Printable View
So to gain the Jambo vote, say 30/40,000 in Edinburgh and a few more around the country they are willing to piss of every other teams supporters as well as all non football fans. I think not. Whatever you think of the SNP they are not stupid people. Also they are within touching distance of their ultimate goal and I doubt that they will do anything crazy like supporting the yams in any way shape or formQuote:
Originally Posted by Russian Hibs
Do Hibbies not get the vote nowadays like?Quote:
Originally Posted by Russian Hibs
Might piss off our side mind. Do we not get an equal vote?Quote:
Originally Posted by NYHibby
My source wouldn't be wrong about pre 2007 they might of changed their view but they think not.
Any obstacles to change of use or planning permission have been hastily invented recently by Hearts sympathisers among the politicos and the press. Why would any blast zone affect the use when it's already agreed that part of the distillers works will be moved when the build their offices on the school. Even the cost of the land has, on first glance, been tampered with somehow. A piece of land two-thirds the size of another piece adjoining going for under a million when the larger section was valued at eighteen million not too long ago. There's been fluctuations but that's a bit hard to swallow. It was all gung-ho when Cala were building homes - the biggest bull****ters ever.
On yackback the yam seem to think the £1.5m they say they will be donating every year (so long as the DD's don't decline) will not be subject to tax. Can any of our experts confirm if this is correct please - it doesn't seem right to treat income in this way, they are not a registered charity so not exempt - their charity record is not great - and its not clear the donation is a charitable one.
If it was turned down for non-planning reasons the result would be reversed on appeal.Quote:
Originally Posted by Russian Hibs
Don't believe bull**** especially from the SNP.
Companies are taxed on profits, not incomeQuote:
Originally Posted by Bostonhibby
There's no precident, as far as I am aware, for a Scottish council blocking such a move and plenty precident where football stadia have become supermarkets.Quote:
Originally Posted by Russian Hibs
Lidl to worry about yam lookers in !Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack
For the first time ever something comes up on Hibs Net that I actually know something about (I'm a planner).Quote:
Originally Posted by SurferRosa
The Council's new Local Development Plan zones the Tynecastle Pitch (but not the stands) as Open Space. So it seems that it's only the pitch that's protected. Also, it's not an absolute ban on development on the pitch. The Council acknowledges that development could be permitted in exceptional circumstances. This could include, for example, a development of community benefit which also provides for a replacement pitch being created elsewhere.
Having said that, this plan would give the Council the reasons it might need if it was determined to refuse permission for political reasons. A developer could then appeal to the Scottish Government but that would cost time and money with no certainty of success. All that will be reflected in the valuation of the PBS.
The Council also zones the Easter Road pitch as open space.
My post was a general comment, and it was about delaying bad news until a time when it is more "palatable" to deliver. While I can't speak about the other parties, it wouldn't surprise me if they have adopted the same policy at the councils they control.
However, while planning applications are outside my area, even if Hearts were liquidated tomorrow and the stadium was sold, I would have thought that a planning application would not be decided before September anyway. Therefore no delaying would be needed and my comment does not apply.
If the application is in process, why would the SNP lose votes from Hibs supporters? They wouldn't be blocking anything.
Pretty sure that the donations will be treated as repayment of the loan from AB. Therefore not taxable.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bostonhibby
It's late though. ..I'll rethink it tomorrow.
Agreed - Sorry ,wrong phrase I guess, never knew what to call it - it just doesn't sit easy that this large intake of what is basically unearned cash won't be taxed - what's to stop other businesses moving cash to subsidiaries and calling it a donation thus avoiding tax. Not my area so keen to understand - I seem to recall an earlier comment on the point but can't find it.Quote:
Originally Posted by mim
Same logic applies to the yams surely? Oh and lest we forget, we're not voting for the SNP in September :wink:Quote:
Originally Posted by NYHibby
:aok:Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
AgreedQuote:
Originally Posted by NYHibby
Thanks for that. What would happen, though, if Hearts themselves decided they wanted to ground share with Livingston, for financial reasons. Does this mean that they would struggle to sell Tynecastle to a developer?Quote:
Originally Posted by Paisley Hibby
Yes, but we're just a wee team so there's no way the 400,000 could ever be outvoted.Quote:
Originally Posted by BarneyK
Over the past few years in Edinburgh we've seen school sports grounds sold off left, right and centre for private development. The council is currently hell bent, for better or for worse, trying to build the new Porty High School on a public park.Quote:
Originally Posted by Paisley Hibby
Edinburgh Council would be hard pushed justifying protecting a football pitch that doesn't measure up to modern specifications.
If UKIO take control of the PBS they should clear the site of all stands, pitch, infrastructure. This would not require planning permission of any sort and once any prospect of the place being used as a football stadium has gone, politicions will move on, and planners and developers can work on an acceptable scheme.Quote:
Originally Posted by Paisley Hibby
NewCo Yam will already have found a new venue, Murrayfield, Meadowbank, Saughton enclosure or who ever will share with them.
The idea that a vacant 6 acre site 1 mile from the city centre could never be developed because a corrupt football club who went bankrupt owing millions, once played there, is just a Yam fantasy.
My brain cell is working overtime, but "community benefit" sounds like a property developer could improve facilities for amateur footballers at nearby Saughton to satisfy the "exceptional circumstances" test. And it would be very difficult for the Council to refuse that offer on the basis that there is no benefit to the Yams.Quote:
Originally Posted by Paisley Hibby
I've also floated the idea before that a developer could offer to let Yamco stay rent free at the PBS for a couple of years in exchange for supporting the housing application. Since the alternative would be to become homeless and pay rent, they'd have little choice but to agree (assuming they have any financial sense) which would make it even harder to refuse permission. However their support would hate the idea of moving which will lead to plenty of bickering within Save Hearts In Trouble :greengrin
this is all very complex!?!! if you are reffering to the forthcoming referendum vote on the 18th of September, can I remind you and a few others on here that the vote is for YES/NO AND IT IS FOR INDEPENDENCE OR NOT for Independence. It Is not a vote for Alex Salmond, and it is not for the SNP. all very confusing. there are/will be thousands who will vote for YES, who have no allegiance with the SNP or otherwise.Quote:
Originally Posted by weecounty hibby
aye awrite, the SNP are experts on bull****ting. top of the league, leaving the tories/lab/libs in their trail eh?:rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by jgl07
And yet the white paper reads like a party manifesto rather than a serious proposal for a constitution.Quote:
Originally Posted by monktonharp
People will vote for all sorts of reasons in September, and both sides are anxious not to do anything that will hurt their cause. That is why the politicians will stay well clear of being seen to help out the Yams, because there will be justifiable outrage from the voters that don't care about football.
They could stick up a CCTV camera outside a kids playground in West Edinburgh which would "benefit the community" as a deterrent for Savile Perverts in maroon sniffing around the bairns playing there.Quote:
Originally Posted by Eyrie
With a recent history of having a fiddler Manager, PlayerS and fans they need a watching.
While they're at it the could maybe pay for financial crime awareness training for the Poppy Factory, Charities and Local business that they robbed from.
The club with no shame/the sh !te that wouldn't flush.
Hope they die soon.
:agree:especially if it is a diddy fitba team that went bust,privately owned business failure ......and before they did ,they ripped off the people of Edin. all and sundry. and yet they are trying to build a school on publicly owned common land!Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack
I'm stuck on a crossword clue:
The chances of Heart of Midlothian finding happiness this week (4, 3)
[QUOTE=Eyrie;3964886]And yet the white paper reads like a party manifesto rather than a serious proposal for a constitution ...The same could be said about the quotes made from the Chancellor re-the pound:wink: difference being, he popped up to Embra, said his piece, refused to speak to the media and was whisked off in a big shiney black Bentley back to wherever he comes fi'.
did you try "good god" ?:greengrinQuote:
Originally Posted by Sergey
Très peu !Quote:
Originally Posted by Sergey
Back in San Diego today. Had Chicken Soltani in a Persian Restaurant called "Bandar". Was wondering if the little **** had published any more sheetcrap. FTH
None. Yes?Quote:
Originally Posted by Sergey
Any letters?
Sent from my iphone
Hope n Norfolk,Quote:
Originally Posted by Sergey
I can't seem to get it in the right order, balls it doesn't fit, I was never good at crosswords!! :confused:
Future development of PBSQuote:
Originally Posted by greenginger
It all depends on who buys it. It FOH/Bidco get it, it will continue, probably with EDC connivance giving them safety certificates but eventually they will have to go into debt to fix the main stand up causing major financial problems and much gnashing of teeth from the natives about investment in the team.
If a developer intent on demolition buys it there are a number of ways he can go about development in the face of opposition. Developers are a scheming bunch don't forget! Here is one scenario
1 New owner Offers it to Bidco at et economic full repairing rent.
2. Bidco can't afford it and Yams move to Livi / Murrayfield.......
3. Owner says that the main stand is a death trap and needs to be demolished and removes the main stand.
4. Leaves grass to grow on unused pitch with only three sideswipe he prepares his development proposals
5. Meanwhile Yams start to claw their way up the leagues in their new home.
6. Developer along with Distiller who is adjoining owner submit joint application for comprehensive development of PBS , school and distillery with Aldi, sports facility, flats etc etc. Includes construction of all weather pitch at Saughton as a sop for loss of open space.
7. Yam Fans now resigned to new home with aspirations of a super stadium to be built west of Edinburgh.
6. EDC Planning Committee approve application after strong lobbying by distillers and owner of PBS and threats of appeal and court action. Yam councillors give tearful statements saying they have no option and what a sad day it is. 5-1 etc etc
7 Hibs win the Scottish Cup.
Totally believable scenario IMHO aIMHO a:drunk::drunk:
According to the Hootsmon this morning, £590,000 of the £690,000 has already been handed over! :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Mellow Hibee
Clearly, no budgetary management lessons learned at the PBS yet.
Still, they must be really desperate now if they are begging for the final £100,000.
Indeed. They could do what Arsenal did at Highbury and keep the pitch as a garden space and build flats/retail around it where the stands currently are!Quote:
Originally Posted by greenginger
Yam fantasy nonsense IMOQuote:
Originally Posted by Russian Hibs
QuiteQuote:
Originally Posted by Eyrie
Spot on.Quote:
Originally Posted by weecounty hibby
It will be subject to tax and V.A.T. if it is deemed regular.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bostonhibby
The are but donations increase income and therefore profitsQuote:
Originally Posted by mim
That could be the case it shares were either issued/transferred from Bidco in exchange or the "donations".Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
F??k AllQuote:
Originally Posted by Sergey
Last throw of the dice !Quote:
Originally Posted by PapillonVert
Is it really necessary to multi quote so many different posts? You do this on a regular basis and to be honest with you it's quite annoying.Quote:
Originally Posted by Weststandwanab
Is £100k enough to see them through the remaining 5 fixtures?
Yet they didn't get rid of billy brown and assume still there picking up a wage .They keep wanting everyone else to bail them out .They could of sold more young players but didn't they know that the league will want them to complete fixtures and therefore help out it's emotional blackmail but this lot will stop at nothing .Quote:
Originally Posted by PapillonVert
Billy 'Struggling' Brown is working for free now.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronniekirk
I'd agree with your points, presumably the guy on loan will be picking up some sort of fee/wage so that's another expense they could easily have done without. On today's news though, all they are left to receive from the league is £100,000. They must really be down to the last few pounds knowing what the club costs to run and how little a dent £100,000 would make on the whole.
I think Broonie is working without a wage as of last week, when that was announced it made me wonder if the piggy bank was almost empty and it is !.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronniekirk
There's a post over there about an upcoming U20 cup final tie and they are talking about cramming the team with all the regular first team players who are eligible. So much for their worries about burning out and putting too much pressure on the 'wee boys'. If they were so concerned about this you would have thought that the absence of pressure in their five remaining matches would allow them to rest a lot of them. The bottom line is of-course that their complaints were lies.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronniekirk
:agree:Quote:
Originally Posted by #FromTheCapital
The administrator for the bank have to get the highest possible value from any assets they hold as security. If they believe for one minute that they can get more on the open market then they have to.
Despite what is being said about the land on the other site, it does have value. Housing sites in Edinburgh are being bought as the market returns. A builder I work for is looking at 3 sites in Edinburgh. With the discount to market they could achieve here any builder would be off their head not to look at it! Even at, say £5m the size of the site without the blast zone issues would be a money maker.
The HFC boys will be hoping that their pals at EDC would make it difficult to get planning but a determined builder would see that off.
This has a way to run.
F*** Off.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sergey
GGTTH
So Hearts receive £790k for finishing 12th
Of which £690k has already been paid out.
Leaves the puddle drinkers with 100k ?
They really are only left with enough money that would barely last a week ?
Dearie me. :greengrin
Do we know that for sure? It doesn't count if it's in the papers :greengrinQuote:
Originally Posted by Www1875hfc
We were working on the basis that the £535k footballing debt was to be paid from that. If it is the case then that's another big chunk they've got to find.
Wonder if they will try and charge for fans last chance to see them win silverware for the next decade at least Wouldn't be surprised :wink:Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim44
Certainly that £ 690 K explains the spending gap from the BDO interim report.Quote:
Originally Posted by Www1875hfc
They only had £ 720 K in the kitty on 18/12/2013 and expenses averaging £95 K per week.
Sure they got a few quid from Swansea,League cup semi, Hibs and Celtic games at the PBS, but that was it .
Without that £ 720 K, they would have been out of cash in the middle of March.
It doesn't annoy me, infact I prefer that to individually replying to half a dozen posts. Isn't that the purpose of the multiquote feature?Quote:
Originally Posted by #FromTheCapital
:agree:Quote:
Originally Posted by #FromTheCapital
Irritates me too, please stop Weststandwanab, there surely isn't any need to respond to all those posts!!
As was BroomfieldQuote:
Originally Posted by SmashinGlass
As was Muirton Park
etc.,
But the yams are special, don't you know.
After previous " misunderstandings " with HMRC , I take it BDO will be required to account for tax deductions, NI, and VAT on a monthly basis, so no huge quarterly bill lurking in some drawer.
Do the Yam players and staff still get paid mid-month ? Kinda miss the Tweets from the first poor sucker to try the cash machine and find out Santa had'nt been yet.
Them were the days ! :greengrin
The multiquote feature is fine, but when you're selecting numerous random posts and responding with short answers every time on a daily basis then it gets quite annoying. The point is there's no need at all to respond to all these posts!Quote:
Originally Posted by StevieC
:agree: Me too.Quote:
Originally Posted by StevieC
Okay, returning to this.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bostonhibby
1. in the books of FOH, there is no profit. Donations received are paid out. There is no trading, either. Result... no Corporation Tax or VAT.
2. in Bidco's books, slightly more complicated. Bidco is putting up cash to fund the first few years. £2.5m for the club, £1m for initial working capital, and then "not less than" £1.4m for WC for each of the next two seasons. Total, at least, £6.3m.
That money will be either AB's personally, paid in either in the form of a loan or shares, or put up by a bank. However that part is structured, the payments from FOH will be repayments of that. Result, no CT or VAT.
If its "to big a political issue"then it would be a"mother of political issue"to explain to normal(non hearts fans)taxpaying/voters why you would do such a thing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Russian Hibs
Its pretty clear the sports hacks in this country don't have a clue and are very bias towards the hearts cause.Can you imagine a proper political/mainstream journalist getting his teeth into this.
Forget the council,do you think the SNP as a party would risk this?
threatening another European government
Quote:
Originally Posted by #FromTheCapital
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacBean
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hank Schrader
Doesn't bother me at allQuote:
Originally Posted by #FromTheCapital
:wink:
Mikey, think the papers have it wrong slightly. I am sure they were advanced 150k right at the start of the admin process, then there will be 535k ring fenced for football debts which is about the 690k mark.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mikey
Cheers CWG, and weststandwanabee above (whose multiquote replies I like).Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
Looks like instead of paying tax on investment earnings I should just get a football club, donate all I have and sit back and collect the profits every year. Anyone know a big team that's going cheap and bound to be in the black for years to come?
Just ignore them then :dunno:Quote:
Originally Posted by #FromTheCapital
Alls bazQuote:
Originally Posted by Sergey
:greengrin
Or better yet, ask the only person on this entire forum who does this regularly to stop.Quote:
Originally Posted by StevieC
I wish you would stop posting. Your really annoying .Quote:
Originally Posted by #FromTheCapital
Any chance we can get back on topic please folks :wink:
I like his multi-quote posting style. It's easier to ignore him in large chunks than lots of individual replies.Quote:
Originally Posted by StevieC
****** the hearts:greengrinQuote:
Originally Posted by Mikey
Sorry if I wind you up so much buddy, can't say I've even noticed you before. Here's another post to annoy you.Quote:
Originally Posted by hibbill2002
Calling me buddy is really annoying, please stop.
Threaten another European government? That could be considered an act of war. With no Yams around, who would save us?Quote:
Originally Posted by Glesgahibby
Shhhh,I was hoping they wouldn't think of that:greengrinQuote:
Originally Posted by EH6 Hibby
Good, my work here is done. ByeQuote:
Originally Posted by hibbill2002
:faf:Quote:
Originally Posted by #FromTheCapital
:tee hee:Quote:
Originally Posted by Geo_1875
May I respectfully suggest you vote with your eyes ?Quote:
Originally Posted by #FromTheCapital
:greengrinQuote:
Originally Posted by #FromTheCapital
Thank you.Quote:
Originally Posted by StevieC
Funnily enough I thought that was the purpose of the Multi quote too -
:duck::duck::greengrinQuote:
Originally Posted by hibbill2002
Are they deid yet?
Thanks to you and others for taking the time to post on this - in a singular format.Quote:
Originally Posted by s.a.m
Quote:
Originally Posted by Weststandwanab
Where's the rest of the quotes?
Back on topic...
Before I choose to believe this 'PR man for the SNP', 'insider at Bloomberg', etc, any chance of naming names?
if you claim to know someone in the know, and that person has nothing to fear by being named, why not just tell us who it is?
Much worse than weststandwanabee's multi-quotes are all these people claiming some informative source, when most of them are talking out of their *rses.
Can you please keep the thread on track people
Unfortunately not .Quote:
Originally Posted by scott7_0(Prague)
if the SNP were to get involved in this an assist the YAMS they would defo lose my families vote.Quote:
Originally Posted by monktonharp
Quote:
Originally Posted by Weststandwanab
I seem to recall that you got a bit of a scolding on the Bounce about multi-quoting.
But that was because you DIDN'T use it at first and you were told to do so!
:greengrin
That was you wasn't it?
Seems you just can't please everyone eh!
:tee hee:
You are 100% correct Sir and indeed you cannot.Quote:
Originally Posted by oldbutdim
As a rule, Multi quote is a great tool, but as in everything in this world it's best in moderation and when the quotes are all specific to each other.
As with all rules, there's always an exception and in this case it's the yams..... I just want them 100% deid! No moderation/halfway house for them!
GGTTH
So either way they're getting very little if the spfl decide to advance them what they're due at the end of the season.Quote:
Originally Posted by HFCDaveA
I don't think they have to ring fence the footballing debt - just they might not get their history or play in Europe hahahaQuote:
Originally Posted by lord bunberry
I think it will be a condition that they pay the debts if they are allowed into the bottom league should they be put in the blenderQuote:
Originally Posted by ...WentToMowAnSPL
You're right about it being better if inside info is attributable, but if you do have conacts, and bandy their names around, very quickly you'll find you don't have contacts.Quote:
Originally Posted by keekaboo
From today's Scotsman page 10 for financial guru's on Here does this relate to the frozen shares ?
It is last paragraph from report on the fugitive Romanov.
"Ukio Bankas was declared insolvent, it's operations suspended, and the Russian-born businessmans accounts frozen by the Central bank"
Doesn't relate at all. The assets that are important in HMFC's case are UBIG's shares in HMFC.Quote:
Originally Posted by steviehibsleith
The Scotsman journo who hosted the webchat yesterday promised to ask BDO about them. Still waiting.....
Not necessarily. Increased income does not always result in increased profit (if any profit at all).Quote:
Originally Posted by Weststandwanab
And UKIO's shares in HMFC.Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
There is no report of their having been frozen.Quote:
Originally Posted by desantos0773