Notes From The 2010 AGM

[blackpoolhibs]

I can guarantee Yogi wont be there tonight. :wink:

[Part/Time Supporter]

Unless he's a shareholder he wouldn't be allowed in!

[3pm]

I can guarantee Yogi wont be there tonight. :wink:

I realise your comment is tongue in cheek but Petrie should be taken task over this. His managerial appointment record is horrific.

I hope someone has the balls to ask him about it tonight and refuse to accept the 'he was the best candidate available' crap that'll be trotted out.

[Part/Time Supporter]

I realise your comment is tongue in cheek but Petrie should be taken task over this. His managerial appointment record is horrific.

I hope someone has the balls to ask him about it tonight and refuse to accept the 'he was the best candidate available' crap that'll be trotted out.

:agree:

Underlying policy (assuming there is one) really has to be questioned. Hopefully there isn't any air of relief after this (inevitable) decision.

[Riordans Boots]

One of the first questions - When is Derek Riordan going to be offered a new contract :agree:

[blackpoolhibs]

I realise your comment is tongue in cheek but Petrie should be taken task over this. His managerial appointment record is horrific.

I hope someone has the balls to ask him about it tonight and refuse to accept the 'he was the best candidate available' crap that'll be trotted out.

:agree:

He has to get this one right, or he will be the one hounded out next.

[Dalkeith]

http://www.hibernianfc.co.uk/news/20101004/agm_2262950_2174134

[PaulSmith]

http://www.hibernianfc.co.uk/news/20101004/agm_2262950_2174134

Format changed for tonight, basically statement from the Chairman and Q&A.

Further chance for shareholders to attend another meeting on Nov 1st

[Speedway]

http://www.hibernianfc.co.uk/news/20101004/agm_2262950_2174134

[BEEJ]

http://www.hibernianfc.co.uk/news/20101004/agm_2262950_2174134

Format changed for tonight, basically statement from the Chairman and Q&A.

Further chance for shareholders to attend another meeting on Nov 1st
They're trying to stage manage proceedings.

The instruction will be that the Q&A should be focussed entirely on the contents of the Chairman's statement. No other questions will be answered.

It's called, 'deflecting the heat'. :cool2: But will lead to quite a false meeting environment, I would imagine.

[bawheid]

They're trying to stage manage proceedings.

The instruction will be that the Q&A should be focussed entirely on the contents of the Chairman's statement. No other questions will be answered.

It's called, 'deflecting the heat'. :cool2: But will lead to quite a false meeting environment, I would imagine.

Farcical. They should just face up to it tonight.

Might as well have Romanov Jnr running tonight's meeting for all the good it'll do.

[Andy74]

http://www.hibernianfc.co.uk/news/20101004/agm_2262950_2174134

Pretty sure new shareholders rights directive gives shareholders the right to continue to ask questions that are relevant to the company so the Q&A can be as full as the shareholders want it to be!

[Phil MaGlass]

the first question should be "is this going to turn into a hertz type farcical AGM or will the fans get some real answers on the real points that matter to the fans/shareholders"?

[Sir David Gray]

They're trying to stage manage proceedings.

The instruction will be that the Q&A should be focussed entirely on the contents of the Chairman's statement. No other questions will be answered.

It's called, 'deflecting the heat'. :cool2: But will lead to quite a false meeting environment, I would imagine.

Surely any questions relating to this morning's news will be entirely relevant under the "any other competent business" part of the meeting. :confused:

[BEEJ]

Pretty sure new shareholders rights directive gives shareholders the right to continue to ask questions that are relevant to the company so the Q&A can be as full as the shareholders want it to be!
Suspect they'll move for a very limited and controlled agenda tonight with the promise of a fuller discussion on 1 November.

By which time the new Manager will be the good news story.

[cwilliamson85]

As said on the link the club has asked not to be asked about new mangers etc.

As a shareholder you have rights to know whats happening but only when the club want to let you know.

[BEEJ]

Surely any questions relating to this morning's news will be entirely relevant under the "any other competent business" part of the meeting. :confused:
I would imagine that whilst the news will be referred to in the Chairman's statement, no questions on the subject will be responded to until the 1 November meeting.

[Speedway]

Suspect they'll move for a very limited and controlled agenda tonight with the promise of a fuller discussion on 1 November.

By which time the new Manager will be the good news story.

It'll also rule out the Deek contract question as that will be 'a matter for the new manager to address'

[Part/Time Supporter]

Embarrassing.

They're obviously hoping to fob any critical issues off until the later meeting in the hope that they'll have a shiny new manager by then who might have won a game or two.

[EVENTUALLY]

I would imagine that whilst the news will be referred to in the Chairman's statement, no questions on the subject will be responded to until the 1 November meeting.

There would appear to be scope for a Q & A session, but not for the Media.

[Beefster]

Embarrassing.

They're obviously hoping to fob any critical issues off until the later meeting in the hope that they'll have a shiny new manager by then who might have won a game or two.

Yup. In addition, while I'm relieved at Hughes' departure, I'm also slightly pissed off that it took the prospect of some hard questioning at the AGM to push the Board to act.

Everything that has happened today is, primarily, to save the Board any hassle.

[Wilson]

Yup. In addition, while I'm relieved at Hughes' departure, I'm also slightly pissed off that it took the prospect of some hard questioning at the AGM to push the Board to act.

Everything that has happened today is, primarily, to save the Board any hassle.

That sounds like a load of old tosh to me...

[Part/Time Supporter]

Yup. In addition, while I'm relieved at Hughes' departure, I'm also slightly pissed off that it took the prospect of some hard questioning at the AGM to push the Board to act.

Everything that has happened today is, primarily, to save the Board any hassle.

:agree:

Their recent recruitment policy also fits this. Instead of hiring people from outside the club who may not be popular, in the way of Miller or Williamson, they have gone for the easy option of hiring former players with little or no experience. The benefit of this being that it is hard to criticise the appointment at the time. Out of the last three the only one that has been questioned to any extent was Yogi, due to him having some track record at Falkirk to assess. Michael O'Neill (for example) would fit that pattern.

[Bad Martini]

So, rather than an Annual General Meeting, what's happening is:

* Petrie's going to read the script, according to the prophecy
* There will be a "limited" Q&Q session which will not include questions on staff to include managerial appointments, playing staff and other staff matters
* There will be another meeting in November once all the decisions are made (is this AGM2 - revenge of the Hibbys or something of similar ilk)?


...why no save the hassle and just post yer statement on the .co.uk and stick a pre-written Q&A up there anaw??

I hate to say it but its all just a bit yamish...

Have the baws to tell the people WHAT ye done and WHY. Cop it on the chin metaphorically (or in the lughole, reality) then move on. You'd get more respect donig that, el Chiefo's of the Boardio...

ADIOSIO. YA BASSIO.

ENDOFIO

[TheEastTerrace]

Far be it for Petrie and Lindsey to accept some accountability for this mess. As the well paid custodians of our club, should they not be questioned about their role in this mess, the mess before it, and the mess before that? Far be it for me to get in the way of reporting some good financials, but their decision making re: the 1st team's management is shoddy and some answers need provided by these individuals.

As it stands, the club is ducking the issue at the most important of the year. Poor show.

[GreenCastle]

Very yammish and not happy with what they have decided to do here. :grr:

[BurghHibby]

Will it be to introduce the new manager followed by a Q&A session with the new man?

[500miles]

Seems pretty straightforward to me. Major change in situation, so the board will involve a basic Q+A tomorrow night as to not to TOTALLY waste the time of those who had planned on going, while allowing them time to get the house order, and actually form some basis to answer the majority of questions regarding the big questions of who next, and when - most likely without actually naming names.

Unless you want them to come out tomorrow, and let anyone currently pissed off fire loaded questions at them for little more than the satisfaction of "getting one over" on people they don't like, and running back here under the pretense they've actually done something meaningful, or made some huge discovery.

Better still, if there is a new manager in place by the time of the AGM, then it would be the perfect time to let him explain his strategy for the way ahead to the fans.

Seems like common sense to me. Bottom line - the circumstances have changed dramatically, so we''ll get the house in order before making any meaningful statements.

[bornahibby]

I think you are all just reading what you want from this. What it says is there will be questions into the chairman's statement. If he decides not to mention the fact that the Hughes is gone he knows he will be hounded. So I think it is safe to assume he will cover it. Therefore the subject will be open to questioning, including his and the board's position on it.

What is not open to questioning is speculation regarding the appointment of a new Manager. In other words to stop people asking "is it going to be such and such". I don't think that is too much to ask as few clubs would respond to this.

And the guys comparing this to the annual puppetshows at the PBS really need to get a grip. In the past the club have been pretty straighforward with the fans, except on the subjects they have always said they will not comment on, e.g. transfer fees.

[TowerHibs]

500miles - did u get bullied at school or something, don't say anything bad or question anyone because.....just because!

Your the type of fan who chairman, managers crave - sit there, don't ask why things are done at OUR club, pay your money and see what happens! Is noone accountable (in your eyes) to why this club with the best set up outside the OF are going backwards on the pitch.

Some people scythe players, but these are hughes' players, they were mixu's players and they were Collins's players. The buck stops with the manager but when managers keep failing then the buck stops with the board

[banarc7062]

There would appear to be scope for a Q & A session, but not for the Media.

Is that not aimed as those members of the media who copy their write-ups from this forum :cool2:

[emmjayfox]

I realise your comment is tongue in cheek but Petrie should be taken task over this. His managerial appointment record is horrific.

I hope someone has the balls to ask him about it tonight and refuse to accept the 'he was the best candidate available' crap that'll be trotted out.

Im pretty sure the majority of Hibs fans were quite happy with the appointment at the time, what is it they say about hindsight...............

[CropleyWasGod]

There would appear to be scope for a Q & A session, but not for the Media.

Media won't be allowed in, unless they are shareholders.

[500miles]

500miles - did u get bullied at school or something, don't say anything bad or question anyone because.....just because!

Your the type of fan who chairman, managers crave - sit there, don't ask why things are done at OUR club, pay your money and see what happens! Is noone accountable (in your eyes) to why this club with the best set up outside the OF are going backwards on the pitch.

Some people scythe players, but these are hughes' players, they were mixu's players and they were Collins's players. The buck stops with the manager but when managers keep failing then the buck stops with the board

Every managerial appointment is a gamble. In the grand scheme of things, I don't think we've been that unsuccessful . European qualification in 3 out of the last 10 seasons, with a CIS cup win and a couple of Finals. While progressing club infrastructure.

You can choose to come up with things to get pissed off about if you like - but anyone can do that if that is thier intention. I'm looking at what I've got, and on balance, it's OK, with potential for improvement. As such, I feel no need to point fingers.

[Alex Trager]

Grab petrie bay the neck and shout in the twats face get paw broon.. pay the compensation and for goodness sake dont sell our best players he brings in..

But replace the word goodness with a stronger one

[ancienthibby]

Grab petrie bay the neck and shout in the twats face get paw broon.. pay the compensation and for goodness sake dont sell our best players he brings in..

But replace the word goodness with a stronger one

Right now, I'd take Craikie any day over any Calderwood circus that includes Sandy Clump!!

Might not be the manager for the long-term, but I'd bet he'd stabilise the good ship Hibees in the near term and get us moving up the league and stop shipping goals!!

[marinello59]

The AGM is now over. Some awkward questions asked of the board, not all answered fully.

More to follow............

[Badge]

The AGM is now over. Some awkward questions asked of the board, not all answered fully.

More to follow............

When?

[Cabbage East]

Any news?

[zlatan]

Any news?

Petrie required 18 stitches after the incident apparently.

[WellingtonHibby]

.....Nothing new from the AGM,

Petrie alluded that the Stokes transfer, was made for reasons other than a footballing nature.
Some hero wanted to know why Petrie hadn't identified a lack of pace in the team and signed players over Yogis head to rectify it.. I think he thought he was across the road...
Soo

[down the slope]

Christ that was quick !.

http://www.hibernianfc.co.uk/news/20101004/agm_2262950_2174942

[BEEJ]

Christ that was quick !.

http://www.hibernianfc.co.uk/news/20101004/agm_2262950_2174942
It's essentially just the prepared statement. There is no minute of the Q&A. :greengrin

[hibsdancer]

.....Nothing new from the AGM,

Petrie alluded that the Stokes transfer, was made for reasons other than a footballing nature.
Some hero wanted to know why Petrie hadn't identified a lack of pace in the team and signed players over Yogis head to rectify it.. I think he thought he was across the road...
Soo

It would help if you posted the question asked.

It was around Yogi's comment after the game on Saturday that Darrel Duffy was the only player we have that can run channels and give us the option of the ball over the top.

He used the data in the accounts were we had 62 players / management on the books. How could this im balance in the squad be allowed to happen. Is the structure of the board correct do we need an experienced football man in there to help evaluate managers requests for players and the long term vision for the football side of the club. Something sadly lacking at the club.

A sensible question I thought.

Far from the chap being a hero. Perhaps you should have spoke to him about his point instead of having a pop on a web site.

[WellingtonHibby]

Either you employ a manager who you trust implicitly to deal with signing players, identifying the needs of the team and so forth, or you dont, and you're stuck with a situation which is unpalatable..the chairman buying players and picking the team. Are you seriously suggesting the board interfering in the signing of players, the style of the team and that side of things is a good thing, or that we should hold the board to account for the managers inability to do his job. The board delegate the footballing matters to the manager to create an effective system of checks and balances - to appoint a "footballing man" to the board would only serve to undermine the authority of the manager. Thats a Shay Given. It was a question that made no sense on a realistic or practical level.

[barcahibs]

Couple of points of interest from the AGM I'm sure others will be along with a fuller record.

Petrie looked exhausted. I'd say the last couple of days have taken a toll on him. It may seem unbeleiveable from hard headed businessman Rod but there was definite emotion in his voice when talking about the parting of ways with Yogi. Most of his speech was given in his usual 'emotionless' style but his voice caught in his throat when talking about Yogi. He wasn't far from a couple of tears IMO. Obviously he may just be a good actor!

He is aware that the 1.2 million recieved for Stokes may seem incongrous from a footballing point of view but asks us to trust him and the board that it was entirely the right decision for the club as a whole in regard to Stokes non-footballing attributes. The manager agreed with this view. He asked us to read between the lines of that statement but he wouldn't go further. He hinted that Stokes wanted to go and mentioned that players are great at kissing the jersey in public when required.

The manager identified Duffy as Stoke's replacement before Stokes was sold.

In his time as Chief Exec he has NEVER told a manager who to buy or who to sell. All managers have been involved in and agreed to all sales. He said that he never would tell a manager what to do in that event either, saying that was a dangerous route to go down. He was not in favour of the board getting involved with signings as one questioner seemed to want.

Petrie regards himself as a football man and dislikes the idea coming from the floor that he isn't. He listed the footballing bodies he was involved with and described himself as a supporter. He seemed a bit irked on this point.

There is still £1.5 million to appear in next years accounts relating to the building of the stand.

There will be more consultations and listening groups in the future focused on ticket prices, family pricing etc.

There will not necessarily be a new manager in place in time for the Kilmarnock game. A hibs connection is not a prerequisite for the job.

Success on the park is the club's reason for existence and its ultimate goal. He wasn't very clear on what the board regarded as success however saying only that challenging near the top of the league, European football and silverware were what they were looking for.

The new manager will have funds available - no mention of how much of course.

Read into all that what you will. All from memory so nodoubt there'll be some errors and misunderstandings on my part.

I thought it was an interesting night and feel the board couldn't have said much more than they did given the circumstances. The Stokes answers were especially interesting I thought, perhaps confirming some of the rumours we've all heard - I thought we weren't going to get an answer to that one as the questioner didn't give Petrie time to respond before interrupting with another question :greengrin luckily someone else came back to it.

[hibsdancer]

Either you employ a manager who you trust implicitly to deal with signing players, identifying the needs of the team and so forth, or you dont, and you're stuck with a situation which is untenable..the chairman buying players and picking the team. Are you seriously suggesting the board interfering in the signing of players, the style of the team and that side of things is a good thing, or that we should hold the board to accoundt for it.

I didn't say that and that wasn't the question.

Big clubs like Barca and Real Madrid have an exec football director and works for them.

Also, the point was looking at the bigger picture of where the club is going. Eg progression of youth players, scouting system, balance of squad etc etc

Managers at barca, madrid, Bayern Munich etc have sporting director to help and make sure the club's footballing strategy is getting carried out by people in the football dept.

[CropleyWasGod]

I didn't say that and that wasn't the question.

Big clubs like Barca and Real Madrid have an exec football director and works for them.

Also, the point was looking at the bigger picture of where the club is going. Eg progression of youth players, scouting system, balance of squad etc etc

Managers at barca, madrid, Bayern Munich etc have sporting director to help and make sure the club's footballing strategy is getting carried out by people in the football dept.

We tried that before with Billy McNeill. It wasn't repeated, so I assume it wasn't a success.

Finance would be a major issue, I would suggest.

[Part/Time Supporter]

We tried that before with Billy McNeill. It wasn't repeated, so I assume it wasn't a success.

Finance would be a major issue, I would suggest.

:agree:

The trouble with it (besides the additional wage) is that the director of football / general manager (call it what you will) either has power, in which case he is encroaching on the responsibilities of the team manager, or he is powerless and ornamental in nature.

[CropleyWasGod]

:agree:

The trouble with it (besides the additional wage) is that the director of football / general manager (call it what you will) either has power, in which case he is encroaching on the responsibilities of the team manager, or he is powerless and ornamental in nature.

The latter is how I saw the Billy McNeill thing... I could never understand what he actually did.

And then he was gone....

[BEEJ]

Couple of points of interest from the AGM I'm sure others will be along with a fuller record.

Petrie looked exhausted. I'd say the last couple of days have taken a toll on him. It may seem unbeleiveable from hard headed businessman Rod but there was definite emotion in his voice when talking about the parting of ways with Yogi. Most of his speach was given in his usual 'emotionless' style but his voice caught in his throat when talking about Yogi. He wasn't far from a couple of tears IMO. Obviously he may just be a good actor!

He is aware that the 1.2 million recieved for Stokes may seem incongrous from a footballing point of view but asks us to trust him and the board that it was entirely the right decision from the club as a whole and a non-footballing point of view. He asked us to read between the lines of that statement but he wouldn't go further. He hinted that Stoke's wanted to go and mentioned that players are great at kissing the jersey in public when required.

The manager identified Duffy as Stoke's replacement before Stokes was sold.

In his time as Chief Exec he has NEVER told a manager who to buy or who to sell. All managers have been involved in and agreed to all sales. He said that he never would tell a manager what to do in that event either, saying that was a dangerous route to go down. He was not in favour of the board getting involved with signings as one questioner seemed to want.
Thanks for that full report. Very interesting.

The point highlighted was the answer I was interested in. Rod's response seems at odds with Mixu's recent comments about his tenure as Manager at Hibs. :dunno:

[hibsdancer]

We tried that before with Billy McNeill. It wasn't repeated, so I assume it wasn't a success.

Finance would be a major issue, I would suggest.
McNeill was brought in to help Rod to do players contracts as he was wet behind the ears back then and agents were pullng the wool over his eyes.

Also, so Duffy could lean on him but things were to far gone by then

[CropleyWasGod]

McNeill was brought in to help Rod to do players contracts as he was wet behind the ears back then and agents were pullng the wool over his eyes.

Also, so Duffy could lean on him but things were to far gone by then

Okay, that makes sense. But Rod must have been a quick learner, then? BM didn;t last too long, or did he go when we got relegated?

[hibsdancer]

Okay, that makes sense. But Rod must have been a quick learner, then? BM didn;t last too long, or did he go when we got relegated?
Yip, just before it was when Big Eck came in

[Mikey]

From the notes I took......

STF was present but didn't speak.

Rod opened the evening. The thanked John Hughes for all his efforts and stated that the whole board was sorry to see him go.

The normal annual review wouldn't be taking place tonight and has been scheduled for 1st November. This event will be for shareholders only.

He then passed over to Jamie Marwick, the Finance Director.

The profit for the last financial year was £139,000. It's the sixth straight year that the club has reported a profit.

The profit was mainly gained through the add ons from previous player sales. The players involved were Fletcher, Murphy and Jones. The add ons totalled £2.3m.

Turnover was down as a result of reduced season ticket prices, reduced capacity and the collapse of Setanta.

Operating costs were reduced by £200,00 from the previous year.

The operating loss was £2m and the club is taking steps to reduce this figure.

Net debt has risen as a result of payment made to contractors.

3000 fans took out the payment plan and this resulted in £500,000 less than usual in the bank. This will obviously come in over time.


My own thoughts here - Overall I thought Jamie gave us much more information than we've had in the past from the Finance Director. I was particularly surprised that we were told the names of the players who made up the add ons.


More to follow............

[barcahibs]

Thanks for that full report. Very interesting.

The point highlighted was the answer I was interested in. Rod's response seems at odds with Mixu's recent comments about his tenure as Manager at Hibs. :dunno:

You're right but I'm afraid there's no obvious answer. The only thing I can say is that Mixu's comments have all come to us through the filter of the press. Petrie's tonight is straight from the horse's mouth :dunno: Or I've misunderstood what he was saying :greengrin

It's also possible that one or the other is being economical with the truth :dunno: In fact was Petrie technically chief exec when Mixu was around? When did he step down?

Just to clarify my first post re the Stokes transfer, it seemed that Petrie was hinting that Stokes left for non-footballing reasons relating to Stokes himself off the field. (perhaps one ofthe many the rumours that we've all heard are actually true for once :faint:)
My post isn't clear about that and from the way I've wrote it it looks like Petrie may have been saying he was sold for financial reasons. If I understood correctly then that was NOT what he was hinting at. Of course Petrie didn't say anything of the sort out loud only asking us to read between the lines.

[Mikey]

Questions put to the Finance Director..........

Q - What's the make up of the net debt?

A - It includes 2 loans from Bank of Scotland and 1 loan from the parent company.

Q - What's the target for the wage to turnover ratio.

A - There isn't a target as such, but the aim is to reduce the current figure of 68%.

Q - Is there any more money due in from previous player sales.

A - There may be more money from add ons but it's dependant on those players being sold on again or reaching agreed targets at their present club.


Rod then stood up again and completed the formalities. The accounts were passed with a show of hands.

He also confirmed that Brian Rice has left the club with John Hughes. Evans, Thomson and Stevenson will train the players this week. A decision will be made early next week regarding the arrangements for the Kilmarnock game. The board doesn't feel that it's imperative to have a new manager in for the Kilmarnock game.


More to follow..........

[Mikey]

We then moved on to a general question and answer session.....

Q - Will there be a different way of recruiting the next manager?

A - To be honest, I didn't really feel that this was answered.

Q - What are the board's expectations for the next manager?

A - The board are trying to live up to the fan's expectations.

Q - Are the right people recruiting the next manager?

A - I didn't think this one was answered either.

Q - What are the board's expectations?

A - The boards expectations are high.

Q - Should Stokes have been sold?

A - The manager was fully involved and he has the final say in all player movements.

Q - Why was Stokes sold for only £1.2m?

A - The board understands the fans concerns over the amount received for Stokes.


More to follow.............

[Mikey]

Q - Why are so many of the new players on short contracts?

A - This was the manager's decision.

Q - Are there any plans to close the gap between the U19's and the first team. It's more difficult for the youngsters to get match practice as there's no reserve league now.

A - Other clubs voted to scrap the reserve league but Hibs didn't. The board wants our young players playing competitive football and that's why many of them have been loaned out. The whole issue of the reserve league is being actively looked at.

Q - Should there be a football person on the board to identify problems?

A - The manager does the football side and the board supports him. The club wants sporting success and will look at any structure that will bring that. That includes considering a Director of Football.

Q - Will Easter Road have any problems with the new UEFA directive regarding pitches and stadiums?

A - No.

Q - Was there any compensation paid to Hughes and Rice?

A - The club would never divulge personal information like that.

Q - Will the next manager be an ex Hibs player?

A - It's not a pre requisite!


More to follow..........

[California-Hibs]

Did no one ask about what the hecks happening with Riordan contract??

[Mikey]

Q - When did the board decide that Hughes was to be sacked? Was he given an ultimatum?

A - The was no ultimatum given. Progress was discussed on an ongoing basis over the period of a couple of weeks. RP and JH met several times over the weekend and today and decided to part ways.

Q - Communications not always working. E-mails to the generic e-mail accounts sometimes go unanswered but e-mails sent directly to a director are dealt with right away.

A - Fife apologised for this and assured us that it would be rectified.

Q - We need a better team on the park to generate bigger attendances. Why are we selling to Rangers and Celtic? Why was Stokes sold to Celtic for such a low amount?

A - The board are trying to get the best team on the pitch. As for Stokes, it was right to sell him. The price was right and it was the right thing to do in footballing terms.

Q - Will the board back the manager with signings in January?

A - The board has a track record of backing the manager and will do so in January. The board will spend a prudent amount that's within budget.


That's yer lot!

[bobbyhibs1983]

some very very intresting insite and its great to get some feedback and some inside information into the in side of the club so to speak.

a few questions thought.
How would somone become a shareholder and is it exspensive?
did all the shareholders get an oppitunity to ask a question? or a few questions each?

are there many shareholders?

ye i know a few questions not many people would be intrested in but hey lol:greengrin

[PaulSmith]

Did no one ask about what the hecks happening with Riordan contract??

No, and the answer would be that it is the football manager who makes those decisions and the board supports the manager.
In simple terms it will be for the new manager to indicate to the board if they wish to keep Riordan

[3pm]

Mikey, who dodged the bullet when discussing the Manager? What did they actually say?

[PaulSmith]

some very very intresting insite and its great to get some feedback and some inside information into the in side of the club so to speak.

a few questions thought.
How would somone become a shareholder and is it exspensive?
did all the shareholders get an oppitunity to ask a question? or a few questions each?

are there many shareholders?

ye i know a few questions not many people would be intrested in but hey lol:greengrin

there are c200 shareholders there tonight.
Write to the club and they'll try to match you to a seller

[Kevvy1875]

Did no one ask about what the hecks happening with Riordan contract??


Thats what I want to know above all else tbh.

[shamo9]

Did no one ask about what the hecks happening with Riordan contract??

Giving Riordan an extension right now would completely undermine any new manager coming in. Hopefully that's the last thing the board want to do after the way their relationships with the three previous managers turned sour.

As much as Derek Riordan is a Hibs legend he's not above the manager, never mind the club. That being said I hope any new manager will be smart enough to realise that Riordan is a big asset. Still their call though.

[bobbyhibs1983]

there are c200 shareholders there tonight.
Write to the club and they'll try to match you to a seller

ok thanx for the response,just was wondering if there were x 1000 it ll be one heck of a q & a session

[PaulSmith]

ok thanx for the response,just was wondering if there were x 1000 it ll be one heck of a q & a session

No probs, Mikey has covered all the Q&A from tonight

[Kevvy1875]

No, and the answer would be that it is the football manager who makes those decisions and the board supports the manager.
In simple terms it will be for the new manager to indicate to the board if they wish to keep Riordan


Good point actually.

[HFC 0-7]

The 2 loans to HBOS and the 1 to the parent company, what are these for and when do they need paid? Did they elaborate on that?

[Gus Fring]

Giving Riordan an extension right now would completely undermine any new manager coming in. Hopefully that's the last thing the board want to do after the way their relationships with the three previous managers turned sour.

As much as Derek Riordan is a Hibs legend he's not above the manager, never mind the club. That being said I hope any new manager will be smart enough to realise that Riordan is a big asset. Still their call though.

Good first bit of business for the new manager though, usual press conference etc then a few days later sign him up to an extension.

[Gatecrasher]

cheers Mikey and the rest for the updates tonight, its always interesting to read whats going on:top marks

[PaulSmith]

The 2 loans to HBOS and the 1 to the parent company, what are these for and when do they need paid? Did they elaborate on that?

250k payable on demand to parent comp.

2 BoS mortgages for west and ff/ south stands totalling c6m. One off payment due in 2020 for 2.5m and other 250k pa until 2018 when 1.6m is due

[HFC 0-7]

250k payable on demand to parent comp.

2 BoS mortgages for west and ff/ south stands totalling c6m. One off payment due in 2020 for 2.5m and other 250k pa until 2018 when 1.6m is due

Ah right, got a bit worried there about the 2 HBOS loans thought they were new! What was the 250K for? A player purchase? Is this new or has it been carrying over into accounts every year?

[Winston Ingram]

From the notes I took......

STF was present but didn't speak.

Rod opened the evening. The thanked John Hughes for all his efforts and stated that the whole board was sorry to see him go.

The normal annual review wouldn't be taking place tonight and has been scheduled for 1st November. This event will be for shareholders only.

He then passed over to Jamie Marwick, the Finance Director.

The profit for the last financial year was £139,000. It's the sixth straight year that the club has reported a profit.

The profit was mainly gained through the add ons from previous player sales. The players involved were Fletcher, Murphy and Jones. The add ons totalled £2.3m.

Turnover was down as a result of reduced season ticket prices, reduced capacity and the collapse of Setanta.

Operating costs were reduced by £200,00 from the previous year.

The operating loss was £2m and the club is taking steps to reduce this figure.

Net debt has risen as a result of payment made to contractors.

3000 fans took out the payment plan and this resulted in £500,000 less than usual in the bank. This will obviously come in over time.


My own thoughts here - Overall I thought Jamie gave us much more information than we've had in the past from the Finance Director. I was particularly surprised that we were told the names of the players who made up the add ons.


More to follow............

:wtf:. £2.3m. That's unbelievable. Any idea what the breakdown was?

I didn't think we got any for Murphy as I thought that went down the swanny when Brum were relegated in his 1st season. Even then it was widely reported here that it was only £500k we would have got if they stayed up
Jones I wasn't aware of one. As he was sold for £400k I wouldn't of imagined it was too much.That add on was obviously down to Scunthorpe staying up
As for Fletcher it was widely reported here that it was 10% (£700k)

I'd only expected £700k of that.

Rod, you truly are a legend:top marks

[PaulSmith]

Ah right, got a bit worried there about the 2 HBOS loans thought they were new! What was the 250K for? A player purchase? Is this new or has it been carrying over into accounts every year?

Every year as far as I can remember in regards to the parent comp loan.

[PaulSmith]

:wtf:. £2.3m. That's unbelievable. Any idea what the breakdown was?

I didn't think we got any for Murphy as I thought that went down the swanny when Brum were relegated in his 1st season. Even then it was widely reported here that it was only £500k we would have got if they stayed up
Jones I wasn't aware of one. As he was sold for £400k I wouldn't of imagined it was too much.That add on was obviously down to Scunthorpe staying up
As for Fletcher it was widely reported here that it was 10% (£700k)

I'd only expected £700k of that.

Rod, you truly are a legend:top marks

I don;t think we got the whole of the Fletcher money up front in the 2009 accounts, there was still a significant sum to be paid from Burnley to Hibs that would've been reflected in the 2010 accounts plus the add ons. IMO.

[Newhaven]

Either you employ a manager who you trust implicitly to deal with signing players, identifying the needs of the team and so forth, or you dont, and you're stuck with a situation which is unpalatable..the chairman buying players and picking the team. Are you seriously suggesting the board interfering in the signing of players, the style of the team and that side of things is a good thing, or that we should hold the board to account for the managers inability to do his job. The board delegate the footballing matters to the manager to create an effective system of checks and balances - to appoint a "footballing man" to the board would only serve to undermine the authority of the manager. Thats a Shay Given. It was a question that made no sense on a realistic or practical level.

I hope you make yourself available to screen questions to make sure they're up to your high standards for the 2011 AGM :yawn:

[cabbageandribs1875]

He is aware that the 1.2 million recieved for Stokes may seem incongrous from a footballing point of view but asks us to trust him and the board that it was entirely the right decision for the club as a whole in regard to Stokes non-footballing attributes. The manager agreed with this view. He asked us to read between the lines of that statement but he wouldn't go further. He hinted that Stokes wanted to go and mentioned that players are great at kissing the jersey in public when required.



thanks for the update barca, maybe some posters on here will once and for all stop going on about hibs allowing stokesy his transfer :agree:

[Part/Time Supporter]

:wtf:. £2.3m. That's unbelievable. Any idea what the breakdown was?

I didn't think we got any for Murphy as I thought that went down the swanny when Brum were relegated in his 1st season. Even then it was widely reported here that it was only £500k we would have got if they stayed up
Jones I wasn't aware of one. As he was sold for £400k I wouldn't of imagined it was too much.That add on was obviously down to Scunthorpe staying up
As for Fletcher it was widely reported here that it was 10% (£700k)

I'd only expected £700k of that.

Rod, you truly are a legend:top marks

Maybe they got something because they went back up?

[Littlest Hobo]

Q - We need a better team on the park to generate bigger attendances. Why are we selling to Rangers and Celtic? Why was Stokes sold to Celtic for such a low amount?

A - The board are trying to get the best team on the pitch. As for Stokes, it was right to sell him. The price was right and it was the right thing to do in footballing terms.

Tell me how can it be the right thing to sell a player who is your top goal scorer with twenty odd goals to one of your biggest rivals? I don't ****ing get it.
Not ****ing good enough Mr Petrie. :bitchy:For years now fans have paid up front for season tickets only to watch our young talent being off loaded out the back door and cheuffer driven along the M8.

Fans have had enough, it's time you got tough and changed your policy to try and bring a small but loyal band of supporters something to shout about.

With regards to T.V deals, why can't the clubs out with the O.F stand united and get what we deserve. Which is an equal share of the t.v money.

The O.F are nothing without us. So why can't we change our policy and start challenging them glory hunting *******s?

We need to also stop player transfers during a season. Fans pay their money on the basis of what players we sign pre-season. They should be there til the season is finished. Just my opinion. :boo hoo:

Mr Petrie these are only just some of the reasons why I and many like me who have been loyal season ticket holders for twenty odd years wont ever buy another ST again.

We need a chairman who will fight our corner, we need a chairman that will do what's right for Hibs. Not what's expected because that's the way it is.

We need change, we're crying out for change. Looks like we aint gonne get change.

Looks like I'll be going shopping most saturdays with the wife.

[matty_f]

thanks for the update barca, maybe some posters on here will once and for all stop going on about hibs allowing stokesy his transfer :agree:

:agree: Agree with that, was particularly frustrating listening to Real Radio this evening as they were going on about Yogi having his best player sold from 'under his feet' on the second last day of the transfer window, neglecting to recognise any input Yogi had in that decision.

[NYHibby]

Ah right, got a bit worried there about the 2 HBOS loans thought they were new! What was the 250K for? A player purchase? Is this new or has it been carrying over into accounts every year?

£250k wasn't the amount of the loan. It is the annual payment

[Hibbyradge]

Questions put to the Finance Director..........

Q - What's the make up of the net debt?

A - It includes 2 loans from Bank of Scotland and 1 loan from the parent company.



So, that loan's of no concern as we owe it to ourselves, right?

[BEEJ]

cheers Mikey and the rest for the updates tonight, its always interesting to read whats going on:top marks
:agree:

Many thanks to Mikey and BarcaHibs for taking the time to post the content of tonight's AGM.

[Hibbyradge]

Tell me how can it be the right thing to sell a player who is your top goal scorer with twenty odd goals to one of your biggest rivals? I don't ****ing get it.
Not ****ing good enough Mr Petrie. :bitchy:For years now fans have paid up front for season tickets only to watch our young talent being off loaded out the back door and cheuffer driven along the M8.

.


...it was entirely the right decision for the club as a whole in regard to Stokes non-footballing attributes.

[HFC 0-7]

Did anyone ask about the SPl restructure and what it could mean for hibs? ie, Entering teams into the lower league etc.

[BEEJ]

Tell me how can it be the right thing to sell a player who is your top goal scorer with twenty odd goals to one of your biggest rivals? I don't ****ing get it.

Not ****ing good enough Mr Petrie. :bitchy:For years now fans have paid up front for season tickets only to watch our young talent being off loaded out the back door and cheuffer driven along the M8.
This has been discussed on here ad nauseam.

Tonight's proceedings appear to have confirmed the view expressed by some in the know on here that there was more to the Stokes deal than simply securing a relatively small transfer fee. Other issues seem to have been prominent in the decision to sell in this instance.

[Littlest Hobo]

This has been discussed on here ad nauseam.

Tonight's proceedings appear to have confirmed the view expressed by some in the know on here that there was more to the Stokes deal than simply securing a relatively small transfer fee. Other issues seem to have been prominent in the decision to sell in this instance.

Ye ok then believe what you will but what about the scores of players who went before and who will keep going?

All they have to do is trot out some old story about whatever and there you have the reason they will keep going.

The facts are we aint ever going to build **** all if we keep letting them go. Rant over:greengrin

[les83]

Ye ok then believe what you will but what about the scores of players who went before and who will keep going?

All they have to do is trot out some old story about whatever and there you have the reason they will keep going.

The facts are we aint ever going to build **** all if we keep letting them go. Rant over:greengrin

I totally agree with the sentiments of not letting our best go west for peanuts but I have (like everyone else on here) heard an awful lot of rumours to the effect that Stokes was not an ideal influence off the field. If that's true and Petrie's answer would suggest it is - then selling him would seem the right thing to do, annoying as that might be.

[Mikey]

Ye ok then believe what you will but what about the scores of players who went before and who will keep going?

All they have to do is trot out some old story about whatever and there you have the reason they will keep going.

The facts are we aint ever going to build **** all if we keep letting them go. Rant over:greengrin

Get yourself a shareholding and get along to the AGM's to see how the club actually works. Simply sitting at home and pulling the bits you want from hibs.net isn't helping your understanding of how the club is run.

I had a good half hour chat with SL after the AGM tonight. Those who say the board don't care about the footballing side and are only interested in their salaries are so far off the mark it's untrue.

[Cool_Hand_Luke]

£250k wasn't the amount of the loan. It is the annual payment

Think there is a £250k loan from the parent company and the £250k per annum is to the bank. Thats how i read it anyway :greengrin

[blackpoolhibs]

I totally agree with the sentiments of not letting our best go west for peanuts but I have (like everyone else on here) heard an awful lot of rumours to the effect that Stokes was not an ideal influence off the field. If that's true and Petrie's answer would suggest it is - then selling him would seem the right thing to do, annoying as that might be.

I dont see what we can do, other than pay them £10k plus a week? We are always going to sell our better players, its been going on since before i started going and will continue after i have gone.

[cabbageandribs1875]

:agree: Agree with that, was particularly frustrating listening to Real Radio this evening as they were going on about Yogi having his best player sold from 'under his feet' on the second last day of the transfer window, neglecting to recognise any input Yogi had in that decision.


wonder if those same posters bemoaning petrie for the stokes move took the time out to thank petrie for the rather clever 'add-ons' we got from the sales of fletcher/murphs/jones :hmmm:

[1875 NO 1]

Did no one ask about what the hecks happening with Riordan contract??

Yogi didn't ask Rod to offer him a new one

[1875 NO 1]

.....Nothing new from the AGM,

Petrie alluded that the Stokes transfer, was made for reasons other than a footballing nature.
Some hero wanted to know why Petrie hadn't identified a lack of pace in the team and signed players over Yogis head to rectify it.. I think he thought he was across the road...
Soo
That question was not asked it was around the correct structure and balance of squad. And having a experienced football man helping behind the scenes. Not picking the team or taking training etc

For me it was valid.Why did we let yogi sign 2 keepers in Jan when we didn't have a right back and a target man and no rightb winger in the squad. This is just one example you could use to highlight issues with the make up off the squad in recent years.

When Mixu left we were very short in right sided midfielders and over loaded with left footed players.

[1875 NO 1]

Couple of points of interest from the AGM I'm sure others will be along with a fuller record.

Petrie looked exhausted. I'd say the last couple of days have taken a toll on him. It may seem unbeleiveable from hard headed businessman Rod but there was definite emotion in his voice when talking about the parting of ways with Yogi. Most of his speech was given in his usual 'emotionless' style but his voice caught in his throat when talking about Yogi. He wasn't far from a couple of tears IMO. Obviously he may just be a good actor!

He is aware that the 1.2 million recieved for Stokes may seem incongrous from a footballing point of view but asks us to trust him and the board that it was entirely the right decision for the club as a whole in regard to Stokes non-footballing attributes. The manager agreed with this view. He asked us to read between the lines of that statement but he wouldn't go further. He hinted that Stokes wanted to go and mentioned that players are great at kissing the jersey in public when required.

The manager identified Duffy as Stoke's replacement before Stokes was sold.

In his time as Chief Exec he has NEVER told a manager who to buy or who to sell. All managers have been involved in and agreed to all sales. He said that he never would tell a manager what to do in that event either, saying that was a dangerous route to go down. He was not in favour of the board getting involved with signings as one questioner seemed to want.

Petrie regards himself as a football man and dislikes the idea coming from the floor that he isn't. He listed the footballing bodies he was involved with and described himself as a supporter. He seemed a bit irked on this point.

There is still £1.5 million to appear in next years accounts relating to the building of the stand.

There will be more consultations and listening groups in the future focused on ticket prices, family pricing etc.

There will not necessarily be a new manager in place in time for the Kilmarnock game. A hibs connection is not a prerequisite for the job.

Success on the park is the club's reason for existence and its ultimate goal. He wasn't very clear on what the board regarded as success however saying only that challenging near the top of the league, European football and silverware were what they were looking for.

The new manager will have funds available - no mention of how much of course.

Read into all that what you will. All from memory so nodoubt there'll be some errors and misunderstandings on my part.

I thought it was an interesting night and feel the board couldn't have said much more than they did given the circumstances. The Stokes answers were especially interesting I thought, perhaps confirming some of the rumours we've all heard - I thought we weren't going to get an answer to that one as the questioner didn't give Petrie time to respond before interrupting with another question :greengrin luckily someone else came back to it.

I found it hard to believe that point. Mogga was happy to sell Gaz on the eve f Scottish Cup semi. JC wanted to sell Whitty, Broony, Murp and Jones. Mixu happy to loose Fletch.

Pull the other one Rod. Managers knew when players were sold the money went for capital infrustructure projects

[Jack]

That question was not asked it was around the correct structure and balance of squad. And having a experienced football man helping behind the scenes. Not picking the team or taking training etc

For me it was valid.Why did we let yogi sign 2 keepers in Jan when we didn't have a right back and a target man and no rightb winger in the squad. This is just one example you could use to highlight issues with the make up off the squad in recent years.

When Mixu left we were very short in right sided midfielders and over loaded with left footed players.

Maybe a right back a target man and a right winger that fitted Yogis plans and/or budget were not available or wanted to come to Hibs. I canny get my head round folk who complain that we signed some position and not another. A good player that strengthens the team is available and signed; a position is left vacant because no-one fits the bill. What's so difficult? :confused:


I found it hard to believe that point. Mogga was happy to sell Gaz on the eve f Scottish Cup semi. JC wanted to sell Whitty, Broony, Murp and Jones. Mixu happy to loose Fletch.

Pull the other one Rod. Managers knew when players were sold the money went for capital infrustructure projects

Offers came in for these players, I cant recall any being actively touted by the club as being for sale. The players will know about offers, at the very least through their agents. I’d imagine a chat between RP and Rodders would then follow where an agreement would have been reached.

[WellingtonHibby]

I hope you make yourself available to screen questions to make sure they're up to your high standards for the 2011 AGM :yawn:

Indeed I shall! Vetting available on request. :rolleyes:

[WellingtonHibby]

That question was not asked it was around the correct structure and balance of squad. And having a experienced football man helping behind the scenes. Not picking the team or taking training etc

For me it was valid.Why did we let yogi sign 2 keepers in Jan when we didn't have a right back and a target man and no rightb winger in the squad. This is just one example you could use to highlight issues with the make up off the squad in recent years.

When Mixu left we were very short in right sided midfielders and over loaded with left footed players.


I know what your saying, but if you cant trust a manager to take care of these issues themselves, then the issue is with bulleting the manager and not picking his signings for him. The board, for me, have to let the manager comepletecontrol over these matters, to presume that they know better (even if they do) would compromise the role of the manager at the club and question his authority to do his job.

[matty_f]

I know what your saying, but if you cant trust a manager to take care of these issues themselves, then the issue is with bulleting the manager and not picking his signings for him. The board, for me, have to let the manager comepletecontrol over these matters, to presume that they know better (even if they do) would compromise the role of the manager at the club and question his authority to do his job.

:agree:

I think that where the board can come into it is by sitting down with the manager and talking through his plans for the next 2 or 3 transfer windows, looking at what players could attract, or have been attracting, interest, which players will be going out of contract etc, and discussing succession planning.

That way the board and the manager will have a clear, focussed, idea of the priorities for players coming in and out of the club and allow the continuity that's sadly lacking at Hibs, to happen.

The board absolutely should not be picking players for the manager, as you say that undermines him and is not the way to go. They should be helping him prioritise though, through regular dialogue and squad reviews.

[sunshine1875]

Get yourself a shareholding and get along to the AGM's to see how the club actually works. Simply sitting at home and pulling the bits you want from hibs.net isn't helping your understanding of how the club is run.

I had a good half hour chat with SL after the AGM tonight. Those who say the board don't care about the footballing side and are only interested in their salaries are so far off the mark it's untrue.

Well said. I have nothing but respect for the job that RP, SL and the others are doing for Hibernian Football Club. Yes, we are going through a rocky period now, but we have had many over the last 40 years. The long-term future for our club is solid, but we are currently in an economic climate that many clubs will struggle or even go out of business.

I was actually impressed with the way that RP dealt with the many questions that were posed. It is not easy in that type of environment when every word could be analysed in so many different ways from those that attended.

What is the alternative? Get in a dodgy dealer that no-one has ever heard off, looking for a quick win but that will eventually lead to long-term pain. With the right manager, we will return stronger.

That aside, the main worry for me is that the board are looking to increase turnover to compensate for the likely loss of sales revenue during the 2010/11 financial period - as it was only the sales that turned an operating loss into a small profit for 2009/10. I am struggling to see how we can increase turnover when the product on the pitch is so poor, though they are obviously looking at other options such as games like the U21 game v Iceland and Semi-Finals and other opportunites (concerts maybe, my thoughts not RP).

The club needs us like never before to get us through the tough times ahead. They have delivered what most on here wanted (Yogi out), now are you ready to give our famous team another go?

[barcahibs]

I found it hard to believe that point. Mogga was happy to sell Gaz on the eve f Scottish Cup semi. JC wanted to sell Whitty, Broony, Murp and Jones. Mixu happy to loose Fletch.

Pull the other one Rod. Managers knew when players were sold the money went for capital infrustructure projects

He didn't say they were happy about it, he said they agreed.

FWIW I could see Mowbray agreeing to the sale, he was one of the biggest promoters of us investing in infrastructure wasn't he?

As for Brown, Murphy, Jones and Fletcher again I can see JC and Mixu agreeing to their sale. All those players wanted to go and an unhappy player can make for an unhappy team. Murphy and Jones in particular had made it clear they wanted to move back down South and IMO Hibs shouldn't have stood in their way.

Where JC and Mixu may have been unhappy is with how much of the money they got back to spend but Rod didn't say anything about that.

FWIW I disagreed with the questioner suggesting the board should get more involved in player purchasing/squad makeup. I can't see how that could possibly work, as others have said above it will inevitably end up with the manager and the board in conflict. I agree with RP that that is a very dangerous route to go down - though I admit that I don't really know how it works abroad.


I had a good half hour chat with SL after the AGM tonight. Those who say the board don't care about the footballing side and are only interested in their salaries are so far off the mark it's untrue.

:top marks I didn't chat with SL last night - presumably because his time was being hogged by .net admins :greengrin - but have no doubt from last night and other occasions that he and RP care deeply about the football team.

[new malkyhib]

Well said. I have nothing but respect for the job that RP, SL and the others are doing for Hibernian Football Club. Yes, we are going through a rocky period now, but we have had many over the last 40 years. The long-term future for our club is solid...

...and if we get relegated, partly by signing crap players and parly by having sub-standard managers continually appointed will he have respect for them then? And what would a (minimum) of one year in the First Division do for the long-term future of the club?

[Disco Dave]

I totally agree with the sentiments of not letting our best go west for peanuts but I have (like everyone else on here) heard an awful lot of rumours to the effect that Stokes was not an ideal influence off the field. If that's true and Petrie's answer would suggest it is - then selling him would seem the right thing to do, annoying as that might be.

Did Petrie say in the AGM that no player gets sold without the managers say so? So it was Hughes decision?

[BSEJVT]

...and if we get relegated, partly by signing crap players and parly by having sub-standard managers continually appointed will he have respect for them then? And what would a (minimum) of one year in the First Division do for the long-term future of the club?

Having read numerous quotes from you over the years, you come over as if you think the board are deliberately messing it up, just to piss you off personally.

There's not one of the managers appointed by the board who havent come into the job without the support and approval of vast quantities of the support.

The fact that some of them havent worked out is just a fact of life.

See Celtic, Liverpool and countless other teams with far deeper pockets than Hibs.

Having appointed their man, the board have backed their choices signing policies, most of which have been dubious to say the least.

We are losing £2m per annum, if your complaint is lack of financial support, how much would you prefer us to lose?

Bear in mind the countless millions squandered by even SPL clubs over the years, signing players who havent worked out.

Its football, there are no guarantees, if there were it would be utterly pointless watching it.

I dont think I have ever seen you post anything positive or optimistic.

Every post is a diatribe against the board.

Like it or lump it they are hear to stay.

Your continued carping about them is just pissing in the wind.

[sunshine1875]

Having read numerous quotes from you over the years, you come over as if you think the board are deliberately messing it up, just to piss you off personally.

There's not one of the managers appointed by the board who havent come into the job without the support and approval of vast quantities of the support.

The fact that some of them havent worked out is just a fact of life.

See Celtic, Liverpool and countless other teams with far deeper pockets than Hibs.

Having appointed their man, the board have backed their choices signing policies, most of which have been dubious to say the least.

We are losing £2m per annum, if your complaint is lack of financial support, how much would you prefer us to lose?

Bear in mind the countless millions squandered by even SPL clubs over the years, signing players who havent worked out.

Its football, there are no guarantees, if there were it would be utterly pointless watching it.

I dont think I have ever seen you post anything positive or optimistic.

Every post is a diatribe against the board.

Like it or lump it they are hear to stay.

Your continued carping about them is just pissing in the wind.

:top marks:notworthy:

[sunshine1875]

The profit for the last financial year was £139,000. It's the sixth straight year that the club has reported a profit.

The profit was mainly gained through the add ons from previous player sales. The players involved were Fletcher, Murphy and Jones. The add ons totalled £2.3m.

Turnover was down as a result of reduced season ticket prices, reduced capacity and the collapse of Setanta.

Operating costs were reduced by £200,00 from the previous year.

The operating loss was £2m and the club is taking steps to reduce this figure.

Net debt has risen as a result of payment made to contractors.

3000 fans took out the payment plan and this resulted in £500,000 less than usual in the bank. This will obviously come in over time.


I remember at 2010 AGM that they noted about turnover being down, the profit only coming from sales and as a result they were looking to reduce the operating loss and it was mentioned a few times that they were looking to increase turnover. After the AGM, there were a few games when there was a few deals like bring a friend or adult/child for £20 or something like that!

Role on a year and season tickets are down by probably 2,000 to 3,000, attendances at games are probably down by 4,000 per game. Turnover must be down. Not looking good for the next financial report / AGM. The word on the street seems to vary between a small profit (due to Bamba / Fletcher sell-on clause) to a small debt.

What do you think this years AGM will be like? What questions should be fired at the Board?

[IWasThere2016]

I think we may see the same approach eg CC and Hibs 'part ways' just before the AGM, which becomes a contrived Q+A session. A more meaningful forum will take place between AGM and Christmas by which time another new manager is installed. Best we can hope foor IMHO is RP retiring and the Boardroom salaries fall accordingly.

[Mikey]

What do you think this years AGM will be like? What questions should be fired at the Board?

I suspect it'll be the most interesting and best attended one I've been to :greengrin



I think we may see the same approach eg CC and Hibs 'part ways' just before the AGM, which becomes a contrived Q+A session. A more meaningful forum will take place between AGM and Christmas by which time another new manager is installed. Best we can hope foor IMHO is RP retiring and the Boardroom salaries fall accordingly.

Not impossible! I'd certainly be surprised if there isn't an announcement of some sort regarding RP.

[MrSmith]

I suspect it'll be the most interesting and best attended one I've been to :greengrin




Not impossible! I'd certainly be surprised if there isn't an announcement of some sort regarding RP.

You know, the way this has panned out is really quite sad. I quite liked the stubborn silence from an efficient board that told the media to go 'F' themselves and with Mowbray we appeared to be heading in the right direction: Manager, team, board and fans - we were all in it together! However, something insidious and sinister has occurred and has taken all that hard work painfully and slowly down over the past five years! Just look at us now, we are all at odds, fans are catogrised and marginalised; managers come and go; Board are getting tight (deservedly so in some instances) And; to round it all off, the teams rubbish and languishing at the bottom of the table!

Who would have thought!?

[Andy74]

You know, the way this has panned out is really quite sad. I quite liked the stubborn silence from an efficient board that told the media to go 'F' themselves and with Mowbray we appeared to be heading in the right direction: Manager, team, board and fans - we were all in it together! However, something insidious and sinister has occurred and has taken all that hard work painfully and slowly down over the past five years! Just look at us now, we are all at odds, fans are catogrised and marginalised; managers come and go; Board are getting tight (deservedly so in some instances) And; to round it all off, the teams rubbish and languishing at the bottom of the table!

Who would have thought!?

It's all abouit football though when all is said and done.

Last February when we went to Parkhead and beat Celtic we were inches off second place, getting talked about as title challengers, getting an average crowd around 13,000 or more, twenty points or so clear of Hearts and a new stand on the way.

Life couldn't get much better and there was an acceptance that all the hard work off the park was beginning to pay off and that we were where we should be.

Then football takes over, you get injuries, rubbish pitches, players lose confidence, losses turn to more losses and then it all goes the wrong way.

The big mistake when things got low (if you accept that things had to chance when we could have stood firm and allowed Hughes to try and address it, which he surely would have done by now?) was to appoint someone who didn't make a difference.

If we had at that stage got an uplift and then the new guy had made a few team changes in arease we lacked we could have quickly got the momentum going again. At the start of last season we were still getting great crowds with the new stand opening and all that and it could have all been built on.

Instead we've had to put up with turgid, boring football and not winning either, weve had the team ripped up and a new one in wth no change, that has turned people off again.

The off the filed stuff doesn't matter so much when things are going well. The board have backed CC with 14 new players so we can't say the off field stuff hasn't deleivered.

We ned to act quickly and it needs to be something that will get the fans imagination.

Even if CC does now slowly turn things back around, i think it would take a long, lomg time for the crowds to start coming back.

CC said at the weekend after one of the worst games ever, that if we scored in the last minute we'd all have gone home happy. I think he is badly misjudging us.

[Stevie Reid]

It's all abouit football though when all is said and done.

Last February when we went to Parkhead and beat Celtic we were inches off second place, getting talked about as title challengers, getting an average crowd around 13,000 or more, twenty points or so clear of Hearts and a new stand on the way.

Life couldn't get much better and there was an acceptance that all the hard work off the park was beginning to pay off and that we were where we should be.

Then football takes over, you get injuries, rubbish pitches, players lose confidence, losses turn to more losses and then it all goes the wrong way.

The big mistake when things got low (if you accept that things had to chance when we could have stood firm and allowed Hughes to try and address it, which he surely would have done by now?) was to appoint someone who didn't make a difference.

If we had at that stage got an uplift and then the new guy had made a few team changes in arease we lacked we could have quickly got the momentum going again. At the start of last season we were still getting great crowds with the new stand opening and all that and it could have all been built on.

Instead we've had to put up with turgid, boring football and not winning either, weve had the team ripped up and a new one in wth no change, that has turned people off again.

The off the filed stuff doesn't matter so much when things are going well. The board have backed CC with 14 new players so we can't say the off field stuff hasn't deleivered.

We ned to act quickly and it needs to be something that will get the fans imagination.

Even if CC does now slowly turn things back around, i think it would take a long, lomg time for the crowds to start coming back.

CC said at the weekend after one of the worst games ever, that if we scored in the last minute we'd all have gone home happy. I think he is badly misjudging us.

Correct Andy, what people who are still backing Calderwood need to realise is that it's going to take a turnaround of miracle proportions for his tenure to possibly work. As things stand, I can't see any way that we can make the top 6 with him in charge, meaning that the best that we can hope for this season is to stay safe from relegation, maybe improve on last season's 10th place - given the football on offer, the crowds by the end of the season would be even more awful than they are now, and who on earth would buy a season ticket for more?

This would mean that revenue is down even further, and the player budget even smaller - meaning Calderwood would have even less money to use when he's already proved that he can't sign well with a bigger budget. The knock on effect would be that even less people would come along to watch the players signed on a much smaller budget, and the downward spiral would continue. Far from the gradual progress we all hoped to see under CC, he is actually running us into the ground. It might cost a lot to sack Calderwood, but I really don't think we can afford to keep him.

Incidentally, I found his comment that you refer to insulting.

[smurf]

The big mistake when things got low (if you accept that things had to chance when we could have stood firm and allowed Hughes to try and address it, which he surely would have done by now?) was to appoint someone who didn't make a difference.

Hughes had an awful Feb-May 2010.

The board stuck with him and backed him. The response was Hart, De Graf, Trakys & Duffy....

So I don't share your confidence in him turning it around. I was at his last game v St Johnstone. It was worse than Aberdeen on Sunday. Hughes stood clueless as what to do... no use of substitutes...

[Elephant Stone]

It's all abouit football though when all is said and done.

Last February when we went to Parkhead and beat Celtic we were inches off second place, getting talked about as title challengers, getting an average crowd around 13,000 or more, twenty points or so clear of Hearts and a new stand on the way.

Life couldn't get much better and there was an acceptance that all the hard work off the park was beginning to pay off and that we were where we should be.

Then football takes over, you get injuries, rubbish pitches, players lose confidence, losses turn to more losses and then it all goes the wrong way.

The big mistake when things got low (if you accept that things had to chance when we could have stood firm and allowed Hughes to try and address it, which he surely would have done by now?) was to appoint someone who didn't make a difference.

If we had at that stage got an uplift and then the new guy had made a few team changes in arease we lacked we could have quickly got the momentum going again. At the start of last season we were still getting great crowds with the new stand opening and all that and it could have all been built on.

Instead we've had to put up with turgid, boring football and not winning either, weve had the team ripped up and a new one in wth no change, that has turned people off again.

The off the filed stuff doesn't matter so much when things are going well. The board have backed CC with 14 new players so we can't say the off field stuff hasn't deleivered.

We ned to act quickly and it needs to be something that will get the fans imagination.

Even if CC does now slowly turn things back around, i think it would take a long, lomg time for the crowds to start coming back.

CC said at the weekend after one of the worst games ever, that if we scored in the last minute we'd all have gone home happy. I think he is badly misjudging us.

Spot on. If we need to rely on last minute goals after impotent performances- i.e Inverness- to win points then we're not good enough. We need to be performing convincingly before we can be satisfied. Calderwood can't possibly be the man to do it if he thinks like this.

[3pm]

It's all abouit football though when all is said and done.

Last February when we went to Parkhead and beat Celtic we were inches off second place, getting talked about as title challengers, getting an average crowd around 13,000 or more, twenty points or so clear of Hearts and a new stand on the way.

Life couldn't get much better and there was an acceptance that all the hard work off the park was beginning to pay off and that we were where we should be.

Then football takes over, you get injuries, rubbish pitches, players lose confidence, losses turn to more losses and then it all goes the wrong way.

The big mistake when things got low (if you accept that things had to chance when we could have stood firm and allowed Hughes to try and address it, which he surely would have done by now?) was to appoint someone who didn't make a difference.

If we had at that stage got an uplift and then the new guy had made a few team changes in arease we lacked we could have quickly got the momentum going again. At the start of last season we were still getting great crowds with the new stand opening and all that and it could have all been built on.

Instead we've had to put up with turgid, boring football and not winning either, weve had the team ripped up and a new one in wth no change, that has turned people off again.

The off the filed stuff doesn't matter so much when things are going well. The board have backed CC with 14 new players so we can't say the off field stuff hasn't deleivered.

We ned to act quickly and it needs to be something that will get the fans imagination.

Even if CC does now slowly turn things back around, i think it would take a long, lomg time for the crowds to start coming back.

CC said at the weekend after one of the worst games ever, that if we scored in the last minute we'd all have gone home happy. I think he is badly misjudging us.

When Hibs were winning under Hughes, they weren't playing well. Results based on those performances were never going to be maintained - and so it proved. The only thing amazing about John Hughes was how he managed to get us into 2nd place in the first place.

[BEEJ]

The big mistake when things got low (if you accept that things had to chance when we could have stood firm and allowed Hughes to try and address it, which he surely would have done by now?) was to appoint someone who didn't make a difference.
Not this ruddy crusade of yours again!? :no way:

This has become an obsession. :greengrin


CC said at the weekend after one of the worst games ever, that if we scored in the last minute we'd all have gone home happy. I think he is badly misjudging us.
:agree: This part I agree with entirely.


Hughes had an awful Feb-May 2010.

The board stuck with him and backed him. The response was Hart, De Graf, Trakys & Duffy....

So I don't share your confidence in him turning it around. I was at his last game v St Johnstone. It was worse than Aberdeen on Sunday. Hughes stood clueless as what to do... no use of substitutes...
Spot on. :top marks

There are none so blind etc etc

[Craig_in_Prague]

When Hibs were winning under Hughes, they weren't playing well. Results based on those performances were never going to be maintained - and so it proved. The only thing amazing about John Hughes was how he managed to get us into 2nd place in the first place.

TBF to Yogi at times we were good to watch. We went to Ibrox with Stokes and Benji up top, with Deeks left and Zouma right, we played well and got a 1-1 draw. Although I wasn't a fan of Deeks on the left, the almost 4-2-4 at times was quite exciting. Home to D UTD was another oustanding performance (mainly coz of Zouma), but we were nice to watch. Hammered Hamilton 5-1 too. Could you see us hitting 5 soon?

I am well aware how crap it became under Hughes, but I do wonder like Andy if the wholesome changes were really needed when it appears we've actually gone back the way.

[IWasThere2016]

I suspect it'll be the most interesting and best attended one I've been to :greengrin

Not impossible! I'd certainly be surprised if there isn't an announcement of some sort regarding RP.

:agree: + :pray: respectively.


You know, the way this has panned out is really quite sad. I quite liked the stubborn silence from an efficient board that told the media to go 'F' themselves and with Mowbray we appeared to be heading in the right direction: Manager, team, board and fans - we were all in it together! However, something insidious and sinister has occurred and has taken all that hard work painfully and slowly down over the past five years! Just look at us now, we are all at odds, fans are catogrised and marginalised; managers come and go; Board are getting tight (deservedly so in some instances) And; to round it all off, the teams rubbish and languishing at the bottom of the table!

Who would have thought!?

Continious regression .. the 'leaders' should go - it would happen elsewhere ..


Hughes had an awful Feb-May 2010.

The board stuck with him and backed him. The response was Hart, De Graf, Trakys & Duffy....

So I don't share your confidence in him turning it around. I was at his last game v St Johnstone. It was worse than Aberdeen on Sunday. Hughes stood clueless as what to do... no use of substitutes...

:top marks

[greenlex]

Maybe the wrong thread but if we beat St Johnstone in our game in hand we sit in 8th place just 2 points off top six after the worst start I can remember for a while. Calderwood can turn this round and it wont take much. A review in the summer about playing style might be in order though.:greengrin

[down the slope]

Maybe the wrong thread but if we beat St Johnstone in our game in hand we sit in 8th place just 2 points off top six after the worst start I can remember for a while. Calderwood can turn this round and it wont take much. A review in the summer about playing style might be in order though.:greengrin



Aye with the flowing football that we have been so unlucky with, your stance regarding the manager is admirable but what is it based on , not a glimmer of anything to show that better times are round the corner and even if we manage a win there will another seven defeats after that. This has to stop now , massive changes are needed at ER and not just the manager.

[Speedway]

TBF to Yogi at times we were good to watch. We went to Ibrox with Stokes and Benji up top, with Deeks left and Zouma right, we played well and got a 1-1 draw. Although I wasn't a fan of Deeks on the left, the almost 4-2-4 at times was quite exciting. Home to D UTD was another oustanding performance (mainly coz of Zouma), but we were nice to watch. Hammered Hamilton 5-1 too. Could you see us hitting 5 soon? I am well aware how crap it became under Hughes, but I do wonder like Andy if the wholesome changes were really needed when it appears we've actually gone back the way.

Maybe in a cup competition.

[Craig_in_Prague]

Maybe in a cup competition.

smart alex!

clearly i mean in SPL, where 1 goal a game looks like a lot to hope for.

[God Petrie]

When is the AGM this year?

Can't remember if I've got a copy of the accounts with the invitation thing this year or not.

[Hibs Class]

When is the AGM this year?

Can't remember if I've got a copy of the accounts with the invitation thing this year or not.

Papers aren't out yet but I'd guess either 3 or 10 October.