PDA

View Full Version : Hibs post profit



1875STEVE
19-10-2016, 09:24 AM
http://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/sport/football/hibs/hibs-return-to-profit-on-back-of-scottish-cup-triumph-1-4261753

:thumbsup:

Highland_Hibee
19-10-2016, 09:30 AM
There are folk on FB who can still find negatives from this. Unbelievable. Makes me so proud to think of our SC achievement on the back of this. Ain't no dipping into the poppy fund on our way to glory.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

1875STEVE
19-10-2016, 09:34 AM
And on the EEN comments.

"If you hadn't won the cup"

We did, we made the money, deal wit it ffs.

"No cup win this season"

Crowds up 7k a week though...:na na:

£2.5m sitting in the bank as well. :aok:

Wee Effen Bee
19-10-2016, 09:37 AM
http://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/sport/football/hibs/hibs-return-to-profit-on-back-of-scottish-cup-triumph-1-4261753

:thumbsup:
Not according to some in the comments section. I never understand why people do this. If the article was full of errors fair dos, but...!

Bostonhibby
19-10-2016, 09:44 AM
No charities were harmed in the making of this profit. Nor was an administration required. Well done hibs

Sent from my HTC One mini 2 using Tapatalk

Biggie
19-10-2016, 10:17 AM
Hearts fans be like "what is this "profit" they talk about" ?.....and I liked the line "no external debt"......digging that **** boys.

superfurryhibby
19-10-2016, 10:20 AM
All very well and good but how can we reconcile this profit with not paying our full dues to a pubically owned bank?

CropleyWasGod
19-10-2016, 10:22 AM
All very well and good but how can we reconcile this profit with not paying our full dues to a pubically owned bank?

You've made a **** of your post. :greengrin

Hamish
19-10-2016, 10:44 AM
You've made a **** of your post. :greengrin

Ach be fair he was only a **'hair away CWG

iwasthere1972
19-10-2016, 10:47 AM
Nearly £25 million fixed assets. About £25 million less a light bulb more than the Yams.

hibby6270
19-10-2016, 11:13 AM
Do shareholders get a copy of Rod's letter and a copy of the accounts sent to them to see the full story?

CropleyWasGod
19-10-2016, 11:22 AM
Do shareholders get a copy of Rod's letter and a copy of the accounts sent to them to see the full story?

Yep.

In past years, the press announcement and the sending of the accounts have happened almost simultaneously.

You'll also get an invitation to the AGM.

Golden Bear
19-10-2016, 11:31 AM
Ah well, that's that then, I'll not bother opening the envelope which just popped thru my letterbox. The wise men of hibs net have spoken!

Col2
19-10-2016, 11:37 AM
Kickback mutants are raging.

Some are giving us token credit but only because we are trying to follow them.

Yet not one of them admit they have paid c3-4million to budge for zero shares to date and still have an extended period to go before they might have control. Budge has moved the goalposts already and until the new mega stand is finished she will be keeping her options to ensure she doesn't lose a penny.

And not one can understand that crowds up by 5k might just have a not so small impact on any loss like previous years.

Bitter and frankly bored they are now that Hibernian FC won the Scottish Cup in 2016 and now post excellent annual results when they predicted administration or equivalent.

GET IT RIGHT UP YE JAMBO FUDS.

bigwheel
19-10-2016, 11:38 AM
Decent result...but a small profit, compared to the level of income increase....we really need to get promoted this year...stating the obvious!

Kojock
19-10-2016, 11:44 AM
Kickback mutants are raging.

Some are giving us token credit but only because we are trying to follow them.

Yet not one of them admit they have paid c3-4million to budge for zero shares to date and still have an extended period to go before they might have control. Budge has moved the goalposts already and until the new mega stand is finished she will be keeping her options to ensure she doesn't lose a penny.

And not one can understand that crowds up by 5k might just have a not so small impact on any loss like previous years.

Bitter and frankly bored they are now that Hibernian FC won the Scottish Cup in 2016 and now post excellent annual results when they predicted administration or equivalent.

GET IT RIGHT UP YE JAMBO FUDS.


"Arguing with a Jambo is like playing chess with a pigeon; no matter how good you are at chess the pigeon is just going to knock over the pieces, crap on the board and strut around like it’s victorious."

hibby6270
19-10-2016, 11:50 AM
Yep.

In past years, the press announcement and the sending of the accounts have happened almost simultaneously.

You'll also get an invitation to the AGM.

Thanks for that. Only purchased shares earlier this year, so wasn't sure.
I'll await the the postie to deliveeerrr!! :greengrin

Callyballybe
19-10-2016, 12:29 PM
Fantastic news. One of the stand out points for me was the 'wages to turnover ratio' going down from 61% to 54% - That really is a great bit of work from Hibs.

On another note, the comments at the bottom of the article are ridiculous, bordering on insane. Some highlights are:

"Pending an 800k fine from Glasgow City Council...that'll rip the hobos wee piggy bank profit to pieces."

and

"So basically Hibs overspent to reach - and win - the Scottish Cup. Had they not won it, they'd have made a loss." - This man (or woman) must be a genuis, or at the very least, a financial expert. Their analysis of the circumstance is astounding.

Kavinho
19-10-2016, 12:44 PM
Great reading the article, painful reading the comments

Mathias Jack
19-10-2016, 12:45 PM
Forgive me for being thick here, but i'll ask it anyways!

It says our total tangible fixed assets (Easter Road and East Mains) are £24.3 million. If they're in our accounts, the stadium belongs to the club, and not the holding the company like it used to then?

CropleyWasGod
19-10-2016, 12:58 PM
Forgive me for being thick here, but i'll ask it anyways!

It says our total tangible fixed assets (Easter Road and East Mains) are £24.3 million. If they're in our accounts, the stadium belongs to the club, and not the holding the company like it used to then?

The Holding Company has never owned EM. Not sure that it ever owned ER either...

Mathias Jack
19-10-2016, 01:11 PM
The Holding Company has never owned EM. Not sure that it ever owned ER either...

Apologies, it was just the stadium I meant, not EM. A Yam was asking, I just wanted to go back with my facts right ha ha

jacomo
19-10-2016, 01:16 PM
"Arguing with a Jambo is like playing chess with a pigeon; no matter how good you are at chess the pigeon is just going to knock over the pieces, crap on the board and strut around like it’s victorious."

A Jambo would lose a game of chess against a pigeon.

And they would be very bitter about it too, slagging off the pigeon for being wee.

Wilson
19-10-2016, 01:19 PM
Ach be fair he was only a **'hair away CWG

Superfurry hibby indeed.

Jack Hackett
19-10-2016, 01:22 PM
Their seethe consumes them

dp00
19-10-2016, 02:30 PM
Some of the jambos I know will still try to tell you we are struggling for cash and are close to going into admin [emoji85]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Deansy
19-10-2016, 02:36 PM
The 'Comments section' in the EEN - the muppets have a '24/7 Hibs-thread alert' who are fanatical about all-things Hibs !. They've no shortage of 'Elmer's in this crack 'Hit-squad' - each and every one of them complete fudds !

Bostonhibby
19-10-2016, 02:54 PM
Some of the jambos I know will still try to tell you we are struggling for cash and are close to going into admin [emoji85]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Have they told you the one about how they are getting shares in their club?

The romanov cash only share "issue" was hilarious but right now it looks like we ain't seen nothing yet.

Sent from my HTC One mini 2 using Tapatalk

Bostonhibby
19-10-2016, 03:00 PM
The 'Comments section' in the EEN - the muppets have a '24/7 Hibs-thread alert' who are fanatical about all-things Hibs !. They've no shortage of 'Elmer's in this crack 'Hit-squad' - each and every one of them complete fudds !
Hit with a silent S at the beginning presumably[emoji6]

Sent from my HTC One mini 2 using Tapatalk

greenginger
19-10-2016, 04:10 PM
Cup runs to two finals and our turnover is just over £ 7 million.

Back in 2006 and 2007 our turnover was £ 8.7 million and £ 9.8 million . These are figures before any transfer fees are taken into account . Our share of the league revenue will be smaller by being in a lower division but £ 2-3 million.

I wish Hibs would provide us with a breakdown of the revenue figure. Every other club does !

Jack Hackett
19-10-2016, 04:15 PM
Have they told you the one about how they are getting shares in their club?

The romanov cash only share "issue" was hilarious but right now it looks like we ain't seen nothing yet.

Sent from my HTC One mini 2 using Tapatalk

This is the issue that really has the steam coming out of their sows ears. All the crowing about 'fan ownership', and they don't have a single piece of paper between them. Don't even mention the gradual dilution of what they'll (eventually, maybe) end up being tossed. It's tearing them up that we actually already own 31.8%, and not some vague promissory note.

:na na:

:loser:

:flag:

ancient hibee
19-10-2016, 04:49 PM
Cup runs to two finals and our turnover is just over £ 7 million.

Back in 2006 and 2007 our turnover was £ 8.7 million and £ 9.8 million . These are figures before any transfer fees are taken into account . Our share of the league revenue will be smaller by being in a lower division but £ 2-3 million.

I wish Hibs would provide us with a breakdown of the revenue figure. Every other club does !
Possibly league cup run would boost 2007 figure.Certainly more league prize money due to higher TV payment.Celtic and Hearts gates would be worth an additional half million so as you say the lower league status is evident.

Smartie
19-10-2016, 05:33 PM
What are the dates that these figures refer to?

Obviously a return to profit is very welcome but a profit of only £200k on 2 cup runs, some live tv games and reaching 2 cup finals is a bit disappointing if the truth be told.

Where does the £1.1 come into things? Is that included? Because if it is, does that not mean that without it we would have lost £900k? Can we count on getting that kind of figure every year?

Are any season ticket sales taken into consideration? Because ultimately for a club like us, most of our income will come via ticket sales and next year's figures may well be improved by our current impressive home attendances. Which would obviously be great. Getting a few good years' figures in a row would be brilliant.

Sorry if this appears negative but just trying to get a realistic feel for what these figures mean. Because there has been a wee bit of me over the past couple of years that has wondered how we managed to go from years of buying utter dross to being able to afford players of the calibre of Allan, McGeouch, McGinn, Fyvie and Stokes in spite of playing at a lower level. Whilst I've been enjoying it, there's been a wee bit of me questioning where has the money been coming from.......

NAE NOOKIE
19-10-2016, 05:46 PM
Kickback mutants are raging.

Some are giving us token credit but only because we are trying to follow them.

Yet not one of them admit they have paid c3-4million to budge for zero shares to date and still have an extended period to go before they might have control. Budge has moved the goalposts already and until the new mega stand is finished she will be keeping her options to ensure she doesn't lose a penny.

And not one can understand that crowds up by 5k might just have a not so small impact on any loss like previous years.

Bitter and frankly bored they are now that Hibernian FC won the Scottish Cup in 2016 and now post excellent annual results when they predicted administration or equivalent.

GET IT RIGHT UP YE JAMBO FUDS.

Yeh ... According to them apparently our fan ownership scheme is following the FOH model which is leading the way for everybody, which is a bit strange because half way down my stairs is a framed certificate which says I own 5,000 shares in Hibernian Football Club, whereas half way down your average member of FOH stairs is .... well nothing, except perhaps a picture of them shaking hands with Vladimir Romanov.

Perhaps they don't get the concept of fan 'ownership' ...... This is where fans pay for shares in their club and for every penny they spend their share of the club increases until they own more than 50% of the clubs shares making them the main owner of the club. This is not to be confused with a scheme where you pay money to keep your club going and help it to build new infrastructure and get nothing in return apart from a shiny new stand in which to watch your team boot the ball up the park to whatever giant lumbering huddie you currently have up front.

FOH is an admirable endeavour, it certainly has helped to dig HoMFC out of the hole they created for themselves, but what it isn't is a fan ownership scheme and it wont be until what folk pay into it is remunerated by the issue of shares in the club ...... by the time that happens they will have to pay more for it because of the new stand they have already paid for.

As things stand FOH is no more a fan ownership scheme than buying your messages at TESCO will make you an owner of TESCO.

CropleyWasGod
19-10-2016, 06:02 PM
What are the dates that these figures refer to?

Obviously a return to profit is very welcome but a profit of only £200k on 2 cup runs, some live tv games and reaching 2 cup finals is a bit disappointing if the truth be told.

Where does the £1.1 come into things? Is that included? Because if it is, does that not mean that without it we would have lost £900k? Can we count on getting that kind of figure every year?

Are any season ticket sales taken into consideration? Because ultimately for a club like us, most of our income will come via ticket sales and next year's figures may well be improved by our current impressive home attendances. Which would obviously be great. Getting a few good years' figures in a row would be brilliant.

Sorry if this appears negative but just trying to get a realistic feel for what these figures mean. Because there has been a wee bit of me over the past couple of years that has wondered how we managed to go from years of buying utter dross to being able to afford players of the calibre of Allan, McGeouch, McGinn, Fyvie and Stokes in spite of playing at a lower level. Whilst I've been enjoying it, there's been a wee bit of me questioning where has the money been coming from.......
The figures are for the 11 months to the end of June 2016.

Included in there are the STs for last season, but not this. Also included is the second parachute payment....250k?

This season's STs...although we had a lot of the money....won't show in the accounts until next year.

Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk

Billy Whizz
19-10-2016, 06:18 PM
[QUOTE=CropleyWasGod;4840384]The figures are for the 11 months to the end of June 2016.

Included in there are the STs for last season, but not this. Also included is the second parachute payment....250k?

This season's STs...although we had a lot of the money....won't show in the accounts until next year.

Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk[/QUOTE
I presume they are allowed to defer this season tickets sales , even though 50% of them were probably bought in the last financial year?

CropleyWasGod
19-10-2016, 06:25 PM
[QUOTE=CropleyWasGod;4840384]The figures are for the 11 months to the end of June 2016.

Included in there are the STs for last season, but not this. Also included is the second parachute payment....250k?

This season's STs...although we had a lot of the money....won't show in the accounts until next year.

Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk[/QUOTE
I presume they are allowed to defer this season tickets sales , even though 50% of them were probably bought in the last financial year?
It's not about being "allowed to". It's about good practice....the STs relate to this season, so should be included in this season's accounts

Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk

Caversham Green
19-10-2016, 07:07 PM
Cup runs to two finals and our turnover is just over £ 7 million.

Back in 2006 and 2007 our turnover was £ 8.7 million and £ 9.8 million . These are figures before any transfer fees are taken into account . Our share of the league revenue will be smaller by being in a lower division but £ 2-3 million.

I wish Hibs would provide us with a breakdown of the revenue figure. Every other club does !

We got to the semis of the Scottish Cup in both those years and won the League Cup in 2007. We also had two home games each against Hearts, Celtic and the club that closed down. Attendances for other games were good and no doubt TV money, sponsorship etc were better than for the second tier. I do agree that it still looks a big drop though - might be worth a question at the AGM

The only clubs that give breakdowns of turnover have to because they're PLCs.


What are the dates that these figures refer to?

Obviously a return to profit is very welcome but a profit of only £200k on 2 cup runs, some live tv games and reaching 2 cup finals is a bit disappointing if the truth be told.

Where does the £1.1 come into things? Is that included? Because if it is, does that not mean that without it we would have lost £900k? Can we count on getting that kind of figure every year?

Are any season ticket sales taken into consideration? Because ultimately for a club like us, most of our income will come via ticket sales and next year's figures may well be improved by our current impressive home attendances. Which would obviously be great. Getting a few good years' figures in a row would be brilliant.

Sorry if this appears negative but just trying to get a realistic feel for what these figures mean. Because there has been a wee bit of me over the past couple of years that has wondered how we managed to go from years of buying utter dross to being able to afford players of the calibre of Allan, McGeouch, McGinn, Fyvie and Stokes in spite of playing at a lower level. Whilst I've been enjoying it, there's been a wee bit of me questioning where has the money been coming from.......

CWG has answered a couple of your points, as for the rest...I agree that the small profit is a bit disappointing, but a loss was budgeted for at the start of the season, so probably not too surprising and it does give us a better than expected grounding for this season. I would assume some of the gains from the cup win will have gone in bonuses so if we hadn't had that success wages would have been lower as well as turnover.

The £1.1m is a Balance Sheet figure - it isn't included in turnover.

Regarding the players, it seems to me that a lot the players we signed post Collins won't have come cheap even though they didn't do the business. On the other hand, all of the players you mention were looking for first team football (Stokes was on loan, probably financed in part by the League cup run) and may not have cost as much as you might think. The sale of Allan will have helped to finance their wages, and last, but by no means least we had the money from HSL and private share issues, none of which went to the owners unlike other share issue schemes I could mention.

IWasThere2016
19-10-2016, 07:24 PM
All very well and good but how can we reconcile this profit with not paying our full dues to a pubically owned bank?

That was negotiated - as many other clubs did - we didn't refuse to - nor were unable to - pay (unlike the Gorgie and Govan Puddle Drinkers)


Decent result...but a small profit, compared to the level of income increase....we really need to get promoted this year...stating the obvious!

I trust there was a loss in 2015 - and that it was an underlying loss also. And we MUST get up or the losses are certain to return.



Fantastic news. One of the stand out points for me was the 'wages to turnover ratio' going down from 61% to 54% - That really is a great bit of work from Hibs.

That % 'improvement' is a consequence of higher income rather than managing the payroll down..

Ryan69
19-10-2016, 08:58 PM
In fairness...its a pretty piss poor profit considering.
We won the Scottish cup.
Got to final of league cup.
Had European football.
Had playoffs.
Compensation for our manager.

Imagine we hadnt won the Scottish cup...we would be in serious difficulty.

Ill put the tin hat on for being abit concerned overall.

How are we going to break even within the next year?

hibbysam
19-10-2016, 09:07 PM
In fairness...its a pretty piss poor profit considering.
We won the Scottish cup.
Got to final of league cup.
Had European football.
Had playoffs.
Compensation for our manager.

Imagine we hadnt won the Scottish cup...we would be in serious difficulty.

Ill put the tin hat on for being abit concerned overall.

How are we going to break even within the next year?

It really isn't rocket science... European football last season? League cup run would not have been that great financially, minimal profit.

How will we cope? £15 for a photo with the cup, £25 for a DVD, average attendance up over 5k, assets within the playing staff worth over £4m if needs must... I think we will be just fine. If we were in financial ruin I doubt we would have rejected £1.7m for JC.

CropleyWasGod
19-10-2016, 09:14 PM
In fairness...its a pretty piss poor profit considering.
We won the Scottish cup.
Got to final of league cup.
Had European football.
Had playoffs.
Compensation for our manager.

Imagine we hadnt won the Scottish cup...we would be in serious difficulty.

Ill put the tin hat on for being abit concerned overall.

How are we going to break even within the next year?
As has been said, we budgeted for a loss, so....no, we wouldn't be in serious difficulty.

Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk

Blaster
19-10-2016, 09:16 PM
CWG, is the Scottish cup winners prize included? Was there not talk that the SFA held it back pending their investigation into the invasion etc

danhibees1875
19-10-2016, 09:35 PM
CWG, is the Scottish cup winners prize included? Was there not talk that the SFA held it back pending their investigation into the invasion etc

Surely that would have been clarified if it were the case. Would be great if it were though.

As previously said, it would be fascinating to see a TB breakdown of the revenue figure.

Ryan69
20-10-2016, 12:17 AM
As has been said, we budgeted for a loss, so....no, we wouldn't be in serious difficulty.

Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk

Its a hell of alot of alot of money to budget for!

CropleyWasGod
20-10-2016, 06:43 AM
CWG, is the Scottish cup winners prize included? Was there not talk that the SFA held it back pending their investigation into the invasion etc
It's not clear from the accounts.

Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk

CropleyWasGod
20-10-2016, 06:45 AM
Its a hell of alot of alot of money to budget for!
Whatever the budgeted loss was....and I don't know what that was.....the Board would have been comfortable that we could live with it.

Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk

Ringothedog
20-10-2016, 07:22 AM
In fairness...its a pretty piss poor profit considering.
We won the Scottish cup.
Got to final of league cup.
Had European football.
Had playoffs.
Compensation for our manager.

Imagine we hadnt won the Scottish cup...we would be in serious difficulty.

Ill put the tin hat on for being abit concerned overall.

How are we going to break even within the next year?

Our accounts for last year are very good:
Yes we won the Scottish cup
We did not have European football
Any money from the playoffs is miniscule as most of the gate receipts go to the SPFL.
Any money from the league cup run would be good but not great.
We will have paid another £500k repayment for our debt.

All in all a very successful season for us as a club

Oh and we won the SCOTTISH CUP!!

NAE NOOKIE
20-10-2016, 05:34 PM
In fairness...its a pretty piss poor profit considering.
We won the Scottish cup.
Got to final of league cup.
Had European football.
Had playoffs.
Compensation for our manager.

Imagine we hadnt won the Scottish cup...we would be in serious difficulty.

Ill put the tin hat on for being abit concerned overall.

How are we going to break even within the next year?

Well, for a kick off a football club anywhere in the world making any kind of a profit is pretty good going, probably 90% of the worlds clubs run at a loss, as I recall the combined debt of clubs in the English premiership is eyewatering and that's the richest league in the world. Hibs never budget on the basis that we will do anything other than get punted in the first game of both cup competitions, any club doing otherwise needs its bumps felt ... we almost certainly lost money putting on that game in the Irn Bru cup.

Chances are we will make a loss this season, but the upturn in our crowds should stop it from being too bad a loss .... our average last season was about 10,000 ... if we can keep this seasons average at 13,000 between now and the end of the season that equates to 54,000 more fans through the door than last season and unlike games at Hampden or semis at the PBS Hibs also make money from those extra fans through catering, hospitality and visits to the club shop.

Making a loss this year will be no big deal if we get promoted .... chances are we will break our season ticket sales record in such an event and provided we can make the top 6 the following season we will sell out the south stand probably at least 6 times and that wont include big away supports from Aberdeen and bigger away supports from the likes of Dundee and Partick Thistle, who for some reason usually bring decent away supports in relation to their home crowds.

That's all positive ..... but if we don't go up the consequences could be dire.

Having said that, if the SPFL are ever going to increase the size of the Premiership the start of next season would be the time to do it .... they wont be open to accusations of doing it to favour the likes of Sevco and the Yams and the same would go for Hibs, who after all by that time will have been in the Championship for 3 seasons.

CropleyWasGod
20-10-2016, 07:26 PM
I've had a chance to read the accounts themselves, and have pulled out a few things....

1. The profit is stated after a gain on sale of players of 330k. Presumably, that's Allan. Can't think of anybody else.

2. It's also stated after depreciation on the buildings (not the land) at EM of 270k. That's required by accounting standards now, but maybe some of our property people can shed some light on whether it reflects actual value.
3.Staff numbers are up from 75 to 92. Presumably, this reflects the bringing in of the catering. Playing staff are up by 6, non-playing by 11...from 21.
4. Directors pay is 217k...down from 314k. Leann and Jamie Marwick are the only paid directors. The highest paid...LD presimably...got 153k including benefits and pension contributions.
5. The playing squad is valued at 247k.
6. Included in accrued income is 700k..up from 132k the previous year. I'm wondering if that is the Cup money that a poster asked about earlier.

That's it so far....:)

Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk

Betty Boop
20-10-2016, 07:42 PM
I've had a chance to read the accounts themselves, and have pulled out a few things....

1. The profit is stated after a gain on sale of players of 330k. Presumably, that's Allan. Can't think of anybody else.

2. It's also stated after depreciation on the buildings (not the land) at EM of 270k. That's required by accounting standards now, but maybe some of our property people can shed some light on whether it reflects actual value.
3.Staff numbers are up from 75 to 92. Presumably, this reflects the bringing in of the catering. Playing staff are up by 6, non-playing by 11...from 21.
4. Directors pay is 217k...down from 314k. Leann and Jamie Marwick are the only paid directors. The highest paid...LD presimably...got 153k including benefits and pension contributions.
5. The playing squad is valued at 247k.
6. Included in accrued income is 700k..up from 132k the previous year. I'm wondering if that is the Cup money that a poster asked about earlier.

That's it so far....:)

Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk
Leanne Dempster earns 153k ? Fair wedge.

West lower
20-10-2016, 07:47 PM
I've had a chance to read the accounts themselves, and have pulled out a few things....

1. The profit is stated after a gain on sale of players of 330k. Presumably, that's Allan. Can't think of anybody else.

2. It's also stated after depreciation on the buildings (not the land) at EM of 270k. That's required by accounting standards now, but maybe some of our property people can shed some light on whether it reflects actual value.
3.Staff numbers are up from 75 to 92. Presumably, this reflects the bringing in of the catering. Playing staff are up by 6, non-playing by 11...from 21.
4. Directors pay is 217k...down from 314k. Leann and Jamie Marwick are the only paid directors. The highest paid...LD presimably...got 153k including benefits and pension contributions.
5. The playing squad is valued at 247k.
6. Included in accrued income is 700k..up from 132k the previous year. I'm wondering if that is the Cup money that a poster asked about earlier.

That's it so far....:)

Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk

They obviuosly don't rate our squad very highly 😳

CropleyWasGod
20-10-2016, 07:47 PM
Leanne Dempster earns 153k ? Fair wedge.
There's possibly a bonus in there, since the accounts mention "performance related " payments.

Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk

CropleyWasGod
20-10-2016, 07:55 PM
They obviuosly don't rate our squad very highly 😳
The value is calculated as the cost of each player, written off over the length of their contract. There's not many that we have actually paid for.



Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk

Phil MaGlass
20-10-2016, 07:59 PM
Hearts fans be like "what is this "profit" they talk about" ?.....and I liked the line "no external debt"......digging that **** boys.

Hertz fans are thick as, they probably think weve turned muslim.
Wondering where we have posted him

West lower
20-10-2016, 08:27 PM
The value is calculated as the cost of each player, written off over the length of their contract. There's not many that we have actually paid for.



Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk

Cheers for that. I had no idea it worked like that, but makes sense.

son of haggart
21-10-2016, 06:57 AM
The value is calculated as the cost of each player, written off over the length of their contract. There's not many that we have actually paid for.



Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk

I've always depreciated Hibs playing squad, so that makes sense

:cb

MB62
21-10-2016, 07:25 AM
I've always depreciated Hibs playing squad, so that makes sense

:cb

:greengrin

HibbySpurs
21-10-2016, 11:57 AM
All very well and good but how can we reconcile this profit with not paying our full dues to a pubically owned bank?

We offered the bank a settlement figure, they accepted!


"The Club is pleased to confirm that it has agreed a settlement with Bank of Scotland and that the Club is now free of Bank debt. That settlement was funded by new loans provided by the holding company to the Club and by a payment made direct to the Bank. The fixed securities held by the Bank over Easter Road Stadium and the Hibernian Training Centre have been released."

Ref: Club statement 29 December 2014

Hope that clarifies this for you, but I have my doubts.

NAE NOOKIE
21-10-2016, 12:17 PM
We offered the bank a settlement figure, they accepted!


"The Club is pleased to confirm that it has agreed a settlement with Bank of Scotland and that the Club is now free of Bank debt. That settlement was funded by new loans provided by the holding company to the Club and by a payment made direct to the Bank. The fixed securities held by the Bank over Easter Road Stadium and the Hibernian Training Centre have been released."

Ref: Club statement 29 December 2014

Hope that clarifies this for you, but I have my doubts.

Exactly ... Hibs didn't default or renege on anything. As I understand it Its a pretty well accepted business practice that in a lot of cases a bank will accept a lump sum payment in order to discharge a debt, in many cases that sum is less than the loan was worth especially if the interest that would have accrued is taken into account, but from the banks point of view it has rid its books of what to its accountants looks like a risky loan and all for a pretty minor hit compared to what could have happened .... at the end of the day the bank benefits because they have one less 'bad loan' on the books and they look more stable as a result.

From Hibs point of view its business conducted in the right way, its above board and for anybody but slavering Yams pretty standard business practice .... put it this way, the bank wasn't exactly under pressure to say yes to Hibs proposal, the club was not teetering on the brink like some others and there was no reason for the bank to think it wouldn't get its money back if it had said no ........ who has ever heard of a bank giving something for nothing, they said yes because the deal suited them and for no other reason ..... and certainly not because they felt like being 'kind' to Hibs.

JoeT_WasTheBest
21-10-2016, 01:15 PM
I'm away on holiday just now, what's the AGM date?

HibbySpurs
21-10-2016, 01:17 PM
Exactly ... Hibs didn't default or renege on anything. As I understand it Its a pretty well accepted business practice that in a lot of cases a bank will accept a lump sum payment in order to discharge a debt, in many cases that sum is less than the loan was worth especially if the interest that would have accrued is taken into account, but from the banks point of view it has rid its books of what to its accountants looks like a risky loan and all for a pretty minor hit compared to what could have happened .... at the end of the day the bank benefits because they have one less 'bad loan' on the books and they look more stable as a result.

From Hibs point of view its business conducted in the right way, its above board and for anybody but slavering Yams pretty standard business practice .... put it this way, the bank wasn't exactly under pressure to say yes to Hibs proposal, the club was not teetering on the brink like some others and there was no reason for the bank to think it wouldn't get its money back if it had said no ........ who has ever heard of a bank giving something for nothing, they said yes because the deal suited them and for no other reason ..... and certainly not because they felt like being 'kind' to Hibs.

agreed, also I haven't seen anywhere that the bank actually took a loss here (maybe I missed something) but it's entirely possible they still got more back than the initial capital advanced? Just not made as much as they might have done!

As you say though it's a debtor off the loan book and the risk is gone.... We'll leave risky loans and defaults to our pals across the city.... Wonga.com springs to mind :greengrin:

grunt
21-10-2016, 01:25 PM
I'm away on holiday just now, what's the AGM date?7pm Monday 7 November.

mjhibby
21-10-2016, 07:01 PM
Good figures whichever way you look at it. This season we would get £185,000 for getting in to Europe plus the money made from the game itself. Plus of course all the money associated with merchandise and dvds. Plus of course the most important. Attendances at the gate. Tv money can be misleading as we tended to lose most of the TVs money due to reduced gates( under 13 thousand at last home game against secco) so the crowd v Dundee Utd was very encouraging. All in all the bean counters at er will be delighted at our financial position considering we are in our third year in the championship. We really need to get promoted and I think we will as we have the squad to come out on top over the season. Then hopefully when we get promoted we will see similar numbers at the games. Team just needs to do the business on the park to continue to enhance our excellent financial position. Only worry if the good news keeps coming then we could see people want to buy the club if sir tom wants out. Then you are in the lap of the gods. A good conundrum to have.

ancient hibee
21-10-2016, 07:37 PM
Don't think anyone will rush to buy Sir Tom's shares as it looks like these will only be a minority interest in a few years as the fan holding increases.

Jdawg
22-10-2016, 08:59 AM
The yams keep going about us cheating uk banks that were bailed out by the taxpayer. Nonsense. With their grasp of accountancy/(non) payment to creditors, it's not a stretch to understand why they don't get it.

We offered a settlement and the BANK accepted that, it's called business. They could have rejected it.

Mon Dieu4
22-10-2016, 09:43 AM
The yams keep going about us cheating uk banks that were bailed out by the taxpayer. Nonsense. With their grasp of accountancy/(non) payment to creditors, it's not a stretch to understand why they don't get it.

We offered a settlement and the BANK accepted that, it's called business. They could have rejected it.

Ignore them, that's like getting abuse off Fred West for the state of your garden

southsider
22-10-2016, 09:44 AM
The yams keep going about us cheating uk banks that were bailed out by the taxpayer. Nonsense. With their grasp of accountancy/(non) payment to creditors, it's not a stretch to understand why they don't get it.

We offered a settlement and the BANK accepted that, it's called business. They could have rejected it.
Dundee Utd certainly and most likely Aberdeen came to similar arrangements. Banks looking to get out of football were happy to take a cut just to get shot of those business.

greenginger
22-10-2016, 09:54 AM
Dundee Utd certainly and most likely Aberdeen came to similar arrangements. Banks looking to get out of football were happy to take a cut just to get shot of those business.


When Romanov first came to Gorgie he arranged for Hearts debts ( about £ 19 million with HBOS ) run up by the Pieman , to be transferred to his Ukio Bankas.

Part of the deal was a reduction in the amount owed by about £ 2 million. So Hearts had bank debt reduction even before their insolvency.

Just Alf
22-10-2016, 09:57 AM
In addition to above, Banks look at the big picture, they would have weighed up the chances of making a better return on their money if they put it somewhere else.... Don't know about the other teams mentioned above but the bank would have got everything thing we owed them, but over time (as per agreement) it was THEIR choice to take their money earlier they didn't have to agree.

high bee
22-10-2016, 09:57 AM
The yams keep going about us cheating uk banks that were bailed out by the taxpayer. Nonsense. With their grasp of accountancy/(non) payment to creditors, it's not a stretch to understand why they don't get it.

We offered a settlement and the BANK accepted that, it's called business. They could have rejected it.

We should've just defaulted on the full amount, that's what big teams do.

I look forward to them staying exactly what we owed and what the settlement figure was. Hibs said a settlement was agreed with the bank but they never actually said if any debt was written off. A bank loan I have, has the facility to agree an early settlement, its 56 days interest on the amount owed meaning you haven't paid all the interest that would have been paid had you seen out the term but you've paid the agreed interest for the term of the loan.

If I had take advantage of this in order to take lower rate finance elsewhere then I'm not ripping off a state owned bank so why are Hibs??? Perhaps it might have something to do with their insecurities about their financial history, just like when they slag Easter Road cause they know the only thing worse than their main stand is the fact that the other 3 are in almost as bad a state and they're about 5 times younger!

Mon Dieu4
22-10-2016, 09:58 AM
I've just read their thread, it's an amusing read, few things I noticed on a brief scan, we don't own anything at the moment with a third of the shares and even at 51% we won't own the club, buuuuuut and it's a big but it just so happens the government stake in Lloyds Banking group in December 2014 was 24%, so by their yaminomics Lloyds wasn't Publicly or Government owned at that time, case closed :wink:

high bee
22-10-2016, 10:01 AM
In addition to above, Banks look at the big picture, they would have weighed up the chances of making a better return on their money if they put it somewhere else.... Don't know about the other teams mentioned above but the bank would have got everything thing we owed them, but over time (as per agreement) it was THEIR choice to take their money earlier they didn't have to agree.

Key word - Agreement.

I'm sure the Lithuanian tax payer and all the local businesses also came to an agreement with them that they could default on all monies owed and nothing more would be said, provided they sent a few cupcakes their way from the bake sale.

CropleyWasGod
22-10-2016, 10:40 AM
We should've just defaulted on the full amount, that's what big teams do.

I look forward to them staying exactly what we owed and what the settlement figure was. Hibs said a settlement was agreed with the bank but they never actually said if any debt was written off. A bank loan I have, has the facility to agree an early settlement, its 56 days interest on the amount owed meaning you haven't paid all the interest that would have been paid had you seen out the term but you've paid the agreed interest for the term of the loan.

If I had take advantage of this in order to take lower rate finance elsewhere then I'm not ripping off a state owned bank so why are Hibs??? Perhaps it might have something to do with their insecurities about their financial history, just like when they slag Easter Road cause they know the only thing worse than their main stand is the fact that the other 3 are in almost as bad a state and they're about 5 times younger!
You won't get anyone saying what the settlement was. That's confidential.

However, look back on a similar thread about a year ago and you'll see some pretty reasonable estimates of what it was. 3 sides of a rectangle, and all that....

Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk

danhibees1875
22-10-2016, 02:06 PM
You won't get anyone saying what the settlement was. That's confidential.

However, look back on a similar thread about a year ago and you'll see some pretty reasonable estimates of what it was. 3 sides of a rectangle, and all that....

Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk

Exactly.

STF may have paid any difference for all we'll ever know. In any case, an agreement is exactly that, and if any financial gain did happen to come our way it's only down to the fact that football is seen to be too risky for them to have much money tied up in... who would we have to thank for that perception?

Caversham Green
22-10-2016, 05:47 PM
Ignore them, that's like getting abuse off Fred West for the state of your garden

:agree: They're desperately trying to drag us down to their level but negotiating early settlement on a £6m loan is not remotely like cheating governments, traders, pension funds and charities out of £67m. We know it and they know it (at least those with IQs higher than their shoe sizes do).

They're clutching at straws.