Annual Accounts - The failure of HSL

[marinello59]

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

In the long term they will have a constant cash flow though it could be easy for them to stop paying now and leave it to Cludge also.

I've no idea why so many are against putting a tenner a month into making our club grow bigger whilst also being apart of the majority shareholding of it gets the desired amount.

Don't put word in to my mouth. If people can afford to put an extra tenner a month in to the club then thats up to them. It should only be an extra, a bonus if you like, rather than an income stream that the club could not operate without .When a professional organisation paying salaries far in excess of what most fans earn starts running itself like a charity then the whole game needs to take a look at itself.
I do pay in to HSL but I do so in the knowledge that it is no longer a route to full fan ownership. We managed to set up a vehicle for fan ownership that can never achieve a majority shareholding.

[Arch Stanton]

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

I don't see it as a failure.

HSL was launched as a vehicle for fans to purchase shares in the club. Along with individual shareholders we now own 34% of the club.

FoH was launched as a vehicle for fans to purchase shares in the club in the form of debt for equity. They currently own zero, zilch, nada but have to keep paying to fund capital investment and running costs.

One day they MIGHT own the club but that day is in the distant future and is by no means guaranteed to come.

I know which one I prefer.

It looks like HSL/share selling will have done it's job (ie 51% fan ownership) in another couple of years time. I suppose better marketting of shares could see that reduced a bit but there really isn't any point.

I fully expect that the HSL income stream will continue after the 51% deadline is reached, albeit in some other form - I know I have every intention of continuing contributions.

I also fully expect that interest in Hearts ownership will have started to dwindle long before they have acheived anything like %51 ownership - football fans are a fickle lot in my view and if they don't deliver on the pitch then AB could well be left holding the baby.

[Ozyhibby]

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

Didn't the HSL help fund the signing of Super John?

Don’t think so, he was already here but it did help fund Stokes loan. Money well spent I’d say.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Firestarter]

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

Notionally, yes. Or any player for that matter. The cash goes straight into the budget for playing staff. It isn't ring-fence for one player over any other though.

Doesn't that answer the proposal to the posters saying they would sign up tomorrow if it was a scheme to go right into transfer kitty?

[Arch Stanton]

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

Don't put word in to my mouth. If people can afford to put an extra tenner a month in to the club then thats up to them. It should only be an extra, a bonus if you like, rather than an income stream that the club could not operate without .When a professional organisation paying salaries far in excess of what most fans starts running itself like a charity then the whole game needs to take a look at itself.
I do pay in to HSL but I do so in the knowledge that it is no longer a route to full fan ownership. We managed to set up a vehicle for fan ownership that can never achieve a majority shareholding.

I'm sorry but a fully subscribed 51% share issue (which it will be at some point in the not too distant future) is in no way a negative - provided of course that the funds raised are used wisely.

Since it also protects the club from an asset stripping takeover then it is of huge benefit in my book.

[Ozyhibby]

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

Doesn't that answer the proposal to the posters saying they would sign up tomorrow if it was a scheme to go right into transfer kitty?

It is a scheme that goes directly to finding the playing squad. There are no other big items the club is currently spending money on.
HSL needs a revamp and a proper relaunch, no doubt about it. But the structure of the scheme is exactly what people say they want, which is extra money for the manager.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Firestarter]

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

Don't put word in to my mouth. If people can afford to put an extra tenner a month in to the club then thats up to them. It should only be an extra, a bonus if you like, rather than an income stream that the club could not operate without .When a professional organisation paying salaries far in excess of what most fans starts running itself like a charity then the whole game needs to take a look at itself.
I do pay in to HSL but I do so in the knowledge that it is no longer a route to full fan ownership. We managed to set up a vehicle for fan ownership that can never achieve a majority shareholding.

Sorry, the first papargraph was a reply to you the second was my personal thoughts in general, I should have made that clear.

I would agree with a lot of your post too. Comparing it again to the foh though, I don't think the majority of their donators see it as a way to run the club as fan ownership either, they see it as putting money into the club to help for years to come and for that reason I can see why they are proud of their fan funded main stand (one day).

[CapitalGreen]

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

Aren't FOH actually saving up so they can pay the debt back to the good doctor but the money so far has subsidised running costs and the big maintenance issues culminating in a whole new stand having to be paid for?

This long term objective is further away than at the beginning and it's a huge assumption to say they'll all continue if the aim is ever achieved? The good doctor might want to build something else.

Our family yam was a giver and he didn't hesitate to pull out when Budge "saved" them. When I told him it still had to be paid for it didn't compute.

Sent from my SM-J320FN using Tapatalk

I've read on here that Hearts fans would discontinue their contributions after:
- Surviving admin
- Getting promoted
- Getting beat by us
- Building their stand

The reality is both clubs have a portion of their support willing and able to contribute to their clubs over and above what they spend on season tickets. As much as many on here will be loathe to admit, Hearts & FOH are engaging these types of supporters far better than we are and reaping the benefits from doing so.

[Firestarter]

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

It is a scheme that goes directly to finding the playing squad. There are no other big items the club is currently spending money on.
HSL needs a revamp and a proper relaunch, no doubt about it. But the structure of the scheme is exactly what people say they want, which is extra money for the manager.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This definitely needs to be made clearer then in that case.

[green day]

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

It is a scheme that goes directly to finding the playing squad. There are no other big items the club is currently spending money on.
HSL needs a revamp and a proper relaunch, no doubt about it. But the structure of the scheme is exactly what people say they want, which is extra money for the manager.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Correct.

I couldn't give 2 hoots about owning the club, but have contributed to HSL since day 1 and continued after the initial period expired.

It needs a straightforward relaunch to clarify that all and any money goes strictly to NL for players.

Shares "bought" as a result of Farmers largesse is a side issue.

[Big_Franck]

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

Note 20 Analysis of Cash flows

Hibs received £150,000 in the last financial year from the Issue of Ordinary Shares

Now I know many will be along to tell me that at least Hibs supporters or HSL own some share whereas the Gunts don't.

But on the back of respective achievements / performances of the last 3 or 4 seasons how the ****ing hell can FOH be raising virtually 10 times what we are, it is an absolute disgrace.

I know many will be along to tell me they either paid up or died and I get that.

I also get that we may never match them for that reason

But it is ridiculous the disparity.

I moan about it all the time and get criticised by many for doing so which is fair enough, the question is what can be done about it!

I agree, the massive difference in numbers is a bit embarrassing to be honest. There are thousands of Hibs fans that can afford to contribute to HSL but don't. Why that is you'd need to ask them. It baffles me.

[Arch Stanton]

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

I've read on here that Hearts fans would discontinue their contributions after:
- Surviving admin
- Getting promoted
- Getting beat by us
- Building their stand

The reality is both clubs have a portion of their support willing and able to contribute to their clubs over and above what they spend on season tickets. As much as many on here will be loathe to admit, Hearts & FOH are engaging these types of supporters far better than we are and reaping the benefits from doing so.

Surely, before the club can 'reap the benfits' AB will need to 'reap the benfits' of being re-imbursed for the money she paid to bail out the club.

[GreenOnions]

The board are enabling HSL to achieve what some posters on here are saying they want - which is simply to directly fund the playing budget via a DD.

The only real difference from what these fans want is that the scheme does something else at the same time. It is trying to safeguard the club for the future by enabling a significant proportion of its shares to be owned by fans to prevent speculative ownership by the likes of Romanov etc once Sir Tom bows out.

By issuing new shares as opposed to selling existing equity the board are doing exactly what posters above want (ie enabling monthly DDs to go directly to NLs budget) BUT AT THE SAME TIME gradually ceding ownership of the club to fans without profiting themselves.

To be frank - it's difficult to imagine how the scheme itself could be better conceived.

[JeMeSouviens]

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

I agree, the massive difference in numbers is a bit embarrassing to be honest. There are thousands of Hibs fans that can afford to contribute to HSL but don't. Why that is you'd need to ask them. It baffles me.

Maybe they feel not far shy of £400 is enough of their disposable income to be spending on football already?

I've no problem with folk doing what they want with their own money, but mostly because of the desperate state Hearts got themselves into, FoH became this pressure thing that measured the worthiness of fans. They will undoubtedly have people paying into it that can't afford it and every little pressure on stretched family budgets is a bad thing, imo.

[Big_Franck]

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

Maybe they feel not far shy of £400 is enough of their disposable income to be spending on football already?

I've no problem with folk doing what they want with their own money, but mostly because of the desperate state Hearts got themselves into, FoH became this pressure thing that measured the worthiness of fans. They will undoubtedly have people paying into it that can't afford it and every little pressure on stretched family budgets is a bad thing, imo.

Totally agree. If anyone can't afford to pay in to HSL then they absolutely shouldn't, even more so if they have kids.

Stating the obvious here, but it's of course down to each football fan how they spend their disposable income. What confuses me is the huge gulf in numbers of hearts and hibs fans that chose to use their disposable income supporting their team through HSL/FOH.

Attendances would indicate we have roughly the same number of fans. Is the average yam just more well off? Why are they far, far more willing to support their club through regular DDs?

[Ozyhibby]

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

Maybe they feel not far shy of £400 is enough of their disposable income to be spending on football already?

I've no problem with folk doing what they want with their own money, but mostly because of the desperate state Hearts got themselves into, FoH became this pressure thing that measured the worthiness of fans. They will undoubtedly have people paying into it that can't afford it and every little pressure on stretched family budgets is a bad thing, imo.

FoH doesn’t measure the worthiness of fans. About half of the hearts support don’t bother with it. They are no less Hearts fans for it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[BSEJVT]

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

Maybe they feel not far shy of £400 is enough of their disposable income to be spending on football already?

I've no problem with folk doing what they want with their own money, but mostly because of the desperate state Hearts got themselves into, FoH became this pressure thing that measured the worthiness of fans. They will undoubtedly have people paying into it that can't afford it and every little pressure on stretched family budgets is a bad thing, imo.

Couldn't agree more

There is no way that folk should be brow beaten into such a scheme and I am not advocating such a thing for a second.

There are however people who would like to or be willing to do more to help Hibs if someone would make it easier for them, communicate with them and encourage them to do so.

HSL does none of these things, in my experience it wont even reply to correspondence.

There was I believe a recent meeting, which I couldn't attend as I was out the country.

At the very least they could have reported on that and used that to drive a relaunch.

If my business was being criticised as often as HSL are on here I would engage with those criticising and find out their issues and try and engage their help or at least their ideas to do better.

Its almost as if they don't care enough to do so or aren't resourced enough to engage.

We seem to have a few figureheads lending their name to it and other than that it seems to be run with les vim and vigour than your local bowling club by folk who don't appear to have the time to do more.

It seems to be completely lacking in cohesion, structure or resource.

The prospect of any of those currently involved taking HSL's seat on the board leaves me utterly cold and afraid. (BTW for the avoidance of doubt I don't include the "figureheads" in that statement but by the same token I wouldn't want just a figurehead representing me anyway, I would want someone willing and able to do so and appropriately qualified for the task by other than their "figurehead" status)

Maybe the club put restrictions on them promoting themselves (although I cant see why they would)

I have never, not once, seen anyone or anything from HSL at ER trying to recruit new members

Even leaflets at the turnstiles would be something

IMO HSL needs to communicate better is full intentions, short medium and long term.

If it is not the vehicle to enable those who don't wish fan ownership or who want to continue funding beyond maximum fan ownership being achieved then we need to come up with one and pronto.

I wont sit back and in years to come listen to my grandchildren ask me why we seldom beat Hearts (if the worm turns again) and glibly tell them that I couldn't be bothered agitating for an organisation that would have enabled us to do so.

[BSEJVT]

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

Totally agree. If anyone can't afford to pay in to HSL then they absolutely shouldn't, even more so if they have kids.

Stating the obvious here, but it's of course down to each football fan how they spend their disposable income. What confuses me is the huge gulf in numbers of hearts and hibs fans that chose to use their disposable income supporting their team through HSL/FOH.

Attendances would indicate we have roughly the same number of fans. Is the average yam just more well off? Why are they far, far more willing to support their club through regular DDs?

That's the puzzle for me too.

I know they had their "event" and probably felt they had to, but a willing volunteer is better than a dozen conscripts.

I would guess its a momentum thing, nothing succeeds like success.

They are rightly lauded for their efforts and as others have said are kept far more involved./ informed.

I have no doubt that HSL suffers from its very low profile and engagement and partly from the fact that as so few contribute it to it there is a lack of buzz or awareness around it and it is never a topic of conversation.

[Argylehibby]

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

The board are enabling HSL to achieve what some posters on here are saying they want - which is simply to directly fund the playing budget via a DD.

The only real difference from what these fans want is that the scheme does something else at the same time. It is trying to safeguard the club for the future by enabling a significant proportion of its shares to be owned by fans to prevent speculative ownership by the likes of Romanov etc once Sir Tom bows out.

By issuing new shares as opposed to selling existing equity the board are doing exactly what posters above want (ie enabling monthly DDs to go directly to NLs budget) BUT AT THE SAME TIME gradually ceding ownership of the club to fans without profiting themselves.

To be frank - it's difficult to imagine how the scheme itself could be better conceived.

Once STF decides to bow out, finding someone to buy his shares will be harder for him because of the fan ownership. If fans have 51% of the shares the buyer is buying something they will have no control over. It's like buying a telly and giving someone else the remote.

To make things worse for the buyer the voting system adopted by HSL for the shares they hold can mean less control. Unless the voting structure has been changed lately under HSL rules if 50.1% of members voting vote one way, 100% of the shares HSL hold are voted that way. The 49.9% of voters may agree with the buyer but their portion of the HSL overall shareholding will be voted against.

[Sioux]

The bottom line is that HSL was conceived to allow fans to own shares. Nothing more and nothing less. The money for those shares goes direct to the club.

HSL was not set up as a fund to organise gift donations. That is something entirely different. If fans want that sort of vehicle, it is up to the fans to create it. As it stands at the minute there is nothing to stop individual fans from setting up a DD - the recipient being Hibernian FC.

There are many ways for fans to get money into the club. A voluntary surcharge on season tickets or match tickets for example would probably be fairly simple to organise, although it would need the club's input into that.

A separate bank account in the club's name could be created to enable fans to donate at their leisure, whether direct debit or one off payments.

For those that want to contribute, stop moaning and blaming HSL, do something about it. You could start with a poll to gauge interest. I won't hold my breath waiting for that to happen.

[Bostonhibby]

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

I've read on here that Hearts fans would discontinue their contributions after:
- Surviving admin
- Getting promoted
- Getting beat by us
- Building their stand

The reality is both clubs have a portion of their support willing and able to contribute to their clubs over and above what they spend on season tickets. As much as many on here will be loathe to admit, Hearts & FOH are engaging these types of supporters far better than we are and reaping the benefits from doing so.

I agree with all of this.

I guess bigging up their scheme as something grander/bigger than HSL is something I'd expect them to naturally do as it's all they have left in the all important being big department.

The main difficulty I see is how we interpret FOH as being something that will inevitably make them stronger on the pitch. It's not where the bulk of the money is destined, however much Budge directs it to other areas, in the end and later than planned it has to pay her back.

In future the yams might own the club and may want to continue some sort of voluntary ongoing scheme where the money goes direct to the football side.

Whenever HSL reaches it's natural end for some or as an alternative we could easily set up another fund to match what we think FOH is doing. Just spend it differently. Less money could maintain a better football advantage.

Sent from my SM-J320FN using Tapatalk

[Green Badger]

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

The board are enabling HSL to achieve what some posters on here are saying they want - which is simply to directly fund the playing budget via a DD.

The only real difference from what these fans want is that the scheme does something else at the same time. It is trying to safeguard the club for the future by enabling a significant proportion of its shares to be owned by fans to prevent speculative ownership by the likes of Romanov etc once Sir Tom bows out.

By issuing new shares as opposed to selling existing equity the board are doing exactly what posters above want (ie enabling monthly DDs to go directly to NLs budget) BUT AT THE SAME TIME gradually ceding ownership of the club to fans without profiting themselves.

To be frank - it's difficult to imagine how the scheme itself could be better conceived.

I would think most Hibs fans would agree that the concept of the HSL scheme itself is a good one. However, the issue is that the marketing of HSL leaves a lot to be desired. If they improved that I have no doubt contributions would increase. They have already missed some key opportunities to do this such as after the SC win etc...

[J-C]

I have no interest to buy shares in the club, I buy my season ticket and hope that the club invest the money wisely in the squad, I would be up for paying £10 pm DD if it is going directly to the playing squad.

[Mikey]

For those of you willing to pay towards the playing fund with no return, Leith Links does that and it also gets kids along to games.

[Iain G]

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

The board are enabling HSL to achieve what some posters on here are saying they want - which is simply to directly fund the playing budget via a DD.

The only real difference from what these fans want is that the scheme does something else at the same time. It is trying to safeguard the club for the future by enabling a significant proportion of its shares to be owned by fans to prevent speculative ownership by the likes of Romanov etc once Sir Tom bows out.

By issuing new shares as opposed to selling existing equity the board are doing exactly what posters above want (ie enabling monthly DDs to go directly to NLs budget) BUT AT THE SAME TIME gradually ceding ownership of the club to fans without profiting themselves.

To be frank - it's difficult to imagine how the scheme itself could be better conceived.

And I don't understand how anyone could class it as any kind of failure?

[Firestarter]

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

For those of you willing to pay towards the playing fund with no return, Leith Links does that and it also gets kids along to games.

Is there a way to find out the difference between what they and hsl put into the club last year?

[Michael]

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

Here’s a thought.

I have no desire whatsoever to see supporters run our football club.

However give me a opportunity to tick a box for a DD at £10 a month which is exclusively for the playing budget and I’d do it tomorrow.

The failure of HSL is that there is no real desire to own shares within the fan base.

The main benefit is that if the fans own a big percentage of the club then we're protected from someone like Romanov coming along and buying us.

[Firestarter]

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

And I don't understand how anyone could class it as any kind of failure?

Because there is and always will be a comparison staring us in the coupon.

[Bostonhibby]

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

The main benefit is that if the fans own a big percentage of the club then we're protected from someone like Romanov coming along and buying us.

Why I've been in all along.

Sent from my SM-J320FN using Tapatalk

[Bostonhibby]

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

Because there is and always will be a comparison staring us in the coupon.

Do you know what %age of FOH funds are indefinitely committed to the footballing side?

Not looking for an argument just trying to highlight the fundamental difference between the schemes.

Sent from my SM-J320FN using Tapatalk