Jump to content

*** Hearts Summer Transfer Window 2022 - Snodgrass signs ***


dazajmbo

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 39.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • RustyRightPeg

    1255

  • Sooks

    1119

  • Bazzas right boot

    957

  • BackOfTheNet

    927

LarrysRightFoot
1 minute ago, DC_92 said:

Hijack pls Hearts.

I agree. Really looked a player the 2nd half of the season. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rick Sanchez

It would be great news to secure Simms before their pre season camp tbh. We need someone in ASAP.

 

Regards to Levitt...you'd think if we wanted him then we'd get him instead of Utd.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Absolute Scenes

I must be in the minority here

I really did not know who Dylan levitt was until he scored against us at Dundee United away. And that’s from watching hearts home and away games. Ronan by far the more effective player

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lone Striker
1 hour ago, hmfc_liam06 said:


Plus 15% of those add ons, so could be up to £2.6m.

Isn't the rules around  add-ons simply to give the selling club some benefit from the NEXT sale ?  We're not the selling club - Bologna are.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agentjambo
3 minutes ago, Absolute Scenes said:

I must be in the minority here

I really did not know who Dylan levitt was until he scored against us at Dundee United away. And that’s from watching hearts home and away games. Ronan by far the more effective player

Better player than Ronan IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

RustyRightPeg
6 minutes ago, Absolute Scenes said:

I must be in the minority here

I really did not know who Dylan levitt was until he scored against us at Dundee United away. And that’s from watching hearts home and away games. Ronan by far the more effective player


Levitt is a sitting midfielder though that occasionally drifts forward 

 

Ronan is a winger / #10

 

hard to compare / judge 

Edited by RustyRightPeg
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pasquale for King
3 minutes ago, Lone Striker said:

Isn't the rules around  add-ons simply to give the selling club some benefit from the NEXT sale ?  We're not the selling club - Bologna are.

 

 

Add ons can be anything, if they wanted to screw us over the sell on they could say it was £5m fee and add one for first team games etc. I think it’s a % of whatever the total fee received over the period of the deal. It will paid in instalments anyway you would think so over 4 years. A nice bonus over that time. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Naisys Tackle
15 minutes ago, Sertse said:

2 million= 500k for Ronan, 500k for Shankland, 1m for Simms 

Easy as that, job done

 

 

 

:lol:

We must be close to getting Shankland now.   Would be amazed if Simms comes back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Naisys Tackle
1 minute ago, Pasquale for King said:

Add ons can be anything, if they wanted to screw us over the sell on they could say it was £5m fee and add one for first team games etc. I think it’s a % of whatever the total fee received over the period of the deal. It will paid in instalments anyway you would think so over 4 years. A nice bonus over that time. 

Wonder how much Celtic get from the sale? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Heartsofgold
Just now, Robbies Tackle said:

Wonder how much Celtic get from the sale? 

Zero. They received their payment when he left us. They are due the square root of **** all from any sell on clause that was negotiated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

RustyRightPeg
3 minutes ago, Agentjambo said:

Shankland not in beerchot squad for friendly against Brugge today.


Ah you beat me to it 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

TyphoonJambo
2 minutes ago, RustyRightPeg said:

No Shankland. 

929F2AB7-4077-4398-96B5-904882FDA1A9.jpeg

Get someone down to the airport sharpish!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, RustyRightPeg said:


Ah you beat me to it 


And he’s bizarrely started following Ross Stewart on Instagram (having already followed Kingsley, Neilson, Halkett and McKay)… 👀 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

RustyRightPeg
3 minutes ago, MattyK82 said:


And he’s bizarrely started following Ross Stewart on Instagram (having already followed Kingsley, Neilson, Halkett and McKay)… 👀 


God you’re sharp 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Absolute Scenes said:

I must be in the minority here

I really did not know who Dylan levitt was until he scored against us at Dundee United away. And that’s from watching hearts home and away games. Ronan by far the more effective player

 

Haven't seen enough of either to say for sure, but my impression is Levitt plays deeper, is more of a passer and has a bit more bite to his game. He's also started adding goals to his game and he's a few years younger than Ronan. Out of contract next summer as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tom Hardy’s Dug
3 minutes ago, JamboAl said:

Why?

Player sale = income = taxable asset

 

Mind you dunno if it is income tax or CGT which I would be vaguely interested to know.

Edited by Tom Hardy’s Dug
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Naisys Tackle
19 minutes ago, Heartsofgold said:

Zero. They received their payment when he left us. They are due the square root of **** all from any sell on clause that was negotiated.

Perfect! 

 

Cheers :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Absolute Scenes said:

I must be in the minority here

I really did not know who Dylan levitt was until he scored against us at Dundee United away. And that’s from watching hearts home and away games. Ronan by far the more effective player

levitt only played against us twice, the game you mention after the split and matchday 4 which was only the second game he was with dundee united for. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rick Sanchez

With Boyce and Grant do we not need more of a sitter with attacking tendencies? I thought Ronan played further back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another Robbo
6 minutes ago, Tom Hardy’s Dug said:

Player sale = income = taxable asset

 

Mind you dunno if it is income tax or CGT which I would be vaguely interested to know.

Corporation tax maybe?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Another Robbo said:

Corporation tax maybe?

 

Corporation tax yes - but often with players, they have a value to the club and any trading is measured as a profit or loss vs that value...I think.  No idea how it works when we no longer hold the asset, is it just straight up income? 

 

Also vaguely interested, wonder if anyone knows definitively...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Chillidigits
2 hours ago, TypoonJambo said:

For the entire season? Impressive stuff.

Take care when you go through the turnstiles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, RustyRightPeg said:

No Shankland. 

929F2AB7-4077-4398-96B5-904882FDA1A9.jpeg

 

Not playing "for family reasons" according to the previous tweet.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tom Hardy’s Dug
3 minutes ago, Waterboy said:

 

Corporation tax yes - but often with players, they have a value to the club and any trading is measured as a profit or loss vs that value...I think.  No idea how it works when we no longer hold the asset, is it just straight up income? 

 

Also vaguely interested, wonder if anyone knows definitively...

Probably CGT.

 

We had a stake in an asset - say 15%.

 

Asset got sold for an increased value so capital gain rather than income?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Mdoug79 said:

I hope we use the Hickey money to pay for Simms on a permanent 🤞🏼


I’m sure it was posted on here that we won’t be taking Hickey money into account for this season coming it will be next summer transfer window.

 

Could have completely imagined this though.

 

 

Edited by Chaps
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Tom Hardy’s Dug said:

Player sale = income = taxable asset

 

Mind you dunno if it is income tax or CGT which I would be vaguely interested to know.

Maybe if this was the club's only transaction in the year.

Also player purchases = allowable expense.

Ignoring other business transactions and any losses carried forward, I have a feeling we'll be spending more on player acqusitions than we'll make from player sales so taxation will not be an immediate concern.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

RustyRightPeg
3 minutes ago, DC_92 said:

 

Not playing "for family reasons" according to the previous tweet.

 

 


:interehjrling:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lone Striker
2 minutes ago, Tom Hardy’s Dug said:

Probably CGT.

 

We had a stake in an asset - say 15%.

 

Asset got sold for an increased value so capital gain rather than income?

Seems wrong to describe  a player at another club as a "partial" Hearts asset.    He's got no asset value to Hearts anyway until that club sells him for money - which they might not do if they decided to let his contract run down.  Seems more like just transfer income for us.  No idea how that gets taxed taxed - Neil Doncaster should  know.....  but good luck with that though  😃

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, DC_92 said:

 

Not playing "for family reasons" according to the previous tweet.

 

 

Hopefully his family are house hunting in Edinburgh.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mr Elwood P
28 minutes ago, Lone Striker said:

Seems wrong to describe  a player at another club as a "partial" Hearts asset.    He's got no asset value to Hearts anyway until that club sells him for money - which they might not do if they decided to let his contract run down.  Seems more like just transfer income for us.  No idea how that gets taxed taxed - Neil Doncaster should  know.....  but good luck with that though  😃


If you had an interest in 15% of a house would you say it was a partial asset of your estate ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Lone Striker said:

Seems wrong to describe  a player at another club as a "partial" Hearts asset.    He's got no asset value to Hearts anyway until that club sells him for money - which they might not do if they decided to let his contract run down.  Seems more like just transfer income for us.  No idea how that gets taxed taxed - Neil Doncaster should  know.....  but good luck with that though  😃

I don't think we need get sidetracked re taxation; our immediate interest is that we get money from Hickey's transfer which will hopefully be used wisely to stregthen the squad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tom Hardy’s Dug
2 minutes ago, JamboAl said:

I don't think we need get sidetracked re taxation; our immediate interest is that we get money from Hickey's transfer which will hopefully be used wisely to stregthen the squad.

Indeed

 

Its a nerd-like interest rather than anything else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Italian Lambretta

So if we could only afford 2 of 3 which players would it be?

 

Shankland

Ronan 

Simms

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lone Striker
19 minutes ago, Mr Elwood P said:


If you had an interest in 15% of a house would you say it was a partial asset of your estate ?

Yes - but houses have a value every day of the year forever, albeit a fluctuating one.  Never zero.   If someone buys the house outright, I'd receive 15% of the money and have to pay CGT on it if it was above the tax threshold.   

 

Not really comparable to a footballer on a short contract which means he has  zero value at the end of it.  imo, its just extra  transfer income which wouldn't have materialised if Brentford had waited till he became a free agent.  

 

 

Anywho, as @jamboAl and @Tom Hardy’s Dug  have said, it disnae really matter - I'm sure Jacqui Duncan  knows what it is. 😉

Edited by Lone Striker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Italian Lambretta said:

So if we could only afford 2 of 3 which players would it be?

 

Shankland

Ronan 

Simms

 

 

 

 

 

Simms plus one 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jambo dans les Pyrenees
6 minutes ago, Italian Lambretta said:

So if we could only afford 2 of 3 which players would it be?

 

Shankland

Ronan 

Simms

 

 

 

 

 

We can afford all 3

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tom Hardy’s Dug
4 minutes ago, Lone Striker said:

Yes - but houses have a value every day of the year forever, albeit a fluctuating one.  Never zero.   If someone buys the house outright, I'd receive 15% of the money and have to pay CGT on it if it was above the tax threshold.   

 

Not really comparable to a footballer on a short contract which means he has  zero value at the end of it.  imo, its just extra  transfer income which wouldn't have materialised if Brentford had waited till he became a free agent.  

 


Although bizarrely Oil which is a tradeable asset fell to below $0 at the start of Covid for a couple days and look at it now.

 

Anyway in answer to the above - Simms and Shankland. 
 

I say that in the knowledge we’d just get an alternative AM instead of Ronan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • davemclaren changed the title to *** Hearts Summer Transfer Window 2022 - Snodgrass signs ***

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.




×
×
  • Create New...