DalryJambo Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 Ok, there have been a few threads recently regarding VR handling of the club and many opinions as to what?s happening. Here is my tuppence worth and I did post a version of this last night on another thread but it?s fallen off the front page. I don?t have any inside info or tipoff?s it?s just what I think is happening. It is clear VR and his cohorts are siphoning money from the club in various ways, for example interest on debt, fee?s for player loans and registrations and transfers, sponsorships etc. But I think this money is being put aside and they will systematically repay the club in lump sums via the debit relief model to reduce the debt and increase their overall stake. They will pay themselves this money and it will become an ?expense? to Hearts. This ?expense? will be sent against any profit made through transfer fees/other income, reducing the amount the club pays to the government in taxes. This is not being done to defraud the government (and falls under tax avoidance rather than evasion), but to maximise the amount of money that can be put towards debt reduction. Why would VR do this rather than just repaying the debt? Well if for example he decided to reduce the debit in one lump sum with a cash injection; sounds straight forward, but that would be regarded as an income and the club would lose the Vat, straight of the bat. It would be regarded as any other income eg season ticket money etc and would be a financially inefficient means of reducing the debit. The debt for equity swap won?t be affected by this loss. It would also have cost them ?20M +. For this plan to work perfectively they will try to manipulate the businesses income to reduce its debits, at no (or little) cost to themselves, whilst maximising thier shareholding. When it comes to selling the business, and to reap the maximum profit, it will be in perfect financial health, fully sustainable, with a strong team, new stadium, flourishing youth academy and would be the perfect proposition for new investors. As a bonus there might even be a hotel (paid for through rental/sponsorship etc) which will be sold as a separate entity, for his/UBIGs financial gain. Why don?t all owners deal with debt in this way? All the owners, if they?ve had the accounts on to it, will have various mechanisms in place to aid in the tax reduction process, but few are in the unique positions VR is in. He owns (or has a controlling interest) in a Bank, allowing him to take on the clubs debt and charge/benefit from the interest accrued (income stream one), he owns (or has a controlling interest) in a few other football clubs from which he can sign players cheaply and transfer them through the pyramid, possibly acting as the players agent, the selling club and the buying club in many of the transfers accruing several fees (income stream two), he also owns (or has a controlling interest) an investment bank (UBIG) who specialise in investing in sporting clubs and sporting arenas in which they invest and take rentals i.e. the proposed hotel, restaurants etc (income stream three). There are probably a few more vehicles being used, but really it doesn?t matter as all this money will be repaid through debt relief and therefore the club is basically repaying its own debts. The recent ?12m debt reduction was an interesting amount for them to choose. It was around 1/3rd of the outstanding debt but also around ?4m a year since he bought the club. I would expect a 12m reduction every 3 years until the debt is cleared. If you add up estimated interest on the debt, the mystery fee?s on the accounts, transfer fee?s of players loaned from other clubs via Kaunas and anything else you can thinks that?s gone missing is it more than ?12m? The basic thing people need to get their heads round is that we now support a company that, as one of it functions, runs a football team. This company has a majority owner that can run things how he sees fit. We just have to hope his intentions are to clear the debt and sell the club for a profit. On the grounds he is a successful business man, that owns (has shares in) an investment bank, then I?m certain it can be his only goal. Winning football matches/leagues/cups etc along the way is a bonus and would speed up the project. I might be wrong, but that?s what I think is being done and in the long term VR will walk away with a lot of someone?s money and Heart of Midlothian Football Club will be in the strongest position in its history. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JamboRobbo Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 didn't you make the same post last night? not that I disagree with the general statement, just thought I read it already! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Don Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 :smell_hobo: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DalryJambo Posted February 4, 2009 Author Share Posted February 4, 2009 didn't you make the same post last night? not that I disagree with the general statement, just thought I read it already! Yea i said that at the start, but i posted it at the end of a 200 post thread at 12.30 last night. I didn't think anyone saw it and thought i would give it its own thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlie-Brown Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 Interesting theory, sounds plausible - worth debating to see where it fits / doesnt fit the evidence to hand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coco Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 I prefer the theory of general incompetence Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DB-14 Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 :smell_hobo: Explain? The boy has put forward a very interesting theory which sounds far too intelligent to be from a Hobnob in the first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DalryJambo Posted February 4, 2009 Author Share Posted February 4, 2009 :smell_hobo: Away and pi$$ off. Is that how everyone gets treated on this site. I've used this username for over three years on the BBC, the Scotsman and this site. I've never once abused or antagonised anyone, and rarely post because of the flack some people take but am on most days reading the threads. And when I actually post, guess what....I get called a hobo. My post is written to suggest what VR is doing should be regarded as a positive as the club will end up in a better position than before he arrived. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Victorian Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 Ok, there have been a few threads recently regarding VR handling of the club and many opinions as to what?s happening. Here is my tuppence worth and I did post a version of this last night on another thread but it?s fallen off the front page. I don?t have any inside info or tipoff?s it?s just what I think is happening. It is clear VR and his cohorts are siphoning money from the club in various ways, for example interest on debt, fee?s for player loans and registrations and transfers, sponsorships etc. But I think this money is being put aside and they will systematically repay the club in lump sums via the debit relief model to reduce the debt and increase their overall stake. They will pay themselves this money and it will become an ?expense? to Hearts. This ?expense? will be sent against any profit made through transfer fees/other income, reducing the amount the club pays to the government in taxes. This is not being done to defraud the government (and falls under tax avoidance rather than evasion), but to maximise the amount of money that can be put towards debt reduction. Why would VR do this rather than just repaying the debt? Well if for example he decided to reduce the debit in one lump sum with a cash injection; sounds straight forward, but that would be regarded as an income and the club would lose the Vat, straight of the bat. It would be regarded as any other income eg season ticket money etc and would be a financially inefficient means of reducing the debit. The debt for equity swap won?t be affected by this loss. It would also have cost them ?20M +. For this plan to work perfectively they will try to manipulate the businesses income to reduce its debits, at no (or little) cost to themselves, whilst maximising thier shareholding. When it comes to selling the business, and to reap the maximum profit, it will be in perfect financial health, fully sustainable, with a strong team, new stadium, flourishing youth academy and would be the perfect proposition for new investors. As a bonus there might even be a hotel (paid for through rental/sponsorship etc) which will be sold as a separate entity, for his/UBIGs financial gain. Why don?t all owners deal with debt in this way? All the owners, if they?ve had the accounts on to it, will have various mechanisms in place to aid in the tax reduction process, but few are in the unique positions VR is in. He owns (or has a controlling interest) in a Bank, allowing him to take on the clubs debt and charge/benefit from the interest accrued (income stream one), he owns (or has a controlling interest) in a few other football clubs from which he can sign players cheaply and transfer them through the pyramid, possibly acting as the players agent, the selling club and the buying club in many of the transfers accruing several fees (income stream two), he also owns (or has a controlling interest) an investment bank (UBIG) who specialise in investing in sporting clubs and sporting arenas in which they invest and take rentals i.e. the proposed hotel, restaurants etc (income stream three). There are probably a few more vehicles being used, but really it doesn?t matter as all this money will be repaid through debt relief and therefore the club is basically repaying its own debts. The recent ?12m debt reduction was an interesting amount for them to choose. It was around 1/3rd of the outstanding debt but also around ?4m a year since he bought the club. I would expect a 12m reduction every 3 years until the debt is cleared. If you add up estimated interest on the debt, the mystery fee?s on the accounts, transfer fee?s of players loaned from other clubs via Kaunas and anything else you can thinks that?s gone missing is it more than ?12m? The basic thing people need to get their heads round is that we now support a company that, as one of it functions, runs a football team. This company has a majority owner that can run things how he sees fit. We just have to hope his intentions are to clear the debt and sell the club for a profit. On the grounds he is a successful business man, that owns (has shares in) an investment bank, then I?m certain it can be his only goal. Winning football matches/leagues/cups etc along the way is a bonus and would speed up the project. I might be wrong, but that?s what I think is being done and in the long term VR will walk away with a lot of someone?s money and Heart of Midlothian Football Club will be in the strongest position in its history. good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JamboRobbo Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 Yea i said that at the start, but i posted it at the end of a 200 post thread at 12.30 last night. I didn't think anyone saw it and thought i would give it its own thread. Fair enough mate thought I was going mad for a minute. Agree with the general thrust of it. Even agree that we MIGHT come out of it in the strongest position we ever have at the end. I have a problem with what happens in the meantime though for us ST holders going to games week to week. No priority at all is given to giving us something exciting to watch in the meantime. I think you've identified that by Winning football matches/leagues/cups etc along the way is a bonus and would speed up the project. Thats the bit that drives me mad, cause for me, winning football matches on a Saturday is what it's all about, and it frustrates the hell out of me knowing I'm going along on a Saturday, and we HAVEN'T put EVERYTHING into winning the next match..... But I can see that there could be benefits in the long term to this strategy. And when we come out the other side, we'll all be delighted if this is the case, and will look back at the short term defeats and laugh about it. But, I think it's also worth noting that it could just as easily not work out though, meaning we've had to put up with all the short term ****e, for no long term gain...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JamboRobbo Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 Away and pi$$ off. Is that how everyone gets treated on this site. Pretty much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DalryJambo Posted February 4, 2009 Author Share Posted February 4, 2009 Pretty much. For the record, I’ve had a season ticket for over 12 years a tynecastle, played football as kid and never got to games until i started uni and never miss home games....but why am I justifying myself????? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JamboRobbo Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 For the record, I’ve had a season ticket for over 12 years a tynecastle, played football as kid and never got to games until i started uni and never miss home games....but why am I justifying myself????? Would'nt take offence its just normal practice on here mate. Say something other than "everything is wonderful", and you put yourself at risk. You're not a man till you've been called a hobo at least 10 times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mundojambo Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 this makes sense. i've always thought vlad has intentions of making money rather than to run a football club into the ground for kicks. he is an intelligent man who knows what he's doing in the business sense. it's also my opinion though that he is a control freak, and that, along with his drive to sell players for profit, is why our team suffers on the field Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
topcat Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 I've not got time to go through that point by point but I'll pick up a couple The recent ?12m debt reduction was an interesting amount for them to choose. It was around 1/3rd of the outstanding debt but also around ?4m a year since he bought the club. I would expect a 12m reduction every 3 years until the debt is cleared. A more obvious explanation is that ?12m amount was the total that was owed to the Parent Company UBIG. The rest being owed to Ukios Bankas. If you add up estimated interest on the debt, the mystery fee?s on the accounts, transfer fee?s of players loaned from other clubs via Kaunas and anything else you can thinks that?s gone missing is it more than ?12m? I would assume from the question mark that that's all guesswork. Besides it assumes that lending Hearts ?12m didn't cost UBIG anything and so treats any interest received as profit rather than income. If Hearts had been paying UBIG interest far significantly in excess of what UBIG could receive from lending elsewhere then it might make some sense. In actual fact the interest rates reported in the accounts were unremarkable. The underlying assumption of your analysis seems to be that Hearts are currently fundamentally profitable and the owners are pretending that they aren't so as to extract the profit in a more efficient way. I remain unconvinced Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JamboRobbo Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 I've not got time to go through that point by point but I'll pick up a couple A more obvious explanation is that ?12m amount was the total that was owed to the Parent Company UBIG. The rest being owed to Ukios Bankas. I would assume from the question mark that that's all guesswork. Besides it assumes that lending Hearts ?12m didn't cost UBIG anything and so treats any interest received as profit rather than income. If Hearts had been paying UBIG interest far significantly in excess of what UBIG could receive from lending elsewhere then it might make some sense. In actual fact the interest rates reported in the accounts were unremarkable. The underlying assumption of your analysis seems to be that Hearts are currently fundamentally profitable and the owners are pretending that they aren't so as to extract the profit in a more efficient way. I remain unconvinced Maybe I've picked it up wrong, but I think you've misunderstood what he's saying. i think he's saying that the money coming in out, and the way it's all being done, is being done to minimise the actual cost to UBIG via tax savings and so on. And that perhaps things like the 3.85M payment, and the 12M payback, are driven by minimising cost to Vlad, and are probably just about cancelling each other out (i.e. Hearts ain't gaining or losing, but it's costing Vlad less to invest, maybe it actually costs him 80% or 60% or whatever)...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tartofmidlothian Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 he owns (or has a controlling interest) in a few other football clubs from which he can sign players cheaply and transfer them through the pyramid, possibly acting as the players agent, the selling club and the buying club in many of the transfers accruing several fees (income stream two) In relation to the above bit, I think that's where a hypothetical plan like this must have fallen down, and why we had those wilderness years between Burley and Csaba. Vlad grossly underestimated the standard of the Scottish PL and thought that flooding the team with half-decent Eastern Europeans, albeit most of them internationals, would bring easy on-field success and a showcase for them to enter the EPL or Championship at 2 or 3 times the fee he paid, at least. Easy profit. On occasion it worked (Skacel, Bednar) but more often than not, the guys he brought over weren't good enough - hence his continual dissatisfaction with coaches who he thought weren't carrying out a foolproof plan well enough. So the credit crunch has been almost a good thing for us, in a way. It's hopefully opened his eyes to the fact that Plan A was a dud, or at least couldn't be carried out by jamming qsuare pegs into round holes and having any old sod 'coach' the team to glory. I think the fact we're actually hearing rumours of possible cash offers for guys like Zal and Cesny is proof of that! Could we have given them away last season? So one plan, back on the rails. Cheers Csaba! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Don Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 Away and pi$$ off. Is that how everyone gets treated on this site. I've used this username for over three years on the BBC, the Scotsman and this site. I've never once abused or antagonised anyone, and rarely post because of the flack some people take but am on most days reading the threads. And when I actually post, guess what....I get called a hobo. My post is written to suggest what VR is doing should be regarded as a positive as the club will end up in a better position than before he arrived. Nice use of vocabulary. Hmmm It is clear VR and his cohorts are siphoning money from the club in various ways, for example interest on debt, fee?s for player loans and registrations and transfers, sponsorships etc. My reasoning for questioning your credibility in the first place see above quote. Straight out of the Sirgay manual of Hobo-economics. For a start it is Not i repeat NOT clear Romanov is siphoning money, and to state he is doing so is wrong. You could have said there is the possibility, or on the outside looking in you could draw that conclusion, but you didn't you went straight into "It is Clear" Apologies if indeed you are a Hearts fan, however these repeated financial conundrums do tend to lead people to think otherwise when posted sometimes. As for the abuse or antagonising, i fail to see where i gave you abuse maybe slight antogonism, however your reply was certainly abusive so was a contradiction in term wasn't it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tartofmidlothian Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 The underlying assumption of your analysis seems to be that Hearts are currently fundamentally profitable and the owners are pretending that they aren't so as to extract the profit in a more efficient way. I remain unconvinced He doesn't seem to be saying that Hearts are fundamentally profitable, so much as there are methods of shifting player fees and tax responsibilities around between Vlad's clubs that offer hidden profits - or at least financial benefits - which aren't obvious to us. All above board legally of course, just not so transparent when spread over a couple of countries. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DalryJambo Posted February 4, 2009 Author Share Posted February 4, 2009 I've not got time to go through that point by point but I'll pick up a couple A more obvious explanation is that ?12m amount was the total that was owed to the Parent Company UBIG. The rest being owed to Ukios Bankas. I would assume from the question mark that that's all guesswork. Besides it assumes that lending Hearts ?12m didn't cost UBIG anything and so treats any interest received as profit rather than income. If Hearts had been paying UBIG interest far significantly in excess of what UBIG could receive from lending elsewhere then it might make some sense. In actual fact the interest rates reported in the accounts were unremarkable. The underlying assumption of your analysis seems to be that Hearts are currently fundamentally profitable and the owners are pretending that they aren't so as to extract the profit in a more efficient way. I remain unconvinced I actually think Ukios Bankas is the parent company and UBIG is its investment arm (Ukios Bankas Investment Group – but I might be wrong) and whoever holds the debt is irrelevant, as long as it’s been reduced on the Hearts balance sheet (which we will soon see) I’m fairly confident it will be to Hearts benefit. I am guessing about the fees received, but if you look at about ?2m per year in interest, ?3.8m of unexplained ‘Fees’ plus a few other bits and pieces I will suggest an educated guess of around ?12m. Also if they had money to invest in projects (which as the investment arm of a Bank, you can assume they do) this would seem I high efficient way of investing money. You stabilise the business you’ve purchased and get the money the business was previously paying HBOS in interest, for yourself. The club has a good turnover, but profit hasn’t been possible because of high costs. Allot of the cost previously accrued were paid to third parties ie Clubs in player fees, loan fees, agent fees, vat, interest on loans, players wages etc etc. If they can stop paying a percentage of this money to the third parties and start paying it to themselves, whilst maintaining a reasonable side on the pitch (which I agree they haven’t done – but that is for another thread) then they can make the profit for these moneys, and reinvest it in debt reduction. To be clear, I think this is a mid-term strategy to clear the debt and when this happens the money saved will be reinvested in the team each year, hopefully raising the standard of the team and putting the club on a more stable footing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Don Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 He doesn't seem to be saying that Hearts are fundamentally profitable, so much as there are methods of shifting player fees and tax responsibilities around between Vlad's clubs that offer hidden profits - or at least financial benefits - which aren't obvious to us. All above board legally of course, just not so transparent when spread over a couple of countries. I think it's been pretty obvious from the start that Romanov would shift players and fees around for "Tax avoidence" purposes which as you say is all perfectly legal and above board. IE. buying a player through Kaunas and loaning him to Hearts and charging a registration fee to Hearts, which is all well if that player then becomes a hearts player and Hearts recieve any sell on fee. Someone can maybe correct me here, but with Hearts as a business in debt and non profit making Romanov or i should say the club would be subject to certain tax relief, is that not correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DalryJambo Posted February 4, 2009 Author Share Posted February 4, 2009 Nice use of vocabulary. Hmmm My reasoning for questioning your credibility in the first place see above quote. Straight out of the Sirgay manual of Hobo-economics. For a start it is Not i repeat NOT clear Romanov is siphoning money, and to state he is doing so is wrong. You could have said there is the possibility, or on the outside looking in you could draw that conclusion, but you didn't you went straight into "It is Clear" Apologies if indeed you are a Hearts fan, however these repeated financial conundrums do tend to lead people to think otherwise when posted sometimes. As for the abuse or antagonising, i fail to see where i gave you abuse maybe slight antogonism, however your reply was certainly abusive so was a contradiction in term wasn't it Sorry, I apologise for that outburst, but you did call me a Hobo!! I used that phrase as I thought it was a wildly held view that we were getting a poor deal from VR and many times it’s been said that there is money missing, strange fees accrued etc and I thought wording it that way, whilst also stating that I thought it was for the benefit of the club made it clear I wasn’t being critical, but trying to explain what is being done. Sorry again for any offence caused. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ben Dover Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 Maybe I've picked it up wrong, but I think you've misunderstood what he's saying. i think he's saying that the money coming in out, and the way it's all being done, is being done to minimise the actual cost to UBIG via tax savings and so on. And that perhaps things like the 3.85M payment, and the 12M payback, are driven by minimising cost to Vlad, and are probably just about cancelling each other out (i.e. Hearts ain't gaining or losing, but it's costing Vlad less to invest, maybe it actually costs him 80% or 60% or whatever)...... Somebody hacked into your account JR ? Two fairly POSITIVE posts on one thread ...............nurse ! Anyway, I've never thought that VR was out to ruin us ( not intentionally anyway ) and it's just a pity we had to make an absolute pigs ear of the footballing side of things in the process. However we will, hopefully, come out of this tunnel in a better state than was ever going to be the case had CPRs plan for Heart of Murrayfield gone ahead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JamboRobbo Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 Somebody hacked into your account JR ?Two fairly POSITIVE posts on one thread ...............nurse ! Just a case of reading a post that talks sense and I agree with, rather than the usual kiddies fantasies and propoganda that are posted on here by the usual suspects. Anyway, I've never thought that VR was out to ruin us ( not intentionally anyway ) and it's just a pity we had to make an absolute pigs ear of the footballing side of things in the process. However we will, hopefully, come out of this tunnel in a better state than was ever going to be the case had CPRs plan for Heart of Murrayfield gone ahead. Hopefully we will, but right now, we're being put through a lot of pain in order to find out, and we might come out the other side to find we gained nothing for all the pain we went through...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nucky Thompson Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 Would'nt take offence its just normal practice on here mate. Say something other than "everything is wonderful", and you put yourself at risk. You're not a man till you've been called a hobo at least 10 times. So there are no people at all who are Hobos that come on here to stir the crap? I'm not saying the OP is, but I'll keep an open mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tartofmidlothian Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 I think it's been pretty obvious from the start that Romanov would shift players and fees around for "Tax avoidence" purposes which as you say is all perfectly legal and above board. IE. buying a player through Kaunas and loaning him to Hearts and charging a registration fee to Hearts, which is all well if that player then becomes a hearts player and Hearts recieve any sell on fee. Someone can maybe correct me here, but with Hearts as a business in debt and non profit making Romanov or i should say the club would be subject to certain tax relief, is that not correct. Which then hinges on whether or not that part of the plan has worked or not, or, like the playing side, whether there have been a bunch of assumptions and unforeseens that have derailed things. If things behind the scenes have been working, DalryJambo's plan seems plausible to this layman at least Heh. I just like it when people lay out sensible rationales for the often strange way things have gone since Vlad took over, rather than falling back on the tired old Daily Record Mad Vlad! guff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JamboRobbo Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 So there are no people at all who are Hobos that come on here to stir the crap? I'm not saying the OP is, but I'll keep an open mind. I never said any such thing, or anything remotely like it. Feel free to show where I did though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tartofmidlothian Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 Just a case of reading a post that talks sense and I agree with, rather than the usual kiddies fantasies and propoganda that are posted on here by the usual suspects. Hopefully we will, but right now, we're being put through a lot of pain in order to find out, and we might come out the other side to find we gained nothing for all the pain we went through...... Month by month this season, it seems we're edging further and further away from the sorry state Pieman took us to the brink of. Fingers crossed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Don Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 Sorry, I apologise for that outburst, but you did call me a Hobo!! I used that phrase as I thought it was a wildly held view that we were getting a poor deal from VR and many times it?s been said that there is money missing, strange fees accrued etc and I thought wording it that way, whilst also stating that I thought it was for the benefit of the club made it clear I wasn?t being critical, but trying to explain what is being done. Sorry again for any offence caused. Apology accepted, however im sure you've been called a lot worse than someone thinking you could be a hobo......on second thoughts being called a hobo when your not is quite a hard thing to take. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Don Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 Would'nt take offence its just normal practice on here mate. Say something other than "everything is wonderful", and you put yourself at risk. You're not a man till you've been called a hobo at least 10 times. Or a racist Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JamboRobbo Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 Or a racist don't forget xenephobe and hat-kicker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Don Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 don't forget xenephobe and hat-kicker. If the hat fits wear it dont kick it :108years: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest S.U.S.S. Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 Yea i said that at the start, but i posted it at the end of a 200 post thread at 12.30 last night. I didn't think anyone saw it and thought i would give it its own thread. Just say "Trolling" its quicker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ben Dover Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 Month by month this season, it seems we're edging further and further away from the sorry state Pieman took us to the brink of. Fingers crossed. Yes indeed. We are already getting carried away with demands for European qualification, big money buys and the like. How quickly we forget eh. Now ok, VRs meddling undoubtedly put a spanner in the works, but lets not forget - it was the works that he himself had helped create. With CPR's figures being massaged to the max we might possibly be at MF now, broke all bar the player transfer values, paying rent to the SRU and perhaps still servicing a level of debt that we could not afford to clear once the sums were added up Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo Bill Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 Now that you two have made up, I suggest you get a room at the honeymoon hotel. Buffalo Bill . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fulham Jambo Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 long time no see Dalry - welcome back. very interesting OP and one which I agree with. corporate debt is a highly complex area and very different from personal debt and you have done much to highlight and explain that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest S.U.S.S. Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 Now that you two have made up, I suggest you get a room at the honeymoon hotel. Buffalo Bill . Ur a sick man BB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Don Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 Now that you two have made up, I suggest you get a room at the honeymoon hotel. Buffalo Bill . Haha, I don't put out on the first date Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest S.U.S.S. Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 Haha, I don't put out on the first date Liar! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TyphoonJambo Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 Away and pi$$ off. Is that how everyone gets treated on this site. I've used this username for over three years on the BBC, the Scotsman and this site. I've never once abused or antagonised anyone, and rarely post because of the flack some people take but am on most days reading the threads. And when I actually post, guess what....I get called a hobo. My post is written to suggest what VR is doing should be regarded as a positive as the club will end up in a better position than before he arrived. Dalry, Don't bite to the Hobo accusations. I have seen several of your threads and it is obvious you are a true jambo. A good, well researched post and I, for one, prefer to look at the "Glass half full" scenario which comes out of this strategy. Maybe I am digging my head in the sand but, complicated as it is I think you might have hit the nail on the head with this one. Why else would a succesful business man buy this club other than to make money. If we end up financialy secure, all the better. I am confident that this will ultimately result in a better fotball team. Well researched mate and thanks for putting the effort in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Don Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 Liar! You wouldn't either if you'd seen some of the monsters ive been on dates with, even after 10 pints. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest S.U.S.S. Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 You wouldn't either if you'd seen some of the monsters ive been on dates with, even after 10 pints. Fair point, we have ALL been there mate. [shudders] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevmacd Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 Well done DJ - good opening post and a sensible take on what might be going on. First and foremost, Vlad is a business man (and a relatively successful one) so any plan would have to be beneficial to him, UBIG, Ukio Bankas and Hearts. His investment in the club only makes sense if there is, eventually, either a profitable business for him to continue to run or a healthy business with good prospects for him to sell at a huge profit. Either way, the idea of him being merely an asset stripper doesn't make any sense at all or he would have proceeded with the sale of Tynie and the move to Murrayfield, as was agreed when he took over. p.s. Ignore the abuse - most of it comes from people who don't fully understand the points you're making or from folk who just like to think ill of people! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamboAl Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 Ok, there have been a few threads recently regarding VR handling of the club and many opinions as to what’s happening. Here is my tuppence worth and I did post a version of this last night on another thread but it’s fallen off the front page. I don’t have any inside info or tipoff’s it’s just what I think is happening. It is clear VR and his cohorts are siphoning money from the club in various ways, for example interest on debt, fee’s for player loans and registrations and transfers, sponsorships etc. But I think this money is being put aside and they will systematically repay the club in lump sums via the debit relief model to reduce the debt and increase their overall stake. They will pay themselves this money and it will become an ‘expense’ to Hearts. This ‘expense’ will be sent against any profit made through transfer fees/other income, reducing the amount the club pays to the government in taxes. This is not being done to defraud the government (and falls under tax avoidance rather than evasion), but to maximise the amount of money that can be put towards debt reduction. Why would VR do this rather than just repaying the debt? Well if for example he decided to reduce the debit in one lump sum with a cash injection; sounds straight forward, but that would be regarded as an income and the club would lose the Vat, straight of the bat. It would be regarded as any other income eg season ticket money etc and would be a financially inefficient means of reducing the debit. The debt for equity swap won’t be affected by this loss. It would also have cost them ?20M +. For this plan to work perfectively they will try to manipulate the businesses income to reduce its debits, at no (or little) cost to themselves, whilst maximising thier shareholding. When it comes to selling the business, and to reap the maximum profit, it will be in perfect financial health, fully sustainable, with a strong team, new stadium, flourishing youth academy and would be the perfect proposition for new investors. As a bonus there might even be a hotel (paid for through rental/sponsorship etc) which will be sold as a separate entity, for his/UBIGs financial gain. Why don’t all owners deal with debt in this way? All the owners, if they’ve had the accounts on to it, will have various mechanisms in place to aid in the tax reduction process, but few are in the unique positions VR is in. He owns (or has a controlling interest) in a Bank, allowing him to take on the clubs debt and charge/benefit from the interest accrued (income stream one), he owns (or has a controlling interest) in a few other football clubs from which he can sign players cheaply and transfer them through the pyramid, possibly acting as the players agent, the selling club and the buying club in many of the transfers accruing several fees (income stream two), he also owns (or has a controlling interest) an investment bank (UBIG) who specialise in investing in sporting clubs and sporting arenas in which they invest and take rentals i.e. the proposed hotel, restaurants etc (income stream three). There are probably a few more vehicles being used, but really it doesn’t matter as all this money will be repaid through debt relief and therefore the club is basically repaying its own debts. The recent ?12m debt reduction was an interesting amount for them to choose. It was around 1/3rd of the outstanding debt but also around ?4m a year since he bought the club. I would expect a 12m reduction every 3 years until the debt is cleared. If you add up estimated interest on the debt, the mystery fee’s on the accounts, transfer fee’s of players loaned from other clubs via Kaunas and anything else you can thinks that’s gone missing is it more than ?12m? The basic thing people need to get their heads round is that we now support a company that, as one of it functions, runs a football team. This company has a majority owner that can run things how he sees fit. We just have to hope his intentions are to clear the debt and sell the club for a profit. On the grounds he is a successful business man, that owns (has shares in) an investment bank, then I’m certain it can be his only goal. Winning football matches/leagues/cups etc along the way is a bonus and would speed up the project. I might be wrong, but that’s what I think is being done and in the long term VR will walk away with a lot of someone’s money and Heart of Midlothian Football Club will be in the strongest position in its history. Whether you're a Hobo or not, you're views are interesting. We all probably agree that VR may have made mistakes along the way in how he's gone about the job pehaps failing to embrace western culture and maybe even business ethics but I cannot get out of my head 3 things 1. He is a successful businessman and a proud man which means that he is not going to lose easily and will pull out all the stops to deliver success. It is hard to imagine how he could do this without relative success on the park and that can only benefit HMFC in the long run. 2. Why Hearts? Well it didn't have to be but Scotland was certainly an attractive proposition. Firstly there exists a duopoly, meaning we only have to break one of the OF to gain access to decent European money with the increased sponsorship,TV, etc that goes with it. He speculated on this and lost. Secondly financial success can be gained via youth development and shrewd acquisitions from elsewhere. We live in the shadow of the EPL where big transfer money can be made (?12m for Gordon/Berra) as we benefit from British TV exposure as well as easy travel access for scouts. Our location also means most players moving will notneed to undergo big acclimatisation/cultural changes in their lives. 3. I have little doubt there is the element of legitimate money-laundering and tax reorganisation - who wouldn't seek to minimise their tax bill/maximise their wealth? International tax avoidance is big business and although there are many countries with double taxation and avoidance agreements, there are many who do not. It would take a lot of time, skill and money to fathom out possibilities so loopholes are inevitable: but as long as it's legal there's nothing one can do beyond tightening the tax laws - usually after the horse has bolted. In the final analysis, although we've had a bumpy ride we've won the Scottish cup during his time and we still play at Tynecastle. All is definitely not perfect but it can certainly have been a helluva lot worse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JamboRobbo Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 p.s. Ignore the abuse - most of it comes from people who don't fully understand the points you're making or from folk who just like to think ill of people! I shall remember that next time you call me a hatkicker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jambo_74 Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 Nice use of vocabulary. Hmmm My reasoning for questioning your credibility in the first place see above quote. Straight out of the Sirgay manual of Hobo-economics. For a start it is Not i repeat NOT clear Romanov is siphoning money, and to state he is doing so is wrong. You could have said there is the possibility, or on the outside looking in you could draw that conclusion, but you didn't you went straight into "It is Clear" Apologies if indeed you are a Hearts fan, however these repeated financial conundrums do tend to lead people to think otherwise when posted sometimes. As for the abuse or antagonising, i fail to see where i gave you abuse maybe slight antogonism, however your reply was certainly abusive so was a contradiction in term wasn't it Have to say mate, calling someone a Hobo is far more abuse than any man should have to take. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Don Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 Have to say mate, calling someone a Hobo is far more abuse than any man should have to take. Have explained my reasoning for doing so, and DJ accepted my apology and i accepted his. Rightly or wrongly with the amount of hobo economists that infiltrate these boards someone coming on after a couple dozen posts saying Romanov is siphoning money did look a tad suspect. As i said its over with, probably wont be the last time he or even myself might be accused of such things depending on what we post, and could have been worse could have called him a mhank. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coco Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 Anyone care to explain the business model behind the purchase of the St Andrew Square building? After all, given that VR is a successful businessman, there must be an explanation why his company bought the place at the very top of the biggest property bubble in UK history and has failed to rent it out for more than 18 months so far. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tartofmidlothian Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 I realise this might seem like boring homework to some readers, but anyone with an interest in the subject could do worse than read the Guardian's current investigation into tax avoidance. It's quite interesting, some of it, kind of http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/series/tax-gap Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlie-Brown Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 Everything will be fine with St Andrew square once they've sold HMFC to the fans for ?2M cash & ?8M debt! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.