Club Accounts - again sorry.

[K1874M]

Did the accounts have an interest figure for our debt?

[maroonedinoz]

I thought they were pretty interesting!!!

[SUTOL]

Did the accounts have an interest figure for our debt?

 

It varies a bit between lenders etc.

[Commander Harris]

It varies a bit between lenders etc.

what's the interest on the majority of the debt that Ukio own?

[awadooningorgie2]

what's the interest on the majority of the debt that Ukio own?

 

From memory some was 5.5% and other 1% above Libor.

[Poseidon]

I thought they were pretty interesting!!!

 

I liked it

[luckydug]

Did the accounts have an interest figure for our debt?

 

 

 

Its in the Profit and Loss Account

 

Interest payable and similar charges for 2007 ?1.815m

2006 ?1.318m

 

By my calculations thats almost ?5000 a day just to service the interest on our debt. This really highlights the extent of our predicament IMO.

Or in other words we have to sell a ?2m player every season to survive.

[Commander Harris]

Its in the Profit and Loss Account

 

Interest payable and similar charges for 2007 ?1.815m

2006 ?1.318m

 

By my calculations thats almost ?5000 a day just to service the interest on our debt. This really highlights the extent of our predicament IMO.

Or in other words we have to sell a ?2m player every season to survive.

 

so gordon bought us 4 and a half years?

[luckydug]

so gordon bought us 4 and a half years?

 

 

Yes as long as we are able to break even each season otherwise the 4 and a half years reduces each season.

One interesting point is that the loss on the seasons activities is ?10.632m the interest brings it up to ?12.447m

In effect we are starting each financial year almost ?2m behind.

No wonder UBIG are relaxed about the debt its money for nothing.

I just have an uneasy feeling about all this.

[Francis Albert]

No wonder UBIG are relaxed about the debt its money for nothing.

I just have an uneasy feeling about all this.

 

So if I transfer money from one Building Society account in my name to another in my name it is "money for nothing"? I never thought of it that way.

[luckydug]

So if I transfer money from one Building Society account in my name to another in my name it is "money for nothing"? I never thought of it that way.

 

If you were to shut down one of your Building Society Accounts would that shatter the hopes and dreams of thousands of fans?

[SeeVee]

So if I transfer money from one Building Society account in my name to another in my name it is "money for nothing"? I never thought of it that way.

 

And the reason you transfer money from one account to another is that they pay more interest.

[SUTOL]

The interest isn't being paid though, is it. It is just a figure on the balance sheet. So UBIG can use it to off-set corporation tax in Lithuania.

 

Also they (UBIG) have not asked for any of the payments they are due for the former SMG loan stock, again figures on a balance sheet.

[Guest JamboRobbo]

Also they (UBIG) have not asked for any of the payments they are due for the former SMG loan stock, again figures on a balance sheet.

 

and I should hope not, given that they already made themselves a tidy 750k out of that little transaction, by buying 4.5M loan stock for 2M, then forgiving only 1.75M of it......

[K1874M]

Thanks for the info....

 

To who ever said aslong as we make profit... I believe we did last year so alls good.

 

Cheers.

 

oh and I'm pretty sure STF is charging the vermin a lot more interest than UBIG are.

 

Some people will see this as a negative thread but from what I've read it is actually more positive than I thought.

[Guest JamboRobbo]

Thanks for the info....

 

To who ever said aslong as we make profit... I believe we did last year so alls good.

 

 

You realise that "making a profit last year" actually means "losing less than 7M before taking into account Craig Gordons transfer"?

 

If we don't make a profit next year, it'll be financial mismanagement of the worst kind.

[K1874M]

You realise that "making a profit last year" actually means "losing less than 7M before taking into account Craig Gordons transfer"?

 

If we don't make a profit next year, it'll be financial mismanagement of the worst kind.

 

No it doesnt.... it means making a profilt... unless you want to disregard 7mill which is worse than vlad does.

 

If we hadnt sold Gordon we would have still had a 9mill assset on our hands.

 

JR, Dont want to argue with you but that point is redic mate, sorry for puting it like that... its like saying...

 

If I didnt get paid this month I'd be X(WAGE) in debt... doesnt work that way, if we hadnt sold CG I'd guess we would have sold Jose, Robbie, Bednar and Wallace to make up the deficit (this is if we was desperate for that cash).

 

We may be getting run badly but I'm sure we would have sold some other assets if we hadnt sold CG.

[Robbos Right Peg]

Totally an insignificant amount involved (?200,000) but does anyone know about the trading of Blue Orchid Flats Ltd. The rentals charged to the company was ?9,600 so they either have 1 flat or charging peppercorn rents (the later I suppose).

[SUTOL]

Totally an insignificant amount involved (?200,000) but does anyone know about the trading of Blue Orchid Flats Ltd. The rentals charged to the company was ?9,600 so they either have 1 flat or charging peppercorn rents (the later I suppose).

 

Did that not cause a bit of a fuss a while back with Hobo's saying it proved Vlad was going to build flats at Tynie.

:107years:

[SeeVee]

The interest isn't being paid though, is it. It is just a figure on the balance sheet. So UBIG can use it to off-set corporation tax in Lithuania.

 

Also they (UBIG) have not asked for any of the payments they are due for the former SMG loan stock, again figures on a balance sheet.

 

It is spending value that is leaving Hearts and going to UBIG for other purposes. That's the same as being paid.

 

And I don't get the off-set of corporation tax point. Surely it's income in UBIG's accounts and therefore will increase their tax, or as a group it will have no effect?

[topcat]

Did the accounts have an interest figure for our debt?

Your going to regret asking that

 

They had several interest rates for the various flavours of debt owed to various creditors. It's quite complicated but here are the main bits

 

4. Interest payable

On Bank Loans and overdrafts: ?1,300K

Other Interest: ?515K

Total: ?1,815

 

11. Creditors: amounts falling due within one year

Bank Loans and Overdrafts: ?3,000K

Deferred Income (see note 15): ?2,676

Other Loans:?9k

Trade Creditors: ? 1,594K

Amount owed to parent company: ?15,681K

Amount owed to other group Companies: ?200K

Taxes and social security costs: ?1,202K

Other creditors and accruals: ?5,291

Total: ?29,653

 

Bank loans and overdrafts represent a ?3.0 million deposit account loan held with AB Ukio Bankas. This bears interest as 1.5% over the applicable base rate.

 

The amount owed to the Ultimate parent Company, UAB Ukio Bankas Investicine Grupe includes ?13.2 million of loan notes repayable within one year from their date of original issue. The first of these loan notes was issued on 2 August 2006. Interest on these loans is payable at 5%. The remaining balance is in respect of payments for player transfers made by the ultimate parent company on behalf of the company.

 

The amounts owed to other group companies is a loan provided to Blue Orchid Fltas Limited, a fellow subsidiary of the immediate parent undertaking, Heart of Midlothian 2005 Limited. There is no interest applied to this loan and no fixed repayment term.

 

Other loans are payable to Scottish and Newcastle plc, bear interest at 2% over base rate and are scured by means of a standard security over Tynecastle Stadium and a bond and floating charge over all the assets of the Company, both ranking second behind those granted in favour of the Company's principal bankers. The loans will be fully repaid by March 2008 and have been included in other creditors due in less than one year.

 

12. Creditors: amounts falling due after more than one year

Bank Loans: ?14,600K

Other Loans: Nil

Deferred Income (See Note 15): ?1,522

Total: ?16,122

 

Loan maturity analysis

In more than one year but not more than two years: ?2,280

In more than two years but not more than five years: ?12,230

 

Bank loans represent a term loan of ?12.3m and a commited working capital facility of ?2.3m, both of which are with AB Ukio Bankas. The term loan consists of two tranches. The first tranche of ?3.0 million bears interest at a fixed rate of 6.49%; the second tranche of ?9.3 million bears interest at 1% over LIBOR. Both tranches are repayable five years from the initial drawdown on 8 February 2005. Interest on the commited working capital facility is payable at 1.5% over the applicable base rate. The working capital facility has no fixed repayment date and the level is based on the ongoing working capital requirement of the company. Both term loan and working capital facility are secured by bond and floating charge over all the assets of the Company, a first ranking security over Tynecastle Stadium and land at Wheatfield Yard Edinburgh.

 

15, Deferred Income

Grants Receivable from the football Trust

Balance at 1 August 2006: ?1,594K

Released to Profit and loss account: -?36K

Balance at 31 July 2007: ?1,558K

Other Deferred Income: ?2,640

Total ?4,198K

 

Deferred Income is disclosed as follows

Amounts falling due within one year: ?2,676K

Amounts falling due within one year: ?1,522K

 

Grants received from the Football Trust are released to the profit and loss account over 50 years in line with the depreciation of the stadium.

 

Other deferred income principally represents amounts received from the sale of season tickets and sponsorship.

[K1874M]

Cheers TC, shattered so will look properly in the morn.

[JamboAl]

You realise that "making a profit last year" actually means "losing less than 7M before taking into account Craig Gordons transfer"?

 

If we don't make a profit next year, it'll be financial mismanagement of the worst kind.

 

Romanov will have to go some to come up with more creative accounting than this.

[cylawny]

Your going to regret asking that

 

{(QUOTE]

 

True.

 

I think it looks like we paid 1.75 Mill to the chuckle bros.

 

Not at unreasonable prices I may add but, but , but.

 

Currents and fish and dirty sheets ?

[Fozzyonthefence]

If we hadnt sold Gordon we would have still had a 9mill assset on our hands.

 

Players are not counted as assets in the accounts. In any case, Gordon's value would have dropped as the time on his contract shortened and I don't think anyone else would have paid ?9m for him anyway.

[K1874M]

Players are not counted as assets in the accounts. In any case, Gordon's value would have dropped as the time on his contract shortened and I don't think anyone else would have paid ?9m for him anyway.

What i meant was he was still an asset that could have been sold....

 

TC; Had a proper read and its pretty grim reading BUT I aint an accountant. I think the real accounts we should all be worried about are next year due to the loans that are needing paid.

[PTBCAL]

IIRC we were paying ?2.1m in interest to HBOS to service a debt of ?19m at the time - rising to ?22m by the time VR came along.

 

Although I have quickly scanned the accounts - I cannot see anything about the income received from UKIO Bankas re shirt sponsership? I'm aware last year this was deducted from the interest due - did this happen again this year?

[Seymour M Hersh]

Its in the Profit and Loss Account

 

Interest payable and similar charges for 2007 ?1.815m

2006 ?1.318m

 

By my calculations thats almost ?5000 a day just to service the interest on our debt. This really highlights the extent of our predicament IMO.

Or in other words we have to sell a ?2m player every season to survive.

 

What's the rate of interest being charged? The same, less or more than a UK Bank?

[Seymour M Hersh]

Players are not counted as assets in the accounts. In any case, Gordon's value would have dropped as the time on his contract shortened and I don't think anyone else would have paid ?9m for him anyway.

 

Are players not actually losses (wages) on the accounts until sold?

[Guest JamboRobbo]

No it doesnt.... it means making a profilt... unless you want to disregard 7mill which is worse than vlad does.

 

If we hadnt sold Gordon we would have still had a 9mill assset on our hands.

 

JR, Dont want to argue with you but that point is redic mate, sorry for puting it like that... its like saying...

 

If I didnt get paid this month I'd be X(WAGE) in debt... doesnt work that way, if we hadnt sold CG I'd guess we would have sold Jose, Robbie, Bednar and Wallace to make up the deficit (this is if we was desperate for that cash).

 

We may be getting run badly but I'm sure we would have sold some other assets if we hadnt sold CG.

 

The point is - CG is a one off sale. Even the accounts would show it like this for this very reason. We'd report an "operating loss", turned into profit after a one off exceptional sale of an asset.

[K1874M]

The point is - CG is a one off sale. Even the accounts would show it like this for this very reason. We'd report an "operating loss", turned into profit after a one off exceptional sale of an asset.

 

Failing to see my point JR..... your angle is backed up by an IF.... my response to it is IF we hadnt sold CG we would have sold others.

 

We have cut back the wage bill and have made roads to reducing our out goings.

[Guest JamboRobbo]

Failing to see my point JR..... your angle is backed up by an IF.... my response to it is IF we hadnt sold CG we would have sold others.

 

We have cut back the wage bill and have made roads to reducing our out goings.

 

Ok. Let me put it another way. I'll be happy if we report don't report an operating loss. But I'm sure we will.

 

Who else would he have sold to make 7M quid? The whole team? We can't make 7M of player sales every year.

[Coco]

Has anyone scanned the whole accounts and would be willing to make them available, perhaps by PM?

 

Many thanks

[SUTOL]

Has anyone scanned the whole accounts and would be willing to make them available, perhaps by PM?

 

Many thanks

 

Buy some shares, get your own set of accounts.

 

Or get the info in pdf from companies house for ?1.

[Coco]

Buy some shares, get your own set of accounts.

 

Or get the info in pdf from companies house for ?1.

 

I think you would have to buy a lot of shares to get ?1 worth when the debt for equity swap happens ...

[JamboAl]

The point is - CG is a one off sale. Even the accounts would show it like this for this very reason. We'd report an "operating loss", turned into profit after a one off exceptional sale of an asset.

 

The point is sh*te!

CG may be a one-off but buying/selling of players is an integral part of ANY club. Once more your sole mission is to denegrate the club. Craig Gordon, like most other players, would want to further their careers and finances, so it doesn't matter who runs the club. You should rejoice in the fact that had the CG situation arisen 3 years ago, he would have been sold for ?2 -?3m.

[K1874M]

Ok. Let me put it another way. I'll be happy if we report don't report an operating loss. But I'm sure we will.

 

Who else would he have sold to make 7M quid? The whole team? We can't make 7M of player sales every year.

 

Next year.... Eggert, Wallace, Bednar, Kingston and possibly Berra, would make 10mill min.

 

Dont know why I'm argueing this as you rarely back down, good traight to have but only when your right.

[Guest JamboRobbo]

The point is sh*te!

 

In your opinion.

 

IMO, this situation is the definition of the term "operating loss", and Craig Gordon's transfer money is the definition of an "exceptional item".

[Guest JamboRobbo]

Next year.... Eggert, Wallace, Bednar, Kingston and possibly Berra, would make 10mill min.

 

Dont know why I'm argueing this as you rarely back down, good traight to have but only when your right.

 

ok doke. you're right, I'm wrong.

 

We'll make an operating profit next year.

[Gibbo]

HBOS charged us 1.5% over base rate in 2004 so we are paying a bit less to Ukio; 1% to 1.5% over base plus some fixed rate debt. UBIG are charging us a very low rate; UK Govt Treasury Bills yield just over 5%.

 

The debt is far too high but UBIG could get a similar return with much lower risk by lending to somebody more solvent. Whatever VR's plans are, running up a huge debt so he can make money by lending to HMFC can be ruled out.

 

One item in the accounts that I've not seen commented on is the restatement of last year's figures in note 1.14.

 

HMFC 'has been retrospectively charged ?486,000 in relation to the year ended 31 July 2006 in respect of players loaned from other clubs. This has resulted in an increase in player costs of ?486,000' to ?10,499,000 for 2006.

 

Comparing the employment costs from note 22 of this year's accounts with those given in note 24 of last year's it appears that the increase all applies to wages & salaries. Presumably it has been decided that HMFC should pay a higher proportion of the wages of Kaunas loan players than had previously been the case.

[cylawny]

ok doke. you're right, I'm wrong.

 

We'll make an operating profit next year.

 

No we won't make a profit.

 

Too many bodies on the payroll. About 135 at last count and I have seen no evidence of the headcount dropping.

 

We will also be due Ukio/ UBIG about ? 2 Million in interest .

 

We also seem to be leaking money alarmingly on so called player acquisition.

 

Sum was ? 3.8 Million.

 

Would sugeest even with the Craig money we will overspend to the tune of ?3 to ? 3.5 Mill , taking us up to the ? 40 Mill liimit.

[JamboAl]

In your opinion.

 

IMO, this situation is the definition of the term "operating loss", and Craig Gordon's transfer money is the definition of an "exceptional item".

 

No, you're wrong. Transfers are an integral part of club business and we'll make an operating profit only if all things remain equal(ish). If we buy big, singular or multiple, we may still have a loss. An exceptional item is something that is unlikely to recur but transfers always happen. You cannot cherry pick even if it is to make a characteristically negative point.

[SMcD]

Thanks for the info....

 

To who ever said aslong as we make profit... I believe we did last year so alls good.

 

Cheers.

 

oh and I'm pretty sure STF is charging the vermin a lot more interest than UBIG are.

 

Some people will see this as a negative thread but from what I've read it is actually more positive than I thought.

 

Wrong. Hibs are not in debt to STF nor any of his companies.

[Guest JamboRobbo]

No, you're wrong.

 

In your opinion.

 

Transfers are an integral part of club business and we'll make an operating profit only if all things remain equal(ish). If we buy big, singular or multiple, we may still have a loss. An exceptional item is something that is unlikely to recur but transfers always happen. You cannot cherry pick even if it is to make a characteristically negative point.

 

We've sold one 7M player in the history of the club. IMO, thats unlikely to recur.

 

If we were talking a typical transfer that we did every year (say 1M), you'd have a point. But we're not. We're talking a one off transfer that is almost the size of the annual turnover of the whole club.

[Sherlock]

Wrong. Hibs are not in debt to STF nor any of his companies.

 

Wrong, wrong, wrong.

 

There are mortgages over BOTH Easter Road and East Mains.

 

These mortgages are registered at the Registers of Scotland at Meadowbank House. This is a public register and anyone can pay to access the information.

 

The lender for both mortgages is HFC holdings.

 

HFC holdings only has 2 directors, STF and Rod the Mowser. This information is registered with Companies House. This is a public register and anyone can pay to access the information.

 

Question: Given that you've raked in approx. ?10m over the last couple of years by selling players as soon as the ugly sisters come knocking, where has the money gone?

[SMcD]

Wrong, wrong, wrong.

 

There are mortgages over BOTH Easter Road and East Mains.

 

These mortgages are registered at the Registers of Scotland at Meadowbank House. This is a public register and anyone can pay to access the information.

 

The lender for both mortgages is HFC holdings.

 

HFC holdings only has 2 directors, STF and Rod the Mowser. This information is registered with Companies House. This is a public register and anyone can pay to access the information.

 

Question: Given that you've raked in approx. ?10m over the last couple of years by selling players as soon as the ugly sisters come knocking, where has the money gone?

 

HFC Holdings is the parent company of HFC, and was set up initially to protect the football club from the perilous level of debt at that time. HFC Holdings at one time owned the stadium and surrounding land, but this was susequently transferred back to the football club once things were running on a more even keel. The new training centre is also owned by the football cub. At this moment in time, HFC are the sole subsidiary of HFC holdings, therefore they are effectively the same thing.

 

The mortgages are with the Bank of Scotland, with neither STF nor Rod Petrie taking a cut of the payments.

 

With regard to your second point, the money is all there in the latest accounts for everyone to see. These should outstanding mortgages but also a very healthy cash in hand balance. However, as with HMFC, the accounts are produced in July, zfter the bulk of the season ticket money is banked, but the club still has to pay wages,loan repayments and bills for the season to come. For hibs this runs to about ?700k per month, so any cash in the bank soon gets eaten up.

 

For Hearts, this would appear to be between ?1.5M and ?2M per month - all from a starting point of -?36M! The CG transfer money would have been spent by Christmas.

[Sherlock]

HFC Holdings is the parent company of HFC, and was set up initially to protect the football club from the perilous level of debt at that time. HFC Holdings at one time owned the stadium and surrounding land, but this was susequently transferred back to the football club once things were running on a more even keel. The new training centre is also owned by the football cub. At this moment in time, HFC are the sole subsidiary of HFC holdings, therefore they are effectively the same thing.

 

The mortgages are with the Bank of Scotland, with neither STF nor Rod Petrie taking a cut of the payments...

 

Hibernian football club: HFC Holdings are the majority shareholder of HFC (the football club) with 58,903,512 shares. The remainder of the 60,000,000 shares are held by hundreds of small shareholders. HFC (the football club) has 3 mortgages and a floating charge with the Bank of Scotland, a floating charge with Girobank plc, a mortgage as well as a bond & floating charge with HFC Holdings and a bond & floating charge to STF.

 

The new training centre is owned by HFC (the football club) but has a mortgage to HFC holdings.

 

HFC holdings: Only two directors, STF & Rod the mowser. This company also has 3 mortgages and a floating charge with the Bank of Scotland (mortgages registered separately from those against the football club) along with a mortgage and bond & floating charge to STF.

 

Not bad for a football club with no debt!

 

(before any accusations of being obsessed with hobonomics are levelled at me, the above took 10 minutes and all info is available via public registers.)

[JamboAl]

In your opinion.

 

 

 

We've sold one 7M player in the history of the club. IMO, thats unlikely to recur.

 

If we were talking a typical transfer that we did every year (say 1M), you'd have a point. But we're not. We're talking a one off transfer that is almost the size of the annual turnover of the whole club.

 

You've managed to prove that the amount is (hitherto) unusually high FOR US but it is still not an exceptional item. You conceded this (or did you?) at post #39. What you are trying to do is anticipate next year's profit and set out your stall to ensure they get no credit. Just give in. You are wrong. Transfers irrespective of amount are not an exceptional item even if separate comment is made in the accounts. In this thread I shall adopt KennyM's approach and not argue with you any further.

[Guest JamboRobbo]

You've managed to prove that the amount is (hitherto) unusually high FOR US but it is still not an exceptional item. You conceded this (or did you?) at post #39. What you are trying to do is anticipate next year's profit and set out your stall to ensure they get no credit.

 

Nope, just giving an opinion. If we make an operating profit, great. If not, not so good.

 

Unlike some, I won't be fooled into thinking a one of transfer has turned us into a profit making company.

 

Just give in. You are wrong.

 

I feel the same about your argument.

 

Transfers irrespective of amount are not an exceptional item even if separate comment is made in the accounts.

 

In your opinion.

 

In this thread I shall adopt KennyM's approach and not argue with you any further.

 

Finally.

[awadooningorgie2]

Come on guys, I think it is fair to see the point Jambo Robbo is making ie we are unlikely to bring a Craig Gordon through the youths often and get such a fee.

 

If our business model were made on such assumptions it would surely be reckless.

 

I'm still scratching my head trying to figure out how we spent ?22 million.

 

Anybody know how much of the ?22 million was paid to either UBIG (who according to the accounts handled the ?3.8 million player registrations), or to Kaunas for salaries on loaned players?