Share Transfers Agreed/Cooling off period

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MADE IN LEITH

No argument from me on this, I can't stand them and hope they get what the so rightly deserve. They do not deserve to be in the Scottish game never mind Division 1. They have not only brought the game into disrepute but they have also made a laughing stock of the Scottish game and thrown it further into the doldrums.

I know I won't loose any sleep if they never besmirch a football pitch ever again.

Clubs like that mob we can do without.

Adios, ciao goodbye, auf wiedersehen and good riddance to bad rubbish.

GGTTH

---

Fixed that for you!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by portycabbage

Fixed that for you!

---

LOL :greengrin

So we know they have over 6000 pledges but how much does that equate to.

What a massive kick in the teeth to the creditors, they get a fraction of what they are due whilst the club starts to rake in 6000 x £50 per month = £300,000 per month.

I really can't come to terms with how this can be allowed. If they can't clear their debt in full, why should they be allowed to carry on trading.

Why don't we just do the same?! Buy a £1 million player then bump the £1 million loan we take out to fund the transfer fee.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by macca70

So we know they have over 6000 pledges but how much does that equate to.

What a massive kick in the teeth to the creditors, they get a fraction of what they are due whilst the club starts to rake in 6000 x £50 per month = £300,000 per month.

I really can't come to terms with how this can be allowed. If they can't clear their debt in full, why should they be allowed to carry on trading.

Why don't we just do the same?! Buy a £1 million player then bump the £1 million loan we take out to fund the transfer fee.

---

For one thing, i don't think that every pledger will be giving £50 per month.

For another, it's not "raking in". Once this season is over, that money would be going to pay off the club's debt to those who would be financing the buying of the club.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by macca70

So we know they have over 6000 pledges but how much does that equate to.

What a massive kick in the teeth to the creditors, they get a fraction of what they are due whilst the club starts to rake in 6000 x £50 per month = £300,000 per month.

I really can't come to terms with how this can be allowed. If they can't clear their debt in full, why should they be allowed to carry on trading.

Why don't we just do the same?! Buy a £1 million player then bump the £1 million loan we take out to fund the transfer fee.

---

It's about £19 average apparently, you would think the more recent pledgers are at the bottom end.
It's the admin process that allows them to dump the debt, but as others have said if they manage it then it won't be the hearts of old and a lot of their core support will struggle to grasp this.

If they do come out of admin, relegation or not makes a huge difference to them.
Season ticket prices either down or buyers much reduced. Away support income slashed.
sponsorship down, commercial income down, TV money maybe for game at home against the newco as they will be on most.

They will be paying off the debt for 5-6 years say, and having to be self sufficient. If it pans out its still a big hit for them. There is no guarantee they would come up at the first time of asking.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by weecounty hibby

Whats all this "if they pull it off good luck to them" p1sh!?!? They are a shower of thieving, cheating, lying, ****bags, total filth from top to bottom as a club. **** them and i hope they get what they deserve and that is liquidation and years struggling to compete. I hope these comments coming from Hibbies is not a sign of a softening of attitudes towards them

---

Absolutely, death is dishonourable for the yak. Blend them, slice them, then send them to the winds of pain.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

For one thing, i don't think that every pledger will be giving £50 per month.

For another, it's not "raking in". Once this season is over, that money would be going to pay off the club's debt to those who would be financing the buying of the club.

---

I doubt every pledger is paying £50 per month but I bet there are a fair few paying more than that and they seem to be indicating that its nearer 7000 pledgers and still rising so say the average pledge is £30 per month, that's 7000 x £30 = £210,000 per month.

So the folk buying the club will be getting repaid but some of the creditors that have provided them with goods or services will be lucky to get a few pence in the pound they are due. Absolute disgrace .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by weecounty hibby

Whats all this "if they pull it off good luck to them" p1sh!?!? They are a shower of thieving, cheating, lying, ****bags, total filth from top to bottom as a club. **** them and i hope they get what they deserve and that is liquidation and years struggling to compete. I hope these comments coming from Hibbies is not a sign of a softening of attitudes towards them

---

In a nutshell mate :top marks

Pinched this from the EN forum as thought it was an excellent summing up of the situation. :greengrin

Let me explain . .

The money raised by FANCO will be paid directly into BANKO.

BIDCO will then pay BDO and non-CVACO.

BIDCO will also pay NEW STANDCO, STAFFCO, probably COSTCO until BANKO says NONO.

BIDCO will urgently want FANCO to pay MOREDO.

BIDCO will sell STADCO to FLATSCO.

FANSCO will be up the creek without a COCO.

FoH will be told to FO.

So you've been TOLDSO.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by YehButNoBut

Pinched this from the EN forum as thought it was an excellent summing up of the situation. :greengrin

Let me explain . .

The money raised by FANCO will be paid directly into BANKO.

BIDCO will then pay BDO and non-CVACO.

BIDCO will also pay NEW STANDCO, STAFFCO, probably COSTCO until BANKO says NONO.

BIDCO will urgently want FANCO to pay MOREDO.

BIDCO will sell STADCO to FLATSCO.

FANSCO will be up the creek without a COCO.

FoH will be told to FO.

So you've been TOLDSO.

---

Ha ha, Brilliant.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by macca70

I doubt every pledger is paying £50 per month but I bet there are a fair few paying more than that and they seem to be indicating that its nearer 7000 pledgers and still rising so say the average pledge is £30 per month, that's 7000 x £30 = £210,000 per month.

So the folk buying the club will be getting repaid but some of the creditors that have provided them with goods or services will be lucky to get a few pence in the pound they are due. Absolute disgrace .

---

Only one, perhaps two, of the creditors will be getting anything. The rest won't get anything.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by YehButNoBut

Pinched this from the EN forum as thought it was an excellent summing up of the situation. :greengrin

Let me explain . .

The money raised by FANCO will be paid directly into BANKO.

BIDCO will then pay BDO and non-CVACO.

BIDCO will also pay NEW STANDCO, STAFFCO, probably COSTCO until BANKO says NONO.

BIDCO will urgently want FANCO to pay MOREDO.

BIDCO will sell STADCO to FLATSCO.

FANSCO will be up the creek without a COCO.

FoH will be told to FO.

So you've been TOLDSO.

---

Forgot Tesco.

Fanastico though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Coco Bryce

Forgot Tesco.

Fanastico though.

---

It's certainly a FIASCO, with their fans going LOCO. Certainly not looking FANTASTICO or too MAGNIFICO if yer a Yam.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dunderhall

It's about £19 average apparently, you would think the more recent pledgers are at the bottom end.
It's the admin process that allows them to dump the debt, but as others have said if they manage it then it won't be the hearts of old and a lot of their core support will struggle to grasp this.

If they do come out of admin, relegation or not makes a huge difference to them.
Season ticket prices either down or buyers much reduced. Away support income slashed.
sponsorship down, commercial income down, TV money maybe for game at home against the newco as they will be on most.

They will be paying off the debt for 5-6 years say, and having to be self sufficient. If it pans out its still a big hit for them. There is no guarantee they would come up at the first time of asking.

---

They'll have the Hun derby to look forward to in the 'Championship' next season, if they do go down.

Unfortunately, a recent result against another SPFL club has given them a glimmer of hope they can escape relegation. :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jacomoseven

They'll have the Hun derby to look forward to in the 'Championship' next season, if they do go down.

Unfortunately, a recent result against another SPFL club has given them a glimmer of hope they can escape relegation. :rolleyes:

---

Hopefully their next 4 games will remove that glimmer, they have Aberdeen (H), ICT (A), Celtic (H) & Ross C (A) strong possibility they will get nothing from that lot which will knock the stuffing out of them and leave them well & truly anchored at the bottom.

Will help our cause if we pick up a few points at the same time. :greengrin

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jacomoseven

They'll have the Hun derby to look forward to in the 'Championship' next season, if they do go down.

Unfortunately, a recent result against another SPFL club has given them a glimmer of hope they can escape relegation. :rolleyes:

---

I did say that will be their time for TV.
Only time will tell regarding their league position regardless of where they are just now.
However if they did survive admin, relegation or not will be critical to their recovery.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zondervan

Wonder when the Evening News will give Hibs some free/ cheap advertising, perhaps for our charitable foundation, or the Leith Links initiative?

@The_FoH: Just had more good news. In support of #FOH @edinburghpaper plans to run ANOTHER full page advert in tomorrow's sports section. Magnificent!

---

:thumbsup: Cheers A!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EdinCapitals

http://leithlinks4kids.com/

https://www.facebook.com/LeithLinks4Kids

---

:thumbsup: I.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by YehButNoBut

Hopefully their next 4 games will remove that glimmer, they have Aberdeen (H), ICT (A), Celtic (H) & Ross C (A) strong possibility they will get nothing from that lot which will knock the stuffing out of them and leave them well & truly anchored at the bottom.

Will help our cause if we pick up a few points at the same time. :greengrin

---

Should be an interesting game :greengrin One Broonie will be looking forward to :aok:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by weecounty hibby

Whats all this "if they pull it off good luck to them" p1sh!?!? They are a shower of thieving, cheating, lying, ****bags, total filth from top to bottom as a club. **** them and i hope they get what they deserve and that is liquidation and years struggling to compete. I hope these comments coming from Hibbies is not a sign of a softening of attitudes towards them

---

I concur.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bajillions

Ian Murray is just the "face" of FOH. He doesn't have any responsibilities to the bid financially. He remains "independent"..

---

Like....."self sufficient" independent? :greengrin

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by macca70

I doubt every pledger is paying £50 per month but I bet there are a fair few paying more than that and they seem to be indicating that its nearer 7000 pledgers and still rising so say the average pledge is £30 per month, that's 7000 x £30 = £210,000 per month.

So the folk buying the club will be getting repaid but some of the creditors that have provided them with goods or services will be lucky to get a few pence in the pound they are due. Absolute disgrace .

---

Nope, it'll be £51 :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HibeesLA

Nope, it'll be £51 :rolleyes:

---

Did anybody else notice that their Direct Debit figures excluded £70 and £62 :wink:

All us peg selling hobo's are forgetting that this BIDCO and FANCO deal is a "win-win" (Ian I'm an MP Murray) and that they'll soon be "back to where we should be in Scottish football"

Die diet huns die

Mate's cousin is cancelling his £10 dd to FOH/FANCO claiming he can no longer afford it :rotflmao::rotflmao:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EdinCapitals

Mate's cousin is cancelling his £10 dd to FOH/FANCO claiming he can no longer afford it :rotflmao::rotflmao:

---

Hibby or Yam ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EdinCapitals

Mate's cousin is cancelling his £10 dd to FOH/FANCO claiming he can no longer afford it :rotflmao::rotflmao:

---

Next door neighbour cancelled his as well,told me yesterday his missus was giving him jip.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EdinCapitals

Mate's cousin is cancelling his £10 dd to FOH/FANCO claiming he can no longer afford it :rotflmao::rotflmao:

---

I was forced to make the same heart wrenching decision with my £100 a month, gutted I really am :tee hee:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by #FromTheCapital

I was forced to make the same heart wrenching decision with my £100 a month, gutted I really am :tee hee:

---

FTC, have you considered the £51 option ?

Brother in law never followed through on his "pledge" he is one of those who thought making it then pulling out after they are "saved" was the way to do it!
Shame as the money would have compensated for the games he never goes to.
I suspect there will be many with a similar view to him.

http://www.15min.lt/en/article/busin...nth-527-362233

This is a better translation of yesterday's statement by the Ukio Bankas administrator published by the Baltic News Service.

The Lith. admin does not seem to agree with the decision to make FoH preferred bidders so , as we saw with DeadCo, things can still be changed.

Anyway, end of the month, not too long until Judgement Day !

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Treadstone

FTC, have you considered the £51 option ?

---

No but I have considered the 'Steam off ma pish' option and decided not to bother with that either

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by #FromTheCapital

No but I have considered the 'Steam off ma pish' option and decided not to bother with that either

---

If I knew that was an option I would have phantom pledged myself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by greenginger

http://www.15min.lt/en/article/busin...nth-527-362233

This is a better translation of yesterday's statement by the Ukio Bankas administrator published by the Baltic News Service.

The Lith. admin does not seem to agree with the decision to make FoH preferred bidders so , as we saw with DeadCo, things can still be changed.

Anyway, end of the month, not too long until Judgement Day !

---

Quite like this bit at the end

"However, Adomonis told BNS that he could not confirm this.

„We can't say at the moment that this offer is the best,“ he said."

When are we going to be told who these 'Edinburgh Businessmen' are that are supplying this interest free money to FoH? Until then we will not know which local companies to boycott.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by big-mo

When are we going to be told who these 'Edinburgh Businessmen' are that are supplying this interest free money to FoH? Until then we will not know which local companies to boycott.

---

They will remain anonymous. However if they are successful with their bid watch the yams change their service providers soon after.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by big-mo

When are we going to be told who these 'Edinburgh Businessmen' are that are supplying this interest free money to FoH? Until then we will not know which local companies to boycott.

---

You should be able to at least rule out the ones they bumped last time? Surely nobody's that daft? Oh wait a minute.

Pretty sure the names will leak eventually, the yam are bound to start paying Vlad style tributes to these new demi-gods who are actually only giving them a cut price deferred loan, yam class.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Treadstone

Hibby or Yam ?

---

Yam :hahaha:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by big-mo

When are we going to be told who these 'Edinburgh Businessmen' are that are supplying this interest free money to FoH? Until then we will not know which local companies to boycott.

---

Edinburgh Evening News are one of them surely, they are not bending over backwards to offer kicks4kids etc free full page adverts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HUTCHYHIBBY

Edinburgh Evening News are one of them surely, they are not bending over backwards to offer kicks4kids etc free full page adverts.

---

The adverts are free but each time the Evening News prints one they ask the FOH to make a donation to the Sick Kids.

Much as i hate to say it, fair enough.











I suppose. :-)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by big-mo

When are we going to be told who these 'Edinburgh Businessmen' are that are supplying this interest free money to FoH? Until then we will not know which local companies to boycott.

---

Need to get Ally McCoist to ask the question.

http://www.heraldscotland.com/mobile...6d23f1c06153a9

"HEARTS supporters have been misled so many times in recent years by those who claim to be working in the club's best interests that they are entitled to feel slightly apprehensive at being asked to make yet another leap of faith."

They won't ask any questions at all. The levels of gullibility are as high as any time in the past and they carry on with their "believe" crap no matter what. Personally I reckon its Chris Robinson and Vladimir Romanov who are behind Bidco. Their fans would sign up to Twatco if the EEN put up a poppy Logo beside the hearts badge to promote it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HUTCHYHIBBY

Edinburgh Evening News are one of them surely, they are not bending over backwards to offer kicks4kids etc free full page adverts.

---

Add kicks4kids to their creditors then.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bajillions

The adverts are free but each time the Evening News prints one they ask the FOH to make a donation to the Sick Kids.

---

More than likely they just pledge. Cold hard cash. Unlikely. They're Yams.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HUTCHYHIBBY

Much as i hate to say it, fair enough.



I suppose. :-)

---

maybe they don't donate though, and just 'pledge' to donate? Money actually being handed over isn't a homfc thing, really.

Let there be no doubt, Ian Murray is a politician. Not 50/50. Not 99%, but the less well known 80%.

Barry Anderson ‏@BarryAnderson_89m
Foundation of Hearts chairman @IanMurrayMP is 80 per cent confident of agreeing a CVA to take #HMFC out of administration. See today's EN.

What does allisbarry know about quoting numbers with Hearts?? this could be only 8% in reality!

Are barry anderson and ian murray related?
Twitchco

Seriously
I will never buy the Edinburgh evening news again.
Teaching us that we should support companies who steal money from local businesses.
Also we should support them in their efforts to dump almost all their 29m debt?
The evening news have no morals.

Latest documents lodged at Companies House by BDO.

At first sight, nothing out of the ordinary. Just a technical change about BDO's remuneration. Happy for someone else to read through it all, though. :greengrin

Attachment 10858

Attachment 10859

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

Latest documents lodged at Companies House by BDO.

At first sight, nothing out of the ordinary. Just a technical change about BDO's remuneration. Happy for someone else to read through it all, though. :greengrin

Attachment 10858

Attachment 10859

---

Could not help but notice "Ransom Payments", who is being held to ransom - we do not negotiate with terrorists. :cb

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

Latest documents lodged at Companies House by BDO.

At first sight, nothing out of the ordinary. Just a technical change about BDO's remuneration. Happy for someone else to read through it all, though. :greengrin

Attachment 10858

Attachment 10859

---

Have they changed their minds about only being paid upon a sale of the club/assets and are taking money from the 'donations'/'STs instead? That's the only thing I want to hear, please be true :greengrin

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by big-mo

When are we going to be told who these 'Edinburgh Businessmen' are that are supplying this interest free money to FoH? Until then we will not know which local companies to boycott.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Treadstone

Let there be no doubt, Ian Murray is a politician. Not 50/50. Not 99%, but the less well known 80%.

Barry Anderson ‏@BarryAnderson_89m
Foundation of Hearts chairman @IanMurrayMP is 80 per cent confident of agreeing a CVA to take #HMFC out of administration. See today's EN.

---

In this article Ian Murray says that the backers will become public if the CVA is successful, and that there is "a handful" of them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

Latest documents lodged at Companies House by BDO.

At first sight, nothing out of the ordinary. Just a technical change about BDO's remuneration. Happy for someone else to read through it all, though. :greengrin

Attachment 10858

Attachment 10859

---

My take on it is the Liths admin are now in complete control over money.

I'm still on the Liquidation boat as the final destination for them though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jacomoseven

In this article Ian Murray says that the backers will become public if the CVA is successful, and that there is "a handful" of them.

---

Six then.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

Latest documents lodged at Companies House by BDO.

At first sight, nothing out of the ordinary. Just a technical change about BDO's remuneration. Happy for someone else to read through it all, though. :greengrin

Attachment 10858

Attachment 10859

---

It seems that, upon instruction from UKIO's administrators, BDO will be taking their fees from the current funds .. rather than from the sale of the assets.

My understanding is that the current funds are basically the season ticket sales that BDO stated would be used to keep the club going until January 2014, and provide an opportunity for additional funding to be found in that time to allow the club to trade till the end of the season.

If UKIO's administrators have instructed BDO to use these funds for their fee's, then would that suggest that they are more interested in maximising their return from the sale of Tynecastle than seeing the club continue trading?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StevieC

It seems that, upon instruction from UKIO's administrators, BDO will be taking their fees from the current funds .. rather than from the sale of the assets.

My understanding is that the current funds are basically the season ticket sales that BDO stated would be used to keep the club going until January 2014, and provide an opportunity for additional funding to be found in that time to allow the club to trade till the end of the season.

If UKIO's administrators have instructed BDO to use these funds for their fee's, then would that suggest that they are more interested in maximising their return from the sale of Tynecastle than seeing the club continue trading?

---

I didn't read it as that, Stevie.

I think it's the "disbursements" that they can draw from current funds; that's expenses that BDO have paid out from their own pocket. The fees can't be drawn until UKIO's admins can say so.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by big-mo

When are we going to be told who these 'Edinburgh Businessmen' are that are supplying this interest free money to FoH? Until then we will not know which local companies to boycott.

---

well, let's hope city cabs come out with a statement then:cb

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bajillions

The adverts are free but each time the Evening News prints one they ask the FOH to make a donation to the Sick Kids.

---

AW, you've got me greetin' now

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jacomoseven

In this article Ian Murray says that the backers will become public if the CVA is successful, and that there is "a handful" of them.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lapsedhibee

Six then.

---

:greengrin

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lapsedhibee

Six then.

---

:not worth

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by monktonharp

well, let's hope city cabs come out with a statement then:cb

---

I'm putting the Central number into my phone straight away. No way I could support giving money to them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

I didn't read it as that, Stevie.

I think it's the "disbursements" that they can draw from current funds; that's expenses that BDO have paid out from their own pocket. The fees can't be drawn until UKIO's admins can say so.

---

Ah right, got you, accountant speak thrown in to confuse us. :greengrin

That's a shame.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

I didn't read it as that, Stevie.

I think it's the "disbursements" that they can draw from current funds; that's expenses that BDO have paid out from their own pocket. The fees can't be drawn until UKIO's admins can say so.

---

Correct! However I found it interesting that UKIO found it necessary to strengthen the clauses to ensure BDO cannot collect any fees without their (UKIO ) specific approval. Sounds to me like UKIO may not have complete faith in BDO, correctly IMO.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StevieC

It seems that, upon instruction from UKIO's administrators, BDO will be taking their fees from the current funds .. rather than from the sale of the assets.

My understanding is that the current funds are basically the season ticket sales that BDO stated would be used to keep the club going until January 2014, and provide an opportunity for additional funding to be found in that time to allow the club to trade till the end of the season.

If UKIO's administrators have instructed BDO to use these funds for their fee's, then would that suggest that they are more interested in maximising their return from the sale of Tynecastle than seeing the club continue trading?

---

that's the way I read it too Stevie. bdo drawing a wage while doing a job. my next thought was on the lines of.....at least getting a payment of sorts, beforw it all goes tits up and the remaining monies are tied up for years through law suits etc. but....i'm not CWG'S apprentice.:wink:

can one of the financial experts please re-assure me that what I'm about to say is fatally flawed...

1. FoH can get 5/6 rich business people or businesses to stump up say £5-6m in total
2. They successfully bid £5+m for YAM FC as a going concern, including the Asbestos Arena removing the UB security over the property
3. UB and UBIG agree the CVA as a) they are effectively both controlled by the Lithuanian state and b) together they own 79.9% of the total equity (everyone else gets shafted)
4. End result: effectively 'transfer' of the security on the Wongadome from UB to the 'Rich-Yams-R-Us' collective, loans paid with pledges and future footballing revenue. They struggle but keep afloat, gloating their wee Jambo faces off. At worst if they get into more financial difficulty they sell the Wongadome off and stagger on. At best (for them), now debt free, super rich Yam (or Romanov 2) comes in to start it all again.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

I'm putting the Central number into my phone straight away. No way I could support giving money to them.

---

No way anyone with an ounce of common decency should support Scab cabs anyway!!!

Sorry to digress from thread....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Suburban Hibby

No way anyone with an ounce of common decency should support Scab cabs anyway!!!

Sorry to digress from thread....

---

Correct :agree:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyisGod

can one of the financial experts please re-assure me that what I'm about to say is fatally flawed...

---

I'll have a go.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyisGod

1. FoH can get 5/6 rich business people or businesses to stump up say £5-6m in total

---

The FOH already have their business, it's not close to £5m at the moment nor is it likely to be

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyisGod

2. They successfully bid £5+m for YAM FC as a going concern, including the Asbestos Arena removing the UB security over the property

---

See #1

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyisGod

3. UB and UBIG agree the CVA as a) they are effectively both controlled by the Lithuanian state and b) together they own 79.9% of the total equity (everyone else gets shafted)

---

The UKIO administrator has intimated today that the current offer is unlikely to be acceptable (depending on how you interpret the quote) It's still incredibly unlikely UBIG will agree to anything as the assets are still frozen. I'm going to bold the next part because it is, at the moment, the most important part in the entire saga and I'd like to to "jump" off the page.

UNTIL VLADS ASSETS ARE UNFROZEN, THE SUCCESSFUL SALE OF HEART OF MIDLOTHIAN FOOTBALL CLUB AS A GOING CONCERN IS IMPOSSIBLE.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Suburban Hibby

No way anyone with an ounce of common decency should support Scab cabs anyway!!!

Sorry to digress from thread....

---

I always check whether its a victor before I hail a cab at 1 am. On occasion I have even asked to get out if I have gotten into one by mistake.

As i drive with city cabs I'd be interested to know why the dissent for city cabs

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Filled Rolls

I always check whether its a victor before I hail a cab at 1 am. On occasion I have even asked to get out if I have gotten into one by mistake.

---

You're missing out by ruling out a peter.

They have been known to offer massive discounts in order to secure your business.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by peter douglas

You're missing out by ruling out a peter.

They have been known to offer massive discounts in order to secure your business.

---

And one of their drivers done me a massive favour and took my wife from me :aok:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by peter douglas

You're missing out by ruling out a peter.

They have been known to offer massive discounts in order to secure your business.

---

Eh?

Still like to know why there's a massive love in for central taxis and dissent for city

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bajillions

I'll have a go.



The FOH already have their business, it's not close to £5m at the moment nor is it likely to be



See #1



The UKIO administrator has intimated today that the current offer is unlikely to be acceptable (depending on how you interpret the quote) It's still incredibly unlikely UBIG will agree to anything as the assets are still frozen. I'm going to bold the next part because it is, at the moment, the most important part in the entire saga and I'd like to to "jump" off the page.

UNTIL VLADS ASSETS ARE UNFROZEN, THE SUCCESSFUL SALE OF HEART OF MIDLOTHIAN FOOTBALL CLUB AS A GOING CONCERN IS IMPOSSIBLE.

---

This, this and this again. Expect 'Mr 80%' Ian Murray to front another cash appeal saying something along the lines of, "we need money to keep going until the assets are frozen, which I'm 80% confident will happen before Christmas..."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LongshanksED

Still like to know why there's a massive love in for central taxis and dissent for city

---

I think some people feel CC favour the yaks, my understanding is that they do in fact support both clubs?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LongshanksED

Still like to know why there's a massive love in for central taxis and dissent for city

---

It's been claimed City are helping out the FoH. Good enough for me. Boycott on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LongshanksED

Still like to know why there's a massive love in for central taxis and dissent for city

---

Bitterness and envy my friend :greengrin

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dashing Bob S

This, this and this again. Expect 'Mr 80%' Ian Murray to front another cash appeal saying something along the lines of, "we need money to keep going until the assets are frozen, which I'm 80% confident will happen before Christmas..."

---

You've got that wrong Bob. I'm sure he was 80% confident there would be a Christmas this year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Treadstone

You've got that wrong Bob. I'm sure he was 80% confident there would be a Christmas this year.

---

Not for the Yams

Been having a thought on those not for profit loans that are to be made by companies to provide funds for the purchase of HOMFC.

If its not a business transaction should these business funds not be treated as director loans when the companies concerned get round to HMRC reporting.

Is it Class 4 National Insurance that comes into play ? Quite hefty charges IIRC.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LongshanksED

Still like to know why there's a massive love in for central taxis and dissent for city

---

Reputable v Bed Partners with crooks.......

Bit like Hibs v Hearts tbh..... I am sure the average yam would choose city everytime.....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by greenginger

Been having a thought on those not for profit loans that are to be made by companies to provide funds for the purchase of HOMFC.

If its not a business transaction should these business funds not be treated as director loans when the companies concerned get round to HMRC reporting.

Is it Class 4 National Insurance that comes into play ? Quite hefty charges IIRC.

---

Think you have mixed up a few things there.

A loan from an individual, or a company, to another company (or Special Purpose Vehicle, as MP Murray says. I mean...WTF?... SPV... sounds like something out of Captain Scarlet. I digress) is, in the main, irrelevant for Tax or National Insurance. It doesn't matter whether it's a "business" or a "private" loan.

If there is interest involved, and we don't yet know if that's the case here, FannyCo has to deduct tax from the interest it pays to BumCo, and then paid it over to HMRC-Co.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyisGod

can one of the financial experts please re-assure me that what I'm about to say is fatally flawed...

1. FoH can get 5/6 rich business people or businesses to stump up say £5-6m in total
2. They successfully bid £5+m for YAM FC as a going concern, including the Asbestos Arena removing the UB security over the property
3. UB and UBIG agree the CVA as a) they are effectively both controlled by the Lithuanian state and b) together they own 79.9% of the total equity (everyone else gets shafted)
4. End result: effectively 'transfer' of the security on the Wongadome from UB to the 'Rich-Yams-R-Us' collective, loans paid with pledges and future footballing revenue. They struggle but keep afloat, gloating their wee Jambo faces off. At worst if they get into more financial difficulty they sell the Wongadome off and stagger on. At best (for them), now debt free, super rich Yam (or Romanov 2) comes in to start it all again.

---

I don't actually see, yet, why UBIG would agree to a CVA. They are in line to get nothing.

If they don't agree to it, the CVA fails. There would not be a 75% vote in favour of it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fife-Hibee

Eh?

---

The different companies have different cab numbers, using the phonetic alphabet.

Central is P for Peter.

Anyone wanting to boycott City Cabs should check they don't have a V for victor in their window.

Simples.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

I don't actually see, yet, why UBIG would agree to a CVA. They are in line to get nothing.

If they don't agree to it, the CVA fails. There would not be a 75% vote in favour of it.

---

Do UBIG have the whole 75%? I was wondering whether HMRC + one or two other larger unsecured creditors would have 25% between them to block a CVA even if UBIG were minded to support one (given they're now essentially the Lithuanian government who will be guaranteed something through UB).

So City Cabs advertising on the hibs official websites + donating to Kicks For Kids = City Cabs are backing Hearts and their financial troubles

Check out the advert at the bottom of the page!
http://www.hibernianfc.co.uk/news/20...262950_2887405

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

I don't actually see, yet, why UBIG would agree to a CVA. They are in line to get nothing.

If they don't agree to it, the CVA fails. There would not be a 75% vote in favour of it.

---

The Times article on Saturday suggested that UBIG would get a "five figure sum" for selling their shares in return for approving a CVA. Thinking was they would (have to?) accept that as they would most likely get nothing under liquidation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Liberal Hibby

Do UBIG have the whole 75%? I was wondering whether HMRC + one or two other larger unsecured creditors would have 25% between them to block a CVA even if UBIG were minded to support one (given they're now essentially the Lithuanian government who will be guaranteed something through UB).

---

Yes (indirectly).

Total debt is £28.5M. Ukio has £15M secured - that leaves £13.5M. UBIG were at about £8M (it was thought to be £10M but some was passed off to other Romanov companies). That's about 60% of the unsecured total.

BUT Ukio is not going to get the full £15M - let's say they only get £5M. Their remaining £10M would join the unsecured pile. Then Ukio + UBIG would be £18M out of an unsecured total £23.5M = 76.6%.

Even if theoretically UBIG and/or Ukio were just short of 75%, a CVA would most likely pass. The only party that is by policy hostile to CVAs is HMRC, who are owed "only" £1.5M or just over 11% of the present unsecured total.

i will try to make this simple

I will buy your house and pay you up monthly with a Direct debit HONEST !!

so the first pledges are due the 2nd September I wonder how many will come up trumphs wait till there partners find out that there other half has decided to buy a share in a football team and have no money for food or a holiday i would like to be a fly on the wall i these houses

NEW CO its a cert

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Liberal Hibby

Do UBIG have the whole 75%? I was wondering whether HMRC + one or two other larger unsecured creditors would have 25% between them to block a CVA even if UBIG were minded to support one (given they're now essentially the Lithuanian government who will be guaranteed something through UB).

---

HMRC don't have enough on their own. From memory, unsecured creditors are about £22m, which means £5.5m would have to vote against, or abstain. HMRC have about £2m, and they will vote No out of policy. However, I don't know why anyone else would..... other than awkwardness.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Part/Time Supporter

The Times article on Saturday suggested that UBIG would get a "five figure sum" for selling their shares in return for approving a CVA. Thinking was they would (have to?) accept that as they would most likely get nothing under liquidation.



Yes (indirectly).

Total debt is £28.5M. Ukio has £15M secured - that leaves £13.5M. UBIG were at about £8M (it was thought to be £10M but some was passed off to other Romanov companies). That's about 60% of the unsecured total.

BUT Ukio is not going to get the full £15M - let's say they only get £5M. Their remaining £10M would join the unsecured pile. Then Ukio + UBIG would be £18M out of an unsecured total £23.5M = 76.6%.

Even if theoretically UBIG and/or Ukio were just short of 75%, a CVA would most likely pass. The only party that is by policy hostile to CVAs is HMRC, who are owed "only" £1.5M or just over 11% of the present unsecured total.

---

UKIO's security is for £6.8m, no?

I didn't see that Times article.... but, that's the only way UBIG would allow the CVA, I reckon. That must bump the price up again.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

I didn't read it as that, Stevie.

I think it's the "disbursements" that they can draw from current funds; that's expenses that BDO have paid out from their own pocket. The fees can't be drawn until UKIO's admins can say so.

---

Hmmm.... so while not as dramatic as BDO getting paid the fee's from current funds, the fact that "disbursements" are being taken from these funds (I take it to maximise what's left after a sale) then this could be seen as an extra financial drain on the Yam's already limited finances?

If that's the case then it makes a decision, one way or another, more likley to happen sooner rather than later?? :confused:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

HMRC don't have enough on their own. From memory, unsecured creditors are about £22m, which means £5.5m would have to vote against, or abstain. HMRC have about £2m, and they will vote No out of policy. However, I don't know why anyone else would..... other than awkwardness.

---

I could see if people were getting 1p in the £ why they might vote yes on the basis it's that or nothing - but if you're asked to accept 0p in the £ wouldn't you want to teach them a lesson? You don't have even pennies to lose.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sir Alf R

Hmmm.... so while not as dramatic as BDO getting paid the fee's from current funds, the fact that "disbursements" are being taken from these funds (I take it to maximise what's left after a sale) then this could be seen as an extra financial drain on the Yam's already limited finances?

If that's the case then it makes a decision, one way or another, more likley to happen sooner rather than later?? :confused:

---

It's "only" about £3k thus far.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Liberal Hibby

I could see if people were getting 1p in the £ why they might vote yes on the basis it's that or nothing - but if you're asked to accept 0p in the £ wouldn't you want to teach them a lesson? You don't have even pennies to lose.

---

This is ANOTHER interesting twist that the YAMS seem to be missing....

As i see it, the Lith Government are ultimatly the main creditor... in terms of the UBIG element they (the UBIG Admins) could push for a "meaningful" price for the shares to squeeze some more money out of the situation.... "or else we won't accept the 0 pence CVA" .....

All that's assuming that the Lith Gov actually free up the shares.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

It's "only" about £3k thus far.

---

:boo hoo:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Filled Rolls

The different companies have different cab numbers, using the phonetic alphabet.

Central is P for Peter.

Anyone wanting to boycott City Cabs should check they don't have a V for victor in their window.

Simples.

---

Yeah i know what the P stood for, just never saw them giving a discount :-)

Gonnae shut up about bl**dy taxis and tell us something interesting about Hawrts demise!





Thanks :greengrin

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LongshanksED

So City Cabs advertising on the hibs official websites + donating to Kicks For Kids = City Cabs are backing Hearts and their financial troubles

Check out the advert at the bottom of the page!
http://www.hibernianfc.co.uk/news/20...262950_2887405

---

There was a thread a while ago calling for a boycott of city cabs as they were donating money to foh, it turned out they were actually donating money to the big hearts charity. As you point out they also donate to hibs charities, but its become a bit of a running joke since then.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lord bunberry

There was a thread a while ago calling for a boycott of city cabs as they were donating money to foh, it turned out they were actually donating money to the big hearts charity. As you point out they also donate to hibs charities, but its become a bit of a running joke since then.

---

Reputable v Bed Partners with crooks.......

Bit like Hibs v Hearts tbh..... I am sure the average yam would choose city everytime.....

Still doesn't change the above though....

Sorry - no more taxi posts

Admin.

Can we keep the title of the thread a little less hopeful for them while keeping it honest?

Instead of (FOH named preferred bidder) maybe (FOH bid not even close)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

Think you have mixed up a few things there.

A loan from an individual, or a company, to another company (or Special Purpose Vehicle, as MP Murray says. I mean...WTF?... SPV... sounds like something out of Captain Scarlet. I digress) is, in the main, irrelevant for Tax or National Insurance. It doesn't matter whether it's a "business" or a "private" loan.

If there is interest involved, and we don't yet know if that's the case here, FannyCo has to deduct tax from the interest it pays to BumCo, and then paid it over to HMRC-Co.



I don't actually see, yet, why UBIG would agree to a CVA. They are in line to get nothing.

If they don't agree to it, the CVA fails. There would not be a 75% vote in favour of it.

---

:agree:

Attachment 10863

The DR this morning has these 2 statements in different articles on the same page.
1. The loaned cash will be repaid to the businessmen ------ with only the interest they'd have collected had their money remained in their bank accounts.
2. Murray revealed the group of wealthy business people ----- have pledged to fund the CVA in the form of an interest free loan.

The same "journo" David McCarthy wrote both articles, wonderful! Personally I believe #1 is far more credible. They're also still trying to perpetrate the developer reputation myth. "'If any developer is willing to take the risk of their reputation being hammered by being becoming known sic! as the man who flattened Tynecastle! " I don't know who's worse, Murray or the MSM, they deserve each other.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sir Alf R

This is ANOTHER interesting twist that the YAMS seem to be missing....

As i see it, the Lith Government are ultimatly the main creditor... in terms of the UBIG element they (the UBIG Admins) could push for a "meaningful" price for the shares to squeeze some more money out of the situation.... "or else we won't accept the 0 pence CVA" .....

All that's assuming that the Lith Gov actually free up the shares.

---

Interesting point, and so long as the Liths don't have an "independent" minded equivalent of "independent" Ian Murray MP hopefully they will just do what is right for their electorate and those who have been robbed, just like Murray really.........