Printable View
If the accounts are properly prepared (and OSCR are hot on that.... form before substance, it seems :rolleyes:), they will tell you where in Government the funds came from.Quote:
Originally Posted by PatHead
Give me a shout if you want me to look at them.
What's the bets that the £30k deficit is largely due to the money owed by hmfc?Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
Have fired off the following email to Mrs Miller. Hope it shakes her enough to encourage her to look at the file again. Once again I will let you see her response. (Sydney eat your heart out for that efficiency!) "Thank you for your reply. I must admit I do find it surprising that a loan to a Limited Company is not against the constitution of the charity or of interest to the regulator. I intend to take this further and would be grateful if you could provide me with a copy of the charities constitution and a copy of their last set of accounts. On receipt of this information I intend to contact my MSP and would therefore appreciate an early reply.Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
If you do not have this information can you advise me where to get this information"
had a look at the site, and all the info/guff about how good the people running it are. it makes a mockery of this operation when they fob off genuine enquiries like the ones made by Pathead. I cant understand, how the charity based in Gorgie (tynie fitba' grund) is still in operation, as the governing body states that the are "active" and yet they and whoever is running the show at tynie, has slipped the money off to the side to assist operations in the financial mess that is hmfc. we all put money into various boxes, direct debits etc over the term of our lifetime in good faith, if it's to a bona fide "charity". this has made my mind up that I will never contribute again.Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
We are as one.Quote:
Originally Posted by rcarter1
Good for you PatHead, The Rangers charity were exonerated after they clearly breached proper standards of governance.Quote:
Originally Posted by PatHead
If it is true that this charity was complicit in receiving tax payer money and then passing it to a private business then that would be a very serious issue.
The internal civil service enquiry would have to go to the top of government.
Perhaps that it why Ms Miller is keen on brevity and reluctant to investigate.
Good luck with your enquiries, there is a paradigm shift occurring in Scotland. The future is Green.
So long as they are liquidated, then none of this stuff will matter.
On the contrary, if the governance of the charity is found wanting, the Trustees might have a problem.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
...only if its Constitution expressly forbade it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hibeesforever
Most charities have a catch-all clause in their constitution which enables them to "advance/loan/grant any monies.... in pursuit of their objectives/for any purpose" etc etc. I suspect that that will be the case here.
<br>Quote:
Originally Posted by Hibeesforever
<br>A good line of inquiry would be to ask the trustees if they had approved the loan arrangement to HOMFC<br>
( common factor here being David Southern being CEO or chairman of both organisations )<br>I think the Politicos like Gillian Tee, Brian Fallon and Jim Panton will dump on Southern if they were not in the loop.<br>Also ,I see the Heritage Lottery Fund are a sponsor and they are usually on the ball if there is a suggestion of misuse of funds in anything they contribute to, so an inquiry there might produce a response.<br>FWIW I think there will be a clause in the Big Hearts Trust allowing them to lend surplus funds to organisations at appropriate interest rates to generate income for the Trust, but lending to an organisation known to be insolvent is a different thing all together.<br>Finally, I wonder how much cash is skimmed in way of expenses, fees, leases, and the rest by HOMFC and the trustees ? these people seldom give their time for nowt.
Barry Anderson @BarryAnderson_8 49m Foundation of Hearts reject an offer from Angelo Massone to join forces in the battle for control of #HMFC. Full story in today's EN.
The big Liquidation party cannae be far away now :cb
That's 2 offers from other bidders they've knocked back now, not sure if that's good news or bad newsQuote:
Originally Posted by BarneyK
Hearts fans are taking this as a positive sign that FoH don't need his cash and have the funds in place to make a successful bid themselves.Quote:
Originally Posted by BarneyK
I wonder who's correct. :greengrin
You can't go into bed with him - he's never produced any money and will just rip everybody off! Think the liquidation party is nearing - FOH Hearts nowhere near what Ukio are looking for which must be higher than the fictional £5m the EN/Barry Anderson and others are throwing around. If FOH were millions short - how can they make that up with money upfront on the tabel now?Quote:
Originally Posted by #FromTheCapital
Could that be because both of those offers included selling the ground?Quote:
Originally Posted by #FromTheCapital
Looking at it another way, you've got to imagine that Massone is now pretty much out of the running if he's trying to make deals to get in with FOH?
They're stupid enough to believe anything is a positive sign. It's the Yam way, just as its the Hun way.Quote:
Originally Posted by YehButNoBut
They think they're untouchable hence why they're sleepwalking to their doom.
I suspect that it's knocked back because it would mean FoH having to pass control over to the person/consortium that provided the majority of the funding.Quote:
Originally Posted by YehButNoBut
Massone will simply be looking for FoH to provide a little bit more capital and the ongoing funding but keeping overall control, and probably using the emotional "or your club will die" as the alternative. Unfortunately (or fortunately) FoH will have to knock it back because it goes against the promise of "fan control" that the direct debits were set up for (and not because they have sufficient funds).
The Rangers thing has been re opened after a heap of pressure from Celtic fans and it would appear he OSCR are a bit rattled.
Whether what happened (at Sevco and Hearts) is legal (it probably is) there is little doubt that those that contribute to these worthy causes do not intend their cash to be subsidising a loss making football team, otherwise they would have made the contribution directly, as has subsequently been the case at both clubs. I would imagine the advertising blurb for both charities will not mention that this happens.
Lets keep at them though.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hibeesforever
This is exactly what I would have said based on the info I have about the FOH bid. Every time BDO/UKIO asks them to raise their bid they are needing to borrow more money. I'm led to believe this isn't them bidding low expecting to be higher, FOH are going all in every time because the way they see it, they've nothing to lose. If it fails they just give the money back. They are hamstrung by the terms of the direct debits and the fact pledges aren't rising in any significant fashion. They can't borrow too much because they've agreed to pay it back fairly promptly and they would be saddling the club with almost as much debt as it had before.Quote:
Originally Posted by StevieC
Liquidation is still the most likely outcome but BDO has every intention at the moment of stringing this out for as long as possible.
Would the debt burden be on the club ? I thought it would be repaid to individual(s) from the FoH pledges as they would be unlikely to get a credit line from anywhere.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bajillions
It would, legally, be on the club.Quote:
Originally Posted by Treadstone
The pledges are paid to the club, and thence to the lenders.
How does this work ? The individual(s) front up the money, give to FoH who bid for club and if successful immediately put the debt on the club ?Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
Not quite.Quote:
Originally Posted by Treadstone
The plan, as I understand it, is:-
FOH's backer (who may or may not be Anne Budge) is paying for the club up-front.
The pledges are designed to pay that lending back, eventually. However, for this season, they will be used to pay for the running costs, and the £500k football debt.
From next season on, they will start to repay the funder.
:cb
That's what i thought the plan was. Why then does the debt have to go to the football club ? Some sort of security ?Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
Because the debt is being used specifically to buy the football club & the repayments are coming from the earnings of the football club.Quote:
Originally Posted by Treadstone
As I understand it, FoH have said their pledges amount to £3.75 million to fund the club for the next 3 years.Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
Assuming £1.25 million is to fill in the black hole left through the disappearance of 7,000 worth of seasons for the season just underway, that means they are due to pay back a total of £2.5 million over the next two seasons to the financial backer? Is that right?
Presumably, that includes an amount for interest and so the bid by FoH must be around £2 million-ish?
If so, and going on what's been said here, that can't be anywhere near acceptable to the secured creditor.
Plus, of course, there is the football debt to take care of meaning the capital funding available to acquire the club + assets must be even lower still.
Sounds like an owe it to themselves kind of deal! Go into admin because you have no cash, get sold and then club assumes the sum used to buy the club as debt. I know what you and CWG are saying but it seems there isn't a lot of independence attached to the offers if this is how it plays out.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bajillions
Although to be honest if I was ponying up I would want some guarantee.
My understanding is that pledges are only supposed to be used to fund the business for the rest of the 2013-14 season. After that the club will be able to trade "normally" at which point the repayments on the money that was used to secure the club will start. Every penny that FOH has available to them as of this moment is borrowed, they cannot start taking pledges until they have control of Hearts. The more they borrow to buy Hearts, the bigger the amount they have to pay back.Quote:
Originally Posted by PapillonVert
OK, so FoH are basically trying to get hold of the club on the cheap and are hoping Micawberishly that something (i.e. enough funds to run the show and pay back the borrowings) will turn up. Why would anyone want to lend if the ability to repay isn't very clear?Quote:
Originally Posted by Bajillions
Sounds like they haven't learned their lesson at all.
BTW, and apropos of on-going costs, will BDO have to pay the Police bill for Sunday?
All sounds a bit like one of those Roman banquets where they all stuffed their faces and then made themselves sick so they could start all over again.Quote:
Originally Posted by Treadstone
They used to have a room set aside especially for the purpose - called the Vomitorium - maybe that should be the new name for Tynie. :greengrin Although historians nowadays dispute whether there ever was such a room. No disputing possible with regard to Edinburgh's Disgrace, aka HMFC.
All of which bears little resemblance as to how the initial sell of the pledge front was presented, and in fact FoH have never been "open and transparent" in this area at all.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bajillions