Mad Dog Frazer Posted November 18, 2011 Share Posted November 18, 2011 must admit ive become quite naive with Hearts and their finances over the past few years What i want is someone to explain to me Please is If we went Bust what would Vlad Lose??? and would he be entitled to any of the money from selling the stadium?? If Vlad was to find a buyer what weould he have to lose? and This share equity thing with the 15 million that UBIG hold. i assume if we went tits up he'd lose this? and im assuming that the sale of the stadium would go to the banks etc in this country before UBIG could try and reclaim their 15 million back?? cheers in advance Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mad Dog Frazer Posted November 18, 2011 Author Share Posted November 18, 2011 must admit ive become quite naive with Hearts and their finances over the past few years What i want is someone to explain to me Please is If we went Bust what would Vlad Lose??? and would he be entitled to any of the money from selling the stadium?? If Vlad was to find a buyer what weould he have to lose? and This share equity thing with the 15 million that UBIG hold. i assume if we went tits up he'd lose this? and im assuming that the sale of the stadium would go to the banks etc in this country before UBIG could try and reclaim their 15 million back?? cheers in advance also does anyone know what were currently loosing a year?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john brownlee Posted November 18, 2011 Share Posted November 18, 2011 must admit ive become quite naive with Hearts and their finances over the past few years What i want is someone to explain to me Please is If we went Bust what would Vlad Lose??? and would he be entitled to any of the money from selling the stadium?? If Vlad was to find a buyer what weould he have to lose? and This share equity thing with the 15 million that UBIG hold. i assume if we went tits up he'd lose this? and im assuming that the sale of the stadium would go to the banks etc in this country before UBIG could try and reclaim their 15 million back?? cheers in advance what you want to be worried about is if Mr Romanov dies and his family inherit all assets . but as the government is entitled to 45% inheritance tax Hearts will have to be sold to cover the cost. start worring Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Footballfirst Posted November 18, 2011 Share Posted November 18, 2011 also does anyone know what were currently loosing a year?? We traded at a ?7.9M loss last year despite the reported ?39k profit as a result of debt forgiveness. When a company goes into admin, the shareholders are the first to lose out. The share capital will be worthless (it effectively is worthless just now anyway) The only assets are Tynecastle and the adjacent land. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Francis Albert Posted November 18, 2011 Share Posted November 18, 2011 what you want to be worried about is if Mr Romanov dies and his family inherit all assets . but as the government is entitled to 45% inheritance tax Hearts will have to be sold to cover the cost. start worring I doubt the UK tax man can hope for any inheritance tax when Vlad pops it. Anyway, it will never work, but it wouldn't be a bad idea to have an agreed set of facts (or rather reasonable working assumptions) on which the endless discussion obver the next months (years?) could be based. For starters: 1. Hearts debt is currently about ?30m. (It doesn't much matter if it is higher than this - it is sufficient to agree it is far higher than the value of Hearts either as a football business or broken up into its assets) 2. Without further write-offs no conceivable programme of cost cutting will reduce the debt to anything near the value of the business. 3. The debt is owed to entities owned by and/or controlled by Vlad. This isn't fact but a reasonable assumption, until some evidence emerges to put it in doubt. 4. Vlad cannot sell the club without writing off a large further chunk of debt 5. If Tynecastle is worth more in some other use (homes or supermarket) and Vlad's only interested in minimising hs losses then it is likely Tynecastle will go. Is that much common ground? Anything else? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jezza Posted November 18, 2011 Share Posted November 18, 2011 Why doesn't Romanov write off all the debt to make us more attractive to buy? He made the decisions to get debt this high in the first place and people have said we owe the debt to ourselves. It's not debt forgiveness, it's his fault we owe UBIG the dosh in the first place. Time to put his money were his mouth is and prove once and for all he owes himself all the debt. People are acting like he doesn't run the club and is some sort of hero for continually bailing us out with forgiveness or some rubbish, no, it's his decisions that make us owe his other companies debt, nobody elses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff Kilpatrick Posted November 18, 2011 Share Posted November 18, 2011 Why doesn't Romanov write off all the debt to make us more attractive to buy? He made the decisions to get debt this high in the first place and people have said we owe the debt to ourselves. It's not debt forgiveness, it's his fault we owe UBIG the dosh in the first place. Time to put his money were his mouth is and prove once and for all he owes himself all the debt. People are acting like he doesn't run the club and is some sort of hero for continually bailing us out with forgiveness or some rubbish, no, it's his decisions that make us owe his other companies debt, nobody elses. So if he wrote off all the debt, how exactly would it make it more attractive? Would it change the price that Vlad would ask for the shares and the debt? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigC Posted November 18, 2011 Share Posted November 18, 2011 The big question is, what are Hearts worth without the debt? How much would Vlad need to be prepared to lose to make a ?1 sale Worth while? Obviously any business person taking over would also be expected totals a hit, but what is a fair price? For me, the price Vlad eventually sells at will define his contribution to Hearts and whether the love/hate relationship finishes with love or hate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff Kilpatrick Posted November 18, 2011 Share Posted November 18, 2011 The big question is, what are Hearts worth without the debt? How much would Vlad need to be prepared to lose to make a ?1 sale Worth while? Obviously any business person taking over would also be expected totals a hit, but what is a fair price? For me, the price Vlad eventually sells at will define his contribution to Hearts and whether the love/hate relationship finishes with love or hate. Correct. And to be quite honest, I would be more worried about a potential new owner who would buy the club without any debt write-off! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fermit the Krog Posted November 18, 2011 Share Posted November 18, 2011 Why should he write off the debt that was accumulated before he arrived? Why should he pay now for the gordan petrics and fitzroy simpsons? He owes us nothing on that front. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jezza Posted November 18, 2011 Share Posted November 18, 2011 So if he wrote off all the debt, how exactly would it make it more attractive? Would it change the price that Vlad would ask for the shares and the debt? If he wrote of the debt the buyer wouldnt have to owe UBIG 30 million plus and that would make us a lot more attractive than a club with massive debts. Vlad should cut his loses -HIS loses, it's not the club or anyone else fault were in this mess it's his decisions and sell us debt free if he actually owes the money to himself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I.T.K Posted November 18, 2011 Share Posted November 18, 2011 Why doesn't Romanov write off all the debt to make us more attractive to buy? He made the decisions to get debt this high in the first place and people have said we owe the debt to ourselves. It's not debt forgiveness, it's his fault we owe UBIG the dosh in the first place. Time to put his money were his mouth is and prove once and for all he owes himself all the debt. People are acting like he doesn't run the club and is some sort of hero for continually bailing us out with forgiveness or some rubbish, no, it's his decisions that make us owe his other companies debt, nobody elses. Correct me if I am wrong, but I think Vlad bought the club with ?20 million debt. There for he writes of 10 million he kind of leaves the club where he found it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Francis Albert Posted November 18, 2011 Share Posted November 18, 2011 Why should he write off the debt that was accumulated before he arrived? Why should he pay now for the gordan petrics and fitzroy simpsons? He owes us nothing on that front. Because, to the extent it exceeds the value of the business, he has no choice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jezza Posted November 18, 2011 Share Posted November 18, 2011 Why should he write off the debt that was accumulated before he arrived? Why should he pay now for the gordan petrics and fitzroy simpsons? He owes us nothing on that front. If he ran us as a proper club money made from the sales of the likes of Gordon, Berra and Hartley would drastically have reduced the debt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff Kilpatrick Posted November 18, 2011 Share Posted November 18, 2011 If he wrote of the debt the buyer wouldnt have to owe UBIG 30 million plus and that would make us a lot more attractive than a club with massive debts. Vlad should cut his loses -HIS loses, it's not the club or anyone else fault were in this mess it's his decisions and sell us debt free if he actually owes the money to himself. Np buyer would owe UBIG ?30M because no one would pay for the club as a going concern with that level of debt. Unless they are clearly mental. Vlad will have to cut his losses so it doesn't really matter if all the debt is written off and converted to equity. All that would do would be to give the share price a value. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jezza Posted November 18, 2011 Share Posted November 18, 2011 Correct me if I am wrong, but I think Vlad bought the club with ?20 million debt. There for he writes of 10 million he kind of leaves the club where he found it. See the point on selling Craig etc. We shouldnt be anywhere near 20 million in debt if we were ran in a decent manner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff Kilpatrick Posted November 18, 2011 Share Posted November 18, 2011 If he ran us as a proper club money made from the sales of the likes of Gordon, Berra and Hartley would drastically have reduced the debt. Hold on! During the first 10 weeks of 2005, were we being run as a proper club when we were spending money like confetti? I don't know about you but I personally was loving it. Did I care about the spending - no! You can't live in hindsight. If you were attacking that kind of spending at the time, I credit you with amazing kudos and foresight. I'm willing to bet you weren't though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jezza Posted November 18, 2011 Share Posted November 18, 2011 Np buyer would owe UBIG ?30M because no one would pay for the club as a going concern with that level of debt. Unless they are clearly mental. Vlad will have to cut his losses so it doesn't really matter if all the debt is written off and converted to equity. All that would do would be to give the share price a value. It's his debt, his fault. Sorry that's the point I'm trying to make. For years we heard he owes himself the debt, well time to show this as the case. We could still have a really decent SPL standard side without having to get rid of everyone if he took the debt away and lowered the wage bill to a manageable level in comparison to revenue in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Francis Albert Posted November 18, 2011 Share Posted November 18, 2011 If he ran us as a proper club money made from the sales of the likes of Gordon, Berra and Hartley would drastically have reduced the debt. And if CPR ran us properly we'd not have Vlad, and so on. It would surely be more fruitful to deal in the facts of where we are rather than endlessly rake over the disastrous mistakes everyone agrees have been made. In fact for what it is worth here is another working assumptioion I suggest everyone can agree on. - For more than a decade the club has been run with a level of incompetence staggering even by the generally low standards of its administration in most of the previous 125 years Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jezza Posted November 18, 2011 Share Posted November 18, 2011 Hold on! During the first 10 weeks of 2005, were we being run as a proper club when we were spending money like confetti? I don't know about you but I personally was loving it. Did I care about the spending - no! You can't live in hindsight. If you were attacking that kind of spending at the time, I credit you with amazing kudos and foresight. I'm willing to bet you weren't though. Of course not. I loved every minute of it. Just because I loved it all doesn't mean Vlad made the decisions to spend so should therefore wipe the debt the club has to another one of his companies for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fermit the Krog Posted November 18, 2011 Share Posted November 18, 2011 If he ran us as a proper club money made from the sales of the likes of Gordon, Berra and Hartley would drastically have reduced the debt. I think he earned the right to do what he wanted with monies recieved in transfers tbh. he'd be entitled to leave us as we were before he arrived. Imo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff Kilpatrick Posted November 18, 2011 Share Posted November 18, 2011 It's his debt, his fault. Sorry that's the point I'm trying to make. For years we heard he owes himself the debt, well time to show this as the case. The proof of the pudding will be when a buyer emerges. It would help if Vlad actually named a price. We could still have a really decent SPL standard side without having to get rid of everyone if he took the debt away and lowered the wage bill to a manageable level in comparison to revenue in. Indeed. The loss of big earning players doesn't bother me in the slightest. We are filled with mediocre pish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jezza Posted November 18, 2011 Share Posted November 18, 2011 And if CPR ran us properly we'd not have Vlad, and so on. It would surely be more fruitful to deal in the facts of where we are rather than endlessly rake over the disastrous mistakes everyone agrees have been made. In fact for what it is worth here is another working assumptioion I suggest everyone can agree on. - For more than a decade the club has been run with a level of incompetence staggering even by the generally low standards of its administration in most of the previous 125 years The difference is the Pieman owed the money to banks. Romanovs hearts owe the money to another Romanov company. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jezza Posted November 18, 2011 Share Posted November 18, 2011 I think he earned the right to do what he wanted with monies recieved in transfers tbh. he'd be entitled to leave us as we were before he arrived. Imo. How did he earn the right? By making decisions to lead the club owing more money to another of his companies? I always wondered why there was a debt in the first place and why he didnt put the money he was spending of the clubs money with money placed in directly. That's what concernes me, I put the put up and show up time now he wants rid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fermit the Krog Posted November 18, 2011 Share Posted November 18, 2011 The difference is the Pieman owed the money to banks. Romanovs hearts owe the money to another Romanov company. But a large chunk of the money owed isnt of his own doing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jezza Posted November 18, 2011 Share Posted November 18, 2011 The proof of the pudding will be when a buyer emerges. It would help if Vlad actually named a price. Indeed. The loss of big earning players doesn't bother me in the slightest. We are filled with mediocre pish. Geoff, if Vlad names the price and the debt he contributed to is gone off his value then he will be my biggest hero ever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff Kilpatrick Posted November 18, 2011 Share Posted November 18, 2011 How did he earn the right? By making decisions to lead the club owing more money to another of his companies? I always wondered why there was a debt in the first place and why he didnt put the money he was spending of the clubs money with money placed in directly. That's what concernes me, I put the put up and show up time now he wants rid. So, again, if he wiped the debt out, what would be different? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Francis Albert Posted November 18, 2011 Share Posted November 18, 2011 The difference is the Pieman owed the money to banks. Romanovs hearts owe the money to another Romanov company. Yes, the difference is it is in Vlad's hands to write off the debt. If our debt had remained with HBOS we wouldn't , post the property and financial collapse of 2008, have anything to worry about today. Anyway the fact is Vlad has no choice but to write off most of the debt if he wants to sell. He will have to reduce the debt to a lower level than he inherited. If he can manage to recover a little of the vast sums he has invested/wasted on Hearts, why on earth shouldn't he? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jezza Posted November 18, 2011 Share Posted November 18, 2011 But a large chunk of the money owed isnt of his own doing. Round in circles. If he ran us proper from the start the Gordon hartley and Berra transfers would have drastically have eaten away at the debt he took on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fermit the Krog Posted November 18, 2011 Share Posted November 18, 2011 How did he earn the right? By building a team who played at Tynecastle that allowed him to command the fees he did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fermit the Krog Posted November 18, 2011 Share Posted November 18, 2011 Round in circles. If he ran us proper from the start the Gordon hartley and Berra transfers would have drastically have eaten away at the debt he took on. and pay for someone elses mistakes? Round in circles indeed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jam Tarts 1874 Posted November 18, 2011 Share Posted November 18, 2011 The difference is the Pieman owed the money to banks. Romanovs hearts owe the money to another Romanov company. So Romanov spent millions trying to make us more sucessful and failed, therefore you are saying that he has to lose everything he put in just because you are not enjoying being an Hearts fan right now. Does that mean that if Hearts had become sucessful on Romanov's money but ultimately still in debt that you would not have enjoyed it? You and many others like you appear to want to have it both ways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Francis Albert Posted November 18, 2011 Share Posted November 18, 2011 Round in circles. If he ran us proper from the start the Gordon hartley and Berra transfers would have drastically have eaten away at the debt he took on. If he hadn't put Gordon on an extended contract at a salary the club could not afford without increasing the debt we would not have got the money we did for Gordon. Of course in retrospect investing in Gordon was a good investment; investing in most of the other players we put on high earnings was not. Isn't hindsight wonderful? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jam Tarts 1874 Posted November 18, 2011 Share Posted November 18, 2011 Round in circles. If he ran us proper from the start the Gordon hartley and Berra transfers would have drastically have eaten away at the debt he took on. Was it not Romanov who put Gordon on a massive salary to keep him with us longer thereby increasing his value? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IronJambo Posted November 18, 2011 Share Posted November 18, 2011 But a large chunk of the money owed isnt of his own doing. Of course it is. Yes there was ?20m debt when he arrived, there were also assets such as Craig Gordon. He sold Craig (and many others) and instead of being responsible and putting even part of it to the debt he decided to keep on racking it up. He has tried to make himself look good by "writing off" parts of debt to UBIG when it shouldn't have been there in the first place. He'll probably pull a fast one and sell the club for 1p with the debt brought down to ?20m on condition that the overdraught (or loan) remains with UBIG so he can rake in the interest. Maybe this was his plan all along? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndyMcI Posted November 18, 2011 Share Posted November 18, 2011 Round in circles. If he ran us proper from the start the Gordon hartley and Berra transfers would have drastically have eaten away at the debt he took on. I think that is a bit of a false economy. If Vlad had us living within our means from day 1 and filled the team with low cost players and offered the like of Gordon a small wage in his re-newed contract we would not have realised the fee we received. If Hearts were mid table obscurity and Gordon on a contract worth ?2k a week we would not have got anywhere near the fee we received for him IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hawaii Posted November 18, 2011 Share Posted November 18, 2011 Mercer sold us to The Pieman & Deans as they were the only ones interested. As the new owners didn't have any cash and CPR went off on some mad power trip we ended up in ?20m debt with the only option being to flog the ground for flats. The Pieman then sold to Vlad - again the only one interested. I just hope that this time the Federation of Hearts Supporters takes a great deal of interest in who buys the club. For all the laughing at the Wide Boy that has landed Rangers for ?1 I would hate it if we ended up with some mini-me Craig Whyte. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Francis Albert Posted November 18, 2011 Share Posted November 18, 2011 Of course it is. Yes there was ?20m debt when he arrived, there were also assets such as Craig Gordon. He sold Craig (and many others) and instead of being responsible and putting even part of it to the debt he decided to keep on racking it up. He has tried to make himself look good by "writing off" parts of debt to UBIG when it shouldn't have been there in the first place. He'll probably pull a fast one and sell the club for 1p with the debt brought down to ?20m on condition that the overdraught (or loan) remains with UBIG so he can rake in the interest. Maybe this was his plan all along? Ah, so that's why Vlad had to fight off so many competing buyers. Gordon was only worth what he was because Vlad put him on a contract and salary which in the short term increased our debt. Of course in retrospect we can say that if he had only paid players too much who turned out to be worth something, our debt would not be where it is now. If your powers of foresight are so good that you can manage that sort of trick, only making the good decisions, then you are wasting your time on a message board when you could be making a fortune out there. Of course Vlad made too many appalling decisions but to suggest that he could have wiped out the inherited debt if only he had invested in Gordon, Hartley, Berra and a few others, and not in "unprofitable" players is taking hindsight to absurd extremes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deejtee Posted November 18, 2011 Share Posted November 18, 2011 We almost died thanks to CR. Vlad tried to speculate to accumulate but underestimated the scale of the job likeloads of previous owners in Scotland and elsewhere. If he wants out he will have lost a huge sum and we can all stop deluding ourselves about third force, players not good enough etc. Lose lose I'm afraid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daydream Believer Posted November 18, 2011 Share Posted November 18, 2011 Of course it is. Yes there was ?20m debt when he arrived, there were also assets such as Craig Gordon. He sold Craig (and many others) and instead of being responsible and putting even part of it to the debt he decided to keep on racking it up. He has tried to make himself look good by "writing off" parts of debt to UBIG when it shouldn't have been there in the first place. He'll probably pull a fast one and sell the club for 1p with the debt brought down to ?20m on condition that the overdraught (or loan) remains with UBIG so he can rake in the interest. Maybe this was his plan all along? His plan all along was quite obvious from Day 1. 1 - Invest in Hearts to raise his profile. 2 - Used his increased profile and contacts to open bank 3 - Make lots of money from bank I don't think he ever hid this and as a hearts fan it was fine because if it worked and the bank made money then the continued investment in hearts (even though they continually made losses) would be more than set off by his banking profits. We'd have a nice symbiotic relationship and a real chance of challenging the OF. It was a risk of course that didn't pay off, and as soon as that plan failed we were always going to be in bother. He looked at a series of plan B's including the stadium/hotel, selling on Lithuanian players, etc but they were never really going to work. I don't buy the nefarious stuff about interest to his bank, secret payments and so forth because there would be no need for a wealthy foreign businessman to buy a high profile club with all the hassles that entails to make a few quid that way. No doubt he developed a relationship with the club over the time he was here, probably helped by run ins with the SFA/media/OF but all we actually are at this point is a failed business plan. The adulation that he's recieved, often on here and sometimes tounge in cheek has led some people to believe that he is some kind of philanthropist looking to help out Hearts. I don't think he is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vincent B.A Posted November 18, 2011 Share Posted November 18, 2011 Of course not. I loved every minute of it. Just because I loved it all doesn't mean Vlad made the decisions to spend so should therefore wipe the debt the club has to another one of his companies for it. You are totally unrealistic mate, why would he wipe all the Debt off? Because he made decisions to spend money? I would imagine he'll write off the bare minimum amount of debt that will put the club in a position where it can be sold (if we dont go bust). I think the best position we could hope for is for the debt to be written off to the level that it was when he first bought the club. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingantti1874 Posted November 18, 2011 Share Posted November 18, 2011 Mercer sold us to The Pieman & Deans as they were the only ones interested. As the new owners didn't have any cash and CPR went off on some mad power trip we ended up in ?20m debt with the only option being to flog the ground for flats. The Pieman then sold to Vlad - again the only one interested. I just hope that this time the Federation of Hearts Supporters takes a great deal of interest in who buys the club. For all the laughing at the Wide Boy that has landed Rangers for ?1 I would hate it if we ended up with some mini-me Craig Whyte. I don't think anyone will buy the club. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mysterion Posted November 18, 2011 Share Posted November 18, 2011 His plan all along was quite obvious from Day 1. 1 - Invest in Hearts to raise his profile. 2 - Used his increased profile and contacts to open bank 3 - Make lots of money from bank I think you are spot on. The way to exit Hearts IMO is to develop a long term repayment scheme with UKIO and a Hearts Community Organisation. He may have to use an intermediary Bank to do this but it is possible. It'll prove to investers his bank can handle long term investments in the UK... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jezza Posted November 18, 2011 Share Posted November 18, 2011 Fair dos the guys who disagree, just thoughts and opinions. Deep down I genuinely think Romanov cares about the club and he will forever be my hero if he clears the debt he helped create and let us start again with some other poor gadge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IronJambo Posted November 18, 2011 Share Posted November 18, 2011 Ah, so that's why Vlad had to fight off so many competing buyers. Gordon was only worth what he was because Vlad put him on a contract and salary which in the short term increased our debt. Of course in retrospect we can say that if he had only paid players too much who turned out to be worth something, our debt would not be where it is now. If your powers of foresight are so good that you can manage that sort of trick, only making the good decisions, then you are wasting your time on a message board when you could be making a fortune out there. Of course Vlad made too many appalling decisions but to suggest that he could have wiped out the inherited debt if only he had invested in Gordon, Hartley, Berra and a few others, and not in "unprofitable" players is taking hindsight to absurd extremes. He knew what he doing with Craig Gordon (clearly not when he bought the club) but why would a Hearts fan pat him on the back for what he done? He extended Craigs contract on massive wages to increase his worth, then sold him for a ridiculous fee. That fee didn't seem to dent the clubs debt, but I'm sure that Craigs wages added to the debt. Romanov made money out of Craig Gordon, not Hearts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Francis Albert Posted November 18, 2011 Share Posted November 18, 2011 He knew what he doing with Craig Gordon (clearly not when he bought the club) but why would a Hearts fan pat him on the back for what he done? He extended Craigs contract on massive wages to increase his worth, then sold him for a ridiculous fee. That fee didn't seem to dent the clubs debt, but I'm sure that Craigs wages added to the debt. Romanov made money out of Craig Gordon, not Hearts. Fair enough. You think Vlad falsified the accounts and embezzled the club. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slap Posted November 18, 2011 Share Posted November 18, 2011 Fair enough. You think Vlad falsified the accounts and embezzled the club. Of that there is very little doubt..,,,,,,, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.