Ann Budge update

[jambogemz]

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

In a nutshell.

 

She's a business woman after all.

[Victorian]

I'll probably get a warning for this but you're way over the line.

You are an ignorant prick.

 

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

He's really not. He, like me, is sick to death of a mercifully small streak of self agrandising, pompous bullshit merchants who do not, or cannot, distinguish between credible criticism and irresponsible obsession.

[Francis Albert]

The implication from FA is that we are spending more than we have and it is unaccounted for. This isn't the case as confirmed by Ann. The cost of the build has increased as has the scale of the build. There is a difference.

where did i say we were spending more than we have? You are just making things up.

[MacDonald Jardine]

He's really not. He, like me, is sick to death of a mercifully small streak of self agrandising, pompous bullshit merchants who do not, or cannot, distinguish between credible criticism and irresponsible obsession.

Do you really think my posts on this thread are those of a bullshit merchant showing an irresponsible obsession?

 

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

[Victorian]

Do you really think my posts on this thread are those of a bullshit merchant showing an irresponsible obsession?

 

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

Pants back on mush. I wasn't referring to you.

[MacDonald Jardine]

Pants back on mush. I wasn't referring to you.

And yet you disapprovingly quoted my post?

 

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

[Bad Religion]

where did i say we were spending more than we have? You are just making things up.

 

[Victorian]

And yet you disapprovingly quoted my post?

 

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

It doesn't matter.

[socrates82]

Indeed. And we'd back to this:

 

 

 

With the threat of moving somewhere still hovering over us.

[MacDonald Jardine]

It doesn't matter.

It does when you're implying I'm in that group.

 

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

[Beast Boy]

It does when you're implying I'm in that group.

 

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

You are part of a group who thinks criticism is essential at all times, whether justified or not.

 

That's a ****ing shite group to be slithering around with, mush.

[MacDonald Jardine]

You are part of a group who thinks criticism is essential at all times, whether justified or not.

 

That's a ******* shite group to be slithering around with, mush.

I don't believe it's essential at all times.

I do believe it's essential when justified.

 

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

[Beast Boy]

I don't believe it's essential at all times.

I do believe it's essential when justified.

 

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

Well yes, obviously. So does anyone who isn't thick as ****.

 

However, there has been a desperate scramble to find something to criticise pretty much from the off. These people like to imagine that they are providing some kind of essential service to us all, by exposing negatives... problem is, they are doing it when there are no real negatives to even bother about.

 

Total trumpets.

[Footballfirst]

Indeed. And we'd back to this:

 

 

 

Yes, but also debt free, with ?3m+ in the bank and the prospect of up to ?1.5m per annum still coming in from FOH.

 

Then we could have started planning the replacement of the stand in a phased development, e.g start with building high standard hospitality accommodation behind where the new stand would sit. Once that was up and running, and more free funds were available start replacing the old stand, maybe in two or three stages.

 

However, the decision has been made to push on with the development first, so there is no point in worrying about what might have been.  I sincerely hope that it will prove to have been the right approach, despite the risks involved.

[MacDonald Jardine]

Well yes, obviously. So does anyone who isn't thick as ****.

 

However, there has been a desperate scramble to find something to criticise pretty much from the off. These people like to imagine that they are providing some kind of essential service to us all, by exposing negatives... problem is, they are doing it when there are no real negatives to even bother about.

 

Total trumpets.

Again you're just being abusive for the sake of it.

Some might think an overspend and delay on the stand isn't a problem.

To think otherwise isn't a desperate scramble to criticise.

 

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

[Buffalo Bill]

Yes, but also debt free, with ?3m+ in the bank and the prospect of up to ?1.5m per annum still coming in from FOH.

 

Then we could have started planning the replacement of the stand in a phased development, e.g start with building high standard hospitality accommodation behind where the new stand would sit. Once that was up and running, and more free funds were available start replacing the old stand, maybe in two or three stages.

 

However, the decision has been made to push on with the development first, so there is no point in worrying about what might have been. I sincerely hope that it will prove to have been the right approach, despite the risks involved.

But with time running out if we consider that the council were going to replace the old nursery.

[Beast Boy]

Again you're just being abusive for the sake of it.

Some might think an overspend and delay on the stand isn't a problem.

To think otherwise isn't a desperate scramble to criticise.

 

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

It is. It's like getting angry with the coast guard for not kissing you on the forehead after they've just hauled you out a choppy sea minutes before hypothermia sets in.

 

It's totally churlish and the behaviour of idiots.

[socrates82]

Yes, but also debt free, with ?3m+ in the bank and the prospect of up to ?1.5m per annum still coming in from FOH.

 

Then we could have started planning the replacement of the stand in a phased development, e.g start with building high standard hospitality accommodation behind where the new stand would sit. Once that was up and running, and more free funds were available start replacing the old stand, maybe in two or three stages.

 

However, the decision has been made to push on with the development first, so there is no point in worrying about what might have been.  I sincerely hope that it will prove to have been the right approach, despite the risks involved.

 

I think building a new stand in one go to minimise disruption is much better than a phased approach like that. We'll be sitting in it before long and it'll start paying for itself sooner than doing it bit by bit with all the extra planning work that would involve.

 

This way, by 2018 we'll be 100% focused on the team from then on without the worry of what's happening with Tynecastle, and the potential costs of doing work to it or moving, holding us back. The opening of the new stand is in my view the real start of the next era for Hearts - both symbolic and in practice.

 

The last few seasons have been about us getting up on our feet, with a lot more success along the way than most of us probably expected in terms of league form.

 

Budge and co have done a sterling job. We'll be sitting pretty in 2018 in a better position off the park than every club outwith Celtic. Who cares if we had one or two meh seasons along the way? We'll get the next manager right, or the one after that, and things will turn around on the park.

[MacDonald Jardine]

Shite. What you are actually being part of, is this horrendous modern trend of desperately looking for a negative slant, and if it doesn't exist, exaggerating a shite one.

Very well put.

You're talking shite.

What agenda would I have for finding fault if it didn't exist?

 

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

[MacDonald Jardine]

It is. It's like getting angry with the coast guard for not kissing you on the forehead after they've just hauled you out a choppy sea minutes before hypothermia sets in.

 

It's totally churlish and the behaviour of idiots.

It really isn't.

 

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

[hueyview]

I think building a new stand in one go to minimise disruption is much better than a phased approach like that. We'll be sitting in it before long and it'll start paying for itself sooner than doing it bit by bit with all the extra planning work that would involve.

 

This way, by 2018 we'll be 100% focused on the team from then on without the worry of what's happening with Tynecastle, and the potential costs of doing work to it or moving, holding us back. The opening of the new stand is in my view the real start of the next era for Hearts - both symbolic and in practice.

 

The last few seasons have been about us getting up on our feet, with a lot more success along the way than most of us probably expected in terms of league form.

 

Budge and co have done a sterling job. We'll be sitting pretty in 2018 in a better position off the park than every club outwith Celtic. Who cares if we had one or two meh seasons along the way? We'll get the next manager right, or the one after that, and things will turn around on the park.

good post.....

[Beast Boy]

Very well put.

You're talking shite.

What agenda would I have for finding fault if it didn't exist?

 

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

I don't know, or care. Maybe you have no agenda other wanting to be the guy who 'pure kent better'. I don't know. I just prefer to deal with real issues when/if they arise, as opposed to desperately seeking any old shite to try and turn in to a big issue.

[Footballfirst]

I think building a new stand in one go to minimise disruption is much better than a phased approach like that. We'll be sitting in it before long and it'll start paying for itself sooner than doing it bit by bit with all the extra planning work that would involve.

 

This way, by 2018 we'll be 100% focused on the team from then on without the worry of what's happening with Tynecastle, and the potential costs of doing work to it or moving, holding us back. The opening of the new stand is in my view the real start of the next era for Hearts - both symbolic and in practice.

 

The last few seasons have been about us getting up on our feet, with a lot more success along the way than most of us probably expected in terms of league form.

 

Budge and co have done a sterling job. We'll be sitting pretty in 2018 in a better position off the park than every club outwith Celtic. Who cares if we had one or two meh seasons along the way? We'll get the next manager right, or the one after that, and things will turn around on the park.

 

I hope that's the case and that there are no lingering debts to be paid from the extra revenue of the upgraded stadium, that delays extra investment on the park.

[socrates82]

I hope that's the case and that there are no lingering debts to be paid from the extra revenue of the upgraded stadium, that delays extra investment on the park.

 

Think of this as ripping a plaster off in one go instead of slowly. Short term pain and all that (even though I am not in the group that seems to think we are in a lot of pain right now). The threat of losing Tynecastle has hung over us for a long time. It's going to be amazing to have that monkey off our back.

[Notts1874]

Looking forward to the game tomorrow.

 

This is about football isn't it?

[wavydavy]

I'll be there with my son supporting our team despite what some might think.

[FarmerTweedy]

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.

 

 

Utterly disgraceful posts from FF on this thread.

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

Ive been to a cracking beer festival tonight. Good beer and music.

 

As usual the answer in these debates is somewhere in the middle.

 

Both sides have good points but they won't listen.

Agreed. Some cannot see that. The vitriol aimed at FF in particular is unjustified, even though I don't agree with his overall premise.

[Beast Boy]

Agreed. Some cannot see that. The vitriol aimed at FF in particular is unjustified, even though I don't agree with his overall premise.

Thank **** Football First has you to hold his jacket, Geoffrey.

[Notts1874]

Agreed. Some cannot see that. The vitriol aimed at FF in particular is unjustified, even though I don't agree with his overall premise.

I just want a successful team that won't bankrupt the club.

[Francis Albert]

I find your posts conflicted.

 

You attribute the over run directly to Ann and surmise it may be ?2-?3 million. A considerable sum, directed at her specifically.

 

You then justify this to Ann making changes to toilets and kiosks.......

 

.........but that might not be the only reason as you don't really know what the number is.

 

So you choose to state an eye catching large sum but can only justify it directly to her based on minor design changes.

 

I don't believe either you or I are na?ve enough believe both of your points can be correct.

 

There is either a lot more issues than those minor design changes, that were in her direct control, or your figure is incorrect.

 

 

As figurehead of the business it has indeed been acknowledged that the "buck stops with her" which I believe should be taken in the context of dealing with the issue that has arisen. This is standard practice.

 

However, you have specifically stated she personally got the budget for the stand wrong. "ann got the stand budget wrong". Again, without going into detail neither you or I are na?ve enough to believe she personally designed and costed the stand or indeed would be likely to know all the costs of the component parts to ascertain whether the budget was correct or otherwise.

 

You are choosing to play on semantics of those words whereas we both know that it is not literal.

FFs it was Ann not me who attributed it to minor design changes. What the over-run on budget is she has chosen not to disclose.

[FarmerTweedy]

Cheers for the info FF always appreciated.

Even though it's extremely selective and highly misleading?

[Bungalow Bill]

I find your posts conflicted.

 

You attribute the over run directly to Ann and surmise it may be ?2-?3 million. A considerable sum, directed at her specifically.

 

You then justify this to Ann making changes to toilets and kiosks.......

 

.........but that might not be the only reason as you don't really know what the number is.

 

So you choose to state an eye catching large sum but can only justify it directly to her based on minor design changes.

 

I don't believe either you or I are na?ve enough believe both of your points can be correct.

 

There is either a lot more issues than those minor design changes, that were in her direct control, or your figure is incorrect.

 

 

As figurehead of the business it has indeed been acknowledged that the "buck stops with her" which I believe should be taken in the context of dealing with the issue that has arisen. This is standard practice.

 

However, you have specifically stated she personally got the budget for the stand wrong. "ann got the stand budget wrong". Again, without going into detail neither you or I are na?ve enough to believe she personally designed and costed the stand or indeed would be likely to know all the costs of the component parts to ascertain whether the budget was correct or otherwise.

 

You are choosing to play on semantics of those words whereas we both know that it is not literal.

FA's posts conflicted? Never...

[luckydug]

Yes, but also debt free, with ?3m+ in the bank and the prospect of up to ?1.5m per annum still coming in from FOH.

 

Then we could have started planning the replacement of the stand in a phased development, e.g start with building high standard hospitality accommodation behind where the new stand would sit. Once that was up and running, and more free funds were available start replacing the old stand, maybe in two or three stages.

 

However, the decision has been made to push on with the development first, so there is no point in worrying about what might have been. I sincerely hope that it will prove to have been the right approach, despite the risks involved.

 

I notice you fail to mention the near one million pound outlay on essential maintenance over the period it would take us to raise the money to build a new stand to your timeline.

You also fail to mention how you expect us to aquire the land for your dream project given that the council would have gone ahead and built a new nursery on part of the land we would need.

You also fail to take into account that by the time you got round to building the new stand costs would have soared even more.

Oh and we would still have had to negotiate the council's planning permission.

You are wasted in your current job you should be a politician .

[Francis Albert]

Impressive as your head shaking neme is.. what is your response to my question?

[CJGJ]

Yes, but also debt free, with ?3m+ in the bank and the prospect of up to ?1.5m per annum still coming in from FOH.

 

Then we could have started planning the replacement of the stand in a phased development, e.g start with building high standard hospitality accommodation behind where the new stand would sit. Once that was up and running, and more free funds were available start replacing the old stand, maybe in two or three stages.

 

However, the decision has been made to push on with the development first, so there is no point in worrying about what might have been.  I sincerely hope that it will prove to have been the right approach, despite the risks involved.

This must be one of the saddest post in regard to this subject.

 

A poster who has made  a complete ****** up on this thread  still trying to wriggle his way out of it.

 

He might well be a respected poster on other threads but on this he is  showing himself to be  badly out of touch with the fans and getting more and more desperate as he is no longer the favoured one on JKB

 

You are badly in need of a rethink and an admission you are simply wrong might get you out of the hole you are digging with each post you make

[Notts1874]

This must be one of the saddest post in regard to this subject.

 

A poster who has made a complete ****** up on this thread still trying to wriggle his way out of it.

 

He might well be a respected poster on other threads but on this he is showing himself to be badly out of touch with the fans and getting more and more desperate as he is no longer the favoured one on JKB

 

You are badly in need of a rethink and an admission you are simply wrong might get you out of the hole you are digging with each post you make

Could you please explain to a layman like me why he is wrong.......ive had my doubts but I'm a bit thick.

[Watt-Zeefuik]

Agreed. Some cannot see that. The vitriol aimed at FF in particular is unjustified, even though I don't agree with his overall premise.

 

He doesn't deserve abuse but his posting of "just the facts" categorizes things in a way out of line with standard accounting practices, and he can't seem to hear that.

[john5698]

I've experienced the worst times in the club's history.

It doesn't make Neilson's style and record in cups or the last half of last season any more acceptable.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

So you have experienced the worst times in the club's history and then you go on to have a go at Robbie's tenure, well i am sorry under Robbie Neilson despite not being some of the best football is far from some of the worst football I have witnessed in all the years I have followed our club.

[wavydavy]

Christ, I must be older than you, actually thought about him when I posted that, at least PG didn't fall off his boat?

 

That's a pity in my opinion.

[wavydavy]

So you have experienced the worst times in the club's history and then you go on to have a go at Robbie's tenure, well i am sorry under Robbie Neilson despite not being some of the best football is far from some of the worst football I have witnessed in all the years I have followed our club.

 

See there you are giving your age away again.

[john5698]

This must be one of the saddest post in regard to this subject.

 

A poster who has made  a complete ****** up on this thread  still trying to wriggle his way out of it.

 

He might well be a respected poster on other threads but on this he is  showing himself to be  badly out of touch with the fans and getting more and more desperate as he is no longer the favoured one on JKB

 

You are badly in need of a rethink and an admission you are simply wrong might get you out of the hole you are digging with each post you make

I agree, I asked what his post was all about, I have still not received a reply.

 

I ask again what was the point of his post.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

,

[john5698]

See there you are giving your age away again.

It's great being my age and thinking I know everything

[luckydug]

Could you please explain to a layman like me why he is wrong.......ive had my doubts but I'm a bit thick.

 

What did you think of my response to FF on his opinion that we should have waited before building the new stand ?

It seemed to me that FF is desperately searching around to find ANYTHING/SOMETHING to complain about.

[Notts1874]

What did you think of my response to FF on his opinion that we should have waited before building the new stand ?

It seemed to me that FF is desperately searching around to find ANYTHING/SOMETHING to complain about.

So he's got an agenda?

[john5698]

So he's got an agenda?

Why did he post what the information then? FF is a poster that I very much appreciated, but in my opinion there was no need for his post.

[Taffin]

I don't know, or care. Maybe you have no agenda other wanting to be the guy who 'pure kent better'. I don't know. I just prefer to deal with real issues when/if they arise, as opposed to desperately seeking any old shite to try and turn in to a big issue.

Then why are you dealing with the non-issue of people who don't agree with you and turning it into a big issue?

 

Those being negative, myself included though maybe to a lesser extent, may be many things but at least none of us have been aggressive hypocrites about it.

 

You're a bully with an unjustifiably high opinion of yourself.

[Hendricks]

Then why are you dealing with the non-issue of people who don't agree with you and turning it into a big issue?

 

Those being negative, myself included though maybe to a lesser extent, may be many things but at least none of us have been aggressive hypocrites about it.

 

You're a bully with an unjustifiably high opinion of yourself.

Steady. The teachers pet is allowed to do whatever he wants around here. Spamming every thread whilst contributing nothing constructive!

[FarmerTweedy]

Higher risk being the operative word.

How many people have lost their life savings when those 'good thing' higher risk investments have went tits up?

 

With the exception of the Great Depression of the 1920s/30s, pretty much nobody who invested sensibly, spreading their investment over a decent range of funds in different sectors (and possibly a diversified range of individual company shares too if they were so inclined), has ever lost their whole life savings.  The only people who have are those who stupidly did things like putting all their money into shares in one company which then went bust, or one specially focussed fund which went breasts skywards, or put all their money in a get-rich-quick scheme that would have looked dubious to most sensible investors.  

[FarmerTweedy]

He really isn't. Why does it matter if she does in any case? She deserves it.

 

He really is!