Questions for the AGM

[lost in leith]

Some questions I'd like answered. I know the Shareholders' Association always prepare a list of questions in advance. I'd like to think they will have this lot covered, but I'll be bringing this list along just in case.

 

Feel free to add any more of your own.

 

Questions for AGM

 

Note 1.1 ? Going concern (page 14) ? ?UBIG?s support is contingent upon the Company being able to materially reduce playing costs going forward.?. Can the directors give an indication of what ?materially? means, and what would happen if they are unable to meet this condition?

 

Note 1.3 ? Turnover (page 14) ? can the directors explain what items are contained within which accounting years? In particular ?

 

a) was some of the income for the AEK Athens game at Murrayfield (played 9/8/06) included for the year to 31/7/06 if it was received in that year; and

was all income for the Barcelona game (played 28/7/06) included for the year to 31/7/07?

 

If all the income from the AEK and Barcelona games was included in the year to 31/7/07, how was match day income more than ?400k less than for the previous year?

 

Can the directors give an indication of how much income the plc made from the Barcelona game, and how much of that had to be paid to Barcelona, the SRU and the company which organised the game?

 

Note 1.14 - Prior year adjustment of ?486k (page 16) ? presumably this relates to players loaned from FBK Kaunas. What is the explanation for this charge?

 

Note 6 ? Intangible fixed assets (page 17). How much of the ?3.822m paid for players? registrations was paid to FKB Kaunas? From this amount can the directors give details of how much was paid for which players? Can they confirm that all of any transfer fee received from West Brom for Roman Bednar will go to the plc rather than FKB Kaunas?

 

Note 11? Creditors: amounts falling due within one year (page 19). The amount due to UBIG increased during the year by just under ?7.3m. ?13.2m is due under renewable loan notes, the first of which was repayable on 2 August 2007. Can the directors tell us how much of this debt was repaid from the Craig Gordon transfer fee after the year end? Also, how does the Board propose to repay the remaining debt if UBIG demand payment on the date the loan notes expire?

 

NOTE ? in fairness the interest rate on this debt is only 5%, which is a significantly lower interest rate than the plc could expect to negotiate with an independent third party.

 

Note 13 ? Convertible loan stock (page 20). Can the directors confirm that they do not have the power to re-negotiate this agreement in order to allow UBIG to convert this debt to shares without a formal meeting of the shareholders?

 

General - why have the directors decided that the club should remain as a plc? The suggestion was that plc status led to unnecessary costs.

[Doctor FinnBarr]

Some questions I'd like answered. I know the Shareholders' Association always prepare a list of questions in advance. I'd like to think they will have this lot covered, but I'll be bringing this list along just in case.

 

Feel free to add any more of your own.

 

Questions for AGM

 

Note 1.1 ? Going concern (page 14) ? ?UBIG?s support is contingent upon the Company being able to materially reduce playing costs going forward.?. Can the directors give an indication of what ?materially? means, and what would happen if they are unable to meet this condition?

 

Note 1.3 ? Turnover (page 14) ? can the directors explain what items are contained within which accounting years? In particular ?

 

a) was some of the income for the AEK Athens game at Murrayfield (played 9/8/06) included for the year to 31/7/06 if it was received in that year; and

was all income for the Barcelona game (played 28/7/06) included for the year to 31/7/07?

 

If all the income from the AEK and Barcelona games was included in the year to 31/7/07, how was match day income more than ?400k less than for the previous year?

 

Can the directors give an indication of how much income the plc made from the Barcelona game, and how much of that had to be paid to Barcelona, the SRU and the company which organised the game?

 

Note 1.14 - Prior year adjustment of ?486k (page 16) ? presumably this relates to players loaned from FBK Kaunas. What is the explanation for this charge?

 

Note 6 ? Intangible fixed assets (page 17). How much of the ?3.822m paid for players? registrations was paid to FKB Kaunas? From this amount can the directors give details of how much was paid for which players? Can they confirm that all of any transfer fee received from West Brom for Roman Bednar will go to the plc rather than FKB Kaunas?

 

Note 11? Creditors: amounts falling due within one year (page 19). The amount due to UBIG increased during the year by just under ?7.3m. ?13.2m is due under renewable loan notes, the first of which was repayable on 2 August 2007. Can the directors tell us how much of this debt was repaid from the Craig Gordon transfer fee after the year end? Also, how does the Board propose to repay the remaining debt if UBIG demand payment on the date the loan notes expire?

 

NOTE ? in fairness the interest rate on this debt is only 5%, which is a significantly lower interest rate than the plc could expect to negotiate with an independent third party.

 

Note 13 ? Convertible loan stock (page 20). Can the directors confirm that they do not have the power to re-negotiate this agreement in order to allow UBIG to convert this debt to shares without a formal meeting of the shareholders?

 

General - why have the directors decided that the club should remain as a plc? The suggestion was that plc status led to unnecessary costs.

 

Good on ya mate for havin a go, but this is Thursday night/Friday morning, I don,t have a clue what you,re on about!

[Rawrrrrrrr]

Some pertinent questions but dont expect proper answers

 

Re the barcelona game, accounting practice states the club should have recognised all income or accrued for it

[Thomsoca]

Personally I think that you should forget about the financial implications of who owns what and how the debt is structured.

 

Let be honest here, the hole is now so big that it's not going to be filled regardless of any plus or minuses in the accounts. Romanov supports the total debt, however it's structured, and if he doesn't it's "game over". He owns the club and calls the shots.

 

So lets just concentrate on the football decisions that are needed if the club is to find its way back to where it should be. A manager must be appointed with full control for both the playing side and transfers in and out.

 

This is the only thing that matters for Hearts supporters.

[zdrastvway]

lost in leith, an incisive set of questions. You read accounts well. On the plc point, remember that although having de-listed a private company can still be a plc. That status doesn't bring with it much increased cost over the vanilla-flavoured Limited, but it does have a minimum share capital to maintain and needs to lodge accounts sooner with Companies House.

[flecktimus]

Its going to be a long day:eek:

[super_vlad]

Some pertinent questions but dont expect proper answers

 

Re the barcelona game, accounting practice states the club should have recognised all income or accrued for it

 

The accounts published are for 2006-2007, so the barca game income should not be included. IMO

[SeeVee]

The accounts published are for 2006-2007, so the barca game income should not be included. IMO

 

The Barca game was on 28 July 2007 and the accounts go up to 31 July 2007 so Prancer is absolutely right.

[Nucky Thompson]

The Barca game was on 28 July 2007 and the accounts go up to 31 July 2007 so Prancer is absolutely right.

But it might have taken more than 3 days to count the cash:p

[Dirk Diggler]

Do you think it's morally correct that a carton of Ribena should cost ?2?

[hmfc1440]

The company that organised the Barcelona match is Platinum One - an Irish owned company with a Scottish office. Very interested to know what they made from the match and what Barcelona were paid. The individual from their Scottish office who arranged the match went straight from Events Organiser to either MD or CEO not long after the match - I think a small fortune was made by Platinum One.

[SeeVee]

But it might have taken more than 3 days to count the cash:p

 

I'm starting to think it didnae take more than three minutes to count our share of the cash.

[rudi must stay]

Do you think it's morally correct that a carton of Ribena should cost ?2?

 

well said. Yup, we need to get the priorities right here

[Rawrrrrrrr]

I'm starting to think it didnae take more than three minutes to count our share of the cash.

 

 

In which case the club should have accrued for the income they knew was coming and guessed the rest then offset it

 

And although the accounts were up until the 31st they certainly didnt close them or design them on the 31st so have had plenty of time

 

The barcelona game income is definitly included and if not the club have disregarded all legal and accounting basis