Share Transfers Agreed/Cooling off period

[brog]

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

I didn't read it as that, Stevie.

I think it's the "disbursements" that they can draw from current funds; that's expenses that BDO have paid out from their own pocket. The fees can't be drawn until UKIO's admins can say so.

Correct! However I found it interesting that UKIO found it necessary to strengthen the clauses to ensure BDO cannot collect any fees without their (UKIO ) specific approval. Sounds to me like UKIO may not have complete faith in BDO, correctly IMO.

[monktonharp]

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

It seems that, upon instruction from UKIO's administrators, BDO will be taking their fees from the current funds .. rather than from the sale of the assets.

My understanding is that the current funds are basically the season ticket sales that BDO stated would be used to keep the club going until January 2014, and provide an opportunity for additional funding to be found in that time to allow the club to trade till the end of the season.

If UKIO's administrators have instructed BDO to use these funds for their fee's, then would that suggest that they are more interested in maximising their return from the sale of Tynecastle than seeing the club continue trading?

that's the way I read it too Stevie. bdo drawing a wage while doing a job. my next thought was on the lines of.....at least getting a payment of sorts, beforw it all goes tits up and the remaining monies are tied up for years through law suits etc. but....i'm not CWG'S apprentice.

[CropleyisGod]

can one of the financial experts please re-assure me that what I'm about to say is fatally flawed...

1. FoH can get 5/6 rich business people or businesses to stump up say £5-6m in total
2. They successfully bid £5+m for YAM FC as a going concern, including the Asbestos Arena removing the UB security over the property
3. UB and UBIG agree the CVA as a) they are effectively both controlled by the Lithuanian state and b) together they own 79.9% of the total equity (everyone else gets shafted)
4. End result: effectively 'transfer' of the security on the Wongadome from UB to the 'Rich-Yams-R-Us' collective, loans paid with pledges and future footballing revenue. They struggle but keep afloat, gloating their wee Jambo faces off. At worst if they get into more financial difficulty they sell the Wongadome off and stagger on. At best (for them), now debt free, super rich Yam (or Romanov 2) comes in to start it all again.

[Suburban Hibby]

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

I'm putting the Central number into my phone straight away. No way I could support giving money to them.

No way anyone with an ounce of common decency should support Scab cabs anyway!!!

Sorry to digress from thread....

[hibees 7062]

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

No way anyone with an ounce of common decency should support Scab cabs anyway!!!

Sorry to digress from thread....

Correct

[Gus Fring]

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

can one of the financial experts please re-assure me that what I'm about to say is fatally flawed...

I'll have a go.

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

1. FoH can get 5/6 rich business people or businesses to stump up say £5-6m in total

The FOH already have their business, it's not close to £5m at the moment nor is it likely to be

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

2. They successfully bid £5+m for YAM FC as a going concern, including the Asbestos Arena removing the UB security over the property

See #1

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

3. UB and UBIG agree the CVA as a) they are effectively both controlled by the Lithuanian state and b) together they own 79.9% of the total equity (everyone else gets shafted)

The UKIO administrator has intimated today that the current offer is unlikely to be acceptable (depending on how you interpret the quote) It's still incredibly unlikely UBIG will agree to anything as the assets are still frozen. I'm going to bold the next part because it is, at the moment, the most important part in the entire saga and I'd like to to "jump" off the page.

UNTIL VLADS ASSETS ARE UNFROZEN, THE SUCCESSFUL SALE OF HEART OF MIDLOTHIAN FOOTBALL CLUB AS A GOING CONCERN IS IMPOSSIBLE.

[Phil D. Rolls]

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

No way anyone with an ounce of common decency should support Scab cabs anyway!!!

Sorry to digress from thread....

I always check whether its a victor before I hail a cab at 1 am. On occasion I have even asked to get out if I have gotten into one by mistake.

[LongshanksED]

As i drive with city cabs I'd be interested to know why the dissent for city cabs

[Pete]

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

I always check whether its a victor before I hail a cab at 1 am. On occasion I have even asked to get out if I have gotten into one by mistake.

You're missing out by ruling out a peter.

They have been known to offer massive discounts in order to secure your business.

[hibees 7062]

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

You're missing out by ruling out a peter.

They have been known to offer massive discounts in order to secure your business.

And one of their drivers done me a massive favour and took my wife from me

[Fife-Hibee]

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

You're missing out by ruling out a peter.

They have been known to offer massive discounts in order to secure your business.

Eh?

[LongshanksED]

Still like to know why there's a massive love in for central taxis and dissent for city

[Dashing Bob S]

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

I'll have a go.



The FOH already have their business, it's not close to £5m at the moment nor is it likely to be



See #1



The UKIO administrator has intimated today that the current offer is unlikely to be acceptable (depending on how you interpret the quote) It's still incredibly unlikely UBIG will agree to anything as the assets are still frozen. I'm going to bold the next part because it is, at the moment, the most important part in the entire saga and I'd like to to "jump" off the page.

UNTIL VLADS ASSETS ARE UNFROZEN, THE SUCCESSFUL SALE OF HEART OF MIDLOTHIAN FOOTBALL CLUB AS A GOING CONCERN IS IMPOSSIBLE.

This, this and this again. Expect 'Mr 80%' Ian Murray to front another cash appeal saying something along the lines of, "we need money to keep going until the assets are frozen, which I'm 80% confident will happen before Christmas..."

[HibbySpurs]

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

Still like to know why there's a massive love in for central taxis and dissent for city

I think some people feel CC favour the yaks, my understanding is that they do in fact support both clubs?

[Ozyhibby]

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

Still like to know why there's a massive love in for central taxis and dissent for city

It's been claimed City are helping out the FoH. Good enough for me. Boycott on.

[lord bunberry]

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

Still like to know why there's a massive love in for central taxis and dissent for city

Bitterness and envy my friend

[Treadstone]

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

This, this and this again. Expect 'Mr 80%' Ian Murray to front another cash appeal saying something along the lines of, "we need money to keep going until the assets are frozen, which I'm 80% confident will happen before Christmas..."

You've got that wrong Bob. I'm sure he was 80% confident there would be a Christmas this year.

[Keith_M]

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

You've got that wrong Bob. I'm sure he was 80% confident there would be a Christmas this year.

Not for the Yams

[greenginger]

Been having a thought on those not for profit loans that are to be made by companies to provide funds for the purchase of HOMFC.

If its not a business transaction should these business funds not be treated as director loans when the companies concerned get round to HMRC reporting.

Is it Class 4 National Insurance that comes into play ? Quite hefty charges IIRC.

[Suburban Hibby]

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

Still like to know why there's a massive love in for central taxis and dissent for city

Reputable v Bed Partners with crooks.......

Bit like Hibs v Hearts tbh..... I am sure the average yam would choose city everytime.....

[CropleyWasGod]

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

Been having a thought on those not for profit loans that are to be made by companies to provide funds for the purchase of HOMFC.

If its not a business transaction should these business funds not be treated as director loans when the companies concerned get round to HMRC reporting.

Is it Class 4 National Insurance that comes into play ? Quite hefty charges IIRC.

Think you have mixed up a few things there.

A loan from an individual, or a company, to another company (or Special Purpose Vehicle, as MP Murray says. I mean...WTF?... SPV... sounds like something out of Captain Scarlet. I digress) is, in the main, irrelevant for Tax or National Insurance. It doesn't matter whether it's a "business" or a "private" loan.

If there is interest involved, and we don't yet know if that's the case here, FannyCo has to deduct tax from the interest it pays to BumCo, and then paid it over to HMRC-Co.

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

can one of the financial experts please re-assure me that what I'm about to say is fatally flawed...

1. FoH can get 5/6 rich business people or businesses to stump up say £5-6m in total
2. They successfully bid £5+m for YAM FC as a going concern, including the Asbestos Arena removing the UB security over the property
3. UB and UBIG agree the CVA as a) they are effectively both controlled by the Lithuanian state and b) together they own 79.9% of the total equity (everyone else gets shafted)
4. End result: effectively 'transfer' of the security on the Wongadome from UB to the 'Rich-Yams-R-Us' collective, loans paid with pledges and future footballing revenue. They struggle but keep afloat, gloating their wee Jambo faces off. At worst if they get into more financial difficulty they sell the Wongadome off and stagger on. At best (for them), now debt free, super rich Yam (or Romanov 2) comes in to start it all again.

I don't actually see, yet, why UBIG would agree to a CVA. They are in line to get nothing.

If they don't agree to it, the CVA fails. There would not be a 75% vote in favour of it.

[Phil D. Rolls]

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

Eh?

The different companies have different cab numbers, using the phonetic alphabet.

Central is P for Peter.

Anyone wanting to boycott City Cabs should check they don't have a V for victor in their window.

Simples.

[Liberal Hibby]

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

I don't actually see, yet, why UBIG would agree to a CVA. They are in line to get nothing.

If they don't agree to it, the CVA fails. There would not be a 75% vote in favour of it.

Do UBIG have the whole 75%? I was wondering whether HMRC + one or two other larger unsecured creditors would have 25% between them to block a CVA even if UBIG were minded to support one (given they're now essentially the Lithuanian government who will be guaranteed something through UB).

[LongshanksED]

So City Cabs advertising on the hibs official websites + donating to Kicks For Kids = City Cabs are backing Hearts and their financial troubles

Check out the advert at the bottom of the page!
http://www.hibernianfc.co.uk/news/20...262950_2887405

[Part/Time Supporter]

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

I don't actually see, yet, why UBIG would agree to a CVA. They are in line to get nothing.

If they don't agree to it, the CVA fails. There would not be a 75% vote in favour of it.

The Times article on Saturday suggested that UBIG would get a "five figure sum" for selling their shares in return for approving a CVA. Thinking was they would (have to?) accept that as they would most likely get nothing under liquidation.

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

Do UBIG have the whole 75%? I was wondering whether HMRC + one or two other larger unsecured creditors would have 25% between them to block a CVA even if UBIG were minded to support one (given they're now essentially the Lithuanian government who will be guaranteed something through UB).

Yes (indirectly).

Total debt is £28.5M. Ukio has £15M secured - that leaves £13.5M. UBIG were at about £8M (it was thought to be £10M but some was passed off to other Romanov companies). That's about 60% of the unsecured total.

BUT Ukio is not going to get the full £15M - let's say they only get £5M. Their remaining £10M would join the unsecured pile. Then Ukio + UBIG would be £18M out of an unsecured total £23.5M = 76.6%.

Even if theoretically UBIG and/or Ukio were just short of 75%, a CVA would most likely pass. The only party that is by policy hostile to CVAs is HMRC, who are owed "only" £1.5M or just over 11% of the present unsecured total.

[happiehibbie]

i will try to make this simple

I will buy your house and pay you up monthly with a Direct debit HONEST !!

so the first pledges are due the 2nd September I wonder how many will come up trumphs wait till there partners find out that there other half has decided to buy a share in a football team and have no money for food or a holiday i would like to be a fly on the wall i these houses

NEW CO its a cert

[CropleyWasGod]

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

Do UBIG have the whole 75%? I was wondering whether HMRC + one or two other larger unsecured creditors would have 25% between them to block a CVA even if UBIG were minded to support one (given they're now essentially the Lithuanian government who will be guaranteed something through UB).

HMRC don't have enough on their own. From memory, unsecured creditors are about £22m, which means £5.5m would have to vote against, or abstain. HMRC have about £2m, and they will vote No out of policy. However, I don't know why anyone else would..... other than awkwardness.

[CropleyWasGod]

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

The Times article on Saturday suggested that UBIG would get a "five figure sum" for selling their shares in return for approving a CVA. Thinking was they would (have to?) accept that as they would most likely get nothing under liquidation.



Yes (indirectly).

Total debt is £28.5M. Ukio has £15M secured - that leaves £13.5M. UBIG were at about £8M (it was thought to be £10M but some was passed off to other Romanov companies). That's about 60% of the unsecured total.

BUT Ukio is not going to get the full £15M - let's say they only get £5M. Their remaining £10M would join the unsecured pile. Then Ukio + UBIG would be £18M out of an unsecured total £23.5M = 76.6%.

Even if theoretically UBIG and/or Ukio were just short of 75%, a CVA would most likely pass. The only party that is by policy hostile to CVAs is HMRC, who are owed "only" £1.5M or just over 11% of the present unsecured total.

UKIO's security is for £6.8m, no?

I didn't see that Times article.... but, that's the only way UBIG would allow the CVA, I reckon. That must bump the price up again.

[Just Alf]

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

I didn't read it as that, Stevie.

I think it's the "disbursements" that they can draw from current funds; that's expenses that BDO have paid out from their own pocket. The fees can't be drawn until UKIO's admins can say so.

Hmmm.... so while not as dramatic as BDO getting paid the fee's from current funds, the fact that "disbursements" are being taken from these funds (I take it to maximise what's left after a sale) then this could be seen as an extra financial drain on the Yam's already limited finances?

If that's the case then it makes a decision, one way or another, more likley to happen sooner rather than later??

[Liberal Hibby]

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

HMRC don't have enough on their own. From memory, unsecured creditors are about £22m, which means £5.5m would have to vote against, or abstain. HMRC have about £2m, and they will vote No out of policy. However, I don't know why anyone else would..... other than awkwardness.

I could see if people were getting 1p in the £ why they might vote yes on the basis it's that or nothing - but if you're asked to accept 0p in the £ wouldn't you want to teach them a lesson? You don't have even pennies to lose.