Share Transfers Agreed/Cooling off period

About the subsequent points penalty.

I've just had a look at what happened to Dunfermline. It looks like they took their hit last season which in effect put them down.

In the close season, July, their CVA was agreed and they were on their way out of administration but didn't actually do so until December. There was no points deduction this season.

So. No further forward there then unless an agreed CVA is taken as that 'exiting administration event' and they escaped the further points deduction that way. I do seem to recall there being a bit of a hiccup when they had to go back to court and a further points deduction was mentioned but I'm not sure how official that all was.

With regard to the UBIG shares, and possibly the UKIO ones. Am I right in thinking that some of these shares will have been acquired in the debt for equity swaps? £20+ million worth?

Another hazy memory is that this was a bit dodgy so perhaps how these came about will be the subject of more legal scrutiny than might otherwise have been in the already #allverycomplicated legal proceedings.

A dodgy UK company, the yams; dodgy Lithuanian companies; dodgy share transfer. Anyone any idea which country any court case would be heard in?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jack

About the subsequent points penalty.

I've just had a look at what happened to Dunfermline. It looks like they took their hit last season which in effect put them down.

In the close season, July, their CVA was agreed and they were on their way out of administration but didn't actually do so until December. There was no points deduction this season.

So. No further forward there then unless an agreed CVA is taken as that 'exiting administration event' and they escaped the further points deduction that way. I do seem to recall there being a bit of a hiccup when they had to go back to court and a further points deduction was mentioned but I'm not sure how official that all was.

With regard to the UBIG shares, and possibly the UKIO ones. Am I right in thinking that some of these shares will have been acquired in the debt for equity swaps? £20+ million worth?

Another hazy memory is that this was a bit dodgy so perhaps how these came about will be the subject of more legal scrutiny than might otherwise have been in the already #allverycomplicated legal proceedings.

A dodgy UK company, the yams; dodgy Lithuanian companies; dodgy share transfer. Anyone any idea which country any court case would be heard in?

---

My understanding is that the court case will be heard in Dodge City.

Jack, Dunfermline May have been treated under old SFL rules which no longer exist. New SPFL rules indicate the Yams would have to exit admin to escape further penalty.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

Actually, I am thinking that it wouldn't have been administration, it would have been liquidation.

Only they can say why they didn't do it. Perhaps they thought that they would get the full value of their security. In hindsight, that may have been a poor choice.

---

This is what I don't quite understand. They seemed to have had the time to exercise that hindsight realise that most return will come from a liquidation but chose not to go down that route. Why not?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Governor

Jack, Dunfermline May have been treated under old SFL rules which no longer exist. New SPFL rules indicate the Yams would have to exit admin to escape further penalty.

---

Good good :-)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Governor

Jack, Dunfermline May have been treated under old SFL rules which no longer exist. New SPFL rules indicate the Yams would have to exit admin to escape further penalty.

---

Very pleasing, how will Scotlands best crop of youngster cope with such heart ache? :greengrin

Just been looking at how the updated SPFL rules define a "season"

[*] Season means the period of the year commencing on the date of the first League Match in a Season and ending on the date of the last League Match in the same Season or otherwise as determined by the Board and which excludes the Close Season;
[*] Close Season means the period of the year outside the Season


the other bit of interest is

[*] Where an Insolvency Event or in the event that such Insolvency Event is part of an Insolvency Process that process, continues and/or is subsisting during a second or later Season then, for each such second or later Season, during the whole or part of which such Insolvency Event or Insolvency Process is continuing and/or subsisting, the Club concerned shall be deducted 15 points and shall start each such second or later Season in the relevant Division on minus 15 points.

the bit in bold gives me the impression that the Yams have until the start of the new season to get out of Admin :rolleyes:

if you can be bothered, here's the link http://spfl.co.uk/docs/067_324__ther...1388495541.pdf

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crazyhorse

This is what I don't quite understand. They seemed to have had the time to exercise that hindsight realise that most return will come from a liquidation but chose not to go down that route. Why not?

---

A few theories have been floated on here:-

1. they have done their homework, and deduced that they won't get any more in a liquidation.

2. they have not done their homework, and have been "persuaded" that they won't get any more in a liquidation.

3. they have known for some time that liquidation is the most likely route, in which case they might get more; approving the CVA is just a political move to make them look less like the bad boys.

I'm not sure which I believe. I'd like to think that 1 is the most likely, but then I'm not privy to the way these guys think.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jack

About the subsequent points penalty.

I've just had a look at what happened to Dunfermline. It looks like they took their hit last season which in effect put them down.

In the close season, July, their CVA was agreed and they were on their way out of administration but didn't actually do so until December. There was no points deduction this season.

So. No further forward there then unless an agreed CVA is taken as that 'exiting administration event' and they escaped the further points deduction that way. I do seem to recall there being a bit of a hiccup when they had to go back to court and a further points deduction was mentioned but I'm not sure how official that all was.

With regard to the UBIG shares, and possibly the UKIO ones. Am I right in thinking that some of these shares will have been acquired in the debt for equity swaps? £20+ million worth?

Another hazy memory is that this was a bit dodgy so perhaps how these came about will be the subject of more legal scrutiny than might otherwise have been in the already #allverycomplicated legal proceedings.

A dodgy UK company, the yams; dodgy Lithuanian companies; dodgy share transfer. Anyone any idea which country any court case would be heard in?

---

All the Ukio/UBIG Yam shares came into existence through debt for equity swaps.

The original shares that Vlad bought from Deans, Pieman and the simple fans were held by a Company called Heart of Midlothian 2005 Ltd.

That Company has been struck-off and those shares have " Fallen to the Crown "

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Just Alf

Just been looking at how the updated SPFL rules define a "season"
[*] Season means the period of the year commencing on the date of the first League Match in a Season and ending on the date of the last League Match in the same Season or otherwise as determined by the Board and which excludes the Close Season;[*] Close Season means the period of the year outside the Season


the other bit of interest is
[*] Where an Insolvency Event or in the event that such Insolvency Event is part of an Insolvency Process that process, continues and/or is subsisting during a second or later Season then, for each such second or later Season, during the whole or part of which such Insolvency Event or Insolvency Process is continuing and/or subsisting, the Club concerned shall be deducted 15 points and shall start each such second or later Season in the relevant Division on minus 15 points.

the bit in bold gives me the impression that the Yams have until the start of the new season to get out of Admin :rolleyes:

if you can be bothered, here's the link http://spfl.co.uk/docs/067_324__ther...1388495541.pdf

---

Your impression is correct. A points deduction will only be applicable if they are still in Admin at the start of the 2014/15 season

Much preferred this thread when we were speculating about them only having a 6% chance of survival. Now the way things are panning out I'd say it's looking more like there's probably only a 6% chance of liquidation.
So what, They'll come out of this in the Championship and financially better off and will feel like they've won a watch.
But they'll still be cheating ratbags.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Just Alf

Just been looking at how the updated SPFL rules define a "season"
[*] Season means the period of the year commencing on the date of the first League Match in a Season and ending on the date of the last League Match in the same Season or otherwise as determined by the Board and which excludes the Close Season;[*] Close Season means the period of the year outside the Season


the other bit of interest is
[*] Where an Insolvency Event or in the event that such Insolvency Event is part of an Insolvency Process that process, continues and/or is subsisting during a second or later Season then, for each such second or later Season, during the whole or part of which such Insolvency Event or Insolvency Process is continuing and/or subsisting, the Club concerned shall be deducted 15 points and shall start each such second or later Season in the relevant Division on minus 15 points.

the bit in bold gives me the impression that the Yams have until the start of the new season to get out of Admin :rolleyes:

if you can be bothered, here's the link http://spfl.co.uk/docs/067_324__ther...1388495541.pdf

---

Its not going to drag on till then they know the new rules and can't be prepared to take that hit . They have more recently been preparing thier fans that administration could drag into March ,the problem is the fans are so up themselves that they just don't listen.if proposed meetings don't take place in February or do and don't reach quick decision knowing it then still has to go throughout the Lithuanian court process then that would be interesting as no idea how long that would take .

There was some talk of Administrators wanting draft documents and agreements in principle signed off Does any one with experience in this area think they could badger new hierarchy to try and say look we have everything in place,here is the written proof ,but we want to be able to come out of administration before it goes through the court in lithuania.

Baj, I've been trying to hazard a guess as to how much the BDO " supervision " is costing HOMFC.

Is there any way your source would have a clue as to the figure ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EK_Hibs

Much preferred this thread when we were speculating about them only having a 6% chance of survival. Now the way things are panning out I'd say it's looking more like there's probably only a 6% chance of liquidation.
So what, They'll come out of this in the Championship and financially better off and will feel like they've won a watch.
But they'll still be cheating ratbags.

---

It looks very bleak for Hearts, how do you come to this conclusion that they'll come out of this in any decent financial state?

Dunfermline were governed by the old SPL rules that have now been superseded by the new SPFL rules (voted in by ALL the SPFL clubs) that state that if a club is 'still' in admin at the start of a new season (i.e. the first league game ) then a 15 point deduction comes into force no matter what division they are in.
IF a club exits Admin but goes back into Admin within 5 years then a 25 point deduction applies, as told to the the rankgers when they enquired what would happen to them if they went into admin AGAIN !!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Governor

It looks very bleak for Hearts, how do you come to this conclusion that they'll come out of this in any decent financial state?

---

If the cva is approved in a timely manner, they are, by definition, better off.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by clerriehibs

If the cva is approved in a timely manner, they are, by definition, better off.

---

Their balance sheet will certainly look a lot better. Not too sure they're going to find it easy to adjust to spending just what they earn, especially just what they're going to earn in the championship ... or where they're going to find the money to rebuild their crumbling hovel?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by clerriehibs

If the cva is approved in a timely manner, they are, by definition, better off.

---

And if my auntie had balls....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jack

About the subsequent points penalty.

With regard to the UBIG shares, and possibly the UKIO ones. Am I right in thinking that some of these shares will have been acquired in the debt for equity swaps? £20+ million worth?

Another hazy memory is that this was a bit dodgy so perhaps how these came about will be the subject of more legal scrutiny than might otherwise have been in the already #allverycomplicated legal proceedings.

A dodgy UK company, the yams; dodgy Lithuanian companies; dodgy share transfer. Anyone any idea which country any court case would be heard in?

---

This is exactly what I have been thinking:agree:
shares were being used as a tool to hide the true extent of the debt.
if this mechanism was used throught Vlads empire,then this would result in a no stone unturned,heavy dutie thorough investigation/court case that could last for years and years.
i have a hunch that the admins of UBIG and UKIO know this"hence the lack of urgency" and can just say yes no probs to anything verbally but can't give timescales for written agreements.

Wonder if this is Bandersons stamp



Attachment 11837

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Governor

And if my auntie had balls....

---

She'd have to have one glass one to say whether or not the cva would be approved.

No one knows; not even your ball-less auntie.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JeMeSouviens

Their balance sheet will certainly look a lot better. Not too sure they're going to find it easy to adjust to spending just what they earn, especially just what they're going to earn in the championship ... or where they're going to find the money to rebuild their crumbling hovel?

---

Essentially hearts will be the same as us. Relying on season tickets, matchdays, merchandise and player sales to fund their playing squad, wages, taxes, maintenance etc but wih a low level debt. (Well, initially)

They won't have a new stand but if they get away with around £26m debt frankly they will be thinking so what?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ronniekirk

Its not going to drag on till then they know the new rules and can't be prepared to take that hit . They have more recently been preparing thier fans that administration could drag into March ,the problem is the fans are so up themselves that they just don't listen.if proposed meetings don't take place in February or do and don't reach quick decision knowing it then still has to go throughout the Lithuanian court process then that would be interesting as no idea how long that would take .

There was some talk of Administrators wanting draft documents and agreements in principle signed off Does any one with experience in this area think they could badger new hierarchy to try and say look we have everything in place,here is the written proof ,but we want to be able to come out of administration before it goes through the court in lithuania.

---

You're looking at this from a football perspective. The hit is a football hit and they have no choice in the matter if it get to that stage. If they don't get the shares then they don't get out of admin, no matter how much they really, really, really want to, and even then there is no guarantee that it'll be in time for August.

#allisnotbarry
#allisexceedinglybleak
#allispleasingforhibbiedom

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

A few theories have been floated on here:-

1. they have done their homework, and deduced that they won't get any more in a liquidation.

2. they have not done their homework, and have been "persuaded" that they won't get any more in a liquidation.

3. they have known for some time that liquidation is the most likely route, in which case they might get more; approving the CVA is just a political move to make them look less like the bad boys.

I'm not sure which I believe. I'd like to think that 1 is the most likely, but then I'm not privy to the way these guys think.

---

Obviously I prefer 3. Because it has given them hope and then snatched it away. It seems a bit heartless (appropriately enough) perhaps but a longer process is more cruel (i.e more fun for us).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Twa Cairpets

You're looking at this from a football perspective. The hit is a football hit and they have no choice in the matter if it get to that stage. If they don't get the shares then they don't get out of admin, no matter how much they really, really, really want to, and even then there is no guarantee that it'll be in time for August.

#allisnotbarry
#allisexceedinglybleak
#allispleasingforhibbiedom

---

I can't imagine the Lithuanian legal process being a quick one. Not sure what leverage BDO would have, if any, for getting it pushed through quickly.

First off, in the event Barry's magic stamp even works they'll have a lower income in the championship (attendances, tv money, prize money and sponsorship), they'll surely find it hard to get credit so even controlled borrowing will be out, maintenance and running Tynie will still cost a fair bit. Better than they are now but it's not going to be a "happy ever after" scenario.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Governor

First off, in the event Barry's magic stamp even works they'll have a lower income in the championship (attendances, tv money, prize money and sponsorship), they'll surely find it hard to get credit so even controlled borrowing will be out, maintenance and running Tynie will still cost a fair bit. Better than they are now but it's not going to be a "happy ever after" scenario.

---

I think what some people are saying is if that's the way it pans out they aren't exactly doing the time for having done the crime. The club effectively robbed a wide range of organisations and individuals including tax payers and charities. Blew the dough and their punishment is relegation and having to learn to live like the other middle income clubs in Scotland. A fair number of merricks will say it was worth it. Personally I was hoping for something worse for them (still am).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Governor

First off, in the event Barry's magic stamp even works they'll have a lower income in the championship (attendances, tv money, prize money and sponsorship), they'll surely find it hard to get credit so even controlled borrowing will be out, maintenance and running Tynie will still cost a fair bit. Better than they are now but it's not going to be a "happy ever after" scenario.

---

They also have tae rely on the diddies tae keep paying up otherwise a lot of their other income will have tae be used tae pay that back. I wonder if anybody had ever ran a successful business on the basis of voluntary DD's, if no, why no :greengrin

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Desperate Dan

They also have tae rely on the diddies tae keep paying up otherwise a lot of their other income will have tae be used tae pay that back. I wonder if anybody had ever ran a successful business on the basis of voluntary DD's, if no, why no :greengrin

---

The DD's are an additional income to their season ticket money, matchday income, merchandise and player sales surely.

As far as I am aware we don't get any additional investment from anywhere else or am I missing something?

What's this 'Stamp' thing all about?
Has Barry Anderson been bumping his gums about a load of rubbish again?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EK_Hibs

Much preferred this thread when we were speculating about them only having a 6% chance of survival. Now the way things are panning out I'd say it's looking more like there's probably only a 6% chance of liquidation.
So what, They'll come out of this in the Championship and financially better off and will feel like they've won a watch.
But they'll still be cheating ratbags.

---

Do clubs that hae suffered an insovency event generally rise like a Phoenix from the flames though?

Ask, Livingston, Dundee, Leeds Utd, Portsmouth and the answer is most likely, no they dont.... Even ask The Rangers how it's going for them.....

Years of financial hardship generally endure as these clubs are forced to live within their means...

Only club that seems to have done reasonably since an administration is Motherwell as far as I can tell.
:cb

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HibbySpurs

Do clubs that hae suffered an insovency event generally rise like a Phoenix from the flames though?

Ask, Livingston, Dundee, Leeds Utd, Portsmouth and the answer is most likely, no they dont.... Even ask The Rangers how it's going for them.....

Years of financial hardship generally endure as these clubs are forced to live within their means...

Only club that seems to have done reasonably since an administration is Motherwell as far as I can tell.
:cb

---

Disbelief will be followed by shock as the 'Big Team' fantasies are confronted by 'skint team' reality.

Assuming they do manage to start next season, I do hope Anne Budge gets her way and instals Levein as manager. Here is a man with a wildly inflated view of his own worth - a perfect match. If they get another 15 point deduction they'll do well to avoid a second relegation in two seasons.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spike Mandela

The DD's are an additional income to their season ticket money, matchday income, merchandise and player sales surely.

As far as I am aware we don't get any additional investment from anywhere else or am I missing something?

---

The DD's are tae pay back the money FOF will be borrowing if they manage tae buy the club. The whole plans is based on those voluntary DD's. When those DD's from the diddes start tae dwindle as they surely will, the money tae pay back the loans from the biddies will need tae come from their other income.

Anybody any idea what the prize money would be for finishing say 6th in the Championship next year? Also what do you get for being the worst team in the SPFL or whatever its called now?

I heard the safety certificate for main stand expires in March....which should be fun.

Can anyone confirm this?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spike Mandela

I can't imagine the Lithuanian legal process being a quick one. Not sure what leverage BDO would have, if any, for getting it pushed through quickly.

---

You know what Spike.
That is the happiest, most upbeat post I think you've ever made.
#Spikeisbarry
:wink::greengrin

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spike Mandela

I can't imagine the Lithuanian legal process being a quick one. Not sure what leverage BDO would have, if any, for getting it pushed through quickly.

---

That's quite cheery, are you ok? :greengrin

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ryan69

I heard the safety certificate for main stand expires in March....which should be fun.

Can anyone confirm this?

---

They have been given a year's grace each year and told it is the last time for the last 10 14 years. Nothing is going to change this year.

Hibs and Hearts were told to sort out their main stands or they would have to close them in 2000. Only one team did - at great cost.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ryan69

I heard the safety certificate for main stand expires in March....which should be fun.

Can anyone confirm this?

---

Not a problem....... That nugget Cardownie will make sure its signed off...... :wink:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TrinityHibs

Anybody any idea what the prize money would be for finishing say 6th in the Championship next year? Also what do you get for being the worst team in the SPFL or whatever its called now?

---

Fill yer boots



.http://sport.stv.tv/football/clubs/a...econstruction/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spike Mandela

Essentially hearts will be the same as us. Relying on season tickets, matchdays, merchandise and player sales to fund their playing squad, wages, taxes, maintenance etc but wih a low level debt. (Well, initially)

They won't have a new stand but if they get away with around £26m debt frankly they will be thinking so what?

---

They will be like us but without the financial backing of Tom Farmer, Farmer hasnt pumped millions into us, but he has (i believe) provided short term loans when cash flow was low. This is the issue, IMO, with fan ownership. Cash flow is probably up and down all the time and although over the course of a year there is enough there will be points where things get tricky if there is no overdraft or owner willing to lend cash for a short period.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Desperate Dan

The DD's are tae pay back the money FOF will be borrowing if they manage tae buy the club. The whole plans is based on those voluntary DD's. When those DD's from the diddes start tae dwindle as they surely will, the money tae pay back the loans from the biddies will need tae come from their other income.

---

I don't think FoH can use Club income to pay off debts for the club purchase. That would be a leveraged purchase which are no longer allowed.

If DDs dry up it has to be cake sales and face painting :greengrin

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HFCDaveA

They will be like us but without the financial backing of Tom Farmer, Farmer hasnt pumped millions into us, but he has (i believe) provided short term loans when cash flow was low. This is the issue, IMO, with fan ownership. Cash flow is probably up and down all the time and although over the course of a year there is enough there will be points where things get tricky if there is no overdraft or owner willing to lend cash for a short period.

---

There's always their sponsors.... WONGA!

They'll be like us except they've had the benefit, in terms of "success" on the pitch and resultant uplift in crowds, that blowing £70m+ of funny money brings. If they only have to spend a season or two in the wilderness to pay for it then that'll be a pretty good result for their shameless (shameful) followers. Of course, no-one else in football recognises their three cup wins in this period as valid.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by greenginger

I don't think FoH can use Club income to pay off debts for the club purchase. That would be a leveraged purchase which are no longer allowed.

If DDs dry up it has to be cake sales and face painting :greengrin

---

Even better :thumbsup: that's a lot of cakes tae pay back that kind of money :greengrin and either way if they cannae they'll be in it again :greengrin

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HFCDaveA

They will be like us but without the financial backing of Tom Farmer, Farmer hasnt pumped millions into us, but he has (i believe) provided short term loans when cash flow was low. This is the issue, IMO, with fan ownership. Cash flow is probably up and down all the time and although over the course of a year there is enough there will be points where things get tricky if there is no overdraft or owner willing to lend cash for a short period.

---

It's not beyond the realms of possibility that a wealthy saviour will come out of the woodwork once the messy business of admin is done with.

But having made such a heavy play of the FoH model and there being 'no white knight', it doesn't seem likely.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

A few theories have been floated on here:-

1. they have done their homework, and deduced that they won't get any more in a liquidation.

2. they have not done their homework, and have been "persuaded" that they won't get any more in a liquidation.

3. they have known for some time that liquidation is the most likely route, in which case they might get more; approving the CVA is just a political move to make them look less like the bad boys.

I'm not sure which I believe. I'd like to think that 1 is the most likely, but then I'm not privy to the way these guys think.

---

I think they are pretending to be 2 but are secretly treading water waiting for 3.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EK_Hibs

What's this 'Stamp' thing all about?
Has Barry Anderson been bumping his gums about a load of rubbish again?

---

They are signing Phil Stamp on February 1st, BDO reckon it'll add dozens to the crowd.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by clerriehibs

If the cva is approved in a timely manner, they are, by definition, better off.

---

IF is big word.

Stick the lot of them in the liquidiser and press the button.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hibernia Na Eir

IF is big word.

---

Eh? It's been approved already?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EK_Hibs

Eh? It's been approved already?

---

There are a few issues one major one..... The frozen shares.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EK_Hibs

What's this 'Stamp' thing all about?
Has Barry Anderson been bumping his gums about a load of rubbish again?

---

It's a fairy tale by BAnderson. :agree:

http://i41.tinypic.com/2nov8p.png

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EK_Hibs

Eh? It's been approved already?

---

It's been approved "conditionally". Which means it's not been approved at all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EK_Hibs

Eh? It's been approved already?

---

Approved conditionally, but the CVA counts for nothing unless UBIGs assets are unfrozen anyway. Barry Anderson and co may have you believe all it takes is a rubber stamp, but sadly for them the reality is very different.

For anyone taking BAnderson at face value here's a twitter coversation with Green Glory (I think) less than a year ago.

https://mobile.twitter.com/BarryAnde...0175356929?p=v

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Treadstone

For anyone taking BAnderson at face value here's a twitter coversation with Green Glory (I think) less than a year ago.

https://mobile.twitter.com/BarryAnde...0175356929?p=v

---

Indeed, I think it was May that Banderson was still telling us everything was still Barry.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Desperate Dan

It's a fairy tale by BAnderson. :agree:

http://i41.tinypic.com/2nov8p.png

---

Nah, it's an open letter begging Vlad to come back and sort the mess out, only no one has a stamp.











.....or an address, or any contact, or any clue where the money went, or any sense.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Treadstone

For anyone taking BAnderson at face value here's a twitter coversation with Green Glory (I think) less than a year ago.

https://mobile.twitter.com/BarryAnde...0175356929?p=v

---

Belter. How has Banderson not won a Pulitzer yet? He is simply an outstanding, fearless journalist.

'UBIG troubles barely affect Hearts'

'Plenty of research and nothing to suggest impending trouble'

:rolleyes:

[/attach]Attachment 11839


[attach=config]11838


:thumbsup:

"Plenty of research". That's a hoot. His research went no further than calling up the Bare Faced Liar and asking him if there was anything up.

My flatmate and I were discussing this earlier and despite having paid close attention to this thread, could someone answer me a pretty simple question please?

As I understand it, the planned debt repayments for the Yams (assuming the CVA is approved and the shares are magically defrosted) would currently be:

• £2.5m to Ukio Bankas as part of CVA
• £50k to UBIG for the shares
• About £60k in football debts (Ayr, Liverpool, Livingstone, Mussellburgh and The Rangers)

• And what I'm not sure about (taxes):
  
  • City of Edinburgh Council: £90,715
  • City of Edinburgh Council (for flats): £2,631
  • HMRC: £1,881,068

​
Regarding the creditors in italics, ie. the tax authorities, do they get what they're owed? Have I understood the rest correctly?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kato

It's been approved "conditionally". Which means it's not been approved at all.

---

Exactly !

When they had the Creditors meeting, UBIG Admin was going to vote 'NO', but BDO had to beg them not to, as that would be it there and then.

So they chose to 'ABSTAIN', citing that they could not give their approval without first consulting their own Creditors - that is the meeting that is talked about possibly being held end of next month.

#AllisBarry is jumping the gun saying it's a formality.

Even if UBIG's creditors don't object to the sale of the 50% shares - there is still the matter of the Lith Government's investigation, which got the Court to freeze them in the first place, being agreeable to it.

Not out of the woods by a long shot

:greengrin

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jacomoseven

It's not beyond the realms of possibility that a wealthy saviour will come out of the woodwork once the messy business of admin is done with.

But having made such a heavy play of the FoH model and there being 'no white knight', it doesn't seem likely.

---

Only because that was the only route left for them. No right minded investor was ever going to touch the Yams while they were in Admin or sitting on £MMMM of debt.

Once out of Admin and stark reality of having to live within their means hits home, these charity thieves will grab the first lump of money waved under their noses. The FOH model will be ditched as they chase their world cup stars and Champ League fantasies.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by VivaHibs

My flatmate and I were discussing this earlier and despite having paid close attention to this thread, could someone answer me a pretty simple question?

As I understand it, the planned debt repayments for the Yams (assuming the CVA is approved and the shares are magically defrosted) would currently be:

• £2.5m to Ukio Bankas as part of CVA
• £50k to UBIG for the shares
• About £60k in football debts (Ayr, Liverpool, Livingstone, Mussellburgh and The Rangers)

• And what I'm not sure about (taxes):
  
  • City of Edinburgh Council: £90,715
  • City of Edinburgh Council (for flats): £2,631
  • HMRC: £1,881,068

​
Regarding the creditors in italics, ie. the tax authorities, do they get what they're owed? Have I understood the rest correctly?

---

The creditors in italics will get not a penny regardless of a CVA being agreed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mikey

"Plenty of research". That's a hoot. His research went no further than calling up the Bare Faced Liar and asking him if there was anything up.

---

Just imagine if Banderson was covering the Phone Hacking scandal.

"So, ehh, Rupert, is there anything in this voicemail thingy?"
"No."

"PHONE HACKING: ALL IS BARRY. NEWS OF THE WORLD IS AN INNOCENT VICTIM"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by VivaHibs

My flatmate and I were discussing this earlier and despite having paid close attention to this thread, could someone answer me a pretty simple question?

As I understand it, the planned debt repayments for the Yams (assuming the CVA is approved and the shares are magically defrosted) would currently be:

• £2.5m to Ukio Bankas as part of CVA
• £50k to UBIG for the shares
• About £60k in football debts (Ayr, Liverpool, Livingstone, Mussellburgh and The Rangers)

• And what I'm not sure about (taxes):
  
  • City of Edinburgh Council: £90,715
  • City of Edinburgh Council (for flats): £2,631
  • HMRC: £1,881,068

​
Regarding the creditors in italics, ie. the tax authorities, do they get what they're owed? Have I understood the rest correctly?

---

Don't quote me, but those last ones are settled in some pence in the pound type deal are that not? So instead of £90k to Edinburgh CC read £6k, etc.

J

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bristolhibby

Don't quote me, but those last ones are settled in some pence in the pound type deal are that not? So instead of £90k to Edinburgh CC read £6k, etc.

J

---

Only once the secured creditors are paid, which means the others will get approximately nixie-pie.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by clerriehibs

If the cva is approved in a timely manner, they are, by definition, better off.

---

If they do survive, and its still an if, I suspect they will be back in administration in around 4-5 seasons. As in their full fat cousins old habits die hard.

As for the CVA they still need a number of decisions to fall their way. All we need is one of that number not to.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EK_Hibs

Eh? It's been approved already?

---

I don't think so mate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mikey

"Plenty of research". That's a hoot. His research went no further than calling up the Bare Faced Liar and asking him if there was anything up.

---

Classic!

Even better

"Tks for telling me how to do my job"

Throbber.

Has the CVA cooling off period not been & gone though?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mikey

"Plenty of research". That's a hoot. His research went no further than calling up the Bare Faced Liar and asking him if there was anything up.

---

:agree:

:singing: He prints what he's told
He prints what he's told
Allisbarry
He prints what he's told

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bristolhibby

Don't quote me, but those last ones are settled in some pence in the pound type deal are that not? So instead of £90k to Edinburgh CC read £6k, etc.

J

---

They get nothing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by VivaHibs

My flatmate and I were discussing this earlier and despite having paid close attention to this thread, could someone answer me a pretty simple question please?

As I understand it, the planned debt repayments for the Yams (assuming the CVA is approved and the shares are magically defrosted) would currently be:

• £2.5m to Ukio Bankas as part of CVA
• £50k to UBIG for the shares
• About £60k in football debts (Ayr, Liverpool, Livingstone, Mussellburgh and The Rangers)

• And what I'm not sure about (taxes):
  
  • City of Edinburgh Council: £90,715
  • City of Edinburgh Council (for flats): £2,631
  • HMRC: £1,881,068

​
Regarding the creditors in italics, ie. the tax authorities, do they get what they're owed? Have I understood the rest correctly?

---

The football debt is approximately £535k

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EK_Hibs

Has the CVA cooling off period not been & gone though?

---

It hasn't started as it hasn't been formally approved.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

It hasn't started as it hasn't been formally approved.

---

I don't think that's true. Unless Bryan Jackson & co have been telling porky pies to the media.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EK_Hibs

I don't think that's true. Unless Bryan Jackson & co have been telling porky pies to the media.

---

So you are saying that the CVA has been approved?

Thanks everyone for clearing that one up, I'd be lost without .net :hibees

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

The football debt is approximately £535k

---

That's a good deal more than I thought (based on this thread). Where did you get that figure, CWG? Ta.

Anyone heard any names yet of who the 'Edinburgh business backers' that were in Bidco - apart from Ann Budge ?

:confused:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EK_Hibs

I don't think that's true. Unless Bryan Jackson & co have been telling porky pies to the media.

---

If the CVA had been approved we'd know about it, they'd be shouting from the rooftops. Nobody at Hearts or BDO has been saying the CVA has been approved other than conditionally.

Page 1875 according to my phone! :) pleasing thread!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by VivaHibs

Thanks everyone for clearing that one up, I'd be lost without .net :hibees





That's a good deal more than I thought (based on this thread). Where did you get that figure, CWG? Ta.

---

It is in BDOs last report. Don't have that to hand, but it's explicitly listed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

So you are saying that the CVA has been approved?

---

Not set in stone as yet, no... But you seemed to be suggesting there's going to be another 30 days 'cooling off period' when/IF UBIG confirm they're onside? I don't believe that's the case at all.
I'd have thought if the UBIG liquidator was going to throw a spanner in the yams 'provisional CVA' works then he'd have done it within the 30 day period following the 30th of November or whenever it was.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EK_Hibs

I don't think that's true. Unless Bryan Jackson & co have been telling porky pies to the media.

---

With all due respect, this is getting quite exhausting. A quick search of relevant news sites will bring you up to date with the basic facts that are in the public domain - even the Scotsman/EEN more or less gets those right.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EK_Hibs

I don't think that's true. Unless Bryan Jackson & co have been telling porky pies to the media.

---

Show evidence that Bryan Jackson has ever said the cooling off period has begun.

A cracker, him and the tweet.

Quote:

---

Barry Anderson ‏@BarryAnderson_8 18 Oct 2012

Following last tweet, #HMFC doing their best being self-sufficient but wage delays unavoidable with no UBIG funds. See today's paper. #SPL

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EK_Hibs

Not set in stone as yet, no... But you seemed to be suggesting there's going to be another 30 days 'cooling off period' when/IF UBIG confirm they're onside? I don't believe that's the case at all.
I'd have thought if the UBIG liquidator was going to throw a spanner in the yams 'provisional CVA' works then he'd have done it within the 30 day period following the 30th of November or whenever it was.

---

You're seem to be grasping while not grasping the situation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kato

You're seem to be grasping while grasping the situation.

---

Eh?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kato

Show evidence that Bryan Jackson has ever said the cooling off period has begun.

---

:jamboid:

:dunno:

:wink:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EK_Hibs

Eh?

---

sorry bud, edited

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kato

Show evidence that Bryan Jackson has ever said the cooling off period has begun.

---

Can't be bothered searching Google for a yam purpose.
My knowledge of this comes from when I heard Bryan Jackson say (whilst being interviewed on sportsound) that he didn't expect any objections from creditors during the 30 day cooling off period following the 29th of November.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kato

Show evidence that Bryan Jackson has ever said the cooling off period has begun.

---

Aye I was right.... I knew I heard him say it on Sportsound.
During the 1st minute of this clip:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/scotland/25159932

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Twa Cairpets

You know what Spike.
That is the happiest, most upbeat post I think you've ever made.
#Spikeisbarry
:wink::greengrin

---

Thats as good as it gets!! Having known Spike for about 27 years and stood and sat beside him at ER and many other places he really is a pessimistic, wet blanket, glass half empty kind of guy. And if your glass is half empty he is most certainly not the type to fill it up !!! He does hate the Merricks though

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EK_Hibs

Has the CVA cooling off period not been & gone though?

---

That's what you would like to have happened.:wink:

Just read EEN and that incompetent minge Barry stating 18 yo Sam Nicholson even though Brokeback Last week had a happy 19th birthday thread for him . Deliberately misleading the readers or just a pathetic journalist.... ..Both I'd say

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EK_Hibs

I don't think that's true. Unless Bryan Jackson & co have been telling porky pies to the media.

---

What there has been was a 30 day period , after the vote on the 29th of November to appeal any irregularities in the vote.

I thought HMRC would have raised an objection . Unfortunately they did'nt.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Twa Cairpets

You know what Spike.
That is the happiest, most upbeat post I think you've ever made.
#Spikeisbarry
:wink::greengrin

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Desperate Dan

That's quite cheery, are you ok? :greengrin

---

Been feeling strange all day. If we sign a decent player now I might just have a happyclap!:greengrin

Nah, probably not.:wink:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kaiser1962

Classic!

Even better

"Tks for telling me how to do my job"

Throbber.

---

He sure needed somebody to tell him :greengrin

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by greenginger

What there has been was a 30 day period , after the vote on the 29th of November to appeal any irregularities in the vote.

I thought HMRC would have raised an objection . Unfortunately they did'nt.

---

They already objected so would have been pointless...like the yams :)