PDA

View Full Version : Chief Exec Interview in the EEN



Andy74
21-01-2011, 12:11 PM
http://edinburghnews.scotsman.com/hibernianfc/Hibs-chief-executive-Lindsay-hits.6698158.jp?articlepage=1

Okay, let's have it.

1two
21-01-2011, 12:16 PM
http://edinburghnews.scotsman.com/hibernianfc/Hibs-chief-executive-Lindsay-hits.6698158.jp?articlepage=1

Okay, let's have it.

I'll start

Who was responsible for sanctioning these transfers and when will they be handing in there notice given the current farcical position we find ourself in?

RIP
21-01-2011, 12:18 PM
Don't think there been many sensible Hibs fans seeking to run us further into debt

So it's nonsense to say it's about spalshing the cash

The problems at Hibs are a lot more fundamental than paying transfer fees

matty_f
21-01-2011, 12:18 PM
http://edinburghnews.scotsman.com/hibernianfc/Hibs-chief-executive-Lindsay-hits.6698158.jp?articlepage=1

Okay, let's have it.

This should be fun!:greengrin

matty_f
21-01-2011, 12:20 PM
I'll start

Who was responsible for sanctioning these transfers and when will they be handing in there notice given the current farcical position we find ourself in?

:greengrin Who should pick what players we sign - managers or the board?

The manager picked them (as I feel he should), and he went.

Calderwood is now picking up the pieces.

Jim44
21-01-2011, 12:20 PM
"Hibs have spent more in transfer fees over the past four years than any club outwith the Old Firm, chief executive Scott Lindsay claimed today as he sought to dispel the perception that the Easter Road club's current woes have been precipitated by penny-pinching."

That's a a clear indictment of our team management/scouting over the last four years.

Bizzle14
21-01-2011, 12:23 PM
"It's just not true to say we have not invested in the squad. We have spent, in the last four years, in the region of £3 million in fees to bring talent to the club."

That statement is a bit concerning! 3 Million, anyone care to have a guess at the breakdown??!!

The Voice Of Reason
21-01-2011, 12:23 PM
"We have spent, in the last four years, in the region of £3 million in fees to bring talent to the club".

Does he mean on transfer fees and/or lump sum payments to players (signing on fees) ?

Wonder what "in the region of" means ?!?

Who have we spent money on ?

Mikey
21-01-2011, 12:24 PM
I don't know why the club bothers to communicate with the fans. As soon as they say anything there's a baying mob looking for a negative slant to what's been said.

Gatecrasher
21-01-2011, 12:25 PM
He wants to bring players to the club he genuinely believes have the right attributes, the right mentality for what lies ahead for the rest of the season, players he believes will make a difference on the park and, of course, it goes without saying, ability.

something the last 2 or 3 managers didnt do imo

maybe they thought they had the right attributes but instead lacked it

matty_f
21-01-2011, 12:26 PM
"It's just not true to say we have not invested in the squad. We have spent, in the last four years, in the region of £3 million in fees to bring talent to the club."

That statement is a bit concerning! 3 Million, anyone care to have a guess at the breakdown??!!

I think the biggest breakdown of the 3 Million is the one I have whenever I watch us at the moment!:greengrin


I don't know why the club bothers to communicate with the fans. As soon as they say anything there's a baying mob looking for a negative slant to what's been said.

:top marks

"You should spend more money"

"We've spent £3m"

"F*** off anyway, etc.":greengrin

The Voice Of Reason
21-01-2011, 12:27 PM
I don't know why the club bothers to communicate with the fans. As soon as they say anything there's a baying mob looking for a negative slant to what's been said.

I think that is harsh.

Andy 74 (aka Rodders :greengrin) invited comments and that is what we are getting.

I personally wonder how on earth we have spent so much, on whom and how the money is broken down - does he mean transfer fees and/or signing on fees ?

Bad Martini
21-01-2011, 12:29 PM
"Hibs have spent more in transfer fees over the past four years than any club outwith the Old Firm, chief executive Scott Lindsay claimed today as he sought to dispel the perception that the Easter Road club's current woes have been precipitated by penny-pinching."

How much did we spend on the most important person at the club in terms of both ON the field and OFF the field impact??? Remind us again how much money we spent on our MANAGERS? All of whom were appointed by our wonderful board??? Exactly. Cheap/Popular option - EVERY time!!!

"A shock Scottish Cup exit at the hands of Second Divison Ayr United, allied to a lowly tenth place in the SPL table, just four points above basement outfit Hamilton, have led to calls for Hibs to "splash the cash" to support manager Colin Calderwood.

But in an exclusive interview with the Evening News today, Lindsay insisted that's exactly what Hibs have been doing for years, backing successive managers to the hilt, both in the transfer market and with an annual increase in money spent on players' wages.

And he declared the board of directors' intention to back Calderwood all the way in providing the cash to bring new players in during the current transfer window the first, as we reveal on our back page today, being Nottingham Forest midfielder Matt Thornhill."

Hope the new laddie does well. Know nothing much about him so reserve judgement. We've spent all this money yet have a sheite squad and a sheite team??? Who's to blame. Is it the players? Yep. In part. Is it the manager. Yep, in PART. Who appointed the managers who SPLASHED this cash the board are giving out and wasted it given we've got sheite in our squad??? The board...


"Hibs have been held up as a shining example of how a football club should be run, driving down debt over recent years while investing millions in both their East Mains Training Centre, and the new 6400 capacity East Stand at Easter Road, thanks, to a great degree, by the sale of players such as Garry O'Connor, Scott Brown, Kevin Thomson, Steven Whittaker and Steven Fletcher."

How much did we make on these transfers? Ball park...seriously??? Versus what we done with it on the PITCH???


"However, their financial prudence has also been interpreted in some quarters as parsimony, an unwillingness to invest in fresh talent and a perception that Hibs players earn less than elsewhere.

"That's absolutely not the case," insisted Lindsay, "It's just not true to say we have not invested in the squad. We have spent, in the last four years, in the region of £3 million in fees to bring talent to the club."

THREE MILLION POUND back on the PITCH. The rest, used (yes, wisely) but IMHO, wrongly. On the pitch is what matters. That's why our expensive new stand has rarely been full.


"I look at other clubs in the League and I'm not sure if anyone outwith Rangers and Celtic will have spent that much."

So, we've "spent" it or WASTED it???

It's done us a lot of good over the other teams, notwithstanding, celtic and rangers hasn't it?

Not happy with this excuse of an interview.

Whatever way you cut it, the board are responsible for either:

1) Putting in the wrong manager (IMHO) who didnt use the money wisely
2) Not giving enough
3) Investing in the wrong things and getting the balance wrong

I think, a bit of all 3 are to blame here.


Nobody said they had spent no money. Lots of opinion as to what should have been spent where, how much and whom was allowed to spend it. AND THAT, is down to our wonderful, untouchable and almost Godly board.

ENDOF

derekHFC
21-01-2011, 12:31 PM
So now that the board isnt to blame, who is next in the firing line? :devil:

Gatecrasher
21-01-2011, 12:32 PM
I don't know why the club bothers to communicate with the fans. As soon as they say anything there's a baying mob looking for a negative slant to what's been said.
:top marks

People got answers to the questions they were asking and they are still moaning :rolleyes:

ScottB
21-01-2011, 12:34 PM
I think that is harsh.

Andy 74 (aka Rodders :greengrin) invited comments and that is what we are getting.

I personally wonder how on earth we have spent so much, on whom and how the money is broken down - does he mean transfer fees and/or signing on fees ?

We probably signed the best part of 20-30 players under Mixu and Hughes, that quickly racks up.

Big fees were presumably Riordan and Stokes, dunno if Mark Brown cost anything. Miller would be a big sum if that includes signing on fees etc.

ScottB
21-01-2011, 12:36 PM
[B]How much did we spend on the most important person at the club in terms of both ON the field and OFF the field impact??? Remind us again how much money we spent on our MANAGERS? All of whom were appointed by our wonderful board??? Exactly. Cheap/Popular option - EVERY time!!!


That will be why CC cost a 6 figure sum to release from Newcastle and this place was groaning with 'we want CC now threads!' then aye?

blackpoolhibs
21-01-2011, 12:40 PM
Its as i have been saying for a while, we do back each manager to the best of our ability. We are more than competitive with ever club bar the obvious. The team we see on the pitch is down to successive managers not being good enough. The board have done their best, where they fail is in the men they appoint to manage the team.

Ray_
21-01-2011, 12:42 PM
I don't know why the club bothers to communicate with the fans. As soon as they say anything there's a baying mob looking for a negative slant to what's been said.

That is because we are in the position where we are, if what has been said is true & that we have had 85 players in, in the last five years, it is little wonder that it has cost us £3M. A great many of the players have ended up in the position where we are now, waiting to be shipped out as dead wood, a position the club always seems to find ourselves in. Clearly there is something wrong with the stategy.

Managers buy players, within budget & its clear we have hired the wrong managers or gave them the wrong budget, or both. But whatever way it is, the club's spiral has been going down rapidly, over the last three years & last years false position fooled very few at just how bad we were.

Off course, all of the above reflects the performance of the club as a business & while assets being sold accounted for much of the debt and the infrastructure, but the fact with the bread and butter part of the business, we are losing serious money year on year, which is a direct result of on pitch performances, which are directly influenced by board level decisions..

greenlex
21-01-2011, 12:44 PM
Folk wanted answers and have got them the last two days.
Folk don't like the answers and still moan.
I wish to **** they would get over it and get behind what is trying to be achieved here.
A club that is bring run in a sustainable fashion and doing tge best it can whilst doing that.
Aye the last 2 managers have been a mistake with hindsight but there cam be no doubt the club is going in the right direction.
Stop your moaning and get behind what's going on here.
Get behind your club. Get behind your team. Let's get out this position we find ourselves.

Bad Martini
21-01-2011, 12:44 PM
That will be why CC cost a 6 figure sum to release from Newcastle and this place was groaning with 'we want CC now threads!' then aye?

My point here is simple.

IMHO (key being MY opinion) we put the wrong manager in not once, not twice but three times.

Think of the money we'd have had, if we'd gotten the right team on the pitch, which almost always comes by putting in the right man in the dugout. I don't think Mixu was right at that time, mistake one. I don' think Hughes was right either, mistake two. And, before he came I said the same - I dont think Calderwood is right either.

Cards on the table; I'd have preferred a decent, proven, solid manager the first time round. Someone like, Jimmy Calderwood. Some like, Jeffries putting aside the yamishness and his Fat Jim Knew stupidity.....not saying HIM or either of them, but someone like that. I dont think it would have cost us all that much to get someone of that ilk or (ideally) far better. What I do know is, there were more sensible/expensive/less popular options out there but we didn't take them....

This, would have allowed us to steady the ship, take far less of a risk, get someone who could motivate and work with less resources initially then build from there. But, we didn't do that. We put in the big man. Then we replaced him with Yogi who had done what precisely and was a side-step, not, a forward step IMHO. Topped it off with Calderwood who, I don't entirely blame for the state we're in now. He was cleaning up the mess Hughes made but even WITHOUT that, I still don't think he was the man.

It all harks back to the manager I feel and that harks back to the people putting IN the manager. We got it wrong a record three times in my most honest opinion and THEN, it went wrong as they've all (yes had money) but in the main (give or a take a few good/decent signings) signed rubbish.

The facts now are, we are paying for this on the pitch. Which is why we're out both cups, the Europa and looking very shoddy in the league. We could have played Ayr for another 3 hours and we still wouldn't have scored and we find out today that Calderwood actually DROPPED our most consistent player for no real good reason!?!?! WTF.

Managerial **** ups are why we're here, now coupled with a team and squad who are rock bottom on confidence and a club that seems to have no idea how the **** to get out of it and soon.

Not exactly braw fun now is it !

smurf
21-01-2011, 12:46 PM
:top marks

People got answers to the questions they were asking and they are still moaning :rolleyes:

But is it an answer? Or is it just clever spin?

Surely it merits debate? Or is that not the purpose of this or indeed any other forum?

I don't doubt that what Scott Lindsay says is true. I'm sure it's all in the accounts.

The impression given though from this EEN interview is that we have spent £3 Million on buying players.

I suspect though that it's a figure that includes agents fees, signing on fees and indeed salaries.

So instead of Kenny Miller being a 400K signing for that Turkish mob he's actually a £10 Million signing....

blackpoolhibs
21-01-2011, 12:47 PM
That is because we are in the position where we are, if what has been said is true & that we have had 85 players in, in the last five years, it is little wonder that it has cost us £3M. A great many of the players have ended up in the position where we are now, waiting to be shipped out as dead wood, a position the club always seems to find ourselves in. Clearly there is something wrong with the stategy.

Managers buy players, within budget & its clear we have hired the wrong managers or gave them the wrong budget, or both. But whatever way it is, the club's spiral has been going down rapidly, over the last three years & last years false position fooled very few at just how bad we were.

Off course, all of the above reflects the performance of the club as a business & while assets being sold accounted for much of the debt and the infrastructure, but the fact with the bread and butter part of the business, we are losing serious money year on year, which is a direct result of on pitch performances, which are directly influenced by board level decisions..

Falkirkhibs had a look at all the other SPL sides during the same period, and we were average in players coming in. There were a lot of teams with a higher input than us.

Gatecrasher
21-01-2011, 12:49 PM
But is it an answer? Or is it just clever spin?

Surely it merits debate? Or is that not the purpose of this or indeed any other forum?

I don't doubt that what Scott Lindsay says is true. I'm sure it's all in the accounts.

The impression given though from this EEN interview is that we have spent £3 Million on buying players.

I suspect though that it's a figure that includes agents fees, signing on fees and indeed salaries.

So instead of Kenny Miller being a 400K signing for that Turkish mob he's actually a £10 Million signing....

Up dor debate? sure why not.

but IMO it puts to bed the board dont back the Manager arguements, but the Managers we have appoint since Mowbray that have been wrong. I do think they have it right this time though.

also i think the board should be applauded for coming out and giving the fans some idea of whats going on. The Statement released on the official site and now this have put to bed some concerns i had.

marinello59
21-01-2011, 12:53 PM
But is it an answer? Or is it just clever spin?

Surely it merits debate? Or is that not the purpose of this or indeed any other forum?

I don't doubt that what Scott Lindsay says is true. I'm sure it's all in the accounts.

The impression given though from this EEN interview is that we have spent £3 Million on buying players.

I suspect though that it's a figure that includes agents fees, signing on fees and indeed salaries.

So instead of Kenny Miller being a 400K signing for that Turkish mob he's actually a £10 Million signing....

So is he lying when he says we have probably spent more than any team outside of the Old Firm? Debate is one thing, rejecting something because you just don't want to hear it is something else entirely.

ScottB
21-01-2011, 12:57 PM
But is it an answer? Or is it just clever spin?

Surely it merits debate? Or is that not the purpose of this or indeed any other forum?

I don't doubt that what Scott Lindsay says is true. I'm sure it's all in the accounts.

The impression given though from this EEN interview is that we have spent £3 Million on buying players.

I suspect though that it's a figure that includes agents fees, signing on fees and indeed salaries.

So instead of Kenny Miller being a 400K signing for that Turkish mob he's actually a £10 Million signing....

Behave! There's no way that £3million includes all the wages we've paid every player we've signed in the last 3 seasons.

As for agents fees, signing on fees and the like, so what if they are included. Are they not part of the costs of buying a player? Or just not when it doesn't suit your 'the Board is tight' argument?

greenlex
21-01-2011, 12:57 PM
Whether the 3 million or thereabouts includes signing on or agents fees is immaterial for me. Fact is we have spent money. Folk were busy saying we sign frees and I have consistently pointed out there would be a signing on fee involved.
If 3 million is what we could afford that's what we spent.

PaulSmith
21-01-2011, 12:58 PM
Hughes "I didn't spend a penny on transfer fees at Easter Road"

Lyndsay "We bought Riordan and Stokes for transfer fees"

Immaterial I suppose, I'm not going to criticise the Board for both the Chairman and the CEO coming out and speaking to the fans through the EEN and official web site. I hope it's something that they continue to do from now until the end of their tenure.

The £3m figure will be used as a stick now to beat anyone that dares to question the Board, fair enough I suppose but I do not believe that this figure has been paid out in transfer fee's alone which the acticle suggests.

It doesn't however change my view that the Board are wholly culpable for our current prediciment and the next 6 months transfer activity will be very enlightening IMO.

IWasThere2016
21-01-2011, 01:02 PM
Hughes "I didn't spend a penny on transfer fees at Easter Road"

Lyndsay "We bought Riordan and Stokes for transfer fees"

Immaterial I suppose, I'm not going to criticise the Board for both the Chairman and the CEO coming out and speaking to the fans through the EEN and official web site. I hope it's something that they continue to do from now until the end of their tenure.

The £3m figure will be used as a stick now to beat anyone that dares to question the Board, fair enough I suppose but I do not believe that this figure has been paid out in transfer fee's alone which the acticle suggests.

It doesn't however change my view that the Board are wholly culpable for our current prediciment and the next 6 months transfer activity will be very enlightening IMO.

:agree:

--------
21-01-2011, 01:03 PM
:greengrin Who should pick what players we sign - managers or the board?

The manager picked them (as I feel he should), and he went.

Calderwood is now picking up the pieces.


A process made infinitely more difficult by the ridiculous situation we're now in with 15-16 first-team squad players out of contract all at the one time in June. A situation that MUST have been sanctioned by the board, surely?


"Thornhill's arrival is the first of what, the News believes, will be a number of new faces at Easter Road before the transfer window closes at the end of this month with Hibs said to be in talks with Inverness Caledonian Thistle striker Adam Rooney, although the club refused to comment on what they described as 'speculation.' However, it was being made clear the imminent signing of Thornhill was no knee-jerk reaction to Hibs' shock Scottish Cup exit at the hands of Second Division Ayr United, with Calderwood having made approaches on several fronts only to find himself foiled by circumstance."

I notice that MT is spoken of as a young player with a 'good work-ethic'. That's welcome news - we have too many wasters, chancers and and lazy-boys around ER right now.

If CC manages to bring in another 3/4 players with a good work-ethic and a real willingness to fight for the club's SPL place, then we may yet get out of the mess we're in.

But one thing needs to happen - Petrie and Lindsay have to make it plain that Hibs players are expected to practice professional fitness standards and living habits - the sort of living habits serious professional sportsmen practice. And it has to show on the park.

I guarantee that if the team shows up at Fir Park, gets stuck in and gives 100%, and then does so again and again through the rest of the season, the fans will be off their backs and behind them right away.

blackpoolhibs
21-01-2011, 01:04 PM
Transfer fee's i can remember are roughly.

O'Brien £350k
Maka £200k
Nish £100k
Rankin£100k
Bamba £80-120k
Plus signing on fee's for free transfers.
Feel free to add.

matty_f
21-01-2011, 01:05 PM
A process made infinitely more difficult by the ridiculous situation we're now in with 15-16 first-team squad players out of contract all at the one time in June. A situation that MUST have been sanctioned by the board, surely?


"Thornhill's arrival is the first of what, the News believes, will be a number of new faces at Easter Road before the transfer window closes at the end of this month with Hibs said to be in talks with Inverness Caledonian Thistle striker Adam Rooney, although the club refused to comment on what they described as 'speculation.' However, it was being made clear the imminent signing of Thornhill was no knee-jerk reaction to Hibs' shock Scottish Cup exit at the hands of Second Division Ayr United, with Calderwood having made approaches on several fronts only to find himself foiled by circumstance."

I notice that MT is spoken of as a young player with a 'good work-ethic'. That's welcome news - we have too many wasters, chancers and piss-artists around ER right now.

If CC manages to bring in another 3/4 players with a good work-ethic and a real willingness to fight for the club's SPL place, then we may yet get out of the mess we're in.

But one thing needs to happen - Petrie and Lindsay have to make it plain that Hibs players are expected to practice professional fitness standards and living habits - the sort of living habits serious professional sportsmen practice. And it has to show on the park.

I guarantee that if the team shows up at Fir Park, gets stuck in and gives 100%, and then does so again and again through the rest of the season, the fans will be off their backs and behind them right away.

It was sanctioned by the board, to do otherwise would have meant they were signing players the manager did not necessarily want to keep. Are you suggesting they should do that?

marinello59
21-01-2011, 01:05 PM
Hughes "I didn't spend a penny on transfer fees at Easter Road"

Lyndsay "We bought Riordan and Stokes for transfer fees"

Immaterial I suppose, I'm not going to criticise the Board for both the Chairman and the CEO coming out and speaking to the fans through the EEN and official web site. I hope it's something that they continue to do from now until the end of their tenure.

The £3m figure will be used as a stick now to beat anyone that dares to question the Board, fair enough I suppose but I do not believe that this figure has been paid out in transfer fee's alone which the acticle suggests.

It doesn't however change my view that the Board are wholly culpable for our current prediciment and the next 6 months transfer activity will be very enlightening IMO.

Sorry, I really don't understand the complaint here. It quite clearly says the transfers cost us £3 million. Who got what as part of the costs is totally irrelevant. In fact your whole post borders on hilarious.

Anybody who dares to question the board (AWDQB) - Tight gits, why don't you spend some dosh on players.
The Board - Actually we spent £3 million.
AWDQB - You only did that so you could use it as a stick to beat us with for bravely questioning why you haven't spent any money.

matty_f
21-01-2011, 01:06 PM
I think the biggest breakdown of the 3 Million is the one I have whenever I watch us at the moment!:greengrin



:top marks

"You should spend more money"

"We've spent £3m"

"F*** off anyway, etc.":greengrin


Hughes "I didn't spend a penny on transfer fees at Easter Road"

Lyndsay "We bought Riordan and Stokes for transfer fees"

Immaterial I suppose, I'm not going to criticise the Board for both the Chairman and the CEO coming out and speaking to the fans through the EEN and official web site. I hope it's something that they continue to do from now until the end of their tenure.

The £3m figure will be used as a stick now to beat anyone that dares to question the Board, fair enough I suppose but I do not believe that this figure has been paid out in transfer fee's alone which the acticle suggests.

It doesn't however change my view that the Board are wholly culpable for our current prediciment and the next 6 months transfer activity will be very enlightening IMO.


:agree:

:whistle:

(Just a joke guys, I know you're serious about your points:agree:)

smurf
21-01-2011, 01:06 PM
Transfer fee's i can remember are roughly.

O'Brien £350k
Maka £200k
Nish £100k
Rankin£100k
Bamba £80-120k

Feel free to add.

Can I add that two of they five were signed by the board?

--------
21-01-2011, 01:08 PM
Transfer fee's i can remember are roughly.

O'Brien £350k
Maka £200k
Nish £100k
Rankin£100k
Bamba £80-120k

Feel free to add.

I assume that he may be referring to signing fees paid to the players as an inducement to sign?

The problem with that is that if a player gets a nice juicy fee for signing, and if that fee's a sizeable percentage of his remuneration for playing for the club, he doesn't have that much of an incentive to work very hard, does he?

He's banked his money and can sit back and enjoy it... :rolleyes:

khib70
21-01-2011, 01:08 PM
I don't know why the club bothers to communicate with the fans. As soon as they say anything there's a baying mob looking for a negative slant to what's been said.
And a cheerleading squad uncritically accepting every word they say.:rolleyes:

Not to mention questioning the loyalty/intelligence/sanity of any one who dares to dissent.

Both Petrie and Lindsay's statements are exactly what I would expect them to say, and are essentially a combination of spin-doctoring and patronising "Hibernian family" and "let's all pull together" slogans.

Full marks to the PR department, both in the boardroom, and on this board.

Bad Martini
21-01-2011, 01:09 PM
The £3m figure will be used as a stick now to beat anyone that dares to question the Board, fair enough I suppose but I do not believe that this figure has been paid out in transfer fee's alone which the acticle suggests.

It doesn't however change my view that the Board are wholly culpable for our current prediciment and the next 6 months transfer activity will be very enlightening IMO.

:agree: ... nail on heid mate.


But one thing needs to happen - Petrie and Lindsay have to make it plain that Hibs players are expected to practice professional fitness standards and living habits - the sort of living habits serious professional sportsmen practice. [B] And it has to show on the park.

I guarantee that if the team shows up at Fir Park, gets stuck in and gives 100%, and then does so again and again through the rest of the season, the fans will be off their backs and behind them right away.

Also agree with this :agree:

What pisses me off is, this is the same ideals John Collins wanted - the last manager we had to actually win anything. No coincidence.

I genuinely believe had we ditched TC and JC stayed where he was with a far better number two, a motivator and people person we'd have had a great combination.

That's by the by now though. We are here now and we definitely need someone to both motivate this team AND give them a kick up the arse.

The fact there are so many people all but out of a job yet doing little to impress says one of two things:
1) They dont care and want to go....
2) They think they can get away with it...

Regardless of which, it should be a case of:

3) Play your ***** off and get us up the league or you're all out the door come June.

Simple as that, for me.

marinello59
21-01-2011, 01:11 PM
And a cheerleading squad uncritically accepting every word they say.:rolleyes:

Not to mention questioning the loyalty/intelligence/sanity of any one who dares to dissent.

Both Petrie and Lindsay's statements are exactly what I would expect them to say, and are essentially a combination of spin-doctoring and patronising "Hibernian family" and "let's all pull together" slogans.

Full marks to the PR department, both in the boardroom, and on this board.

What do you want them to say then?

smurf
21-01-2011, 01:11 PM
And a cheerleading squad uncritically accepting every word they say.:rolleyes:

Not to mention questioning the loyalty/intelligence/sanity of any one who dares to dissent.

Both Petrie and Lindsay's statements are exactly what I would expect them to say, and are essentially a combination of spin-doctoring and patronising "Hibernian family" and "let's all pull together" slogans.

Full marks to the PR department, both in the boardroom, and on this board.

I agree fully. Obviously...

greenlex
21-01-2011, 01:12 PM
I assume that he may be referring to signing fees paid to the players as an inducement to sign?

The problem with that is that if a player gets a nice juicy fee for signing, and if that fee's a sizeable percentage of his remuneration for playing for the club, he doesn't have that much of an incentive to work very hard, does he?

He's banked his money and can sit back and enjoy it... :rolleyes:
Like Stokes and Riordan have like?
Do you really think it would be better to sign free transfers on bigger wages per say

Cropley10
21-01-2011, 01:12 PM
I don't know why the club bothers to communicate with the fans. As soon as they say anything there's a baying mob looking for a negative slant to what's been said.

Which might not be the case if say we're sitting clear in 3rd tucked in behind the 2nd place team, with say 26 points between us and Hertz?

Captain Trips
21-01-2011, 01:15 PM
£3m is a higher figure than I would have thought how it is broken down I dont know but I do not for 1 second think it not to be a fact or we spent more than all the rest of the SPL.

I though leaves a few issues, firstly yeah it would appear we back our managers but so might every other club, we have taken in a hell of a lot more than all the other SPL teams but do we know what they spent? is £3m a distinct advantage considering all the fees we got? Other clubs might have spent £2m, £2.5m for all we know. All of that £3m we got from just 1 sale say in SF.

Is the £3m from us running the club very well or was it greatly helped with transfer fees? If it is not from any fees then it truly is excellent work and its a pity things have not went better if a huge portion is from fees I do have a worry

What does worry me is if the £3m was helped by transfer fees and thats fine btw glad it got reinvested what of the next 3 or 4 years, out of all of the players we bought in that time we are about to maybe lose a fair amount for free, if we spend £3m on players then you simply have to ensure you pick up 2 or 3 players with a great resell value. This £3m was backed by several multi million pound sales and with a few with that same potential.

If the £3m figure is just club turnaround then great no reason for it to change over next few years, if it was helped with trabsfers then will it be less we spend at a time we probably need more than before.

IMO the money has been pretty much wasted on losing players for free and players whom failed to do anything and we got very little money for this leaves us in a position of no real players worth money, our squad as of today IMO based on contract lengths mostly but on ability does not justify the money spent, be lucky to get £3m for all of them.

We dont get these fees back it looks like they have gone, the managers have failed to utilise the money they have been given but the board have failed to make the right appointments and along with surely seeing the teams value go down to what we have now.

We are what out the cup and in a relegation situation after spending all this? As I said will it be £3m again in next few years? I think a few folk need to look at their input in the big decisions and maybe step away from club, its a mess.

smurf
21-01-2011, 01:22 PM
Ok I know... I can't help myself...

3 Million over 4 years the board say rather triumphantly and defiantly....

2 Million over the same time period has been THEIR cost to the club for their services.

Just a thought...

greenlex
21-01-2011, 01:22 PM
And a cheerleading squad uncritically accepting every word they say.:rolleyes:

Not to mention questioning the loyalty/intelligence/sanity of any one who dares to dissent.

Both Petrie and Lindsay's statements are exactly what I would expect them to say, and are essentially a combination of spin-doctoring and patronising "Hibernian family" and "let's all pull together" slogans.

Full marks to the PR department, both in the boardroom, and on this board.

Well you know something why dont you just stay away. Your negative meanderings are not helping. Yes question what's going on. Yes question what you want but when you get the answer either get on board or you should **** off and go shopping at the weekend.

khib70
21-01-2011, 01:22 PM
What do you want them to say then?
Any kind of admission that they got at least something wrong would be a start.

And did they mention how much has been raised in transfer fees, add-ons etc over that period?

Thought not

Ray_
21-01-2011, 01:22 PM
Falkirkhibs had a look at all the other SPL sides during the same period, and we were average in players coming in. There were a lot of teams with a higher input than us.

So they be doing the wrong thing as well, but they are still out performing us & few pay as much as we do to hire senior staff to make sure we don't keep on making the wrong decisions.

greenlex
21-01-2011, 01:24 PM
Any kind of admission that they got at least something wrong would be a start.

And did they mention how much has been raised in transfer fees, add-ons etc over that period?

Thought not
Read the reports from the AGM. Everything that comes in and goes out is in there.
FFS

PaulSmith
21-01-2011, 01:24 PM
Sorry, I really don't understand the complaint here. It quite clearly says the transfers cost us £3 million. Who got what as part of the costs is totally irrelevant. In fact your whole post borders on hilarious.

Anybody who dares to question the board (AWDQB) - Tight gits, why don't you spend some dosh on players.
The Board - Actually we spent £3 million.
AWDQB - You only did that so you could use it as a stick to beat us with for bravely questioning why you haven't spent any money.

"The whole post borders on hilarious."

What the bit about Hughes saying he didn't spend money on transfer fees and Lyndsey did?

or

The part about saying that they should be applauded for communicating to the fans and they should continue to do so.

or

The part about the Board being culpable for the prediciment that we find ourselves in. Player sales, manager merry-go-round, fan disenchantment etc

or

The part about questioning the article's interpretation that the club have spent £3m on transfer fees

Genuinely interested in your attempt to be-little someone who tries to contribute a different and decent view point.

Hibbyradge
21-01-2011, 01:28 PM
Transfer fee's i can remember are roughly.

O'Brien £350k
Maka £200k
Nish £100k
Rankin£100k
Bamba £80-120k
Plus signing on fee's for free transfers.
Feel free to add.

Riordan
Stokes

Hibbyradge
21-01-2011, 01:31 PM
Any kind of admission that they got at least something wrong would be a start.

And did they mention how much has been raised in transfer fees, add-ons etc over that period?

Thought not

Every time they sack a manager, they admit to getting something wrong, but why is it so important for you to have a bogeyman to blame?



And did they mention how much has been raised in transfer fees, add-ons etc over that period?



We know how much has been raised though. We also know how much debt has been paid off, how much the new stand cost to build and the training centre to buy and build.

khib70
21-01-2011, 01:32 PM
Well you know something why dont you just stay away. Your negative meanderings are not helping. Yes question what's going on. Yes question what you want but when you get the answer either get on board or you should **** off and go shopping at the weekend.
A really stupid post.

I'm not going to "stay away" because I support the team, and the club and have done all my life. That doesn't require me to support whoever happens to be occupying the boardroom at the time. Your attitude is reminiscent of the idea that criticism of the Bush government in America a few years ago was somehow unpatriotic. "You don't like the President, get the hell out of the country".

We can ask questions, according to you, provided we uncritically accept whatever answer the board's PR machine comes up with, or we're being disloyal and not proper Hibees like you.

Pathetic

Ray_
21-01-2011, 01:37 PM
Every time they sack a manager, they admit to getting something wrong, but why is it so important for you to have a bogeyman to blame?



We know how much has been raised though. We also know how much debt has been paid off, how much the new stand cost to build and the training centre to buy and build.

Debts & infrastructure are easy when you have assets to sell, providing a product to encourage growth has always been the difficult part of any business & this is the area where our highly paid board are seriously lacking.

marinello59
21-01-2011, 01:37 PM
"The whole post borders on hilarious."

What the bit about Hughes saying he didn't spend money on transfer fees and Lyndsey did?

Wasn't Hughes argument that he had a positive transfer balance therefore had not spent any money? That wouldn't conflict with the boards statement.

or

The part about saying that they should be applauded for communicating to the fans and they should continue to do so.

or

The part about the Board being culpable for the prediciment that we find ourselves in. Player sales, manager merry-go-round, fan disenchantment etc

So would sack cloth and ashes do it for you? Yes, the board has made mistakes but do you honestly think they are going to list them at this point?
or

The part about questioning the article's interpretation that the club have spent £3m on transfer fees

Are they lying then? The costs were £3million, that's what was spent. Whether it lined the players pockets, the agents pockets or went to the selling clubs bank balance doesn't matter.

Genuinely interested in your attempt to be-little someone who tries to contribute a different and decent view point.

Suggesting that the £3million figure was going to be used as a stick to beat 'those who dare' to question the board with is ludicrous. You could argue that they should spend more but your comment merely churlish as it does not fit your argument.
Different viewpoint? Read this messageboard, do you honestly think blaming the board for everything is a minority viewpoint?

greenlex
21-01-2011, 01:39 PM
A really stupid post.

I'm not going to "stay away" because I support the team, and the club and have done all my life. That doesn't require me to support whoever happens to be occupying the boardroom at the time. Your attitude is reminiscent of the idea that criticism of the Bush government in America a few years ago was somehow unpatriotic. "You don't like the President, get the hell out of the country".

We can ask questions, according to you, provided we uncritically accept whatever answer the board's PR machine comes up with, or we're being disloyal and not proper Hibees like you.

Pathetic
Ok tell me what's not to like about both the statement yesterday and today's interview.

Ray_
21-01-2011, 01:42 PM
Ok tell me what's not to like about both the statement yesterday and today's interview.

Because the board have been making noises like that from day one & we still are where we are.

greenlex
21-01-2011, 01:50 PM
Because the board have been making noises like that from day one & we still are where we are.
So you don't like those noises?
What do you want then?
We have replaced the last two managers who when it became
aparant they couldn't take us where we want to be were let go.
We are spending more than anyone else bar the Old Firm and tge basket cases o er the road. We have a positive goal set.
Again what do you want done differently

Removed
21-01-2011, 01:55 PM
I don't know why the club bothers to communicate with the fans. As soon as they say anything there's a baying mob looking for a negative slant to what's been said.

:agree: However there is always the other side who will always defend the board no matter what they say.

marinello59
21-01-2011, 02:16 PM
:agree: However there is always the other side who will always defend the board no matter what they say.

There are plenty in the middle ground too.

Simon70
21-01-2011, 02:16 PM
Hughes "I didn't spend a penny on transfer fees at Easter Road"

Lyndsay "We bought Riordan and Stokes for transfer fees"



Riordan was a Mixu signing, so these statements are not conflicting.

khib70
21-01-2011, 02:21 PM
Ok tell me what's not to like about both the statement yesterday and today's interview.
That's a fair question.

Firstly the fact that it's taken what Scott Lindsay acknowledges is twelve months of underachievement on the pitch to get the Board to show serious concern about the situation. And they've only done that because there is major unrest among the fans, and that is being reflected in numbers at the turnstiles.

Secondly, as other posters have pointed out, it's merely repeating previous utterances. The classic themes are all there - "we are totally behind the manager" "we spend more than (insert names here)". "We're a family and we're all in it together".

I know that the exact figures are mainly available in the AGM reports, and I don't doubt that £3m has been paid out. However, in the same period, the sale of Scott Brown, Steven Fletcher, Sol Bamba and Anthony Stokes raised at least three times that figure, without taking add-ons into account. So the football side of the club has in fact been a loser to the tune of (conservatively) some £6 million in those four years alone. There's no point quoting balance sheet figures if you only quote one side of the balance, is there?

And yes, I know, there have been infrastructure improvements but my understanding is that the money for them didn't totally, or even mainly, come from player sales. And what's the point of building a super duper, state of the art factory, if the product your making is of poor quality and no-one wants to buy it?

We've heard these statements a dozen times about "backing the manager to the limit of our resources". Talk is cheap, like most of the signings made during this period.

I'll watch a hopeless Hibs team in preference to a team of any standard at any other club. But I want to watch a great Hibs team that has me buzzing about every forthcoming game. That's not going to happen with an accountancy-focussed Board who have long ago run out of ideas and imagination.

Barney McGrew
21-01-2011, 02:22 PM
:agree: However there is always the other side who will always defend the board no matter what they say.

And the vast majority who sit in the middle and accept that there's blame on both sides.

As usual though, when we go through a sticky patch the voices blaming the board get louder and louder, and when we're doing well the ones who think the board can't be touched tend to post more.

Ray_
21-01-2011, 02:27 PM
So you don't like those noises?
What do you want then?
We have replaced the last two managers who when it became
aparant they couldn't take us where we want to be were let go.
We are spending more than anyone else bar the Old Firm and tge basket cases o er the road. We have a positive goal set.
Again what do you want done differently

Noises are just that, noises & I think you are confusing spending with wasting, because a bulk of the money going out is on players & managers who are not up to it, whether it is wages, transfer fee's compensation, we are not getting it right with our choice of managers or journeymen players.

We should have invested what we had to, to get the right person in charge of the club, in a position that is far more important than the basic role Petrie & Co has been filling.

We need to invest in the best young talent that is available to us, even if it costs more, not the continuous conveyor belt of journeymen, who have little or no sell on value & even less appetite.

An example is our interest now in Rooney; he should have been signed, sealed & delivered before Stokes was allowed to move on. I can’t think of any occasion, when any of the big name players departed the club, where we brought in timely replacements that fitted the category of player that would have kept us moving forward.

Financially, we would have been far far worse off, if it wasn’t for the emergence of the golden generation & TM footballing philosophy, during the middle of the noughties. With cash pouring in not only from sales, but from the bread and butter side of the business as well.

Although the players that came through during the noughties, weren’t as good as their counterparts, at the end of the sixties & early seventies, they were certainly the best group of players since then & you have to go back to the late forties, for the next group, who were the best of the lot.

Only three times in over a hundred years have hibs produced such a large group of talented young players & without the financial benefits, of the most recent group, the boards reported fiscal success, wouldn’t be anywhere near as impressive as is overly stated on here & in the media.

greenlex
21-01-2011, 02:28 PM
That's a fair question.

Firstly the fact that it's taken what Scott Lindsay acknowledges is twelve months of underachievement on the pitch to get the Board to show serious concern about the situation. And they've only done that because there is major unrest among the fans, and that is being reflected in numbers at the turnstiles.

Secondly, as other posters have pointed out, it's merely repeating previous utterances. The classic themes are all there - "we are totally behind the manager" "we spend more than (insert names here)". "We're a family and we're all in it together".

I know that the exact figures are mainly available in the AGM reports, and I don't doubt that £3m has been paid out. However, in the same period, the sale of Scott Brown, Steven Fletcher, Sol Bamba and Anthony Stokes raised at least three times that figure, without taking add-ons into account. So the football side of the club has in fact been a loser to the tune of (conservatively) some £6 million in those four years alone. There's no point quoting balance sheet figures if you only quote one side of the balance, is there?

And yes, I know, there have been infrastructure improvements but my understanding is that the money for them didn't totally, or even mainly, come from player sales. And what's the point of building a super duper, state of the art factory, if the product your making is of poor quality and no-one wants to buy it?

We've heard these statements a dozen times about "backing the manager to the limit of our resources". Talk is cheap, like most of the signings made during this period.

I'll watch a hopeless Hibs team in preference to a team of any standard at any other club. But I want to watch a great Hibs team that has me buzzing about every forthcoming game. That's not going to happen with an accountancy-focussed Board who have long ago run out of ideas and imagination.

I am at work at the moment and on my phone. I will give you my comments tonight when I get home as I no doubt would **** it up using the phone.
I bet you can't wait.:)

Barney McGrew
21-01-2011, 02:33 PM
Only three times in over a hundred years have hibs produced such a large group of talented young players & without the financial benefits, of the most recent group, the boards reported fiscal success, wouldn’t be anywhere near as impressive as is overly stated on here & in the media.

It's also pretty easy to argue that without that group of players, we would still have the old East Stand and no East Mains because the club would not have had the finance to spend on developing them.

blackpoolhibs
21-01-2011, 02:33 PM
Noises are just that, noises & I think you are confusing spending with wasting, because a bulk of the money going out is on players & managers who are not up to it, whether it is wages, transfer fee's compensation, we are not getting it right with our choice of managers or journeymen players.

We should have invested what we had to, to get the right person in charge of the club, in a position that is far more important than the basic role Petrie & Co has been filling.

We need to invest in the best young talent that is available to us, even if it costs more, not the continuous conveyor belt of journeymen, who have little or no sell on value & even less appetite.

An example is our interest now in Rooney; he should have been signed, sealed & delivered before Stokes was allowed to move on. I can’t think of any occasion, when any of the big name players departed the club, where we brought in timely replacements that fitted the category of player that would have kept us moving forward.

Financially, we would have been far far worse of, if it wasn’t for the emergence of the golden generation & TM footballing philosophy, during the middle of the noughties. With cash pouring in not only from sales, but from the bread and butter side of the business as well.

Although the players that came through during the noughties, weren’t as good as their counterparts, at the end of the sixties & early seventies, they were certainly the best group of players since then & you have to go back to the late forties, for the next group, who were the best of the lot.

Only three times in over a hundred years have hibs produced such a large group of talented young players & without the financial benefits, of the most recent group, the boards reported fiscal success, wouldn’t be anywhere near as impressive as is overly stated on here & in the media.

That we will agree on, although each manager we have appointed was warmly cheered into office by the majority of the fans. And those who didn't want any of them didn't give us anyone who could do better, and even if they did, could rest in the knowledge their idea would never be put to the test. It still does not make up for the fact they have got the managers wrong.

PaulSmith
21-01-2011, 02:39 PM
Riordan was a Mixu signing, so these statements are not conflicting.

Simon, the common denominator though is Stokes....

matty_f
21-01-2011, 02:40 PM
That we will agree on, although each manager we have appointed was warmly cheered into office by the majority of the fans. And those who didn't want any of them didn't give us anyone who could do better, and even if they did, could rest in the knowledge their idea would never be put to the test. It still does not make up for the fact they have got the managers wrong.

How many clubs get their manager right, consistently though?

Even those that can pay absolutely top dollar for a manager, and get the best in the business, can still find themselves having to empty that manager and pick up the pieces from it.

Every appointment in any business is a risk, the steps that the board of any company (or the people responsible for recruiting) have to take is to minimise the risk by making the best selection from the choices available (including those head-hunted).

That, and give the manager the tools for the job. Outside of that, there's not much else they can do about it.

Baker9
21-01-2011, 02:43 PM
Ok I know... I can't help myself...

3 Million over 4 years the board say rather triumphantly and defiantly....

2 Million over the same time period has been THEIR cost to the club for their services.Just a thought...

That certainly raised and eyebrow here. Strong financial leadership but terrible handling of people.

Removed
21-01-2011, 02:44 PM
There are plenty in the middle ground too.


And the vast majority who sit in the middle and accept that there's blame on both sides.

As usual though, when we go through a sticky patch the voices blaming the board get louder and louder, and when we're doing well the ones who think the board can't be touched tend to post more.

:agree: Was it not Matty that said we are the most bi-polar support going :dunno:

Anyway thanks to Mrs S :aok: I am now officially a happy clapper again :greengrin

Removed
21-01-2011, 02:46 PM
I am at work at the moment and on my phone. I will give you my comments tonight when I get home as I no doubt would **** it up using the phone.
I bet you can't wait.:)

Just get a decent mobile then :wink:

greenlex
21-01-2011, 02:52 PM
Just get a decent mobile then :wink:

Aw Shurrap!! :)

blackpoolhibs
21-01-2011, 02:57 PM
How many clubs get their manager right, consistently though?

Even those that can pay absolutely top dollar for a manager, and get the best in the business, can still find themselves having to empty that manager and pick up the pieces from it.

Every appointment in any business is a risk, the steps that the board of any company (or the people responsible for recruiting) have to take is to minimise the risk by making the best selection from the choices available (including those head-hunted).

That, and give the manager the tools for the job. Outside of that, there's not much else they can do about it.

I agree Matty, the market we can work in will be hit and miss, we have to get it right soon though, hopefully we have. :pray:

Captain Trips
21-01-2011, 03:08 PM
Noises are just that, noises & I think you are confusing spending with wasting, because a bulk of the money going out is on players & managers who are not up to it, whether it is wages, transfer fee's compensation, we are not getting it right with our choice of managers or journeymen players.

We should have invested what we had to, to get the right person in charge of the club, in a position that is far more important than the basic role Petrie & Co has been filling.

We need to invest in the best young talent that is available to us, even if it costs more, not the continuous conveyor belt of journeymen, who have little or no sell on value & even less appetite.

An example is our interest now in Rooney; he should have been signed, sealed & delivered before Stokes was allowed to move on. I can’t think of any occasion, when any of the big name players departed the club, where we brought in timely replacements that fitted the category of player that would have kept us moving forward.

Financially, we would have been far far worse off, if it wasn’t for the emergence of the golden generation & TM footballing philosophy, during the middle of the noughties. With cash pouring in not only from sales, but from the bread and butter side of the business as well.

Although the players that came through during the noughties, weren’t as good as their counterparts, at the end of the sixties & early seventies, they were certainly the best group of players since then & you have to go back to the late forties, for the next group, who were the best of the lot.

Only three times in over a hundred years have hibs produced such a large group of talented young players & without the financial benefits, of the most recent group, the boards reported fiscal success, wouldn’t be anywhere near as impressive as is overly stated on here & in the media.

Good post ray, I would have thought a fair chunk of that reported £3m amount will have come off the back of the sales of some big players, we appear to not have any more players to sell, be interesting to see how much it is over next 3 or 4 years we spemd, ironically at a time we will need a hell of a lot to sort this squad out.

matty_f
21-01-2011, 03:12 PM
I agree Matty, the market we can work in will be hit and miss, we have to get it right soon though, hopefully we have. :pray:

:agree: Fingers crossed, I suppose time will tell.

Captain Trips
21-01-2011, 03:23 PM
How many clubs get their manager right, consistently though?

Even those that can pay absolutely top dollar for a manager, and get the best in the business, can still find themselves having to empty that manager and pick up the pieces from it.

Every appointment in any business is a risk, the steps that the board of any company (or the people responsible for recruiting) have to take is to minimise the risk by making the best selection from the choices available (including those head-hunted).

That, and give the manager the tools for the job. Outside of that, there's not much else they can do about it.

Fair points, however it appears they got it wrong twice in a row at a time when we had some good money from transfers kicking about, 2007-2009 we should have as well as building a ground and training facility we should have been getting a team together using that extra income.

Unfortunatly the mangers who got the money seem to have wasted it, this wasa key time in our development on the park, we are now left after this £3m with players whom all seem to have a contract ending at the same time in a very high volume which IMo is ridiculous and we have no players I can see any real value in.

The Browns, Oconnors, thompsons and Fletchers dont come around too often at the best of times and certainly not together, credit for investing in the stadium but the team has been left a total shambles when managers had it appears the tools to do a lot better, indeed the managers are at fault but the lagacy is a dreadful relegation situation and a team needing rebuilt on too grand a scale IMO to work.

CC will have to make a few signings and like all managers some will be good some might not be, the team has IMO been set back years and others apart from the manager simply have to move on as they have failed. If CC doesnt work out it is a total disaster from the club.

Sergio sledge
21-01-2011, 03:24 PM
Noises are just that, noises & I think you are confusing spending with wasting, because a bulk of the money going out is on players & managers who are not up to it, whether it is wages, transfer fee's compensation, we are not getting it right with our choice of managers or journeymen players.

The choice of managers is down to the board, and hindsight has proven that they have got that totally wrong with the last two. That's not to say that Mixu and Yogi are bad managers, for whatever reasons they didn't work out at Hibs however. I'm sure when the board employed Mixu, they imagined him doing the sort of job that he is doing at Killie just now, incidentally with a lot less money than he had at Hibs. The same could be said with Yogi, I'm sure the board looked at his record in re-inventing Falkirk as a club and thought he could do the same job at Hibs. He didn't, for whatever reasons, and it remains to be seen whether he will be a success elsewhere. There are a few strains of thought you could put on this either;
1) the managers were duff and the board are rubbish at picking managers
2) the managers were good but were hampered by a lack of financial backing from the board
3) that the managers had had reasonable success at previous clubs and impressed the board at interviews and were fans favourites so were deemed to be the best candidates for the job but for whatever reasons it didn't work out for them at Hibs.
IMHO in each case the board gave them long enough to try to show that they were changing the club and both failed, I tend to think that the blame for this lies failure lies partly with 1, and partly with 2.

The board have continually stated that they have increased the budget year on year and have stated how much they have invested on signings to try to remove option two from the above scenarios. £3m over 4 years is nearly 10% of our turnover each year spent on new signings, to me this seems like a reasonably sustainable figure. You mention the word "waste" in your paragraph as if the fact that the money was spent on duff players is something else to attack the board about. What they do is give the manager a budget to identify the players he wants and the board try to sign these players within the budget they have set. Any wastage lies solely at the foot of the manager, the board should not be interfering in who he should sign.


We need to invest in the best young talent that is available to us, even if it costs more, not the continuous conveyor belt of journeymen, who have little or no sell on value & even less appetite.

Agree wholeheartedly with this strategy.


An example is our interest now in Rooney; he should have been signed, sealed & delivered before Stokes was allowed to move on. I can’t think of any occasion, when any of the big name players departed the club, where we brought in timely replacements that fitted the category of player that would have kept us moving forward.

What about signing O'Brien to replace Sproule? :wink:

In all seriousness, the only one I can remember that seemed to be a success was signing Stokes to replace Fletcher, although this was months after Fletcher was sold. With regards to Rooney, at the start of the season he would have cost more, and it was a different manager managing the club at that time. Just because Calderwood is interested in Rooney doesn't mean Yogi was and as I said before the board shouldn't be interfering with the managers signings. This is where IMHO, we need a consistent "director of football/cheif scout" type person at the club in the same sort of role that John Park had who is consistent despite the change of managers and consistently good at his job of spotting young players and older players who would be assets to the club.


Financially, we would have been far far worse off, if it wasn’t for the emergence of the golden generation & TM footballing philosophy, during the middle of the noughties. With cash pouring in not only from sales, but from the bread and butter side of the business as well.

Although the players that came through during the noughties, weren’t as good as their counterparts, at the end of the sixties & early seventies, they were certainly the best group of players since then & you have to go back to the late forties, for the next group, who were the best of the lot.

Only three times in over a hundred years have hibs produced such a large group of talented young players & without the financial benefits, of the most recent group, the boards reported fiscal success, wouldn’t be anywhere near as impressive as is overly stated on here & in the media.

I don't think anyone could argue with that but, (maybe I'm picking you up wrong, apologies if so) you seem to be implying that the emergence of the golden generation was all a lucky occurrence. I agree that there is a large part of luck involved but the board must take some credit for putting the building blocks, for want of a better phrase, in place to allow for the acquisition and development of the golden generation of kids to come through. The structure to allow for the identification of this talent, the persuasion of these talents to sign for Hibs and the coaches in place to develop these kids were all put in place by someone. Whether it was the board that chose the structure or whether they gave one person carte blanche to organise it in a way they saw fit, they must be allowed credit for putting the right people in place and sanctioning whatever actions were required to secure and improve these players.

HFC 0-7
21-01-2011, 03:40 PM
The fans are wanting answers as to why we are in this position and what is going to be done to get out of it. The board are just sending out information that people expect them to say, in regards to Lindsays message today, in some ways it puts to bed some of the questions around whether we are paying enough, however it also makes issues worse as we ARE spending that amount of money and still find ourselves in this position.

The board mention nothing about a strategy to avoid this in future, nothing saying that they are re visiting their scouting structure. IMO, spending 3 million in the last 4 years on fees and finding ourselves in this position is shocking. The fans are wanting someone to take responsibility instead of sending out messages about the financials of hibs.

In any other business, which is how Hibs are being run, spending the 3rd or 4th highest in the peer group only to find the results and product is 10th best would be seen as failure. I get the feeling that if the financials are good then the board see it as a success and if the results are bad then the board see it as a failing not on them but the manager. Normally I would agree with this mostly, however, after the succesive managers failing it is becoming a problem that the board need to take responsibility for.

FWIW I think the board are starting to take some of that and publicly to as we are starting to get more in the way of comms from them. They are probably a bit shocked at the fans responses towards them and perhaps we will start to see more in the way of comms regarding strategy.

Captain Trips
21-01-2011, 03:41 PM
The fans are wanting answers as to why we are in this position and what is going to be done to get out of it. The board are just sending out information that people expect them to say, in regards to Lindsays message today, in some ways it puts to bed some of the questions around whether we are paying enough, however it also makes issues worse as we ARE spending that amount of money and still find ourselves in this position.

The board mention nothing about a strategy to avoid this in future, nothing saying that they are re visiting their scouting structure. IMO, spending 3 million in the last 4 years on fees and finding ourselves in this position is shocking. The fans are wanting someone to take responsibility instead of sending out messages about the financials of hibs.

In any other business, which is how Hibs are being run, spending the 3rd or 4th highest in the peer group only to find the results and product is 10th best would be seen as failure. I get the feeling that if the financials are good then the board see it as a success and if the results are bad then the board see it as a failing not on them but the manager. Normally I would agree with this mostly, however, after the succesive managers failing it is becoming a problem that the board need to take responsibility for.

FWIW I think the board are starting to take some of that and publicly to as we are starting to get more in the way of comms from them. They are probably a bit shocked at the fans responses towards them and perhaps we will start to see more in the way of comms regarding strategy.


Good stuff.

number 27
21-01-2011, 04:15 PM
So who is lying to us about Stokes transfer then? Either a fee was paid or it wasn't. Keep it confidential if you must but spinning us two competely contradictory lines at different times seems like treating us with contempt IMO.

marinello59
21-01-2011, 04:23 PM
So who is lying to us about Stokes transfer then? Either a fee was paid or it wasn't. Keep it confidential if you must but spinning us two competely contradictory lines at different times seems like treating us with contempt IMO.

Anybody want to dig up exactly what Yogi said?

Cropley10
21-01-2011, 04:24 PM
The fans are wanting answers as to why we are in this position and what is going to be done to get out of it. The board are just sending out information that people expect them to say, in regards to Lindsays message today, in some ways it puts to bed some of the questions around whether we are paying enough, however it also makes issues worse as we ARE spending that amount of money and still find ourselves in this position.

The board mention nothing about a strategy to avoid this in future, nothing saying that they are re visiting their scouting structure. IMO, spending 3 million in the last 4 years on fees and finding ourselves in this position is shocking. The fans are wanting someone to take responsibility instead of sending out messages about the financials of hibs.

In any other business, which is how Hibs are being run, spending the 3rd or 4th highest in the peer group only to find the results and product is 10th best would be seen as failure. I get the feeling that if the financials are good then the board see it as a success and if the results are bad then the board see it as a failing not on them but the manager. Normally I would agree with this mostly, however, after the succesive managers failing it is becoming a problem that the board need to take responsibility for.

FWIW I think the board are starting to take some of that and publicly to as we are starting to get more in the way of comms from them. They are probably a bit shocked at the fans responses towards them and perhaps we will start to see more in the way of comms regarding strategy.

:agree: Bragging about how much money we've spent just proves that something is very wrong when we're nearly bottom of the League.:confused:

marinello59
21-01-2011, 04:26 PM
:agree: Bragging about how much money we've spent just proves that something is very wrong when we're nearly bottom of the League.:confused:

Giving out the facts is now bragging? And the club is accused of putting a spin on things. :greengrin

Spike Mandela
21-01-2011, 04:35 PM
Approaching £3M in four years. Is that really unsurprising:confused:

How much money did Hibs receive in transfer fees, season tickets and commercial income in that same time? How does this compare to the other clubs that we have outspent?

It's not even near the transfer income we received from Celtic for Scott Brown in one deal.

We have built a training centre and a stand with most of the money and this approaching £3m has been spent very thinly on quantity rather than quality.

Mr Lindsay has put the statement out but IMO it can be used to praise the board or criticise the board depending on your viewpoint.

The Falcon
21-01-2011, 04:38 PM
[QUOTE=matty_fairnie;2702257 How many clubs get their manager right, consistently though?

Even those that can pay absolutely top dollar for a manager, and get the best in the business, can still find themselves having to empty that manager and pick up the pieces from it.

Every appointment in any business is a risk, the steps that the board of any company (or the people responsible for recruiting) have to take is to minimise the risk by making the best selection from the choices available (including those head-hunted).

That, and give the manager the tools for the job. Outside of that, there's not much else they can do about it.[/QUOTE]

We could have appointed proven experienced managers like Roy Hodgson or Rafa Benitez. Avram Grant? Or even Sam Allardyce? Carlo Ancellotti or Mark Hughes have hardly been raging successes either.

Barney McGrew
21-01-2011, 05:12 PM
I don't think anyone could argue with that but, (maybe I'm picking you up wrong, apologies if so) you seem to be implying that the emergence of the golden generation was all a lucky occurrence. I agree that there is a large part of luck involved but the board must take some credit for putting the building blocks, for want of a better phrase, in place to allow for the acquisition and development of the golden generation of kids to come through. The structure to allow for the identification of this talent, the persuasion of these talents to sign for Hibs and the coaches in place to develop these kids were all put in place by someone. Whether it was the board that chose the structure or whether they gave one person carte blanche to organise it in a way they saw fit, they must be allowed credit for putting the right people in place and sanctioning whatever actions were required to secure and improve these players.

:top marks

In some people's eyes, when the board get it right then it's luck and when they don't it's because they're rubbish.

If they're going to get criticism for wrong appointments and decisions, it's only right that they should get praise for the things they do get right. Ultimately, when it comes to the youth set up, it's something they should get a pat on the back for. Or maybe it's just luck again that Hanlon, Wotherspoon and more than likely Booth by the end of the season will be regulars in the first team?

Andy74
21-01-2011, 05:18 PM
:agree: However there is always the other side who will always defend the board no matter what they say.

For my part that's nonsense.

Just because I happen to think that they have been doing a good job doesn't mean that I've come to that conclusion just by accepting anyting they say.

I've looked at the evidence, asked a few questions and come to the conculsion I'm happy about it.

Why suggest that a differing opinion must have been reached just by blindly accepting anything?

If anyhting I've seen some fairly convoluted ways on this and similar recent threads to still attach blame in certain places despite certain evidence as that doesn't quite suit the stance people have already decided on.

Beefster
21-01-2011, 05:22 PM
I don't know why the club bothers to communicate with the fans. As soon as they say anything there's a baying mob looking for a negative slant to what's been said.

No criticism implied but if you speak to the guy semi-regularly (compared with most fans), I wouldn't say you're the most impartial poster on here either. It's swings and roundabouts.

Ray_
21-01-2011, 05:44 PM
:top marks

In some people's eyes, when the board get it right then it's luck and when they don't it's because they're rubbish.

If they're going to get criticism for wrong appointments and decisions, it's only right that they should get praise for the things they do get right. Ultimately, when it comes to the youth set up, it's something they should get a pat on the back for. Or maybe it's just luck again that Hanlon, Wotherspoon and more than likely Booth by the end of the season will be regulars in the first team?

Average youth players reaching the first team is not that much of a success, its unfair to judge Booth, but players like Brownlie, Blackley, Cormack & Cropley were already capped by far better Scotland teams, when they were younger than the players you mentioned, that is being successful.


So far the golden generation has been a one off during our recent history, if hibs continue to bring through players of that calibre, then we can start crowing about having a successful established youth policy.

Barney McGrew
21-01-2011, 05:48 PM
Average youth players reaching the first team is not that much of a success, its unfair to judge Booth, but players like Brownlie, Blackley, Cormack & Cropley were already capped by far better Scotland teams, when they were younger than the players you mentioned, that is being successful.


So far the golden generation has been a one off during our recent history, if hibs continue to bring through players of that calibre, then we can start crowing about having a successful established youth policy.

I'd say that the three mentioned are well above average youth players - Wotherspoon and Hanlon have been regulars for the Scotland U-21s for a while now. As for being capped for the full team, I think we could have Messi in the Hibs team (a scottish born version of course) and Potter wouldn't pick him because he played at ER :greengrin

The purpose of the youth system is to bring through first team players and it's continuing to do just that.

PaulSmith
21-01-2011, 05:53 PM
For my part that's nonsense.

Just because I happen to think that they have been doing a good job doesn't mean that I've come to that conclusion just by accepting anyting they say.

I've looked at the evidence, asked a few questions and come to the conculsion I'm happy about it.

Why suggest that a differing opinion must have been reached just by blindly accepting anything?

If anyhting I've seen some fairly convoluted ways on this and similar recent threads to still attach blame in certain places despite certain evidence as that doesn't quite suit the stance people have already decided on.

Andy, I really do hope that we get through this season without going down and these last few weeks are seen as a watershed moment for the fans (on each side of the argument), the manager, the board and more importantly the players who remain at the club.

There have been wild accusations on both sides on here, some crazy posts, some lies, some opinions & some facts.

Your truth is that the board are doing a good job, my truth is that they are in some aspects but failing miserably in others and then there is the truth which is somewhere in between.

Some good posters have even resorted to trying to take the P with replies, fair do's as it's an emotive subject, but in the main its been good to get everything out in the open.

If by posts on here and emails to the Board it has made them re-double their efforts to get signings, or re-focused how they interact with the fan base, or given themselves a bloody good kick up the erse to realise that we are still a football club then I'd say "well done". Hopefully it has reminded the current custodians that sections of the support will not tolerate nor standby silently whilst the club lurches from crisis to crisis.

Ray_
21-01-2011, 05:58 PM
I'd say that the three mentioned are well above average youth players - Wotherspoon and Hanlon have been regulars for the Scotland U-21s for a while now. As for being capped for the full team, I think we could have Messi in the Hibs team (a scottish born version of course) and Potter wouldn't pick him because he played at ER :greengrin

The purpose of the youth system is to bring through first team players and it's continuing to do just that.

I'd have to disagree with you there, players like the ones I mentioned and the likes of Thomson, Brown, O'Connor, Fletcher & Riordan were well ahead of Wotherspoon and Hanlon at the same age & I would consider them to be above average players.

Sorry, Scotland U21, IMHO, doesn't really count for a great deal, when you consider some of the distinctly average players that's performed at that level.

matty_f
21-01-2011, 06:15 PM
For my part that's nonsense.

Just because I happen to think that they have been doing a good job doesn't mean that I've come to that conclusion just by accepting anyting they say.

I've looked at the evidence, asked a few questions and come to the conculsion I'm happy about it.

Why suggest that a differing opinion must have been reached just by blindly accepting anything?

If anyhting I've seen some fairly convoluted ways on this and similar recent threads to still attach blame in certain places despite certain evidence as that doesn't quite suit the stance people have already decided on.

Same here. :agree:

I like to think that more often than not I back up my points on the issue with a fairly sound argument, so I think it's a bit dismissive to suggest it's blindly accepting something.

PaulSmith
21-01-2011, 06:16 PM
Same here. :agree:

I like to think that more often than not I back up my points on the issue with a fairly sound argument, so I think it's a bit dismissive to suggest it's blindly accepting something.

Ditto.

matty_f
21-01-2011, 06:21 PM
I'd have to disagree with you there, players like the ones I mentioned and the likes of Thomson, Brown, O'Connor, Fletcher & Riordan were well ahead of Wotherspoon and Hanlon at the same age & I would consider them to be above average players.

Sorry, Scotland U21, IMHO, doesn't really count for a great deal, when you consider some of the distinctly average players that's performed at that level.

With respect, Ray, none of the Golden Generation were battering down the manager's door with their performances to get a game ahead of the first team players that were there.

They became first team players earlier than this batch out of necessity as we tried to slash the wage bill at the club after the money fell out of Scottish football.

By the time the likes of Fletcher and co were almost 20, most had (IIRC) more or less three seasons of first team action behind them. That brought them on massively, but had financial times been different, they would have been drip fed into the team in a more similar way to that which we see just now.

Their emergence and development was a pleasant offshoot of the cuts we had to take, but wasn't down especially to fantastic youth scouting etc.

They also weren't consistently fantastic even at their peak with Hibs, never mind the years leading up to their final ones at the club. They were young and enthusiastic and as such got given a fair amount of slack from the support in the early days.

The Falcon
21-01-2011, 06:34 PM
There have been wild accusations on both sides on here, some crazy posts, some lies, some opinions & some facts.

Your truth is that the board are doing a good job, my truth is that they are in some aspects but failing miserably in others and then there is the truth which is somewhere in between.


Very fair and reasonable. I think we all want the same thing but it is a pretty frustrating time just now and emotions are running very high.

ekhibee
21-01-2011, 06:36 PM
Well if it's true and they've spent approx £3 mil in 4 years, that amounts to approx £750k a year. We are going to need to spend a whole lot more than that in the next few months if we are to survive in the SPL and progress from there.

Arch Stanton
21-01-2011, 06:51 PM
Any kind of admission that they got at least something wrong would be a start.

And did they mention how much has been raised in transfer fees, add-ons etc over that period?

Thought not

Surely to god they didn't spend the money they got for selling players on buying other ones?

That's against the law surely!

Ray_
21-01-2011, 06:57 PM
With respect, Ray, none of the Golden Generation were battering down the manager's door with their performances to get a game ahead of the first team players that were there.

They became first team players earlier than this batch out of necessity as we tried to slash the wage bill at the club after the money fell out of Scottish football.

By the time the likes of Fletcher and co were almost 20, most had (IIRC) more or less three seasons of first team action behind them. That brought them on massively, but had financial times been different, they would have been drip fed into the team in a more similar way to that which we see just now.

Their emergence and development was a pleasant offshoot of the cuts we had to take, but wasn't down especially to fantastic youth scouting etc.

They also weren't consistently fantastic even at their peak with Hibs, never mind the years leading up to their final ones at the club. They were young and enthusiastic and as such got given a fair amount of slack from the support in the early days.

Although there was level of inconsistency, as you get with young players, I would suggest that the level of performance was higher than the present ones & IMHO players like Thomson, Brown & Riordan were stand outs, right from the start.

At any clubs youth policy you would expect players to come through and establish themselves in the first team, otherwise what is the point of a youth policy? I don't think the latest bunch have done anymore than that.

blackpoolhibs
21-01-2011, 07:18 PM
Well if it's true and they've spent approx £3 mil in 4 years, that amounts to approx £750k a year. We are going to need to spend a whole lot more than that in the next few months if we are to survive in the SPL and progress from there.

Why, who else is spending that kind of money?

Kaiser1962
21-01-2011, 07:20 PM
Although there was level of inconsistency, as you get with young players, I would suggest that the level of performance was higher than the present ones & IMHO players like Thomson, Brown & Riordan were stand outs, right from the start.

At any clubs youth policy you would expect players to come through and establish themselves in the first team, otherwise what is the point of a youth policy? I don't think the latest bunch have done anymore than that.

I have to say I am a bit dissapointed as to how some of these guys careers has gone since leaving ER. Brown in particular as I thought he was the real deal. Thompson on the Boro treatment table (again). O'Connor is at Barnsley or something. Riordan is poor in a poor Hibs team. Whittaker is with the huns in a poor league and interesting no one. Murph and Fletch are doing probably best of them all but even then its at the lower end of the EPL. Or Kenny miller.
Pthers who looked good but have drifted into relative obscutity include Doumbe, Sproule, Jones and Killen. Dissapointing really as I expected better from them.

WhileTheChief..
21-01-2011, 07:22 PM
It may be a cheesy line but we are all in this together.

I was raging after the Ayr game and wanted everyone sacked but having seen the statement and interviews and taken some time to think things over I realise that we need to pull together.

Before hand there seemed to be a massive them and us attitude between the club and fans. We need to galvanise together to get out of this mess and all the accusations etc don't help anyone.

We wanted to hear from the club and they responded. I have no doubt that was as a result of some comments on here and emails directly to the club. So they do listen. And they do care.

Some folk will dismiss it or choose not to believe them, fair do's, but the board are here, and are going nowhere. Might be more enjoyable to get back to supporting the club rather than feeling bitterness for the rest of the season.

I didn't think I was going to go again this season but now I can't wait to get back to Easter Rd :greengrin

Barney McGrew
21-01-2011, 07:25 PM
I have to say I am a bit dissapointed as to how some of these guys careers has gone since leaving ER. Brown in particular as I thought he was the real deal. Thompson on the Boro treatment table (again). O'Connor is at Barnsley or something. Riordan is poor in a poor Hibs team. Whittaker is with the huns in a poor league and interesting no one. Murph and Fletch are doing probably best of them all but even then its at the lower end of the EPL. Or Kenny miller.
Pthers who looked good but have drifted into relative obscutity include Doumbe, Sproule, Jones and Killen. Dissapointing really as I expected better from them.

It's good point. A lot of their careers have really stagnated, and you could even suggest that very few of them have reached anything like the kind of form they displayed when they left us.

Fletch apart, I wonder if any of them would reach the kind of transfer fee now that our much maligned board managed to get for us at the time :stirrer:

Removed
21-01-2011, 07:30 PM
For my part that's nonsense.

Just because I happen to think that they have been doing a good job doesn't mean that I've come to that conclusion just by accepting anyting they say.

I've looked at the evidence, asked a few questions and come to the conculsion I'm happy about it.

Why suggest that a differing opinion must have been reached just by blindly accepting anything?

If anyhting I've seen some fairly convoluted ways on this and similar recent threads to still attach blame in certain places despite certain evidence as that doesn't quite suit the stance people have already decided on.

You have a pm

Alfred E Newman
21-01-2011, 07:56 PM
Why, who else is spending that kind of money?

:agree: We could give Calderwood a couple of million to spend and still go down. Its not all about money, its about getting in the right players for the job.

matty_f
21-01-2011, 08:01 PM
You have a pm

Where's mine?!:na na:

Haggis Hibby
21-01-2011, 08:02 PM
:top marks
Folk wanted answers and have got them the last two days.
Folk don't like the answers and still moan.
I wish to **** they would get over it and get behind what is trying to be achieved here.
A club that is bring run in a sustainable fashion and doing tge best it can whilst doing that.
Aye the last 2 managers have been a mistake with hindsight but there cam be no doubt the club is going in the right direction.
Stop your moaning and get behind what's going on here.
Get behind your club. Get behind your team. Let's get out this position we find ourselves.

ScottB
21-01-2011, 08:03 PM
This place just boggles the mind at the moment honestly.

We've had folk demanding a response from the Board. They get one, pretty much saying everything you could expect to hear, yet folk moan. Because new players weren't queuing at the door on New Year's Day, the Board 'didn't care' or 'didn't want to spend.' There's no winning at the moment.

Like it or not, this statement (not that it was needed if you were willing to look at the figures in the first place) puts an end, in black and white, to the ridiculous nonsense that we 'are tight.'

In the current climate, combined with significant investment off the pitch, that's a damn fine level of investment. I can't say fairer than that. Anyone thinking we should have spent more is in cloud cuckoo land frankly, as for the assertion that we've brought in more money than we've spent, well obviously! Did anyone really expect to turn all that cash into transfer fees in? Madness.

Of course, we can debate all day long as to how those funds have been spent, and there there are question marks. But the simple black and white of it is; do the Board back managers to a reasonable degree in comparison to our rivals? Yes.

Removed
21-01-2011, 08:05 PM
Where's mine?!:na na:

:greengrin

greenlex
21-01-2011, 08:38 PM
Ok here goes. :greengrin

That's a fair question.

Firstly the fact that it's taken what Scott Lindsay acknowledges is twelve months of underachievement on the pitch to get the Board to show serious concern about the situation. And they've only done that because there is major unrest among the fans, and that is being reflected in numbers at the turnstiles.

It may have taken twelve months but after the completion of the season we were in fourth place and in Europe on merit over the season. Europe was one of Hughes targets building on what Mixu actually had managed to achieve on the top six front.
I would be willing to wager the board, like us, had concerns about what was happening on the pitch at the end of the season. It would however been a bit harsh if that was Hughes' goal and dont forget subsequent proclamations from Petrie would back that up if he was sacked. It became apparent that as this season progressed that those fears were bourne out and he had to go. His team were not performing and his signings looked poor.
All of this took us to 3 months ago.
The reaction from fans so far into Calderwoods tenure and cup defeat have perhaps got a reaction from the board of course it has. The accusations were they were doing nothing about the situation. Fans were saying they had had enough. I am not surprised there was a reaction from the board.
A reality check for fans is needed IMO. They can only back the manager they have put in to redress the situation and can only do that in the January window. Its started.




Secondly, as other posters have pointed out, it's merely repeating previous utterances. The classic themes are all there - "we are totally behind the manager" "we spend more than (insert names here)". "We're a family and we're all in it together".
That is board policy though. They may be classic themes but it doesnt make them any less true. They have backed every manager appointed as far as they can (up to their limit) until its time to say enough is enough. Mixu's signings wernt great and the football wasnt great and even with ll that we still managed to scrape top six but the cup runs were not good enough. If the football had been poor but results ok he would have survived.

Hughes was very similar to Mixu. Intead of a steady run of form his team did very well results wiise at first before the huge slump from February.Again results poor and signings failed.
The Hibernian family bit is true however corny it seems. We are in this together and we will get through the other side together. I think Hibernian is a unique club. If you have any doubt watch again the documetary "The team that wouldnt die" if you need it reafirmed.I dont get the mistrust of the board and that of STF. )I am not saying you by the way) They are doing what is best for our club


I know that the exact figures are mainly available in the AGM reports, and I don't doubt that £3m has been paid out. However, in the same period, the sale of Scott Brown, Steven Fletcher, Sol Bamba and Anthony Stokes raised at least three times that figure, without taking add-ons into account. So the football side of the club has in fact been a loser to the tune of (conservatively) some £6 million in those four years alone. There's no point quoting balance sheet figures if you only quote one side of the balance, is there?
No one is questioning the money brought in from player sales though that is why that is not being quoted. It is club policy that we do not spend money brought in on transfer fees and that it would be sopent on infrastructure. I dont have the quotes to had but they are out there somewhere.
It is impossible to replace a 4 million pound player unless you spend 4 million. We would be foolish to even try.


And yes, I know, there have been infrastructure improvements but my understanding is that the money for them didn't totally, or even mainly, come from player sales. And what's the point of building a super duper, state of the art factory, if the product your making is of poor quality and no-one wants to buy it?
Infrastrucutre improvements were a must. Particularly the training centre. Mowbray and Collins both are on record as saying it was essential. It is instrumental in attracting better calibre players to the club and should(i do say should) have helped bring success on the pitch.
The stand was needed no matter what its inhabitants say. The price secured for it was half what it would have cost in a different economic climate. It had to be built when it was IMO. I do think we may have financed it differently but I am no money man so take it on trust that is was the right thing to do financing it as we have.
The stadium is now complete and it is in place along with the training complex to give us a platform to kick on from. The product on the park is not how it should be but that will and is being addressed in the fulness of time. Hibs playing well in a different economic climate will see us fill it for the big games. If it wasnt there we would be restricted for growth and have to spend twice as much or more in those circumstances. Its there right now waiting for a team to match.
I am willing to bet our latest signing from Forrest would not have entertained us in our situation training in Wardie Park and in front of the old East Stand.

We've heard these statements a dozen times about "backing the manager to the limit of our resources". Talk is cheap, like most of the signings made during this period.
Cheap shot mate. Its true the managers have been backed as best we could. You cannot say Riordan Stokes Miller and deGraff were cheap signings under any circumstances. Budget increased year on year is alos true. I bet youve heard that a few times too.

I'll watch a hopeless Hibs team in preference to a team of any standard at any other club. But I want to watch a great Hibs team that has me buzzing about every forthcoming game. That's not going to happen with an accountancy-focussed Board who have long ago run out of ideas and imagination.
I am exactly the same. I am sure all Hibs fans are the same. We obviously differ on our opinions of the board but they have been consistent in there communication and direction. The on field stuff will go dip and peak but at the risk of repeating myself the platform is there.
I think the board know they have made mistakes with the last two managers. I also think they have appointed the manager they should have appointed the last time. A manager with a track record and no ties with the club. Dont forget he didnt even apply this time. The board approached him.
The board want a successful team lets back tham and let them get on with it..

Cropley10
21-01-2011, 08:46 PM
Ok here goes. :greengrin
.

You say "The board want a successful team lets back tham and let them get on with it."

I don't think that means you can't come on here and debate it, surely? If it's groundhog day then let us get on with it and do something else :greengrin:

The debate is now very polarised, but I think both sides have it very much in common in that we want Hibs to do well. We are all backing the team, not that its doing any of us any good right now:thumbsup:

blackpoolhibs
22-01-2011, 10:02 AM
:agree: We could give Calderwood a couple of million to spend and still go down. Its not all about money, its about getting in the right players for the job.

:agree: