accounts, UBIG are financially backing Hearts so they could have some liability in the vent of a liquidation. I would not fancy the chances of any cereditor getting any cash.

Yes they are.....http://wck2.companieshouse.gov.uk/abaf6617cb3a42ead2b6a3141bbfbf48/compdetails

I can't see that UBIG would have any liability. They will make a loss on their investment, though.

[JoeTortolanoFanClub]

The brochure also lists operating costs of just over £3million.
So:
Turnover: £7M
Squad Costs: £8M
Operating costs: £3M
Possible back tax bill: £1 3/4M
Bank Says "No more"


As Dickens' Micawber said: "Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure nineteen pounds nineteen shillings and sixpence, result happiness. Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure twenty pounds nought and six, result misery."

[green glory]

http://wck2.companieshouse.gov.uk/abaf6617cb3a42ead2b6a3141bbfbf48/compdetails

Just noticed the Company that is looking for supporters cash can't even keep up to date with their annual returns.Should have been lodged at companies house by 19th September.

Its a 2 minute job with a £ 13 lodging fee,that is if you know who is willing to be listed as a company director of that lot.

Can you make a share offer if your statutory returns are out of date ? :confused:

I think you're all missing the important factor here. Maroonsevco don't have the 13 big ones.

[Jack Hackett]

Anyone know if Vlad actually took delivery of the £17m jet he was reported to have bought last year. Did he turn up in it for his trip here last weekend?

Would be a right slap in the face for the jumbos if he did :na na:

[green glory]

Anyone know if he actually took delivery of the £17m jet he was reported to have bought last year. Did he turn up in it for his trip here last weekend?

Would be a right slap in the face for the jumbos if he did :na na:

Now that would be funny. Then a helicopter to the centre circle at the Wee Pink Wonga Dome, quaffing the best champagne with a chick on each arm. Meanwhile the tramps are raiding their bairns piggy banks to keep their beloved club alive.

[macca70]

Anyone know if Vlad actually took delivery of the £17m jet he was reported to have bought last year. Did he turn up in it for his trip here last weekend?

Would be a right slap in the face for the jumbos if he did :na na:

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/hearts-owner-vladimir-romanov-buys-1096179

[nonshinyfinish]

Credit where it's due - HMRC are having an absolute stormer this year.

[Sir David Gray]

I'll believe this when I see it.

There's been so many false dawns before to believe that this will actually happen and so many rumours that they were going to the wall and going into administration etc.

If HMRC win the case against them, I might start to believe that they are finished but until then all we can really do is get the prayer mats out. :pray:

FTH :giruy:

[jgl07]

I can't see that UBIG would have any liability. They will make a loss on their investment, though.

If that is the case then why have the auditors been signing off the accounts for a clearly insolvent company for the last four years?

Does the implicit support that UBIG have been giving Hearts bear no liability (apart from the initial purchase price and all theose debt for equity exchanges)?

[Caversham Green]

Could they sell Tynie as a "going concern" with guaranteed rental income though, in the way you might sell any other rented property? The sale of Tynie would be deducted from UBIG debt (lets say £30m-£15m sale) and they would then become an unsecured creditor in a CVA attempt. The CVA would be £15m-£1.75m in UBIG favour on the remaining assets (players etc.).

They could do that but it would depend on turning HoMFC into a business that makes enough cash profit to service the rent and if that was a possibility they would be better taking the £1.75m hit and just doing it. The more the external debt increases the more likely (or less unlikely) administration becomes, but I think it's a long way from being viable right now.

[Caversham Green]

But if UBIG has a standard security over the stadium and a floating charge over all the Company assets would'nt UBIG be the first to get their debts settled leaving nothing for HMRC or any other mugs , sorry, creditors.

You're right, I was overlooking the floating charge. I would think though, that administration (as opposed to liquidation) would look to keep as many of the assets as possible and seek fresh investment to pay off the creditors - the secured creditors still wouldn't have a vote in the CVA, and even if the assets were all sold that would reduce UBIG's voting power in a CVA proposal.

[Hermit Crab]

100 pager this.

[Caversham Green]

I'll believe this when I see it.

There's been so many false dawns before to believe that this will actually happen and so many rumours that they were going to the wall and going into administration etc.

If HMRC win the case against them, I might start to believe that they are finished but until then all we can really do is get the prayer mats out. :pray:

FTH :giruy:

This always irks me a bit. Everything I've posted on this subject has been based on a genuine analysis of their situation using my professional knowledge and experience - it has never just been wishful thinking. I've also always tried to explain the reasons behind my comments as clearly as I could. The one and only factor that has kept HoMFC going has been Romanov's willingness to throw money at them for far longer than I or many others expected. He has made it very clear that that has now stopped and I can't see any form of rescue for them unless he changes his mind. I'll happily debate the possibilities with anyone who can offer a reasonable argument, but "we've heard it all before" just won't do.

I realise that it's been going on for years, but every incident has had subtle differences from the previous one that suggested they were getting closer and closer to the S-trap and this looks like the worst so far. If you think it's not going to happen then give us good reasons why you think that.

BTW that wasn't a direct go at you FH - I don't think you usually post that sort of comment.

[green glory]

More funny Yam doom.

http://m.scotsman.com/the-scotsman/sport/stuart-bathgate-romanov-must-reveal-his-exit-plan-1-2603507

[Caversham Green]

If that is the case then why have the auditors been signing off the accounts for a clearly insolvent company for the last four years?

Does the implicit support that UBIG have been giving Hearts bear no liability (apart from the initial purchase price and all theose debt for equity exchanges)?

The audit report carries a very significant qualification. It refers to UBIG's commitment to provide sufficient future funding, but states that the auditors have been unable to verify whether UBIG was in a position to provide that funding. Tha accounting policy note also says that the directors have written confirmation from UBIG that it would provide funding for the foreseeable future. The foreseeable future is generally accepted as meaning 12 months from the date of signing the accounts so UBIG might arguably have some liability for debts incurred up to 5 April 2013. However, if UBIG has subsequently advised the directors that the funding was being withdrawn then any debts incurred since that notice would have been incurred recklessly by the directors and it would more likely be their personal liability. It would be up to a court to decide though.

[CropleyWasGod]

If that is the case then why have the auditors been signing off the accounts for a clearly insolvent company for the last four years?

Does the implicit support that UBIG have been giving Hearts bear no liability (apart from the initial purchase price and all theose debt for equity exchanges)?

I am not sure of the points you are making.

1. Cav has covered the question of the audit report.

2. The support that UBIG have been giving Hearts does bear a liability. The liability is the risk that UBIG will not recover the money that they have invested.

[Mikey]

A wee word of advice to everyone. Pay attention to what CG, CWG and PTS have to say on the subject :wink:

[greenginger]

You're right, I was overlooking the floating charge. I would think though, that administration (as opposed to liquidation) would look to keep as many of the assets as possible and seek fresh investment to pay off the creditors - the secured creditors still wouldn't have a vote in the CVA, and even if the assets were all sold that would reduce UBIG's voting power in a CVA proposal.


The way I could see it work for the Liths would be this,

Enter administration with their own version of the Duffers appointed, UBIG Mark 2 offers to buy the HOMFC assets for a sum way over any other consortium might offer, but less than UBIG Mark 1 has security for.

Ownership is transferred to UBIG Mark 2, and cash to Mark 1, Leaving UBIG with the assets at no cost and the other creditors mainly HMRC with nowt.

Bit of a Baldrick type plan, and a lot of work to dump a circa £ 3 million debt I know.

[JeMeSouviens]

This always irks me a bit. Everything I've posted on this subject has been based on a genuine analysis of their situation using my professional knowledge and experience - it has never just been wishful thinking. I've also always tried to explain the reasons behind my comments as clearly as I could. The one and only factor that has kept HoMFC going has been Romanov's willingness to throw money at them for far longer than I or many others expected. He has made it very clear that that has now stopped and I can't see any form of rescue for them unless he changes his mind. I'll happily debate the possibilities with anyone who can offer a reasonable argument, but "we've heard it all before" just won't do.

I realise that it's been going on for years, but every incident has had subtle differences from the previous one that suggested they were getting closer and closer to the S-trap and this looks like the worst so far. If you think it's not going to happen then give us good reasons why you think that.

BTW that wasn't a direct go at you FH - I don't think you usually post that sort of comment.

Think you're spot on and the bit in bold is very much the key point. Exactly what kind of doom the Yams end up with is still very much down to Vlad's whims. Although he's stopped pumping money in at insane levels, he has still been willing to write off huge chunks of debt. If his exit was done in a Yam friendly way, writing off the bulk of the remaining debt and allowing them to keep Tiny, they could still come out relatively unscathed, albeit they'd have to return to the real world. However, if that was his plan why hasn't he done it already? At the other extreme, he could get fed up, pull the plug and they'd be toast. I suspect the outcome will be somewhere in the middle. Hearts continue with most of the debt gone but as tenants in their own midden, still clinging to a council super stadium as the way out of their troubles.

[Caversham Green]

The way I could see it work for the Liths would be this,

Enter administration with their own version of the Duffers appointed, UBIG Mark 2 offers to buy the HOMFC assets for a sum way over any other consortium might offer, but less than UBIG Mark 1 has security for.

Ownership is transferred to UBIG Mark 2, and cash to Mark 1, Leaving UBIG with the assets at no cost and the other creditors mainly HMRC with nowt.

Bit of a Baldrick type plan, and a lot of work to dump a circa £ 3 million debt I know.

I can understand the plan and the higher the external debt the more viable it becomes but it supposes that UBIG want to keep the money lavvy that is Heart of Midlothian plc. Every indication is that they want rid but can't find someone daft enough to buy it so right now a straight liquidation would be a better business move than administration.

[Caversham Green]

Think you're spot on and the bit in bold is very much the key point. Exactly what kind of doom the Yams end up with is still very much down to Vlad's whims. Although he's stopped pumping money in at insane levels, he has still been willing to write off huge chunks of debt. If his exit was done in a Yam friendly way, writing off the bulk of the remaining debt and allowing them to keep Tiny, they could still come out relatively unscathed, albeit they'd have to return to the real world. However, if that was his plan why hasn't he done it already? At the other extreme, he could get fed up, pull the plug and they'd be toast. I suspect the outcome will be somewhere in the middle. Hearts continue with most of the debt gone but as tenants in their own midden, still clinging to a council super stadium as the way out of their troubles.

I posted on the pm board that my best bet had been that he would keep them going in gradual decline but that changed when this share offer came up. Mikey summarised my lengthy comments into "It's a donation" earlier in the thread and he was spot on - Mr Romanov has got the begging bowl out because it would appear that he doesn't want to give HoMFC anything at all. £1.79m isn't going to go far even if they avoid this tax liability and they're already talking about another share issue next year. It has all the hallmarks of panic management and even if it does work this time future share issues are bound to produce diminishing returns.

[greenginger]

I posted on the pm board that my best bet had been that he would keep them going in gradual decline but that changed when this share offer came up. Mikey summarised my lengthy comments into "It's a donation" earlier in the thread and he was spot on - Mr Romanov has got the begging bowl out because it would appear that he doesn't want to give HoMFC anything at all. £1.79m isn't going to go far even if they avoid this tax liability and they're already talking about another share issue next year. It has all the hallmarks of panic management and even if it does work this time future share issues are bound to produce diminishing returns.


Yeah, but thats what happens when the loan sharks get their claws into you, they keep coming back for more, and more_ _ _ :greengrin

[haagsehibby]

Apologies if it's already been answered in the thread - but is the share offer a sale of existing shares or a new issue which would dilute the existing holdings ?

[Caversham Green]

Apologies if it's already been answered in the thread - but is the share offer a sale of existing shares or a new issue which would dilute the existing holdings ?

It's new shares.

[StevieC]

Apologies if it's already been answered in the thread - but is the share offer a sale of existing shares or a new issue which would dilute the existing holdings ?

I read it as 10% of existing shares.


It's new shares.

I stand corrected. :greengrin

[CropleyWasGod]

Apologies if it's already been answered in the thread - but is the share offer a sale of existing shares or a new issue which would dilute the existing holdings ?

Cav beat me to it.

If it were existing shares, then the cash would go to the current shareholders. This way, it's new cash coming into the company.

As you say, it's a dilution of the worth of the current shareholdings. What are turds now will be slightly soggy ones.

[PatHead]

Cav, unlike you I'm still hoping they get a stay of execution though I am looking forward to Hearts demise. I hope it takes another 3 years simply because in that time we are missing out on at least 1 if not 2 Category A games whilst the Ibrox club remain in the lower divisions. Were Hearts to go the same way that would mean we may only have 1, but more than likely 2, Category A games a season against Celtic. That would hurt us financially without doubt.

So to me our ideal scenario would be for Hearts to limp along drawing us in both the league and Scottish Cups for the next 3 seasons whilst we run up a number of record matching or breaking 7 or 8 goal victories. (Maybe throw in a few last minute winners along the way when we have been outplayed for the majority of the game just as a tease.)

Hearts, by the end, are even more financially rooked on their average home crowd of 4,000 approach us with a begging bowl asking to move in with us whilst they sort themselves out. The board consider it over the summer building their hopes up then say no thanks. Hearts are outvoted for a place in the league and Spartans or Edinburgh City get their place.

Oh the squirming would be wonderful.

[Jim44]

Somewhere in this thread, I described the fan trait of indiscriminately and irrationally referring to Hibs in times of stress and discomfort as a sort of dummy tit or comfort blanket. It has even spread to the Jambo media. In this morning's Jamboman, in three seperate stories by three different journos, on one page, there is reference to " the Tynecastle side's 5-1 destruction of Edinburgh rivals....". ; " leading Hearts to Scottish Cup glory" and " Heart's 5-1 hammering of their bitter city rivals in May's one sided Scottish Cup Final ". No coincidence and unbelievably, not one of the articles was penned by Bathgate himself ...... yes there's Jambo strength in depth in the good old Scotsman. This infatuation with us is going to grow arms and legs in the next few months as they slip into the abyss. Cold and temporary comfort methinks.

[haagsehibby]

Cav beat me to it.

If it were existing shares, then the cash would go to the current shareholders. This way, it's new cash coming into the company.

As you say, it's a dilution of the worth of the current shareholdings. What are turds now will be slightly soggy ones.

Thanks for the answers. But give what you've stated above, how does that square with the Hearts statement that the aim is "to potentially step towards a supporter-owned football club" ? Since, to my ill-trained eye, I can't see how an annual issue of new shares could ever achieve this aim.

[CropleyWasGod]

Thanks for the answers. But give what you've stated above, how does that square with the Hearts statement that the aim is "to potentially step towards a supporter-owned football club" ? Since, to my ill-trained eye, I can't see how an annual issue of new shares could ever achieve this aim.

The word "potentially" is a powerful one :greengrin

I suppose that the plan (this week's one, anyway) is to raise the cash to pay HMRC in the short-term. When that particular storm is over, and the hordes see how successful that plan was, they will flock in their dozens to buy the rest of the shares off Vlad, UBIG and the others.

:cb

[Hibee87]

I might be wrong but I could have sworn I seen a post on facebook from someone i know who is already a shareholder at hearts saying they have an AGM tonight, if so will be interesting to see what comes from it :cb

[jonty]

I thought Romanov was offloading some of UBIGs shares?

From Stuart Bathgates article:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=WIoHSu5v1Mo


Hearts want to sell ten per cent of the shares owned by Ubig, the parent company in which Vladimir Romanov has a controlling interest, for £1.78m.


The Hearts owner is offering supporters the chance to buy 11 per cent of his 98 per cent shareholding and hopes to raise around £1.8million to keep the club in working capital. (Daily ******. I know. Sorry)

[Bighoose]

Not familiar with UBIG's accounts, but can they allow the "asset" of £28M Hearts Debt to disappear from their accounts without making them insolvent too?

[Treadstone]

Avatar changed . Thats all .

[Sudds_1]

Somewhere in this thread, I described the fan trait of indiscriminately and irrationally referring to Hibs in times of stress and discomfort as a sort of dummy tit or comfort blanket. It has even spread to the Jambo media. In this morning's Jamboman, in three seperate stories by three different journos, on one page, there is reference to " the Tynecastle side's 5-1 destruction of Edinburgh rivals....". ; " leading Hearts to Scottish Cup glory" and " Heart's 5-1 hammering of their bitter city rivals in May's one sided Scottish Cup Final ". No coincidence and unbelievably, not one of the articles was penned by Bathgate himself ...... yes there's Jambo strength in depth in the good old Scotsman. This infatuation with us is going to grow arms and legs in the next few months as they slip into the abyss. Cold and temporary comfort methinks.

Hell mend them. The purchase of their comfort blanket (in the form of a big win over us last year) effectively means nowt as they slip into the abyss. Their arrogance has probably cost them their club..................

so..........let them sneer all they want. They're headed only one way......and we're going the other way.
:flag:

[Treadstone]

Tom English webchat on Hearts at midday if anyone is interested .

http://www.scotsman.com/scotland-on-sunday/webchats

[Off the bar]

Avatar changed . Thats all .

love it! :thumbsup:

[Seveno]

The word "potentially" is a powerful one :greengrin

I suppose that the plan (this week's one, anyway) is to raise the cash to pay HMRC in the short-term. When that particular storm is over, and the hordes see how successful that plan was, they will flock in their dozens to buy the rest of the shares off Vlad, UBIG and the others.

:cb

I don't think the money is to pay HMRC but as working capital to keep them going till something turns up.

By the time you add interest and penalties, HMRC will be after much more than £1.7m and it will likely take a few months for the Tribunal decision to be announced.

i can't wait till wages day this month to see what happens next.

[Hibs Class]

As Caversham Green says however I suggest opening this link and reading page 18.

http://view.vcab.com/?vcabid=gheSelgegScajnegn&count=25/10/2012%2015:19:02-6


Had a look at that doc - laughed where it says that the pulling power of the club was best demonstrated when Hearts entertained Barcelona at Murrayfield in 2007 in a crowd of 57k :crazy:

[DarrenSQH]

Had a look at that doc - laughed where it says that the pulling power of the club was best demonstrated when Hearts entertained Barcelona at Murrayfield in 2007 in a crowd of 57k :crazy:

haha yeah no one was there to see messi, Xavi and Ineista.

Its a joke they use 1914 as a marketing tool in their packages of shares. The 1914 package costs £10,000. I doubt anyone will take them up.

Packages
Maroon package- £110
Tynecastle £ 275
1874 £550
Robbo £1100
Tommy Walker £2750
Terrible Trio £5500
1914- £11000
Heart of Midlothian- £25000

[Part/Time Supporter]

A bit more detail on the tax case (from the HMFC point of view)

http://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/top-football-stories/ex-hearts-star-insists-loan-players-were-taxed-in-uk-and-lithuania-1-2605333

Problem still remains of how they can justify that 50/50 split of wages being taxed in Lithuania and UK, when the two clubs have common ownership.

[DaveF]

A bit more detail on the tax case (from the HMFC point of view)

http://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/top-football-stories/ex-hearts-star-insists-loan-players-were-taxed-in-uk-and-lithuania-1-2605333

Problem still remains of how they can justify that 50/50 split of wages being taxed in Lithuania and UK, when the two clubs have common ownership.

Does that dilute the HMRC case and strengthen the yams hand, in your opinion?

[poolman]

A wee word of advice to everyone. Pay attention to what CG, CWG and PTS have to say on the subject :wink:

.Net resident financial whizzkids :agree:

This thread would not be the same without their knowledgable input

Same for the Huns thread as well of course

[Hibernia Na Eir]

The Revenue will have a watertight case. they usually always do. Hertz better be ready!

[CropleyWasGod]

Does that dilute the HMRC case and strengthen the yams hand, in your opinion?

IMO, it adds nothing to anyone's case. The journalist is guessing at what the exact issue is. "an outstanding amount of £1.75m in unpaid tax, which may relate to other benefits given to any of the 19 players loaned from Kaunas ".... means nothing.

HMRC will not say what the issue is. HMFC will make (probably biased) statements as to what it is. The rest of us (myself included) will speculate on what it is.

What Mrowiec says (about who is responsible for the tax) is contrary to what Robertson said at the weekend. And both are reasonable stances to take. I'll therefore reserve judgement.... and continue to speculate :greengrin

[CropleyWasGod]

The Revenue will have a watertight case. they usually always do. Hertz better be ready!

I almost fell off my chair there.

Sorry, that's just not the case.

[DaveF]

IMO, it adds nothing to anyone's case. The journalist is guessing at what the exact issue is. "an outstanding amount of £1.75m in unpaid tax, which may relate to other benefits given to any of the 19 players loaned from Kaunas ".... means nothing.

HMRC will not say what the issue is. HMFC will make (probably biased) statements as to what it is. The rest of us (myself included) will speculate on what it is.

What Mrowiec says (about who is responsible for the tax) is contrary to what Robertson said at the weekend. And both are reasonable stances to take. I'll therefore reserve judgement.... and continue to speculate :greengrin

Cheers.

I forgot it was BAnderson who wrote that article so that eliminates any possible journalistic integrity attached to it.

I guess I'll sit back and watch what happens. Seems to be all anyone can do.

[Saorsa]

Cheers.

I forgot it was BAnderson who wrote that article so that eliminates any possible journalistic integrity attached to it.

I guess I'll sit back and watch what happens. Seems to be all anyone can do.you forgot laugh :hilarious

[Hibee87]

Does that dilute the HMRC case and strengthen the yams hand, in your opinion?

Im no expert at all in regards to this and all i am basining my post on is guessing what I think might have happened here.

Hearts pay half wages through hearts

Kaunas pay half wages through Kaunas


the case which im guesing hmrc are chasing is this bit - 'which may relate to other benefits given to any of the 19 players loaned from Kaunas'


I wonder if any bonuses, win bonus, goal bonuses, clean sheet bonuses etc have been paid into the kaunas side of things therefore avoiding the UK tax on such earnings. I do belive that alot of there players wages and the reason the wage bill was so high was due to bonuses so I guess my question to the experts (cav/cropley) on here is - If hearts players loaned from kaunas were paid any additonal income through there Lith banks is this illeagal and does it sound plausable as to what the bill is for?

[RyeSloan]

IMO, it adds nothing to anyone's case. The journalist is guessing at what the exact issue is. "an outstanding amount of £1.75m in unpaid tax, which may relate to other benefits given to any of the 19 players loaned from Kaunas ".... means nothing.

HMRC will not say what the issue is. HMFC will make (probably biased) statements as to what it is. The rest of us (myself included) will speculate on what it is.

What Mrowiec says (about who is responsible for the tax) is contrary to what Robertson said at the weekend. And both are reasonable stances to take. I'll therefore reserve judgement.... and continue to speculate :greengrin

What an cutting edge piece that was....dig up an ex loanee and take his word for it that tax was paid on his wages. I don't think it even addresses the point in that HMRC are saying UK tax is due on all wages not just the UK paid piece. :rolleyes:

Vlad must be really really tempted just to pull the plug and bolt.....

[DaveF]

you forgot laugh :hilarious

I assumed all Hibbies were on automatic laugh :greengrin

[Mikey]

If they get hit with the tax bill they should make Campbell Ogilvie pay it.

[CropleyWasGod]

Im no expert at all in regards to this and all i am basining my post on is guessing what I think might have happened here.

Hearts pay half wages through hearts

Kaunas pay half wages through Kaunas


the case which im guesing hmrc are chasing is this bit - 'which may relate to other benefits given to any of the 19 players loaned from Kaunas'


I wonder if any bonuses, win bonus, goal bonuses, clean sheet bonuses etc have been paid into the kaunas side of things therefore avoiding the UK tax on such earnings. I do belive that alot of there players wages and the reason the wage bill was so high was due to bonuses so I guess my question to the experts (cav/cropley) on here is - If hearts players loaned from kaunas were paid any additonal income through there Lith banks is this illeagal and does it sound plausable as to what the bill is for?

It's not illegal. However, if these players were HMFC employees (and I am still not convinced that they were) then any bonuses etc would be subject to UK tax (however and wherever they were paid) and should be put through the PAYE system.

[Part/Time Supporter]

Does that dilute the HMRC case and strengthen the yams hand, in your opinion?

It's not as blatant as I thought it might be, but it's the same problem. What rationale was there for having HMFC pay half the wages, rather than a lesser or greater share?

Hearts have to prove (IMO) that the deals with Kaunas were done at arm's length. That's going to be very difficult, particularly in the cases where Kaunas signed a player and then immediately "loaned" him to HMFC. Protesting that they have all this paperwork documenting how the payments were made isn't going to cut it.

[cocopops1875]

.Net resident financial whizzkids :agree:

This thread would not be the same without their knowledgable input

Same for the Huns thread as well of course
I'm still hoping they don't bill us for the Huns thread

[Hibee87]

It's not illegal. However, if these players were HMFC employees (and I am still not convinced that they were) then any bonuses etc would be subject to UK tax (however and wherever they were paid) and should be put through the PAYE system.

Ah right bang goes my theory, cheers.

So if a player is loaned to hearts via kaunas say roman bednar for example, I dont think he ever set foot in lithuania but was signed for then and immediatly loaned to hearts would hmrc have a case about his earnings being half paid in lithuania?

[greenginger]

Im no expert at all in regards to this and all i am basining my post on is guessing what I think might have happened here.

Hearts pay half wages through hearts

Kaunas pay half wages through Kaunas


the case which im guesing hmrc are chasing is this bit - 'which may relate to other benefits given to any of the 19 players loaned from Kaunas'


I wonder if any bonuses, win bonus, goal bonuses, clean sheet bonuses etc have been paid into the kaunas side of things therefore avoiding the UK tax on such earnings. I do belive that alot of there players wages and the reason the wage bill was so high was due to bonuses so I guess my question to the experts (cav/cropley) on here is - If hearts players loaned from kaunas were paid any additonal income through there Lith banks is this illeagal and does it sound plausable as to what the bill is for?

HMRC have all the rules on their side. They wrote them after all.

This scheme that they dreamt up to register the players in Kaunus before being loaned to the Yams has to be shown to be for " commercial reasons " not just a tax saving device.

If it can't be shown there was sound commercial reasons for operating the scheme, the HMRC have the power to set aside the scheme and apply the tax rules as if the scheme never existed.
In other words tax, NI on the lot with interest and penalties as far back as 2006. There has been notes on the Yam accounts going back to 2008 about this investigation.

[CropleyWasGod]

Ah right bang goes my theory, cheers.

So if a player is loaned to hearts via kaunas say roman bednar for example, I dont think he ever set foot in lithuania but was signed for then and immediatly loaned to hearts would hmrc have a case about his earnings being half paid in lithuania?

If he was loaned to Hearts, then he isn't their employee. They have no responsibility in PAYE terms; they would pay Kaunas a fee per month. Which is where my confusion arises. :confused:

However, HMRC may have concluded that he IS an employee. Such decisions aren't up to the employer or employee... they are often decided on the basis of a number of facts. If that is the case, then all of the loaned players would be subject to PAYE.

If that is HMRC's position, and it is supported by the FTT, that could have serious implications for all cross-border loans.

[Caversham Green]

I've been assuming the tax case was a twist on the transfer pricing operation - e.g. V owns company Y in Scotland and company K in Lithuania. Tax rates are lower in Lithuania so K sell goods to Y at inflated prices to reduce Y's profits and increase K's making V's overall tax bill lower than it should have been. The same principle can be applied to wages so that V pays less for employees working in Scotland by paying them through K rather than Y. Neither arrangement is legal and the onus is on the taxpayer rather than HMRC to prove that such an arrangement didn't exist.

[cocteautwin]

I don't log on often, normally lurching in the background as a guest, but these few days I feel the need to contribute to what I have no doubt will become the longest thread in hibs.net history over the coming months, dwarfing the already legendary Rangers thread.

This is history in the making for our city rivals. Unfortunately for them it's soon to be the end of their history.

It's going to be a long slow death over the next few months. I'm afraid (not!) that the cancer is terminal for Jambos. :na na:

I'm off to get a huge bag of pop corn and watch this unfold.

This is undoubtedly the start of the end. GIRUY!

[Sergio sledge]

It's not as blatant as I thought it might be, but it's the same problem. What rationale was there for having HMFC pay half the wages, rather than a lesser or greater share?

Hearts have to prove (IMO) that the deals with Kaunas were done at arm's length. That's going to be very difficult, particularly in the cases where Kaunas signed a player and then immediately "loaned" him to HMFC. Protesting that they have all this paperwork documenting how the payments were made isn't going to cut it.

Especially considering some of these players never played or even trained with Kaunas for the duration of their contract. Loans are legitimate means of getting players off the wage bill, or giving players game time before they either return to the parent club or get sold on. Either way it is ultimately the parent club which has the benefit of reduced wage bill for a period, improved player returning to them or an improved transfer fee at the end. How did Kaunas benefit from any of this? Reduced wage bill - No, increased because of the new player they signed. Player returns better - No. Increased transfer fees at the end - Unclear where these went. They got player "registration fees," whatever they are, but I struggle to see how they made any money out of it. The question HMRC will be asking is "Why didn't hearts just pay the transfer fee and sign the players themselves and save going through a 3rd party?" If Kaunas benefited and Hearts benefited, then surely Hearts would have been better off just removing the 3rd party and buying the player themselves. Unless there was some sort of tax benefit to buying the players through the Lithuanian club and loaning them to Hearts.....

As an aside, did anyone notice this photo in the share brochure?

8779

Can anyone explain the reason behind putting this picture into the section for the terms and conditions? Other than the obvious "5-1" hand signal the ref is giving.....:rolleyes:

[s.a.m]

My opinion is about as inexpert as it gets, but I'm assuming that HMRC have taken the view that Hearts are at it, in claiming that some of their players are employed by Kaunas. Some of them are quite clearly Hearts' players alone, and have no involvement (other than their wages) with Kaunas. If you add to their obvious non-employment at Kaunas the advantage that is gained by the owner of both clubs, there is surely at least room for suspicion that they are avoiding paying UK taxes by employing people through kid-on loans.:dunno:

Claros, and the many other foreign loanees plying their trade here, look like genuine loans because they have an employment history at the club that claims to employ them, and they generally go back there.

No?


[Edit: and Sergio Sledge has beaten me to it....:greengrin]

[HIBERNIAN-0762]

As an aside, did anyone notice this photo in the share brochure?

8779

Can anyone explain the reason behind putting this picture into the section for the terms and conditions? Other than the obvious "5-1" hand signal the ref is giving.....:rolleyes:

I can.

They are 110% obsessed with us. Nothing matters during the season as long as they beat us. Small minds have small pleasures. They are far too busy with pictures of various coppers, refs and former players doing the 5-1 thing to notice that are on the way out of the SPL very soon.

I truly hope the taxman and the SPL bosses absolutely bury this club, the 3rd division isn't just punishment for them, they need a Gretna type expulsion.

[Part/Time Supporter]

My opinion is about as inexpert as it gets, but I'm assuming that HMRC have taken the view that Hearts are at it, in claiming that some of their players are employed by Kaunas. Some of them are quite clearly Hearts' players alone, and have no involvement (other than their wages) with Kaunas. If you add to their obvious non-employment at Kaunas the advantage that is gained by the owner of both clubs, there is surely at least room for suspicion that they are avoiding paying UK taxes by employing people through kid-on loans.:dunno:

Claros, and the many other foreign loanees plying their trade here, look like genuine loans because they have an employment history at the club that claims to employ them, and they generally go back there.

No?


[Edit: and Sergio Sledge has beaten me to it....:greengrin]

That is correct. The share offer brochure specifically states the tax dispute is to do with players "loaned" from Kaunas to Hearts. They have signed several players on loan from other foreign clubs since Romanov took over (eg1 Skacel in his first spell there, eg2 Pinilla) and they aren't subject to this action.

[Aldo]

They all have their heads in the sand... Delusional. Craigan mentioned the other nite that the day before the story came out bout the 1.75 mill tax bill they was going to be a share issue trying to raise....mmmm let me think. 1.75 mill.

Anyone of them who puts their cash to that needs to visit the Andrew Duncan ( and no disrespect to those at Andrew Duncan meant)

I hope they get dragged through the nite. Stripped of everything. I get a feeling that the mad one has a wee sneaky up his sleeve when the rug gets pulled.

Something like o the ground doesn't belong to them it's leased from someone else.

I really do hope this happens as I won't need a crimbo or birthday present as their demise would be more than enough for me.

[Hibbyradge]

So, Kaunus buy a player who immediately goes "on loan" to Hearts.

The transfer fee/signing on fee/agent fee is then recouped by the mysterious "player registrations" which Hearts paid.

Hearts then avoid PAYE on the salary.

Is this a possible scenario?

[Treadstone]

CG , CWG or PTS

In the share brochure they say that the 'burden of proof is on the company' does this mean that:

1. HMRC has a stated and probably common sense position on this ?
2. It is up to Hearts to disprove this ?
3. This is almost sewn up from an HMRC view ?

[Keith_M]

If he was loaned to Hearts, then he isn't their employee. They have no responsibility in PAYE terms; they would pay Kaunas a fee per month. Which is where my confusion arises. :confused:

However, HMRC may have concluded that he IS an employee. Such decisions aren't up to the employer or employee... they are often decided on the basis of a number of facts. If that is the case, then all of the loaned players would be subject to PAYE.

If that is HMRC's position, and it is supported by the FTT, that could have serious implications for all cross-border loans.

When I was Contracting (don't ask and you won't get hurt :wink:) I was aware that there is a rule that says once you have been in an country (possibly EU only though, can't remember) more than 182 days, you are due to pay tax in that country.

Is this not relevant in this instance? For instance, Bednar signs for Kaunas but plays all his football at Hearts, more than 182 days. HMRC consider this to be de-facto employement by Hearts and therefore adjudge him to be 100% liable to UK taxation.

Or is this too simplistic?

[CropleyWasGod]

CG , CWG or PTS

In the share brochure they say that the 'burden of proof is on the company' does this mean that:

1. HMRC has a stated and probably common sense position on this ?
2. It is up to Hearts to disprove this ?
3. This is almost sewn up from an HMRC view ?

HMRC have made an assessment, which HMFC have appealled against. It is now up to HMFC to prove the basis of their appeal.

[Spike Mandela]

I don't log on often, normally lurching in the background as a guest, but these few days I feel the need to contribute to what I have no doubt will become the longest thread in hibs.net history over the coming months, dwarfing the already legendary Rangers thread.

This is history in the making for our city rivals. Unfortunately for them it's soon to be the end of their history.

It's going to be a long slow death over the next few months. I'm afraid (not!) that the cancer is terminal for Jambos. :na na:

I'm off to get a huge bag of pop corn and watch this unfold.

This is undoubtedly the start of the end. GIRUY!

Like it was the end for Rangers?

Cast your eyes over to Ibrox. Sitting top of their league, millions of debt cast off, riding roughshod over the authorities, laughing at other teams and their supporters and more unscrupulous people taking over trying to make a fast buck.

My prediction to the end of all this will see Hearts suffering some kind of sanctions allied to their financial woes but the future will be pretty much as it is for Rangers. Carry on regardless.

[CropleyWasGod]

When I was Contracting (don't ask and you won't get hurt :wink:) I was aware that there is a rule that says once you have been in an country (possibly EU only though, can't remember) more than 182 days, you are due to pay tax in that country.

Is this not relevant in this instance? For instance, Bednar signs for Kaunas but plays all his football at Hearts, more than 182 days. HMRC consider this to be de-facto employement by Hearts and therefore adjudge him to be 100% liable to UK taxation.

Or is this too simplistic?

It's kind of relevant. The number of days aren't important (although that would be if they were actual employees), but I am veering towards the theory that HMRC have decided that they ARE employees, no matter what anyone says.

[HibbyRod]

I can.

They are 110% obsessed with us. Nothing matters during the season as long as they beat us. Small minds have small pleasures. They are far too busy with pictures of various coppers, refs and former players doing the 5-1 thing to notice that are on the way out of the SPL very soon.

I truly hope the taxman and the SPL bosses absolutely bury this club, the 3rd division isn't just punishment for them, they need a Gretna type expulsion.

Is that Craig Thomson doing the hands gesture? :rolleyes:

[FitbaFolkKen]

http://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/spl/tom-english-buy-hearts-shares-or-live-with-results-1-2602698

Enjoyed this, apologies if posted already!

[JimBHibees]

Is that Craig Thomson doing the hands gesture? :rolleyes:

If it isnt it should be.

[Off the bar]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/20140052

according to mcfud it's all celtics fault.

[Hibercelona]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/20140052

according to mcfud it's all celtics fault.

Sadly, because its a dig at Celtic, everybody will agree with him. Although his reasoning behind not wanting Celtic in the league, will greatly differ from our own and other club supporters that aren't jambos or huns.

[Keith_M]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/20140052

according to mcfud it's all celtics fault.


Well, it seems they now have the same victim complex as their big brothers in the west. They think everything is Celtcs fault as well but nothing is the fault of Rangers/The Rangers/Sevco.


FWIW, I wouldn't like to see Celtc leave the league now, seeing as the league is closer than it's been for decades.

[Newry Hibs]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/20140052

according to mcfud it's all celtics fault.

In the link ....

"At the minute it's exciting because from week to week someone else is second in the league," McGlynn continued.


Celtc could be 4th at 5.00pm on Saturday if results work out (though, admittedly I think they'll win the league).

[Spike Mandela]

Scots law blog talks Hearts share issue

http://scotslawthoughts.wordpress.com/2012/10/30/the-hearts-share-issue-risk-factors-galore-one-for-the-die-hards-only/

[Billy Whizz]

Scots law blog talks Hearts share issue

http://scotslawthoughts.wordpress.com/2012/10/30/the-hearts-share-issue-risk-factors-galore-one-for-the-die-hards-only/

Under the heading
Specific Risks Factors – Working Capital Shortfall
It says Hearts may need a "payday" loan if they have insufficient working Capital!
Will Wonga step in

[cam75]

Scots law blog talks Hearts share issue

http://scotslawthoughts.wordpress.com/2012/10/30/the-hearts-share-issue-risk-factors-galore-one-for-the-die-hards-only/

Decent read,now we're is my cheque book :-)

[Sir David Gray]

This always irks me a bit. Everything I've posted on this subject has been based on a genuine analysis of their situation using my professional knowledge and experience - it has never just been wishful thinking. I've also always tried to explain the reasons behind my comments as clearly as I could. The one and only factor that has kept HoMFC going has been Romanov's willingness to throw money at them for far longer than I or many others expected. He has made it very clear that that has now stopped and I can't see any form of rescue for them unless he changes his mind. I'll happily debate the possibilities with anyone who can offer a reasonable argument, but "we've heard it all before" just won't do.

I realise that it's been going on for years, but every incident has had subtle differences from the previous one that suggested they were getting closer and closer to the S-trap and this looks like the worst so far. If you think it's not going to happen then give us good reasons why you think that.

BTW that wasn't a direct go at you FH - I don't think you usually post that sort of comment.

:confused: I wasn't directly commenting on or challenging anything that you have said in my last post so not sure why you're replying to me here. :dunno:

I know you've commented a lot on Hearts' situation over the years and I know you've looked at it a lot in quite great detail.

All I was saying was that I really want to see them finally meet the justice that they deserve for their overspending and general cheating during the Romanov reign and I have heard so many people, for about the past five or six years, saying that Hearts were going to be finished by such and such a day and would be in administration etc and it's just never happened.

I will admit that this latest comment admitting serious concerns from one of their own directors looks and sounds quite promising but I just don't want to get my hopes up.

However, that is not to say that I am doubting your knowledge of the situation.

[poolman]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/20140052

according to mcfud it's all celtics fault.

You have to bow to his experience tho :agree:

He's managed in rhe S P L for three months now :agree:

He's also managed teams like Easthouses Lily and Musselburgh Athletic :rolleyes:

[Pedantic_Hibee]

Hi lads, just thought I'd pop in to let you know I'm still absolutely laughing my heid aff one week later.

[PatHead]

Might as well remind you that Hearts are going to their most favourite away venue this weekend. Hope the fond memories of that famous day bring an even bigger smile to your face.



Aw ****** it, might as well go for it, can someone put up a link? (Any photos of that guy greeting would be appreciated as well)

[Hibbyradge]

Scots law blog talks Hearts share issue

http://scotslawthoughts.wordpress.com/2012/10/30/the-hearts-share-issue-risk-factors-galore-one-for-the-die-hards-only/

“What is being offered are shares in a company where the buyer’s holding can be diluted without their approval; where there is no market for the shares; where there is no prospect of a dividend; where the company is effectively insolvent and therefore the shares are worthless the minute the buyer writes a cheque for them.”

[rossevenil]

Someone else mentioned it earlier in the thread about Craig Gordons move to Sunderland,now did his contract get switched to Kaunas before this transfer thus meaning that the £10mil fee would be paid to them rather than
Sevco 2 and in someway dodging more tax??
I have absolutely no idea on this but was just wondering if that could be what raised suspicions if a contract changed hands shortly before a big money transfer.

[Golden Bear]

“What is being offered are shares in a company where the buyer’s holding can be diluted without their approval; where there is no market for the shares; where there is no prospect of a dividend; where the company is effectively insolvent and therefore the shares are worthless the minute the buyer writes a cheque for them.”

That makes good reading but to be honest many of us who are Hibs shareholders did so purely on the basis that they were buying into "their Club" with no prospect of any future financial gain.

I remember the bleak days of the Mercer takeover when our supporters (acting out of desperation) went out and purchased Hibs shares with a view to preventing the Devil incarnate from purchasing any further shares.

I can visualise that supporters of THEM will indeed go ahead and purchase shares in a last desperate throw of the dice to save their tawdry club.

[Twa Cairpets]

That makes good reading but to be honest many of us who are Hibs shareholders did so purely on the basis that they were buying into "their Club" with no prospect of any future financial gain.

I remember the bleak days of the Mercer takeover when our supporters (acting out of desperation) went out and purchased Hibs shares with a view to preventing the Devil incarnate from purchasing any further shares.

I can visualise that supporters of THEM will indeed go ahead and purchase shares in a last desperate throw of the dice to save their tawdry club.

The more money that these deluded f***tards p*ss up a wall in order to save they're horrible little club the better. Unlike the takeover bid, the buying of shares was a tactical move to block him getting more. Hearts share offer is nothing more than a grubby plea for cash from a grubby institution.

Every penny they spend trying to do a Canute and fighting the tide is a penny they don't have to invest in the inevitable maroonsevco, and the worse off they are in the long run.

When they end up in division 3, or lower, it'll be interesting to see if their "big team" mantra doesn't even hold true in the bottom tier of the league.

I don't want them to die. I just want them to suffer. For ever.

[Bill Milne]

So, Kaunus buy a player who immediately goes "on loan" to Hearts.

The transfer fee/signing on fee/agent fee is then recouped by the mysterious "player registrations" which Hearts paid.

Hearts then avoid PAYE on the salary.

Is this a possible scenario?

This is what I have contended the problem to be. It seems like tax evasion rather thand tax avoidance, which is probably why HMRC are now chasing them. As the onus is on Hertz to prove their case, I await a, no doubt, convulted fairy tale from Romanov and his minions to squirm out of the very deep pile of sh*te they are now in.:aok:

[500miles]

As an aside, did anyone notice this photo in the share brochure?

8779

Can anyone explain the reason behind putting this picture into the section for the terms and conditions? Other than the obvious "5-1" hand signal the ref is giving.....:rolleyes:

Good to see they're finally admitting who was really thier key player in the final.

[Seveno]

I suspect that the immediate reaction of the share sale flop by Vlad will be to instruct a massive fire sale in January and claim that it is not his fault. As can be seen from Kaunas, he won't give a **** if they drop down several divisions.

A few years in the lower leagues until the property market recovers, and then UBIG call in the debt leading to the sale of the PBS.

The slow lingering death that would be the best option for me, I think.

[Aldo]

That makes good reading but to be honest many of us who are Hibs shareholders did so purely on the basis that they were buying into "their Club" with no prospect of any future financial gain.

I remember the bleak days of the Mercer takeover when our supporters (acting out of desperation) went out and purchased Hibs shares with a view to preventing the Devil incarnate from purchasing any further shares.

I can visualise that supporters of THEM will indeed go ahead and purchase shares in a last desperate throw of the dice to save their tawdry club.

Yeah but the mad one knows there is a 1.75 million HMRC bill on its way and wait they want to raise 1.75 million in a share issue.

If you buy into the club yur shares are worth nowt before you even start and when they go tits up they'll be worth absolutely diddly ****. No even worth the paper they are written.

Please please please Santa bring me the demise of the Yams.

[Golden Bear]

Yeah but the mad one knows there is a 1.75 million HMRC bill on its way and wait they want to raise 1.75 million in a share issue.

If you buy into the club yur shares are worth nowt before you even start and when they go tits up they'll be worth absolutely diddly ****. No even worth the paper they are written.

Please please please Santa bring me the demise of the Yams.

It's simply a financial donation and even the yams are not stupid enough to think otherwise.(I think!)

[EuanH78]

“What is being offered are shares in a company where the buyer’s holding can be diluted without their approval; where there is no market for the shares; where there is no prospect of a dividend; where the company is effectively insolvent and therefore the shares are worthless the minute the buyer writes a cheque for them.”

When you put it like that...where do I sign up?

[Eyrie]

I'm very concerned by the number of Hibs fans stating in this thread that they'd sign up. Don't you realise that each of you will cost Hearts money if they have to print and post a prospectus to you, then pay the post office to collect it because you didn't put enough postage on the reply and finally pay for someone to wade through all the applications from M Mouse, R Skacel and W Mercer?

[fatbloke]

That makes good reading but to be honest many of us who are Hibs shareholders did so purely on the basis that they were buying into "their Club" with no prospect of any future financial gain.

I remember the bleak days of the Mercer takeover when our supporters (acting out of desperation) went out and purchased Hibs shares with a view to preventing the Devil incarnate from purchasing any further shares.

I can visualise that supporters of THEM will indeed go ahead and purchase shares in a last desperate throw of the dice to save their tawdry club.

I still have my thousand shares. The way I am going it will be all I leave my kids:greengrin

[Minder]

I'm very concerned by the number of Hibs fans stating in this thread that they'd sign up. Don't you realise that each of you will cost Hearts money if they have to print and post a prospectus to you, then pay the post office to collect it because you didn't put enough postage on the reply and finally pay for someone to wade through all the applications from M Mouse, R Skacel and W Mercer?


You failed to mention though that you will have to collect the prospectus first of all and pay the postage as they send it out with no postage !

[Kato]

Long, slow, painful journey into obscurity.

[cam75]

You failed to mention though that you will have to collect the prospectus first of all and pay the postage as they send it out with no postage !

Post date your cheque 2020 never?

[Carheenlea]

Now I'm no expert in the goings on at Hearts, but I've felt for a long time that the only player in this whole sorry saga from a Hearts perspective who will emerge with his dignity intact will be Chris Robinson. The guy would have sold Tynecastle, yes, but would I be right in saying he was hounded into selling up to Romanov by the obnoxious Deans and the imbecile Foulkes? Both those clowns and many others castigated Robinson to anyone who would listen whilst at the same time fawning over Romanov and buying into his ludicrous predictions for the glorious future. Of course, these guys appear to have crawled back under their rocks, funnily enough not having too much to say for themselves these days. I'm surprised Robinson has remained silent though, and I think that it could be interesting to hear his views on all what has happened. We may hear soon enough, and as I said, I feel he will be the only one who can hold his head up and sleep easy with a clear conscience if this goes the way that the more informed posters on this thread predict.

[steakbake]

The Hearts fans turned on Robinson in a nasty way. Fairly sure he got a bit of hassle in the street for a while.

Then the EEN started its own campaign with regular stories about the ''ousted'' chairman's leylandii in his garden. I would like to see him vindicated after all this.

Also: thought they were cutting back? Why has Edgaras Jankauskas just turned up to be Assistant to the bus driver? Wonder what odds you'd get on him being manager by Xmas?

[monktonharp]

My opinion is about as inexpert as it gets, but I'm assuming that HMRC have taken the view that Hearts are at it, in claiming that some of their players are employed by Kaunas. Some of them are quite clearly Hearts' players alone, and have no involvement (other than their wages) with Kaunas. If you add to their obvious non-employment at Kaunas the advantage that is gained by the owner of both clubs, there is surely at least room for suspicion that they are avoiding paying UK taxes by employing people through kid-on loans.:dunno:

Claros, and the many other foreign loanees plying their trade here, look like genuine loans because they have an employment history at the club that claims to employ them, and they generally go back there.

No?


[Edit: and Sergio Sledge has beaten me to it....:greengrin]my opinion too, that the tax man kens their at it, and he is about to explain to them, just exactly how he kens.and just as a wee sidenote: if all these guys came from or through lithuania, to play here, where did they stay/who paid for the lodgings, and was this declared or just used as a tool to avoid paying taxes/ we've known/guessed/surmised for years that the gorgie mob have been at it, and the tax man isnae just doing this to keep his fellow taxmen in employment to prevent the from working on the side:wink:

[poolman]

I've been assuming the tax case was a twist on the transfer pricing operation - e.g. V owns company Y in Scotland and company K in Lithuania. Tax rates are lower in Lithuania so K sell goods to Y at inflated prices to reduce Y's profits and increase K's making V's overall tax bill lower than it should have been. The same principle can be applied to wages so that V pays less for employees working in Scotland by paying them through K rather than Y. Neither arrangement is legal and the onus is on the taxpayer rather than HMRC to prove that such an arrangement didn't exist.


:dizzy: :greengrin

[brog]

I've been assuming the tax case was a twist on the transfer pricing operation - e.g. V owns company Y in Scotland and company K in Lithuania. Tax rates are lower in Lithuania so K sell goods to Y at inflated prices to reduce Y's profits and increase K's making V's overall tax bill lower than it should have been. The same principle can be applied to wages so that V pays less for employees working in Scotland by paying them through K rather than Y. Neither arrangement is legal and the onus is on the taxpayer rather than HMRC to prove that such an arrangement didn't exist.

I think this is a definite possibility. My other thought is it may be simply a way of buying players yams could otherwise not afford. Put simply for a yam player to receive £10k a week net of tax his contract would be for £16k approx. I have no idea re Lithuanian tax rates but assume they're lower. If Vlad saved say £4k a week per player then 5 players = £1mm a year.

[Billy Whizz]

http://europa.eu/youreurope/business/managing-business/paying-taxes/lithuania/index_en.htm

[greenginger]

I wonder if all these dodgy transfers and loans deals started as soon as Romanov took over or was after Phil Anderton got emptied and Mr Campbell Ogilvie arrived on the scene that the Yams started digging their own grave.

[green glory]

I wonder if all these dodgy transfers and loans deals started as soon as Romanov took over or was after Phil Anderton got emptied and Mr Campbell Ogilvie arrived on the scene that the Yams started digging their own grave.

Ogilvie brought the Hun EBT scheme to The Wee Pink Wonga Dome. If there are dual contracts involved as with the Bigots then it's going to be very interesting.

[greenginger]

Ogilvie brought the Hun EBT scheme to The Wee Pink Wonga Dome. If there are dual contracts involved as with the Bigots then it's going to be very interesting.

Are you sure ? I have never seen any payments to any kind of trust fund in any of the Yams annual accounts.

Still we can always hope ! :greengrin

Of course, if all the player payments channeled through Lithland were not on the contracts it is equally damaging.

[CropleyWasGod]

Ogilvie brought the Hun EBT scheme to The Wee Pink Wonga Dome. If there are dual contracts involved as with the Bigots then it's going to be very interesting.

If there are, then they aren't disclosed in the accounts.

[JeMeSouviens]

We may hear soon enough, and as I said, I feel he will be the only one who can hold his head up and sleep easy with a clear conscience if this goes the way that the more informed posters on this thread predict.

Why do you think he'd have a clear conscience? It was his ridiculous overspending that got them into the £20M+ of debt in the first place. Just another jumped up delusional "3rd force" Yam.

[Part/Time Supporter]

Ogilvie brought the Hun EBT scheme to The Wee Pink Wonga Dome. If there are dual contracts involved as with the Bigots then it's going to be very interesting.

I don't think that's the case at all. EBTs were instigated at Rangers by the Murray Group. You had some Huns arguing for a while that Murray should accept any liability for the big tax case. Ogilvie received some EBT payments, but there isn't any evidence to suggest he was in charge of the scheme or that he imported it to Hearts.

As far as football sanctions against Hearts go, people are getting way ahead of themselves. Even if the tax tribunal finds in HMRC's favour that the players should have been fully taxed in the UK, that doesn't necessarily mean that SFA or SPL rules were broken. As long as Hearts declared the full payment to players, they will have complied. The contention that the wrong amount of tax was deducted isn't relevant.

[green glory]

http://www.hibs.net/showthread.php?228678-EBT-s

This was discussed before and while certainly not conclusive, I'm pretty certain it was also openly discussed by Rangerstaxcase a while ago.
I may have green tinted specs but I'd wager it was true.

[Caversham Green]

:confused: I wasn't directly commenting on or challenging anything that you have said in my last post so not sure why you're replying to me here. :dunno:

I know you've commented a lot on Hearts' situation over the years and I know you've looked at it a lot in quite great detail.

All I was saying was that I really want to see them finally meet the justice that they deserve for their overspending and general cheating during the Romanov reign and I have heard so many people, for about the past five or six years, saying that Hearts were going to be finished by such and such a day and would be in administration etc and it's just never happened.

I will admit that this latest comment admitting serious concerns from one of their own directors looks and sounds quite promising but I just don't want to get my hopes up.

However, that is not to say that I am doubting your knowledge of the situation.

I know mate, my rant was somewhat misdirected - it was your first sentence "I'll believe it when I see it." that got me going. I usually go to some lengths to explain my comments, as do others, and then someone (not you as far as I remember) pops up with "wishful thinking/we all know it's not going to happen" type comments without offering any sort of counter-argument. We can never be sure one way or the other but these guys are despite never bringing anything of value to the discussion.

Sorry for any offence.

[DarrenSQH]

I'm very concerned by the number of Hibs fans stating in this thread that they'd sign up. Don't you realise that each of you will cost Hearts money if they have to print and post a prospectus to you, then pay the post office to collect it because you didn't put enough postage on the reply and finally pay for someone to wade through all the applications from M Mouse, R Skacel and W Mercer?


How do we do this?

[Future17]

Ogilvie brought the Hun EBT scheme to The Wee Pink Wonga Dome. If there are dual contracts involved as with the Bigots then it's going to be very interesting.

Hearts don't pay some of their players once - very unlikely they pay any of them twice!!!

[green glory]

How do we do this?

I'm sure every member of each household would like to take up this marvellous investment opportunity. My goldfish Alan is especially keen.

[Caversham Green]

Now I'm no expert in the goings on at Hearts, but I've felt for a long time that the only player in this whole sorry saga from a Hearts perspective who will emerge with his dignity intact will be Chris Robinson. The guy would have sold Tynecastle, yes, but would I be right in saying he was hounded into selling up to Romanov by the obnoxious Deans and the imbecile Foulkes? Both those clowns and many others castigated Robinson to anyone who would listen whilst at the same time fawning over Romanov and buying into his ludicrous predictions for the glorious future. Of course, these guys appear to have crawled back under their rocks, funnily enough not having too much to say for themselves these days. I'm surprised Robinson has remained silent though, and I think that it could be interesting to hear his views on all what has happened. We may hear soon enough, and as I said, I feel he will be the only one who can hold his head up and sleep easy with a clear conscience if this goes the way that the more informed posters on this thread predict.

I sort of agree with that. The plan to move from Tynecastle was understandably unpopular but in truth it was the least bad option he had (apart from finding a sugardaddy) and in truth, was moving to a bigger, better stadium a few hundred yards away really that bad? The atmosphere would certainly have suffered, but I reckon they could have countered that by only opening certain parts of the stadium. Undoubtedly they'd be in a healthier position now if they'd taken their medicine then.


Why do you think he'd have a clear conscience? It was his ridiculous overspending that got them into the £20M+ of debt in the first place. Just another jumped up delusional "3rd force" Yam.

Certainly he overspent and probably mismanaged the club somewhat, but he inherited a real mess from Mercer. The stadium was half finished and sub-standard with a commitment to complete to the same low but expensive standards, and the finances were far from being healthy. HoMFC have had ideas above their station since well before Pieman's time but he tried to go some way towards reining them back, at least towards the end of his regime.

[LeighLoyal]

The two cup defeats they've dolled out to us, done with teams they couldn't afford. If they fold up they should be stripped just like the Zombie hun are about to be. :cb

[Hibbyradge]

I don't think that's the case at all. EBTs were instigated at Rangers by the Murray Group. You had some Huns arguing for a while that Murray should accept any liability for the big tax case. Ogilvie received some EBT payments, but there isn't any evidence to suggest he was in charge of the scheme or that he imported it to Hearts.

As far as football sanctions against Hearts go, people are getting way ahead of themselves. Even if the tax tribunal finds in HMRC's favour that the players should have been fully taxed in the UK, that doesn't necessarily mean that SFA or SPL rules were broken. As long as Hearts declared the full payment to players, they will have complied. The contention that the wrong amount of tax was deducted isn't relevant.

I am led to believe that this isn't the case.

[DarrenSQH]

I'm sure every member of each household would like to take up this marvellous investment opportunity. My goldfish Alan is especially keen.

Well make sure he and anyone else intrested prints out page 21-22 of this and send its back.
http://www.heartsfc.co.uk/staticFiles/44/b9/0,,10289~178500,00.pdf

The Share Manager
Heart Of Midlothian PLC
Tynecastle Park
Gorgie Road
Edinburgh
EH11 2NL

[green glory]

Well make sure he and anyone else intrested prints out page 21-22 of this and send its back.
http://www.heartsfc.co.uk/staticFiles/44/b9/0,,10289~178500,00.pdf

The Share Manager
Heart Of Midlothian PLC
Tynecastle Park
Gorgie Road
Edinburgh
EH11 2NL

Most excellent, Alsn says cheers. Ian my budgie could maybe be talked into this too.

[StevieC]

If they fold up they should be stripped just like the Zombie hun are about to be.

Rangers are likely to lose their league titles but I'm not sure whether they are getting chased for their cups? It may be that the cup competitions have different registration rules and that dual-contracts may not have ruled certain players out of the cup competitions.
:dunno:

[hibsmad]

Rangers are likely to lose their league titles but I'm not sure whether they are getting chased for their cups? It may be that the cup competitions have different registration rules and that dual-contracts may not have ruled certain players out of the cup competitions.
:dunno:

Does anyone know if Rangers are likely to be stripped of cup wins? Or if that is something that would be pursued along with titles?

I would honestly laugh and probably never stop if Hearts were stripped of last seasons. Can you imagine it? A match that they can basically rip the you know what out of us for the rest of our lives. If that was suddenly taken away due to them being cheating tax dodging ****bags.

It would never take the hurt away that I felt on the day, but I would certainly feel a lot better and would raise a wee glass to justice being done.

[The_Sauz]

Rangers are likely to lose their league titles but I'm not sure whether they are getting chased for their cups? It may be that the cup competitions have different registration rules and that dual-contracts may not have ruled certain players out of the cup competitions.
:dunno:
I'm sure I read it was just the League Cup that they would not loose, but could loose League & Scottish Cup titles
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/revealed-football-chiefs-secret-plan-1167046

[Part/Time Supporter]

Does anyone know if Rangers are likely to be stripped of cup wins? Or if that is something that would be pursued along with titles?

I would honestly laugh and probably never stop if Hearts were stripped of last seasons. Can you imagine it? A match that they can basically rip the you know what out of us for the rest of our lives. If that was suddenly taken away due to them being cheating tax dodging ****bags.

It would never take the hurt away that I felt on the day, but I would certainly feel a lot better and would raise a wee glass to justice being done.

I can't see how they would be stripped of 2012, even if there was a discrepancy, because I don't think they had any players on loan from Kaunas last season. 2006 would be in trouble though.

[StevieC]

I would honestly laugh and probably never stop if Hearts were stripped of last seasons.

The HMRC have been putting this case together for a couple of years now, I doubt even Hearts would be stupid enough to continue paying wages from Lithuania after the HMRC had started their investigation.

[CropleyWasGod]

Does anyone know if Rangers are likely to be stripped of cup wins? Or if that is something that would be pursued along with titles?

I would honestly laugh and probably never stop if Hearts were stripped of last seasons. Can you imagine it? A match that they can basically rip the you know what out of us for the rest of our lives. If that was suddenly taken away due to them being cheating tax dodging ****bags.

It would never take the hurt away that I felt on the day, but I would certainly feel a lot better and would raise a wee glass to justice being done.

Sorry to pour cold water on any of this, but thus far Hearts haven't been accused of anything that would warrant stripping them of anything. There is no suggestion (yet) of double-contracts or the like. "All" they are accused of is not complying with tax law. I don't think there is any precedent anywhere (including Rangers) for teams losing titles etc because of that.

[StevieC]

I can't see how they would be stripped of 2012, even if there was a discrepancy, because I don't think they had any players on loan from Kaunas last season. 2006 would be in trouble though.

How do you present a trophy to a team that no longer exists???

Would actually highlight how much of a joke Scottish Football has become, that Gretna are in the running for a Scottish Cup title?

[Part/Time Supporter]

How do you present a trophy to a team that no longer exists???

Would actually highlight how much of a joke Scottish Football has become, that Gretna are in the running for a Scottish Cup title?

Re-awarding cup wins is very tricky. On the face of it it should be awarded to the runner-up, but then all the other teams that Hearts (or Rangers, in their cases) knocked out earlier in the competition could argue that they would have gone on to win it.

[StevieC]

There is no suggestion (yet) of double-contracts or the like. "All" they are accused of is not complying with tax law.

Maybe not a direct suggestion of double contracts, but there is a suggestion that the players were receiving 2 wages .. one (small one) from Hearts and one (large one) from Lithuania.
If the one from Lithuania was registered with the League then they've nothing to worry about.
If it wasn't, is it any different to the additional EBT payments that Rangers players received?

[IWasThere2016]

I am led to believe that this isn't the case.

:agree:

HMRC can demand info from UK employer and UK employee - and the info will not tie - as payments are also sent/received via Lithuania.

I wouldnae be confident if I was a Yam

[Hibbyradge]

Does anyone know if Rangers are likely to be stripped of cup wins? Or if that is something that would be pursued along with titles?

I would honestly laugh and probably never stop if Hearts were stripped of last seasons. Can you imagine it? A match that they can basically rip the you know what out of us for the rest of our lives. If that was suddenly taken away due to them being cheating tax dodging ****bags.

It would never take the hurt away that I felt on the day, but I would certainly feel a lot better and would raise a wee glass to justice being done.

The HMRC action might hit them financially, but it's unlikely to affect them in that way.

In any case, the tax case applies to a previous period.

[CropleyWasGod]

Maybe not a direct suggestion of double contracts, but there is a suggestion that the players were receiving 2 wages .. one (small one) from Hearts and one (large one) from Lithuania.
If the one from Lithuania was registered with the League then they've nothing to worry about.
If it wasn't, is it any different to the additional EBT payments that Rangers players received?

As ever, Stevie, I'm sitting on the fence. :greengrin

The "suggestions" have all come from the media and the message boards. In other words, with little authority. The one you mention would indeed have them in double-contract territory. But "mere" tax-dodging doesn't seem to be a hanging offence yet.

It's cold up here on the fence......

[Hibbyradge]

:agree:

HMRC can demand info from UK employer and UK employee - and the info will not tie - as payments are also sent/received via Lithuania.

I wouldnae be confident if I was a Yam

I don't understand this bit, G.

If a player was receiving, and declaring, £1000pw from Hearts, but was paid another £4k from Kaunus into a Lith based bank account, how would HMRC prove it?

[Part/Time Supporter]

I don't understand this bit, G.

If a player was receiving, and declaring, £1000pw from Hearts, but was paid another £4k from Kaunus into a Lith based bank account, how would HMRC prove it?

Co-operation with the Lithuanian tax authorities.

[CropleyWasGod]

Co-operation with the Lithuanian tax authorities.

All that would do would prove that the player had or hadn't been paying the correct amount of tax. It would have no relevance to Hearts.

If they have been operating the correct PAYE codes (as issued by HMRC), then it's none of their business what the players have been paid elsewhere; that's entirely between the player and the tax authorities here and abroad.

[JeMeSouviens]

Slightly o/t, but this caught my eye being referred to on kickback. Was anyone else aware of a previous episode of Yammish financial shenanigans?

http://www.heartsfc.co.uk/articles/20070416/1904-1914_2241543_1011739


Financial Crisis

During season 1904-05 the club ran into financial difficulties because the limited company formed in 1903 was unable to continue after debts amounting to £1,400 had accumulated. In March 1905 at a Quarterly General Meeting, a resolution, "Proposal for Temporary Loans from Present Shareholders", was defeated by 94 votes to 72, but later that month, three resolutions were passed and the company was voluntarily wound up. On 29 April 1905, the present company was incorporated on the Register of Companies and the new concern picked up the debt which had increased to £1,600. Despite a problem selling all the new shares it cleared this debt within a reasonably short time.

Does this amount to a Hearts newco? In which case, scrub 3 Scottish cups and 2 league titles from their honours. Making Hibs comfortably Edinburgh's most successful club (since league titles are trumps). :wink:

4 Championships, 2 Scottish cups, 3 Scottish League cups vs 2 Championships, 5 Scottish cups*, 4 Scottish League cups

* if they get to keep them all.

[Hibbyradge]

All that would do would prove that the player had or hadn't been paying the correct amount of tax. It would have no relevance to Hearts.

If they have been operating the correct PAYE codes (as issued by HMRC), then it's none of their business what the players have been paid elsewhere; that's entirely between the player and the tax authorities here and abroad.

So it's ok for Hearts to pay a player in Litas and in Sterling and in 2 separate countries?

I'm well confused.

[TrinityHibs]

I sort of agree with that. The plan to move from Tynecastle was understandably unpopular but in truth it was the least bad option he had (apart from finding a sugardaddy) and in truth, was moving to a bigger, better stadium a few hundred yards away really that bad? The atmosphere would certainly have suffered, but I reckon they could have countered that by only opening certain parts of the stadium. Undoubtedly they'd be in a healthier position now if they'd taken their medicine then.



Certainly he overspent and probably mismanaged the club somewhat, but he inherited a real mess from Mercer. The stadium was half finished and sub-standard with a commitment to complete to the same low but expensive standards, and the finances were far from being healthy. HoMFC have had ideas above their station since well before Pieman's time but he tried to go some way towards reining them back, at least towards the end of his regime.

While Mercer was a bad man, for a host of reasons and probably manipulated a higher offer out of Robinson by using Hearts minded businessmen to promote an alternative offer for the club (They were actually advised not to get involved by Sir Davie Murray as he thought it was a sure fire way to lose serious money..the irony) he did construct usable stands that were relatively inexpensive. He also had the Council lined up to take a lease on the dead space under the third stand which went a good way to actually paying for it. This disappeared as quickly as the existing Gorgie pie supplier when Robinson got involved. Robinson was out of his depth and didnt have, or was able to source, the cash to lose that was needed to maintain the Gorgie excesses.

[The_Sauz]

When folks on here were talking about Craig Gordon situation, I remembered about this guy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jos%C3%A9_Gon%C3%A7alves refusing to sign a new deal, as it was going to be a Kaunas contract and not a Hearts one. FJK then told the media that was dropping him as did not want to stay with the "Big" team (We all knew it was Vlad that dropped him :agree:) and then was promptly shipped out on loan to Germany for not playing nice with Vlad :greengrin

2006–2008
Kaunas (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FBK_Kaunas)
0
(0)



2006–2008
→ Hearts (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heart_of_Midlothian_F.C.) (loan)
38
(0)


2008–2010
Hearts (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heart_of_Midlothian_F.C.)
20
(2)


2008–2009
→ 1. FC Nuremberg (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1._FC_Nuremberg) (loan)
14
(0)


So he was signed by Kaunas, yet never played for them :confused:
How many other have gone down this route!

[CropleyWasGod]

So it's ok for Hearts to pay a player in Litas and in Sterling and in 2 separate countries?

I'm well confused.

Sorry, your post said that it was Kaunas who paid them in Lithuania. That's what my post referred to.

If Hearts chose to pay them in different currencies, then there's nothing wrong with that either, as long as they were paid under PAYE. (and, as I keep saying, :greengrin, as long as they are Hearts' employees)

[hibsmad]

Sorry to pour cold water on any of this, but thus far Hearts haven't been accused of anything that would warrant stripping them of anything. There is no suggestion (yet) of double-contracts or the like. "All" they are accused of is not complying with tax law. I don't think there is any precedent anywhere (including Rangers) for teams losing titles etc because of that.

It's ok I realise they haven't been accused yet and also that there is no precedent. I just like to hope.

To those replying that they were not paying players via Lithuania last year. What about the possibility of players who were previously paid by Kaunas but who still played for Hearts last season. Im thinking of the likes of Zaliukas or Novikovas. I know I'm clutching at straws here but I just want to believe that there is the slightest possibility.

Come on people, give me something here! :greengrin

[SloopJB]

How do you present a trophy to a team that no longer exists???

Would actually highlight how much of a joke Scottish Football has become, that Gretna are in the running for a Scottish Cup title?
wouldn't they just be 're writing the history books'?
Doesn't matter the club no longer exists, they clearly did at the time.

[StevieC]

wouldn't they just be 're writing the history books'?
Doesn't matter the club no longer exists, they clearly did at the time.

Yes, that's what they'd do.

I'm just highlighting the fact that it was a team that came from nowhere, (potentially) won a cup, and then disappeared again.

[greenginger]

It's ok I realise they haven't been accused yet and also that there is no precedent. I just like to hope.

To those replying that they were not paying players via Lithuania last year. What about the possibility of players who were previously paid by Kaunas but who still played for Hearts last season. Im thinking of the likes of Zaliukas or Novikovas. I know I'm clutching at straws here but I just want to believe that there is the slightest possibility.

Come on people, give me something here! :greengrin


Best chance is with Skacel. At his court case in the dispute with his agent it was stated his salary as per his contract was 190,000 euro per year about £ 3000 per week.

I don't think the player came back to Hearts to get paid a lot less than some of the other donkeys.

Trouble is nobody is asking any questions --- Yet !

[hibsmad]

Best chance is with Skacel. At his court case in the dispute with his agent it was stated his salary as per his contract was 190,000 euro per year about £ 3000 per week.

I don't think the player came back to Hearts to get paid a lot less than some of the other donkeys.

Trouble is nobody is asking any questions --- Yet !

That'll do, thanks! :aok:

[EskbankHibby]

Does anyone know if Rangers are likely to be stripped of cup wins? Or if that is something that would be pursued along with titles?

I would honestly laugh and probably never stop if Hearts were stripped of last seasons. Can you imagine it? A match that they can basically rip the you know what out of us for the rest of our lives. If that was suddenly taken away due to them being cheating tax dodging ****bags.

It would never take the hurt away that I felt on the day, but I would certainly feel a lot better and would raise a wee glass to justice being done.


In the unlikely event that anything like this did happen it would make no difference to me - they still had their day. It's the same with all the Rangers titles they may lose, all they lose is a few lines in the history books, the fans still had a magic day - the hangovers, the cup parades, bragging rights for a period of time.

For the same reason 7-0, 6-2, 5-1 or 4-0 now mean almost nothing to me. 7-0 (was not at) and 6-2 (was at) will mean at lot less to me than a scabby 1-0 win at the piggery in the next derby.

As an aside seems that the "mug punter share issue" has a few takers.

http://www.scotsman.com/edinburgh-evening-news/sport/hearts-fans-ready-to-back-club-s-share-issue-1-2607161

[Off the bar]

In the unlikely event that anything like this did happen it would make no difference to me - they still had their day. It's the same with all the Rangers titles they may lose, all they lose is a few lines in the history books, the fans still had a magic day - the hangovers, the cup parades, bragging rights for a period of time.

For the same reason 7-0, 6-2, 5-1 or 4-0 now mean almost nothing to me. 7-0 (was not at) and 6-2 (was at) will mean at lot less to me than a scabby 1-0 win at the piggery in the next derby.

As an aside seems that the "mug punter share issue" has a few takers.

http://www.scotsman.com/edinburgh-evening-news/sport/hearts-fans-ready-to-back-club-s-share-issue-1-2607161

not so much a piece of journalism there as a straight out sales pitch to the fans, no mention of the potential (highly likely) to lose all your money, I appreciate that its in an edinburgh paper and written by a jambo, but ffs a proper journalist would get a quote from a city trader or someone who knows the stock market who could say something like 'you'd be more likely to get a return by eating your money and waiting to see if you **** gold'
I almost feel sorry for the jumbos who are buying into this, almost.

[WindyMiller]

In the unlikely event that anything like this did happen it would make no difference to me - they still had their day. It's the same with all the Rangers titles they may lose, all they lose is a few lines in the history books, the fans still had a magic day - the hangovers, the cup parades, bragging rights for a period of time.

For the same reason 7-0, 6-2, 5-1 or 4-0 now mean almost nothing to me. 7-0 (was not at) and 6-2 (was at) will mean at lot less to me than a scabby 1-0 win at the piggery in the next derby.

As an aside seems that the "mug punter share issue" has a few takers.

http://www.scotsman.com/edinburgh-evening-news/sport/hearts-fans-ready-to-back-club-s-share-issue-1-2607161

Some Yam Fud....“I don’t think it’s a case of Hearts not being here if people don’t buy into this, but they will struggle and they will have to cut back even more. They could still be a big club but they won’t be a top club.




Cannae help themselves

[Pedantic_Hibee]

I wouldn't want a retrospective award of a Scottish Cup title.

[jacomo]

As an aside seems that the "mug punter share issue" has a few takers.

http://www.scotsman.com/edinburgh-evening-news/sport/hearts-fans-ready-to-back-club-s-share-issue-1-2607161

more fool them - mind you, I am not sure people as credulous as this should have unsupervised access to their own bank account:


Supporters want to back their club in its hour of need following statements from 
director Sergejus Fedotovas stressing that the situation is now “serious” as the board seeks new investment. Steve Kilgour, secretary of the Federation of Hearts Supporters’ Clubs, said: “Of the fans I’ve spoken to so far, I’d say about 95 per cent of them are interested in buying shares. Most of the ones I’ve spoken to go to games week in and week out and the feedback has been very positive. The majority of people I’ve spoken to are going to buy shares.

“I think people realise we have to do something to help the club. The ultimatum is you either back them or watch them dwindle. The folk I’ve talked to are loyal Hearts fans and willing to back the club. If you have the club’s best interests at heart, then you have to back this. In the absence of a better alternative at the moment, we have to back the share scheme.

“I don’t think it’s a case of Hearts not being here if people don’t buy into this, but they will struggle and they will have to cut back even more. They could still be a big club but they won’t be a top club.

“If what we’re getting told is 100 per cent true, which I tend to believe it is, then I think the club has been as transparent as they can be. If you’re honest with the fans, the fans will back you. That’s what we’ve always said. It’s like any walk of life, if people feel they’re getting duped they will walk away.

“At my own supporters’ club, Livingston Hearts, our members have really got behind it. They’ve actually asked to organise a fundraiser so we can buy shares in the name of the supporters’ club. That’s on top of what anyone might do as an individual.”

[jacomo]

I wouldn't want a retrospective award of a Scottish Cup title.

Agreed, pointless and it wouldn't feel real.

[hibsmad]

I wouldn't want a retrospective award of a Scottish Cup title.

I wouldn't want awarded the cup either. I would just want them found guilty of cheating and subsequently stripped of their greatest ever victory.

Despite the fact they still had their day, if they had the trophy taken back then that would hurt their fans - to the point of them probably feeling physically sick.

That would please me a lot.

[green glory]

Some Yam Fud....“I don’t think it’s a case of Hearts not being here if people don’t buy into this, but they will struggle and they will have to cut back even more. They could still be a big club but they won’t be a top club.

Cannae help themselves

With regards to them still wanting to be a 'big club' and still wanting a team capable of competing in Europe. Tom English summed it up perfectly in the Scotland on Sunday.

"Enough"!

[ballengeich]

As an aside seems that the "mug punter share issue" has a few takers.

http://www.scotsman.com/edinburgh-evening-news/sport/hearts-fans-ready-to-back-club-s-share-issue-1-2607161

"many have moved quickly to 
ensure they do not miss out." :greengrin

[jonty]

"many have moved quickly to 
ensure they do not miss out." :greengrin
They've had their fingers burnt with the ST sale - they'll be moving quickly on this one :greengrin

[greenginger]

I wouldn't want a retrospective award of a Scottish Cup title.


Agree, but I want it out in the open if they did have improperly registered players, if only to shut-up some Yam fuds down the pub when they start their Big Club boasts.

[blackpoolhibs]

If what we’re getting told is 100 per cent true, which I tend to believe it is, then I think the club has been as transparent as they can be. If you’re honest with the fans, the fans will back you. That’s what we’ve always said. It’s like any walk of life, if people feel they’re getting duped they will walk away.


:faf:

How many times can one man bugger a yam? Gullible needs a new entry into the dictionary. :greengrin

[Hibbyradge]

:faf:

How many times can one man bugger a yam? Gullible needs a new entry into the dictionary. :greengrin

The word "gullible" isn't in my copy of the Yamathaurus.

[Pedantic_Hibee]

If what we’re getting told is 100 per cent true, which I tend to believe it is, then I think the club has been as transparent as they can be. If you’re honest with the fans, the fans will back you. That’s what we’ve always said. It’s like any walk of life, if people feel they’re getting duped they will walk away.


:faf:

How many times can one man bugger a yam? Gullible needs a new entry into the dictionary. :greengrin

I think within the first year we will be completely out of debt - Vladimir Romanov ~ Oct 2005

[Dashing Bob S]

Agreed, pointless and it wouldn't feel real.

At first I thought 'no way', and how hollow and pathetic it would be.


Then I started to look at it through their eyes and think how outraged they would be...

[Pedantic_Hibee]

Won't matter, FR. If they get liquidated we'll have won more trophies than them.

Hearts would no longer be Hearts. That would be funny. Very funny.

[Mikey]

I think within the first year we will be completely out of debt - Vladimir Romanov ~ Oct 2005

2004 :wink:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/h/heart_of_midlothian/3710698.stm

[Saorsa]

2004 :wink:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/h/heart_of_midlothian/3710698.stmI knew Vlad was at it even back then when he came out with this.


Lithuania-based Romanov, who described Hearts fans as "the best in the world":hilarious

[Baldy Foghorn]

I wouldn't want a retrospective award of a Scottish Cup title.

Indeed, however if the yams do go bust, and lose the SC title, would we be recompensed for missing out on a European spot....Probably not, however, I would love to seek clarification from our governing body....

[Seveno]

Indeed, however if the yams do go bust, and lose the SC title, would we be recompensed for missing out on a European spot....Probably not, however, I would love to seek clarification from our governing body....

You have to take into account all the others teams that they cheated on the way to the final. Would be have beaten Celtic at Hampden ?
p

[EdinMike]

I think the whole reprimanding Cup trophies and handing them to the other finalists wouldn't work.

It would probably just be a null and void line in the History books, but we would know. :wink:

[green glory]

I think the whole reprimanding Cup trophies and handing them to the other finalists wouldn't work.

It would probably just be a null and void line in the History books, but we would know. :wink:

I agree and not winning it on the day wouldn't be the same. However that wouldn't diminish my enthusiasm of it being cruelly taken from them.

[cabbageandribs1875]

I think the whole reprimanding Cup trophies and handing them to the other finalists wouldn't work.

It would probably just be a null and void line in the History books, but we would know. :wink:



how can you reprimand a cup :confused:

[BSEJVT]

how can you reprimand a cup :confused:

Sternly!

[lord bunberry]

how can you reprimand a cup :confused:

Naughty cup don't do that again

[ginger_rice]

I wouldn't want a retrospective award of a Scottish Cup title.

Me neither, when we win it and we will we will win it fair and square and with flair!!

[tamig]

not so much a piece of journalism there as a straight out sales pitch to the fans, no mention of the potential (highly likely) to lose all your money, I appreciate that its in an edinburgh paper and written by a jambo, but ffs a proper journalist would get a quote from a city trader or someone who knows the stock market who could say something like 'you'd be more likely to get a return by eating your money and waiting to see if you **** gold'
I almost feel sorry for the jumbos who are buying into this, almost.

Let's get real here. I don't think any Hertz fan would contemplate buying any of these shares looking for a return on their investment. They all know the score. They know they are pishing in the sea.

[Treadstone]

A bit of a leap at the moment to suggest Hearts get stripped of any cups . Although hopefully it does come around . One of the Scottish cup years that really bugs me is 2007/2008 . Rangers won the cup after beating us in a quarter final replay . This is one of the cups they would be likely stripped of .

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/revealed-football-chiefs-secret-plan-1167046

After they beat us in a replay the rest of the semi line-up was Queen of the South , Aberdeen and St Johnstone .

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007%E2%80%9308_Scottish_Cup

[cabbageandribs1875]

Sternly!


Naughty cup don't do that again


:greengrin he's obviously not taking the cups feelings into account

[Barney McGrew]

Does paying staff other than players have to be reported to the SPL under the new rules?

If it is, I wonder if they've told them that some of the coaches haven't been paid for three months......

[DarrenSQH]

I heard that hearts staff have all been called in for a meeting later today. Not sure what its about or how true.

[green glory]

I heard that hearts staff have all been called in for a meeting later today. Not sure what its about or how true.

Just playing staff?

[DarrenSQH]

Just playing staff?

non playing staff.

[green glory]

non playing staff.

I've just tweeted Barry Anderson the Yam reporter at the Evening News to see what he knows.

[JimBHibees]

Does paying staff other than players have to be reported to the SPL under the new rules?

If it is, I wonder if they've told them that some of the coaches haven't been paid for three months......

First team, youth coaches?

[green glory]

First team, youth coaches?

Did Harry Potter not say last night that Uncle Fester the bus driver hasn't been paid for 3 months?

[Mikey]

I've just tweeted Barry Anderson the Yam reporter at the Evening News to see what he knows.

He'll only say what he's been told to say.

[green glory]

He'll only say what he's been told to say.

You're probably right. The Yam's very own Traynor.

[Pedantic_Hibee]

Hearts are away to Dundee this weekend. Is this the first time they've ever played at Dens Park?

[green glory]

Hearts are away to Dundee this weekend. Is this the first time they've ever played at Dens Park?

No. They've played there often enough before. 1986 was very special for them there.

[surreyhibbie]

Hearts are away to Dundee this weekend. Is this the first time they've ever played at Dens Park?

I think they may have played there in 1986, can't remember the score though...maybe someone else can?

[Jim44]

Did Harry Potter not say last night that Uncle Fester the bus driver hasn't been paid for 3 months?

Levein's just stirring up trouble for his old club. He said last night that the non-payment of staff was not on and that he felt sorry for the state of affairs at Tynie. Has he not heard McGlib and some of the players saying that they were comfortable with the way they were being sh@t upon and didn't know what all the fuss was about.

[poolman]

I think they may have played there in 1986, can't remember the score though...maybe someone else can?


You're KIDDin right ? :greengrin

[muzzhfc]

I just asked Siri about Heart of Midlothian Football Club . . . his response "I couldnt find any football clubs"

[Twa Cairpets]

I think they may have played there in 1986, can't remember the score though...maybe someone else can?

I find it stunning the numbers of Hibs fans who forget what happened on this day.

Hearts needed a point to win the league after a long unbeaten run.
They were up against a Dundee team with nothing to play for on the last day of the season.
A previously unheralded player called Albert Kidd scored twice to allow Celtic to pip Hearts at the post.
Some Hearts fans cried, apparently.

I hope this refreshes everyones mind.

It was one of the funniest single events in the history of word football.

[Pedantic_Hibee]

I find it stunning the numbers of Hibs fans who forget what happened on this day.

Hearts needed a point to win the league after a long unbeaten run.
They were up against a Dundee team with nothing to play for on the last day of the season.
A previously unheralded player called Albert Kidd scored twice to allow Celtic to pip Hearts at the post.
Some Hearts fans cried, apparently.

I hope this refreshes everyones mind.

It was one of the funniest single events in the history of word football.

Pictures or it didn't happen. I refuse to believe this.

[haagsehibby]

I find it stunning the numbers of Hibs fans who forget what happened on this day.

Hearts needed a point to win the league after a long unbeaten run.
They were up against a Dundee team with nothing to play for on the last day of the season.
A previously unheralded player called Albert Kidd scored twice to allow Celtic to pip Hearts at the post.
Some Hearts fans cried, apparently.

I hope this refreshes everyones mind.

It was one of the funniest single events in the history of word football.

I prefer to remember the fact that the one point we took off them that season denied them the league. :greengrin:

[MB62]

I find it stunning the numbers of Hibs fans who forget what happened on this day.

Hearts needed a point to win the league after a long unbeaten run.
They were up against a Dundee team with nothing to play for on the last day of the season.
A previously unheralded player called Albert Kidd scored twice to allow Celtic to pip Hearts at the post.
Some Hearts fans cried, apparently.

I hope this refreshes everyones mind.

It was one of the funniest single events in the history of word football.

You're making that up. No way could something like that happen, unless it was in a comic book :wink:

[PatHead]

Al bert you it did happen. Remember it well.

[Pedantic_Hibee]

Did they get a chance to redeem themselves in any of the domestic cups later that year?

[Eyrie]

Did they get a chance to redeem themselves in any of the domestic cups later that year?
A club that size couldn't go thirty six years without winning a trophy, so I'm sure they did. Unless anyone can prove otherwise.

[Twa Cairpets]

Did they get a chance to redeem themselves in any of the domestic cups later that year?

Again, the memory of people here is quite shocking.

Aberdeen took on Hearts a mere few days after the exciting denoument to the league season.
Having been red hot favourites for an unprecdented double to the extent t-shirts had been printed, Hearts were defeated 3-0
Walter Kidd got a red card
Apparently Hearts fans cried. Again

Really, some people should get memory tests.

This was a close runner up to the comedy majesty of the league.

[Pedantic_Hibee]

Wow. Can't believe I was not aware of this. Were the local press in attendance in so much as so that they may have taken pictures of either event?

[Seveno]

I find it stunning the numbers of Hibs fans who forget what happened on this day.

Hearts needed a point to win the league after a long unbeaten run.
They were up against a Dundee team with nothing to play for on the last day of the season.
A previously unheralded player called Albert Kidd scored twice to allow Celtic to pip Hearts at the post.
Some Hearts fans cried, apparently.

I hope this refreshes everyones mind.

It was one of the funniest single events in the history of word football.

That's amazing. You have done us a great service by researching and telling this long forgotten story.

We not not allow this to happen again and I suggest that we put up a granite plaque in the East Stand in honour of this man Kidd.

[poolman]

Wow. Can't believe I was not aware of this. Were the local press in attendance in so much as so that they may have taken pictures of either event?


Is this one :confused: :greengrin


http://i45.tinypic.com/9sdn61.jpg

[degenerated]

Wow. Can't believe I was not aware of this. Were the local press in attendance in so much as so that they may have taken pictures of either event?

like these for instance

8788

[Golden Bear]

Help ma boab did this really happen? :coffee:

You learn something new every day.