Ann Budge update

[Eldar Hadzimehmedovic]

 

People wanting shot of Neilson need to be careful what they wish for.

This logic is so stupid.

 

People wanted Neilson replaced because they thought we could push on and do better. Our dof appointed someone much, much worse. Maybe your ire should be directed at him.

[Footballfirst]

This is all a bit disingenuous, FF. The reason that cost will be included in the agreement is because, after discussion by legal counsel and other advisers, that's how much they will have concluded it'll cost in professional fees to service the agreement. It's not some figure plucked from the sky. It's not going to be sitting around waiting for a "rainy day" and it's kind of mischievous of you to suggest it's included in the profit pot as free money or the "money Ann will take from the club" - it will pay Bidco's professional costs. Costs Bidco will only incur in the first place because it's lending us a ton of cash and lending a lot of cash costs a lot of money. 

 

There's not a chance FOH legal counsel would allow Bidco legal counsel just to pluck some random figure totalling hundreds of thousands of pounds (possibly more over lifetime of agreement) out of the sky, insert it in the agreement and we pay it. It will have been included because that's the sum we all agree that it will cost to service the agreement. To go down that road you have to then imply that our own professional advisers are doing iffy things or advising us badly and then it starts to get really daft. 

I'm sorry, I don't see it being as disingenuous at all.  The sums mentioned are those that Ann has procured from the club under the terms of the Bidco loan and funding agreements.  That money has exited the club, much of it funded by FOH.

 

Perhaps you should classify interest payments in the same way as you have the professional fees and the arrangement fees.  After all they are only replacing investment income that Ann may have received elsewhere had she not made the loan to the club, i.e. it is not new income going into Ann's pocket.

 

Anyway, I never said that Ann had pocketed the money.  I stated that Ann's reward would come from her legacy shareholding.

 

Edit: I should add that FOH incurred legal fees of ?72,000 which were also met by the club.

[Francis Albert]

Since i believe foh is only allowed to retain 50k a year for all its own admin costs ann clearly outspent foh by a huge margin on legal and other professional advice. If you read the foh/bidco agreement it shows. This isnt attacking ann who is perfectly entitled to protect her own interests ... and if someone else is paying there is not perhaps the same incentive to control those costs. (Since we are told foh and bidco are as one and fully trust each other you do wonder why the costs were so high for what is in fact quite a small transaction. Edit - i see from ff's latest post that foh did not pay its legal fees out of its retained share of foh subs - my point stands.

 

.

[The Treasurer]

I'm sorry, I don't see it being as disingenuous at all.  The sums mentioned are those that Ann has procured from the club under the terms of the Bidco loan and funding agreements.  That money has exited the club, much of it funded by FOH.

 

Perhaps you should classify interest payments in the same way as you have the professional fees and the arrangement fees.  After all they are only replacing investment income that Ann may have received elsewhere had she not made the loan to the club, i.e. it is not new income going into Ann's pocket.

 

Anyway, I never said that Ann had pocketed the money.  I stated that Ann's reward would come from her legacy shareholding.

 

Edit: I should add that FOH incurred legal fees of ?72,000 which were also met by the club.

Surely that should have been worded that FoH has "procured" ?72k from the club.

Just to make it sound like they've taken something they weren't entitled to 

[Francis Albert]

In you estimation, what sort of salaries would a CEO, Project Manager etc cost to an organisation the size of Hearts.

Probably a lot more over 3 years than the ?110k you quote

These are all jobs that AB does for "free"

to suggest ann is project manager for the new stand is the most damaging claim on the thread!

[The Treasurer]

to suggest ann is project manager for the new stand is the most damaging claim on the thread!

Ok probably not the right choice of words.

But the point still stands that all the work she undertakes on behalf of the club would still need to be done and to employ a professional(s) to fill these roles would cost substantially more than ?110k over a period of 3 years or more

[Hendricks]

This logic is so stupid.

 

People wanted Neilson replaced because they thought we could push on and do better. Our dof appointed someone much, much worse. Maybe your ire should be directed at him.

Correct.

 

The irony is even Neilson himself knew he'd peaked and that the ship was taking on water. Wasn't a daft lad that Neilson, desperately wanted out and took the first opportunity afforded him. He turned out way brighter than I gave him credit for. The fact remains anyone who wants Hearts to be the best they can be knew Neilson had taken us as far as he could and the European / cup results were simply unacceptable. To this day I'm delighted he left. It's not the fans fault they then appointed someone totally inadequate and are fannying about now trying to replace him.

[Dusk_Till_Dawn]

What utopia particularly?

 

The Cathro "utopia" ended with me after the last Aberdeen game last season.

 

I wanted to see him get the players he needed to play the way he wanted but it is clear that wouldn't happen so I haven't been mincing around any utopia for 3 months or so.

 

I've mostly been moaning about the club set up the construction project, ironically, an anti-utopia....

 

However I'll end with the comment I posted that Hendricks roasted me for around 18 months ago

 

People wanting shot of Neilson need to be careful what they wish for.

That last sentence has proven correct. Although I do think it was going stale under Neilson - and his handling of those infamous Hibs cup ties was a watershed moment in his popularity.

[Nookie Bear]

This logic is so stupid.

 

People wanted Neilson replaced because they thought we could push on and do better. Our dof appointed someone much, much worse. Maybe your ire should be directed at him.

 

Precisely.

 

People wanting shot of Neilson - whether that was a sensible wish or not - did not expect him to be replaced by someone so unsuitable.

 

if we had replaced Neilson with Wright (AS AN EXAMPLE!!!) then we would not be in this mess and nobody would care too much about Robbie leaving.

 

It's just the fact Cathro was so inept, and kept in a job way too long (I would have booted him after the Partick game, after the hibs defeat) that raises Robbie's profile amongst the Hearts fans.

[redm]

I'm sorry, I don't see it being as disingenuous at all.  The sums mentioned are those that Ann has procured from the club under the terms of the Bidco loan and funding agreements.  That money has exited the club, much of it funded by FOH.

 

Perhaps you should classify interest payments in the same way as you have the professional fees and the arrangement fees.  After all they are only replacing investment income that Ann may have received elsewhere had she not made the loan to the club, i.e. it is not new income going into Ann's pocket.

 

Anyway, I never said that Ann had pocketed the money.  I stated that Ann's reward would come from her legacy shareholding.

 

Edit: I should add that FOH incurred legal fees of ?72,000 which were also met by the club.

 

Oh come on. That's mischievous! 

 

It's a standard part of an agreement involving loans and/or transactions for large sum of money. It's standard in many many types of agreements. The borrower pays the professional costs of the lender. It's not some mechanism to squeeze money out of us, but that's how you're painting it - as something she shouldn't have, or as something she/Bidco aren't entitled to. The value of these fees are collectively agreed (and are often capped as well, to my knowledge), so it's not some mechanism to extort our cash. Quite often the party paying the fees reviews the invoices from the professional service providers as well, it's not left to someone saying "Oh hiya gimme ?600k of your hard-earned would you because that's how much I think it'll cost. Ta." There's a difference between "money exiting the club" and "money Ann takes from the club" or however you originally put it. That money has exited the club but it's for professional fees - fees without which this deal would never have happened. 

 

This must be massively boring for everyone else so I'll stop harping on about it now, but it's really not fair of you to deliberately attempt to muddy the puddle on this FF. Just saying. 

[luckydug]

Oh come on. That's mischievous!

 

It's a standard part of an agreement involving loans and/or transactions for large sum of money. It's standard in many many types of agreements. The borrower pays the professional costs of the lender. It's not some mechanism to squeeze money out of us, but that's how you're painting it - as something she shouldn't have, or as something she/Bidco aren't entitled to. The value of these fees are collectively agreed (and are often capped as well, to my knowledge), so it's not some mechanism to extort our cash. Quite often the party paying the fees reviews the invoices from the professional service providers as well, it's not left to someone saying "Oh hiya gimme ?600k of your hard-earned would you because that's how much I think it'll cost. Ta." There's a difference between "money exiting the club" and "money Ann takes from the club" or however you originally put it. That money has exited the club but it's for professional fees - fees without which this deal would never have happened.

 

This must be massively boring for everyone else so I'll stop harping on about it now, but it's really not fair of you to deliberately attempt to muddy the puddle on this FF. Just saying.

 

The boring part is the mischief makers with their constant innuendo against a woman who came to our aid .

If FF is so sure of his facts he should bring this up at the next AGM along with the sneaky insinuations he keeps making.

[Winston Ingram]

Just to be clear, nobody is criticising FF for posting figures.. at least they shouldn't be.

 

The blatant innacuracies are: 'Saving the club, rebuilding its finances and now the fabric of the club, are more down to the fans contributions through FOH and ticket sales than any individual's contribution, including Ann..'

 

For reasons widely explained as per CVA fund, this is drivel.

 

He is also complaining about timing of stand project. Thomaso and others have ripped that theory to shreds.

[Glamorgan Jambo]

The one cost we don't know, and won't know, much about is the Loan Arrangement Fee of ?100K.

 

If Ann had ?2.4 million sitting in an easy access account or even near cash assets such as gilts then it's obviously a very significant amount of money.

 

If it was tied up in property, alternative assets or funds with limited redemption capabilities less so (I read that Ann invests in Private Equity and while generally lucrative it's also necessarily illiquid).

 

I agree with those that say this is a red herring. The way the deal was structured showed she was serious and professional, unlike the majority of characters that put their money into football. She's got the Edinburgh business community onside for Hospitality etc, something most of them wouldn't have touched with a bargepole during the Mercer, Robinson and Romanov eras. And do people not think that it's likely she may be one or even all of the mysterious 'benefactors' that have appeared recently.

 

I'm truly shaking my head at some of these comments.

[luckydug]

Just to be clear, nobody is criticising FF for posting figures.. at least they shouldn't be.

 

The blatant innacuracies are: 'Saving the club, rebuilding its finances and now the fabric of the club, are more down to the fans contributions through FOH and ticket sales than any individual's contribution, including Ann..'

 

For reasons widely explained as per CVA fund, this is drivel.

 

He is also complaining about timing of stand project. Thomaso and others have ripped that theory to shreds.

 

Cast your mind back to when the CVA was agreed. FF and FA were against the deal even then. They never quite got round to telling us what their alternative would have been but have been active ever since chipping away trying their hardest to justify their position.

I feel that FF has gone a step to far this time and should challenge AB directly at the club's AGM rather than sit at a keyboard making mischievous allegations.

[Beast Boy]

Cast your mind back to when the CVA was agreed. FF and FA were against the deal even then. They never quite got round to telling us what their alternative would have been but have been active ever since chipping away trying their hardest to justify their position.

I feel that FF has gone a step to far this time and should challenge AB directly at the club's AGM rather than sit at a keyboard making mischievous allegations.

I think FA was keen to move from Tynecastle too. Might be remembering that incorrectly though.

[Watt-Zeefuik]

I'm sorry, I don't see it being as disingenuous at all.  The sums mentioned are those that Ann has procured from the club under the terms of the Bidco loan and funding agreements.  That money has exited the club, much of it funded by FOH.

 

Perhaps you should classify interest payments in the same way as you have the professional fees and the arrangement fees.  After all they are only replacing investment income that Ann may have received elsewhere had she not made the loan to the club, i.e. it is not new income going into Ann's pocket.

 

Anyway, I never said that Ann had pocketed the money.  I stated that Ann's reward would come from her legacy shareholding.

 

Edit: I should add that FOH incurred legal fees of ?72,000 which were also met by the club.

 

I'm with redm here -- the bit in bold is splitting the finest of hairs.

 

You have referred to the revenue intake of Bidco as "Ann's reward," which yes, is disingenuous.  Bidco is an operating company wholly controlled by Ms Budge, but it also has operating expenses.  To call money that goes towards a company which is spent on the costs of doing business as a "reward" is downright silly.  Any owner draw from Bidco, should Ann choose to make one, might properly be called "Ann's reward," but that won't include expenses paid to professionals.

 

I'm all for proper scrutiny of the Bidco/Fanco deals but I strongly feel that presenting this as anything other than a high risk investment with a return non-commensurate with that risk which also requires a phenomenal application of uncompensated high skill labor hours on her part is misrepresenting the truth.

[Beats]

Cheers for the info FF always appreciated.

[BelgeJambo]

Not knowing what will happen with Rangers aside, The model in place for Hearts future will surely place us financially ahead of the Aberdeen and Hibs and being sustainable, with eventual strength on the field once the Main Stand and Ownership is taken care off

Arsenal is a bit of an example. When they built the Emirates, they took a bit of a back seat in the transfer market compared to the likes of UTD and Chelsea but still managed to finish top 4 every season and pay off the stadium with the income brought in from continued Champions League participation

 

For this Ann deserves a great deal of credit for her vision and dedication to our club and on field performance will come eventually

[NANOJAMBO]

Precisely.

 

People wanting shot of Neilson - whether that was a sensible wish or not - did not expect him to be replaced by someone so unsuitable.

 

if we had replaced Neilson with Wright (AS AN EXAMPLE!!!) then we would not be in this mess and nobody would care too much about Robbie leaving.

 

It's just the fact Cathro was so inept, and kept in a job way too long (I would have booted him after the Partick game, after the hibs defeat) that raises Robbie's profile amongst the Hearts fans.

People are missing the point.  RN was  always going to be replaced - at some point. That , after all, is the whole ethos of the club : that we employ young coaches who will improve/progress and undoubtedly move on to bigger and better things. At least , that was the ethos at that time. The fact that RN chose to leave when he did AND the club made no attempt to keep him tells its own story. The club was always going to have to replace him and it did so with a guy who was already on CLs radar and would have been in situ earlier had CL got his way. It's got nothing to do with the fans. 

 

As for the veiled criticism on here - very, very disappointing it has come to this. 

[Beast Boy]

There is a hardcore group of people who are vehemently against FoH. One of them even owns another anti-Hearts forum. It's all very odd.

[Footballfirst]

The boring part is the mischief makers with their constant innuendo against a woman who came to our aid .

If FF is so sure of his facts he should bring this up at the next AGM along with the sneaky insinuations he keeps making.

 

I have asked such questions at previous AGMs

 

In answer to a question I raised about Ann's legacy shareholding the answer given was that Ann didn't take a salary from the club.

I also asked for a breakdown of the ?472,000 professional fees. That question wasn't answered.

[soonbe110]

A fan base?? What folk on JKB? This place must represent at most about 5% of those that go to games.

Yes. The 5% that live in the mad house.

[Francis Albert]

I'm with redm here -- the bit in bold is splitting the finest of hairs.

 

You have referred to the revenue intake of Bidco as "Ann's reward," which yes, is disingenuous.  Bidco is an operating company wholly controlled by Ms Budge, but it also has operating expenses.  To call money that goes towards a company which is spent on the costs of doing business as a "reward" is downright silly.  Any owner draw from Bidco, should Ann choose to make one, might properly be called "Ann's reward," but that won't include expenses paid to professionals.

 

I'm all for proper scrutiny of the Bidco/Fanco deals but I strongly feel that presenting this as anything other than a high risk investment with a return non-commensurate with that risk which also requires a phenomenal application of uncompensated high skill labor hours on her part is misrepresenting the truth.

What risk was Ann taking? Her loan was secured with the assets of the club. The risk that the value of the club's assets would fall below ?2.4m (especially with Ann retaining full control of the club until her loan is repaid) was never "high".

 

And of course the addition of a ?12m (or whatever) new stand, helped by a gift of ?6m from FoH (us) reduces that risk to an infinitesimal level.

 

And the 17.4% share she will retain would (if she had paid the same price per share as FoH will have done for its 75.1%) have cost her not ?19,000 but over ?2m.

[soonbe110]

I think the hierarchy at F.o.H. are none too pleased at goings on at the club just now as well.

Think ? Or know? One is fact the other is just conjecture. Possibly proves previous posters point

[Boris]

What risk was Ann taking? Her loan was secured with the assets of the club. The risk that the value of the club's assets would fall below ?2.4m (especially with Ann retaining full control of the club until her loan is repaid) was never "high".And of course the addition of a ?12m (or whatever) new stand, helped by a gift of ?6m from FoH (us) reduces that risk to an infinitesimal level.

She still ponied up. And no guarantee that FoH subs would remain, however unlikely.

[Francis Albert]

She still ponied up. And no guarantee that FoH subs would remain, however unlikely.

If FoH subs had dried up completely the day after the CVA was agreed, Ann would still have had her ?2.4m secured with the assets of the club.

[socrates82]

He did not challenge in any of the Cups unfortunately, which are vitally important from the financial and fans point of view.

 

Cups are important but not "vitally" important. We didn't challenge in the cups for about my first 15 years following Hearts. We still became the best outwith the OF and still had good crowds more often than not. It also had no bearing on my support for the club, unlike folk today who threaten not to renew STs and all sorts.

 

This generation of fans has been spoiled pure and simple, and they are acting like spoilt children. Quite right that Budge should utterly ignore these eejits. And by eejits I mean the ones who thought finishing 3rd then challenging for 2nd wasn't good enough 8 months ago.

[john5698]

If FoH subs had dried up completely the day after the CVA was agreed, Ann would still have had her ?2.4m secured with the assets of the club.

And how long do you think it would take to shift the secured assets and at what cost? Her ?2.4 million may have been secured was the other ?419,000 which was highlighted in FF's post?

[graygo]

If FoH subs had dried up completely the day after the CVA was agreed, Ann would still have had her ?2.4m secured with the assets of the club.

 

Is it jealousy F.A.?

 

Is that what it is?

 

She got a good deal, our club survived and in the not too distant future ownership of the club will pass to the supporters - what's not to like?

[Section Q]

She still ponied up. And no guarantee that FoH subs would remain, however unlikely.

If that was the case then she'd've got a bargain for a couple of million and no debt on a freehold Tynecastle. Nice little bit of biz. Win...Win...!

[BelgeJambo]

Can folk just get off their high horses and give Ann Budge a ****ing break

 

Absolute joke on here

[Francis Albert]

Is it jealousy F.A.?

 

Is that what it is?

 

She got a good deal, our club survived and in the not too distant future ownership of the club will pass to the supporters - what's not to like?

It isn't jealousy. It's fact.

[Section Q]

And how long do you think it would take to shift the secured assets and at what cost? Her ?2.4 million may have been secured was the other ?419,000 which was highlighted in FF's post?

FoH already had over a million in the bank by that time, so she had no or very little exposure. Good luck to her though. Her only liability is Levein.

[Beast Boy]

Can folk just get off their high horses and give Ann Budge a ******* break

 

Absolute joke on here

Indeed. Totally ***** behaviour.

[Bowmans_Boot]

Cups are important but not "vitally" important. We didn't challenge in the cups for about my first 15 years following Hearts. We still became the best outwith the OF and still had good crowds more often than not. It also had no bearing on my support for the club, unlike folk today who threaten not to renew STs and all sorts.

 

This generation of fans has been spoiled pure and simple, and they are acting like spoilt children. Quite right that Budge should utterly ignore these eejits. And by eejits I mean the ones who thought finishing 3rd then challenging for 2nd wasn't good enough 8 months ago.

I would argue that cups are actually vitally important to the club, both from a fan and financial viewpoint. We have absolutely no hope of winning the league (I always hoped we would, every season) and so they are the only opportunity of success. They also bring in a hell of a lot of money.

[Rudi5kaceldream1ng]

When I wade through CVs I tend to bin 2/3rds right from the off because the candidates don't have the skills to even get the spelling and grammar correct on their own bloody CV! That is in the arena of finance, so I wonder what it is like wading through football manager CVs...

Humble brag type post. I can imagine selecting a top level football manager is nothing like selecting a finance professional. No offence but comparing your job to that is cringeworthy.

[NANOJAMBO]

It isn't jealousy. It's fact.

FA - what is your purpose in posting these facts at this time ?

 

Do you support AB or not ? 

[Francis Albert]

And how long do you think it would take to shift the secured assets and at what cost? Her ?2.4 million may have been secured was the other ?419,000 which was highlighted in FF's post?

The other ?419,000 did not come from Ann's pocket. It came from our pockets.

[Francis Albert]

FA - what is your purpose in posting these facts at this time ?

 

Do you support AB or not ?

Because I think knowledge of facts is a good thing especially when we are in the process of collectively gifting the club ?9 million plus.

 

I support Ann and FoH by continuing to pay my monthly subscription as I have from day one.

[luckydug]

Can folk just get off their high horses and give Ann Budge a ******* break

 

Absolute joke on here

 

 

I have asked such questions at previous AGMs

 

In answer to a question I raised about Ann's legacy shareholding the answer given was that Ann didn't take a salary from the club.

I also asked for a breakdown of the ?472,000 professional fees. That question wasn't answered.

 

You appeared personally at the AGMs and let the matter slide without a satisfactory answer ? 

[Hendricks]

Hearts fans are "spoilt"    

 

I must be imagining our record in 'big' games that actually mean something.  The cup competitions should be the biggest matches of our entire season given we have absolutely no chance of winning the SPL.

[john5698]

You appeared personally at the AGMs and let the matter slide without a satisfactory answer ? 

Beat me to it.

[john5698]

The other ?419,000 did not come from Ann's pocket. It came from our pockets.

So is FF's post inaccurate?

[john5698]

FoH already had over a million in the bank by that time, so she had no or very little exposure. Good luck to her though. Her only liability is Levein.

Doesn't answer the question though.

[graygo]

It isn't jealousy. It's fact.

 

We know, it is in the public domain after all.

 

I just wonder why you feel the constant need to post it.

[DH1986]

This all reminds a bit of the Fergus McCann situation at Celtic.....

 

A section of supporters are being extremely short sighted and impatient....also questioning methods, decisions and even querying financial matters.

 

When McCann sold his shares that club was in a ridiculously sound position and it hasn't really looked back.

 

I expect us to be in a similar position and leaving a section of our supporters feeling a little sheepish.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Francis Albert]

So is FF's post inaccurate?

FF's posts are rarely if ever inaccurate, though I think his wording on the post about moneys put in and money's taken out could have been more felicitously worded.

 

I can't actually find the ?419,000 referred to but FF identified about ?750,000 of other costs (not including the interest on the loan) which I assume included your ?419,000. None of those were paid out of Anne's pocket and so did not expose her to risk.

[BelgeJambo]

This all reminds a bit of the Fergus McCann situation at Celtic.....

 

A section of supporters are being extremely short sighted and impatient....also questioning methods, decisions and even querying financial matters.

 

When McCann sold his shares that club was in a ridiculously sound position and it hasn't really looked back.

 

I expect us to be in a similar position and leaving a section of our supporters feeling a little sheepish.

 

 

Good post

 

FOH is not gifting Ann Budge or Hearts

All pledgers know what they were signing up for

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Nookie Bear]

People are missing the point. RN was always going to be replaced - at some point. That , after all, is the whole ethos of the club : that we employ young coaches who will improve/progress and undoubtedly move on to bigger and better things. At least , that was the ethos at that time. The fact that RN chose to leave when he did AND the club made no attempt to keep him tells its own story. The club was always going to have to replace him and it did so with a guy who was already on CLs radar and would have been in situ earlier had CL got his way. It's got nothing to do with the fans.

 

As for the veiled criticism on here - very, very disappointing it has come to this.

Keep forgetting Levein wanted Cathro before Robbie. Had that happened we would still be in the Championship!

[Footballfirst]

You appeared personally at the AGMs and let the matter slide without a satisfactory answer ? 

Both were emailed, because I could not attend. One was answered (2014), the other not (2015).