flecktimus Posted June 24, 2008 Share Posted June 24, 2008 Jesus Christ how could this lot cost us ?3.8m The graph below shows the amounts paid each year to bring in new players. These figures may not have been quoted in the press but they are the figures that the club report in their accounts. Up to 2005 there was little spent in the transfer market. This was probably due to the ease of getting players on free-transfers through Bosmans. In 2006 more was spent on players than in the previous 5 years put together. In 2007 twice as much again was spent. There is no itemisation of the fees paid, but according to http://www.soccerbase.com the players brought in during the 2007 season for a total of ?3.8m were Zaliukus, Kurskis, Pinilla, Kancelskis, and Kingston (reported to be for ?500,000). http://www.football-finances.org.uk/hearts/transfers2.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cylawny Posted June 24, 2008 Share Posted June 24, 2008 Jesus Christ how could this lot cost us ?3.8m The graph below shows the amounts paid each year to bring in new players. These figures may not have been quoted in the press but they are the figures that the club report in their accounts. Up to 2005 there was little spent in the transfer market. This was probably due to the ease of getting players on free-transfers through Bosmans. In 2006 more was spent on players than in the previous 5 years put together. In 2007 twice as much again was spent. There is no itemisation of the fees paid, but according to http://www.soccerbase.com the players brought in during the 2007 season for a total of ?3.8m were Zaliukus, Kurskis, Pinilla, Kancelskis, and Kingston (reported to be for ?500,000). http://www.football-finances.org.uk/hearts/transfers2.htm Mysterious stuff. Expect more of the same in the next accounts. There are some people on here who think the debt will reduced to pre-Vlad levels. Income from transfers etc........... That will be shining. The Russian fecker is doing more damage to our finances than Mugabi is to Zimbabwe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Quagmire Posted June 24, 2008 Share Posted June 24, 2008 Can we get some more Hobo Smilies please Mods ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nucky Thompson Posted June 24, 2008 Share Posted June 24, 2008 Jesus Christ how could this lot cost us ?3.8m The graph below shows the amounts paid each year to bring in new players. These figures may not have been quoted in the press but they are the figures that the club report in their accounts. Up to 2005 there was little spent in the transfer market. This was probably due to the ease of getting players on free-transfers through Bosmans. In 2006 more was spent on players than in the previous 5 years put together. In 2007 twice as much again was spent. There is no itemisation of the fees paid, but according to http://www.soccerbase.com the players brought in during the 2007 season for a total of ?3.8m were Zaliukus, Kurskis, Pinilla, Kancelskis, and Kingston (reported to be for ?500,000). http://www.football-finances.org.uk/hearts/transfers2.htm It was posted yesterday:rolleyes:http://www.hmfckickback.co.uk/showthread.php?t=18878 That one didn't get much response, so I doubt your effort will:cool: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awadooningorgie2 Posted June 24, 2008 Share Posted June 24, 2008 It was posted yesterday:rolleyes:http://www.hmfckickback.co.uk/showthread.php?t=18878 That one didn't get much response, so I doubt your effort will:cool: Oh well. That means it's nothing to worry about then. Carry on regardless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awadooningorgie2 Posted June 24, 2008 Share Posted June 24, 2008 See you all in Saughton Park in 2012 while we scratch our heads wondering how the debt managed to get to ?x without as much as a cheap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H.A.N.S Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 An item in the accounts mentioned in the accounts is how long on average it takes Hearts to pay people they owe money to. In 2004 this was 36 days, in 2005 it was 47 days, by 2007 this had stretched to 82 days. This is often an indicator of problems with an ability to pay. From the debt section of the link, everything is a disaster and worrying apart from this. In the business world you want money you are due in sharpish and to keep money you are due out as long as possible to gain interest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest GhostHunter Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 Hmmm - even worse when you see it graphed.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest GhostHunter Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 Hearts - Interest Payments Hearts has to pay out interest on loans taken out for various purposes. The graph below shows that the club has been paying out an ever increasing amount to service its borrowings. Most of the club borrowings are from AB Ukio Bankas. In the short term there is ?3m worth of loans and overdrafts that are being repaid at a rate 1.5% over the base rate. There is then ?13.2m worth of loan notes which have interest at 5% charged on them. There is also a ?5.3m loan form Scottish & Newcastle which is bearing interest at 2% over the base rate. There are then longer term loans. There is a ?3m loan at a fixed rate of 6.49%, a further ?9.3m is at an interest rate 1% over the London base rate. A further ?2.5m is at 1.5% over the base rate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H.A.N.S Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 The next thing to look at is whether the club has the ability to cover the money it owes. So if the business had to sell all the players, then the ground, everything, would this cover all the money they owe in the next year. This is graph of how this has progressed is shown below. Even when the club was viewed as being in financial difficulties in the time up to 2005 the assets always covered the money owed. This is not now the case, with a huge gap now in place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marshallschunkychicken Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 Hmmm - even worse when you see it graphed.... Looking at that though - it seems to have our liabilities at about ?8 million in 2005, Jumping to ?30 odd million in 2007. The graph looks skewed to me. Edit: and it seems that the club has never had assets over ?5M. So who owns Tynecastle? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H.A.N.S Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 Looking at that though - it seems to have our liabilities at about ?8 million in 2005, Jumping to ?30 odd million in 2007. The graph looks skewed to me. Edit: and it seems that the club has never had assets over ?5M. So who owns Tynecastle? Graph is spot on in relation to the figures. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheepie Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 Looking at that though - it seems to have our liabilities at about ?8 million in 2005, Jumping to ?30 odd million in 2007. The graph looks skewed to me. Edit: and it seems that the club has never had assets over ?5M. So who owns Tynecastle? Tynecastle is a 'fixed' asset rather than a 'current' asset which is plotted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest GhostHunter Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 Key... An item in the accounts mentioned in the accounts is how long on average it takes Hearts to pay people they owe money to. In 2004 this was 36 days, in 2005 it was 47 days, by 2007 this had stretched to 82 days. This is often an indicator of problems with an ability to pay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H.A.N.S Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 Looking at that though - it seems to have our liabilities at about ?8 million in 2005, Jumping to ?30 odd million in 2007. The graph looks skewed to me. Edit: and it seems that the club has never had assets over ?5M. So who owns Tynecastle? The ?5m assets in this case is money in the bank or money due to us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JamboRobbo Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 Paying out 3.8M in transfer fees, to bring in Zaliukus, Kurskis, Pinilla, Kancelskis, and Kingston, is the bit that concerns me the most. Perhaps Pinilla is worth money if he ever gets fit. And Kingston is worth a bit. But 3.8M. For what we've got out of that lot? And to think, some people give Jim Jefferies stick for spending 500k on Petric! Along with Rodney refusing, at the AGM, to answer a shareholders question as to who that 3.8M was paid to .......it's a concern IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest GhostHunter Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 The Liquidators Graph of Choice... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H.A.N.S Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 Key... Read post 7 of thread, this is good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marshallschunkychicken Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 Graph is spot on in relation to the figures. Fair enough. Does this not include long term liabilities then? I thought our debt was a lot higher in the years 2001-2006. Cheers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marshallschunkychicken Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 The Liquidators Graph of Choice... Now THAT includes Tyney, yes? Sobering... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H.A.N.S Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 Fair enough. Does this not include long term liabilities then? I thought our debt was a lot higher in the years 2001-2007. Cheers. From what I am reading the long term liabilities are: ?3m loan at a fixed rate of 6.49%, a further ?9.3m is at an interest rate 1% over the London base rate. A further ?2.5m is at 1.5% over the base rate. It doesn't say who these are with but so I am assuming Ukio. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H.A.N.S Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 Now THAT includes Tyney, yes? Sobering... Yes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest GhostHunter Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 Yes That graph actually makes me feel sick..... What it does mean though (I think), is that there is no way on earth that VR can simply walk away, nor, sell up with that level of net loss. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flecktimus Posted June 25, 2008 Author Share Posted June 25, 2008 It was posted yesterday:rolleyes:http://www.hmfckickback.co.uk/showthread.php?t=18878 That one didn't get much response, so I doubt your effort will:cool: Please accept my apologies for starting this thread. Didn't relies another thread was posted, but unfortunately i haven't got the time to sit by my computer all day. Response- Kickbackers will decide what the response will be. Effort - Can never be to much effort when the football club you love is being run like a financial circus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cut The Crap Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 Paying out 3.8M in transfer fees, to bring in Zaliukus, Kurskis, Pinilla, Kancelskis, and Kingston, is the bit that concerns me the most. Perhaps Pinilla is worth money if he ever gets fit. And Kingston is worth a bit. But 3.8M. For what we've got out of that lot? And to think, some people give Jim Jefferies stick for spending 500k on Petric! Along with Rodney refusing, at the AGM, to answer a shareholders question as to who that 3.8M was paid to .......it's a concern IMO. Not surprising he refused to answer. Now if only we could find out where the money actually went... What a relief to have such astute businessmen running our club. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PTBCAL Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 Without reading the report - would it be fair to say our debt is around ?30m? That allows for another increase in debt this season (albiet less than previous years due to high earners leaving) minus the Gordon/Bednar transfer fees. P.S So why knock back ?1m for Jose? To break even on him is doing well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H.A.N.S Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 That graph actually makes me feel sick..... What it does mean though (I think), is that there is no way on earth that VR can simply walk away, nor, sell up with that level of net loss. He can undoubtedly walk but he'll take an almighty hit in the pocket. We also have loans and liabilities to other companies and possibly clubs other than UKIO, so I'd imagine any money he and UKIO may recoup would be after settling these. Only Scottish and Newcastle ?5.3m loan is mentioned but. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jambovambo Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 Here's a question for the stattos : How long a washing line would be required to dry the equivalent of ?3.8m in Lithuanian notes, after they had been through a laundry process ? Just asking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fat Striker Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 That graph actually makes me feel sick..... What it does mean though (I think), is that there is no way on earth that VR can simply walk away, nor, sell up with that level of net loss. It just makes his stance over giving us a decent manager even more unfathomable. Why is he deliberately shooting himself in the foot? Depressing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flecktimus Posted June 25, 2008 Author Share Posted June 25, 2008 Paying out 3.8M in transfer fees, to bring in Zaliukus, Kurskis, Pinilla, Kancelskis, and Kingston, is the bit that concerns me the most. Perhaps Pinilla is worth money if he ever gets fit. And Kingston is worth a bit. But 3.8M. For what we've got out of that lot? And to think, some people give Jim Jefferies stick for spending 500k on Petric! Along with Rodney refusing, at the AGM, to answer a shareholders question as to who that 3.8M was paid to .......it's a concern IMO. Got to say the ?3.8m transfer money was originally the area i was looking at, but after reading the report i feel sick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JamboRobbo Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 Got to say the ?3.8m transfer money was originally the area i was looking at, but after reading the report i feel sick. I didn't think it was possible, but your actually making me MORE concerned than I was now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jambovambo Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 It just makes his stance over giving us a decent manager even more unfathomable. Why is he deliberately shooting himself in the foot? Depressing. Exactly my question for the last 2+ years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flecktimus Posted June 25, 2008 Author Share Posted June 25, 2008 Without reading the report - would it be fair to say our debt is around ?30m? That allows for another increase in debt this season (albiet less than previous years due to high earners leaving) minus the Gordon/Bednar transfer fees. P.S So why knock back ?1m for Jose? To break even on him is doing well. http://www.football-finances.org.uk/hearts/transfers2.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H.A.N.S Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 Exactly my question for the last 2+ years. The bandit had been banking on a ?10m a season CL windfall I reckon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun.lawson Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 Here's a question for the stattos : How long a washing line would be required to dry the equivalent of ?3.8m in Lithuanian notes, after they had been through a laundry process ? Just asking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun.lawson Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 The Liquidators Graph of Choice... Ho ho ho. Don't forget though Dex, he saved us, and the commercial side of the club has never been stronger! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamblow Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 Mark my words we are witnessing the end game. Next season even more money wil be routed to Kaunas in this web of financial fraud before the club goes tits up. I really feel sorry for every one that has bought a season ticket this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jambovambo Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 Mark my words we are witnessing the end game. Next season even more money wil be routed to Kaunas in this web of financial fraud before the club goes tits up. I really feel sorry for every one that has bought a season ticket this year. Strong words, but the only rational reason - all the irrational reasons have been exhausted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awadooningorgie2 Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 Mark my words we are witnessing the end game. Next season even more money wil be routed to Kaunas in this web of financial fraud before the club goes tits up. I really feel sorry for every one that has bought a season ticket this year. Don't forget the ?51 million main stand project......:eek: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stanley_ Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 What I don't understand is why we have already apparently rejected bids for Driver, Berra and Goncalves if the situation is this bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H.A.N.S Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 What I don't understand is why we have already apparently rejected bids for Driver, Berra and Goncalves if the situation is this bad. Because in the Chairman's statement they are still claiming we can manage the debt with increased revenue from European football. Unless the offer is too good to refuse (?1m for Jose - bite their hand off) then nobody will go. Seems funny but Vlad thinks he has gems here in Miko, Zaliukas and co. and just needs someone to get the best out them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
janie jones Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 Just get this awful feeling that one day the club will really go t*** up and we all wonder why we did SFA! Hope that day never comes and no I don't what can be done but I guess the vast majority feel there is far, far more to worry about than just getting in a decent manager who has control of the footballing side. Almost everything in the last two seasons shows that most aspects of the club - everything from team selection to communication with the fans - is a shambles and we are being by run a control freak who has us by the short and curlies. Cue the usual suspects telling us it'll either all be ok or asking what can we do anyway but nothing suggests it will be ok anytime soon and I feel very worried about where Vlad's reign will ultimately take us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sydney Posted June 26, 2008 Share Posted June 26, 2008 I owe significantly more (mortgage, car loan, credit cards) than I earn (salary), but the bank is happy with my ability to repay the debts over a long time (20 years), so I don't need to sell my TV (asset) to someone who fancies buying it - even if they offer me good money for it. Now, if they offer way over the value of the TV, I'll probaby accept it and go and buy another. The main issue with the debt is that we have to pay so much interest - having debt, no matter how big, isn't an issue until we're unable to pay it back. So, I say, although Romanov is presently ruining the club, we don't need to worry so much about the finances. Let's focus more on terrible comms, no manager, and sh*te players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Das Root Posted June 26, 2008 Share Posted June 26, 2008 I would assume if Romanov went full on with selling all decent type players fans might just get up and do something about it. Fair enough if ?2m offered for Goncalves as too good, but ?1m? Maybe more money to be made elsewhere that can only be done without a baying mob of Jambos outside the front door. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
macbeth Posted June 27, 2008 Share Posted June 27, 2008 For any of you vaguely interested in other sides I've just added Dundee United to the site- http://www.football-finances.org.uk/dundeeunited/ slightly surprised that their income has been roughly half of Hearts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boaby Ewing Posted June 27, 2008 Share Posted June 27, 2008 For any of you vaguely interested in other sides I've just added Dundee United to the site- http://www.football-finances.org.uk/dundeeunited/ slightly surprised that their income has been roughly half of Hearts Really good site, cheers for doing Hearts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.