:greengrinQuote:
Originally Posted by Eyrie
Printable View
:greengrinQuote:
Originally Posted by Eyrie
Yup, missed it first time too! Well done sir.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack Hackett
:greengrinQuote:
Originally Posted by Eyrie
:bye:
Oh God..... Massive whoosh moment from me when I read it ..... Soooo glad I didn't reply with what I was going to! :D
Quote:
Originally Posted by eyrie
lol ;)
Where is it going to stop? Hearts are not content with doing the Yam kids out of their Christmas presents (adults have spent all the festive money on shares and cake mix instead of bikes and dolls) but now they are stooping as low as getting their dinner money as well by going around the schools and demanding £1 to have their photo with the big cup. Piggy banks will be next. Time to call Esther Rantzen.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eyrie
The RIP fund raising group seem to be aware of their clubs impending demise.
Judean Peoples FrontQuote:
Originally Posted by cabbageandribs1875
Peoples Front of Judea
Popular Front for the Liberation of Judea
Judean Popular Front
None of whom bake cakes, but they have branches who bake cakes and are currently debating whether to bake any in support of the yams or whether to bake any in support of those who don't support the yams.
What have the Yams ever done for them......
You couldn't make it up - truly Pythonesque.
Well they raised the equivalent of about 4 days work for Zaliukas at their face painting and bouncy castle extravaganza today so that should tide them over until.................................
:faf:
£3,700 is not to be sniffed at. All they need to do is have 11 fun days per day for the next 4 weeks and they will raise the other £1.2 million they desperately need from the share issue. :thumbsup:Quote:
Originally Posted by lyonhibs
:top marksQuote:
Originally Posted by hibs0666
Superb. And the irony is - all it would do is help them survive with assumption big tax case goes away AND they offload high earners in January!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by hibs0666
It seems there is no Big Tax Case for the Hearts anymore. First day of the Tribunal last week their Council said hearts were not going to contest the £ 1.7 million assessment and have now arranged another meeting to discuss the interest and penalties aspects of the case.
This info does not seem to have hit the wires yet, but it came from someone who works at the Tax Tribunal Offices in George Street and I have absolutely no reason to doubt the story.
All the more reason to think Vlad will pull the plug as soon as the kiddies piggy banks are empty and the dinner money spent.
if true, it's remarkable this hasn't gone public!Quote:
Originally Posted by greenginger
Quote:
Originally Posted by clerriehibs
I know, but I dare say Hearts were not going to announce it and the HMRC won't say anything until their full sum due is agreed,by which time Hearts will be toast.
I will try phoning the FTT offices tomorrow for some kind of confirmation.
If true then they are at the end of the road. My rough calculation suggests they should owe £3m minimum if you include interest and penalties.Quote:
Originally Posted by clerriehibs
How many bake sales and tombola's do they need to pay for that?!?!?
This HAS to come out in public this week of all weeks on run up to derby. Even if its a paper story before its official.Quote:
Originally Posted by greenginger
After screwing the fans and their kids of all their cash, I believe that they now want the kids selection boxes donated so they can do a tombola!!! Some very generous parent even donated a top prize of 24 cans of Skol.
Can one of the Photoshop experts on here do a Vlad dressed as Santa climbing down the chimney and stealing the kids Christmas presents.
Maybe even have McGlynn as Rudolph.
Cheers.
The "Big" club still have over 1700 tickets left for Wednesday v Celtic. Looks like they can't find 388,000 of their fans (bearing in mind Celtic will get a whole stand to themselves.)
So much for them all coming out in droves to save their club they obviously couldn't give a friars tuck.
Well I see that people are still joking away in this thread.
But is anything actually happening? Or is it the usual nonsense, with nothing actually ever happening to them? :yawn:
Well you are still making tedious posts so that's something.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hibercelona
Only reason I can think of for Hearts doing this is if HMRC made it a condition of the time extension they got a couple of weeks back. Is this likely?Quote:
Originally Posted by greenginger
Does the figure of £1.7million not include penalties and interest already?Quote:
Originally Posted by Col2
Sorry should have been clear - my £3m estimate is the £1.7m bill plus interest and penalties. Therefore they would have overall black hole of £5m, £600k of which they have raised through share thing and bake sales.Quote:
Originally Posted by peterdouglas
should i even bother going for my tickets today?Quote:
Originally Posted by Col2
Does "not contesting" mean that they intend to pay it?
Maybe. Maybe that they did not have money to pay their lawyers. It's hard to work out their game plan. I'm not even sure they have one.Quote:
Originally Posted by s.a.m
Come on, this is hearts we're talking about. "Not contesting" more than likely means they can't afford to pay the legal fees involved with contesting. Fwiw I'll be waiting to see something a bit more reliable than a rumour on an Internet forum before I believe this latest twist, no disrespect to the person who posted it though.Quote:
Originally Posted by s.a.m
If they are not appealing the tax then for me there is no doubt administration / liquidation is their plan.
Stupid muppets have just gave Romanov all their Xmas money too!!
True enough, but I've decided to believe it anyway as it's putting a smile on my face on a Monday morning.Quote:
Originally Posted by #FromTheCapital
Assuming that the info is correct (i.e. they're not contesting the case),will the amount be payable immediately?
In theory, yes. In theory, it was payable months ago.Quote:
Originally Posted by matty_f
However, if the story about discussing the interest and penalties is correct, HMRC may hang fire for the moment. It's common for there to be a negotiation over the penalty part of a settlement. In that case, once the penalties are agreed, there is normally a 30 day period for payment.
If that story is not true, then HMRC can demand all of the settlement now.
What's tedious is all the hype about them being close to death, yet no matter how close to death we make them out to be, they never actually come close to dying.Quote:
Originally Posted by flash
Is there anybody on here who genuinely knows whats going on over at the pink pishpot? Or is it all just drivel?
I want to know the facts of whats actually going on over there. But this thread just seems to be full of jokes, without any indication of whats actually going on.
That's quite a slur on those of us who have a handle on what's going on. We don't know the full facts, of course, but those of us with some knowledge of business and HMRC can interpret what does sneak into the public domain.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hibercelona
Using the Rangers experience as an example, we collectively were always pretty close to the truth. Indeed, sometimes I thought that MSM was getting some of its info from us. :greengrin
In my opinion they are close to death now.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hibercelona
If you don't want tedious jokes and decimation about their demise this is not the place for you.
Fact is that there is very little transparency from Lithuania about Hearts so all we can go on is what's happening here. They have admitted they need £2m to finish the season. It's unlikely they will raise that by the end of the share issue in 3 weeks. They also have a further £3m bill coming from HMRC.
Surely that enough of a basis for a little harmful speculation about them?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hibercelona
I don't think it was a hibs.netter that posted on hmfc website that the game v. St midden might be theur last. So we're not making out anything - we're just enjoying the ride!
Not trying to have a go at people. But its just difficult to get the facts straight, when you know theres going to be bias spin on anything that is said on here.
Are they really as close to death as we're making out on here? Or are we just getting a little ahead of ourselves?
Which we have a tendency to do from time to time. :wink:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hibercelona
Read roamingoff's lips - "we're donald ducked - give me all your money and your kids' too"
I might be missing something but given that the vast majority of Hertz debt is owed to Vladmir Romanov's bank, why is he going to let them go into administration and thus will lose control? Clearly he doesn't want to provide them with the cashflow to survive so he gets the mug punter to do that by selling sharesto him in an insolvent company which he is valuing at £20m
If he can't get his hands on enough cash to pay the bills, then he has no choice in the matter.Quote:
Originally Posted by allezsauzee
Don't think it was the actual kids he was after? Or was it? Jambo b******s.Quote:
Originally Posted by clerriehibs
=-OQuote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
There is an apostrophe there :-P
I can just imagine Vlad in his child catcher from Chitty Chitty Bang Bang costume dancing around Gorgie with his lollipops.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
Is there any evidence that Vlad is short of the necessary cash if the yams had told him to bolt?
Also unlikely to see administration at all. As even one Yam on kickback said - paraphrasing here -' £5M to Romanov in cash now, is probably worth more than £20M on paper' smart money says straight to liquidation.Quote:
Originally Posted by allezsauzee
We can speculate as to why Romanov is no longer funding them, be it loss of interest or something more sinister i.e he no longer has a pot to piss in which the performance of his other companies seem to suggest or maybe something else entirely. However, he is no longer funding them and considering their general financial maladministration it is right to expect them to go pop sooner rather than later, at the minute they are not able to operate without external funding. Share money and bake sales can only keep them going for so long....the tax man cometh.
Quote:
Originally Posted by allezsauzee
The share prices in ukio bankas have taken a major nosedive in the last month or 2, someone will be able to post a link to the graph showing this
Quote:
Originally Posted by #FromTheCapital
:wink: Just ask ..... This is the last month and down a whopping %25
http://www.nasdaqomxbaltic.com/marke...=11&end_y=2012
I thought that the debt was owed to UBIG not UKIAS Bank (which Romanov only had a minority shareholding). I think it is more a case of can't pay than won't pay.Quote:
Originally Posted by allezsauzee
Regarding selling shares in an insolvent company, that is the reason why none of the credit card companies will process payments for share applications. They fear that the disgruntled punters will come after them for a refund of the money paid.
Romanov (taken from Wikipedia)
He is chairman of UBIG Investments which is the majority shareholder in Scottish Premier League football club Hearts and Lithuanian Basketball League club Žalgiris. He also controls the Lithuanian club FBK Kaunas
Romanov was amongst those who founded Ūkio bankas, which was the first private bank to be founded in Lithuania. Romanov still has a substantial stake in the bank through his private investment group UBIG.
I have also found that it was Ukio bankas that setup the investment group UBIG (see link).
http://www.bib.ba/eng/?page=103
So... If he “has a substantial stake in the bank through his private investment group UBIG” (or vice versa) and the bank is getting it tight, does it follow that UBIG are getting it tight? Also as the chairman of UBIG, does it also follow that he will be getting it tight (especially as all his investments in Edinburgh have fallen flat on their face (property and sport))?
It seems to me that UBIG and Ukio are so intertwined that it would be difficult to see a gap. Either way they are all ****’ed
Tumescent.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pedantic_Hibee
:greengrin At my age I am usually in detumescence
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pedantic_Hibee
Dinnae say that or you’ll have Geldof and Bono helpin them out.
Good though, and correct.:thumbsup:
http://www.nasdaqomxbaltic.com/marke...s&tab=securityQuote:
Originally Posted by gogse
I think that is all a bit out of date. Vlad owns 65% of the bank personally, UBIG have a very small holding in the Bank, if any.
Quote:
Originally Posted by greenginger
UBIG stands for “Ūkio banko investicinė grupė “ Ukio Banko Investment Group?
So, is it not the case that UBIG are the investment branch of UKIO, rather than UBIG having shares in UKIO?
:dunno:
I agree which is why he would go straight to liquidation I would have thought. The problem for me, well perhaps for the Yams actually, is he has just received £600k in sterling (much of it in cash apparently) what is in it for him to hand that over in tax? He will never get that amount again. He also has saved a months wages with the deferment. So is this not the perfect time to liquidate? People talk about him losing control of his key earning vehicle but has he not in reality already done so? Maybe the finance boys like CWG or Cav can explain when the best time to bail out of a situation like is if you are a crook.Quote:
Originally Posted by allezsauzee
An absolute must read.
http://sport.stv.tv/football/clubs/h...necastle-club/
Quote:
Originally Posted by gogse
Pretty good snapshot and the journalism lacks the usual "riddy" cringe factor from STV of having the word "Scottish" attached to load of drivel passing as news.
Vague on this bit In the most recent company accounts (for the period to June 30, 2011) Hearts owed UBIG £22.4m. The accounts state that UBIG has confirmed it will not seek repayment of this in the foreseeable future.
I thought that position was being reconsidered July 2013 which is very much the foreseeable future.
Not for the Yams it isn't. :wink:Quote:
Originally Posted by Kato
Agree, but…Quote:
Originally Posted by Kato
“UBIG has a standard security charge over Tynecastle Stadium and the land around it. This means UBIG has the power to sell the stadium to recoup debts it is owed.”
And this bit is interesting...
“UBIG holds a floating charge over these assets, and any others that may come into the club’s possession. This floating charge exists until a point at which the company is wound up or enters into receivership. At that point the assets are ‘crystallised’ and become the possession of UBIG.”
Is it the case that if Hearts go into receivership, UBIG can sell the stadium and assets to recover their investment?
Yes.Quote:
Originally Posted by gogse
This assumes that the property is actually owned by HMFC. There are doubts.Quote:
Originally Posted by gogse
Btw, I don't think he is right that the players become the property of UBIG should they appoint a receiver. Their contracts remain the property of HMFC until such times as the company goes into liquidation, at which point they revert to the SFA. It's a small point, but it could be important.
He is also wrong about the league membership transferring to UBIG. It is non transferrable.Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
Being pedantic, but the terminology is poor. Hearts cannot go into Receivership as all of the Floating Charges are registered subsequent to 2002 (I'm positive that's when new legislation came in), meaning that it would be Administration. Believe me, there's quite a difference between the two. Basically, HMRC won't go for Administration, they tend to go straight for Liquidation so, realistically, the only people who could call in Administrators would be UBIG. In Administration, the assets fall under the remit of the Administrator to sell. Whilst UBIG would have the interest in the assets, the Administrator has far wider powers.Quote:
Originally Posted by gogse
I think that's how it goes, as I now no longer work in that industry and have returned to Uni :thumbsup:
Yup, all in all pretty crap journalism. I'm not surprised, since I have had the knives out for STV ever since they accused Rangers of deducting VAT from wages:rolleyes:
However, I have given them the chance to redeem themselves. I have suggested that the stadium may not be owned by HMFC, and that it wouldn't take much to find that out. We shall see......
HMRC tried to appoint administrators in Rangers' case.Quote:
Originally Posted by SmashinGlass
That said, there probably won't be any administration in this case. It will be straight to liquidation, no matter who pulls the trigger.
That's a pretty good point. Not sure why though, I know from previous experience of processing their petitions that they generally go for Liquidation. I cannot see in any circumstances the viability of trading HMFC through an Admin. Maybe in Rangers' case they were convinced that it was possible. Who knows!?:confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
And if, they go to receivership, what then??? Can this happen??
In RFC's case, it was to try and retain some sort of control over the process. They had previous dealings with Craig Whyte, and didn't want him to appoint someone who might be sympathetic to his plans.Quote:
Originally Posted by SmashinGlass
Pretty sure it can't. As SG says, the floating charges were created after the legislation changed.Quote:
Originally Posted by LeithenHibby
I remember that now, yeah. In allowing Whyte to appoint Duff and Duffer, that kind of backfired on them a bit. Likely a case of Once bitten, twice shy with the yamsQuote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
Am I right in saying that in Rangers case, the Taxman went for administration because the level of debt at the point (big tax case excluded at the time) Rangers would have been capable of trading their way out of the mess? Or might have raised some good funds through a sale.
Hearts on the other hand clearly have no capability to trade out of their mess, nor is the club or its assets worth much either...
Rangers were not capable of trading their way out of their situation regardless of the outcome of the BTC. HMRC had enough of the debt to block a CVA. Rangers were doomed. Craig Whyte obviously thought differently and was hoping that a CVA could be forced through so there was a case for administration to be given a chance.Quote:
Originally Posted by ScottB
As for Hearts, administration would seem to be futile. If Vlad can't pay or won't pay, they will struggle to survive Christmas.
But when Whyte pulled the trigger HMRC were trying to put them into admin too, not liquidation as they have always tried with Hearts. What's the reason for that then other than them thinking more money could be extracted from a Rangers allowed to stagger on? In Hearts case to me it seems like they favour liquidation to prevent them from running up further bills, having given up ever seeing the money...Quote:
Originally Posted by jgl07
I heard from a Yam that the next meeting takes place on Thursday this week and the bill was between £1m to £3m.Quote:
Originally Posted by greenginger
HMRC have threatened HMFC with winding-up on numerous occasions and, thus far, have always got their cash. They also know that there is no chance of getting any cash once HMFC stop trading, and have therefore tried to minimise the loss. In that respect, their strategy has worked.Quote:
Originally Posted by ScottB
In RFC's case, there was a greater chance of the company continuing to trade, hence more chance of getting some cash out of an administration.
Q&A on hearts site now.
No where near getting a buyer
Only half way to meeting tax and wages due this year
Pleads for fans to continue to buy shares
Might sell Hearts but rent back stadium
Nothing optimistic there at all for hearts fans imo
Ain't it wonderful? :tee hee:Quote:
Originally Posted by GoldenEagle
I usually wouldn't say this about any football club or wish it, but Hearts deserve to die. :agree:
So once the bairns piggy banks are empty, Vlad pulls the plug, they have no cash, vlad will rent them the stadium and I assume expect the debt to be repaid.
If they don't die then they face a bleak future. If a buyer has to pay for the rent of the stadium as well as pay off the debt, they will be left with the lowest player budget in the SPL. There will be nothing left for the player academy at Riccarton.
Even then, it still doesnt address the problem of the crumbling main stand.
Mark Donaldson quoted via Twitter as saying that asking price is £8m for the club but UBIG keep stadium and rent back to Hearts FC.
Cant see anyone going for that unless you get some willing to burn £10M immediately.Quote:
Originally Posted by GoldenEagle
No stadium = No Assets = No bank going to lend them any cash (Unless that Bank is based in Lithuania and charges higher interest than Wonga)
sounds good. torn between wanting them to die or surviving and suffering, looks i'll be happy either way.Quote:
Originally Posted by GoldenEagle
nae such dilemma for me, die all the way and I wish they'd hurry up.Quote:
Originally Posted by Green E's
:agree:Quote:
Originally Posted by Desperate Dan
They could never die too soon for me either.
Have to admit, being the softie I am. I don't want them to die. If would be a cruel blow to many people in Edinburgh, and very unfortunate if it came to pass.Quote:
Originally Posted by Green E's
A future of derby after derby of maroon clad bairns sobbing themselves to sleep after every encounter with Hibs would be the kindest outcome. Jambo babies born into a world that can only hold a lifetime of green and white induced suffering.
But as I said I'm just a big softie.
i admire your hatred. seeing the misery if they went bust would be priceless, on the other hand so would pumping them constantly for yearsQuote:
Originally Posted by Desperate Dan
They'd be kicking about in the lower divisions. We'd never play them. Where's the joy in that? Let them die, i say. One city one team!!Quote:
Originally Posted by Green E's
:faf:Quote:
Originally Posted by Desperate Dan
:top marks
Agreed!
Sums it up for meQuote:
Originally Posted by clerriehibs
They are not going to die. They will survive in some format. For me a ****ty SPL yo yo club would be best.
Is the £8m to get the club, plus take on the debt?
If thy don't make it past Christmas I think il will Believe in sant againQuote:
Originally Posted by jgl07
Mark Donaldson said on twitter he think that is just for the club. Whoever takes it over would also have to service the debt to Romanov and pay him rent.Quote:
Originally Posted by matty_f
What a guy.
:greengrin
Untill land prices increase :)Quote:
Originally Posted by GoldenEagle
Thing is, that isn't even unreasonable.Quote:
Originally Posted by Part/Time Supporter
The reality of Hearts position now should really be hitting home to supporters instead of fantasies like fan ownership of the club. Most buyer's plans so far have hinged on massive debt forgiveness from Romanov but why the hell should he?
He sits back, withdraws funding and unless they can live within their means or find a buyer he will simply let some form of insolvency event take care of matters.
My guess is that the £8m would be to pay off all current debts (including TAX liabilities). The new owner would then own the club (name, players, history, etc.), but that UBIG/UKIO/Romanov take control of the assets and rent the stadium back.Quote:
Originally Posted by matty_f
Similar to the Rangers situation, only nearly twice the cost and with no assets .. although you would avoid liquidation and having to start in Div. 3 as a NewCo.
3 Are UBIG willing to write off all of the debt or some of the debt in order to do a deal?
It depends on the deal. If the buyer is willing to get the club for nothing like Foundation of Hearts has tried, then there should be no expectation of the debt being written off. UBIG has acquired the club with a similar amount of debt, similar financial situation by paying a consideration for the shares.
http://www.scotsman.com/edinburgh-ev...club-1-2661677
I myself wrestle with that confounded dilemma every day, and it never fails to excite or amuse.Quote:
Originally Posted by Green E's
Just saw the thing on the EEN site, £8m plus take on £22m of debt that's already been shown to be practically unservicable.Quote:
Originally Posted by Part/Time Supporter
Dream on!
Quote:
Originally Posted by matty_f
:brokenyam:
:lolyam:
:fenlon
haha nobody in their right mind would do that! buy something for 8 million but be saddled with £22million of debt in the process?Quote:
Originally Posted by matty_f
For a company that makes a 2 million a year loss.Quote:
Originally Posted by CraigHibee
****ing brilliant.