Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
shaun.lawson

Anyone seen this?

Recommended Posts

shaun.lawson

Total speculation of course, but interesting nonetheless... What do you think? (And before anyone accuses me: no, I'm not the person behind this blog - even given the length of the articles!)

 

http://tynecastle.blogspot.com/2008/01/15-to-20-year-plan.html

 

You can prove virtually anything by employing number crunching and statistics. For example: 3 games unbeaten and The Jambos are flying. Or ... Just 1 (s)crappy win in 11 matches for the Hearts against opposition who are struggling with their own form ... could both accurately apply to the same set of circumstances.

 

An upbeat mood in a positive climate (understandably, we all enjoy it when Hearts FTH!) the day after a Derby victory, is an ideal time to shout out aloud from the roof tops that HMFC are having that new stand and here's the proof the club owners (with a few, as of yet still to be found investors) can afford to build it. After all, I heard it with my own ears yesterday "Who gives a toss about all the other crap as long as we've beaten the Hibess!!??"

 

Hmm, one of the ways of financing the new stand mentioned is an increased ticket revenue of ?2.5million per year. Very good, excellent, thank goodness those at the helm of the club have thought it all through.

 

But hang on a minute ... if that's increased revenue, on top of current turnover, for a purported 10,000 extra seats, just what kind of season ticket and matchday prices are the club going to be asking for to bring in that sort of money? And where are all the affluent people who can afford that kind of outlay going to suddenly appear from? They've not exactly been turning out in droves previously, so just what is going to entice them in now?

 

And what of those of us who are already paying quite enough and wouldn't really wish to, or even possibly be able to afford to, stretch to that sort of budget? Season ticket prices would need an inflation busting and rather phenominal price rise to come anywhere near to that figure. Think about it!

 

Here's a thought that hasn't been suggested yet though, not yet, that could get around the awkward obstacle of fleecing fans to the maximum and making it affordable (or at least seem affordable) to them, while making people feel like an integral and important part of the club into the bargain. 10 year season tickets, paid for in advance, to guarantee you a seat in the new main stand for the next decade, your own personal bit of Hearts, with your own name on it. Who's tempted?

 

And how are you going to finance it? Well, by way of a massive coincidence, the club owner has links to a bank and can probably set up a nice preferential rate loan scheme for all Jambos to sign up for. Thereby 'generously' lending supporters the money for them to invest in the club that he owns. You wouldn't even have to actually touch the cash, it could stay in his bank accuring interest charges from day one. Simplistic and brilliant isn't it?

 

Of course, this is all purely hypothetical ... for the time being at least.

 

A very similar scheme was employed to cover the shortfall required to build the new(ish) Wembley Stadium ... "But that's in London, IT COULDN'T HAPPEN HERE!" I hear people saying in unison. Hmm, well let's just hope not.

 

Those buying into the scheme would have their ticket prices pegged at the same price for ten years as a reward for their loyalty. Brilliant!!! Well, it would be if the interest rates on any loan agreement were pegged too, the preferential introductory rate won't last forever. Vlad is a banker! Alas, banks have to consider such things as index linked inflation rates, so no such deal would actually be practicable or workable for them. And besides, there's always that projected increase of ?2.5million per year to consider, if that can't be raised through pegged ticket prices, the interest, as dictated by the bank will adequately cover the deficit ... be sure of that. If a lump some was to be raised up front, a steady income flow and turnover must be maintained somehow. And if UKIOS Bank are benefitting too, err ... everyone's happy. Aren't we???

 

This is all very much at the hypothetical and heresay stage as of yet. But mark my words, it has already been demonstrated to the current board of directors that football fan loyalty is a profitable and exploitable commodity that is ripe for them to pluck. And supporter long term investment is one option that has been discussed at high level.

 

Personally, I would be very wary of investing any money into a scheme with a body that can (as someone quite aptly put it on one of the forums today) just flippantly dismiss 5 years in a single stroke. As in, it will take 15 'maybe' 2o years to get the club out of debt ... a projection with a 5 year (at least AKA maybe) safety net to accommodate any hiccups, is fairly vague don't you think? Also while I'm on the subject, whatever happened to the 5 year plan that Vladimir Romanov had/has* in place already? Can somebody at the club please explain, via one of the now regular spin/briefing official announcement sessions, when the current 5 year plan we hear so much about actually commenced? Did it start when Vladimir Romanov took over the club, or did it begin when he made an announcement at the beginning of this year? If the latter is the case - is it a 5 year plan with a 3 year preperation period, or a 8 year plan, or what? I guess that all leads back to the statistics and number crunching again. Either way, it's probably designed to confuse people like you and me, and evidently the person who raised this point on JKB earlier. Sorry, but I forgot the posters name, but I'm sure he wasn't alone in needing a certain amount of clarification and demystification regarding this matter.

 

At certain other clubs where they have needed to raise money for redevelopment or relocation, they have employed debenture schemes, whereby supporters buy debenture shares/bonds/limited stock in the club, once again usually via a loan scheme curtailing interest charges, which guarantee those who buy into these schemes the 'right' to purchase and renew a season ticket annually, but don't actually have any shareholder voting rights attatched to them. Some of these schemes were greatly successful (from the clubs who launched thems point of view least ways). But fundamentally, all they're offering fans was a piece of paper which, though probably worded quite differently, should have read 'This sucker just spent a fortune to continue with the privilege of being a paying customer/supporter* of their favourite football club.' As stated previously, loyalty is a profitable and exploitable commodity.

 

Of course, Tynecastle, or whatever it ends up being called, will also have (as it already does following a successful pilot scheme) catergory B season ticket holders, who won't get the same perks and purchasing power that the principle club investors will have - by principle club investors, I mean long term season ticket holders who have put their money into the club, not any individual who has leant - i.e. not given or invested - the club any money from his own bank. But they're already part of an anticipated cash flow equalling current turnover anyway, not part of any extra funding. Doubtless some of them will be tempted to upgrade. That won't be a problem, as the number crunchers seem confident that there are an infinite number of people just waiting in the wings to fill in all the gaps. Does anybody truly believe 28,000 people will turn out to watch Hearts versus (no offence intended) Gretna, on a cold February day? I certainly don't. Part of the problem facing Scottish football clubs in general, financially, came about when clubs had to build minimum requirement all seater stadiums that are hardly ever filled to capacity. Those who don't learn from the mistakes of the past are doomed to repeat them.

 

For every hundred people sat there right now saying "Nah, none of the above would ever happen at Hearts", or for the few like minded souls thinking "Eek, I'd heard rumours about these schemes too" ... there are going to be just as many people nodding and saying "If that's what it takes to carry on supporting MY football club, I would be prepared to do that." A worrying thought isn't it? Unless of course you're one of the number crunchers formulating money raising schemes, just in case investors aren't forthcoming with the abundance of finance required (I don't actually envisage the Edinburgh business community having a lot of confidence in the unconventional methods of the club owner to be honest), or ways of raising even more extra cash when the estimates prove to be nowhere near the actual costs that were originally envisaged. Take Wembley as an example again, where those behind that project actually got quite a lot of financial assistance from elsewhere that won't be available to HMFC, but who still couldn't cover the cost, not even for a national stadium. Builders estimates are notorious for going up just as rapidly as any structure, even a fancy new football stand complex.

 

?2.5million extra turnover per season, on ticket income alone, is a massive sum of money to generate. Is that figure actually feasible? Those carrying out feasibility studies are bound to say yes ... they're getting paid to come up with answers and solutions that Vladimir Romanov and his cohorts will find agreeable.

 

I'm not scare-mongering, nor indulging in idle gossip and conjecture. I'm just looking at the wider picture and considering the ramifications of what could happen. And taking into account the other topics besides those actually slow released through a trickle of very professional sounding and presented official PR announcements of late, that have been discussed at high level too.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Boris

Wow, more paranoid ramblings about Hearts!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dave 1974

Serious question mate.

 

Are you on some kind of self-mission to enlighten the JKB community into the merits of burning ones retinas to nothing by reading the most expansive texts known to man?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
shaun.lawson
Serious question mate.

 

Are you on some kind of self-mission to enlighten the JKB community into the merits of burning ones retinas to nothing by reading the most expansive texts known to man?

 

Good God man - it's just a blog! Sheesh: lighten up...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Boris
That HAS to be Lacostelad.

 

He has a point, I think. But he always was one to look very deeply into comments/projections etc.

 

Time will tell.

 

We're doomed Captain Mainwaring, doomed I tell ye!

 

James_Frasier.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
shaun.lawson
That HAS to be Lacostelad.

 

He has a point, I think. But he always was one to look very deeply into comments/projections etc.

 

Time will tell.

 

It could be: I'd be surprised though. Is that his usual writing style?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Acey
... "But that's in London, IT COULDN'T HAPPEN HERE!" I hear people saying in unison.

[/i]

 

Ha ha - I do say that a lot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dave 1974
It could be: I'd be surprised though. Is that his usual writing style?

 

It can be. LL can be multifaceted when he so desires.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dave 1974
I think so. I enjoyed reading his stuff, even if I didn;t agree with much of it.

 

The conversational lay-out, screeds of rhetorical questions....as well as the desire simply to come up with a Hearts blog site all point to Mr LL I think.

 

'Screeds....' Fantastic wordage Mr. Borthers. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PTBCAL
Total speculation of course, but interesting nonetheless... What do you think? (And before anyone accuses me: no, I'm not the person behind this blog - even given the length of the articles!)

 

http://tynecastle.blogspot.com/2008/01/15-to-20-year-plan.html

 

You can prove virtually anything by employing number crunching and statistics. For example: 3 games unbeaten and The Jambos are flying. Or ... Just 1 (s)crappy win in 11 matches for the Hearts against opposition who are struggling with their own form ... could both accurately apply to the same set of circumstances.

 

An upbeat mood in a positive climate (understandably, we all enjoy it when Hearts FTH!) the day after a Derby victory, is an ideal time to shout out aloud from the roof tops that HMFC are having that new stand and here's the proof the club owners (with a few, as of yet still to be found investors) can afford to build it. After all, I heard it with my own ears yesterday "Who gives a toss about all the other crap as long as we've beaten the Hibess!!??"

 

Hmm, one of the ways of financing the new stand mentioned is an increased ticket revenue of ?2.5million per year. Very good, excellent, thank goodness those at the helm of the club have thought it all through.

 

But hang on a minute ... if that's increased revenue, on top of current turnover, for a purported 10,000 extra seats, just what kind of season ticket and matchday prices are the club going to be asking for to bring in that sort of money? And where are all the affluent people who can afford that kind of outlay going to suddenly appear from? They've not exactly been turning out in droves previously, so just what is going to entice them in now?

 

And what of those of us who are already paying quite enough and wouldn't really wish to, or even possibly be able to afford to, stretch to that sort of budget? Season ticket prices would need an inflation busting and rather phenominal price rise to come anywhere near to that figure. Think about it!

 

Here's a thought that hasn't been suggested yet though, not yet, that could get around the awkward obstacle of fleecing fans to the maximum and making it affordable (or at least seem affordable) to them, while making people feel like an integral and important part of the club into the bargain. 10 year season tickets, paid for in advance, to guarantee you a seat in the new main stand for the next decade, your own personal bit of Hearts, with your own name on it. Who's tempted?

 

And how are you going to finance it? Well, by way of a massive coincidence, the club owner has links to a bank and can probably set up a nice preferential rate loan scheme for all Jambos to sign up for. Thereby 'generously' lending supporters the money for them to invest in the club that he owns. You wouldn't even have to actually touch the cash, it could stay in his bank accuring interest charges from day one. Simplistic and brilliant isn't it?

 

Of course, this is all purely hypothetical ... for the time being at least.

 

A very similar scheme was employed to cover the shortfall required to build the new(ish) Wembley Stadium ... "But that's in London, IT COULDN'T HAPPEN HERE!" I hear people saying in unison. Hmm, well let's just hope not.

 

Those buying into the scheme would have their ticket prices pegged at the same price for ten years as a reward for their loyalty. Brilliant!!! Well, it would be if the interest rates on any loan agreement were pegged too, the preferential introductory rate won't last forever. Vlad is a banker! Alas, banks have to consider such things as index linked inflation rates, so no such deal would actually be practicable or workable for them. And besides, there's always that projected increase of ?2.5million per year to consider, if that can't be raised through pegged ticket prices, the interest, as dictated by the bank will adequately cover the deficit ... be sure of that. If a lump some was to be raised up front, a steady income flow and turnover must be maintained somehow. And if UKIOS Bank are benefitting too, err ... everyone's happy. Aren't we???

 

This is all very much at the hypothetical and heresay stage as of yet. But mark my words, it has already been demonstrated to the current board of directors that football fan loyalty is a profitable and exploitable commodity that is ripe for them to pluck. And supporter long term investment is one option that has been discussed at high level.

 

Personally, I would be very wary of investing any money into a scheme with a body that can (as someone quite aptly put it on one of the forums today) just flippantly dismiss 5 years in a single stroke. As in, it will take 15 'maybe' 2o years to get the club out of debt ... a projection with a 5 year (at least AKA maybe) safety net to accommodate any hiccups, is fairly vague don't you think? Also while I'm on the subject, whatever happened to the 5 year plan that Vladimir Romanov had/has* in place already? Can somebody at the club please explain, via one of the now regular spin/briefing official announcement sessions, when the current 5 year plan we hear so much about actually commenced? Did it start when Vladimir Romanov took over the club, or did it begin when he made an announcement at the beginning of this year? If the latter is the case - is it a 5 year plan with a 3 year preperation period, or a 8 year plan, or what? I guess that all leads back to the statistics and number crunching again. Either way, it's probably designed to confuse people like you and me, and evidently the person who raised this point on JKB earlier. Sorry, but I forgot the posters name, but I'm sure he wasn't alone in needing a certain amount of clarification and demystification regarding this matter.

 

At certain other clubs where they have needed to raise money for redevelopment or relocation, they have employed debenture schemes, whereby supporters buy debenture shares/bonds/limited stock in the club, once again usually via a loan scheme curtailing interest charges, which guarantee those who buy into these schemes the 'right' to purchase and renew a season ticket annually, but don't actually have any shareholder voting rights attatched to them. Some of these schemes were greatly successful (from the clubs who launched thems point of view least ways). But fundamentally, all they're offering fans was a piece of paper which, though probably worded quite differently, should have read 'This sucker just spent a fortune to continue with the privilege of being a paying customer/supporter* of their favourite football club.' As stated previously, loyalty is a profitable and exploitable commodity.

 

Of course, Tynecastle, or whatever it ends up being called, will also have (as it already does following a successful pilot scheme) catergory B season ticket holders, who won't get the same perks and purchasing power that the principle club investors will have - by principle club investors, I mean long term season ticket holders who have put their money into the club, not any individual who has leant - i.e. not given or invested - the club any money from his own bank. But they're already part of an anticipated cash flow equalling current turnover anyway, not part of any extra funding. Doubtless some of them will be tempted to upgrade. That won't be a problem, as the number crunchers seem confident that there are an infinite number of people just waiting in the wings to fill in all the gaps. Does anybody truly believe 28,000 people will turn out to watch Hearts versus (no offence intended) Gretna, on a cold February day? I certainly don't. Part of the problem facing Scottish football clubs in general, financially, came about when clubs had to build minimum requirement all seater stadiums that are hardly ever filled to capacity. Those who don't learn from the mistakes of the past are doomed to repeat them.

 

For every hundred people sat there right now saying "Nah, none of the above would ever happen at Hearts", or for the few like minded souls thinking "Eek, I'd heard rumours about these schemes too" ... there are going to be just as many people nodding and saying "If that's what it takes to carry on supporting MY football club, I would be prepared to do that." A worrying thought isn't it? Unless of course you're one of the number crunchers formulating money raising schemes, just in case investors aren't forthcoming with the abundance of finance required (I don't actually envisage the Edinburgh business community having a lot of confidence in the unconventional methods of the club owner to be honest), or ways of raising even more extra cash when the estimates prove to be nowhere near the actual costs that were originally envisaged. Take Wembley as an example again, where those behind that project actually got quite a lot of financial assistance from elsewhere that won't be available to HMFC, but who still couldn't cover the cost, not even for a national stadium. Builders estimates are notorious for going up just as rapidly as any structure, even a fancy new football stand complex.

 

?2.5million extra turnover per season, on ticket income alone, is a massive sum of money to generate. Is that figure actually feasible? Those carrying out feasibility studies are bound to say yes ... they're getting paid to come up with answers and solutions that Vladimir Romanov and his cohorts will find agreeable.

 

I'm not scare-mongering, nor indulging in idle gossip and conjecture. I'm just looking at the wider picture and considering the ramifications of what could happen. And taking into account the other topics besides those actually slow released through a trickle of very professional sounding and presented official PR announcements of late, that have been discussed at high level too.

 

 

Is it not a ?2.5m increase in revenue through increased tickets sales and match day corporate facilities?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
redm
That HAS to be Lacostelad.

 

He has a point, I think. But he always was one to look very deeply into comments/projections etc.

 

Time will tell.

 

My thoughts exactly. That has LL written all over it.

 

Some interesting ideas there, but it's all speculation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sherlock
Is it not a ?2.5m increase in revenue through increased tickets sales and match day corporate facilities?

 

I was thinking that myself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fine Scottish Wine

I would loved to have read it all but i felt my brain melting through my eyes half way through.

Wish i had the time to be so paranoid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gilamas

For what it's worth, it is an interesting parallel to the Da Vinci Code. The Blogger takes the SUGGESTED IDEA "one of the ways of financing the new stand mentioned is an increased ticket revenue of ?2.5million per year"

 

All very bland and even promising in its own right.

 

Then he develops his argument using the above SUGGESTED IDEA as if it were a statement of FACT; as if it were taken as read that increased ticket revenue was the ONLY method of financing the new Stand.

 

I do not believe anyone in UBIG/UKIO Bankas has suggested that increased ticket revenue would pay for the whole of the new Stand, that it would be the only source of revenue etc etc.

 

But the blog is so long and re-visits the original theory (which, remember, is a SUGGESTED IDEA) that by the end of it you are so familiar with the SUGGESTED IDEA that (just like the Da Vinci Code), you are easily persuaded to accept it as FACT.

 

Just for the record, other methods could include:

1. Stadium hire

2. Sponsorship

3. Off-set tax liability and debts within the company group

4. Player sales

5. Playing success and prize money

6. Third party investment

7. Hotel and other facility use

8. Corporate entertainment at matchday

etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
shaun.lawson
Is it not a ?2.5m increase in revenue through increased tickets sales and match day corporate facilities?

 

Indeed: the corporate facilities being crucial, indeed. One thing though: Pedro Lopez spoke of us being debt-free within fifteen to twenty years. How is that possible if we're making just ?2.5m per year: the sums don't add up, do they?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ToadKiller Dog

Yep sounds like LL on his one man missonary service to save our hearts.

Does he make any mention about money raised from corporate tickets in his speil i got a little lost in the words.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Boris
I would loved to have read it all but i felt my brain melting through my eyes half way through.

Wish i had the time to be so paranoid.

 

sshh.....who said that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
shaun.lawson
Two 'indeeds'? That's sexy prose.

 

It's ****e prose, more like! I hate it when I do that. :biggrin:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Craig_
Is it not a ?2.5m increase in revenue through increased tickets sales and match day corporate facilities?

 

I'm sure PL said that was for tickets alone and that the corporate stuff would be on top of that.

 

Anyway, time for some back-of-fag-packet calculations. If the current income from 4,000 seats = ?1.2m pa (assuming an average of ?300 per seat), then to make an extra ?2.5m from a 10,000 seat stand, you'd need to sell the seats for an average of ?370 pa, which by my reckoning is a mere 23% increase in price.

 

As someone who squeezes into our antiquated main stand, I'd quite happily shell out another ?70 a year on my ST to sit in a luxurious new stand!

 

(apologies for the hibs-style simplistic mathematics!)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
shaun.lawson
I hate blogs.

 

Are you aware that you're pretty much writing on one right now, though? Messageboards, blogs... there's barely any difference, really.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The People's Chimp
My thoughts exactly. That has LL written all over it.

 

Some interesting ideas there, but it's all speculation.

 

where is LL? not taking advantage of the amnesty?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thig Ar Latha
Is it not a ?2.5m increase in revenue through increased tickets sales and match day corporate facilities?

 

I think 'Corporate' is meant to be a big part of future Turnover.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest GhostHunter
Are you aware that you're pretty much writing on one right now, though? Messageboards, blogs... there's barely any difference, really.

 

Ha !

 

Wait till I add the Blog On facility.

 

:ninja:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
redm
where is LL? not taking advantage of the amnesty?

 

Was it a full amnesty? I thought it was just for those on suspensions/warnings etc? If they're allowing people who were banned to come back, I'd be very surprised if he doesn't take advantage.

 

I haven't spoken to him for a while but I think he's still floating about at VFG.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sherlock
Was it a full amnesty? I thought it was just for those on suspensions/warnings etc? If they're allowing people who were banned to come back, I'd be very surprised if he doesn't take advantage.

 

I haven't spoken to him for a while but I think he's still floating about at VFG.

 

Seems to be a full'ish amnesty...

 

...the admin team would like to offer some of our banned members the opportunity to be reinstated to the board if they wish. With this in mind, we?re opening a temporary ?amnesty window? in which banned members can be reinstated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
marshallschunkychicken
I was thinking that myself.

 

Ditto.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Billy52
For what it's worth, it is an interesting parallel to the Da Vinci Code. The Blogger takes the SUGGESTED IDEA "one of the ways of financing the new stand mentioned is an increased ticket revenue of ?2.5million per year"

 

All very bland and even promising in its own right.

 

Then he develops his argument using the above SUGGESTED IDEA as if it were a statement of FACT; as if it were taken as read that increased ticket revenue was the ONLY method of financing the new Stand.

 

I do not believe anyone in UBIG/UKIO Bankas has suggested that increased ticket revenue would pay for the whole of the new Stand, that it would be the only source of revenue etc etc.

 

But the blog is so long and re-visits the original theory (which, remember, is a SUGGESTED IDEA) that by the end of it you are so familiar with the SUGGESTED IDEA that (just like the Da Vinci Code), you are easily persuaded to accept it as FACT.

 

Just for the record, other methods could include:

1. Stadium hire

2. Sponsorship

3. Off-set tax liability and debts within the company group

4. Player sales

5. Playing success and prize money

6. Third party investment

7. Hotel and other facility use

8. Corporate entertainment at matchday

etc.

 

Lets not get too technical about this.

 

What is needed is a manager who can put a product on the park and win things...............See, it's simple really

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
shaun.lawson

 

:biggrin:

 

I don't actually know what Mozzer did to get banned.

 

I missed it somewhere.

 

Still, he seems to be happy on BiM...

 

And people call me pretentious!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
shaun.lawson
Indeed: the corporate facilities being crucial. One thing though: Pedro Lopez spoke of us being debt-free within fifteen to twenty years. How is that possible if we're making just ?2.5m per year: the sums don't add up, do they?

 

Back to the top, seeing as no-one's answered so far. Current debt = approx ?30m. Cost of main stand plus various corporate add-ons = ?51m. Debt after it's built = ?81m - so a profit of ?2.5m/year would leave us debt free... in thirty-three years. Unless I've got this wrong?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
redm
Back to the top, seeing as no-one's answered so far. Current debt = approx ?30m. Cost of main stand plus various corporate add-ons = ?51m. Debt after it's built = ?81m - so a profit of ?2.5m/year would leave us debt free... in thirty-three years. Unless I've got this wrong?

 

Or...wasn't it also mentioned that the profit from the hotel, serviced apartments, flats, conferencing, rented office space etc goes towards paying off the debt too? Ticket and corporate/matchday profit is just one revenue stream.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hackney Hearts
Back to the top, seeing as no-one's answered so far. Current debt = approx ?30m. Cost of main stand plus various corporate add-ons = ?51m. Debt after it's built = ?81m - so a profit of ?2.5m/year would leave us debt free... in thirty-three years. Unless I've got this wrong?

 

 

If you're using the whole 51 million as part of the debt, then surely you've got to use the income from hotel etc as part of your income figure?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Surrey Jambo
That HAS to be Lacostelad.

 

He has a point, I think. But he always was one to look very deeply into comments/projections etc.

 

Time will tell.

 

As far as I know, it's not LL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
shaun.lawson
Or...wasn't it also mentioned that the profit from the hotel, serviced apartments, flats, conferencing, rented office space etc goes towards paying off the debt too? Ticket and corporate/matchday profit is just one revenue stream.

 

Are we sure about this? What exactly is in it for UBIG if they don't profit themselves somewhere along the line? Dumbojambo (sorry for naming a poster on the thread) has made a series of exceptional posts in which he's argued that the commercial and footballing sides will be separated, with the money from the hotel, flats etc going straight into UBIG's coffers, and Tynecastle being rented out to a new buyer. He's no hatkicker or Vladsheep at all - and I've always found what he's suggested to be very persuasive, if I'm honest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
shaun.lawson
If you're using the whole 51 million as part of the debt, then surely you've got to use the income from hotel etc as part of your income figure?

 

Presumably so, yes. Of course, how much the projections, which must be on the optimistic side of things, match up with reality remains to be seen... But as I've asked above: surely UBIG must be looking to profit somewhere in all this, rather than just eat away at the debt? What's in it for them if they don't? I don't get it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bickfest

What a load of male cattle manure. The extra seats increase capacity by 5,500. If season tickets average ?400 for those seats (and were all sold) that would alone be ?2.2 million. (Individual sales per game might be more.) Add cup games, food & drink, corporates etc etc it's really not hard to get to comfortably more than ?2.5 million.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
redm
Are we sure about this? What exactly is in it for UBIG if they don't profit themselves somewhere along the line? Dumbojambo (sorry for naming a poster on the thread) has made a series of exceptional posts in which he's argued that the commercial and footballing sides will be separated, with the money from the hotel, flats etc going straight into UBIG's coffers, and Tynecastle being rented out to a new buyer. He's no hatkicker or Vladsheep at all - and I've always found what he's suggested to be very persuasive, if I'm honest.

 

That sounds like a plausible theory to me too, and I don't see any reason why it can't work in Hearts' favour assuming that the commercial side of the business impacts positively on the footballing side and vice versa. To begin with anyway. Just because it might prove beneficial to UBIG, it doesn't necessarily have to be detrimental to the interests of the club. If this were to happen, Hearts FC would literally be reduced to a brand and a squad of players...and while that terrifies the living daylights out of me, I can see why it might work well. Not that I necessarily support the concept btw, I'm just playing with ideas!

 

The only fly in the ointment would be if the ?51m was added to Hearts' bill but UBIG took all the profits and I can't see that happening. It's too daft to contemplate. I hope. :o

 

Buuuut....I have a nagging feeling that there's something in place that prevents this sort of thing though...possibly regarding ownership and use of the stadium and the land on which it stands? Maybe someone with less porridge and bumblebees in their noggin can remember what it was, I'm half asleep this afternoon...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dr. Bapswent

Ahh LL, where are you with your twisted mind bending conspiracy fuelled nonsense over the top madcap crazy ideas!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Poseidon

Lets look at it like this - if Hearts sold out every game at a 23,000 Tynecastle these calculations would hopefully help to work out why an extra ?2.5m ticket revenue per season is easily reachable;

 

Lets say the number of home games at Tynecastle per season would be 22;

 

19 league games

2 cup games

1 glamour friendly

 

If the number of season ticket holders was to remain the same - around 13,000 with 5,000 of these having a cup top up then the following would apply;

 

23,000 would need to buy a ticket to the friendly

18,000 would need to buy a ticket to the 2 cup games

10,000 would need to buy a ticket to the 19 league games

 

23,000 + 36,000 + 190,000 = 249,000 tickets sold per season.

 

If ?4m (I’m basing this on ?1.5m ticket sales this season for games not covered by STs + ?2.5m extra when new stand built) came from these 249,000 tickets (not including increases in season ticket prices) the cost per ticket would be ?16.06. Obviously we aren’t going to sell out every game but even if only half the people bought tickets for games not included in their ST they would only need to pay ?32.12 per ticket and this would translate to attendances of 11,500 for a friendly, 14,000 for cup games and 18,000 for league games.

 

And realistically, you'd see an increase in ST prices by then so if the average ST cost ?300 and there's a 10% increase by then, you can knock another ?390,000 off the ?4m you need to find which would equate to ?14.50/?29 tickets usisng the calculations above.

 

Told you it was easy to work out……. :thumb:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  



×
×
  • Create New...