Printable View
So to gain the Jambo vote, say 30/40,000 in Edinburgh and a few more around the country they are willing to piss of every other teams supporters as well as all non football fans. I think not. Whatever you think of the SNP they are not stupid people. Also they are within touching distance of their ultimate goal and I doubt that they will do anything crazy like supporting the yams in any way shape or formQuote:
Originally Posted by Russian Hibs
Do Hibbies not get the vote nowadays like?Quote:
Originally Posted by Russian Hibs
Might piss off our side mind. Do we not get an equal vote?Quote:
Originally Posted by NYHibby
My source wouldn't be wrong about pre 2007 they might of changed their view but they think not.
Any obstacles to change of use or planning permission have been hastily invented recently by Hearts sympathisers among the politicos and the press. Why would any blast zone affect the use when it's already agreed that part of the distillers works will be moved when the build their offices on the school. Even the cost of the land has, on first glance, been tampered with somehow. A piece of land two-thirds the size of another piece adjoining going for under a million when the larger section was valued at eighteen million not too long ago. There's been fluctuations but that's a bit hard to swallow. It was all gung-ho when Cala were building homes - the biggest bull****ters ever.
On yackback the yam seem to think the £1.5m they say they will be donating every year (so long as the DD's don't decline) will not be subject to tax. Can any of our experts confirm if this is correct please - it doesn't seem right to treat income in this way, they are not a registered charity so not exempt - their charity record is not great - and its not clear the donation is a charitable one.
If it was turned down for non-planning reasons the result would be reversed on appeal.Quote:
Originally Posted by Russian Hibs
Don't believe bull**** especially from the SNP.
Companies are taxed on profits, not incomeQuote:
Originally Posted by Bostonhibby
There's no precident, as far as I am aware, for a Scottish council blocking such a move and plenty precident where football stadia have become supermarkets.Quote:
Originally Posted by Russian Hibs
Lidl to worry about yam lookers in !Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack
For the first time ever something comes up on Hibs Net that I actually know something about (I'm a planner).Quote:
Originally Posted by SurferRosa
The Council's new Local Development Plan zones the Tynecastle Pitch (but not the stands) as Open Space. So it seems that it's only the pitch that's protected. Also, it's not an absolute ban on development on the pitch. The Council acknowledges that development could be permitted in exceptional circumstances. This could include, for example, a development of community benefit which also provides for a replacement pitch being created elsewhere.
Having said that, this plan would give the Council the reasons it might need if it was determined to refuse permission for political reasons. A developer could then appeal to the Scottish Government but that would cost time and money with no certainty of success. All that will be reflected in the valuation of the PBS.
The Council also zones the Easter Road pitch as open space.
My post was a general comment, and it was about delaying bad news until a time when it is more "palatable" to deliver. While I can't speak about the other parties, it wouldn't surprise me if they have adopted the same policy at the councils they control.
However, while planning applications are outside my area, even if Hearts were liquidated tomorrow and the stadium was sold, I would have thought that a planning application would not be decided before September anyway. Therefore no delaying would be needed and my comment does not apply.
If the application is in process, why would the SNP lose votes from Hibs supporters? They wouldn't be blocking anything.
Pretty sure that the donations will be treated as repayment of the loan from AB. Therefore not taxable.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bostonhibby
It's late though. ..I'll rethink it tomorrow.
Agreed - Sorry ,wrong phrase I guess, never knew what to call it - it just doesn't sit easy that this large intake of what is basically unearned cash won't be taxed - what's to stop other businesses moving cash to subsidiaries and calling it a donation thus avoiding tax. Not my area so keen to understand - I seem to recall an earlier comment on the point but can't find it.Quote:
Originally Posted by mim
Same logic applies to the yams surely? Oh and lest we forget, we're not voting for the SNP in September :wink:Quote:
Originally Posted by NYHibby
:aok:Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
AgreedQuote:
Originally Posted by NYHibby
Thanks for that. What would happen, though, if Hearts themselves decided they wanted to ground share with Livingston, for financial reasons. Does this mean that they would struggle to sell Tynecastle to a developer?Quote:
Originally Posted by Paisley Hibby
Yes, but we're just a wee team so there's no way the 400,000 could ever be outvoted.Quote:
Originally Posted by BarneyK
Over the past few years in Edinburgh we've seen school sports grounds sold off left, right and centre for private development. The council is currently hell bent, for better or for worse, trying to build the new Porty High School on a public park.Quote:
Originally Posted by Paisley Hibby
Edinburgh Council would be hard pushed justifying protecting a football pitch that doesn't measure up to modern specifications.
If UKIO take control of the PBS they should clear the site of all stands, pitch, infrastructure. This would not require planning permission of any sort and once any prospect of the place being used as a football stadium has gone, politicions will move on, and planners and developers can work on an acceptable scheme.Quote:
Originally Posted by Paisley Hibby
NewCo Yam will already have found a new venue, Murrayfield, Meadowbank, Saughton enclosure or who ever will share with them.
The idea that a vacant 6 acre site 1 mile from the city centre could never be developed because a corrupt football club who went bankrupt owing millions, once played there, is just a Yam fantasy.
My brain cell is working overtime, but "community benefit" sounds like a property developer could improve facilities for amateur footballers at nearby Saughton to satisfy the "exceptional circumstances" test. And it would be very difficult for the Council to refuse that offer on the basis that there is no benefit to the Yams.Quote:
Originally Posted by Paisley Hibby
I've also floated the idea before that a developer could offer to let Yamco stay rent free at the PBS for a couple of years in exchange for supporting the housing application. Since the alternative would be to become homeless and pay rent, they'd have little choice but to agree (assuming they have any financial sense) which would make it even harder to refuse permission. However their support would hate the idea of moving which will lead to plenty of bickering within Save Hearts In Trouble :greengrin
this is all very complex!?!! if you are reffering to the forthcoming referendum vote on the 18th of September, can I remind you and a few others on here that the vote is for YES/NO AND IT IS FOR INDEPENDENCE OR NOT for Independence. It Is not a vote for Alex Salmond, and it is not for the SNP. all very confusing. there are/will be thousands who will vote for YES, who have no allegiance with the SNP or otherwise.Quote:
Originally Posted by weecounty hibby
aye awrite, the SNP are experts on bull****ting. top of the league, leaving the tories/lab/libs in their trail eh?:rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by jgl07
And yet the white paper reads like a party manifesto rather than a serious proposal for a constitution.Quote:
Originally Posted by monktonharp
People will vote for all sorts of reasons in September, and both sides are anxious not to do anything that will hurt their cause. That is why the politicians will stay well clear of being seen to help out the Yams, because there will be justifiable outrage from the voters that don't care about football.
They could stick up a CCTV camera outside a kids playground in West Edinburgh which would "benefit the community" as a deterrent for Savile Perverts in maroon sniffing around the bairns playing there.Quote:
Originally Posted by Eyrie
With a recent history of having a fiddler Manager, PlayerS and fans they need a watching.
While they're at it the could maybe pay for financial crime awareness training for the Poppy Factory, Charities and Local business that they robbed from.
The club with no shame/the sh !te that wouldn't flush.
Hope they die soon.
:agree:especially if it is a diddy fitba team that went bust,privately owned business failure ......and before they did ,they ripped off the people of Edin. all and sundry. and yet they are trying to build a school on publicly owned common land!Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack
I'm stuck on a crossword clue:
The chances of Heart of Midlothian finding happiness this week (4, 3)
[QUOTE=Eyrie;3964886]And yet the white paper reads like a party manifesto rather than a serious proposal for a constitution ...The same could be said about the quotes made from the Chancellor re-the pound:wink: difference being, he popped up to Embra, said his piece, refused to speak to the media and was whisked off in a big shiney black Bentley back to wherever he comes fi'.
did you try "good god" ?:greengrinQuote:
Originally Posted by Sergey