Who are you likely to support regarding club ownership?

[marinello59]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

The documented facts are my belief.......

its clear to see the repayments to the bank.

its easy to recalculate what the new number should be over a ten year interest free loan and its less than 200k pa......thats a lot less than 500k pa.

I think you should look at your arithmetic there.

[Global Hibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Did you think the BuyHibs model was flawed as well then given that HSL isn't that different to what BuyHibs were offering?

You know what is sad Marinello......is the division......if .net could lead the way and get the various groups to find out the areas we " all agree on " that would be a great start.

Then we can put aside the difficult conversation areas and have a joined up approach to the objectives we all agree.

The financial model required for a sustainable long term future has not been provided by anyone so far.....that includes the current shareholders.

I think the buys hibs model and the hsl model provide a foundation to build from.

[Global Hibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I think you should look at your arithmetic there.

Please correct me as am on a train on mobile device

what is the number ?

[Global Hibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

How do you get to £200k pa interest free, over 10 years, on a bank loan that was sitting at approximately £6.3m?

Are you forgetting about the balloon payments?

(and these aren't the costs of the HOH stunt the other night, btw )

Not forgetting the balloon payements Cropley........i simply took the bank settlement number added a bit and divided it by ten years.

[Barney McGrew]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

if .net could lead the way and get the various groups to find out the areas we " all agree on " that would be a great start.

It's not Hibs.net place to do that, all we do is create a forum for Hibs supporters to discuss topics about our club. And that will continue, despite the pot shots that some of the groups have at us.

Why don't you lead the way to do it, you've been vocal on the subject all the way through this?

[marinello59]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

You know what is sad Marinello......is the division......if .net could lead the way and get the various groups to find out the areas we " all agree on " that would be a great start.

Then we can put aside the difficult conversation areas and have a joined up approach to the objectives we all agree.

The financial model required for a sustainable long term future has not been provided by anyone so far.....that includes the current shareholders.

I think the buys hibs model and the hsl model provide a foundation to build from.

All we do here is provide a platform for Hibs fans of all viewpoints to have their say and as such we don't act as fan leaders or spokespeople. That doesn't stop some having a go at us because they don't like what they read here but we really have no editorial policy or stance. It's up to the members here to make up their own minds.
I agree about the divisions, it is frustrating, particularly when there is no need. We managed to decide the future of our nation with much less vitriol then some are throwing about regarding the future of our football club.

[Sioux]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I also think a shareholders job is to put cash in real money terms into what they believe in......as far as i can see the shareholders keep providing loans and not real cash.

Really? A shareholder is usually someone who invests in a company with a view to benefit, either through dividends out of profit or by a return of capital via a sale of his shares when the shares have achieved a value increase.

Do you suggest that, for example, the trustees of my pension provider should plough money into those large companies of which they are shareholder, in circumstances where the company may be going through periods of downturn (temporary), with no guarantee of return, thus depleting the value of the fund for the members?

I'm sure that if the trustees did act in such a way they would be in breach and probably liable on a personal basis for the pension fund loss.

I think you need to take off your shining white armour and cease with the pretence. A shareholder does not have a 'job' in his capacity as shareholder.

[CropleyWasGod]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Not forgetting the balloon payements Cropley........i simply took the bank settlement number added a bit and divided it by ten years.

Don't follow that logic.

1. If the settlement was 1.8m, it was for immediate settlement. It couldn't be repaid over 10 years at no interest

2. You're forgetting about the, at least, 3m due to the holding company.

[Andy74]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Did you think the BuyHibs model was flawed as well then given that HSL isn't that different to what BuyHibs were offering?

It's very different. Cash would have gone to existing owners not funding the club. What would their plan for the debt have been? Large outside investors were talked about as was interest or dividends out of the club.

[Global Hibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

It's not Hibs.net place to do that, all we do is create a forum for Hibs supporters to discuss topics about our club. And that will continue, despite the pot shots that some of the groups have at us.

Why don't you lead the way to do it, you've been vocal on the subject all the way through this?

I thought i had been very quiet on the subject for many months lol

I will give some thought to your suggestion

[Andy74]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Don't follow that logic.

1. If the settlement was 1.8m, it was for immediate settlement. It couldn't be repaid over 10 years at no interest

2. You're forgetting about the, at least, 3m due to the holding company.

If the settlement was £1.8m the holding company wod only be due £4.8m. They are due £9.5m before the equity swap.

Did Sir Tom not admit the other night he had provided the money to pay the bank what they were due. There was no talk of any big discount.

[tamig]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

If the settlement was £1.8m the holding company wod only be due £4.8m. They are due £9.5m before the equity swap.

Did Sir Tom not admit the other night he had provided the money to pay the bank what they were due. There was no talk of any big discount.

Did he not say he settled the bank debt, i.e., he paid what was agreed under the terms of the settlement? No indication that the full whack was settled - which as I've said several times before is not how Lloyds operate these days where football clubs are concerned.

[Global Hibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Don't follow that logic.

1. If the settlement was 1.8m, it was for immediate settlement. It couldn't be repaid over 10 years at no interest

2. You're forgetting about the, at least, 3m due to the holding company.

1. If i am the shareholder and pay the bank 1.8m.....then why can't i have that being repaid to me over ten years ??

2, I did not forget about the loan to the holding company...i mention the 3m......my view is that the shareholders should have invested the 3m and not loaned it.

I think they should put aside the 3m loan repayment for five years if they are really genuine about the fans owning 51%

[marinello59]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

It's very different. Cash would have gone to existing owners not funding the club. What would their plan for the debt have been? Large outside investors were talked about as was interest or dividends out of the club.

Aye, basically HSL is a much improved version of BuyHibs with greater transparency. Which makes me all the more baffled that they codnt support this.
I don't think they really exist anymore now though.

[grunt]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Not forgetting the balloon payements Cropley........i simply took the bank settlement number added a bit and divided it by ten years.

Have you forgotten about the £2.5m payment due in 2020?

[Barney McGrew]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Aye, basically HSL is a much improved version of BuyHibs with greater transparency. Which makes me all the more baffled that they codnt support this.
I don't think they really exist anymore now though.

My view is that Buy Hibs model would have had two or three people at its head who would have invested larger sums of money, and would have effectively have been in control of the club.

HSL doesn't seem to make any nod to how much you spend, it's still one person one vote so it's much more difficult for those with access to larger amounts of money to have influence.

That may well be the difference in why one model doesn't have the support of some of the players in this.

[grunt]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I think the buys hibs model ... provide a foundation to build from.

Can you please explain what the BuyHibs model is? How does it differ to the HSL model? Is the only difference that under the BuyHibs model you expect STF to gift the club £3m?

[Andy74]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

1. If i am the shareholder and pay the bank 1.8m.....then why can't i have that being repaid to me over ten years ??

2, I did not forget about the loan to the holding company...i mention the 3m......my view is that the shareholders should have invested the 3m and not loaned it.

I think they should put aside the 3m loan repayment for five years if they are really genuine about the fans owning 51%

Why? I think you miss that it was £9.5m they were due and they have agreed to that being £5m interest free instead.

The oaymenrs are no more than we pay now. It has no impact on the fans owning 51 per cent if they want.

[Barney McGrew]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Are you saying that the HSL model doesn't pander to the lust for power that those with more money to spend would appear to require? Is that necessarily a bad thing?

The HSL model certainly seems to be very democratic.

I'll let people draw their own conclusions on how that fits in with a lust for power that some may have

[grunt]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

The HSL model certainly seems to be very democratic.

I'll let people draw their own conclusions on how that fits in with a lust for power that some may have

Thanks - I had initially deleted my post as I wasn't happy that it said what I wanted, but you have correctly interpreted it.

[blackpoolhibs]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

1. If i am the shareholder and pay the bank 1.8m.....then why can't i have that being repaid to me over ten years ??

2, I did not forget about the loan to the holding company...i mention the 3m......my view is that the shareholders should have invested the 3m and not loaned it.

I think they should put aside the 3m loan repayment for five years if they are really genuine about the fans owning 51%

Disnae matter what you think now, its done and dusted and we have what we have. You can either invest or not, the same choice we all have now.

[joe breezy]

Is this a real share issue?

Do you get share certificates?

[Global Hibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Really? A shareholder is usually someone who invests in a company with a view to benefit, either through dividends out of profit or by a return of capital via a sale of his shares when the shares have achieved a value increase.

Do you suggest that, for example, the trustees of my pension provider should plough money into those large companies of which they are shareholder, in circumstances where the company may be going through periods of downturn (temporary), with no guarantee of return, thus depleting the value of the fund for the members?

I'm sure that if the trustees did act in such a way they would be in breach and probably liable on a personal basis for the pension fund loss.

I think you need to take off your shining white armour and cease with the pretence. A shareholder does not have a 'job' in his capacity as shareholder.

dropping down to personal comments like shinning white armour....just shows how limiting your ability is to debate !!

i am a shareholder in 15 companies across the globe.......i invested into those companies in real cash not loans. I believe my role as a role as shareholder is to make funds available at the appropriate time. Providing a loan to support losses is not what i call support and its fine you don't agree with that.

RP and STF are not trustees and nor are they managing any pension monies either, so no idea why that comes into your point.

I dont care about the trustees of your pension......... what i care about is Hibs having a sustainable financial model to enable AS and LD and their respective teams to provide the hibs support with a team that delivers success.

[grunt]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

what i care about is Hibs having a sustainable financial model to enable AS and LD and their respective teams to provide the hibs support with a team that delivers success.

Can you please explain what in your view would be a sustainable financial model for Hibs, and in what way does your model differ from the plans set out by LD?

[Pete]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Is this a real share issue?

Do you get share certificates?

Yes. You will get them or HSL will get them depending on which avenue you choose to go down.

It's not a share issue Savile style.

[Global Hibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Can you please explain what the BuyHibs model is? How does it differ to the HSL model? Is the only difference that under the BuyHibs model you expect STF to gift the club £3m?

I will do a review of both models in more detail and give you my thoughts......In regard to Tom gifting 3m to the club.

My view is this........STF and RP made the decisions which resulted in the 3m number........am sure the majority of supporters would agree with this...........if you or I make a bad decision.....are we not responsible for that ? Or do we loan the money to ourselves and then expect someone else to pay it back to us ?

Its called paying for your mistakes and you pay for them in my opinion....you do not loan your way out of mistakes.

interested to hear your thoughts on that Grunt ?

[Eyrie]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I will do a review of both models in more detail and give you my thoughts......In regard to Tom gifting 3m to the club.

My view is this........STF and RP made the decisions which resulted in the 3m number........am sure the majority of supporters would agree with this...........if you or I make a bad decision.....are we not responsible for that ? Or do we loan the money to ourselves and then expect someone else to pay it back to us ?

Its called paying for your mistakes and you pay for them in my opinion....you do not loan your way out of mistakes.

interested to hear your thoughts on that Grunt ?

Farmer has already effectively gifted £4.5m to the club by turning half of the £9m previously owed to the bank into shares, which will have very little value once diluted by the imminent share issue.

[Ozyhibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

If the settlement was £1.8m the holding company wod only be due £4.8m. They are due £9.5m before the equity swap.

Did Sir Tom not admit the other night he had provided the money to pay the bank what they were due. There was no talk of any big discount.

It took them 11 months to thrash out a deal with the bank. If STF had just paid it back with no discount then that would taken less than 11 seconds for the bank to agree.

[Global Hibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Can you please explain what in your view would be a sustainable financial model for Hibs, and in what way does your model differ from the plans set out by LD?

Hibs need an immediate cash investment of 3.5m by my calculations to put it on solid foundation to go forward.
1.5m for working capital and 2m investment.

I am not talking about loans either.........shareholders loaning money to a football club is detrimental to the club and provides a noose around its neck. That is a major reason the club is in difficulty.

To my mind the fans additional money should be ring-fenced to make a measurable difference to the club........as an example.....why cant those funds just be used to enhance the first team squad only.

The shareholders existing and new proposed in the shape of HSL...should be underwriting the issue...they are not............Thats a great weakness in my opinion.

Once that foundation is in place....one is able to change the cultural and the current business model.....the current culture model is survival............the business model is driven on a cost managment model base.

Those need to be stopped...........Maybe then we will get to the root cause and stop the continual repetitive symptom treating approach of the last decade.

[Global Hibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Farmer has already effectively gifted £4.5m to the club by turning half of the £9m previously owed to the bank into shares, which will have very little value once diluted by the imminent share issue.

That is not true re gifted the club 4.5 million.....

You clearly believe that to be the case and I think it is wrong for the current owners to represent it like this!

The bank wanted out of football...the debt was already written off by them when Rangers went bust. Anything they collected from the various clubs in Scotland was a bonus !