Share Transfers Agreed/Cooling off period

[CropleyWasGod]

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

I'm no longer buying this 'administrator has a duty to do his best by the creditors' as it does not happen in real life.

In UK law, that is not the primary duty of an administrator.

In Lithuanian law, an administrator is akin to our liquidator. In other words, it is their primary duty.

[CropleyWasGod]

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

The assets are Tiny, the players' registrations, the brand (toxic as it is), the SFA & SPFL memberships. If they don't buy the shares they don't own Hearts! UBIG's and Ukio's liquidators both have the power to sell their assets to recover money for their creditors. They both have shareholdings in Hearts and (subject to freezing issues which I'm not convinced are in force any longer since UBIG's offishul move to liquidation) both have the power to sell them.

I don't think that is relevant.

It's a Court-based process.

[Pete]

Can we stop all this "yam" stuff and start calling them by their real name please.

The cheats.

[RIP Bestie]

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

Fair point.

From memory, once 75% has been obtained, the holder can make an offer for the remaining 25%. (or maybe that's 90%?)

No matter... it would be interesting to see which shareholders voted today to approve the sale. ie whether the 21% were represented at all.

CWG I'm confused. Have they done a Houdini act and got away with this with nothing more than a 15 point penalty? I know that could mean relegation and a struggle to come straight back up, but is that the extent of what's going to happen to them? Can they sign out of contract over 21 year old players come February? Or is there a chance this could all still crumble around their ears?

[Aldo]

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

Can we stop all this "yam" stuff and start calling them by their real name please. The cheats.

Ha ha. Post of the day for me.

Top Marks!!

[Gus Fring]

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

CWG I'm confused. Have they done a Houdini act and got away with this with nothing more than a 15 point penalty? I know that could mean relegation and a struggle to come straight back up, but is that the extent of what's going to happen to them? Can they sign out of contract over 21 year old players come February? Or is there a chance this could all still crumble around their ears?

The transfer embargo is in place until the 1st of February regardless of when they leave admin. If they are still in admin after February 1st (which BDO have confirmed is very likely to be the case) then the embargo will continue until such times as a court confirms they are no longer in administration.

[CropleyWasGod]

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

CWG I'm confused. Have they done a Houdini act and got away with this with nothing more than a 15 point penalty? I know that could mean relegation and a struggle to come straight back up, but is that the extent of what's going to happen to them? Can they sign out of contract over 21 year old players come February? Or is there a chance this could all still crumble around their ears?

In essence, there's not a lot that has changed after today. If the vote had gone the other way, yes, that would have been goodnight.

All that has happened of significance today is that UKIO have decided that they're happy with what is on offer. I have to say that that surprised me, but I am assuming that they have done their homework.

The ball is still, as it was anyway, in UBIG's court. They have some negotiating to do over how much they will accept for their shares. Shares that they can't actually sell yet.

The situation of signing players hasn't changed at all. Hearts are still in administration, and look as if they will be so for some months yet.

[jacomo]

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

CWG I'm confused. Have they done a Houdini act and got away with this with nothing more than a 15 point penalty? I know that could mean relegation and a struggle to come straight back up, but is that the extent of what's going to happen to them? Can they sign out of contract over 21 year old players come February? Or is there a chance this could all still crumble around their ears?

They can't sign anyone until they come out of administration. BDO reckon that won't be til March or April, which if true means they really won't be signing anyone this season, unless there are any free agents happy to wait until then to get a deal.

[Leith Mo]

In view of today's events it is imperative that they are reminded of the true facts: aside from a lot of other things, the one that really winds them up is exactly what the banner says:

"LEST WE FORGET HMFC DID NOT PAY FOR THEIR POPPIES"

I have emailed Hibs again today asking for the Banner to come home as agreed in the Club's previous email to me. It shall fly with pride at the next Derby....a commodity those SC** know nothing of.

The Club with no Shame indeed

[GreenLake]

cva hearts

[bighairyfaeleith]

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

In view of today's events it is imperative that they are reminded of the true facts: aside from a lot of other things, the one that really winds them up is exactly what the banner says:

"LEST WE FORGET HMFC DID NOT PAY FOR THEIR POPPIES"

I have emailed Hibs again today asking for the Banner to come home as agreed in the Club's previous email to me. It shall fly with pride at the next Derby....a commodity those SC** know nothing of.

The Club with no Shame indeed

Why did the stewards take that down by the way?

Sent from my HUAWEI U8815 using Tapatalk 2

[Dashing Bob S]

It's all down to two elements now:

1. The Lithuanian authorities who have frozen the UBIG shares pending their investigations. Presumably these investigations relate to financial fraud across the Romanov empire. How extensive those investigations are, and when they will be concluded, is anybody's guess. However -and I might be wrong here- there is apparently a limitation on how long the government can freeze those shares? Assuming there are no more twists in the tale as unearthed by those investigations (and remember, that Hearts directors of this era were part of this group of companies and had money paid into and removed from these accounts by other companies) then:

2. The decision of the UBIG admins. It seems that they would vote for a CVA on the basis that 'something is better than nothing' but there may be some strategy to realize the full value of the Hearts assets (the PBS).

Hearts still face the race against time scenario - hoping that this business is concluded and that the CVA is in place and they exit admin before they run out off money.

THEN

They get to proceed with this totally unworkable business plan, devised and adminstered by clowns over morons with sky-high expectations.

[Leith Mo]

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

Why did the stewards take that down by the way?

Sent from my HUAWEI U8815 using Tapatalk 2

Email from CLub gave following reason for removal of banner:

"In the build up towards the game on Wednesday night we held a number of planning meetings internally and also with our partners, including Police Scotland.


The Club had become aware that our fans were intent on displaying banners at the game, some of which would likely relate to the current financial situation at Heart of Midlothian FC, whilst this in itself would not be a reason to exclude banners, we do have to make an assessment of the impact of any banner displayed and consider the likely negative impact.

Our Club has a very good relationship with Poppy Scotland and a decision was taken that any banners that bore the name or could link Poppy Scotland and the current situation at Heart of Midlothian FC would not be permitted to be displayed during this match, this is the reason that you were not permitted to put the banner up.

Whether you agree or disagree with this decision it was taken in the interests of the reputation of Poppy Scotland and our Club."

[PapillonVert]

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

The main assets of HMFC are its stadium, its playing squad, and its brand.

As for the UBIG situation. It is in admin, and one of its assets is its shareholding in HMFC. The administrator has a duty to realise that asset for as much as is possible, in order to maximise the return to its own shareholders. Hence why I think that they didn't reject the CVA, as the CVA route gives them a chance of some cash for those shares.

I am trying to unravel all this.

The stadium is subject to the security in favour of Ukio which they have now accepted a reduced sum for via the proposed CVA. I understand that the playing "assets" and the brand name will, in theory at least, also have a value, although probably nominal at best.

I am trying to think from the POV of a potential purchaser, however, and the old "what's in for me?" question keeps coming up as to why someone would want to buy the shares to get their mitts on these assets.

Even if they did get the stadium via purchasing the company, they would presumably have to realise more than the security's worth to get any money themselves? Am I right in thinking, therefore, that the CVA offer from the Fannies would fall if a 3rd party managed to purchase the shares?

That might make sense. So, someone offering even slightly more than the Fannies might end up with Tynie (although again Ukio would have to play ball and not insist on realising the full value of the security - which I believe is north of £6million or thereabouts).

Confused - not half!

[Weststandwanab]

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

Fair point.

From memory, once 75% has been obtained, the holder can make an offer for the remaining 25%. (or maybe that's 90%?)

No matter... it would be interesting to see which shareholders voted today to approve the sale. ie whether the 21% were represented at all.

90%

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

In some file in a Lithuanian Court.

They are indeed.

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

It's all down to two elements now:

1. The Lithuanian authorities who have frozen the UBIG shares pending their investigations. Presumably these investigations relate to financial fraud across the Romanov empire. How extensive those investigations are, and when they will be concluded, is anybody's guess. However -and I might be wrong here- there is apparently a limitation on how long the government can freeze those shares? Assuming there are no more twists in the tale as unearthed by those investigations (and remember, that Hearts directors of this era were part of this group of companies and had money paid into and removed from these accounts by other companies) then:

2. The decision of the UBIG admins. It seems that they would vote for a CVA on the basis that 'something is better than nothing' but there may be some strategy to realize the full value of the Hearts assets (the PBS).

Hearts still face the race against time scenario - hoping that this business is concluded and that the CVA is in place and they exit admin before they run out off money.

THEN

They get to proceed with this totally unworkable business plan, devised and adminstered by clowns over morons with sky-high expectations.

Great Points.

[CropleyWasGod]

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

I am trying to unravel all this.

The stadium is subject to the security in favour of Ukio which they have now accepted a reduced sum for via the proposed CVA. I understand that the playing "assets" and the brand name will, in theory at least, also have a value, although probably nominal at best.

I am trying to think from the POV of a potential purchaser, however, and the old "what's in for me?" question keeps coming up as to why someone would want to buy the shares to get their mitts on these assets.

Even if they did get the stadium via purchasing the company, they would presumably have to realise more than the security's worth to get any money themselves? Am I right in thinking, therefore, that the CVA offer from the Fannies would fall if a 3rd party managed to purchase the shares?

That might make sense. So, someone offering even slightly more than the Fannies might end up with Tynie (although again Ukio would have to play ball and not insist on realising the full value of the security - which I believe is north of £6million or thereabouts).

Confused - not half!

2 questions in there:-

1. if they buy the company, they have an asset (PBS) which they paid £2.5m for. In other words, if they want to make money by selling it, that's their minimum price.

2. I don't think that another bidder for the shares can be entertained at this stage.

[Pretty Boy]

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

Can we stop all this "yam" stuff and start calling them by their real name please.

The cheats.

They really don't like that.

Interestingly a lot of them crowing away about how the poppy money was paid so they didn't rip off any charities.

Can someone confirm when the £30K+ owed to the Big Hearts Foundation was paid? Thought not.

[green glory]

@BBCthomasmcg: .@JamTarts Hearts fans may be asked for funds before end of season, says administrator http://t.co/vqcKLqIP3O http://t.co/TYSWK6n8En

Softening them up for more piggy bank raiding.

History repeats itself.

[Pretty Boy]

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

@BBCthomasmcg: .@JamTarts Hearts fans may be asked for funds before end of season, says administrator http://t.co/vqcKLqIP3O http://t.co/TYSWK6n8En

Softening them up for more piggy bank raiding.

History repeats itself.

Another year with no Christmas or summer holiday for Jimmy and Jemima Jambos children. Shame.

Scaffs.

[Ozyhibby]

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

It's all down to two elements now:

1. The Lithuanian authorities who have frozen the UBIG shares pending their investigations. Presumably these investigations relate to financial fraud across the Romanov empire. How extensive those investigations are, and when they will be concluded, is anybody's guess. However -and I might be wrong here- there is apparently a limitation on how long the government can freeze those shares? Assuming there are no more twists in the tale as unearthed by those investigations (and remember, that Hearts directors of this era were part of this group of companies and had money paid into and removed from these accounts by other companies) then:

2. The decision of the UBIG admins. It seems that they would vote for a CVA on the basis that 'something is better than nothing' but there may be some strategy to realize the full value of the Hearts assets (the PBS).

Hearts still face the race against time scenario - hoping that this business is concluded and that the CVA is in place and they exit admin before they run out off money.

THEN

They get to proceed with this totally unworkable business plan, devised and adminstered by clowns over morons with sky-high expectations.

While I agree that they are going to struggle as they have no way of borrowing, significant costs maintaining their stadium and have not lived within their means for 30 years, I don't see what is fundamentally wrong with their business plan?
I also think they will get the shares from Ubig IF they become unfrozen.
Everything else I agree with.

[Waxy]

The timing of this is more likely designed to get the yams all warm and fuzzy for the November and early december paydays.
If you haven't given us yer dough then why not?
Yams are about to bring out the begging bowl of begging bowls i reckon.

[SmashinGlass]

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

@BBCthomasmcg: .@JamTarts Hearts fans may be asked for funds before end of season, says administrator http://t.co/vqcKLqIP3O http://t.co/TYSWK6n8En

Softening them up for more piggy bank raiding.

History repeats itself.

The admins should really be getting hauled over the coals here. If they need a further injection of funds, then they are not running the club using a viable business model. If they're running an admin whilst incurring what would be losses in any other line of business, trading would cease. It's sickening

[greenpaper55]

So they might be skint by the end of February , maybe they will have a share issue....?.

[down-the-slope]

Hearts: More cash from fans may be required, says administrator


Hearts may ask fans for more funds if the club runs out of money before the end of the season, according to administrator Bryan Jackson.

But Jackson needs to acquire the majority shareholding from UBIG, a process likely to take several months , and only has funds to last until March.
"There's nowhere else for me to go if we run into difficulties," he said.
"We'll just have to take that as we go. The cash flow is fluent, it can change

[jgl07]

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

While I agree that they are going to struggle as they have no way of borrowing, significant costs maintaining their stadium and have not lived within their means for 30 years, I don't see what is fundamentally wrong with their business plan?

Does any other club operate on the assumption that supporters will pay both for season tickets and a monthly direct debit? It appears dodgy to me as a sustainable long-term business strategy.

The ticking time bomb for Hearts is the need to replace the old main stand. At some stage it will lose its safety certificate or at least be reduced significantly in capacity. Where will the cash come from for a replacement?

[SHODAN]

So how long before they're back to paying extortionate wages for players then?

I reckon June 2014.

[Dr Jimmy]

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

@BBCthomasmcg: .@JamTarts Hearts fans may be asked for funds before end of season, says administrator http://t.co/vqcKLqIP3O http://t.co/TYSWK6n8En

Softening them up for more piggy bank raiding.

History repeats itself.

I am surprised this is allowed/legal.
Surely BDO knew/had a good idea of how much money they had and were likely to get during the season.
Therefore they should know (+/- % fluctuation) how much they could spend to enable them to get the club through to the end of the season. Why did they not cut their cloth accordingly, instead of signing Wilson and keeping staffing levels and running costs at a level they clearly could not sustain without further (and not guaranteed!!) investment.
I may also add they are coming up short despite getting a bonus from the cup game with us and then Celtic!
BDO are in danger of making Duff & Phelps look professional.....!!!!!

[paul_hfc3]

A Jambo claims that it's in the Scotsman that quotes from the companies in the paper saying Lady Haig's claim even though they are listed a creditor, Hearts don't owe them money. Smell bull**** or is he correct?

[Spike Mandela]

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

In UK law, that is not the primary duty of an administrator.

In Lithuanian law, an administrator is akin to our liquidator. In other words, it is their primary duty.

Please oh please can we stop with these sham quotes CWG.

Their primary role is to make money for themselves which they seem rather good at.

Duff and Phelps and BDO have proved that any thought for getting the maximum return for creditors is just something they glibly give lip service to. Keeping the cheating companies as a going concern is clearly more profitable to them.

Ukio will be lucky to see half of the £2.5m once administrators fees and other things come off the CVA offer.

Ukio and Ubig's administrators will now be reaping every penny they can out of their administrations but the creditors, nevermind Hearts, will be the least of their worries just whatever makes them the most dosh out of this situation.

[joe breezy]

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

Please oh please can we stop with these sham quotes CWG.

Their primary role is to make money for themselves which they seem rather good at.

Duff and Phelps and BDO have proved that any thought for getting the maximum return for creditors is just something they glibly give lip service to. Keeping the cheating companies as a going concern is clearly more profitable to them.

Ukio will be lucky to see half of the £2.5m once administrators fees and other things come off the CVA offer.

Ukio and Ubig's administrators will now be reaping every penny they can out of their administrations but the creditors, nevermind Hearts, will be the least of their worries just whatever makes them the most dosh out of this situation.

Accountants / insolvency people = cowboys, the lot of them