PDA

View Full Version : Yams Yams accounts



Ozyhibby
17-11-2016, 03:57 PM
http://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/sport/football/hearts/hearts-financial-results-club-income-rises-by-3m-1-4292374

Good figures for the yams. Shows how much we are losing down in this league.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Pedantic_Hibee
17-11-2016, 04:00 PM
If only they had that money a few years back, those poor charities etc wouldn't have suffered. Disgusting.

Peevemor
17-11-2016, 04:08 PM
Is the £3m from FOH & Sow in the overall turnover figure of £9m? If so then these figures aren't that brilliant.

Ozyhibby
17-11-2016, 04:13 PM
Is the £3m from FOH & Sow in the overall turnover figure of £9m? If so then these figures aren't that brilliant.

The money for Sow appears to be separate but FOH cash included.
Being able to rely on £1.5m a year free cash from supporters is a definite advantage they have over us.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Bostonhibby
17-11-2016, 04:31 PM
£1.5m a year over twenty odd years would pay off all those poor creditors and they might be able to start to shake off that stigma that follows them and will be around forever.

I know who I'd rather support

Sent from my HTC One mini 2 using Tapatalk

Billy Whizz
17-11-2016, 04:38 PM
The money for Sow appears to be separate but FOH cash included.
Being able to rely on £1.5m a year free cash from supporters is a definite advantage they have over us.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Sow went January, why wouldn't be included, if their year is June?

Ozyhibby
17-11-2016, 04:46 PM
Sow went January, why wouldn't be included, if their year is June?

I think it's an accounting thing. It's been added to their cash reserves but not included in turnover. I think.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

andrew70
17-11-2016, 04:47 PM
The money for Sow appears to be separate but FOH cash included.
Being able to rely on £1.5m a year free cash from supporters is a definite advantage they have over us.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

All their money is going to build a new stand though and they will still not own their club. A profit of about £600k all in...approx only £400k+ more than us for finishing 12 places ahead of us in terms of league placings.

Net cash looks great upon first reading but if they want to buy players in January or the summer then they are going to have to find money elsewhere as the bus shelter will take precendence over anything else and they won't have a chinese club willing to pay stupid money for crap striker.

They'll paint this as a good news story whilst omitting the truth, as they always do.:tumble:

Billy Whizz
17-11-2016, 04:48 PM
I think it's an accounting thing. It's been added to their cash reserves but not included in turnover. I think.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ok ta

May2116
17-11-2016, 05:07 PM
£600k profit including £1.5m from FOH and £1.5m from Sow? Including 'sell outs' every week. Aye very good stuff from them. So when they pay the stand off their reserves and there's £0 in the bank, no assets to move on, and finishing below Celtic rangers and Aberdeen. This is as good a year as they will have and they made £600k.

calumhibee1
17-11-2016, 05:12 PM
Fair play to them for being debt free and making a profit. The Huns could take note. Although the way they're all giving each other pats on the backs etc is pretty shameless.

Pedantic_Hibee
17-11-2016, 05:19 PM
Fair play to them for being debt free and making a profit. The Huns could take note. Although the way they're all giving each other pats on the backs etc is pretty shameless.

There's a reason they're free. 36 million reasons actually.

CropleyWasGod
17-11-2016, 05:29 PM
I think it's an accounting thing. It's been added to their cash reserves but not included in turnover. I think.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Haven't seen their accounts, but can't think of any reason why the.fee wouldn't be in turnover.

Edit.....probably shown as a gain on an intangible asset.

I'll have a look later.[emoji1]

Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk

CropleyWasGod
17-11-2016, 05:30 PM
Fair play to them for being debt free and making a profit. The Huns could take note. Although the way they're all giving each other pats on the backs etc is pretty shameless.
They're not debt free.



Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk

Bostonhibby
17-11-2016, 05:36 PM
They're not debt free.



Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk
Owing it to themselves again already? If they say it enough it becomes true, it's a yam thing

Sent from my HTC One mini 2 using Tapatalk

greenginger
17-11-2016, 05:44 PM
Haven't seen their accounts, but can't think of any reason why the.fee wouldn't be in turnover.

I'll have a look later.[emoji1]

Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk


I don't think the accounts are available yet, its just headline figures fed to AllisBarry @ EEN.

Yam idea of debt free, we owe it to ourselves ( FoH ), we owe Mrs Budge, we owe HMRC , and we owe trade creditors.
Business as usual. :cb

EskbankHibby
17-11-2016, 06:51 PM
There's a reason they're free. 36 million reasons actually.

Poppy's are free as well I believe.

Famous Fiver
17-11-2016, 07:02 PM
Looks like there is a cash cow there for a wee while yet for wee Budgie to milk for all she's worth.

Gaun yersel, hen.

CropleyWasGod
17-11-2016, 07:25 PM
I don't think the accounts are available yet, its just headline figures fed to AllisBarry @ EEN.

Yam idea of debt free, we owe it to ourselves ( FoH ), we owe Mrs Budge, we owe HMRC , and we owe trade creditors.
Business as usual. :cb

So I see.

It's interesting that they've done it this way. :cb

2 things stick out for me:-

1. the headline says that "income" is up. The text says "turnover". The 2 are different. The accounts will clarify that.

2. a profit of £600k AFTER the Sow and FOH money? That would be interesting.

I'll reserve judgement until I've seen the accounts, but I think there might be some softening-up going on here.

GreenLake
17-11-2016, 07:32 PM
http://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/sport/football/hearts/hearts-financial-results-club-income-rises-by-3m-1-4292374

Good figures for the yams. Shows how much we are losing down in this league.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No breakdown of fan ownership figures.

Bostonhibby
17-11-2016, 07:58 PM
No breakdown of fan ownership figures.
Still just the one fan with "ownership" the cash for same is building the one stand. The one fan is earning a nice return too. The rest just give like drones.

Sent from my HTC One mini 2 using Tapatalk

Cameron1875
17-11-2016, 09:40 PM
I will never ever say "fair play" to them for anything financial related.

**** them. No money can ever take back that they were 2-0 up and they ballsed it up with their greatest rivals going on to win the Scottish Cup.

Stax
17-11-2016, 10:05 PM
Lived well beyond their means for years and achieved f*** all. At least the Huns lorded it (while also cheating on a ridiculous scale) for a while before going out of existence. Hertz beat Gretna on penalties and beat one of the poorest Hibs sides in recent times and that's it. It really is laughable. What a legacy. What a Scottish institution as some pish stained old disgrace recently said.

GreenCastle
17-11-2016, 10:13 PM
Debt free?!!

Have you forgotten about the money you owe Budge and will do for the foreseeable future. Queen Ann and family (doing work on new stand)will be milking the club for all they can get.

Sham of a club

Deansy
17-11-2016, 10:17 PM
Have to remember, since they got away with literally financial-murder, they've enjoyed a fairly good run - promoted straight back to the SPL at the first attempt and been in the top six ever since. But they still haven't hit a bad patch yet and that WILL come ('Playing within their means' will see to that) - a run of cancelled D/D's will set alarm-bells ringing at the PBS !

mca
17-11-2016, 10:33 PM
fraud
frɔːd/
noun
plural noun: frauds


wrongful or criminal deception intended to result in financial or personal gain....



Does this Apply.. Because They Dont Like it When i call Them "Frauds".. :wink:

lucky
17-11-2016, 11:23 PM
Regardless of profit from Sow there fans are still putting £1.5m a year into them. They've got the cash for their stand and moving forward. We owe STF £4.5m and none of us know what's happening with HSL as they've gone awol apart from the occasional tweet. It's time we concentrated on our own club. Get our fan ownership completed, pay of STF and get promoted. Then we can gloat at them.

SunshineOnLeith
17-11-2016, 11:55 PM
Haven't seen their accounts, but can't think of any reason why the.fee wouldn't be in turnover.

Edit.....probably shown as a gain on an intangible asset.

I'll have a look later.[emoji1]

Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk

Your edit is right, or at least it is for Hibs' accounts.

cocteautwin
18-11-2016, 01:41 AM
One thing I've wondered, is Budge the only club owner in the UK that's taking money out of the club that is owned? There can't be many owners creaming an income from their club? I would suspect there are very few clubs in the UK paying a dividend to it's owner (maybe none?) but there must also be very few where the owner is taking out 6% of their investment annually. Are Hearts (and possibly Man U.) the only ones?

green day
18-11-2016, 07:24 AM
Regardless of profit from Sow there fans are still putting £1.5m a year into them. They've got the cash for their stand and moving forward. We owe STF £4.5m and none of us know what's happening with HSL as they've gone awol apart from the occasional tweet. It's time we concentrated on our own club. Get our fan ownership completed, pay of STF and get promoted. Then we can gloat at them.

I thought it was public knowledge that fans and HSL own 31% between them, and that the club are paying STF off at £500k PA?

I'm quite relaxed about that and continue my DD to HSL.

Oscar T Grouch
18-11-2016, 08:08 AM
Regardless of profit from Sow there fans are still putting £1.5m a year into them. They've got the cash for their stand and moving forward. We owe STF £4.5m and none of us know what's happening with HSL as they've gone awol apart from the occasional tweet. It's time we concentrated on our own club. Get our fan ownership completed, pay of STF and get promoted. Then we can gloat at them.

When did they announce the £3m shortfall for their new stand had been raised? I know I've stopped watch news programs but I thought I would have picked it up on here?!?

Ringothedog
18-11-2016, 08:15 AM
I wonder if they will parade their accounts during halftime at their next home game.

Ringothedog
18-11-2016, 08:18 AM
When did they announce the £3m shortfall for their new stand had been raised? I know I've stopped watch news programs but I thought I would have picked it up on here?!?

They haven't.Still don't have all the money for their super duper all singing all Dancing(although there won't be much of that) stand.

Ozyhibby
18-11-2016, 08:25 AM
They haven't.Still don't have all the money for their super duper all singing all Dancing(although there won't be much of that) stand.

Budge has stated that she will make up the shortfall in the meantime. It will just push the fan ownership down the line a bit.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Pete
18-11-2016, 08:32 AM
If the point of this thread is to instigate one big naval gazing exercise then you can count me out.

We're fine and they will always be cheats. End of.

Ozyhibby
18-11-2016, 09:06 AM
The point of the thread was to discuss the relative strengths or weaknesses of our closest rivals. Quite common on football message boards.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Peevemor
18-11-2016, 09:12 AM
Profit for the year was £623,000 and Hearts' bank balance now stands at £5,036,000. Much of that cash is likely to be used to fund the new main stand at Tynecastle, due for completion in September 2017.


It should be remembered that the reported bank balance of £5m isn't simply a pile of cash waiting to be spent on their stand - it's the equivalent of any of us being "minted" at the beginning of the month having just been paid.

Caversham Green
18-11-2016, 10:03 AM
The article will have been written for Banderson with the intention of presenting the figures in the most positive way possible - that's neither criticism nor praise, it's just the way these things are done and Hibs do exactly the same thing.

Having said that, I think the £9.9m is the pure turnover figure - profit from player sales always appears elsewhere in the Profit and Loss account and there would be VAT implications if the FoH money was treated as revenue (although the article contradicts this by saying the FoH money contributed to the £3m increase in revenue).

A broad calculation shows income £9.9m less staff costs of £5.5m and other operating costs of £4.1m - that would give a profit £0.3m whereas the reported profit is £0.6m, suggesting the income from player sales must be added to the profit figure. Since they reportedly sold Sow for £1m there's a shortfall of £.7m - did they pay money for Sow or are there other costs 'below the line'?

Staff numbers are up from an already high 122 to 144, suggesting they've brought catering or some other operations in-house which would go some way to explaining the high-looking turnover figure. IIRC Aberdeen's turnover was north of £11m which suggests that the Premiership is more lucrative than the old SPL.

On cash flow, the article reports a £1.5 net inflow, and that's borne out by the increase in cash in hand from £3.5m to £5m. As Peevemor points out a proportion of that will be needed to finance wages and expenses for the current season, but they still have a decent wedge there for the stand. Hibs were similarly stockpiling cash 10 years ago to build the training centre and East Stand. The article claims that the extra £1.5m came largely from the sale of Sow, but I suspect that wasn't a cash transaction in total and it's more accurate to say that it came from the FoH contribution (which was also £1.5m), and all their other activities - including player sales - were cash-neutral.

On the face of it a decent set of figures which emphasises the necessity for Hibs to get back where they belong.

bruno
18-11-2016, 10:19 AM
The article will have been written for Banderson with the intention of presenting the figures in the most positive way possible - that's neither criticism nor praise, it's just the way these things are done and Hibs do exactly the same thing.

Having said that, I think the £9.9m is the pure turnover figure - profit from player sales always appears elsewhere in the Profit and Loss account and there would be VAT implications if the FoH money was treated as revenue (although the article contradicts this by saying the FoH money contributed to the £3m increase in revenue).

A broad calculation shows income £9.9m less staff costs of £5.5m and other operating costs of £4.1m - that would give a profit £0.3m whereas the reported profit is £0.6m, suggesting the income from player sales must be added to the profit figure. Since they reportedly sold Sow for £1m there's a shortfall of £.7m - did they pay money for Sow or are there other costs 'below the line'?

Staff numbers are up from an already high 122 to 144, suggesting they've brought catering or some other operations in-house which would go some way to explaining the high-looking turnover figure. IIRC Aberdeen's turnover was north of £11m which suggests that the Premiership is more lucrative than the old SPL.

On cash flow, the article reports a £1.5 net inflow, and that's borne out by the increase in cash in hand from £3.5m to £5m. As Peevemor points out a proportion of that will be needed to finance wages and expenses for the current season, but they still have a decent wedge there for the stand. Hibs were similarly stockpiling cash 10 years ago to build the training centre and East Stand. The article claims that the extra £1.5m came largely from the sale of Sow, but I suspect that wasn't a cash transaction in total and it's more accurate to say that it came from the FoH contribution (which was also £1.5m), and all their other activities - including player sales - were cash-neutral.

On the face of it a decent set of figures which emphasises the necessity for Hibs to get back where they belong.

It's impossible to say with any certainty without seeing the full accounts however just to hopefully answer 1 point the shortfall of £0.7m you mention I think is what has been spent on the start of demolition of buildings and work on the Wheatfield undercroft

Cabbage East
18-11-2016, 10:28 AM
It's impossible to say with any certainty without seeing the full accounts however just to hopefully answer 1 point the shortfall of £0.7m you mention I think is what has been spent on the start of demolition of buildings and work on the Wheatfield undercroft

You're suggesting that Hearts are paying a company for their services? Changed days for your thieving club then.

greenginger
18-11-2016, 10:33 AM
It's impossible to say with any certainty without seeing the full accounts however just to hopefully answer 1 point the shortfall of £0.7m you mention I think is what has been spent on the start of demolition of buildings and work on the Wheatfield undercroft


The £0.7 million is money spent at 30th June.

I'd guess about £150,000 on the start of the Wheatfield undercroft ( There is still no Building Warrant for the work ).

Maybe a deposit of £ 50,000 paid to Chris Stewart Group to secure the purchase of the office block.

And the remaining £ 500,000 will be design fees. Remember the Vlad application boxes cost about £ 1.1 m. :greengrin

Caversham Green
18-11-2016, 10:34 AM
It's impossible to say with any certainty without seeing the full accounts however just to hopefully answer 1 point the shortfall of £0.7m you mention I think is what has been spent on the start of demolition of buildings and work on the Wheatfield undercroft

Not sure that would be the case as I would expect those costs to be included in fixed assets rather than P&L. Looking at the layout of the P&L it's possible that the profit figure has been given before interest charges, but that wouldn't explain the whole £700k. My guess would be that there are some write-offs or possibly post-administration costs in there. That is just speculation though.

bruno
18-11-2016, 10:48 AM
Not sure that would be the case as I would expect those costs to be included in fixed assets rather than P&L. Looking at the layout of the P&L it's possible that the profit figure has been given before interest charges, but that wouldn't explain the whole £700k. My guess would be that there are some write-offs or possibly post-administration costs in there. That is just speculation though.
Fair enough
You'll have a better understanding of accounts than i do so you're probably right
Thanks for the reply

brog
18-11-2016, 11:03 AM
Not sure that would be the case as I would expect those costs to be included in fixed assets rather than P&L. Looking at the layout of the P&L it's possible that the profit figure has been given before interest charges, but that wouldn't explain the whole £700k. My guess would be that there are some write-offs or possibly post-administration costs in there. That is just speculation though.

Possibly the fee for Sow is being paid in instalments? While we're on, & apologies if this has been covered previously re our a/cs.
1. Our gain on disposal of intangible fixed assets was £332k. That usually represents player sales. Other than Dom who did we sell? That figure turned an operating loss of £149k into a profit of £183k.
2. Our prepayments & trade debtors shot up by £630k. That's very healthy though increasing one's debtors shows rare confidence these days! Anyone any idea what this may represent?

Peevemor
18-11-2016, 11:05 AM
Possibly the fee for Sow is being paid in instalments? While we're on, & apologies if this has been covered previously re our a/cs.
1. Our gain on disposal of intangible fixed assets was £332k. That usually represents player sales. Other than Dom who did we sell? That figure turned an operating loss of £149k into a profit of £183k.
2. Our prepayments & trade debtors shot up by £630k. That's very healthy though increasing one's debtors shows rare confidence these days! Anyone any idea what this may represent?

Could the trade debtors be STs on a payment plan?

CropleyWasGod
18-11-2016, 11:11 AM
Possibly the fee for Sow is being paid in instalments? While we're on, & apologies if this has been covered previously re our a/cs.
1. Our gain on disposal of intangible fixed assets was £332k. That usually represents player sales. Other than Dom who did we sell? That figure turned an operating loss of £149k into a profit of £183k.
2. Our prepayments & trade debtors shot up by £630k. That's very healthy though increasing one's debtors shows rare confidence these days! Anyone any idea what this may represent?

1. that was Scott Allan, which happened in that accounting year.

2. I was going to ask that question at the AGM, but questions weren't encouraged. I am guessing that it's related to the Cup money, which was possibly withheld pending the various enquiries.

Caversham Green
18-11-2016, 12:23 PM
Possibly the fee for Sow is being paid in instalments? While we're on, & apologies if this has been covered previously re our a/cs.
1. Our gain on disposal of intangible fixed assets was £332k. That usually represents player sales. Other than Dom who did we sell? That figure turned an operating loss of £149k into a profit of £183k.
2. Our prepayments & trade debtors shot up by £630k. That's very healthy though increasing one's debtors shows rare confidence these days! Anyone any idea what this may represent?

Re Sow, if they were guaranteed the money rather than it being contingent (eg) on him playing a certain number of games then the whole of the profit would be included in the accounts with the other side being in debtors.

On the Hibs accounts, the balance sheet date is a month earlier than previous years, so its possible that amounts that were receivable in July (eg prize money) are included in debtors whereas last year they would have already been in cash. Likewise prepayments might include July costs in addition to those relating to August and later.

son of haggart
18-11-2016, 01:01 PM
The article will have been written for Banderson with the intention of presenting the figures in the most positive way possible - that's neither criticism nor praise, it's just the way these things are done and Hibs do exactly the same thing.

Having said that, I think the £9.9m is the pure turnover figure - profit from player sales always appears elsewhere in the Profit and Loss account and there would be VAT implications if the FoH money was treated as revenue (although the article contradicts this by saying the FoH money contributed to the £3m increase in revenue).

A broad calculation shows income £9.9m less staff costs of £5.5m and other operating costs of £4.1m - that would give a profit £0.3m whereas the reported profit is £0.6m, suggesting the income from player sales must be added to the profit figure. Since they reportedly sold Sow for £1m there's a shortfall of £.7m - did they pay money for Sow or are there other costs 'below the line'?

Staff numbers are up from an already high 122 to 144, suggesting they've brought catering or some other operations in-house which would go some way to explaining the high-looking turnover figure. IIRC Aberdeen's turnover was north of £11m which suggests that the Premiership is more lucrative than the old SPL.

On cash flow, the article reports a £1.5 net inflow, and that's borne out by the increase in cash in hand from £3.5m to £5m. As Peevemor points out a proportion of that will be needed to finance wages and expenses for the current season, but they still have a decent wedge there for the stand. Hibs were similarly stockpiling cash 10 years ago to build the training centre and East Stand. The article claims that the extra £1.5m came largely from the sale of Sow, but I suspect that wasn't a cash transaction in total and it's more accurate to say that it came from the FoH contribution (which was also £1.5m), and all their other activities - including player sales - were cash-neutral.

On the face of it a decent set of figures which emphasises the necessity for Hibs to get back where they belong.

The catering was brought in house but only in February of this year - so the staff figure will rise but this only accounts for part of the turnover rise of £2.9million. Hearts spent £190k on the new museum and memorial garden and approx £700k on the new stand work in the financial year reported

brog
18-11-2016, 10:44 PM
1. that was Scott Allan, which happened in that accounting year.

2. I was going to ask that question at the AGM, but questions weren't encouraged. I am guessing that it's related to the Cup money, which was possibly withheld pending the various enquiries.

Thanks CWG & CG, informative as ever. Scott Allan, how quickly we forget, or at least I did!

Borderhibbie76
19-11-2016, 08:06 AM
I thought it was public knowledge that fans and HSL own 31% between them, and that the club are paying STF off at £500k PA?

I'm quite relaxed about that and continue my DD to HSL.
As do I mate. Our HSL and fan ownership is progressing just fine

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

danhibees1875
19-11-2016, 09:04 AM
1. that was Scott Allan, which happened in that accounting year.

2. I was going to ask that question at the AGM, but questions weren't encouraged. I am guessing that it's related to the Cup money, which was possibly withheld pending the various enquiries.

Was Stubbs mentioned as being part of 1) also?

I think you could be right on 2). Also, I found last year that Jamie was quite approachable to talk about the accounts afterwards as an FYI.

Kaiser1962
19-11-2016, 10:17 AM
The article will have been written for Banderson with the intention of presenting the figures in the most positive way possible - that's neither criticism nor praise, it's just the way these things are done and Hibs do exactly the same thing.

Having said that, I think the £9.9m is the pure turnover figure - profit from player sales always appears elsewhere in the Profit and Loss account and there would be VAT implications if the FoH money was treated as revenue (although the article contradicts this by saying the FoH money contributed to the £3m increase in revenue).

A broad calculation shows income £9.9m less staff costs of £5.5m and other operating costs of £4.1m - that would give a profit £0.3m whereas the reported profit is £0.6m, suggesting the income from player sales must be added to the profit figure. Since they reportedly sold Sow for £1m there's a shortfall of £.7m - did they pay money for Sow or are there other costs 'below the line'?

Staff numbers are up from an already high 122 to 144, suggesting they've brought catering or some other operations in-house which would go some way to explaining the high-looking turnover figure. IIRC Aberdeen's turnover was north of £11m which suggests that the Premiership is more lucrative than the old SPL.

On cash flow, the article reports a £1.5 net inflow, and that's borne out by the increase in cash in hand from £3.5m to £5m. As Peevemor points out a proportion of that will be needed to finance wages and expenses for the current season, but they still have a decent wedge there for the stand. Hibs were similarly stockpiling cash 10 years ago to build the training centre and East Stand. The article claims that the extra £1.5m came largely from the sale of Sow, but I suspect that wasn't a cash transaction in total and it's more accurate to say that it came from the FoH contribution (which was also £1.5m), and all their other activities - including player sales - were cash-neutral.

On the face of it a decent set of figures which emphasises the necessity for Hibs to get back where they belong.

Makes you want to look at how well Aberdeen do considering their average attendance was 3.5k lower than the Yams yet their "turnover" at £13.4m is considerably higher than Hearts £9.9m. Hearts did slightly better in the national cups with the only significant difference being that Aberdeen had three well attended home games in the Europa Cup. Aberdeen appear to do something quite well.

CropleyWasGod
19-11-2016, 11:19 AM
Was Stubbs mentioned as being part of 1) also?

I think you could be right on 2). Also, I found last year that Jamie was quite approachable to talk about the accounts afterwards as an FYI.
Don't have the accounts to hand, but I'm not sure that coaching staff are treated in the same way as players when it comes to signing on and transfer fees. If they are, then...yes, the AS money would be in there too.

Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk

CropleyWasGod
19-11-2016, 11:22 AM
Makes you want to look at how well Aberdeen do considering their average attendance was 3.5k lower than the Yams yet their "turnover" at £13.4m is considerably higher than Hearts £9.9m. Hearts did slightly better in the national cups with the only significant difference being that Aberdeen had three well attended home games in the Europa Cup. Aberdeen appear to do something quite well.
There was a thread about Aberdeen's accounts a wee while back....it's their commercial income that is pretty special.

My take on that is that, as the only club in what is (albeit not so much these days) a thriving business environment, they could charge more than we or Hearts could.

Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk

Ozyhibby
19-11-2016, 11:36 AM
There was a thread about Aberdeen's accounts a wee while back....it's their commercial income that is pretty special.

My take on that is that, as the only club in what is (albeit not so much these days) a thriving business environment, they could charge more than we or Hearts could.

Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk

Aberdeen's prices.
http://www.afc.co.uk/downloads/BrochureCommercial201617webLatest.pdf

They are pretty pricey but I don't think it fully explains the massive difference in commercial income.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

CropleyWasGod
19-11-2016, 11:43 AM
Aberdeen's prices.
http://www.afc.co.uk/downloads/BrochureCommercial201617webLatest.pdf

They are pretty pricey but I don't think it fully explains the massive difference in commercial income.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
That's just match day stuff though.

Do they, for example, have income from , for example, training courses during the week? If you can get the stadium working 6 or 7 days a week, that's got to be worth doing.

Do we do that? I know that Tynie does. ...but not sure to.what extent. Again, there's competition not just between ourselves but also from Murrayfield.

Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk

Ozyhibby
19-11-2016, 11:54 AM
That's just match day stuff though.

Do they, for example, have income from , for example, training courses during the week? If you can get the stadium working 6 or 7 days a week, that's got to be worth doing.

Do we do that? I know that Tynie does. ...but not sure to.what extent. Again, there's competition not just between ourselves but also from Murrayfield.

Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk

Hopefully when we get the game changer stuff up and running our non match day income will improve in a similar way.

CropleyWasGod
19-11-2016, 12:00 PM
Hopefully when we get the game changer stuff up and running our non match day income will improve in a similar way.
You might be right.

I can't say that I've ever been in ER for anything not related to Hibs or football. And only rarely Tynie. I'm going to the SAMH event at ER on Tuesday, albeit that is linked to the Club.

I like LD 's commitment to the community, and I'm hoping that it is now bearing fruit in commercial terms.

Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk

son of haggart
19-11-2016, 12:20 PM
Hearts only took their catering etc in house in February. Remember it will include shirt sales etc as well, so turnover will be much bigger but not necessarily profit.

poolman
19-11-2016, 04:59 PM
Fair play to them for being debt free and making a profit. The Huns could take note. Although the way they're all giving each other pats on the backs etc is pretty shameless.

Debt free my erse

HIBERNIAN-0762
19-11-2016, 06:34 PM
Debt free my erse

Correct.

ancient hibee
19-11-2016, 07:56 PM
Correct.


Don't think they owe any money.

CropleyWasGod
19-11-2016, 08:02 PM
Don't think they owe any money.

They owe Budge a couple of million.

And that's outwith the normal business debts.

O'Rourke3
19-11-2016, 08:08 PM
The Press release should really have said Anne Budge is debt free and she own a football club.

Famous Fiver
19-11-2016, 08:27 PM
As long as their upturn in profits/income (I don't think Banderson knows the difference) is going to line wee Budgie's nest at a glorious rate of interest they can stay debt free for ever.

It's going to take the deluded years to realise they are being screwed over.,

ancient hibee
19-11-2016, 08:40 PM
They owe Budge a couple of million.

And that's outwith the normal business debts.


Surely Budge holds capital and has not given Hearts a loan.FOH will repay by buying the shares.She could hardly give Hearts a loan to buy the Hearts.

grunt
19-11-2016, 08:44 PM
They owe Budge a couple of million.

And that's outwith the normal business debts.And it completely ignores the fact that just a few short years ago they stiffed Lithuanian pensioners to the tune of £60m. I'm guessing the amount, but it was of that order.

CropleyWasGod
19-11-2016, 08:48 PM
Surely Budge holds capital and has not given Hearts a loan.FOH will repay by buying the shares.She could hardly give Hearts a loan to buy the Hearts.

She lent the club £2.4m, and is currently charging them 6.5% interest.

Notes 12 and 23 here:-

http://cdn.heartsfc.co.uk/assets/downloads/Final%20Heart%20of%20Mid%20plc%20300615%20signed.p df

Famous Fiver
19-11-2016, 08:49 PM
She subbed them a few £Mill to get them out of their administration hole and they are paying her back before they embark on the great fan share ownership. This will be held up into the distant future with them now having to pay for the shortfall in the new stand funding ( £3 Mill or so)

Then and only then will they start to repay her for the further sub to get the stand started in the first place (at a tidy rate of interest) which is completely separate from the aforesaid £3 Mill.

The first fan share certificate is years away (decade anyone?)

They are the only football club to have been debt free because they have only ever owed the money to themselves.

Old habits die hard.

Cabbage East
19-11-2016, 08:58 PM
Surely Budge holds capital and has not given Hearts a loan.FOH will repay by buying the shares.She could hardly give Hearts a loan to buy the Hearts.

Come on mate :rolleyes:

ancient hibee
19-11-2016, 08:59 PM
She lent the club £2.4m, and is currently charging them 6.5% interest.

Notes 12 and 23 here:-

http://cdn.heartsfc.co.uk/assets/downloads/Final%20Heart%20of%20Mid%20plc%20300615%20signed.p df
So they owe it to themselves?:greengrin

CropleyWasGod
19-11-2016, 09:01 PM
So they owe it to themselves?:greengrin

Abso-******-lutely :greengrin

Bostonhibby
19-11-2016, 10:55 PM
As long as their upturn in profits/income (I don't think Banderson knows the difference) is going to line wee Budgie's nest at a glorious rate of interest they can stay debt free for ever.

It's going to take the deluded years to realise they are being screwed over.,
Yep, vlad and his cash only shareless share issue was the quick violent shafting where they were left with a sair erse and a load of stale home made cakes. Budge is giving them a long slow screwing at 13 times base rate and using their own share money to build the one stand that the idiots ironically credit her with getting built.

Still, they seem happy enough.

Sent from my HTC One mini 2 using Tapatalk

greenginger
19-11-2016, 11:03 PM
Hearts did two DFE swaps to the tune of £22m in 2008 and again 2010 with a further debt forgiveness of £16.706m in successive seasons 2010 + 2011. When they bumped they owed UKIO Bankas £15,488,290.00 and UBIG £8,151,497 with a further £1,223,989.43 owed to another dodgy lot in the Virgin Islands called Milson capital Corp which was also linked to Vlad. In their final season there was £3.9m moved inter co from Kaunas for player rental or some such thing making a grand total of £76,273,776.43 linked to the Lithuanians. I am bound to have missed some as well.

It's a good job the companies weren't linked to Hearts in any way whatsoever and allowed to vote in the CVA otherwise the HMRC debt of £1,881,065.58 would likely have sunk them.

They also owed the Lady Haig's Poppy Factory £185.80 which was subsequently paid by STF I believe.

Don't ever let them forget it.

Of course the companies were linked.

Vlad the overall controller Ukio bankas and UBIG and his son, Roman was Chairman at HOMFC and his niece a director as well.

When Brian Jackson of BDO held the CVA meeting he never bothered with a non-connected creditors vote.

As crooked as the day is long !

lapsedhibee
20-11-2016, 08:21 AM
It's a good job the companies weren't linked to Hearts in any way whatsoever
:greengrin

greenginger
23-11-2016, 09:17 AM
Their 2016 accounts now published on Companies House web page.


https://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/document-api-images-prod/docs/OOY7iSqepzjMHnZ68ke5t5nOgLuOoYiaPKfbTNG9nKg/application-pdf?AWSAccessKeyId=ASIAI4J7OOCGPSDNWWIQ&Expires=1479892200&Signature=bUFHVx10kRvduWn673Y9A0pUFCQ%3D&x-amz-security-token=FQoDYXdzEJ7%2F%2F%2F%2F%2F%2F%2F%2F%2F%2FwEa DJnOl4BCcheYmJBrYyKcA6kailVF4ZCgOQ8kVA9ULdsuJ7xRNj BJE3FwK0ROLKwPbh%2FKSmFgLp9SNBodq0tV9EMKRmM7DwISm8 lCiZxIQmzqNxszcXr%2F48FWMMHOrtyxXMYksL42YCH7svhqbB To9LlHQAD1ytY7B5gKBoYcZXYFWmij%2FxHz%2Bik0Xg2FEqg% 2BjoX928P23f1iUz7qiXqBynLbcO02WTrpcjBQOT7BOJo28Mpt zNDrZrE3dkwLJrABghkDPjCW2W8H7E7MiJeE2Ld7GkX03gw6k7 C9QeffYSOevQtiP6bq%2BNv74TBIF4TEhf04J2zpDlmXuSalmv xqlkUahCZKBozY2yO3%2BYEco0SRqlVHs3f0WiRUBsLzBbOM10 dj1dBCHe%2Bat2uyTsuY47JUrQXtktMkXNKC%2BsZTqTV6byq2 mEpRZanfGUHenQB6oRpp9LjMqKzOTR8P%2BstApvUTGsmMI3jL m6An6efaYejHqrfRKO4Tg9v%2F4pexCzh%2BXfB4bfAyrzgxcN ozA3KTM9EhsZBYIKZfQk5CQm8AKsZp%2FtbjZFlYDrcMWLMonb PUwQU%3D


https://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/document-api-images-prod/docs/OOY7iSqepzjMHnZ68ke5t5nOgLuOoYiaPKfbTNG9nKg/application-pdf?AWSAccessKeyId=ASIAI4J7OOCGPSDNWWIQ&Expires=1479895689&Signature=DbmpvwonRMeSNx4r0WmjT70Se0Y%3D&x-amz-security-token=FQoDYXdzEJ7%2F%2F%2F%2F%2F%2F%2F%2F%2F%2FwEa DJnOl4BCcheYmJBrYyKcA6kailVF4ZCgOQ8kVA9ULdsuJ7xRNj BJE3FwK0ROLKwPbh%2FKSmFgLp9SNBodq0tV9EMKRmM7DwISm8 lCiZxIQmzqNxszcXr%2F48FWMMHOrtyxXMYksL42YCH7svhqbB To9LlHQAD1ytY7B5gKBoYcZXYFWmij%2FxHz%2Bik0Xg2FEqg% 2BjoX928P23f1iUz7qiXqBynLbcO02WTrpcjBQOT7BOJo28Mpt zNDrZrE3dkwLJrABghkDPjCW2W8H7E7MiJeE2Ld7GkX03gw6k7 C9QeffYSOevQtiP6bq%2BNv74TBIF4TEhf04J2zpDlmXuSalmv xqlkUahCZKBozY2yO3%2BYEco0SRqlVHs3f0WiRUBsLzBbOM10 dj1dBCHe%2Bat2uyTsuY47JUrQXtktMkXNKC%2BsZTqTV6byq2 mEpRZanfGUHenQB6oRpp9LjMqKzOTR8P%2BstApvUTGsmMI3jL m6An6efaYejHqrfRKO4Tg9v%2F4pexCzh%2BXfB4bfAyrzgxcN ozA3KTM9EhsZBYIKZfQk5CQm8AKsZp%2FtbjZFlYDrcMWLMonb PUwQU%3D

JDHibs
23-11-2016, 09:52 AM
I love how all the Jambos have popped up recently to "brag" about their accounts...shame they dont have the intelligence to look further into it.

So they made a £600k profit, very good.

That figure includes in excess of £1m for the sale of Sow. Take that away and they make a loss.

Add to that the fact that they are now starting this new stand and they will be further into a loss.

Plus the fact that now that this stand is in progress, attendances will be hit, squad transfer funds will be hit and they are still Jambos..

Its actually pretty grim reading, for them, excellent for me to read.

CropleyWasGod
23-11-2016, 10:00 AM
Also interesting to note that AB waived £13k of interest during the year.

It also looks as if she's not charging interest as of 1st June 2016.

Hibby Kay-Yay
23-11-2016, 10:10 AM
Also interesting to note that AB waived £13k of interest during the year.

It also looks as if she's not charging interest as of 1st June 2016.

She's their Sir Tom Farmer. So to summarise, they are not debt free, their stand is still going to be the second best football stadium the capital and we still have the Scottish Cup.

Fair do's

greenginger
23-11-2016, 10:18 AM
A couple of other items caught my eye.

Note 27 Commitment to non cancellable leases . £ 3.168 million

Note 28 Acquisition of tangible fixed assets contracted for but not in accounts. £ 1.418 million

( maybe Clydesdale's design fees :greengrin )

HibbySpurs
23-11-2016, 10:21 AM
She lent the club £2.4m, and is currently charging them 6.5% interest.

Notes 12 and 23 here:-

http://cdn.heartsfc.co.uk/assets/downloads/Final%20Heart%20of%20Mid%20plc%20300615%20signed.p df


6.5%!!!!!!!!! When you consider the current BoE base rate that's a pretty tasty RoI.... Just £162,500 per annum... Nae wonder the Budgie is always so chirpy :greengrin

cocteautwin
23-11-2016, 10:22 AM
How are they accounting for the fans contributions from FoH? Is it classified as income and thus taxable?

CropleyWasGod
23-11-2016, 10:40 AM
6.5%!!!!!!!!! When you consider the current BoE base rate that's a pretty tasty RoI.... Just £162,500 per annum... Nae wonder the Budgie is always so chirpy :greengrin

That was in 2015, and for most of the 2016 accounts. As of 1 June 2016, she's not charging anything.

Saturday Boy
23-11-2016, 11:30 AM
That was in 2015, and for most of the 2016 accounts. As of 1 June 2016, she's not charging anything.

I think I read that the interest holiday was her contribution to building the new stand. Rather than actually putting any money in, she's just not talking any out.

Ozyhibby
23-11-2016, 11:59 AM
I think I read that the interest holiday was her contribution to building the new stand. Rather than actually putting any money in, she's just not talking any out.

To be fair she does have a lot of her money tied up in Hearts. I don't see her as anything but an honest owner for them, something they have not had for a very long time.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

northstandhibby
23-11-2016, 12:05 PM
To be fair she does have a lot of her money tied up in Hearts. I don't see her as anything but an honest owner for them, something they have not had for a very long time.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yip I think your'e right. She is investing in infrastructure and is attempting to grow the yams by raising additional capital in the correct manner.

Certainly appears to be conducting business properly although bearing in mind the helping hands from the council who have bent over backwards to accommodate their plans.

HibbySpurs
23-11-2016, 07:49 PM
Yip I think your'e right. She is investing in infrastructure and is attempting to grow the yams by raising additional capital in the correct manner.

Certainly appears to be conducting business properly although bearing in mind the helping hands from the council who have bent over backwards to accommodate their plans.

To be fair to her I agree that she does actually appear to have the clubs best interests at heart (no pun).

Everyone's entitled to make a few quid in return as well... It's no like STF has had a total nil return from his ownership of Hibs but his priority has been to ensure the club develops and operates within its mean as far as reasonably possible. I do think her priorities are similar for hearts.

Also she's no feart from what I've seen to tell the GFA to GTF which along with LD having a similar attitude is no bad thing for the interests of football in Edinburgh.

Bostonhibby
23-11-2016, 08:18 PM
I think I read that the interest holiday was her contribution to building the new stand. Rather than actually putting any money in, she's just not talking any out.
On the cynical side, she's using their share money to (partially) increase the value of what she effectively owns and gets her cash back, plus interest at a time and rate only she controls whilst she continues to be the one fan who is a shareholder under the FOH illusion.

Sent from my HTC One mini 2 using Tapatalk

Ozyhibby
23-11-2016, 08:41 PM
On the cynical side, she's using their share money to (partially) increase the value of what she effectively owns and gets her cash back, plus interest at a time and rate only she controls whilst she continues to be the one fan who is a shareholder under the FOH illusion.

Sent from my HTC One mini 2 using Tapatalk

FoH have an agreement to buy at a price fixed before the stand is built. There is nothing in the deal to suggest that the fans are being ripped off.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Bostonhibby
23-11-2016, 08:44 PM
FoH have an agreement to buy at a price fixed before the stand is built. There is nothing in the deal to suggest that the fans are being ripped off.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Agree, nor am I suggesting that. Just entering into the budge tribute to point out she can, and already has moved the goalposts as she pleases. Not literally obviously or they'd have solved the pitch problem by now.

Sent from my HTC One mini 2 using Tapatalk

GreenLake
23-11-2016, 09:17 PM
Hearts only took their catering etc in house in February. Remember it will include shirt sales etc as well, so turnover will be much bigger but not necessarily profit.

Makes sense. Always catering to themselves.