Yam accounts

[CropleyWasGod]

Save the Children. I know you don't agree that it should be counted, but it's an anonymous amount of cash put in to the project by a Hearts person, so it gets counted in my book.

Ah gotcha :greengrin

[superfurryhibby]

They've simply followed the law in this case. Facilities don't have to be disclosed, transactions do.

Disclosed to who?

Do the recipients have to declare who the donors are, ie: inland revenue? Assuming these donations weren’t delivered in brown papaer bags, they are obviously legit, but surely Hearts will need to declare the source to someone, somewhere?

[CropleyWasGod]

Disclosed to who?

Do the recipients have to declare who the donors are, ie: inland revenue? Assuming these donations weren’t delivered in brown papaer bags, they are obviously legit, but surely Hearts will need to declare the source to someone, somewhere?

Disclosed to the public, in the accounts. Company Law stipulates the detailed information that has to be in the accounts.

There's no need to disclose the individual donations to HMRC, unless they ask. The auditors will need to know, for audit and anti-money laundering purposes.

[lapsedhibee]

when it emerged that AB was actually the loan facility I thought that the words from the previous year were - at best - disingenuous.
Budge. Tells. Lies.

[Famous Fiver]

So if I am reading this right Hearts are being propped up by donations/loans ( sources unknown) which is enabling them to act like Kids in a Candy Store at Christmas.

This is in addition to the FOH donations presently being splurged in similar fashion.

Will there be another day of reckoning or do they go careering along in the same fashion as they have done for the last thirty years or more?

[superfurryhibby]

Disclosed to the public, in the accounts. Company Law stipulates the detailed information that has to be in the accounts.

There's no need to disclose the individual donations to HMRC, unless they ask. The auditors will need to know, for audit and anti-money laundering purposes.

Cheers. It will probably emerge at somepoint. Certainly providing impressive backing, even ifthey did bump their creditors etc:agree:

[HIBERNIAN-0762]

They're such a shady shower aren't they?

[greenginger]

Exactly - don't believe these Jambos they are trying to put us off the scent. All roads lead to Budge. Another false rumour I think.


Can't see it being Budge. Although wealthy, she does not have the wealth to give away £ 8 million and not notice it.

Besides, why would she keep taking her 6 % interest on the original £ 2.5 million loan, paying up to 45% tax to HMRC , and then gift whats left and a lot more back to the Club.

[FifeHibs]

Peter Jones the IT and Telecommunication entrepreneur

[cocteautwin]

So if I am reading this right Hearts are being propped up by donations/loans ( sources unknown) which is enabling them to act like Kids in a Candy Store at Christmas.

This is in addition to the FOH donations presently being splurged in similar fashion.

Will there be another day of reckoning? or do they go careering along in the same fashion as they have done for the last thirty years or more?


Despite the massive amounts of cash being consumed, there’s little chance of another admin event happening soon.

Although their accounts looked a bit strange at the end of June with not much cash at all in the bank, they subsequently took a further anonymous donation of £3.25m, have FoH funding of $125k a month and also a sponsorship scheme which nets them c£300k per annum, so that’s £5m over and above season ticket and match day takings.

Additionally, most of the £22.4m extraneous funding since their Admin is not actually repayable but is in fact straight donations/gifts to the club. Only £4.3m loans to Budge are repayable at some remote time in the future and most of this will come from FoH anyway.

It looks like they have every intention of careering along in the same fashion as the last 30 years, and why not, when there seems to be a string of suitors willing to throw cash at it for nothing in return. Our only hope is that their trophy cabinet stays empty and we can continue to count up their spend, and point our fingers and laugh at the enormous amounts of cash that are being thrown at it.

[FilipinoHibs]

Disclosed to the public, in the accounts. Company Law stipulates the detailed information that has to be in the accounts.

There's no need to disclose the individual donations to HMRC, unless they ask. The auditors will need to know, for audit and anti-money laundering purposes.
Quite easy to set up a Special Purpose Vehicles (SPVs) to wash the donations through so they are not connected to Budge.

[weecounty hibby]

Peter Jones the IT and Telecommunication entrepreneur

Penry, the mild mannered janitor? Could be!!

[Danderhall Hibs]

Peter Jones the IT and Telecommunication entrepreneur

Has anyone else heard it’s Blatter and Platini that are the anonymous donors?

[FifeHibs]

Has anyone else heard it’s Blatter and Platini that are the anonymous donors?

Just passing on a name that came from someone with Tynecastle connections.

[CropleyWasGod]

Quite easy to set up a Special Purpose Vehicles (SPVs) to wash the donations through so they are not connected to Budge.Captain Scarlet drove one of them, didn't he? [emoji3]

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

[PatHead]

Captain Scarlet drove one of them, didn't he? [emoji3]

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

Stupid suggestion it was obviously Parker.

[Moulin Yarns]

Stupid suggestion it was obviously Parker.

Yes m'Lady.

[CropleyWasGod]

Stupid suggestion it was obviously Parker.

Cough, m'lady.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spectrum_Pursuit_Vehicle

[PatHead]

Cough, m'lady.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spectrum_Pursuit_Vehicle

Need a pink car to match a pink stadium.

[where'stheslope]

Noticed in today's papers that the mystery Yams backer will give them another £million if they don't need to wear ties to board meetings?
Does this mean the mystery backers are on the board or just invited to occasional meetings??????:confused::confused::confused::confu sed:

[CropleyWasGod]

Noticed in today's papers that the mystery Yams backer will give them another £million if they don't need to wear ties to board meetings?
Does this mean the mystery backers are on the board or just invited to occasional meetings??????:confused::confused::confused::confu sed:

That's not what was said.

One of the benefactors asked that they not be obliged to wear a suit and tie if they were in the Directors' box.

https://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/sport/football/hearts/ann-budge-hearts-benefactors-have-no-say-on-spend-but-have-one-condition-1-4845978

If they were Board members, the donations would be disclosed in the accounts.

[FilipinoHibs]

That's not what was said.

One of the benefactors asked that they not be obliged to wear a suit and tie if they were in the Directors' box.

https://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/sport/football/hearts/ann-budge-hearts-benefactors-have-no-say-on-spend-but-have-one-condition-1-4845978

If they were Board members, the donations would be disclosed in the accounts.

Unless of course they washed the money through some spurious company or vehicle that looked unconnected to the board member.

[cocteautwin]

https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/46632165


^^^ I read this article about HMFC saying they’d be willing to help finance a VAR system in Scottish Football.

I then thought to myself, that’s very generous of you Ann Budge. When you consider you’ve blasted through £10m of anonymous donations, £8m of fan contributions and a £4m (loan) of your own, building a financially dubious incomplete £24m stand, then it’s a very flipping generous offer indeed.

[Golden Bear]

Didn't we just know that this would be happening:-

:rolleyes:


https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/46665129


Anything we can do etc etc!

[Famous Fiver]

It amuses me, this Hearts VAR thing.

We would have had three goals, Foster header, Griffiths free kick and Shaw goal awarded if VAR had been available and at least three reds which were retrospectively given that would have been shown at the time.

That's off the top of my head.

They should be careful what they wish for.

[FilipinoHibs]

It amuses me, this Hearts VAR thing.

We would have had three goals, Foster header, Griffiths free kick and Shaw goal awarded if VAR had been available and at least three reds which were retrospectively given that would have been shown at the time.

That's off the top of my head.

They should be careful what they wish for.

The penalty in the cup final.

[danhibees1875]

It amuses me, this Hearts VAR thing.

We would have had three goals, Foster header, Griffiths free kick and Shaw goal awarded if VAR had been available and at least three reds which were retrospectively given that would have been shown at the time.

That's off the top of my head.

They should be careful what they wish for.

Yes, but on the other hand we would never have got the advantage of.... nope, nothing.