PDA

View Full Version : The Board!



HFC 0-7
30-08-2010, 11:40 PM
My view on the Hibs board is that they have done a fantastic job of getting the clubs financials sorted whilst building a new stadium and training facility. I believe the board have done so well because they are very good business men.

These type of people are good at balancing books and spending money when you know exactly what the return is, ie, spend 2 million and get 1 6,400 all seated stadium. What they are not good at is spending money on things which cant be guaranteed, ie, a footballer. If footballers were bought by going out to suppliers who gave you an exact spec of how many goals they would get in a season and how much income they would generate I am sure our board would be the best in the land. However, what our board is lacking is someone who would 'gamble' that little bit and spend large amounts of money on things that cannot be guaranteed, ie, players.

I think the secret is to strike a balance, someone with the business brain, ie, Petrie and someone with the footballing brain who would be willing to use the clubs money on players with the risk of losing some of it. I am not talking about careless spending but we need to start speculating a little. I would also add that I dont think the chairman with a footballing brain needs to be a hibs fan as that can sometimes cloud the judgement and can lead to needless spending to try and buy success.

By all means the board should still operate by trying to get free transfers and loan deals however I think we need to start spending transfer fees and decent ones too. We are in a position to buy players from our competitors like Dundee Utd and Motherwell which will strengthen us and weaken them and at the same time giving the fans a lift.

My last point re the board is that they should be more open with us regarding the player sales etc. In particular the stokes saga. Should he be sold, I believe they need to come out and tell us why, ie, there was a clause that was met and therefore we had no choice, or the offer was silly money and we couldnt refuse. This will enable the fans to relate to the boards decisions and stop too much un rest amongst us.

(((Fergus)))
31-08-2010, 01:09 AM
"someone with the footballing brain who would be willing to use the clubs money on players with the risk of losing some of it"

manager's job?

Jack
31-08-2010, 05:49 AM
Can you point me to a club, successful or otherwise, where this openness already happens?
.
There's a couple of very minor clubs where the supporters are the shareholders but thats hardly the same.
.
In fact I'm not sure there's a business in the world that 'explains itself' to its customers the way your calling for.
.
As for the rest of it I thought you were describing Hearts!

down the slope
31-08-2010, 06:43 AM
I'm more than happy in the way Hibs do business.

Stokes leaving isn't exactly a mystery. 1 year left on contract. I would think Hughes had a say in the decision as well.

Sell now and bring in a centre half and 1 or 2 replacement strikers or let him leave for nowt at the end of the season.

The whole thing smacks of panic buying , there is no way this has been planned in the long term and it looks like an exercise to paper over the cracks with the board sanctioning loan deals as they must see the way we are heading under Hughes. He will probably bring in another centre half and drop Bamba such is the way of Hughes, the sooner this sorry exercise
is over the better.

Kaiser1962
31-08-2010, 06:44 AM
Football clubs lose money and when your competitors are overspending that makes it doubly difficult to put a decent team on the park. Unless someone has a spare £100m to throw away then thats how its going to remain. Forget the OF cos we cant even get close in terms of money so we need to sign players with a bit of desire, experience and maybe a point to prove. Or we continue to develop our own players and recall Callum and Kurtis but, if they do well, very well, then they too will become targets for other clubs and the cycle continues. Perhaps we should limit squad sizes like they are now doing in England?

As for overstretching the clubs finances to pay wages we cant afford for a very short term gamble on minimal success then no, sorry, been here before. Guys like Stokes will continue to come here and if they do well they WILL move on, this has happened and will continue to happen until the whole system changes, or breaks down, whichever comes first.

HFC 0-7
31-08-2010, 07:24 AM
Football clubs lose money and when your competitors are overspending that makes it doubly difficult to put a decent team on the park. Unless someone has a spare £100m to throw away then thats how its going to remain. Forget the OF cos we cant even get close in terms of money so we need to sign players with a bit of desire, experience and maybe a point to prove. Or we continue to develop our own players and recall Callum and Kurtis but, if they do well, very well, then they too will become targets for other clubs and the cycle continues. Perhaps we should limit squad sizes like they are now doing in England?

As for overstretching the clubs finances to pay wages we cant afford for a very short term gamble on minimal success then no, sorry, been here before. Guys like Stokes will continue to come here and if they do well they WILL move on, this has happened and will continue to happen until the whole system changes, or breaks down, whichever comes first.

How can we not afford this? Right now we still have a good bank balance but still manage to pay for stands and training complexes. We now dont have anything like that to pay for so why not go 2-3 million into debt for a couple of seasons and see what happens on the pitch. If it goes well we will start re couping the money through attendances or through out league positions etc. If we dont do well we will be in exactly the same position we are now, having to sell players to pay for something, in this instance, debt.

I am not talking about going 10 million into debt etc, I am talking about going into debt slightly. There is too much of a fixation now about our balance sheets.

Antifa Hibs
31-08-2010, 08:04 AM
I don't get this constant brown nosing of the board.

Granted the debt is slashed yadda yadda, but that is 99% down to the fact we had things to sell. It was just very lucky we had a massive car park to sell, and a few quality players that brought us in millions, nothing to really do with STF/Petrie. It is not as if they miraculously pulled something out the bag, all they done was sell things and invested in everything at Hibernian F.C other than the football team. Not really worthy of the half million pound they take out every season IMO.

marinello59
31-08-2010, 08:13 AM
I don't get this constant brown nosing of the board.

Granted the debt is slashed yadda yadda, but that is 99% down to the fact we had things to sell. It was just very lucky we had a massive car park to sell, and a few quality players that brought us in millions, nothing to really do with STF/Petrie. It is not as if they miraculously pulled something out the bag, all they done was sell things and invested in everything at Hibernian F.C other than the football team. Not really worthy of the half million pound they take out every season IMO.

Sack the board then.:grr:
That better? How about be get that foreign guy who runs Hearts in to sort us out. Or Stewart Milne could come down from Aberdeen and give our board a few pointers. Maybe David Murray would be willing to explain to our board how they hand the club over to the bank to run?

blackpoolhibs
31-08-2010, 08:14 AM
I think we just have to be a little more patient. I wanted this spending done a few years ago, when we sold the golden generation. Now i can see i was wrong, and there is light at the end of the tunnel. This league is nearly bankrupt, we on the other hand have a little debt, one that will be cleared in the next few years. When this is done, we will then be in a position to pay much more wages than any team outside the old firm, no idea what Hearts will be doing then. At the moment we are only paying a minimal amount more for your Stokes Millers and Riordan, but the rest of our players are all bought from the same bargain basement bucket.

Soon we will be able to buy or get players with a lot bigger budget than our competitors in every position, a budget that will make a difference. Just a little more patience is needed.

Twa Cairpets
31-08-2010, 08:15 AM
I don't get this constant brown nosing of the board.

Granted the debt is slashed yadda yadda, but that is 99% down to the fact we had things to sell. It was just very lucky we had a massive car park to sell, and a few quality players that brought us in millions, nothing to really do with STF/Petrie. It is not as if they miraculously pulled something out the bag, all they done was sell things and invested in everything at Hibernian F.C other than the football team. Not really worthy of the half million pound they take out every season IMO.

The opposite of mounting a "burn the witch/sack the board" campaign is not brown nosing.

Reading your post, it's like Monty Python "what did the Romans do for us"? It's frustrating for us as fans becuase we are massively short-termist in out views. I'm very much on the fence with Hughes, but as a club we are now miles and miles ahead of our nearest competitors - Hearts, aberdeen, Utd - and it will pay dividends when the elements come together. While the familiar "stands empty / we want to watch the players not the training centre" cry will doubtless go up in the long term if we want a succesful team to watch the infrastructure is in place to provide that.

I've been watching mediocrity for 40-odd years. I'm prepared to be patient for another five or ten.

ahibby
31-08-2010, 08:18 AM
Some wanted the board sacked when St Johnstone knocked us out of the league cup in Perth midweek many years ago. I don't like the way ST holders are treated in that they are encouraged to buy their ST early and then the board sell our best players just before the season starts. That isn't a new thing it's been happening for a long time and is the reason I stopped buying a ST early doors and ultimately at all. Something doesn't feel right about the club at the moment for me and the board would go some way to making it feel better by treating their ST holders with a bit of respect.

Antifa Hibs
31-08-2010, 08:22 AM
Sack the board then.:grr:
That better? How about be get that foreign guy who runs Hearts in to sort us out. Or Stewart Milne could come down from Aberdeen and give our board a few pointers. Maybe David Murray would be willing to explain to our board how they hand the club over to the bank to run?

No-one is saying that. Everyone seems to think Petrie and co are some sort of god send. All they have done is sold things that originally had nothing to do with them. The car park, Brown, Whittacker, O'Connor etc etc etc, all while taking half a million pound per season (which could knock £50 of a head for a season ticket, or sign a £5k a week player for two seasons).

hibees53
31-08-2010, 08:22 AM
OK maybe we do have a nice new stand and our own training complex at East Mains but the truth is that the hibs board have no ambition regarding the playing side of the business,everything is done on the cheap,clueless managers,free transfer signings,any decent player sold and they wonder why supporters like myself get pissed of and stop going to games,i really think it is time for Petrie and his pals to wake up to the fact that fans wont pay there hard earned cash to come along and watch the utter crap that is on display at Easter Road at the moment.And no i aint no Jambo just a very disapointed and disollusioned Hibs fan

marinello59
31-08-2010, 08:23 AM
No-one is saying that. Everyone seems to think Petrie and co are some sort of god send. All they have done is sold things that originally had nothing to do with them. The car park, Brown, Whittacker, O'Connor etc etc etc, all while taking half a million pound per season (which could knock £50 of a head for a season ticket, or sign a £5k a week player for two seasons).

Where does the half a million figure come from?
And should they work for free?

SaudiHibby
31-08-2010, 08:24 AM
Spot on Antifa. Hibs are risk averse and always will be with the current Board. No-one is suggesting that we become a club that invests heavily in players and it could be argued that any team with Brown (excellent so far in my opinion), Bamba, Spoony, Miller, McBride, Deek and Stokes in it should be doing far better than they have done but only the Board and the Manager know the truth about why that is. In my humble opinion all decisions being taken at the moment are the easy option, the no-brainer option. The target each year is safety which is not good enough for this Hibs fan as it would only take a little bit of risk to get this team firing on all cylinders. That may not involve playing staff but it absolutely does involve the coaching staff. If all they did was get rid of this numpty and got a qualified, ambitious and above all tactically proven manager in, the investment of circa 1 million a year woudl reap dividends. Someone could do wonders with the playing staff (out on loan ones as well) we have.:agree:

Hibs90
31-08-2010, 08:24 AM
OK maybe we do have a nice new stand and our own training complex at East Mains but the truth is that the hibs board have no ambition regarding the playing side of the business,everything is done on the cheap,clueless managers,free transfer signings,any decent player sold and they wonder why supporters like myself get pissed of and stop going to games,i really think it is time for Petrie and his pals to wake up to the fact that fans wont pay there hard earned cash to come along and watch the utter crap that is on display at Easter Road at the moment.And no i aint no Jambo just a very disapointed and disollusioned Hibs fan

Are you sure :cool2:

HFC 0-7
31-08-2010, 08:32 AM
"someone with the footballing brain who would be willing to use the clubs money on players with the risk of losing some of it"

manager's job?

normally I would agree and say that it should be the manager but it needs to be someone at the same level as Petrie and the other board members, someone that can help authorise the use of funds. I dont have a problem with the baord and I have said that they have done a great job, I just think that people like Petrie who are brilliant in business find spending money on footballers very difficult as there are absolutely no guarantees as to how they will play, injuries etc. What the board have spent money on is things like buildings etc where you know what you will get when you hand the money over.

Caversham Green
31-08-2010, 08:34 AM
How can we not afford this? Right now we still have a good bank balance but still manage to pay for stands and training complexes. We now dont have anything like that to pay for so why not go 2-3 million into debt for a couple of seasons and see what happens on the pitch. If it goes well we will start re couping the money through attendances or through out league positions etc. If we dont do well we will be in exactly the same position we are now, having to sell players to pay for something, in this instance, debt.

I am not talking about going 10 million into debt etc, I am talking about going into debt slightly. There is too much of a fixation now about our balance sheets.

I kind of agree with your OP, but you're showing here why someone with a football brain should not run a football club on his own. I do think the right director of football would be a useful addition to the board, but he would have to be balanced by a very good business brain for the club to succeed.

The fact is that as a Scottish football club Hibs are in a very healthy position. In general business terms they are mediocre to poor - noone is going to invest in them in the hope of a decent return on their capital. That's the way it should be, but getting the business/football balance wrong would be disastrous. I predict that at least one SPL or former SPL club will go out out of business (not into administration) in the next three years. It won't be Hibs and it's unlikely to be Celtic, but it could conceivably be any of the others, and it will be because they followed the route you suggest.

Antifa Hibs
31-08-2010, 08:34 AM
Where does the half a million figure come from?
And should they work for free?

http://www.football-finances.org.uk/hibs/2009/index.htm

Bottom 2/3 paragraphs.

And no, but i'm not the only thinks its a bit of a joke, while we're getting pumped from diddy outfits left right and centre, paying the second most expensive season tickets in the country, our board can still justify that amount to pay themselves.

smurf
31-08-2010, 08:37 AM
Some wanted the board sacked when St Johnstone knocked us out of the league cup in Perth midweek many years ago. I don't like the way ST holders are treated in that they are encouraged to buy their ST early and then the board sell our best players just before the season starts. That isn't a new thing it's been happening for a long time and is the reason I stopped buying a ST early doors and ultimately at all. Something doesn't feel right about the club at the moment for me and the board would go some way to making it feel better by treating their ST holders with a bit of respect.

Very well said.

smurf
31-08-2010, 08:42 AM
Where does the half a million figure come from?
And should they work for free?

A figure i've always been on the lookout for is this....

Our board often make the claim that outwith Rantic and the Yams we spend more on wages than any other club in the SPL.

But i've always wanted to ask "More than any other outwith that three on PLAYING staff"?

Because i believe that what that claim includes is the remuneration of the board and i'd suggest that in boardroom pay we are near if not top of the SPL?

Twa Cairpets
31-08-2010, 08:43 AM
normally I would agree and say that it should be the manager but it needs to be someone at the same level as Petrie and the other board members, someone that can help authorise the use of funds. I dont have a problem with the baord and I have said that they have done a great job, I just think that people like Petrie who are brilliant in business find spending money on footballers very difficult as there are absolutely no guarantees as to how they will play, injuries etc. What the board have spent money on is things like buildings etc where you know what you will get when you hand the money over.

This is an over-simplistic view.

Almost the very last thing I would want on the board is "a football man", by which I guess you mean an ex-player. That is what the manager is meant to be. if you have a "Director of Football" as has been seen time and again, you have conflict and mistrust. The first team squad should be the responsibility of the manager - he identifies who he wants, and makes a case ot the board within agreed budgets. This makes sense, its the quality of the manager is the issue. I'm very ambivalent about Hughes, and I suspect what we need is more money invested in an experienced manager rather than the squad at the moment.

Also, its not right to say the board spend only on things that they can see the tangible value of. The stand has a cost, but it although it may have a capital value on the books, it is essentially worthless if the extra capacity doesnt generate revenue. it would be very naive to think Petrie and the Board don't understand this.

HFC 0-7
31-08-2010, 08:43 AM
I kind of agree with your OP, but you're showing here why someone with a football brain should not run a football club on his own. I do think the right director of football would be a useful addition to the board, but he would have to be balanced by a very good business brain for the club to succeed.

The fact is that as a Scottish football club Hibs are in a very healthy position. In general business terms they are mediocre to poor - noone is going to invest in them in the hope of a decent return on their capital. That's the way it should be, but getting the business/football balance wrong would be disastrous. I predict that at least one SPL or former SPL club will go out out of business (not into administration) in the next three years. It won't be Hibs and it's unlikely to be Celtic, but it could conceivably be any of the others, and it will be because they followed the route you suggest.

I agree with your post, but not sure what you mean re the bit in bold. I said in my post that i think its all about the balance between football brain and business brain. As you seem to be very good re finance etc maybe you could answer this.

Hibs have managed to pay millions on stands and training facilities through player sales. Now that we dont need to pay for any of that, because there is nothing left to build, can we not spend 2-3 million over 3 seasons and see how things go, then, should it not go good we just revert back to whats happening now and sell players to cover the outlay of a few million, then start again spending money on the players?

This sort of model doesnt seem to risky as long as you keep to a strict level of debt, ie, 3 million. If gate receipts, cup runs and league finishes dont start to improve the profit and eating into the 3 million debt then start selling as we do now?

DarlingtonHibee
31-08-2010, 08:45 AM
No-one is saying that. Everyone seems to think Petrie and co are some sort of god send. All they have done is sold things that originally had nothing to do with them. The car park, Brown, Whittacker, O'Connor etc etc etc, all while taking half a million pound per season (which could knock £50 of a head for a season ticket, or sign a £5k a week player for two seasons).

Hibs financial and business strategy is the envy of every other SPL club. Dundee United have even put that on record.

Rod and STF are not "lucky", they are experienced business people, who came in and sorted out a horrific mess at the club, so we can continue to watch Hibernian play football.

We will never out punch the Old Firm, due to their brand / sponsorship deals, and level of support.

Finally, Rod Petrie could easily have earned 2-3 times his salary elsewhere.

History will show that he did a great job for Hibs.

There is no magic answer to sucess on the pitch, it is supply and demand, and the power is will the player's.

We must show faith, and get behind the team as best we can.

My games are limited due to my location, but I'll be making the 300 mile round trip with my son (Hibs kid) for the ICT game.

Caversham Green
31-08-2010, 08:45 AM
No-one is saying that. Everyone seems to think Petrie and co are some sort of god send. All they have done is sold things that originally had nothing to do with them. The car park, Brown, Whittacker, O'Connor etc etc etc, all while taking half a million pound per season (which could knock £50 of a head for a season ticket, or sign a £5k a week player for two seasons).

The point is that they sold these things at the right time. They could have sold the car park ten years before they did and would have got a fraction of the price they did. They were expected to sell Brown and Thomson for £2m in total and got £6.4m instead (that's their 'half-million' saved for eight years right there). There is a lot more to running a football club than just selling things that "originally had nothing to do with them" (how does that work with players' contracts etc anyway?) and again you're showing why a football brain should not be let loose on the business side of a football club.

marinello59
31-08-2010, 08:46 AM
http://www.football-finances.org.uk/hibs/2009/index.htm

Bottom 2/3 paragraphs.

And no, but i'm not the only thinks its a bit of a joke, while we're getting pumped from diddy outfits left right and centre, paying the second most expensive season tickets in the country, our board can still justify that amount to pay themselves.

How is that half a million broken down? Who gets what? And why?
How much should they be paid?

Antifa Hibs
31-08-2010, 08:48 AM
Hibs financial and business strategy is the envy of every other SPL club. Dundee United have even put that on record.

Rod and STF are not "lucky", they are experienced business people, who came in and sorted out a horrific mess at the club, so we can continue to watch Hibernian play football.

We will never out punch the Old Firm, due to their brand / sponsorship deals, and level of support.

Finally, Rod Petrie could easily have earned 2-3 times his salary elsewhere.

History will show that he did a great job for Hibs.

There is no magic answer to sucess on the pitch, it is supply and demand, and the power is will the player's.

We must show faith, and get behind the team as best we can.

My games are limited due to my location, but I'll be making the 300 mile round trip with my son (Hibs kid) for the ICT game.

Fair enough. But without the car park and without the super players we brought through, were would we be?

Hibs were extremely lucky to get £10m from the car-park and another £10m+ from Brown, Thomson, Whittacker and O'Connor. If Aberdeen, Dundee Utd, Killie etc etc etc had all that, they'd be sound aswell.

HFC 0-7
31-08-2010, 08:49 AM
This is an over-simplistic view.

Almost the very last thing I would want on the board is "a football man", by which I guess you mean an ex-player. That is what the manager is meant to be. if you have a "Director of Football" as has been seen time and again, you have conflict and mistrust. The first team squad should be the responsibility of the manager - he identifies who he wants, and makes a case ot the board within agreed budgets. This makes sense, its the quality of the manager is the issue. I'm very ambivalent about Hughes, and I suspect what we need is more money invested in an experienced manager rather than the squad at the moment.

Also, its not right to say the board spend only on things that they can see the tangible value of. The stand has a cost, but it although it may have a capital value on the books, it is essentially worthless if the extra capacity doesnt generate revenue. it would be very naive to think Petrie and the Board don't understand this.

Should have been more clear. I Did say that in my original post that the person didnt need to be a hibs fan. The person coming in would still need to be a business type but have more of an understanding of football than the current board. This person would not have full control of the funds but be part of the board to discuss using the money. The manager doesnt really have much of a say in the financials of a club they will either ask to have money or be told how much.

regarding the stand, the stand was only built because of the low cost of steel and contruction, they would have spent money on the understanding of the current revenue coming into ER not the possible revenue. When was the last time the board spent decent money on a player transfer fee, bearing in mind we are financially stable, decent sized club and appealing to players?

Antifa Hibs
31-08-2010, 08:51 AM
How is that half a million broken down? Who gets what? And why?
How much should they be paid?

Couldn't tell you, couldn't tell you and couldn't tell you.

Havn't a clue.

http://www.football-finances.org.uk/hibs/2009/payroll2.htm

smurf
31-08-2010, 08:57 AM
Rod and STF are not "lucky", they are experienced business people, who came in and sorted out a horrific mess at the club, so we can continue to watch Hibernian play football.

Really?

IIRC Rod joined the board in 1996. In 1997 he was running the show with Cromb sidelined.

At that time we had a reasonably small overdraft arrangement with the bank.

By 2003 our debts were so bad Straiton was again on the agenda with debts over £15 Million.

So they didn't exactly "...come in and sort out a horrific mess at the club". On their watch one was created. (in the main by allowing GJP to go mental in paying the Hurtardo's of this world and Sir Tom going likewise with the interior of the FF Stand...)

2003 until the present credit where its due. The horrific mess has been sorted. But if not for 1.6 Million Garry O'Connor, 100K Derek Riordan, 4.4 Million Scott Brown, 2 Million Kevin Thomson, 2 Million Steven Whittaker, 1.5 Million David Murphy, 400K Ivan Sproule.....:wink:

And credit to STF and RP for the stewardship of the club since 2003.:thumbsup:

But there was a period of mismanagement 1997-2003 and if not just where would we be today with those lovely transfer receipts 2003 until present?:cool2:

Caversham Green
31-08-2010, 08:57 AM
I agree with your post, but not sure what you mean re the bit in bold. I said in my post that i think its all about the balance between football brain and business brain. As you seem to be very good re finance etc maybe you could answer this.

Hibs have managed to pay millions on stands and training facilities through player sales. Now that we dont need to pay for any of that, because there is nothing left to build, can we not spend 2-3 million over 3 seasons and see how things go, then, should it not go good we just revert back to whats happening now and sell players to cover the outlay of a few million, then start again spending money on the players?

This sort of model doesnt seem to risky as long as you keep to a strict level of debt, ie, 3 million. If gate receipts, cup runs and league finishes dont start to improve the profit and eating into the 3 million debt then start selling as we do now?

That strategy depends on having the players available to sell. With the training facility/stands/debt reduction, if we hadn't sold the players we wouldn't have the assets and we'd still be in dire straits. You're advocating going back into debt in the hope that we can produce players again in what looks like being a diminishing market and with very uncertain returns on the footballing side - buying big players and paying big wages doesn't guarantee any real success in Scottish football and almost certainly won't bring any great financial gain.

Having said all that, I don't think Hibs have always got the balance we're both talking about right, but we're now in a better position to do so in the future than we ever have been in the past.

HFC 0-7
31-08-2010, 09:02 AM
How is that half a million broken down? Who gets what? And why?
How much should they be paid?

I think you are missing the posters point. We are paying the board 3 times more than other SPL clubs which is OTT.

Petrie in particular has been on the Hibs board for about 14 years and the chairman for about 6 years. He has done a fantastic job in reducing debt and building the hibs stadium and training centre. The board however have not done enough IMO in investing in the playing side of things. Petrie and the board have done a fantastic job of building the stadium and training centre fit for a very good football team but they seem to have forgot about making the team fit the stadium. in the future I honestly cant see Petrie and co investing in the team because it is always risky, but that is football, sometimes its a risk. Unless the team has money spent on it the stadium will never be used properly which means that the money spent on it may have been a waste.

You can run a club to survive or run a club to win with the possibility of oblivion, my point is that there is a balance in there somewhere which is quite safe but I dont think the board have grasped that.

Woody1985
31-08-2010, 09:05 AM
The grass is always greener and all that...

Some people think that as soon as the last breeze block was put down on the stand that we'd suddenly be signing players for cash. Over the next 2-3 seasons I'd expect us to sell a few and reinvest a LOT more in the playing side of things.

And what's with the obsessions of signing players for cash? Next to no one is signing for players for cash just now and if we can get decent quality for free such as Miller then all the better.

I think that we will start to shell out larger transfer fees in 2-3 seasons time.

Things are finally coming together after the mess we were in which will allow us to reinvest more. I think I'm correct in saying that the player budget has increased every year for a number of years now. It may take a couple of more for the standard of quality to reach one that we'll be happy with but until then there's little we can do.

As others have said, we're definitely on the up off the pitch and others are on the way down. If we get the right management team and players in over the next couple of season then we will capitalise on the progress. Anything less will be a major disappointment but it's not going to happen right now.

Dashing Bob S
31-08-2010, 09:05 AM
I think we just have to be a little more patient. I wanted this spending done a few years ago, when we sold the golden generation. Now i can see i was wrong, and there is light at the end of the tunnel. This league is nearly bankrupt, we on the other hand have a little debt, one that will be cleared in the next few years. When this is done, we will then be in a position to pay much more wages than any team outside the old firm, no idea what Hearts will be doing then. At the moment we are only paying a minimal amount more for your Stokes Millers and Riordan, but the rest of our players are all bought from the same bargain basement bucket.

Soon we will be able to buy or get players with a lot bigger budget than our competitors in every position, a budget that will make a difference. Just a little more patience is needed.

I agree with this. It's hard when you get to a certain age and have heard the patience mantra again and again, but things have been tangibly happening off-the-field, and Scottish football is in a very sick state.

I think it would be wrong to make ourselves just another sick club in the pack, by paying wages we, nor the game can't sustain, to a few semi-decent preeners to what? Get into Europe in a poor league?

I think it'll take a couple more seasons of stability before we can kick it up a visible notch and reap the benefits of what we've done behind the scenes.

HFC 0-7
31-08-2010, 09:05 AM
That strategy depends on having the players available to sell. With the training facility/stands/debt reduction, if we hadn't sold the players we wouldn't have the assets and we'd still be in dire straits. You're advocating going back into debt in the hope that we can produce players again in what looks like being a diminishing market and with very uncertain returns on the footballing side - buying big players and paying big wages doesn't guarantee any real success in Scottish football and almost certainly won't bring any great financial gain.

Having said all that, I don't think Hibs have always got the balance we're both talking about right, but we're now in a better position to do so in the future than we ever have been in the past.

Agree! but I am not advocating spending stupid, particularly on wages. rangers and Celtic used to do it a lot more to us a few years ago where they would buy our best players. What i think we should be doing is looking at the teams around us outwith the old firm and trying to buy their best players. Yes there will be transfer fees but the wages should be about the same. these clubs are not in great financial footings therefore, probably, wont re invest the money therefore weakening them and strengthening us. In regards to the transfer fees, I am talking about 250K - 500K fees for a couple of players.

Twa Cairpets
31-08-2010, 09:06 AM
http://www.football-finances.org.uk/hibs/2009/index.htm

Bottom 2/3 paragraphs.

And no, but i'm not the only thinks its a bit of a joke, while we're getting pumped from diddy outfits left right and centre, paying the second most expensive season tickets in the country, our board can still justify that amount to pay themselves.

Surely this is because our board are generally employees, not owners. Milne at Aberdeen, Murray at der Hun, Romanov+son over the road, Thomson at Dundee Utd, McDonald at Hamilton, Boyle at Motherwell, the guys at Killie and St Johnstone whos name I forget. All these are active owner/chairman who are putting their personal money in for no return (or not in the case of the Yams). They are not drawing down a salary because there is no point. Our business is structured differently and therefore the cost basis is different.

Like I posted earlier, you can take an ultra short-term knee jerk view, or invest in the long term, which I believe we are doing. The long term isnt next week or next month, but 3,5, 10 years. if we're still struggling for top 6 in 2015, I'll be the first to come back and say "I was wrong, where's my pitchfork?".

SaudiHibby
31-08-2010, 09:08 AM
Well it's comforting to know that my grandchildren might (:wink:) see a decent Hibs team by 2025 thanks to the great work done by the board in the last 15 years. Whoooopppeeeee :rolleyes:

HFC 0-7
31-08-2010, 09:10 AM
The grass is always greener and all that...

Some people think that as soon as the last breeze block was put down on the stand that we'd suddenly be signing players for cash. Over the next 2-3 seasons I'd expect us to sell a few and reinvest a LOT more in the playing side of things.

And what's with the obsessions of signing players for cash? Next to no one is signing for players for cash just now and if we can get decent quality for free such as Miller then all the better.

I think that we will start to shell out larger transfer fees in 2-3 seasons time.

Things are finally coming together after the mess we were in which will allow us to reinvest more. I think I'm correct in saying that the player budget has increased every year for a number of years now. It may take a couple of more for the standard of quality to reach one that we'll be happy with but until then there's little we can do.

As others have said, we're definitely on the up off the pitch and others are on the way down. If we get the right management team and players in over the next couple of season then we will capitalise on the progress. Anything less will be a major disappointment but it's not going to happen right now.

The good players bar a few 'luckies' are nearly always going to require a fee. All the good teams pay transfer fees, even if it is just 100K. All the good players are signing for cash, its looking actually looking like clubs are holding on to players to get a small fee rather than offloading at the minute resulting in the players that are available on frees etc are players that are getting to the end of their careers or players that have shown signs of being a good player but have ended up moving from club to club without setting the heather a light.

degenerated
31-08-2010, 09:11 AM
http://www.football-finances.org.uk/hibs/2009/index.htm

Bottom 2/3 paragraphs.

And no, but i'm not the only thinks its a bit of a joke, while we're getting pumped from diddy outfits left right and centre, paying the second most expensive season tickets in the country, our board can still justify that amount to pay themselves.

can you provise some evidence to back up the claim that hibs have the second most expensive season tickets in the country because with all due respect i don't believe you.

marinello59
31-08-2010, 09:11 AM
I think you are missing the posters point. We are paying the board 3 times more than other SPL clubs which is OTT.


No I am not missing the point which is why I asked the questions that I did. Who gets what and why is a fair question. especially if you want to go down the route of comparing it with the directors of other clubs.

HFC 0-7
31-08-2010, 09:13 AM
Surely this is because our board are generally employees, not owners. Milne at Aberdeen, Murray at der Hun, Romanov+son over the road, Thomson at Dundee Utd, McDonald at Hamilton, Boyle at Motherwell, the guys at Killie and St Johnstone whos name I forget. All these are active owner/chairman who are putting their personal money in for no return (or not in the case of the Yams). They are not drawing down a salary because there is no point. Our business is structured differently and therefore the cost basis is different.

Like I posted earlier, you can take an ultra short-term knee jerk view, or invest in the long term, which I believe we are doing. The long term isnt next week or next month, but 3,5, 10 years. if we're still struggling for top 6 in 2015, I'll be the first to come back and say "I was wrong, where's my pitchfork?".

we have been struggling to make an impact for about 10 - 15 years! So these last 10 or 15 years and the following 10 years are just the grand 25 year plan?

Antifa Hibs
31-08-2010, 09:16 AM
can you provise some evidence to back up the claim that hibs have the second most expensive season tickets in the country because with all due respect i don't believe you.

Was in the Sun last week. Someone infact posted it here. I also made a post last season with a comparison of few teams for different similar views/stands.

Caversham Green
31-08-2010, 09:16 AM
How is that half a million broken down? Who gets what? And why?
How much should they be paid?

The half million is misleading as Hibs are the only non-OF club to have a full working board. All the other clubs have mostly amateurs on the board and employees doing the work that our board do. These employees' salaries don't have to be reported but I wouldn't expect them to be quite as high as the individual board members' at Hibs. The one club in our mini-league (Hibs, Hearts, Aberdeen and Dundee Utd) that has a working MD is Aberdeen and his salary is on a similar level to what Rod's was before he stepped down from that post.

HFC 0-7
31-08-2010, 09:17 AM
No I am not missing the point which is why I asked the questions that I did. Who gets what and why is a fair question. especially if you want to go down the route of comparing it with the directors of other clubs.

Regardless of who is getting what, the board is still getting much more than any other club. For that you would expect to see the kind of financial results we are seeing but also some results on the pitch which we are not at the moment.

Whether we are only playing Rod 1000 pound a year and the remainder to everyone else, its still a lot of money going to the board to do a job. If the job was ONLY to make the club financially sound then they are doing a great job. If they were employed to make the club sound financially but also on the park I think they are failing as they have neglected spending money on the playing side.

Twa Cairpets
31-08-2010, 09:19 AM
Well it's comforting to know that my grandchildren might (:wink:) see a decent Hibs team by 2025 thanks to the great work done by the board in the last 15 years. Whoooopppeeeee :rolleyes:

3, 5, 10 years does not equal 15 years.

Anyway, you're in Saudi so you wouldnt see them any way...:wink:

SaudiHibby
31-08-2010, 09:22 AM
3, 5, 10 years does not equal 15 years.

Anyway, you're in Saudi so you wouldnt see them any way...:wink:

See them every week :confused:

Coming home for the Hall of Fame Dinner and teh Killie match in October. Wonder if there will be any entrants in the Hall of Fame before 2025 :rolleyes:

Caversham Green
31-08-2010, 09:23 AM
Agree! but I am not advocating spending stupid, particularly on wages. rangers and Celtic used to do it a lot more to us a few years ago where they would buy our best players. What i think we should be doing is looking at the teams around us outwith the old firm and trying to buy their best players. Yes there will be transfer fees but the wages should be about the same. these clubs are not in great financial footings therefore, probably, wont re invest the money therefore weakening them and strengthening us. In regards to the transfer fees, I am talking about 250K - 500K fees for a couple of players.

We're only now in the position to do this to some extent (but if they are good enough there will be offers from richer clubs to compete with), but we have been paying transfer fees in that range for the last five years....

Twa Cairpets
31-08-2010, 09:24 AM
Regardless of who is getting what, the board is still getting much more than any other club. For that you would expect to see the kind of financial results we are seeing but also some results on the pitch which we are not at the moment.

Whether we are only playing Rod 1000 pound a year and the remainder to everyone else, its still a lot of money going to the board to do a job. If the job was ONLY to make the club financially sound then they are doing a great job. If they were employed to make the club sound financially but also on the park I think they are failing as they have neglected spending money on the playing side.

Sorry, again this is over-simplistic - see Cavershams post above.

They have avoided spending money on transfer fees, but wages have gone up, signing on fees to players increased and the like. This is investment in the playing side. Whether that investment has been succesful is a different discussion, but the Millers. Stokes and Riordans of the world command better wages than others - thats where the money goes.

Cocaine&Caviar
31-08-2010, 09:27 AM
Regarding the money invested in the paying squad by the board, just how good do players have to be in order to be successful in what is a very poor SPL?

If you look at our competitors for third, none of them have invested thi summer with the exception of Hearts, and it remains to be seen whether the liks of Conway (Middelsbrough) and Reynolds (Wigan) remain in the league come tomorrow.

Even with the loss of Stokes, we should still have a decent enough budget to be successful (4th and above, with a decent up run), its the current management that are to blame IMO, not the board. Although it is the boards responsibility to get the management right...

SaudiHibby
31-08-2010, 09:28 AM
Why is 'simplistic' to question the perfomance of the Board? They have done fantastically well managing the finances of the club (with some asset stripping along the way) but are failing and have faile don the playing side. Is that statement wrong?:confused:

Green Mikey
31-08-2010, 09:28 AM
Fair enough. But without the car park and without the super players we brought through, were would we be?

Hibs were extremely lucky to get £10m from the car-park and another £10m+ from Brown, Thomson, Whittacker and O'Connor. If Aberdeen, Dundee Utd, Killie etc etc etc had all that, they'd be sound aswell.

We were lucky with the great players we brought through and having the car park ot sell but it was how Petrie managed this 'luck' is what is most important. He simply could have used the extra money to buy expensive players to please fans and the club would probably be in the same situation it now as it was in 2003.

What Petrie has done for Hibs is looked at what a succesful club needs in the long term. With the money through players sales etc the revenue potential has been increased through completing the stadium, potential for better players to be developed at East Mains and facilities that can attract better players. What would you have done with the money?

I think too many people don't look at the long term picture. Hibs have been around for 135 years and have not been particualry succesful in that time. We now have a sustainable future for Hhibernian with a basis on which to build towards success in the future. Hopefully this success is sooner rather than later but I stronly belive the work that the board has done increases the chances of success.

SaudiHibby
31-08-2010, 09:30 AM
We were lucky with the great players we brought through and having the car park ot sell but it was how Petrie managed this 'luck' is what is most important. He simply could have used the extra money to buy expensive players to please fans and the club would probably be in the same situation it now as it was in 2003.

What Petrie has done for Hibs is looked at what a succesful club needs in the long term. With the money through players sales etc the revenue potential has been increased through completing the stadium, potential for better players to be developed at East Mains and facilities that can attract better players. What would you have done with the money?

I think too many people don't look at the long term picture. Hibs have been around for 135 years and have not been particualry succesful in that time. We now have a sustainable future for Hhibernian with a basis on which to build towards success in the future. Hopefully this success is sooner rather than later but I stronly belive the work that the board has done increases the chances of success.

I would argue that Petrie did'nt simply obtain his skills himself through self improvement courses. He was told how to do it by Sir Tom.

blackpoolhibs
31-08-2010, 09:35 AM
Regarding the money invested in the paying squad by the board, just how good do players have to be in order to be successful in what is a very poor SPL?

If you look at our competitors for third, none of them have invested thi summer with the exception of Hearts, and it remains to be seen whether the liks of Conway (Middelsbrough) and Reynolds (Wigan) remain in the league come tomorrow.

Even with the loss of Stokes, we should still have a decent enough budget to be successful (4th and above, with a decent up run), its the current management that are to blame IMO, not the board. Although it is the boards responsibility to get the management right...

Did we not finish 4th last season?

Green Mikey
31-08-2010, 09:35 AM
I would argue that Petrie did'nt simply obtain his skills himself through self improvement courses. He was told how to do it by Sir Tom.

He was told to sort out the club by Sir Tom and he did. It doen't detract from the fact that he did sort the club.

Petrie, Sir Tom and HIbs have broken the mould when it comes to football club management. We are one of the few UK clubs run in a manner consistent with proper business practice.

Green Mikey
31-08-2010, 09:36 AM
Did we not finish 4th last season?

Aye and got to the 1/4 finals of the cup:wink:

SaudiHibby
31-08-2010, 09:43 AM
He was told to sort out the club by Sir Tom and he did. It doen't detract from the fact that he did sort the club.

Petrie, Sir Tom and HIbs have broken the mould when it comes to football club management. We are one of the few UK clubs run in a manner consistent with proper business practice.

I would argue that using the McDonalds template of proper business practice shows the sale of a burger with the wrap around business strategy of real estate and franchising demonstrates that ultimately they still needed a strong prduct that required review and revision continually. They make more money from real estate and franchising than they do from selling burgers. We are loyal to the brand Hibernian in a way that no other business can boast yet the product we buy is terrible. In proper business practice we would go bust.

Twa Cairpets
31-08-2010, 09:46 AM
Why is 'simplistic' to question the perfomance of the Board? They have done fantastically well managing the finances of the club (with some asset stripping along the way) but are failing and have faile don the playing side. Is that statement wrong?:confused:

The simplistic view is that they get paid more than other SPL boards and are therefore overpaid. On face value, its correct, but the reasons behind it make sense.

You make some very bold statements as fact:
"Asset stripping" = player sales, I presume. Name me a club in the histrory of the game who have successfully kept a player who wants away. So the board are either lucky to have have good players who are wanted for a fee, or would have been negligent in producing any good young players. Can't really win there, eh?

"Failed on playing side" = measurement of relative success v the period prior to the current board? Erm, generally speaking, naw, thats demonstrably wrong. Just because its not as good as we would all like it to be doesnt mean we've "failed on the playing side".

The board to my mind have made mistakes - the appointments of Sauzee and Mixu as managers (both of which were generally popular at the time - if Franck hadnt got the gig there would have been riots) were errors. Whether its because they were the cheap option or the "Hibs-minded" option I don't know, and I think we're still paying for the stultifying mundane-ness of the Mixu era.

So they may not be the football equivalent of the Microsoft board, but they are indisputably a damn sight better than all their peers in the game.

Cocaine&Caviar
31-08-2010, 09:49 AM
Aye and got to the 1/4 finals of the cup:wink:


Did we not finish 4th last season?

Wouldnt you have considered that a sucess at the beginning of last season, with new management, lots of new players, etc?

It was just the manorr in which it happened with the second half of the season demise, due mainly to Hughes' decision making IMO.

Twa Cairpets
31-08-2010, 09:50 AM
I would argue that using the McDonalds template of proper business practice shows the sale of a burger with the wrap around business strategy of real estate and franchising demonstrates that ultimately they still needed a strong prduct that required review and revision continually. They make more money from real estate and franchising than they do from selling burgers. We are loyal to the brand Hibernian in a way that no other business can boast yet the product we buy is terrible. In proper business practice we would go bust.

Rubbish analogy. Sorry.

We're not retail, or Fast Food. We're not a franchise. We make very little out of our Real Estate as a percentage of turnover. And the last sentence is just wrong - we are as close to operating under "proper business practice" as any football club in the country.

Green Mikey
31-08-2010, 09:54 AM
I would argue that using the McDonalds template of proper business practice shows the sale of a burger with the wrap around business strategy of real estate and franchising demonstrates that ultimately they still needed a strong prduct that required review and revision continually. They make more money from real estate and franchising than they do from selling burgers. We are loyal to the brand Hibernian in a way that no other business can boast yet the product we buy is terrible. In proper business practice we would go bust.

Hibs are not comparable with McDonalds because the fast food and footbal are two competely different products.

McDonalds can produce a homogenous product in any outlet consistently becasue they have developed process that are easily repeated. Football is completey different because it is a sport where there a multiple random factors that can influence the product.

'In proper business practice we would go bust' is a pretty daft statement!

blackpoolhibs
31-08-2010, 09:57 AM
Wouldnt you have considered that a sucess at the beginning of last season, with new management, lots of new players, etc?

It was just the manorr in which it happened with the second half of the season demise, due mainly to Hughes' decision making IMO.

I thought last season was a success, especially when you consider we lost both centre half and centre forward before it started. We had to get new players in, and get them to gel. We managed to get a European place something we don't do often, so yes imho it was a success.

SaudiHibby
31-08-2010, 09:57 AM
No need for sorry, I can take it :wink:

No-one in my opinion should ever set their stall out to be slightly better everyone else if everyone is else is ****. Sir Tom is an astute business man who understands the value of the product but has decided that he wants no part in risk on that side of the business. I would be happier saying that history showed that he and the tahce had produced both a great product and a healthy profit. Then I would elevate them to the iconic level you seem to be saying they have reached. I fundamentally disagree. They have done okay.

Ray_
31-08-2010, 10:25 AM
The simplistic view is that they get paid more than other SPL boards and are therefore overpaid. On face value, its correct, but the reasons behind it make sense.

You make some very bold statements as fact:
"Asset stripping" = player sales, I presume. Name me a club in the histrory of the game who have successfully kept a player who wants away. So the board are either lucky to have have good players who are wanted for a fee, or would have been negligent in producing any good young players. Can't really win there, eh?

"Failed on playing side" = measurement of relative success v the period prior to the current board? Erm, generally speaking, naw, thats demonstrably wrong. Just because its not as good as we would all like it to be doesnt mean we've "failed on the playing side".

The board to my mind have made mistakes - the appointments of Sauzee and Mixu as managers (both of which were generally popular at the time - if Franck hadnt got the gig there would have been riots) were errors. Whether its because they were the cheap option or the "Hibs-minded" option I don't know, and I think we're still paying for the stultifying mundane-ness of the Mixu era.

So they may not be the football equivalent of the Microsoft board, but they are indisputably a damn sight better than all their peers in the game.

To me it’s all very simple, at the moment the product is very very poor & it has been for the past 2-3 years.

We may be looking reasonably good as a business, with little debt and the development of the ground & training centre, however, as a football club, that means so much too so many people, this has been funded by player sales & declining standards.

Before the board can claim to be an unrivalled success, they still have the hardest part to perform & that is to produce a product attractive enough to fill the ER coffers, other than by player sales, at the moment all they will do is drive people away.

Twa Cairpets
31-08-2010, 10:27 AM
No need for sorry, I can take it :wink:

No-one in my opinion should ever set their stall out to be slightly better everyone else if everyone is else is ****. Sir Tom is an astute business man who understands the value of the product but has decided that he wants no part in risk on that side of the business. I would be happier saying that history showed that he and the tahce had produced both a great product and a healthy profit. Then I would elevate them to the iconic level you seem to be saying they have reached. I fundamentally disagree. They have done okay.

Who's said anything about iconic? Or did you just ignore the bits where I said they made mistakes and outlined what they were?

Everyone would be delighted if we had both the profit and success, but if you insist on analysing it in terms of "product", then we have a market where the product is being marketed to a very small group, with a peculiar demographic.

There is virtually zero opportunity to attract customers from other directly competing businesses - you either are a Hibby or you aren't. To ensure that there is a future customer base, the business needs to ensure that there compared to external attractions - cinema, playing with mates etc - the facilities are at least comfortable and safe. Why? Because a big proportion of the future customer base will be based on genetics - i.e. "I'll take my kids".

Success is measured in on the field terms without a doubt, and in terms of results, sadly, we do, on average, need only to be slightly better than everyone else. It will be great if we are a lot better, but it is simply not possible to do that in a oner - I offer you Man City as an example. I think Hibs are setting themselves out to be a lot better than everyone else, and ignore how keech or otherwse the opposition are - what they do is up to them, we can only control our own destiny.

As the vast majority of our non-playing spending has been completed with the stand and East Mains, the only real place to invest now is in the playing side. That will take a bit of time to filter through, hence the 3/5/10 year span.

If Im wrong, I'm wrong, but the direction the board are taking the club, I agree with in general if not on all of the specifics. i can't see wht everyone else wants to take us back to Duff and Gray

Green Mikey
31-08-2010, 10:32 AM
Who's said anything about iconic? Or did you just ignore the bits where I said they made mistakes and outlined what they were?

Everyone would be delighted if we had both the profit and success, but if you insist on analysing it in terms of "product", then we have a market where the product is being marketed to a very small group, with a peculiar demographic.

There is virtually zero opportunity to attract customers from other directly competing businesses - you either are a Hibby or you aren't. To ensure that there is a future customer base, the business needs to ensure that there compared to external attractions - cinema, playing with mates etc - the facilities are at least comfortable and safe. Why? Because a big proportion of the future customer base will be based on genetics - i.e. "I'll take my kids".

Success is measured in on the field terms without a doubt, and in terms of results, sadly, we do, on average, need only to be slightly better than everyone else. It will be great if we are a lot better, but it is simply not possible to do that in a oner - I offer you Man City as an example. I think Hibs are setting themselves out to be a lot better than everyone else, and ignore how keech or otherwse the opposition are - what they do is up to them, we can only control our own destiny.

As the vast majority of our non-playing spending has been completed with the stand and East Mains, the only real place to invest now is in the playing side. That will take a bit of time to filter through, hence the 3/5/10 year span.

If Im wrong, I'm wrong, but the direction the board are taking the club, I agree with in general if not on all of the specifics. i can't see wht everyone else wants to take us back to Duff and Gray

:top marks

blackpoolhibs
31-08-2010, 10:35 AM
To me it’s all very simple, at the moment the product is very very poor & it has been for the past 2-3 years.

We may be looking reasonably good as a business, with little debt and the development of the ground & training centre, however, as a football club, that means so much too so many people, this has been funded by player sales & declining standards.

Before the board can claim to be an unrivalled success, they still have the hardest part to perform & that is to produce a product attractive enough to fill the ER coffers, other than by player sales, at the moment all they will do is drive people away.

I agree with most of that, but will say the progress we are starting to see taking shape off the pitch, should give us the platform to get better on the pitch very soon. Its been hard, we are starting to look good off the pitch, but we cant go out and splash the cash, or we could see us back in the mess we have just recovered from.

A little more patience should see us develop a better team over the next few years, and hopefully pull away from the rest of them chasing that 3rd spot, and hopefully help us get closer the old firm.

blackpoolhibs
31-08-2010, 10:46 AM
Who's said anything about iconic? Or did you just ignore the bits where I said they made mistakes and outlined what they were?

Everyone would be delighted if we had both the profit and success, but if you insist on analysing it in terms of "product", then we have a market where the product is being marketed to a very small group, with a peculiar demographic.

There is virtually zero opportunity to attract customers from other directly competing businesses - you either are a Hibby or you aren't. To ensure that there is a future customer base, the business needs to ensure that there compared to external attractions - cinema, playing with mates etc - the facilities are at least comfortable and safe. Why? Because a big proportion of the future customer base will be based on genetics - i.e. "I'll take my kids".

Success is measured in on the field terms without a doubt, and in terms of results, sadly, we do, on average, need only to be slightly better than everyone else. It will be great if we are a lot better, but it is simply not possible to do that in a oner - I offer you Man City as an example. I think Hibs are setting themselves out to be a lot better than everyone else, and ignore how keech or otherwse the opposition are - what they do is up to them, we can only control our own destiny.

As the vast majority of our non-playing spending has been completed with the stand and East Mains, the only real place to invest now is in the playing side. That will take a bit of time to filter through, hence the 3/5/10 year span.

If Im wrong, I'm wrong, but the direction the board are taking the club, I agree with in general if not on all of the specifics. i can't see wht everyone else wants to take us back to Duff and Gray

What a great post. :top marks

TrickyNicky
31-08-2010, 10:51 AM
I thought last season was a success, especially when you consider we lost both centre half and centre forward before it started. We had to get new players in, and get them to gel. We managed to get a European place something we don't do often, so yes imho it was a success.

I, too think last season was a success.

At one point, I honestly thought 3rd was there for the taking - then the slump, then the slump and then the slump - a bit of luck, a little wimper of fight and a sprinkle of magic fairy dust at the end and we were happy again, aware of our failings and all those shortcomings but still happy I would wager.

Without sounding like a sap or trying to be too preachy - nobody can ever deny how much the posters an these boards all love the Hibs and we are so passionate about them - it pulsates through the veins, we feel that pain for those losses we rejoice on those derby days ( even if we're 10, 000 miles away ) and it's this emotion that makes us act and feel like we're kids again.

I often think the board are looked upon and take on the role to some extent as the " parents of the Hibs family " and at times the similarities are uncanny - certain important issues discussed behind closed doors so as to not cause extra household dramas, doing things for our benefit that we can't quite see but their wisdom, they believe, will prevail, we think they don't understand us at times, sometimes they are trying to be too controlling and like any family imho it's a pretty emotional time but there is a house tae run as well.

I've had days recently that I've thought Yogi's a tool, Yogi's finally shown us ( 2nd half v Motherwell ) the players are gash, the players are great ( 2nd half v Motherwell ), the same applies with the 1st half v rangers.

Then it all goes to pot again and some of us want to run to our football mummy and daddy and demand answers cos the other kids are gettin wins every week.
Others are angry and others take it on the chin.

Being on the board of some football clubs must be up there with parenting at times and being a fan of the Hibs makes me feel like ah'm sitting on mah Mum's knee again occasionally.
I suppose without sounding like Gwenyth Paltrow - thanks for listening, I'm going back to my trailer.

SaudiHibby
31-08-2010, 11:30 AM
Who's said anything about iconic? Or did you just ignore the bits where I said they made mistakes and outlined what they were?

Everyone would be delighted if we had both the profit and success, but if you insist on analysing it in terms of "product", then we have a market where the product is being marketed to a very small group, with a peculiar demographic.

There is virtually zero opportunity to attract customers from other directly competing businesses - you either are a Hibby or you aren't. To ensure that there is a future customer base, the business needs to ensure that there compared to external attractions - cinema, playing with mates etc - the facilities are at least comfortable and safe. Why? Because a big proportion of the future customer base will be based on genetics - i.e. "I'll take my kids".

Success is measured in on the field terms without a doubt, and in terms of results, sadly, we do, on average, need only to be slightly better than everyone else. It will be great if we are a lot better, but it is simply not possible to do that in a oner - I offer you Man City as an example. I think Hibs are setting themselves out to be a lot better than everyone else, and ignore how keech or otherwse the opposition are - what they do is up to them, we can only control our own destiny.

As the vast majority of our non-playing spending has been completed with the stand and East Mains, the only real place to invest now is in the playing side. That will take a bit of time to filter through, hence the 3/5/10 year span.
If Im wrong, I'm wrong, but the direction the board are taking the club, I agree with in general if not on all of the specifics. i can't see wht everyone else wants to take us back to Duff and Gray

Point one is not entirely true. There are floating fans as evidenced by cup final days and the number of people on here who say they can't be arsed. A relatively successful team will draw more fans.

My point all along shirley :confused: there has been an overzealous focus on this side and not enough on the 'product'. Who's to say that had we had more success we wouldn't be in more stable finacial position?

Anyhoo, got work to do. My guess is another window will close with no real quality coming in, Yogi will still be in charge and the Board will find something else to build or renovate to avoid paying for players. That's the real 3-5-10-15-20-25 year plan at the moment.

blackpoolhibs
31-08-2010, 11:37 AM
I, too think last season was a success.

At one point, I honestly thought 3rd was there for the taking - then the slump, then the slump and then the slump - a bit of luck, a little wimper of fight and a sprinkle of magic fairy dust at the end and we were happy again, aware of our failings and all those shortcomings but still happy I would wager.

Without sounding like a sap or trying to be too preachy - nobody can ever deny how much the posters an these boards all love the Hibs and we are so passionate about them - it pulsates through the veins, we feel that pain for those losses we rejoice on those derby days ( even if we're 10, 000 miles away ) and it's this emotion that makes us act and feel like we're kids again.

I often think the board are looked upon and take on the role to some extent as the " parents of the Hibs family " and at times the similarities are uncanny - certain important issues discussed behind closed doors so as to not cause extra household dramas, doing things for our benefit that we can't quite see but their wisdom, they believe, will prevail, we think they don't understand us at times, sometimes they are trying to be too controlling and like any family imho it's a pretty emotional time but there is a house tae run as well.

I've had days recently that I've thought Yogi's a tool, Yogi's finally shown us ( 2nd half v Motherwell ) the players are gash, the players are great ( 2nd half v Motherwell ), the same applies with the 1st half v rangers.

Then it all goes to pot again and some of us want to run to our football mummy and daddy and demand answers cos the other kids are gettin wins every week.
Others are angry and others take it on the chin.

Being on the board of some football clubs must be up there with parenting at times and being a fan of the Hibs makes me feel like ah'm sitting on mah Mum's knee again occasionally.
I suppose without sounding like Gwenyth Paltrow - thanks for listening, I'm going back to my trailer.

Good post, just about sums what i have been thinking recently. :agree:

degenerated
31-08-2010, 11:38 AM
Did we not finish 4th last season?

only if you count the whole seasons results though.

i thought on here we only analysed the 18, 19 or 23 or however many it takes to prove a point and that we were actually relegated.

who did we get in the challenge cup again?

:greengrin

matty_f
31-08-2010, 11:59 AM
only if you count the whole seasons results though.

i thought on here we only analysed the 18, 19 or 23 or however many it takes to prove a point and that we were actually relegated.

who did we get in the challenge cup again?

:greengrin


I read we're displaying relegation form already, while we sit in 9th place after 3 games. This ignores the fact that there are 3 teams below us, who are obviously not showing relegation form, as we all know that it's the team in 9th that gets relegated.

Hibs On Tour
31-08-2010, 12:55 PM
How can we not afford this? Right now we still have a good bank balance but still manage to pay for stands and training complexes. We now dont have anything like that to pay for so why not go 2-3 million into debt for a couple of seasons and see what happens on the pitch. If it goes well we will start re couping the money through attendances or through out league positions etc. If we dont do well we will be in exactly the same position we are now, having to sell players to pay for something, in this instance, debt.

I am not talking about going 10 million into debt etc, I am talking about going into debt slightly. There is too much of a fixation now about our balance sheets.

Exactamundo. There is a world of difference between crazy debt and manageable debt [which almost all businesses in the world carry to some degree]. Yes, in an ideal world being debt-free is undoubtedly a 'good thing'. However, it is *not* an essential and it is *not* something that should be being regarded as one of the top priorities by Hibs board - whereas ensuring we only have manageable debt obviously is. If we had £3m cash and £3m debt I don't think we should be clearing all the debt and spending nothing on the team, for example.

sesoim
31-08-2010, 01:50 PM
I read we're displaying relegation form already, while we sit in 9th place after 3 games. This ignores the fact that there are 3 teams below us, who are obviously not showing relegation form, as we all know that it's the team in 9th that gets relegated.


If you look at our form since January, then add in the fact we have sold possibly the best goalscorer in the SPL (who bailed us out regularly last season), and that the manager still plays a stupid 4-3-3 system with Nish that loses us games that we shouldn't, then why should we be arrogant enough to think Dundee Utd and co wont overtake us?

Anyway, I'm not worried. After Hearts hammer us we'll get a new guy in (Calderwood/Mowbray) and go on a run that clinches 4th place.:wink:

Kaiser1962
31-08-2010, 03:31 PM
:top marks

The opposite of mounting a "burn the witch/sack the board" campaign is not brown nosing.

Reading your post, it's like Monty Python "what did the Romans do for us"? It's frustrating for us as fans becuase we are massively short-termist in out views. I'm very much on the fence with Hughes, but as a club we are now miles and miles ahead of our nearest competitors - Hearts, aberdeen, Utd - and it will pay dividends when the elements come together. While the familiar "stands empty / we want to watch the players not the training centre" cry will doubtless go up in the long term if we want a succesful team to watch the infrastructure is in place to provide that.

I've been watching mediocrity for 40-odd years. I'm prepared to be patient for another five or ten.

Caversham Green
31-08-2010, 03:47 PM
Exactamundo. There is a world of difference between crazy debt and manageable debt [which almost all businesses in the world carry to some degree]. Yes, in an ideal world being debt-free is undoubtedly a 'good thing'. However, it is *not* an essential and it is *not* something that should be being regarded as one of the top priorities by Hibs board - whereas ensuring we only have manageable debt obviously is. If we had £3m cash and £3m debt I don't think we should be clearing all the debt and spending nothing on the team, for example.

It's important to remember that Hibs are not a profit-centred business - their stated aim is to spend a pound less than they earn. That makes the proportion of manageable debt to turnover/assets much lower than in the 'real' business world and the failure margin much tighter. It also makes debt capital harder to come by. The current level of debt is about as high as manageable debt can go IMO.

As I said earlier, Hibs are very healthy in terms of Scottish football, but as an investment vehicle they are a non-starter.

Kaiser1962
31-08-2010, 04:10 PM
we have been struggling to make an impact for about 10 - 15 years! So these last 10 or 15 years and the following 10 years are just the grand 25 year plan?

Well I've watched some total gash sides since around 1975. Thats how it is and you get used.

Hibs On Tour
31-08-2010, 11:22 PM
It's important to remember that Hibs are not a profit-centred business - their stated aim is to spend a pound less than they earn. That makes the proportion of manageable debt to turnover/assets much lower than in the 'real' business world and the failure margin much tighter. It also makes debt capital harder to come by. The current level of debt is about as high as manageable debt can go IMO.

As I said earlier, Hibs are very healthy in terms of Scottish football, but as an investment vehicle they are a non-starter.

I'm not talking about spending a penny more, I'm talking about it now being the time to spend what we are already gonna spend but on the team instead of on exclusively wiping out debt/building something else. I'm not therefore talking about increasing our debt at all either.

Which is a little different...

Caversham Green
01-09-2010, 08:11 AM
I'm not talking about spending a penny more, I'm talking about it now being the time to spend what we are already gonna spend but on the team instead of on exclusively wiping out debt/building something else. I'm not therefore talking about increasing our debt at all either.

Which is a little different...

My bad - but you were agreeing with a post that advocated going further into debt and I was referring to your comment about the difference between manageable debt and crazy debt. My view is that the current level of debt is manageable, but there's not much scope for increasing it for the reasons I mentioned.

Like you, and hibsrandomnumbers I hope the board don't use future transfer receipts exclusively to pay off the debt we currently hold but likewise I hope they don't just throw money at the team and expect instant improvement.

Hibs07p
01-09-2010, 08:12 AM
I have not read every post on this thread, so I might duplicate some of the points.
Would the board be perceived to be overpaid if the team was successful on the park? Probably not, it would be irrelevant to most fans. The board have done a great job with the infrastructure, but not so good with the team. Players have been sold, but new players have arrived and need to be paid. Who decides if a player is sold? Probably both board and manager, but mostly the board. Does the board identify the players brought in, or does the manager? I would say most definitely the manager. The board decides on which manager is employed, and explain their working relationship. The manager either accepts or rejects those working terms and works within that remit. We, as a club expect to get the best players available for the money we spend, and those players expect to be salaried whether they are playing or not. And IMHO this is where a lot of the problems lie, players being guaranteed their income regardless of their performance. Our players are playing as individuals. That is why clubs with lower player budgets do better against us, and battle for ninety minutes. Most are on a basic wage with bonuses for points gained. They play and battle as a team, they are playing for each other and their bonuses, their livlihood. I don't know how we pay our players, but they are probably on enough basic, not to have to worry about their bonus, especially if it is a small bonus. Maybe we should be paying smaller basic wages and higher bonuses, then we might get a team prepared to battle for ninety minutes trying to win games, instead of just turning up on the day and hope that 8 or 9 will have a good day.

Hibs On Tour
01-09-2010, 09:54 AM
My bad - but you were agreeing with a post that advocated going further into debt and I was referring to your comment about the difference between manageable debt and crazy debt. My view is that the current level of debt is manageable, but there's not much scope for increasing it for the reasons I mentioned.

Like you, and hibsrandomnumbers I hope the board don't use future transfer receipts exclusively to pay off the debt we currently hold but likewise I hope they don't just throw money at the team and expect instant improvement.

That's all I'm looking for. I think my 'underwhelment' from this transfer window sums it up. We should be looking at and getting in better level players than Duffy for example, particularly when its a replacement for a 20+ goals a season striker like Stokes. I know there are never any guarantees but there are better, more proven players around that surely aren't outwith our reach...

Hibs On Tour
01-09-2010, 09:56 AM
I have not read every post on this thread, so I might duplicate some of the points.
Would the board be perceived to be overpaid if the team was successful on the park? Probably not, it would be irrelevant to most fans. The board have done a great job with the infrastructure, but not so good with the team. Players have been sold, but new players have arrived and need to be paid. Who decides if a player is sold? Probably both board and manager, but mostly the board. Does the board identify the players brought in, or does the manager? I would say most definitely the manager. The board decides on which manager is employed, and explain their working relationship. The manager either accepts or rejects those working terms and works within that remit. We, as a club expect to get the best players available for the money we spend, and those players expect to be salaried whether they are playing or not. And IMHO this is where a lot of the problems lie, players being guaranteed their income regardless of their performance. Our players are playing as individuals. That is why clubs with lower player budgets do better against us, and battle for ninety minutes. Most are on a basic wage with bonuses for points gained. They play and battle as a team, they are playing for each other and their bonuses, their livlihood. I don't know how we pay our players, but they are probably on enough basic, not to have to worry about their bonus, especially if it is a small bonus. Maybe we should be paying smaller basic wages and higher bonuses, then we might get a team prepared to battle for ninety minutes trying to win games, instead of just turning up on the day and hope that 8 or 9 will have a good day.

Jim McLean always said that was one of the cornerstones of how he used to do things with the arabs. Lower basic salary and big bonuses. Creates clear incentive for everyone to try harder. I'm all for that kind of approach. :agree:

blackpoolhibs
01-09-2010, 09:58 AM
Does anyone know just how much debt we have? And if as it seems our debt is manageable, how much more do we need to spend before it becomes unmanageable? Are we close to that or not?:confused:

Caversham Green
01-09-2010, 10:19 AM
Does anyone know just how much debt we have? And if as it seems our debt is manageable, how much more do we need to spend before it becomes unmanageable? Are we close to that or not?:confused:
If we didn't take on any more debt for the stand (I think we could have manged without doing so, but I'm by no means certain) the debt would stand at £6m in the accounts to be published shortly. We're paying part of that off a £240k pa and interest is about £140k pa. That means we have to make £480k profit to stand still in cash terms (all other things remaining equal). We haven't managed that by a long way since the CIS cup season, so but for player sales we would be going backwards in financial terms. I think last season will be better and we might have broken even but if the trend continues and we don't sell players the debt is already unmanageable.

It depends greatly on footballing success - start winning cups and getting into Europe on a regular basis and the debt is trifling. Early cup exits and regular sixth palce finishes and we're already in trouble.

Hibs07p
01-09-2010, 10:19 AM
Jim McLean always said that was one of the cornerstones of how he used to do things with the arabs. Lower basic salary and big bonuses. Creates clear incentive for everyone to try harder. I'm all for that kind of approach. :agree:

Funny you should mention Jim McLean and his ethos. Tommy McLean was in charge of Hearts when Mo Johnston was on £3K a week guaranteed, and both had a fall out resulting in Mo being dropped, resulting in £3K a week being wasted. The other side of the coin, I had spoken to Craig Patterson who had not long left Motherwell and he told me Tommy McLean the Motherwell manager at the time, had almost put him out the game. They had had a fall out, and Craig was dropped indefinitely from the 14 players stripped every week. The 14 players were the only ones getting a bonus as well as a basic, and as a senior pro, that wasn't good enough. There is good and bad regarding that system, but I think the answer lies in a system that incorporates every squad player being on a basic that recognises their skills, and rewards success with a 50% / 100% bonus depending on results. Squad members not playing, maybe rewarded 25% / 50% if they are not stripped. Maybe they do that, I don't know.

RyeSloan
01-09-2010, 11:39 AM
If we didn't take on any more debt for the stand (I think we could have manged without doing so, but I'm by no means certain) the debt would stand at £6m in the accounts to be published shortly. We're paying part of that off a £240k pa and interest is about £140k pa. That means we have to make £480k profit to stand still in cash terms (all other things remaining equal). We haven't managed that by a long way since the CIS cup season, so but for player sales we would be going backwards in financial terms. I think last season will be better and we might have broken even but if the trend continues and we don't sell players the debt is already unmanageable.

It depends greatly on footballing success - start winning cups and getting into Europe on a regular basis and the debt is trifling. Early cup exits and regular sixth palce finishes and we're already in trouble.

Which really is the point isn't it.

The board have walked a very tight line between investment in the long term set up of the club and on field matters.

IMHO the above shows they have done ths very well. We now have the infrastructure in place and throughout most of that period have given a very competative budget to their managers.

Sadly I think no manager in recent times at Hibs has managed to evidence this and certainly none has managed to get a return above what he has been given,IF we could source a manager that could make MORE than the sum of the parts at ER then we would be in a very happy place I would say.

Quite why manager after manager has 'failed' us I'm not too sure, and I suspect that Rod and Co are not entirely sure either.

Baldy Foghorn
01-09-2010, 11:57 AM
Which really is the point isn't it.

The board have walked a very tight line between investment in the long term set up of the club and on field matters.

IMHO the above shows they have done ths very well. We now have the infrastructure in place and throughout most of that period have given a very competative budget to their managers.

Sadly I think no manager in recent times at Hibs has managed to evidence this and certainly none has managed to get a return above what he has been given,IF we could source a manager that could make MORE than the sum of the parts at ER then we would be in a very happy place I would say.

Quite why manager after manager has 'failed' us I'm not too sure, and I suspect that Rod and Co are not entirely sure either.

:top marks

Woody1985
01-09-2010, 12:29 PM
Can someone tell me what all these other 'buildings' are that we're 'planning' as people seem convinced that we're not going to invest in the playing side now. Are people just making these things up in their heads and getting jumped up over nothing?

Why would Rod do anything to avoid investment in the playing side of things. We've got manageable debt now and as far as I can see a complete infrastructure. Therefore, any income can be used on the playing budget and financing existing debt.

We'll still have to sell players but we should get better on the pitch over the next 2-3 years and mount sustainable challenges for 3rd and maybe higher in the longer term.

I'm sure RP knows that the better success on the field means better financial income off it. I don't think they want/wanted to risk all the hard work to get us where we are now by splashing out half million transfer fees and a couple of hundred grand wages on a player who might turn out gash after a season.

We can take those kind of calculated risks when we can afford them. Just now, we still can't.

blackpoolhibs
01-09-2010, 01:07 PM
If we didn't take on any more debt for the stand (I think we could have manged without doing so, but I'm by no means certain) the debt would stand at £6m in the accounts to be published shortly. We're paying part of that off a £240k pa and interest is about £140k pa. That means we have to make £480k profit to stand still in cash terms (all other things remaining equal). We haven't managed that by a long way since the CIS cup season, so but for player sales we would be going backwards in financial terms. I think last season will be better and we might have broken even but if the trend continues and we don't sell players the debt is already unmanageable.

It depends greatly on footballing success - start winning cups and getting into Europe on a regular basis and the debt is trifling. Early cup exits and regular sixth palce finishes and we're already in trouble.

Thanks for that. Its a little as i suspected, we need to keep selling a player each season, and until such time as the debt is wiped out that will nearly always be the case. Any more debt and it will be unmanageable, so more investment in the team would be stupid.

matty_f
01-09-2010, 01:16 PM
Which really is the point isn't it.

The board have walked a very tight line between investment in the long term set up of the club and on field matters.

IMHO the above shows they have done ths very well. We now have the infrastructure in place and throughout most of that period have given a very competative budget to their managers.

Sadly I think no manager in recent times at Hibs has managed to evidence this and certainly none has managed to get a return above what he has been given,IF we could source a manager that could make MORE than the sum of the parts at ER then we would be in a very happy place I would say.

Quite why manager after manager has 'failed' us I'm not too sure, and I suspect that Rod and Co are not entirely sure either.


Well said.

We've had the training centre for 2 complete seasons now (maybe 3?) yet we're not seeing vastly fitter of improved performances. We still see players out-muscled, we are one of the slowest teams in the league, and we're still not able to defend a simple ball lumped into the box.

We should be seeing a bigger improvement on the park, and the increased spend on the playing side should be showing by now as well. The only mitigation (IMHO) that Yogi can put forward just now is that there are some deeper rooted issues at the club that cannot be solved without a root and branch clear out, something that takes time and money that Yogi has not had at this point.

I do think that the board need to look at the wages situation, and try to remain competitive while at the same time making a big difference to pay through win bonuses.

As I see it, there are players at the club who know that they are getting paid about as much as they could expect to be, enough to be very comfortable regardless of whether or not they play, how well they play, and how the team does.

That is reflected in apathetic performances on the park and a seemingly widespread lack of application at times.

Folk talk about the manager having to motivate players, but I'm sorry - for the money that Hibernian pay their players, the absolute minimum they should expect is for the players to be self-motivated enough to give 100% in training and in games.

Ray_
01-09-2010, 01:25 PM
Thanks for that. Its a little as i suspected, we need to keep selling a player each season, and until such time as the debt is wiped out that will nearly always be the case. Any more debt and it will be unmanageable, so more investment in the team would be stupid.

It works both ways, we are needing to sell players because our lack of success on the playing side. TM team and footballing philosophy, brought in record amounts of cash via all area's of the business.

jdships
01-09-2010, 01:25 PM
Surely we must accept that over the past few years the Board have been building/rebuilding the infrastructure of HFC.
Debt reduction , training facility, ground improvement and generally stabilizing the club.
From next season we would expect that there will be increased funds available to improve the "product on offer"

When a comparison is made with other SPL clubs ,although the board has been extremely prudent, we have not really fallen behind those clubs ( OF excluded) who are living beyond their means.- there are a few !!
Surely this reflects well on the Board .

:flag:

cockneymike
01-09-2010, 01:30 PM
Thanks for that. Its a little as i suspected, we need to keep selling a player each season, and until such time as the debt is wiped out that will nearly always be the case. Any more debt and it will be unmanageable, so more investment in the team would be stupid.

I don't think that's exactly what caversham said?

Did he not also say when we do well (ie win a cup/ come 3rd/4th get into Europe etc), we make money, so that we don't need to sell players to keep paying off the debt - however that doesn't happen often enough. When it doesn't happen that's when we need to sell a player.

The point as SiMar makes, is that most of our recent managers have not done a decent job of managing the team so that we get the return required of our playing budget. Yogi, last season, perhaps being an exception to the rule - the financial results will tell us.

The player budget is like any investment, you expect a return, and most of our managers in recent times, have not delivered the expected return. Yogi may have done last season, as for this year, only time will tell.

Caversham Green
01-09-2010, 02:11 PM
Thanks for that. Its a little as i suspected, we need to keep selling a player each season, and until such time as the debt is wiped out that will nearly always be the case. Any more debt and it will be unmanageable, so more investment in the team would be stupid.


I don't think that's exactly what caversham said?

Did he not also say when we do well (ie win a cup/ come 3rd/4th get into Europe etc), we make money, so that we don't need to sell players to keep paying off the debt - however that doesn't happen often enough. When it doesn't happen that's when we need to sell a player.

The point as SiMar makes, is that most of our recent managers have not done a decent job of managing the team so that we get the return required of our playing budget. Yogi, last season, perhaps being an exception to the rule - the financial results will tell us.

The player budget is like any investment, you expect a return, and most of our managers in recent times, have not delivered the expected return. Yogi may have done last season, as for this year, only time will tell.

Er, yes and no. First of all I'd call excessive 'investment' in the team dangerous rather than stupid - if it works good and well, if it doesn't the penalties are heavy. In my view the club's investment in recent years has been geared towards


Improving the product on the pitch by way of the training centre - making the most of what we've got and making the club more attractive to better players.
Attracting crowds to ER by making it a comfortable and attractive venue.

We'll never know whether giving successive managers more money to sign 'better' players would have been a more successful strategy, but given the transigent nature of footballers it would have been far more risky and less permanent. If we were to pay a star centre-half £20k per week and he turned out like Zaliukas that money would still be gone and we'd have nothing to invest in the future (I know that's excessive, but it works lower down the scale as well). The way we are we still have scope for future success even if the present is not all that.

ancienthibby
01-09-2010, 04:08 PM
Er, yes and no. First of all I'd call excessive 'investment' in the team dangerous rather than stupid - if it works good and well, if it doesn't the penalties are heavy. In my view the club's investment in recent years has been geared towards


Improving the product on the pitch by way of the training centre - making the most of what we've got and making the club more attractive to better players.
Attracting crowds to ER by making it a comfortable and attractive venue.

We'll never know whether giving successive managers more money to sign 'better' players would have been a more successful strategy, but given the transigent nature of footballers it would have been far more risky and less permanent. If we were to pay a star centre-half £20k per week and he turned out like Zaliukas that money would still be gone and we'd have nothing to invest in the future (I know that's excessive, but it works lower down the scale as well). The way we are we still have scope for future success even if the present is not all that.

The fundamental problem with the Hibs' business model is that the basic revenue line is too small to support the (rightful) ambitions of the fans.:agree:

Petire is on record in saying that, a couple of seasons ago, the break-even point for the club (i.e. it maintains steady state) was an average home attendance of 11,000. I suspect that number is now closer to 12,000.

If Hibs support added another 1,000 per home game at say £20 per, that would add £360,000 to the revenues over 18 games. Not a huge amount by any means, but it could do a lot for the players' budget.

On the other hand, if home attendance could rise to say 15,000 that would add 3,000x£20x18, or some £1 million plus each year to the top line, before any cup revenue uplifts.

Now that you could do something tangible with on the playing side (infrastructure now completed).:thumbsup:

With the recent additions to the squad (and all are welcomed and wished the most successful season ever!) the real task for the Board is to find the right incentives to get those extra numbers through the turnstiles!!:greengrin