Sale of Tynecastle is final act of folly

IT IS over a week since we learned that the sale of Tynecastle has been agreed by the board of directors at Heart of Midlothian. The suddenness of it came as a shock which, despite full awareness of the chief executive’s hell-bent dash to get the stadium sold, was still numbing. A similar reaction will, I know, have been felt by thousands of Hearts fans.

Alongside the feelings of deep depression which followed the news, however, there were other emotions; anger, mostly, but above all incredulity that this nonsensical deed is on the verge of actually being executed, in spite of the huge wave of opposition from all who hold this great club and its fantastic ground close to their hearts.

This will be the final act of folly, let’s make no bones about it. Chris Robinson and his board of directors would have us believe that "this is a great deal for Hearts .... we have the chance to take this club on to a different level ... we’re selling Tynecastle because it can’t meet our needs for the future ... the sale of the stadium is necessary to make sure we have sufficient working capital for the future".

Those are stirring words, I am sure we would all agree, although normally uttered in an atmosphere of development, progress, expansion, investment for the future or with other positive benefits in the pipeline for a company. Sadly, on this occasion we are fully aware that they come as a futile and desperate attempt to convince Hearts supporters that this preposterous plan is being carried through for the best possible reasons.

Ever since the very first "Tynecastle must go" declaration by Chris Robinson, hard evidence in support of the "totally unsuitability for the club’s needs" which he averred the stadium quite suddenly had become has failed to surface. If this proposed disposal of its only asset is therefore such a "tremendous opportunity" for Hearts, where are the detailed figures and hard facts to convince supporters:

(a) that Tynecastle is no longer "commercially viable";

(b) that it is not "fit for purpose" and cannot, even 75 per cent complete, be made so;

(c) that planning permissions for the re-development of the old stand would be refused, yet a builder can acquire the ground and build new housing and shops on it;

(d) that the financial future of the club - as a tenant will be more secure than if a proper rescue plan to keep the club where it is was negotiated;

(e) that a sale and lease back deal is worse in both the short and long term than the airy-fairy pronouncements by the board about finding a new home "sometime".

Unless and until Chris Robinson and Stewart Fraser, the finance director, reveal the financial forecasting on why they think Tynecastle has become untenable and why playing at Murrayfield will maker a significant difference to revenue - other than optimistic noises about attracting more corporate customers - they will convince no-one that the proposed disposal of Tynecastle is anything other than the last throw of the dice in an attempt to dig themselves out of the hole gouged over the past five years.

I find it astonishing that the chief executive of a public limited company which has seen its debt rise from 5 million to almost 20 million under his stewardship, during an unbroken string of loss-making years, has the audacity to apportion the blame for that elsewhere, yet continues to retain the services of his financial director. They have presided over consistent trading losses - why were these not foreseen and acted upon? What other plc would tolerate such a state of affairs? What on earth has been going on in the accounts department at Tynecastle that it failed to prevent such financial devastation developing? Has the financial director simply rubber-stamped the workings of his chief executive because he has no clout himself? If not, how can he possibly escape responsibility for the near-insolvency which confronts the company and remain in his post?

Equally alarming, perhaps, is the absence of any submission to interested parties of the financial forecasts of the company if it remains at Tynecastle compared to a move to rented accommodation. If this sale goes ahead, how can office-bearers with that track record possibly be trusted to take the company forward?

After last week’s announcement the board was quoted as saying: "Tynecastle is not commercially viable; we have all seen that." Who, exactly, does "we" refer to? Not the supporters, because nothing but scraps have been revealed to them. And why is it not commercially viable? Is it because it costs too much to maintain, or conversely doesn’t generate enough income? Where is the evidence that Murrayfield or Sighthill or Straiton or Hermiston - or Timbuktu for that matter - would be commercially viable?

Then of course, came the crunching of numbers. "The sale of the stadium is necessary to make sure we have sufficient working capital to trade," said the board. Unless I’ve done my sums wrong, less than 20 million will remain after fees, costs and taxation are taken off the gross sale proceeds. That will wipe out borrowings from the Bank of Scotland, SMG and other creditors but leave less than 1 million in the kitty. By the time a sale goes through, more losses are likely to remove even that surplus working capital.

With no asset upon which new borrowings might be secured, we are entitled to ask where the real working capital will come from. Shareholders? Unlikely. The board of directors? Not a chance. The Bank of Scotland? Minimal funds, if any.

If we assume that, by some miracle, the directors manage to arrest the losses and next year produce a profit, they presumably feel secure in the knowledge that it will be sufficient to meet running costs, provide funds towards the establishment of a new stadium and thus "take the club on to a different level" (Chris Robinson’s words). I’m looking forward to hearing how that piece of accounting wizardry is explained.

We can only guess at the board room discussions which, over the past five years - and 18 months in particular - have resulted in this great Edinburgh institution being taken to the brink. The farcical situation of a chief executive, in charge while debts surged from 5 million to 19 million, also holding a key percentage of issued shares in the company and thus capable of doing whatever he thinks fit, makes a nonsense of the public limited company status. Irrespective of what happens at Tynecastle over the next nine months, it is inconceivable that the future of Hearts should be entrusted to him. A track record of accumulating losses in enormous amounts is ample evidence of seriously flawed financial management. Should this same team remain in power, the downward spiral of our great club will almost certainly accelerate, whatever the ultimate outcome of this saga may be.

It is very difficult to find a light in the dark at the moment, away from the playing field where Craig Levein is doing wonders bearing in mind what is going on all around him. It’s a bit like an old Western; the one where the settlers had been ambushed and the wagons drawn into a tiny circle. Ammunition was running out, Indians whooped all around them - it was only a matter of time before the pioneers were all wiped out. Then, out of nowhere, the cavalry came charging over the hill, bugles sounding, swords drawn and rifles firing. Fifteen minutes later, rescue was complete and life returned to normal.

How desperately Hearts supporters need to see the cavalry charging over the hill now. There will be no encouragement from the boardroom at Tynecastle, of course, to entertain the calvary if and when it comes. It would be nothing short of a disgrace, however, if the recommendations from the working party are ignored or if alternative proposals from the McGrails - or any other creditable rescue plan for that matter - are neither carefully examined, nor given the due depth of consideration they deserve.

The beginning of the end of Heart of Midlothian is unquestionably a stark reality now. Unless there is a change of mindset, a share buy-out or an eleventh hour appearance by the cavalry, one of Scotland’s most atmospheric stadia is about to disappear and many thousands of hearts will be broken. In addition to threatening to remove our traditional home of 118 years, Chris Robinson has alienated the overwhelming majority of Hearts supporters, while his intransigence has sickened them. He will never be forgiven for what he and his board of directors are trying to force through and he has no cognisance of the hurt he has caused to all who love this magical place. It is not yet too late, but how desperately all who hold Tynecastle dear need either to see a white flag from the board room or - just as vitally now - the sound of a bugle.

The impending tragedy of the loss of Tynecastle, with its subsequent consignment to history, is much too serious, involves too many dedicated people and has too much emotional content simply to be discussed and settled within the confines of a narrow-minded board room. The less forthright or more vague the directors appear to be in this sad episode, the greater will be the suspicion about their actions, and thus the increasing antagonism towards them. I challenge the directors to have the courage to publish all the facts and face the supporters with them, and address the huge number of questions and doubts which surround the issue. By so doing, they may yet recover some of the goodwill they have thrown away over the past year.

In the sheer enormity of what is going to happen to our club, it is the very least we all deserve.