Ann Budge

[Allowayjambo1874]

It's still unknown, how all this fan ownership will work, as FOH statute is not yet finished (or published). But if one assumes that the whole thing will work like on the continent, and that basic democratic principles (one member one vote) will be applied, the primary motivation would be that you remain a fan which owns your club, with your voice having an equal "worth" as anyone else's. As in:

The club is fan-owned, but the fans that own it are the ones who pay the membership fee/pledge in the current year/season. You don't want to pay it any more, you are not one of the fans that own the club and have a voting right (that's how it works on the continent). Barcelona has millions of fans, but the ones who cast votes in elections or AGMs are some 100,000 of them who actually pay annual membership fee. (I'm guessing here that regardless of how much you pledged in the past, if you are not pledging anymore, you are not co-owner any more, that's how it works elsewhere).

 

In my opinion, there should be changes when the purchase of the club is completed, or even sooner. The fix amount of pledge would be fair, and the amount could (better: should) be 10 pounds or better less, let's say 5 pounds per month (60 pounds per year). There should be several discounts for the fan-owners (as they are elsewhere). I wonder if in the future loyalty points will be abolished, as the fan-owners are the ones which the club "serves", the owners get tickets first, and then anyone else, if there's anything left (as it's done on the continent).

 

Good post.

Whilst we are on average putting in something like ?17 per month per fan think that membership fee should be ?20 per month, with some sort of associate membership set at a tenner which gives everything except voting right.

The news that complete fan ownership wont be for another 5 years may (just may) encourage people to reduce their current level of financial commitment.

[Sooperstar]

I've always worried that people were looking at these DD's as a short term thing. For me it has always been as a permanent way of giving the club additional working capital, after the debt has been paid off.

 

I won't be surprised to see a drop in contributions once the club leaves admin.

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

 

 

Then people dont understand the concept of a fan owned club

 

As far as I see it I will continue to make these payments to the club as long as it exists or as long as I am alive.

 

Thats the whole point.

 

This isnt just a rescue package, this is an additional layer of income that I am prepared to provide to my club in order that it never gets into this position again

 

Did fans actually think the DDs were just to pay off the debt?

The point is that FoH said that is what they were for. I'm not bothered but I can see why others are.

[The Comedian]

Thanks Mrs B for stepping up.

 

[Deevers]

Good times just around the corner - welcome Mrs Budge and thank you.

[I.T.K]

Song for Ann Budge required I reckon, chirpy, chirpy, cheep cheep? I'm not good at making up the verses i'll let someone elese come up with that.

 

Budge love to watch Hibs get to-tally beat beat!

[Jammy T]

The point is that FoH said that is what they were for. I'm not bothered but I can see why others are.

 

I dont recall them saying that that was their sole purpose or that payment of DDs would cut off after repayment or a certain time

 

But I may have missed this....

[Allowayjambo1874]

Then people dont understand the concept of a fan owned club

 

As far as I see it I will continue to make these payments to the club as long as it exists or as long as I am alive.

 

Thats the whole point.

 

This isnt just a rescue package, this is an additional layer of income that I am prepared to provide to my club in order that it never gets into this position again

 

Did fans actually think the DDs were just to pay off the debt?

 

Surely though the 'debt' will be the money owed to AB (or BIDCO) when we are out of admin, Hearts FC will be pretty much a blank canvas financially speaking. So why can the club not be run like a proper business and live within it's means? Then after the 'debt' is paid of (say 3 years) the DD's can then continue and supplement the club to move forward as extra income? It feels to me that we are doing the second part first, or at least for the next 2 years. What happens if we don't get up in the next 2 seasons? We then have to start repaying the 'debt' to AB whilst we are on vastly reduced income in the second tier of Scottish football and people will be screaming blue murder about it.

 

However I will say, I have no idea what the expenses are in the background, maybe if FOH could come out with what these are it may sit a little better.

 

re paying for life, off course I will as will many others, I just personally think we should be owning the club in 3 years not 5.

Edited February 14, 2014 by Allowayjambo1874

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

 

 

I dont recall them saying that that was their sole purpose or that payment of DDs would cut off after repayment or a certain time

 

But I may have missed this....

I think you should read the website.

[Taffin]

Personally I would have like to have see the current money raised from pledges used to see out the season and get us through summer.

 

After that, I was hoping all pledges would be used to gain fan control asap.

 

My intention is to pledge for life, but I'm less keen on this way of doing things as fan ownership was the major appeal for me.

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

BTW, it would be nice to know Ann Budge's response to what she plans to do if for some reason she isn't paid back, bearing in mind she is carrying the risk.

[Clerry Jambo]

http://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/sport/football/hearts/ann-budge-holding-detailed-review-of-hearts-staff-1-3306157

 

Prospective Hearts owner Ann Budge is currently conducting a detailed review of the club as she prepares to become chairwoman, including assessing every member of football and non-football staff.

The millionaire Edinburgh businesswoman is keen to protect her investment after Foundation of Hearts confirmed she is bankrolling their ?2.5million takeover.

[henry]

I've always worried that people were looking at these DD's as a short term thing. For me it has always been as a permanent way of giving the club additional working capital, after the debt has been paid off.

 

I won't be surprised to see a drop in contributions once the club leaves admin.

 

I'm in for the long haul and would encourage others to do the same. We need to build on the pledges we have, the extra income this would provide would see more success on the park..... Surely that's what people want and if so they should pledge.

 

 

[Jammy T]

Surely though the 'debt' will be the money owed to AB (or BIDCO) when we are out of admin, Hearts FC will be pretty much a blank canvas financially speaking. So why can the club not be run like a proper business and live within it's means? Then after the 'debt' is paid of (say 3 years) the DD's can then continue and supplement the club to move forward as extra income? It feels to me that we are doing the second part first, or at least for the next 2 years. What happens if we don't get up in the next 2 seasons? We then have to start repaying the 'debt' to AB whilst we are on vastly reduced income in the second tier of Scottish football and people will be screaming blue murder about it.

 

However I will say, I have no idea what the expenses are in the background, maybe if FOH could come out with what these are it may sit a little better.

 

re paying for life, off course I will as will many others, I just personally think we should be owning the club in 3 years not 5.

 

It might be the difference between owning a run down Championship club that is stuck in that division and one int the SPL

 

Think of it like a massive refurbishment of a grand old country house. You wouldnt want the full mortgage repayments to kick in at the start of the job, you'd want most of the rebuilding done before the bank came knocking on the door.

 

Its all very bizarre to not want this breathing space - its almost self destructive

[doctor jambo]

BTW, it would be nice to know Ann Budge's response to what she plans to do if for some reason she isn't paid back, bearing in mind she is carrying the risk.

 

Geoff- she is bearing hee haw risk

Pledges already could cover a third of her outlay, so she is essentially securing a ?1.5 million loan on Tynecastle- Billy Bowie just paid that for a share in Killie

I dont want an owner chairwoman figure- I've had enough of those frankly.

I also dont want them reviewing footballing staff etc- aye thanks for putting up the money, but repay it sharpish and deliver fan ownership ASAP

[henry]

http://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/sport/football/hearts/ann-budge-holding-detailed-review-of-hearts-staff-1-3306157

 

Prospective Hearts owner Ann Budge is currently conducting a detailed review of the club as she prepares to become chairwoman, including assessing every member of football and non-football staff.

The millionaire Edinburgh businesswoman is keen to protect her investment after Foundation of Hearts confirmed she is bankrolling their ?2.5million takeover.

 

The review is almost certain to have been done a long time ago.

[1874robbo]

http://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/sport/football/hearts/ann-budge-holding-detailed-review-of-hearts-staff-1-3306157

 

Prospective Hearts owner Ann Budge is currently conducting a detailed review of the club as she prepares to become chairwoman, including assessing every member of football and non-football staff.

The millionaire Edinburgh businesswoman is keen to protect her investment after Foundation of Hearts confirmed she is bankrolling their ?2.5million takeover.

 

 

Southern and Murray first please.

[Lord Beni of Gorgie]

I'm amazed at the level of debate to be honest. Club was screwed.....club needs white knight (Lady)..... finds one......club needs to learn to become self sustainable.......handed a platform by white knight to do so.......fans now need to continue what they have done so well for so long now and pay for our success. This is our reality. If we continue to do what we have been, we will grow and we will attract sponsors, we will become stronger TOGETHER. HHGH today, tomorrow and forever more. God Bless the First Lady of Heart of Midlothian, Ann Budge

[Footballfirst]

BTW, it would be nice to know Ann Budge's response to what she plans to do if for some reason she isn't paid back, bearing in mind she is carrying the risk.

 

Ann is protected in that her investment will be secured on Tynecastle. Also she would remain as the owner of the club as the major shareholder.

[Diego10]

I've got no problems with maintaining my pledge for the long haul, that was always my intention. However, I share some concern about the time taken to repay the, much appreciated, loan from Ms Budge. I can understand some money going towards the payment of footballing creditors etc in year 1. But I'd have liked some sort of assertion that bar that, the FoH money is used in the first instance to repay the loan. Normal operating revenues should be used to bankroll the football club. Expecting everyone to maintain a long term commitment, when the club will be generating normal revenues which we should be aiming to live within, is playing with fire. Once the loan is paid off, by all means then I have no issues whatsoever about FoH membership money being used as additional working capital, but first and foremost secure Fan ownership of the club.

[al_hearts65]

I always thought it was a pledge for life so not bothered about the five year deal, we with the help of Ann Budge are saving our club so let's stop the bleating about 2 years 3 years 5 years, continue to contribute as much as you can for as long as you can and show newco how it is done.

[redm]

Geoff- she is bearing hee haw risk

Pledges already could cover a third of her outlay, so she is essentially securing a ?1.5 million loan on Tynecastle- Billy Bowie just paid that for a share in Killie

I dont want an owner chairwoman figure- I've had enough of those frankly.

I also dont want them reviewing footballing staff etc- aye thanks for putting up the money, but repay it sharpish and deliver fan ownership ASAP

 

You do realise that there's a very good chance we wouldn't have been a club to whinge about if she hadn't put in her cash, right?

Deary me. Come on, doctor. Very poor chat.

 

She didn't have to do this, but she did. And thank god for that. Even better, she sounds like someone who can potentially get our club whipped into shape. Who in their right mind would be against that? Baffling. Utterly baffling.

 

Who would you prefer to be doing the business review at the moment?

Edited February 14, 2014 by redm

[Jammy T]

I think you should read the website.

 

OK the draft member agreement

 

FUNDS

 

 

Your support is required to enable FoH to achieve its objectives (see below)

 

 

The funds will be used for

1. The financing of the purchase of the majority shareholding in HoMplc

2. Other legitimate purposes/projects, subject to board and membership approval, which will assist in ensuring the financial stability and/or betterment of the football club

 

OBJECTIVES

Primary aim to purchase majority shareholding and thereafter to ensure a stable financial future where all funds generated by the club, FOH and fans are reinvested in the football club

 

 

 

Patently clear to me that the DDs are not only for purchase of the club (that is a primary aim, not a sole aim), that they are also for the betterment of the club/financial security (ie additional income whenever it is needed) and that it is intended that they will continue after purchase (and thereafter ie after the purchase)

Edited February 14, 2014 by Jammy T

[Lord Beni of Gorgie]

I always thought it was a pledge for life so not bothered about the five year deal, we with the help of Ann Budge are saving our club so let's stop the bleating about 2 years 3 years 5 years, continue to contribute as much as you can for as long as you can and show newco how it is done.

In absolute agreement, until I can no longer afford it which hopefully will be never

[Koolkeith]

I'm not bothered how many years it takes. I'd rather have someone like Ann in place than what is going on at Rangers or some other fantasist hearts fan. The whole point of fan ownership is you continue to invest via a membership/payment. I though this was obvious. I'll happily pay my money every month for as long as I'm able to.

[Armageddon]

She's a business woman with the added bonus that her daughter has a love for us (or so the story goes). She has more to lose than we do if this fails.

 

Does her daughter post on here???

[davemclaren]

 

 

That's fine and will deliver the club to the fans within 5 years. Ann Budge is clearly a very capable businesswoman and (I hope) will have presented a number of options to the current FOH Board and that the current proposal was agreed as the best way forward.

 

However, I come back to the point that FoH's primary aim was to deliver ownership of the club, not to generate additional funds to run the club. Given that the two years "working capital" requirement and a five year plan for ownership has come as a surprise to some (certainly me), I would have thought that it was incumbent on FOH to at least seek some feedback on the alternative means of achieving their aims and risks associated with each, thereby achieving a better consensus.

 

It was always foh intention to continue the fan dd funding as an additional source of income. Min

[davemclaren]

 

 

 

It was always foh intention to continue the fan dd funding as an additional source of income. Minutes of the jkb members meeting with them shouldconfirm that. Not sure why that is a problem.

[redm]

We don't want to be a Dundee, we don't want to be a Rangers, surely we just want to get this right? Nothing worth having ever came easy.

 

If that takes more time than we expected then so be it. If in taking that extra time we increase the strength of the club going forward (and protect it from suffering further financial problems) then I'm all for doing whatever that takes. What difference does it actually make if we achieve ownership in 2/3 years or in 5 when the club has been around since 1874 and we want it to be secure for another 140 years at the very least? I don't want this to be half-arsed, I want us to take every possible step that we can to ensure that the club never has to go through something like this ever again. Risk avoidance sounds pretty peachy to me.

[The Gasman]

http://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/sport/football/hearts/ann-budge-holding-detailed-review-of-hearts-staff-1-3306157

 

Prospective Hearts owner Ann Budge is currently conducting a detailed review of the club as she prepares to become chairwoman, including assessing every member of football and non-football staff.

The millionaire Edinburgh businesswoman is keen to protect her investment after Foundation of Hearts confirmed she is bankrolling their ?2.5million takeover.

 

Hopefully this is just crap reporting.

 

I would not be comfortable with any Chair Woman / Chairman assessing the playing staff. I wasn't comfortable with Romanov doing it, and with no disrespect to Ann Budge, I don't think her skills set will be any better suited than his for assessing footballers.

 

[Generic Username]

Hopefully this is just crap reporting.

 

I would not be comfortable with any Chair Woman / Chairman assessing the playing staff. I wasn't comfortable with Romanov doing it, and with no disrespect to Ann Budge, I don't think her skills set will be any better suited than his for assessing footballers.

 

 

Hopefully it'll mean contract/bonus pay reviews rather than her going;

 

"Oh I like him/he wears funny boots/what's that haircut all about"

[Allowayjambo1874]

It might be the difference between owning a run down Championship club that is stuck in that division and one int the SPL

 

Think of it like a massive refurbishment of a grand old country house. You wouldnt want the full mortgage repayments to kick in at the start of the job, you'd want most of the rebuilding done before the bank came knocking on the door.

 

Its all very bizarre to not want this breathing space - its almost self destructive

 

I appreciate what you are saying and yes it could be the best way forward. But like some others I want the club in the hands of the fans, first and foremost. Ann Budge could be the best thing that has ever happened to the club and I sincerely hope she is, but at the end of the day for the next 5 years we have have a chairperson on the board who can effectively run the club as she wants. Despite what is going on in the background with FOH we are actually no different from any other club, we will have a board of directors who will be deciding the future and direction of the club. Yes there will be a FOH rep on the board but so what? If the board decides to accept a transfer fee or have a player budget that is extreme or sell Tynecastle and move to somewhere else where are we? (I have taken extreme examples btw!)

 

Let me be clear, I strongly suspect AB will be very good for the club and will be sensible regards decisions but I am a little bit miffed that my contributions for the next 2 years (which will run into 4 figures) will possibly be used to pay a players wages rather than buying shares in the club which is what I signed up for.

 

This is just debate incidentally, like most I will pay into FOH until my dying day.

[redm]

Hopefully this is just crap reporting.

 

I would not be comfortable with any Chair Woman / Chairman assessing the playing staff. I wasn't comfortable with Romanov doing it, and with no disrespect to Ann Budge, I don't think her skills set will be any better suited than his for assessing footballers.

 

 

I'd imagine the review will be of the playing squad as a resourcing and budgeting/cost related study.

Difficult to plan with any certainty when you have completely mad and inefficient baseline to start from.

[JAMBONI]

Hopefully this is just crap reporting.

 

I would not be comfortable with any Chair Woman / Chairman assessing the playing staff. I wasn't comfortable with Romanov doing it, and with no disrespect to Ann Budge, I don't think her skills set will be any better suited than his for assessing footballers.

 

I think Craig Levein may be more involved behind the scenes.

[Robbo-Jambo]

Can we not at this point be extremely grateful we still have a team to support ?

 

We were at deaths door on a life support machine a short time ago but we are now once again alive and kicking.

 

Whether people thought their pledges were for the start of owning the club from day one or being used for working capital for the first couple of years is almost irrelevant to me.

 

These pledges from us and the capital from Ann Budge have kept the club from going under and we should be taking one step at a time and not worrying 5 years down the line.

 

We could have ended up like Sevco with people trying to change our name, obliterate our history and take away our titles and cups.

 

Or we could have been the next Third Lanark.

 

FFS lets just be grateful that there is an HMFC here to support today and stop the bickering and arguing and pull together as one united support and let the future unfold in due course

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

 

 

Geoff- she is bearing hee haw risk

Pledges already could cover a third of her outlay, so she is essentially securing a ?1.5 million loan on Tynecastle- Billy Bowie just paid that for a share in Killie

I dont want an owner chairwoman figure- I've had enough of those frankly.

I also dont want them reviewing footballing staff etc- aye thanks for putting up the money, but repay it sharpish and deliver fan ownership ASAP

That's the question though. If she is not paid, what is her contingency?

[Mikey1874]

Thanks Ann.

 

For me I'm happy to contribute for as long as it takes to achieve the following:

 

1. Save club

2. Return to top division

3. Build new stand to replace main stand

 

At the end of this, with the club debt-free, it should be easy for the club to run within its means and be inthe top 2/3.

 

Longer term, I think we should look to have a membership scheme at say ?50 a year and try and encourage 20000 members.

 

Members would be entered for draws for tickets etc.

 

Another point re the 5 years instead of 3 for repaying Bidco is that while there may be some caution by Bidco 5 years is a more reasonable timescale imo to set the club up to move forward in a totally sustainable way incl deciding on a new stand or new ground.

[JAMBONI]

Can we not at this point be extremely grateful we still have a team to support ?

 

We were at deaths door on a life support machine a short time ago but we are now once again alive and kicking.

 

Whether people thought their pledges were for the start of owning the club from day one or being used for working capital for the first couple of years is almost irrelevant to me.

 

These pledges from us and the capital from Ann Budge have kept the club from going under and we should be taking one step at a time and not worrying 5 years down the line.

 

We could have ended up like Sevco with people trying to change our name, obliterate our history and take away our titles and cups.

 

Or we could have been the next Third Lanark.

 

FFS lets just be grateful that there is an HMFC here to support today and stop the bickering and arguing and pull together as one united support and let the future unfold in due course

 

Totally agree.

[Tiberius Stinkfinger]

Too many punters on here shedding a tenner a month dreaming of sitting on the board in my humble opinion.

 

Radio rental !!

[bigsuperslim1874]

 

 

Hopefully this is just crap reporting.

 

I would not be comfortable with any Chair Woman / Chairman assessing the playing staff. I wasn't comfortable with Romanov doing it, and with no disrespect to Ann Budge, I don't think her skills set will be any better suited than his for assessing footballers.

 

 

Report states Levein has been advising on footy matters......more fuel to the fire about him being the new manager!

[Diego10]

We don't want to be a Dundee, we don't want to be a Rangers, surely we just want to get this right? Nothing worth having ever came easy.

 

If that takes more time than we expected then so be it. If in taking that extra time we increase the strength of the club going forward (and protect it from suffering further financial problems) then I'm all for doing whatever that takes. What difference does it actually make if we achieve ownership in 2/3 years or in 5 when the club has been around since 1874 and we want it to be secure for another 140 years at the very least? I don't want this to be half-arsed, I want us to take every possible step that we can to ensure that the club never has to go through something like this ever again. Risk avoidance sounds pretty peachy to me.

I'd like to know why extra working capital takes precedence over transfer of ownership?

 

The primary goal of the DDs should be to secure ownership. That protects FoH against a medium-long term drop in pledges. Why given we will still bring in ST and other money, are we providing extra funding for a budget that hasn't yet been set?

 

 

[davemclaren]

 

The point is that FoH said that is what they were for. I'm not bothered but I can see why others are.

 

That's not true. Alex Mackie said the funds would also provide additional ongoing income.

[davemclaren]

Double post. Bloody fones.

Edited February 14, 2014 by davemclaren

[buzzbomb]

The original proposal was for ?5.75M and I think the split was around ?3M working capital.

 

At the time pledges were at less than ?1.5M per annum, so I don't know how people didn't think they were in for at least 4 years and how working capital is a surprise.

 

Saving the club, but leaving it languishing in the 1st division, well, what is the point?

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

 

 

That's not true. Alex Mackie said the funds would also provide additional ongoing income.

Indeed but was that the first objective?

[Cut The Crap]

Hopefully this is just crap reporting.

 

I would not be comfortable with any Chair Woman / Chairman assessing the playing staff. I wasn't comfortable with Romanov doing it, and with no disrespect to Ann Budge, I don't think her skills set will be any better suited than his for assessing footballers.

 

 

It says she's conducting a review, but not that she's looking into every single aspect of it personally. I'd guess there are areas where she is more than qualified to make judgments and areas, such as coaching and playing staff, where she'll take advice from someone who knows better than she does.

 

On the general point of the thread, I can't say I'm surprised at the lukewarm response from some one here because it's coming mostly from exactly the posters you'd expect to take that stance. To me, though, the proposal seems infinitely preferable to what we have now and to the model we've worked with for the past 25 years. I'm definitely in - and grateful that we have someone with the means to help us back onto our feet after the disastrous mismanagement of the past nine years in particular.

[Boris]

Hopefully this is just crap reporting.

 

I would not be comfortable with any Chair Woman / Chairman assessing the playing staff. I wasn't comfortable with Romanov doing it, and with no disrespect to Ann Budge, I don't think her skills set will be any better suited than his for assessing footballers.

 

 

At a club the CEO/Chairperson or whomever may look at the players and their contracts and assess with the manager how much they can afford/offer when they are up for renewal.

 

Perhaps that is what that means?

[davemclaren]

 

Indeed but was that the first objective?

 

He wasn't specific. I took them as parallel objectives if possible depending on circumstances.

[redm]

I'd like to know why extra working capital takes precedence over transfer of ownership?

 

The primary goal of the DDs should be to secure ownership. That protects FoH against a medium-long term drop in pledges. Why given we will still bring in ST and other money, are we providing extra funding for a budget that hasn't yet been set?

 

Presumably because when they were able to go into further detail with the planning they realised that original timescales presented an unacceptable associated risk. That's my guess anyway. Even BDO were struggling to get to grips with the costs buried in running Hearts and maybe now we're a good few months down the line, their detailed knowledge of the club's finances and cooperation with FOH means a more sound proposal. There were many unknowns back then, less so now, and of course Ann Budge has to agree to it all so there's the top layer right there.

 

I'm sure they'll explain in detail at some point. We know about the football debt but maybe there's other unavoidable costs we don't yet know about. I'd put vast sums of money on the answer not being "we just fancied having a bit extra to splash out on players we can't afford or other superfluous/frivolous stuff".

 

There will be a written agreement in place that ownership is transferred once repayments are concluded so I'm not even a wee bit worried at all about that.

[Yoda]

You do realise that there's a very good chance we wouldn't have been a club to whinge about if she hadn't put in her cash, right?

Deary me. Come on, doctor. Very poor chat.

 

She didn't have to do this, but she did. And thank god for that. Even better, she sounds like someone who can potentially get our club whipped into shape. Who in their right mind would be against that? Baffling. Utterly baffling.

 

Who would you prefer to be doing the business review at the moment?

 

Spot on.