Share Transfers Agreed/Cooling off period

[CropleyWasGod]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Agree, but…

“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?

This assumes that the property is actually owned by HMFC. There are doubts.

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.

[Ozyhibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

This assumes that the property is actually owned by HMFC. There are doubts.

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.

[SmashinGlass]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Agree, but…

“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?

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.

I think that's how it goes, as I now no longer work in that industry and have returned to Uni

[CropleyWasGod]

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

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......

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

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.

I think that's how it goes, as I now no longer work in that industry and have returned to Uni

HMRC tried to appoint administrators in Rangers' case.

That said, there probably won't be any administration in this case. It will be straight to liquidation, no matter who pulls the trigger.

[SmashinGlass]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

HMRC tried to appoint administrators in Rangers' case.

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!?

[Leithenhibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

HMRC tried to appoint administrators in Rangers' case.

That said, there probably won't be any administration in this case. It will be straight to liquidation, no matter who pulls the trigger.

And if, they go to receivership, what then??? Can this happen??

[CropleyWasGod]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

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!?

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.

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

And if, they go to receivership, what then??? Can this happen??

Pretty sure it can't. As SG says, the floating charges were created after the legislation changed.

[SmashinGlass]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

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.

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 yams

[ScottB]

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...

[jgl07]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

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.

As for Hearts, administration would seem to be futile. If Vlad can't pay or won't pay, they will struggle to survive Christmas.

[ScottB]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

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.

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...

[theonlywayisup]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

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.

I heard from a Yam that the next meeting takes place on Thursday this week and the bill was between £1m to £3m.

[CropleyWasGod]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

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...

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.

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.

[GoldenEagle]

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

[Hibercelona]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

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?

I usually wouldn't say this about any football club or wish it, but Hearts deserve to die.

[LeithSqualk]

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.

[Seveno]

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.

[GoldenEagle]

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.

[Bighoose]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

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.

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)

[adhibs]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

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.

sounds good. torn between wanting them to die or surviving and suffering, looks i'll be happy either way.

[Saorsa]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

sounds good. torn between wanting them to die or surviving and suffering, looks i'll be happy either way.

nae such dilemma for me, die all the way and I wish they'd hurry up.

[Hibercelona]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

nae such dilemma for me, die all the way and I wish they'd hurry up.

They could never die too soon for me either.

[green glory]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

sounds good. torn between wanting them to die or surviving and suffering, looks i'll be happy either way.

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.

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.

[adhibs]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

nae such dilemma for me, die all the way and I wish they'd hurry up.

i admire your hatred. seeing the misery if they went bust would be priceless, on the other hand so would pumping them constantly for years

[clerriehibs]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

i admire your hatred. seeing the misery if they went bust would be priceless, on the other hand so would pumping them constantly for years

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!!

[#FromTheCapital]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

nae such dilemma for me, die all the way and I wish they'd hurry up.

Agreed!

[Ozyhibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

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!!

Sums it up for me

[lucky]

They are not going to die. They will survive in some format. For me a ****ty SPL yo yo club would be best.

[matty_f]

Is the £8m to get the club, plus take on the debt?

[Jpdhfc]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

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.

As for Hearts, administration would seem to be futile. If Vlad can't pay or won't pay, they will struggle to survive Christmas.

If thy don't make it past Christmas I think il will Believe in sant again