Share Transfers Agreed/Cooling off period

***Spike Mandela*** · 24-05-2013 03:08 PM

Originally Posted by YehButNo But

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

They really live in dream land don't they and the Yam frothers just lap it up.

http://www.teamtalk.com/hearts/87318...top-three-spot

Fedotovas eyes top-three spot

Hearts director Sergejus Fedotovas has targeted a top-three finish next season - despite the threat of a 15-point deduction.

Majority shareholder UBIG last week indicated its insolvency and Hearts could face Scottish Premier League punishment if that declaration is ratified in the Lithuanian courts in the coming weeks.

Hearts were already cutting back on wage costs for the second year running after finishing 10th in the SPL but Fedotovas expects major improvement under Gary Locke, who replaced John McGlynn as manager in March.

Fedotovas told Hearts TV: "I think we really need to be targeting at least the top-three places.

"Obviously this will be pretty much a new team so it will be important how Gary will be able to glue new faces into a good team and deliver results.

"I believe it's not the first time it has happened in football. Reconstruction of a football team happens a lot everywhere and we are viewing it positively.

"Having in mind the result we had last season, this is really painful to speak about it, but we are looking to radically improve this situation next season."

Hearts have released Mehdi Taouil, Danny Grainger, Darren Barr, Gordon Smith and Fraser Mullen from their squad but Fedotovas has promised replacements.

"We are clearing up in order for new people to come in who can hopefully improve the squad and make it better in terms of results from last season," he said.

"The faces are identified and people are working to get the negotiations right and get the deals done.

"We are very hopeful we will be able to start announcing people coming in and be ready for the next season."

It's a misquote. What he means is if they get liquidated he can see no reason why they can't finish top 3 in Div 3.

**Andy74** · 24-05-2013 03:11 PM

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

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

It wasn't voted down, though. The absentee shareholders voted him in, presumably by proxy.

Add this to their list of things they don't understand, how voting at an AGM works. They actually though a handful of token shareholders could have an impact on a vote?

**Treadstone** · 24-05-2013 03:21 PM

Originally Posted by Andy74

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

Add this to their list of things they don't understand, how voting at an AGM works. They actually though a handful of token shareholders could have an impact on a vote?

Or believe that the power player would listen to the floor.

***grunt*** · 24-05-2013 03:35 PM

Originally Posted by Treadstone

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

I assume there is a growing number of us thinking that the £10m loan is now unsecured as to give them the power to hold all the voting aces in a CVA. Please tell me i am wrong.

Originally Posted by Caversham Green

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

My best guess now is that it's not secured. As you say, £10m unsecured debt due to UBIG would give them the casting vote in a CVA so it is potentially important if HoMFC themselves go into administration - they could actually come out of it again.

Originally Posted by JeMeSouviens

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

Where "them" = the Lithquidators. Not necessarily going to be Yam-favourable.

I think Cav has it right here (doesn't he always) - the "them" is the creditors, not the liquidators. If UBIG now have a £10m unsecured loan due from HMFC, that makes them the majority creditor capable of voting in any potential CVA for HMFC, and means they can vote to approve a CVA put forward. Meaning that it is now feasible that HMFC could go into administration and come out the other side via a CVA. This must have been the objective of the recent loan movements.

Is this not a major game changer, Cav?

**Treadstone** · 24-05-2013 03:44 PM

Originally Posted by grunt

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

I think Cav has it right here (doesn't he always) - the "them" is the creditors, not the liquidators. If UBIG now have a £10m unsecured loan due from HMFC, that makes them the majority creditor capable of voting in any potential CVA for HMFC, and means they can vote to approve a CVA put forward. Meaning that it is now feasible that HMFC could go into administration and come out the other side via a CVA. This must have been the objective of the recent loan movements.

Is this not a major game changer, Cav?

As JeMeSouviens says, the 'them' is likely to be the liquidators and not UBIG themselves.

***CropleyWasGod*** · 24-05-2013 03:45 PM

Originally Posted by grunt

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

I think Cav has it right here (doesn't he always) - the "them" is the creditors, not the liquidators. If UBIG now have a £10m unsecured loan due from HMFC, that makes them the majority creditor capable of voting in any potential CVA for HMFC, and means they can vote to approve a CVA put forward. Meaning that it is now feasible that HMFC could go into administration and come out the other side via a CVA. This must have been the objective of the recent loan movements.

Is this not a major game changer, Cav?

It is and it isn't.

Whilst it is theoretically possible for a CVA to take place, an administrator will take a look at the reality of the situation..... ie one major asset, which is pledged to the secured creditor... and say "there is nothing here for the ordinary creditors, so it's as well going into liquidation."

The only potential way round that is if the sale of the ground realises more than the UKIO debt, in which case there IS a dividend to ordinary creditors. However, unless the sale of the ground is to one of these consortia, they won't be playing at Tynie.

***Spike Mandela*** · 24-05-2013 03:46 PM

Originally Posted by grunt

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

I think Cav has it right here (doesn't he always) - the "them" is the creditors, not the liquidators. If UBIG now have a £10m unsecured loan due from HMFC, that makes them the majority creditor capable of voting in any potential CVA for HMFC, and means they can vote to approve a CVA put forward. Meaning that it is now feasible that HMFC could go into administration and come out the other side via a CVA. This must have been the objective of the recent loan movements.

Is this not a major game changer, Cav?

Not some financial shenanigans from board members prior to resignig en masse, surely not

corrupt to the core.

**~~Sanger~~** · 24-05-2013 03:59 PM

Originally Posted by grunt

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

I think Cav has it right here (doesn't he always) - the "them" is the creditors, not the liquidators. If UBIG now have a £10m unsecured loan due from HMFC, that makes them the majority creditor capable of voting in any potential CVA for HMFC, and means they can vote to approve a CVA put forward. Meaning that it is now feasible that HMFC could go into administration and come out the other side via a CVA. This must have been the objective of the recent loan movements.

Is this not a major game changer, Cav?

They would not have moved loan to UB and given Tynecastle as security in order to have a cva as it takes the only asset worth anything out of the equation. Ukio Bankas realised UBIG insolvent and unable to pay any loans back so getting as much security on assets of companies UBIG lent money on to. Ukio Bankas went insolvent/bankrupt because of 1.6 trillion litas of bad loans made to Romanov companies. This would have all been carried out via UBIG. The 79% of Hearts shares held by Ukio Bankas are a claim against the £53.6 (68.6 -15) million lent to UBIG that was lent on to/forgiven to Hearts ( see my previous posts to see how £68.6m is arrived at). UKio Bankas administrator will be the largest creditor in any CVA. Any action would be suspended on appeal from the UB administrators because of the pending bankruptcy of UB/UBIG if UBIG tried to play a fast one.

***lapsedhibee*** · 24-05-2013 04:52 PM

Originally Posted by desantos0773

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

They would not have moved loan to UB and given Tynecastle as security in order to have a cva as it takes the only asset worth anything out of the equation. Ukio Bankas realised UBIG insolvent and unable to pay any loans back so getting as much security on assets of companies UBIG lent money on to. Ukio Bankas went insolvent/bankrupt because of 1.6 trillion litas of bad loans made to Romanov companies. This would have all been carried out via UBIG. The 79% of Hearts shares held by Ukio Bankas are a claim against the £53.6 (68.6 -15) million lent to UBIG that was lent on to/forgiven to Hearts ( see my previous posts to see how £68.6m is arrived at). UKio Bankas administrator will be the largest creditor in any CVA. Any action would be suspended on appeal from the UB administrators because of the pending bankruptcy of UB/UBIG if UBIG tried to play a fast one.

Would it in reality, though? Is it not a fact universally acknowledged that The Huns sold The Big House & Murray Park for a laughably small amount to The The Huns, without (so far) any comeback? When are the supposed controls over this sort of abuse going to come into play, and are the Lith authorities any more assiduous than the Scotch authorities when fast ones are played?

**~~Sanger~~** · 24-05-2013 04:55 PM

Originally Posted by lapsedhibee

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

Would it in reality, though? Is it not a fact universally acknowledged that The Huns sold The Big House & Murray Park for a laughably small amount to The The Huns, without (so far) any comeback? When are the supposed controls over this sort of abuse going to come into play, and are the Lith authorities any more assiduous than the Scotch authorities when fast ones are played?

Ukio Bankas a secured creditor of Hearts and UBIG. No secured creditor at the Huns.

**~~hibs0666~~** · 24-05-2013 05:02 PM

Originally Posted by lapsedhibee

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

Would it in reality, though? Is it not a fact universally acknowledged that The Huns sold The Big House & Murray Park for a laughably small amount to The The Huns, without (so far) any comeback? When are the supposed controls over this sort of abuse going to come into play, and are the Lith authorities any more assiduous than the Scotch authorities when fast ones are played?

UBIG assets are frozen in order to stop Vlad pulling a fast one.

**Gus Fring** · 24-05-2013 05:31 PM

Originally Posted by hibs0666

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

UBIG assets are frozen in order to stop Vlad pulling a fast one.

The media repeatedly gives 0 mention of this. There are many many hurdles in place for a buyout of Hearts that were not present in the Sevco saga. The big differences are the secured debt, frozen assets and that the Seller, Buyer and Administrator are highly unlikely to be working in cahoots.

***semaj64*** · 24-05-2013 05:31 PM

Originally Posted by gogsy23

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

I believe its worth very little due to the fact it sits next to the distillery and chemical plant and housing permision would not get granted.

So my Flats or Houses bid is devalued with just have to disguise it as Fans Of Hearts and see how much I can raise

***Caversham Green*** · 24-05-2013 05:55 PM

Originally Posted by grunt

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

I think Cav has it right here (doesn't he always) - the "them" is the creditors, not the liquidators. If UBIG now have a £10m unsecured loan due from HMFC, that makes them the majority creditor capable of voting in any potential CVA for HMFC, and means they can vote to approve a CVA put forward. Meaning that it is now feasible that HMFC could go into administration and come out the other side via a CVA. This must have been the objective of the recent loan movements.

Is this not a major game changer, Cav?

I don't think the loan moves were done for that purpose, but it does look like the UBIG loan is unsecured now. I think the intention behind the debt shifting was to artificially prop up Ukio's balance sheet in a last-ditch effort to postpone the inevitable insolvency until an escape plan could be formulated. That escape plan appears to have involved HoMFC remaining solvent - again by artificial means. In truth, I think they've made an almighty mess of the whole thing.

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

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

It is and it isn't.

Whilst it is theoretically possible for a CVA to take place, an administrator will take a look at the reality of the situation..... ie one major asset, which is pledged to the secured creditor... and say "there is nothing here for the ordinary creditors, so it's as well going into liquidation."

The only potential way round that is if the sale of the ground realises more than the UKIO debt, in which case there IS a dividend to ordinary creditors. However, unless the sale of the ground is to one of these consortia, they won't be playing at Tynie.

One way they could conceivably exit administration is if a new buyer paid sufficient money into the administration fund to make a CVA acceptable to UBIG's administrator. That wouldn't clear the Ukio debt though and the new buyer could still be left with the problem of finding £15m in two years unless they could also buy the security from Ukio's administrator.

Not cheap, not what any of the prospective buyers claim to want and HoMFC would still suffer at least one points penalty, but it could happen.

***CropleyWasGod*** · 24-05-2013 05:56 PM

Originally Posted by desantos0773

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

They would not have moved loan to UB and given Tynecastle as security in order to have a cva as it takes the only asset worth anything out of the equation. Ukio Bankas realised UBIG insolvent and unable to pay any loans back so getting as much security on assets of companies UBIG lent money on to. Ukio Bankas went insolvent/bankrupt because of 1.6 trillion litas of bad loans made to Romanov companies. This would have all been carried out via UBIG. The 79% of Hearts shares held by Ukio Bankas are a claim against the £53.6 (68.6 -15) million lent to UBIG that was lent on to/forgiven to Hearts ( see my previous posts to see how £68.6m is arrived at). UKio Bankas administrator will be the largest creditor in any CVA. Any action would be suspended on appeal from the UB administrators because of the pending bankruptcy of UB/UBIG if UBIG tried to play a fast one.

They would be a creditor in a CVA only to the extent of the unsecured part of the debt, though. Given that the major asset would be the subject of their security, I doubt that a CVA would have any merit. Unless the sale of Tynie provided a larger sum than the £10m security, there would next to nothing available for the CVA.

**~~clerriehibs~~** · 24-05-2013 07:58 PM

Originally Posted by lapsedhibee

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

Would it in reality, though? Is it not a fact universally acknowledged that The Huns sold The Big House & Murray Park for a laughably small amount to The The Huns, without (so far) any comeback? When are the supposed controls over this sort of abuse going to come into play, and are the Lith authorities any more assiduous than the Scotch authorities when fast ones are played?

What have the whisky people got to do with all this?!?

***lapsedhibee*** · 24-05-2013 08:30 PM

Originally Posted by clerriehibs

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

What have the whisky people got to do with all this?!?

Would it be inhaling a toxic combination of asbestos and whisky fumes that makes yams beLIEve so easily?

**~~clerriehibs~~** · 24-05-2013 08:47 PM

Originally Posted by grunt

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

I think Cav has it right here (doesn't he always) - the "them" is the creditors, not the liquidators. If UBIG now have a £10m unsecured loan due from HMFC, that makes them the majority creditor capable of voting in any potential CVA for HMFC, and means they can vote to approve a CVA put forward. Meaning that it is now feasible that HMFC could go into administration and come out the other side via a CVA. This must have been the objective of the recent loan movements.

Is this not a major game changer, Cav?

so they really did just lend it to themselves, and it wasn't a problem.

Just a problem for the other ukio/ubig creditors, of course.

I'd love to see/hear the spl spin on this if it comes to fruition.

***Jack*** · 25-05-2013 10:25 AM

Originally Posted by Spike Mandela

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

Despite what he is saying publically Fedetovas obviously knew what was happening with Ubig and he knws the situation with Hearts.

I am certain that with the aid of contacts, ex board members, Lithuanian officials palms greased, Romanov himself, knowledge of both Lithuanian and UK insolvency law he will be orchestrating all the factors within his cotrol and probably pulling a few strings of others with control in other crucial areas so that Hearts will get as soft a landing as possible and end up at new owners at a cheap rate.

Given there are likely to be criminal proceedings and jail sentences I doubt there will be anyone even answering the phone in Lith to Fredo who might be in a position to help hahahearts.

***CentreLine*** · 25-05-2013 11:22 AM

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

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

They would be a creditor in a CVA only to the extent of the unsecured part of the debt, though. Given that the major asset would be the subject of their security, I doubt that a CVA would have any merit. Unless the sale of Tynie provided a larger sum than the £10m security, there would next to nothing available for the CVA.

Would all of this explain in part why hahahearts have continued to pay HMRC thus ensuring that HMRC are not in a position to block a CVA? It just seems that there has been a great deal of juggling with debt for no obvious reason except perhaps removing the impact that HMRC policy might have on an administration bid.

**~~MSK~~** · 26-05-2013 01:25 AM

Are they still here ?

**Curly1875** · 26-05-2013 01:27 AM

Originally Posted by happyhibbie

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

Are they still here ?

If they are, no one cares! We have a final to concern ourselves with!

**~~MSK~~** · 26-05-2013 01:32 AM

Originally Posted by Curly1875

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

If they are, no one cares! We have a final to concern ourselves with!

True ..but Im no concerned ..

***CyberSauzee*** · 26-05-2013 04:26 PM

May as well get this back on the first page. Got to take my mind off today's hoofball with this summers comedy extravaganza.

**Hibs07p** · 27-05-2013 08:14 AM

Are they deid yet?
ggtth

***bingo70*** · 27-05-2013 08:21 AM

Originally Posted by CyberSauzee

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

May as well get this back on the first page. Got to take my mind off today's hoofball with this summers comedy extravaganza.

Sorry for the thread hijack but need to pick you up on this point, yesterday wasn't hoofball, it was dissapointing result but if anything we were too tippy tappy and slow in midfield.

Anyway, back on topic, **** the hearts

***Spike Mandela*** · 27-05-2013 08:28 AM

The one true anaesthetic to yesterday's defeat is returning to this thread and the sorry state this bunch of mugs find themselves in

***Ozyhibby*** · 27-05-2013 08:39 AM

Bloke on Kickback claiming they have informed the SPL that they may be moving out of Tynecastle next season.
More of this type of news will help take away the disappointment of yesterday.