Share Transfers Agreed/Cooling off period

**HFC 0-7** · 23-01-2014 04:31 PM

Originally Posted by Spike Mandela

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

Essentially hearts will be the same as us. Relying on season tickets, matchdays, merchandise and player sales to fund their playing squad, wages, taxes, maintenance etc but wih a low level debt. (Well, initially)

They won't have a new stand but if they get away with around £26m debt frankly they will be thinking so what?

They will be like us but without the financial backing of Tom Farmer, Farmer hasnt pumped millions into us, but he has (i believe) provided short term loans when cash flow was low. This is the issue, IMO, with fan ownership. Cash flow is probably up and down all the time and although over the course of a year there is enough there will be points where things get tricky if there is no overdraft or owner willing to lend cash for a short period.

***greenginger*** · 23-01-2014 04:51 PM

Originally Posted by Desperate Dan

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

The DD's are tae pay back the money FOF will be borrowing if they manage tae buy the club. The whole plans is based on those voluntary DD's. When those DD's from the diddes start tae dwindle as they surely will, the money tae pay back the loans from the biddies will need tae come from their other income.

I don't think FoH can use Club income to pay off debts for the club purchase. That would be a leveraged purchase which are no longer allowed.

If DDs dry up it has to be cake sales and face painting

**The_Todd** · 23-01-2014 04:52 PM

Originally Posted by HFCDaveA

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

They will be like us but without the financial backing of Tom Farmer, Farmer hasnt pumped millions into us, but he has (i believe) provided short term loans when cash flow was low. This is the issue, IMO, with fan ownership. Cash flow is probably up and down all the time and although over the course of a year there is enough there will be points where things get tricky if there is no overdraft or owner willing to lend cash for a short period.

There's always their sponsors.... WONGA!

**HibsNibs** · 23-01-2014 04:56 PM

They'll be like us except they've had the benefit, in terms of "success" on the pitch and resultant uplift in crowds, that blowing £70m+ of funny money brings. If they only have to spend a season or two in the wilderness to pay for it then that'll be a pretty good result for their shameless (shameful) followers. Of course, no-one else in football recognises their three cup wins in this period as valid.

**~~Saorsa~~** · 23-01-2014 05:06 PM

Originally Posted by greenginger

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

I don't think FoH can use Club income to pay off debts for the club purchase. That would be a leveraged purchase which are no longer allowed.

If DDs dry up it has to be cake sales and face painting

Even better

that's a lot of cakes tae pay back that kind of money

and either way if they cannae they'll be in it again

***jacomo*** · 23-01-2014 05:07 PM

Originally Posted by HFCDaveA

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

They will be like us but without the financial backing of Tom Farmer, Farmer hasnt pumped millions into us, but he has (i believe) provided short term loans when cash flow was low. This is the issue, IMO, with fan ownership. Cash flow is probably up and down all the time and although over the course of a year there is enough there will be points where things get tricky if there is no overdraft or owner willing to lend cash for a short period.

It's not beyond the realms of possibility that a wealthy saviour will come out of the woodwork once the messy business of admin is done with.

But having made such a heavy play of the FoH model and there being 'no white knight', it doesn't seem likely.

***Kato*** · 23-01-2014 05:10 PM

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

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

A few theories have been floated on here:-

1. they have done their homework, and deduced that they won't get any more in a liquidation.

2. they have not done their homework, and have been "persuaded" that they won't get any more in a liquidation.

3. they have known for some time that liquidation is the most likely route, in which case they might get more; approving the CVA is just a political move to make them look less like the bad boys.

I'm not sure which I believe. I'd like to think that 1 is the most likely, but then I'm not privy to the way these guys think.

I think they are pretending to be 2 but are secretly treading water waiting for 3.

***Kato*** · 23-01-2014 05:15 PM

Originally Posted by EK_Hibs

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

What's this 'Stamp' thing all about?
Has Barry Anderson been bumping his gums about a load of rubbish again?

They are signing Phil Stamp on February 1st, BDO reckon it'll add dozens to the crowd.

**~~Hibernia Na Eir~~** · 23-01-2014 05:18 PM

Originally Posted by clerriehibs

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

If the cva is approved in a timely manner, they are, by definition, better off.

IF is big word.

**Waxy** · 23-01-2014 05:23 PM

Stick the lot of them in the liquidiser and press the button.

**~~EK_Hibs~~** · 23-01-2014 05:23 PM

Originally Posted by Hibernia Na Eir

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

IF is big word.

Eh? It's been approved already?

***Aldo*** · 23-01-2014 05:27 PM

Originally Posted by EK_Hibs

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

Eh? It's been approved already?

There are a few issues one major one..... The frozen shares.

**~~Saorsa~~** · 23-01-2014 05:30 PM

Originally Posted by EK_Hibs

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

What's this 'Stamp' thing all about?
Has Barry Anderson been bumping his gums about a load of rubbish again?

It's a fairy tale by BAnderson.

***Kato*** · 23-01-2014 05:32 PM

Originally Posted by EK_Hibs

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

Eh? It's been approved already?

It's been approved "conditionally". Which means it's not been approved at all.

**The_Todd** · 23-01-2014 05:37 PM

Originally Posted by EK_Hibs

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

Eh? It's been approved already?

Approved conditionally, but the CVA counts for nothing unless UBIGs assets are unfrozen anyway. Barry Anderson and co may have you believe all it takes is a rubber stamp, but sadly for them the reality is very different.

**Treadstone** · 23-01-2014 05:37 PM

For anyone taking BAnderson at face value here's a twitter coversation with Green Glory (I think) less than a year ago.

https://mobile.twitter.com/BarryAnde...0175356929?p=v

**The_Todd** · 23-01-2014 05:39 PM

Originally Posted by Treadstone

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

For anyone taking BAnderson at face value here's a twitter coversation with Green Glory (I think) less than a year ago.

https://mobile.twitter.com/BarryAnde...0175356929?p=v

Indeed, I think it was May that Banderson was still telling us everything was still Barry.

***Kato*** · 23-01-2014 05:41 PM

Originally Posted by Desperate Dan

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

It's a fairy tale by BAnderson.

Nah, it's an open letter begging Vlad to come back and sort the mess out, only no one has a stamp.

.....or an address, or any contact, or any clue where the money went, or any sense.

***jacomo*** · 23-01-2014 05:42 PM

Originally Posted by Treadstone

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

For anyone taking BAnderson at face value here's a twitter coversation with Green Glory (I think) less than a year ago.

https://mobile.twitter.com/BarryAnde...0175356929?p=v

Belter. How has Banderson not won a Pulitzer yet? He is simply an outstanding, fearless journalist.

'UBIG troubles barely affect Hearts'

'Plenty of research and nothing to suggest impending trouble'

***Green Reaper*** · 23-01-2014 05:44 PM

[/attach]stamp2.jpg

[attach=config]11838

***Mikey*** · 23-01-2014 05:46 PM

"Plenty of research". That's a hoot. His research went no further than calling up the Bare Faced Liar and asking him if there was anything up.

**VivaHiberña** · 23-01-2014 05:48 PM

My flatmate and I were discussing this earlier and despite having paid close attention to this thread, could someone answer me a pretty simple question please?

As I understand it, the planned debt repayments for the Yams (assuming the CVA is approved and the shares are magically defrosted) would currently be:

£2.5m to Ukio Bankas as part of CVA
£50k to UBIG for the shares
About £60k in football debts (Ayr, Liverpool, Livingstone, Mussellburgh and The Rangers)

And what I'm not sure about (taxes):
- City of Edinburgh Council: £90,715
- City of Edinburgh Council (for flats): £2,631
- HMRC: £1,881,068

Regarding the creditors in italics, ie. the tax authorities, do they get what they're owed? Have I understood the rest correctly?

***Tynie01011973*** · 23-01-2014 05:52 PM

Originally Posted by Kato

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

It's been approved "conditionally". Which means it's not been approved at all.

Exactly !

When they had the Creditors meeting, UBIG Admin was going to vote 'NO', but BDO had to beg them not to, as that would be it there and then.

So they chose to 'ABSTAIN', citing that they could not give their approval without first consulting their own Creditors - that is the meeting that is talked about possibly being held end of next month.

#AllisBarry is jumping the gun saying it's a formality.

Even if UBIG's creditors don't object to the sale of the 50% shares - there is still the matter of the Lith Government's investigation, which got the Court to freeze them in the first place, being agreeable to it.

Not out of the woods by a long shot

**Onion** · 23-01-2014 05:52 PM

Originally Posted by jacomoseven

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

It's not beyond the realms of possibility that a wealthy saviour will come out of the woodwork once the messy business of admin is done with.

But having made such a heavy play of the FoH model and there being 'no white knight', it doesn't seem likely.

Only because that was the only route left for them. No right minded investor was ever going to touch the Yams while they were in Admin or sitting on £MMMM of debt.

Once out of Admin and stark reality of having to live within their means hits home, these charity thieves will grab the first lump of money waved under their noses. The FOH model will be ditched as they chase their world cup stars and Champ League fantasies.

***KeithTheHibby*** · 23-01-2014 05:53 PM

Originally Posted by VivaHibs

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

My flatmate and I were discussing this earlier and despite having paid close attention to this thread, could someone answer me a pretty simple question?

As I understand it, the planned debt repayments for the Yams (assuming the CVA is approved and the shares are magically defrosted) would currently be:

£2.5m to Ukio Bankas as part of CVA
£50k to UBIG for the shares
About £60k in football debts (Ayr, Liverpool, Livingstone, Mussellburgh and The Rangers)

And what I'm not sure about (taxes):
- City of Edinburgh Council: £90,715
- City of Edinburgh Council (for flats): £2,631
- HMRC: £1,881,068

Regarding the creditors in italics, ie. the tax authorities, do they get what they're owed? Have I understood the rest correctly?

The creditors in italics will get not a penny regardless of a CVA being agreed.

**The_Todd** · 23-01-2014 05:53 PM

Originally Posted by Mikey

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

"Plenty of research". That's a hoot. His research went no further than calling up the Bare Faced Liar and asking him if there was anything up.

Just imagine if Banderson was covering the Phone Hacking scandal.

"So, ehh, Rupert, is there anything in this voicemail thingy?"
"No."

"PHONE HACKING: ALL IS BARRY. NEWS OF THE WORLD IS AN INNOCENT VICTIM"

***Bristolhibby*** · 23-01-2014 05:53 PM

Originally Posted by VivaHibs

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

My flatmate and I were discussing this earlier and despite having paid close attention to this thread, could someone answer me a pretty simple question?

As I understand it, the planned debt repayments for the Yams (assuming the CVA is approved and the shares are magically defrosted) would currently be:

£2.5m to Ukio Bankas as part of CVA
£50k to UBIG for the shares
About £60k in football debts (Ayr, Liverpool, Livingstone, Mussellburgh and The Rangers)

And what I'm not sure about (taxes):
- City of Edinburgh Council: £90,715
- City of Edinburgh Council (for flats): £2,631
- HMRC: £1,881,068

Regarding the creditors in italics, ie. the tax authorities, do they get what they're owed? Have I understood the rest correctly?

Don't quote me, but those last ones are settled in some pence in the pound type deal are that not? So instead of £90k to Edinburgh CC read £6k, etc.

J

***Kato*** · 23-01-2014 05:56 PM

Originally Posted by Bristolhibby

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

Don't quote me, but those last ones are settled in some pence in the pound type deal are that not? So instead of £90k to Edinburgh CC read £6k, etc.

J

Only once the secured creditors are paid, which means the others will get approximately nixie-pie.

**Kaiser1962** · 23-01-2014 05:56 PM

Originally Posted by clerriehibs

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

If the cva is approved in a timely manner, they are, by definition, better off.

If they do survive, and its still an if, I suspect they will be back in administration in around 4-5 seasons. As in their full fat cousins old habits die hard.

As for the CVA they still need a number of decisions to fall their way. All we need is one of that number not to.