PDA

View Full Version : Are you sure Mr P ?



down the slope
20-08-2011, 09:27 PM
http://www.hibernianfc.co.uk/news/20110705/club-update_2262950_2386569

How long does he get Mr p , ? if he goes you will have to go.

Kaiser1962
20-08-2011, 09:30 PM
http://www.hibernianfc.co.uk/news/20110705/club-update_2262950_2386569

How long does he get Mr p , ? if he goes you will have to go.


As the second biggest shareholder I dont see how he "will have" to do anything he dosent want to.

wah
20-08-2011, 09:32 PM
http://www.hibernianfc.co.uk/news/20110705/club-update_2262950_2386569

How long does he get Mr p , ? if he goes you will have to go.

Hopefully next week will see the end to this farce. Petrie is trying to eek out his retirement plan .This objective may take a little longer.

Don Giovanni
20-08-2011, 09:36 PM
http://www.hibernianfc.co.uk/news/20110705/club-update_2262950_2386569How long does he get Mr p , ? if he goes you will have to go. IMO Calderwood couldn't have hoped for much more backing from the board. If he goes in the short term Petrie may also have to fall on his sword after fighting to keep him & backing him in the transfer market. Alternatively it could result in a stay of execusion with Petrie reluctant to dispose of the man he has backed so heavily.

pacorosssco
20-08-2011, 09:54 PM
Hopefully next week will see the end to this farce. Petrie is trying to eek out his retirement plan .This objective may take a little longer.

sadly this could be true.

as a major shareholder he cant sack himself. maybe he sees cc as a way out. after backing him he wont sack him

300k turndown to pay up a contract weeks later. not going to happen

im gonna start a thread with this hieconomics

wah
20-08-2011, 10:05 PM
sadly this could be true.

as a major shareholder he cant sack himself. maybe he sees cc as a way out. after backing him he wont sack him

300k turndown to pay up a contract weeks later. not going to happen

im gonna start a thread with this hieconomics

Don't think 10% is anyway a major shareholder, major minority maybee. anyhow Petrie has lot more to lose if the club has to be sold under duress.

The Falcon
20-08-2011, 10:11 PM
Don't think 10% is anyway a major shareholder, major minority maybee. anyhow Petrie has lot more to lose if the club has to be sold under duress.


What does "sold under duress" mean and how will this happen?

wah
20-08-2011, 10:16 PM
What does "sold under duress" mean and how will this happen?

Didn't mean anything sinister here. It's best to sell any business when everything is at its best. If support starts to dwindle and revenue falls then it will force the selling price of the club down.

The Falcon
20-08-2011, 10:22 PM
Didn't mean anything sinister here. It's best to sell any business when everything is at its best. If support starts to dwindle and revenue falls then it will force the selling price of the club down.

The selling price is what the land would be worth and that will not be affected by what happens on the pitch.

The purpose of a business is to make money and you are not going to do that through football.

wah
20-08-2011, 10:28 PM
The selling price is what the land would be worth and that will not be affected by what happens on the pitch.

The purpose of a business is to make money and you are not going to do that through football.

Didn't take long for me to get my wrists slapped. As Jonse'y used to say they don't like it up them!

are you suggesting the club folds and we sell off the assets?

The Falcon
20-08-2011, 10:36 PM
Didn't take long for me to get my wrists slapped. As Jonse'y used to say they don't like it up them!

are you suggesting the club folds and we sell off the assets?

I'm not and never have. I was questioning how you would envisage the club being "sold under duress".

I would add that folk have a misconception as to what a football club is worth. Dosent matter how it's doing on the field. Rangers are current Scottish champions with a turnover far exceeding ours,a bulging trophy cabinet and a worldwide fan base but they got sold for a quid.

SteveHFC
20-08-2011, 11:56 PM
The sooner Petrie goes the better. :agree:

The Falcon
21-08-2011, 07:30 AM
The sooner Petrie goes the better. :agree:

Petrie is certainly diluting his role and delegating more and more responsibility. It's happening so everything will improve now, right?

HFC 0-7
21-08-2011, 07:35 AM
Petrie is certainly diluting his role and delegating more and more responsibility. It's happening so everything will improve now, right?

Diluting some of his role, yes, but key decisions still stay with him. Important things like managerial appointments, releasing money for players, saying no to opposition teams when trying to get our manager, ticket pricing, terrible articles on the hibs website they all still stay with Petrie.

The Falcon
21-08-2011, 07:57 AM
Diluting some of his role, yes, but key decisions still stay with him. Important things like managerial appointments, releasing money for players, saying no to opposition teams when trying to get our manager, ticket pricing, terrible articles on the hibs website they all still stay with Petrie.

Do you think these things are not discussed in detail with the other board members?

Peevemor
21-08-2011, 08:04 AM
Diluting some of his role, yes, but key decisions still stay with him. Important things like managerial appointments, releasing money for players, saying no to opposition teams when trying to get our manager, ticket pricing, terrible articles on the hibs website they all still stay with Petrie.

How do you know?

HFC 0-7
21-08-2011, 08:15 AM
Do you think these things are not discussed in detail with the other board members?

Whats your point? Because they have been discussed he shouldnt be blamed or that everyone should be blamed? He is the Chairman of Hibs therefore he is in charge and has responsibility, thats why he gets paid the big bucks. The chairman has the final decisions in key matters and the fact that it has been discussed doesnt matter. He is in charge, he is accountable.

HFC 0-7
21-08-2011, 08:17 AM
How do you know?

He was the one that was publicly talking about not letting Calderwood go, previous managers have talked about Petrie and him controlling the purse strings. Managers of other clubs have talked about dealing with Petrie when trying to sign players. If he isnt controlling these things, why is he still the highest paid and why is he still Chairman?

Peevemor
21-08-2011, 08:47 AM
He was the one that was publicly talking about not letting Calderwood go, previous managers have talked about Petrie and him controlling the purse strings.

In the past.


Managers of other clubs have talked about dealing with Petrie when trying to sign players. If he isnt controlling these things, why is he still the highest paid and why is he still Chairman?

Is he?

HFC 0-7
21-08-2011, 08:58 AM
In the past.


Is he?

If you know more please tell. If he isnt doing any of these things what is he doing, why should he get paid anything at all. Yeah, petrie telling clubs that CC wasnt for sale for in the past, less than a month in the past.

Kaiser1962
21-08-2011, 09:30 AM
If you know more please tell. If he isnt doing any of these things what is he doing, why should he get paid anything at all. Yeah, petrie telling clubs that CC wasnt for sale for in the past, less than a month in the past.

How much do think Petrie gets paid?

HFC 0-7
21-08-2011, 09:38 AM
how much do think petrie gets paid?

100k

Kaiser1962
21-08-2011, 09:39 AM
100k

Hardly Peter Lawell though is it? Or Willie Miller for that matter?

HFC 0-7
21-08-2011, 09:46 AM
Hardly Peter Lawell though is it? Or Willie Miller for that matter?

What are you saying then? Hibs Board is paid more than any other board in the SPL, 10% of hibs income is spent on 7 people. Are you saying that because, in your opinion, 100K isnt a lot we shouldnt expect a lot of him, he shouldnt be accountable for his managerial appointments?

Kaiser1962
21-08-2011, 09:53 AM
What are you saying then? Hibs Board is paid more than any other board in the SPL, 10% of hibs income is spent on 7 people. Are you saying that because, in your opinion, 100K isnt a lot we shouldnt expect a lot of him, he shouldnt be accountable for his managerial appointments?

Its not 10% and the reasons have been done to death on here.

If we offered a player £100k a year would you think that was a lot?



HFC 0-7
21-08-2011, 10:04 AM
Its not 10% and the reasons have been done to death on here.

If we offered a player £100k a year would you think that was a lot?



It must be very close to 10%, what other chairman of any club in a premier division gets paid more than the players? Managers dont get paid more than the players either. Nice to see you have chosen not to answer my other points. If Petrie is not accountable because he has handed these responsibilities elsewhere as someone has suggested then why is he at hibs, what is he doing?

Kaiser1962
21-08-2011, 10:21 AM
It must be very close to 10%, what other chairman of any club in a premier division gets paid more than the players? Managers dont get paid more than the players either. Nice to see you have chosen not to answer my other points. If Petrie is not accountable because he has handed these responsibilities elsewhere as someone has suggested then why is he at hibs, what is he doing?

Its 6.6%. We have directors in charge of finance and marketing. Other clubs do not so their salaries are are not reflected in the accounts as directors pay.

The club appoints the manager of that there is no doubt but to want him sacked then that isn't going to happen but I doubt it is a one man process.

Do you really think RP is the highest paid at the club?

down the slope
21-08-2011, 10:32 AM
Its 6.6%. We have directors in charge of finance and marketing. Other clubs do not so their salaries are are not reflected in the accounts as directors pay.

The club appoints the manager of that there is no doubt but to want him sacked then that isn't going to happen but I doubt it is a one man process.

Do you really think RP is the highest paid at teh club?

I think Petrie takes around 80 k plus car and pension stuff which is less than he used to take but please correct me if i'm wrong, is he not a high heid yin with the SPL ?. Also he has been getting this for years so he must have made a nice little pile off his initial investment.

Kaiser1962
21-08-2011, 10:39 AM
I think Petrie takes around 80 k plus car and pension stuff which is less than he used to take but please correct me if i'm wrong, is he not a high heid yin with the SPL ?. Also he has been getting this for years so he must have made a nice little pile off his initial investment.

Did he not, or is he in the process off, stepping down from that position?

I think his total package was around £106k with everything in and evidently Farmer thinks he's worth it, and trusts him implicitly, so whatever anyone else thinks is more or less irrelevant.

HFC 0-7
21-08-2011, 10:47 AM
Its 6.6%. We have directors in charge of finance and marketing. Other clubs do not so their salaries are are not reflected in the accounts as directors pay.

The club appoints the manager of that there is no doubt but to want him sacked then that isn't going to happen but I doubt it is a one man process.

Do you really think RP is the highest paid at the club?

I think he is the highest paid of the board. I was making a point regarding your comment of whether I thought he got paid more than players. I dont think that, but I think its irrelevant as no club pays their chairman more than players. My point is that he is ultimately accountable for the club. He runs it as a business and in any business its the people at the top that are ultimately responsible.

He has appointed all the managers that have been failures, which there have been more failures than success's. At present CC is failing, if he keeps failing and we have to get rid of him then Petrie will be in a very hard position where we could have got monmey for him to go now we need to pay him off. things are not going well at Hibs and through the mess there has been one person in charge all the time, the board have come out and said that the recent form and last seasons results are not good enough, so by their own accounts they are failing. Who would you say should be accountable?

Kaiser1962
21-08-2011, 10:54 AM
I think he is the highest paid of the board. I was making a point regarding your comment of whether I thought he got paid more than players. I dont think that, but I think its irrelevant as no club pays their chairman more than players. My point is that he is ultimately accountable for the club. He runs it as a business and in any business its the people at the top that are ultimately responsible.

He has appointed all the managers that have been failures, which there have been more failures than success's. At present CC is failing, if he keeps failing and we have to get rid of him then Petrie will be in a very hard position where we could have got monmey for him to go now we need to pay him off. things are not going well at Hibs and through the mess there has been one person in charge all the time, the board have come out and said that the recent form and last seasons results are not good enough, so by their own accounts they are failing. Who would you say should be accountable?

Its the people who appoint the staff who are responsible. CC is responsible for the players he signs. The board are responsible for their appointments also. But if you're looking for a bloodletting it ain't gonna happen. The people at the top are responsible in anything ultimately but when the folk at the top are the owners what do you you do? Expect them to sack themselves?

There is change happening at boardroom level so will see what happens next.