Any More Questions For Hibernian Supporters Limited?

[Mikey]

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

Is there a reason why the voting of members of HSL couldn't be reflected proportionally in an HFC shareholder vote, so that each vote in HSL is carried forward to a vote in HFC, rather than as a block vote (if I've understood it correctly)?

Also, am I right in thinking you would get a vote in HSL after you'd reached the £225 mark, however long that took (minimum officially £18.75 p/m, but £10 p/m also mentioned)? And it's one HSL member, one HSL vote, regardless of whether you decide to put more than £225 in?

Q1....

From the HSL Q&A

13. If the membership of HSL is split on an issue (say 55-45) will the whole HSL shareholding vote in accordance with the 55%, or will it be pro-rated?

A. The democratic process would prevail. Voting intentions at the AGM will be determined by a simple majority of the membership.

http://www.hibs.net/showthread.php?2...imited-Q-amp-A


Q2....

That one's answered in point 26 of the Articles Of Association. Sorry, I can't copy that paragraph direct to this thread but you can see the full document here......

http://hiberniansupporters.co.uk/ass...ion-of-hsl.pdf

[Mikey]

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

Hi mikey, my question is do the club anticipate shareholders being asked to plug holes in the club's finances (as STF does just now)?

If the club make a bigger than expected loss next year, will the begging bowl go out to the shareholders?
Or will they go for a bank facility? Or look to add to the mortgage from the holding company?

I think that's more of a general question rather than one for HSL.

My take on it is that the club lives within its means. STF is still there so we could fall back on him if need be but it'll be LD's job as CEO to make sure that doesn't happen. We also have the opportunity of a payment holiday if that's needed.

[Ken]

Mikey, cheers for your help with all this.

I was skeptical about the set up of HSL, but every question that I needed answered has been and I'm very comfortable with the set up of HSL. Ultimately my money is going to the club and the fans will have a huge say in way the club will be run in the future.

I'm in

[emerald green]

Apologies if this has been covered elsewhere, but I was wondering if HSL had considered / would consider issuing some sort of statement after an appropriate period of time had elapsed after 2 February when supporters can start contributing to buy shares through HSL?

By "statement" I mean announcing a) how many supporters had started contributing via HSL, and b) how much was being paid each month in total? Is this possible, or is it unrealistic? I was thinking perhaps after an initial period of say 2 months had elapsed after 2 February.

Secondly, would it also be possible to announce how many supporters were buying shares in the club directly, and how much?

[emerald green]

1) How long should I expect to have to wait for an acknowledgement (email) from HSL of having registered an interest in buying shares? I haven't received an acknowledgement yet, but I only registered an interest through their website the other day, so am I jumping the gun?

2) When HSL's website goes "live" from 9am Monday morning, will I be able to do everything, set up Direct Debit etc, through their website? Will their website be able to cope with expected demand on Monday morning, or am I getting carried away with myself?

[portycabbage]

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

Q1....

From the HSL Q&A



http://www.hibs.net/showthread.php?2...imited-Q-amp-A


Q2....

That one's answered in point 26 of the Articles Of Association. Sorry, I can't copy that paragraph direct to this thread but you can see the full document here......

http://hiberniansupporters.co.uk/ass...ion-of-hsl.pdf

Thanks for the reply, however I'd read the bit about Q1 and was wondering why it couldn't be "pro-rated" instead? That seems more democratic to me, rather than shares you've paid for being used to possibly vote opposite to your intentions if you're in the minority in HSL on an issue. Was wondering if it was for a legal reason that they had to vote in a block? This is probably the only thing that is putting me off HSL (still will probably get shares though).

[Mikey]

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

Thanks for the reply, however I'd read the bit about Q1 and was wondering why it couldn't be "pro-rated" instead? That seems more democratic to me, rather than shares you've paid for being used to possibly vote opposite to your intentions if you're in the minority in HSL on an issue. Was wondering if it was for a legal reason that they had to vote in a block? This is probably the only thing that is putting me off HSL (still will probably get shares though).

I think they've decided to do it that way so everyone gets the same power, regardless of what they put in.

[Seveno]

I was told by someone who was at the AGM that the HSL shareholding does not give them full voting rights ?

Is this correct ?

[Mikey]

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

I was told by someone who was at the AGM that the HSL shareholding does not give them full voting rights ?

Is this correct ?

Yes. More info here.......

http://www.hibs.net/showthread.php?2...sue-The-Basics

[marinello59]

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

I think they've decided to do it that way so everyone gets the same power, regardless of what they put in.

Exactly as it should be in my opinion. One member, one vote regardless of financial standing. I'm getting all Wolfie Smith over this. Power to the people.

[Seveno]

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

Yes. More info here.......

http://www.hibs.net/showthread.php?2...sue-The-Basics

I perhaps did not express myself fully. I know that the members of HSL do not have individual voting rights but I was told that HSL, through their directors as representatives, do not have voting rights. The above suggests that they do.

if HSL achieve a significant shareholding, I would assume that they would be entitled, to seats on the Board and a say in all decisions. I also assume that the Directors of HSL would be bound by any majority votes of its members.

Are my assumptions correct? If so, then it really does blow HoH out of the water.

[marinello59]

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

I perhaps did not express myself fully. I know that the members of HSL do not have individual voting rights but I was told that HSL, through their directors as representatives, do not have voting rights. The above suggests that they do.

if HSL achieve a significant shareholding, I would assume that they would be entitled, to seats on the Board and a say in all decisions. I also assume that the Directors of HSL would be bound by any majority votes of its members.

Are my assumptions correct? If so, then it really does blow HoH out of the water.

I think a 20% shareholding by HSL guarantees a seat on the board.

[Mikey]

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

I perhaps did not express myself fully. I know that the members of HSL do not have individual voting rights but I was told that HSL, through their directors as representatives, do not have voting rights. The above suggests that they do.

if HSL achieve a significant shareholding, I would assume that they would be entitled, to seats on the Board and a say in all decisions. I also assume that the Directors of HSL would be bound by any majority votes of its members.

Are my assumptions correct? If so, then it really does blow HoH out of the water.

Yes, your assumptions are correct. HSL get 1 seat on the board when they reach 20% of the shareholding.

[ancient hibee]

Of course HSL has voting rights-not much point in having a big shareholding if you can't vote.The biggest shareholders in public companies are normally pension funds and they have a vote-and don't need to consult their members.

[greenlex]

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

Yes, your assumptions are correct. HSL get 1 seat on the board when they reach 20% of the shareholding.

Quick query. Presuming after 40% of shares are reached we will have two board members. Will they be in addition to the existing board members or will they replace the newly appointed fans representatives on the board?

[ancient hibee]

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

Quick query. Presuming after 40% of shares are reached we will have two board members. Will they be in addition to the existing board members or will they replace the newly appointed fans representatives on the board?

Wouldn't have thought so -they will be representing a different"constituency".

[greenlex]

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

Wouldn't have thought so -they will be representing a different"constituency".

My thoughts too but essentially 4 fans board members us quite inconceivable really.

[Mikey]

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

Quick query. Presuming after 40% of shares are reached we will have two board members. Will they be in addition to the existing board members or will they replace the newly appointed fans representatives on the board?

It would be additional board members.

[greenlex]

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

It would be additional board members.

[portycabbage]

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

I think they've decided to do it that way so everyone gets the same power, regardless of what they put in.

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

Exactly as it should be in my opinion. One member, one vote regardless of financial standing. I'm getting all Wolfie Smith over this. Power to the people.

I'm fine with "one HSL member, one vote", it's just that I'd like the split of HSL member votes carried forward to the HFC shareholder vote.

As it stands, if 55% of HSL members vote one way and 45% vote the other, 100% of HSL shareholder votes in HFC go with the 55%.

I was wondering if it was feasible instead for HSL to use their shares in HFC to vote e.g. in a 55/45 split, reflecting the split of their members. This would mean the 45% (or whatever) minority, as well as the would still get a say in HFC shareholder votes. I think that would be fairer, and you'd know that you always had an input in HFC votes - whether you bought shares directly or with HSL.

I guess I'm trying to say Proportional Representation for HSL is the best way to get "one member, one vote" in HFC!