I.T.K Posted November 19, 2011 Share Posted November 19, 2011 Quite positive.... http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/scotland/15799102.stm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cobblers Posted November 19, 2011 Share Posted November 19, 2011 Was he not positive about Vlad's arrival Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flux Posted November 19, 2011 Share Posted November 19, 2011 BBC in can't spell won't spell shocker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jambof3tornado Posted November 19, 2011 Share Posted November 19, 2011 He did state that he would want new owners to own the stadium also. Not keen on this splitting the club from the ground malarky. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jam Tarts 1874 Posted November 19, 2011 Share Posted November 19, 2011 No-one has contacted Hearts about a takeover. http://www.scotsman....rance_1_1974832 Interesting that the piece in the hibsman also talks about UKIO Bankas, but obviously as it is good news about the bank there is no chance of an headline. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
audrey65 Posted November 19, 2011 Share Posted November 19, 2011 He did state that he would want new owners to own the stadium also. Not keen on this splitting the club from the ground malarky. If what we are hearing is accurate, that the bidders are looking at some sort of long term lease on Tynecastle, it would appear that they do not have the funds to truly take over. Then a split would be inevitable and probably in the best interests of the Football Club which, after all, is the only thing that is truly important. Not keen on George Foulkes if I'm honest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jambos are go! Posted November 19, 2011 Share Posted November 19, 2011 If you own the club you own the ground surely - directly or indirectly Any takeover will IMO be largely centred on the development of the area around Tynecastle and/or a new stadium as part of a much larger development on the West of the City. IMO as I said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gcjambo Posted November 19, 2011 Share Posted November 19, 2011 No-one has contacted Hearts about a takeover. http://www.scotsman....rance_1_1974832 Interesting that the piece in the hibsman also talks about UKIO Bankas, but obviously as it is good news about the bank there is no chance of an headline. Brian McLauchlin was asked about the 2 offers on Sportsound yesterday evening. He said then that neither consortium had contacted Hearts/Vlad yet and that they were still preparing their offer/proposals etc etc. Just need to wait and see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colonel Kurtz Posted November 19, 2011 Share Posted November 19, 2011 Brian McLauchlin was asked about the 2 offers on Sportsound yesterday evening. He said then that neither consortium had contacted Hearts/Vlad yet and that they were still preparing their offer/proposals etc etc. Just need to wait and see. Surely we should learn from our previous mistakes and give no credence to what Foulkes and his cronies say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
audrey65 Posted November 19, 2011 Share Posted November 19, 2011 If you own the club you own the ground surely - directly or indirectly Any takeover will IMO be largely centred on the development of the area around Tynecastle and/or a new stadium as part of a much larger development on the West of the City. IMO as I said. In an ideal world this is what will happen. Unfortunately, despite much hot air to the contrary, I cant the council being of much help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I.T.K Posted November 19, 2011 Author Share Posted November 19, 2011 Surely we should learn from our previous mistakes and give no credence to what Foulkes and his cronies say. Which mistake? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joe.gausden Posted November 19, 2011 Share Posted November 19, 2011 Could it be that the leasing of the stadium would be short term until a new ground was built. This could bring SDM into the equation with him leasing Tynie from Vlad until he gets this village project up and running. No inside info, all just IMO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jambos are go! Posted November 19, 2011 Share Posted November 19, 2011 In an ideal world this is what will happen. Unfortunately, despite mucroseburnh hot air to the contrary, I cant the council being of much help. As I've said before a pal of Alistair Darling told me that the Council preferred option was to get Hearts out of Gorgie to allow a huge development From Macleod Street to Roseburn. And there are some on the Council who dont mind if the Green Belt is breached and would see a new stadium as a helpful PR aid . The Council will help Hearts and associated developers if it serves their purpose but not for Hearts Sake . IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colonel Kurtz Posted November 19, 2011 Share Posted November 19, 2011 Which mistake? 1.Endorsing Romanovs bid for total control,and advocating that shareholders sell to him,within a week of achieving total control Romanov sacked Burley. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colonel Kurtz Posted November 19, 2011 Share Posted November 19, 2011 Could it be that the leasing of the stadium would be short term until a new ground was built. This could bring SDM into the equation with him leasing Tynie from Vlad until he gets this village project up and running. No inside info, all just IMO SDM recently made a few bob out of his "land pocket" which was part of Glasgow Commonwealth Games development.He "anticipated" this land would be essential to the councils development and bought the land cheap. The money he made would be small beer if he could get his holdings in the west of EDinburgh reclassified from Green Belt by the council...he has been trying for years Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
portobellojambo1 Posted November 19, 2011 Share Posted November 19, 2011 No-one has contacted Hearts about a takeover. http://www.scotsman....rance_1_1974832 Interesting that the piece in the hibsman also talks about UKIO Bankas, but obviously as it is good news about the bank there is no chance of an headline. People seem to be getting in a tizzy over the fact no one appears to have contacted HMFC since Romanov officially announced he was selling. Christ, it was only Thursday it was announced, any group interested would have to establish all the facts before wading in (I hope). People have been speaking to Romanov over the course of his tenure, so he is aware there is interest, but the last people he would give names to, present or past, are the feckin press, just lets that lot print even more shite. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joe.gausden Posted November 19, 2011 Share Posted November 19, 2011 SDM recently made a few bob out of his "land pocket" which was part of Glasgow Commonwealth Games development.He "anticipated" this land would be essential to the councils development and bought the land cheap. The money he made would be small beer if he could get his holdings in the west of EDinburgh reclassified from Green Belt by the council...he has been trying for years I'd have to assume he'd see this as the ideal opportunity to get them to shift if they're that desperate to get the land at Tynie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clerry Jambo Posted November 19, 2011 Share Posted November 19, 2011 1.Endorsing Romanovs bid for total control,and advocating that shareholders sell to him,within a week of achieving total control Romanov sacked Burley. Colonel, how the hell can you blame Lord Foulkes or anyone else for that matter, no-one knew what Vlad was going to be like, hindsight is a wonderful thing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colonel Kurtz Posted November 19, 2011 Share Posted November 19, 2011 Colonel, how the hell can you blame Lord Foulkes or anyone else for that matter, no-one knew what Vlad was going to be like, hindsight is a wonderful thing At the time there was a body of opinion who thought that to paraphrase"power corrupts .total power corrupts totally" Romanov was the majority shareholder,but there was sufficient shareholding to provide a balance to his more knee jerk actions..like sacking Burley Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Old Tolbooth Posted November 19, 2011 Share Posted November 19, 2011 Was he not positive about Vlad's arrival He's a politician, he's used to spouting shite that everyone wants to hear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff Kilpatrick Posted November 19, 2011 Share Posted November 19, 2011 1.Endorsing Romanovs bid for total control,and advocating that shareholders sell to him,within a week of achieving total control Romanov sacked Burley. Given the DFE swaps, that was immaterial. Given that Vlad owned 75% in any case, he could force through anything he wanted via an EGM. In other words, having a go at Foulkes for this is tackling the man without the ball. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colonel Kurtz Posted November 19, 2011 Share Posted November 19, 2011 Given the DFE swaps, that was immaterial. Given that Vlad owned 75% in any case, he could force through anything he wanted via an EGM. In other words, having a go at Foulkes for this is tackling the man without the ball. 1,The DFE had not happened at this stage 2,He could ,but not instantly..perhaps stopping some of his more knee jerk decisions,there would also be people who were not his "beetroot soup" boys who could give alternatives. 3.Foulkes ceratinly wasnt on the ball ,i would agree with that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff Kilpatrick Posted November 19, 2011 Share Posted November 19, 2011 1,The DFE had not happened at this stage 2,He could ,but not instantly..perhaps stopping some of his more knee jerk decisions,there would also be people who were not his "beetroot soup" boys who could give alternatives. 3.Foulkes ceratinly wasnt on the ball ,i would agree with that Fair point, the DFE's hadn't happened. Another counter point I would make though is that the announcement of the takeover when Vlad bought out SMG was followed 24 hours later by Burley's sacking. Surely shareholders could have made up their own minds? I didn't own shares so I didn't have to make the decision (I wouldn't have sold incidentally but that's immaterial). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Brightside Posted November 19, 2011 Share Posted November 19, 2011 If you own the club you own the ground surely - directly or indirectly Not necessarily, Chelsea recently tried ( and failed) to buy back the Stamford Bridge from a fans group. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
japanjambo Posted November 19, 2011 Share Posted November 19, 2011 I like George Foulkes. And there's no doubt in my mind he had Hearts best interests at heart when he got Romanov involved. Those first few weeks of that first season were absolutely amazing. Tickets were like gold dust. We'd never seen that before at Tynie. None of us can see into the future, so I don't think you can blame Foulkes for what happened. We were all on the Romanov bandwagon. He's an eccentric guy and has made some awful decisions. It's been a rollercoaster few years, never a dull moment. Hopefully we'll get some new owners in soon and get back to normality. We will still be talking about 'Mad Vlad' in ten years time though, and hopefully having a good chuckle at some of his antics. Lynn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gigolo-Aunt Posted November 19, 2011 Share Posted November 19, 2011 Meh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.