PDA

View Full Version : Mr Petrie - Can he Prove Gordon Waddell Wrong



AlbertK86
31-01-2011, 11:29 AM
Just read an article in the Sunday Mail where Waddell accused Rod of being a control freak basically.

Welcome to the real world... has he just noticed !!!

He makes the point that despite raking in millions for our top players over the years time and again only a tiny fraction has been re-invested in replacing them.

Once again this season over a million in for Stokes, Bamba and Zemmama and only £80k paid out. aye you could argue about wages but I bet there wages will more than cover who we have brought in.

He also made the point about Calderwood not being allowed to bring in his own tried and trusted assistance and that Rod decided who his assistance would be. I noticed a few weeks ago that the chemistry does not seem to be there between CC and DA and it looked to me as if DA was pushing to get subs on at Ayr but CC wasn't for it.

Liked all CCs new signings yesterday and believe if he is allowed to do it his way he can build a decent team.

All we need now is for ROD PETRIE to prove Waddell wrong and invest today to back his manager and keep us in the top flight. Mass clearout in the summer thereafter.

ROD IF YOU SHIRK YOUR DUTY TO THE FANS AND YOUR MANAGER THEN YOU SHOULD BE AS MR WADDELL HINTS ...... OUT THE DOOR

greenlex
31-01-2011, 11:35 AM
Another hack peddling the same lines. Do any of them have anything original to say?

khib70
31-01-2011, 11:41 AM
Another hack peddling the same lines. Do any of them have anything original to say?
Of course it never occurred to you that all these people might be saying because it's true?

Thought not.

AlbertK86
31-01-2011, 11:43 AM
Greenlex

I totally agree with you about it being an old story but ROD is killing our club. All the money taken in will be of no significance if we end up relegated.

The drop in income would swallow up any money we have taken in for the great young lads reared by us.

We are in dire straits and need to stop the rot.

Invest a few hundered thousand and keep us up makes financial sense to me

greenlex
31-01-2011, 11:44 AM
Of course it never occurred to you that all these people might be saying because it's true?

Thought not.
Each and every one of them put a miserly Petrie slant on it. Nothing could be further from the truth. If you want to lap up what's in the press crack on. I have no intention of getting into another pointless debate with you or anyone else about this so I am out.

Keith_M
31-01-2011, 11:48 AM
Just read an article in the Sunday Mail where Waddell accused Rod of being a control freak basically.
...
...
...
All we need now is for ROD PETRIE to prove Waddell wrong and invest today to back his manager and keep us in the top flight. Mass clearout in the summer thereafter.

ROD IF YOU SHIRK YOUR DUTY TO THE FANS AND YOUR MANAGER THEN YOU SHOULD BE AS MR WADDELL HINTS ...... OUT THE DOOR


Hi Gordon.

Are you THAT short of ideas on what to put in your articles? You could at least have come on here under your real name.

khib70
31-01-2011, 11:49 AM
Greenlex

I totally agree with you about it being an old story but ROD is killing our club. All the money taken in will be of no significance if we end up relegated.

The drop in income would swallow up any money we have taken in for the great young lads reared by us.

We are in dire straits and need to stop the rot.

Invest a few hundered thousand and keep us up makes financial sense to me
:top marks....but it appears some people just don't want to hear it.

(fingers in ears and going la la la smilie)

steakbake
31-01-2011, 11:51 AM
I think to be fair to the Board, we need to be reasonable in our expectations about how much money there really is at ER to throw around and buy in "names".

However, Petrie's record of bringing in management is appalling. Ideally for a club like us, management teams should leave after a period of time of being with the club and we should expect our managers to move on to bigger and better things when these come up - a la Mowbray for example.

However, to have sacked as many managers as we have in recent years is unbelievable and hints that those running the club don't necessarily know how to do so.

The Falcon
31-01-2011, 11:59 AM
Can Gordon Waddell provide evidence, other than gossip and hearsay, that what HE says is correct?

Petrie is the 2nd largest shareholder with the full support of the major shareholder. Contrary to popular opinion we are not a democracy and if this means that Rod is, basically, not returning some hacks calls or answering their stupid unsubstantiated allegations, then more power to him.

NORTHERNHIBBY
31-01-2011, 12:10 PM
If the unthinkable happens and we go down, the Petrie's job as Chairman would be untenable IMO.

Arch Stanton
31-01-2011, 12:15 PM
Just read an article in the Sunday Mail where Waddell accused Rod of being a control freak basically.

Welcome to the real world... has he just noticed !!!

He makes the point that despite raking in millions for our top players over the years time and again only a tiny fraction has been re-invested in replacing them.

Once again this season over a million in for Stokes, Bamba and Zemmama and only £80k paid out. aye you could argue about wages but I bet there wages will more than cover who we have brought in.

He also made the point about Calderwood not being allowed to bring in his own tried and trusted assistance and that Rod decided who his assistance would be. I noticed a few weeks ago that the chemistry does not seem to be there between CC and DA and it looked to me as if DA was pushing to get subs on at Ayr but CC wasn't for it.

Liked all CCs new signings yesterday and believe if he is allowed to do it his way he can build a decent team.

All we need now is for ROD PETRIE to prove Waddell wrong and invest today to back his manager and keep us in the top flight. Mass clearout in the summer thereafter.

ROD IF YOU SHIRK YOUR DUTY TO THE FANS AND YOUR MANAGER THEN YOU SHOULD BE AS MR WADDELL HINTS ...... OUT THE DOOR

I suspect Mr Waddell knowledge of cask conditioned ale far exceeds his knowledge of football finances.

What he fails to appreciate that money from player sales could be used to finance player acquisitions, it could also be used to make up that part of the wage bill that isn't covered by other income. What it CANNOT be used for is BOTH!!

The following shows this point graphically -
http://www.football-finances.org.uk/hibs/2010/profits2.htm

I have come to the conclusion that people who comment on club finances but who don't cover wages to turnover ratio or amortisation are just timewasters.

As regards amortisation, there is nothing to stop a manager buying players if he wished to go for quality rather than bulk. The following link, albeit about Celtic, explains this -
http://www.football-finances.org.uk/celtic/2010/amortisation2.htm

Here is the Hibs one -
http://www.football-finances.org.uk/hibs/2010/amortisation2.htm

Phil D. Rolls
31-01-2011, 12:16 PM
Greenlex

I totally agree with you about it being an old story but ROD is killing our club. All the money taken in will be of no significance if we end up relegated.

The drop in income would swallow up any money we have taken in for the great young lads reared by us.

We are in dire straits and need to stop the rot.

Invest a few hundered thousand and keep us up makes financial sense to me

Welcome to the board mate, but Waddell is hardly saying anything we didn't already know. Actually, I take that back, he has done a spectacular U turn from his previous articles on Mr Petrie, as he used to say that the Tache was running the club well and was a model for other teams to follow.

Of course that was before his best mate John Hughes got the bullet. He now comes out with an article that could have been written by cutting and pasting from Hibs.net.

I think all the stuff about the death of the club is more than a little premature to be honest. If we were 38 million in debt and facing the drop, then we'd have a lot more to worry about. Whatever happens, Hibs will come through this.

It just seems to me, that people are not giving the board credit for all the good things they have done, and are being a wee bit short termist - we aren't even down yet FFS.

PaulSmith
31-01-2011, 12:21 PM
Can Gordon Waddell provide evidence, other than gossip and hearsay, that what HE says is correct?

Petrie is the 2nd largest shareholder with the full support of the major shareholder. Contrary to popular opinion we are not a democracy and if this means that Rod is, basically, not returning some hacks calls or answering their stupid unsubstantiated allegations, then more power to him.

Personally the allegations made by Waddell are slanderous and potentially libellous, I'd be very interested in hearing our Chairmans comments on several of these matters. GW has printed as a matter of fact certain aspects that should be the sole control of the football manager of the club, I believe that GW is friendly with Hughes from his time at Falkirk and would hope that what is printed is factually incorrect but it would certainly help to explain recent comments from ex managers.

re not a democracy, yes but can you remind Rod (the next time your down at East Mains) that he is simply the current custodian of our football club :wink:

Sammy7nil
31-01-2011, 12:24 PM
Does anyone have a link to the article ?

Beefster
31-01-2011, 12:26 PM
Does anyone have a link to the article ?

http://blogs.dailyrecord.co.uk/gordonwaddell/2011/01/ruling-with-rod-of-iron.html

I don't doubt that most of it is true.

down the slope
31-01-2011, 12:35 PM
Can Gordon Waddell provide evidence, other than gossip and hearsay, that what HE says is correct?

Petrie is the 2nd largest shareholder with the full support of the major shareholder. Contrary to popular opinion we are not a democracy and if this means that Rod is, basically, not returning some hacks calls or answering their stupid unsubstantiated allegations, then more power to him.

More power to him !, have a look at the league table.

RIP
31-01-2011, 12:41 PM
Having read the article - it looks like an increasing amount of people within Scottish Football (Columnists, Managers, Players and Fans) are coming to the conclusion that at Hibs - the manager doesn't have the correct relationship with the Chairman

Yet many of us have such blind allegiance to Mr Petrie that we see his role as above question

I've said it before that it's become a convenient excuse for Mr Petrie to end the contract of the first-team coach. In doing so that person becomes the patsy, the fall guy for all the ills at the Football Club

Yet Rod, who is really in charge, carries on regardless as do the board

How many more managers must be sacrificed before we find out what's really going on?

Phil D. Rolls
31-01-2011, 12:45 PM
Having read the article - it looks like an increasing amount of people within Scottish Football (Columnists, Managers, Players and Fans) are coming to the conclusion that at Hibs - the manager doesn't have the correct relationship with the Chairman

Yet many of us have such blind allegiance to Mr Petrie that we see his role as above question

I've said it before that it's become a convenient excuse for Mr Petrie to end the contract of the first-team coach. In doing so that person becomes the patsy, the fall guy for all the ills at the Football Club

Yet Rod, who is really in charge, carries on regardless as do the board

How many more managers must be sacrificed before we find out what's really going on?

Who are these people, Gordon Waddell is a mouthpiece for Yogi. Are these the "real fitba folk" that were hinted at by our hugely (un)successful ex manager during the last days of his madness?

Ray_
31-01-2011, 12:50 PM
I suspect Mr Waddell knowledge of cask conditioned ale far exceeds his knowledge of football finances.

What he fails to appreciate that money from player sales could be used to finance player acquisitions, it could also be used to make up that part of the wage bill that isn't covered by other income. What it CANNOT be used for is BOTH!!

The following shows this point graphically -
http://www.football-finances.org.uk/hibs/2010/profits2.htm

I have come to the conclusion that people who comment on club finances but who don't cover wages to turnover ratio or amortisation are just timewasters.

As regards amortisation, there is nothing to stop a manager buying players if he wished to go for quality rather than bulk. The following link, albeit about Celtic, explains this -
http://www.football-finances.org.uk/celtic/2010/amortisation2.htm

Here is the Hibs one -
http://www.football-finances.org.uk/hibs/2010/amortisation2.htm

So the quality of the staff & the way we perform doesn't affect turnover? We can go right down to the third division & pay appropriate wages and be in profit every season, without having to sell players, season on season, but then we would rarely have anybody worth selling, [much like the position we have almost reached now]. I think people who can't incorporate growth within their figures are time-wasters & I happen to believe that is why we are in such poor nick now.

RIP
31-01-2011, 12:59 PM
Who are these people, Gordon Waddell is a mouthpiece for Yogi. Are these the "real fitba folk" that were hinted at by our hugely (un)successful ex manager during the last days of his madness?


The manager who was undermined by Petrie and asked to pick his signings from a pot of names supplied by agents?
The manager who is now doing a fine job at Kille without the constraints he had at ER?
The manager who only had 3 of his first picks signed by Petrie?
The manager who had his assistant picked by Petrie as succession planning?
Former players who are now speaking out?
Journalists who are now speaking out?


Given the nature of confidentiality agreements you would expect everybody to keep quiet? But an increasing number and speaking out. Why is this - if there's nothing to see.

Maybe we should just believe?

Arch Stanton
31-01-2011, 01:06 PM
So the quality of the staff & the way we perform doesn't affect turnover? We can go right down to the third division & pay appropriate wages and be in profit every season, without having to sell players, season on season, but then we would rarely have anybody worth selling, [much like the position we have almost reached now]. I think people who can't incorporate growth within their figures are time-wasters & I happen to believe that is why we are in such poor nick now.

Some day there might be computers with logic checkers as well as spell checkers, and maybe then we will hear the last of the twaddle spoken about ambition and growth and investment for that's all it is, twaddle.

Mind you at least that bit is comprehensible unlike the guff that precedes it.

Phil D. Rolls
31-01-2011, 01:07 PM
The manager who was undermined by Petrie and asked to pick his signings from a pot of names supplied by agents?
The manager who is now doing a fine job at Kille without the constraints he had at ER?
The manager who only had 3 of his first picks signed by Petrie?
The manager who had his assistant picked by Petrie as succession planning?
Former players who are now speaking out?
Journalists who are now speaking out?


Given the nature of confidentiality agreements you would expect everybody to keep quiet? But an increasing number and speaking out. Why is this - if there's nothing to see.

Maybe we should just believe?

Jeez, I am starting to sound like an apologist for Petrie here. All I am saying is that those speaking out are hardly impartial, and so maybe a pinch of salt is needed.

If Petrie has been lying to the shareholders he would be in trouble. If players, managers and their pals get mixed up about the facts, they can just pass it off as a mistake.

Jackie MacNamara had something to say, when was he last in the Hibs boardroom, I think Kano and Keith Wright have also been accredited with remarks, again how close to the club are they?

Just take a look at some of the rubbish Gary MacKay has been coming out with for years about his beloved Hearts - players aren't the sharpest tools in the box. Yet their word is taken as gospel.

I am not saying nothing is going on, I am wanting to see more reliable evidence before I decide.

AlbertK86
31-01-2011, 01:08 PM
Contrary to what some people might think at the beginning of the thread I would take everything each and every journalists says with a large pinch of salt.

I would not believe them if they told me that each new day started after midnight !

However as has been said already by others why do we go through so many managers who can't and aren't as bad prior to or after they leave Hibs.

On this occasion Mr waddell has a point .... all are restrcited by Rod 'I rule the roost' Petrie

Phil D. Rolls
31-01-2011, 01:16 PM
Contrary to what some people might think at the beginning of the thread I would take everything each and every journalists says with a large pinch of salt.

I would not believe them if they told me that each new day started after midnight !

However as has been said already by others why do we go through so many managers who can't and aren't as bad prior to or after they leave Hibs.

On this occasion Mr waddell has a point .... all are restrcited by Rod 'I rule the roost' Petrie


Well, Mixu previously managed Cowdenbeath, so he was at a lower level. By his own admission he wasn't ready for Hibs, and took a year out to reflect and learn more.

Collins and Mowbray had never managed before, Collins hasn't managed since, and Mowbray has had mixed fortunes again at a higher level.

Hughes was pretty awful at Falkirk, was awful at Hibs, and hasn't exactly been fighting off new clubs with a stick. So really your facts don't stack up.

Not saying they are not restricted by the chairman, it happens at a lot of clubs. Look at Hearts - the owner was actually picking the team and deciding on substitutes.

They are a bunch of plonkers though, and I would hate the only positive thing about Hibs to be that they are not in as bad a mess as Hearts. I'm sure you'll agree that we wouldn't want that, I mean Hearts are just horrible, aren't they?

Arch Stanton
31-01-2011, 01:17 PM
Contrary to what some people might think at the beginning of the thread I would take everything each and every journalists says with a large pinch of salt.

I would not believe them if they told me that each new day started after midnight !

However as has been said already by others why do we go through so many managers who can't and aren't as bad prior to or after they leave Hibs.

On this occasion Mr waddell has a point .... all are restrcited by Rod 'I rule the roost' Petrie

I guess that's as good a piece of fiction as any.

Personally I reckon that managers come to Hibs thinking that they will make Hibs into the huge club it deserves to be and then bring in loads of players to give themselves a nice big pool of players to choose from.

Mixu is doing better at Kilmarnock with less funds available than he had at at ER - how exactly did RP muck it up for him when he was here?

bawheid
31-01-2011, 01:19 PM
They are a bunch of plonkers though, and I would hate the only positive thing about Hibs to be that they are not in as bad a mess as Hearts. I'm sure you'll agree that we wouldn't want that, I mean Hearts are just horrible, aren't they?

:agree:

The insistance on calling everyone Mr is the giveaway.

greenlex
31-01-2011, 01:19 PM
The manager who was undermined by Petrie and asked to pick his signings from a pot of names supplied by agents? Do you think the following players were supplied to Hibs managers in that manner? Sheils Murphy O'Brien Jonieliet McBride Cregg Stokes Riordan Duffy
The manager who is now doing a fine job at Kille without the constraints he had at ER? Not what I have heard from a first team player. Still doesnt have a plan B. He will get caught out eventually
The manager who only had 3 of his first picks signed by Petrie? Name names
The manager who had his assistant picked by Petrie as succession planning? Pure speculation.
Former players who are now speaking out? Name names
Journalists who are now speaking out? Wouldnt believe any of them pro or anti board.

Given the nature of confidentiality agreements you would expect everybody to keep quiet? But an increasing number and speaking out. Why is this - if there's nothing to see.

Maybe we should just believe?
.

Removed
31-01-2011, 01:21 PM
FR - I thought Collins went to Belgium not long after he walked out on us?

Greenblood70
31-01-2011, 01:21 PM
I suspect Mr Waddell knowledge of cask conditioned ale far exceeds his knowledge of football finances.

What he fails to appreciate that money from player sales could be used to finance player acquisitions, it could also be used to make up that part of the wage bill that isn't covered by other income. What it CANNOT be used for is BOTH!!

The following shows this point graphically -
http://www.football-finances.org.uk/hibs/2010/profits2.htm

I have come to the conclusion that people who comment on club finances but who don't cover wages to turnover ratio or amortisation are just timewasters.

As regards amortisation, there is nothing to stop a manager buying players if he wished to go for quality rather than bulk. The following link, albeit about Celtic, explains this -
http://www.football-finances.org.uk/celtic/2010/amortisation2.htm

Here is the Hibs one -
http://www.football-finances.org.uk/hibs/2010/amortisation2.htm

Interesting links, thanks for posting.

Looking at the "Payroll" section I was interested to note this paragraph -

"The Hibs directors take over 10% of the club income. The next highest figure in Scottish football is Aberdeen at 4%, for the rest of the clubs it is under 2%. Clearly the Hibs board values itself far higher than any other."

Is there any reason for this or anything to put in perspective or is it as black and white as it's painted on that link?

No wonder Smurf does his nut at the £500k we're shelling out versus performance!!

Ray_
31-01-2011, 01:28 PM
Some day there might be computers with logic checkers as well as spell checkers, and maybe then we will hear the last of the twaddle spoken about ambition and growth and investment for that's all it is, twaddle.

Mind you at least that bit is comprehensible unlike the guff that precedes it.

Your logical mind didn't teach you anything about manners did it, do you always get insulting when a differing opinion is offered, might be because, no matter what, you are always right?

So, tell us mere mortals that only have facts to guide us, what part of this logical path are we now?

Anyway, my limited observation tells me that without players sales the club would have been losing money and with our buying policy, we have little left to sell. And if we add the fact that as a business, we have a product that's so poor, even season ticket holders can't be bothered going, crowds are drifting away, merchandising & hospitality seriously down.

So where do you think we are going wrong or is this all part of the master-plan, or are you that blinkered in front of that computer of yours, trying to figure out how you can incorporate a logical link, you can't see what's happening in the real world?

CropleyWasGod
31-01-2011, 01:33 PM
Interesting links, thanks for posting.

Looking at the "Payroll" section I was interested to note this paragraph -

"The Hibs directors take over 10% of the club income. The next highest figure in Scottish football is Aberdeen at 4%, for the rest of the clubs it is under 2%. Clearly the Hibs board values itself far higher than any other."

Is there any reason for this or anything to put in perspective or is it as black and white as it's painted on that link?

No wonder Smurf does his nut at the £500k we're shelling out versus performance!!

It's been discussed before. Hibs have their senior employees on the Board; other clubs don't. Therefore comparisons are invalid.

sahib
31-01-2011, 01:36 PM
Personally the allegations made by Waddell are slanderous and potentially libellous, I'd be very interested in hearing our Chairmans comments on several of these matters. GW has printed as a matter of fact certain aspects that should be the sole control of the football manager of the club, I believe that GW is friendly with Hughes from his time at Falkirk and would hope that what is printed is factually incorrect but it would certainly help to explain recent comments from ex managers.

re not a democracy, yes but can you remind Rod (the next time your down at East Mains) that he is simply the current custodian of our football club :wink:

You can't be charged for stating the truth.
This being Scotland I think he will be alright unless he defames anyone.

sahib
31-01-2011, 01:38 PM
Just read an article in the Sunday Mail where Waddell accused Rod of being a control freak basically.

Welcome to the real world... has he just noticed !!!

He makes the point that despite raking in millions for our top players over the years time and again only a tiny fraction has been re-invested in replacing them.

Once again this season over a million in for Stokes, Bamba and Zemmama and only £80k paid out. aye you could argue about wages but I bet there wages will more than cover who we have brought in.
He also made the point about Calderwood not being allowed to bring in his own tried and trusted assistance and that Rod decided who his assistance would be. I noticed a few weeks ago that the chemistry does not seem to be there between CC and DA and it looked to me as if DA was pushing to get subs on at Ayr but CC wasn't for it.

Liked all CCs new signings yesterday and believe if he is allowed to do it his way he can build a decent team.

All we need now is for ROD PETRIE to prove Waddell wrong and invest today to back his manager and keep us in the top flight. Mass clearout in the summer thereafter.

ROD IF YOU SHIRK YOUR DUTY TO THE FANS AND YOUR MANAGER THEN YOU SHOULD BE AS MR WADDELL HINTS ...... OUT THE DOOR

Add Hogg's wages to the savings as well.

RIP
31-01-2011, 01:41 PM
Many of the journos points are, like ours, conjecture

However if the buck ultimately stops with Petrie and our board.......

And if figures are to be believed, they take 10% of income compared with 4% and 2% at other SPL clubs.........

They why in an underperforming business is it only the first-team coach that's sacked for poor performance?

If I wanted good financials at my football club I'd hire an accountant

I'm not sure I would hire 3 though! It's hardly surprising if they end up looking for other jobs to do

CropleyWasGod
31-01-2011, 01:43 PM
Many of the journos points are, like ours, conjecture

However if the buck ultimately stops with Petrie and our board.......

And if figures are to be believed, they take 10% of income compared with 4% and 2% at other SPL clubs.........

They why in an underperforming business is it only the first-team coach that's sacked for poor performance?

If I wanted good financials at my football club I'd hire an accountant

I'm not sure I would hire 3 though! It's hardly surprising if they end up looking for other jobs to do

Again, just not valid.

Beefster
31-01-2011, 01:50 PM
Again, just not valid.

What do other chairmen of clubs of our size/turnover take in salary?

CropleyWasGod
31-01-2011, 01:57 PM
What do other chairmen of clubs of our size/turnover take in salary?

I really don't know. But I am arguing against the oft-put statistic about the percentage of turnover our Board take out. As has been said consistently (and, apparently, ignored) our senior employees are on the Board, whilst they aren't at other clubs. Hence the fallacy in comparing apples and pears.

The_Sauz
31-01-2011, 02:09 PM
The manager who was undermined by Petrie and asked to pick his signings from a pot of names supplied by agents?
The manager who is now doing a fine job at Kille without the constraints he had at ER



The manager who only had 3 of his first picks signed by Petrie?
The manager who had his assistant picked by Petrie as succession planning?
Former players who are now speaking out?
Journalists who are now speaking out?


Given the nature of confidentiality agreements you would expect everybody to keep quiet? But an increasing number and speaking out. Why is this - if there's nothing to see.

Maybe we should just believe?

Have you ever spoke to Rod Petrie, have ever phoned or written to him personally
about the above, or do you just read what the papers spill out.

Phil D. Rolls
31-01-2011, 02:12 PM
FR - I thought Collins went to Belgium not long after he walked out on us?

That rings a bell, was it Charleroi? I don't think he did much there though, which was the OP's point.

blackpoolhibs
31-01-2011, 02:19 PM
That rings a bell, was it Charleroi? I don't think he did much there though, which was the OP's point.

Thats the team, Collins had huge success there, left and Tommy Craig took over later on, and he had more of the same success before leaving to seek pastures new.

The_Sauz
31-01-2011, 02:21 PM
How come the last three managers when asked about the budgets they had recived for players when they joined the club, they all agreed they were fine and manageable for what they needed, but as soon as they are sacked, they come back and say they did not get the backing from the board.
If they had the stones to be honest and say, I could not reach the targets that were set a side by the board when I took on the job, then half this crap would not be going on!

Phil D. Rolls
31-01-2011, 02:25 PM
How come the last three managers when asked about the budgets they had recived for players when they joined the club, they all agreed they were fine and manageable for what they needed, but as soon as they are sacked, they come back and say they did not get the backing from the board.
If they had the stones to be honest and say, I could not reach the targets that were set a side by the board when I took on the job, then half this crap would not be going on!

I hope you are not suggesting that they take some element of responsibility for their failure? That sort of thing is just not in the make up of real fitba folk, they're just not bright enough - except when it comes to counting their pay.

The Falcon
31-01-2011, 02:26 PM
Personally the allegations made by Waddell are slanderous and potentially libellous, I'd be very interested in hearing our Chairmans comments on several of these matters. GW has printed as a matter of fact certain aspects that should be the sole control of the football manager of the club, I believe that GW is friendly with Hughes from his time at Falkirk and would hope that what is printed is factually incorrect but it would certainly help to explain recent comments from ex managers.

re not a democracy, yes but can you remind Rod (the next time your down at East Mains) that he is simply the current custodian of our football club :wink:

I will do that Paul :greengrin

The point I was making was that while we regard them as "custodians" of our Club that by any measure of law they actually own it, lock stock and barrell. That means they can do with it what they will.

joebakerforever
31-01-2011, 02:29 PM
I really don't know. But I am arguing against the oft-put statistic about the percentage of turnover our Board take out. As has been said consistently (and, apparently, ignored) our senior employees are on the Board, whilst they aren't at other clubs. Hence the fallacy in comparing apples and pears.

For those of us not well versed in deciphering Annual Accounts, it appears to be very difficult to achieve like-for-like comparisons between various Clubs, depending on how the data is presented by each.

On a simplistic level is it possible to extract the following aggregate information from Hibs Annual Accounts since 2005:-


Player Wage Bill per season

Transfer Income received per season

Transfer expenditure per season

I am aware there are other factors involved in running a club, but the above figures are probably the most contentious on here.

Arch Stanton
31-01-2011, 02:30 PM
I really don't know. But I am arguing against the oft-put statistic about the percentage of turnover our Board take out. As has been said consistently (and, apparently, ignored) our senior employees are on the Board, whilst they aren't at other clubs. Hence the fallacy in comparing apples and pears.

I took in on myself to send an email correcting this to the football finances site as this seems to be the main source for people making this point - hopefully they will correct this and we won't see it so often.

Beefster
31-01-2011, 02:51 PM
Have you ever spoke to Rod Petrie, have ever phoned or written to him personally
about the above, or do you just read what the papers spill out.

Have you ever tried to speak to Rodders about anything other than banal chit-chat? Unless you know him far better than most Hibs fans, he squirms, mumbles and moves on.


How come the last three managers when asked about the budgets they had recived for players when they joined the club, they all agreed they were fine and manageable for what they needed, but as soon as they are sacked, they come back and say they did not get the backing from the board.
If they had the stones to be honest and say, I could not reach the targets that were set a side by the board when I took on the job, then half this crap would not be going on!

Whilst I'm sure that there's an element of revisionism going on, especially by Hughes, I'm fairly sure most folk, if asked in public and with their bosses watching, would say everything was hunky dory.

RIP
31-01-2011, 03:45 PM
How come the last three managers when asked about the budgets they had recived for players when they joined the club, they all agreed they were fine and manageable for what they needed, but as soon as they are sacked, they come back and say they did not get the backing from the board.
If they had the stones to be honest and say, I could not reach the targets that were set a side by the board when I took on the job, then half this crap would not be going on!

Can you name a single manager who has said they did not get financial backing from the board?

Thought not - just another red herring in the Defend the Board campaign

If anything we have suffered from :-


Too many players brought in
Too few of the first-team coach's first pick
Too many picked from the 'pot' of players whose agents came direct to Petrie
Lack of an overall squad building strategy


Did we really have to turn over 90 players and 4 coaching teams in 5 years?
Or is this just another example of our Director's lack of acumen in all matters football?

Maybe he thought that rebuilding a football club was as easy as selling all it's viable assets. It appears not.

greenlex
31-01-2011, 03:50 PM
Can you name a single manager who has said they did not get financial backing from the board?

Thought not - just another red herring in the Defend the Board campaign

If anything we have suffered from :-


Too many players brought in
Too few of the first-team coach's first pick
Too many picked from the 'pot' of players whose agents came direct to Petrie
Lack of an overall squad building strategy


Did we really have to turn over 90 players and 4 coaching teams in 5 years?
Or is this just another example of our Director's lack of acumen in all matters football?

Maybe he thought that rebuilding a football club was as easy as selling all it's viable assets. It appears not.
You keep banging on about this pot of players from agents etc. Are you under the impression that its only Hibs that do this? Every club in the world has had to do this post bosman its not a Hibs thing you know.:rolleyes:

RIP
31-01-2011, 04:09 PM
You keep banging on about this pot of players from agents etc. Are you under the impression that its only Hibs that do this? Every club in the world has had to do this post bosman its not a Hibs thing you know.:rolleyes:

Does the chairman get involved in this at other clubs or does he merely set the overall budget and allow the football management team the authority to work within these boundaries?

greenlex
31-01-2011, 04:11 PM
Does the chairman get involved in this at other clubs or does he merely set the overall budget and allow the football management team the authority to work within these boundaries?
I would think all chairmen get involved. What makes you think others dont?

CropleyWasGod
31-01-2011, 04:13 PM
Does the chairman get involved in this at other clubs or does he merely set the overall budget and allow the football management team the authority to work within these boundaries?

It has been said that Hearts' financial problems started the day Robinson got the money from IMG, but still allowed JJ to deal with the agents. They were shafted royally in that period, solely due to JJ's inabilities in that regard.

It would be irresponsible of any club not to have its CE/chair involved at some point in the player negotiations.

down the slope
31-01-2011, 04:15 PM
Does the chairman get involved in this at other clubs or does he merely set the overall budget and allow the football management team the authority to work within these boundaries?


Only at the club rub by Vlad the mad , we used to laugh at the goings on across there but if this article is true then we are every bit as bad only we pay less !.

Cropley10
31-01-2011, 04:39 PM
"He decides who stays and who goes. He decides what staff the manager gets to work with, all the way down to the physios.He sets the budget, he carries out the negotiations and the scouts report to him rather than the manager."


So - if the above is true, and at the end of the day Mr Waddell could find himself in Court if this isn't true - we DO have a Director of Football and his name is Mr Petrie.


I mean the Scouts report to him - this is either true or it isn't and it will be very easy to find out. It really is an extraordinary situation to have the Chairman controlling these types of things.



As PaulSmith points out - yes he's the second largest shareholder, but actually he's just the current custodian of the Club. And if we get relegated he really should reconsider what he does and how he does it.

Kaiser1962
31-01-2011, 04:58 PM
Of course it never occurred to you that all these people might be saying because it's true?

Thought not.

I cant get over what sort of total cowards and pansies we must repeatedly employ as managers who take being dictated to in this way? This alone make me think the guy is talking out his erse.

Beefster
31-01-2011, 05:09 PM
I cant get over what sort of total cowards and pansies we must repeatedly employ as managers who take being dictated to in this way? This alone make me think the guy is talking out his erse.

Football managers (up here at least) will rarely resign as they usually have mortgages, families to feed and so on. The only manager without these worries in recent times resigned whilst pretty much blaming Rodders.

Kaiser1962
31-01-2011, 05:21 PM
Football managers (up here at least) will rarely resign as they usually have mortgages, families to feed and so on. The only manager without these worries in recent times resigned whilst pretty much blaming Rodders.

After filling the squad with quality players?

I think Calderwood has done okay out the game and dont imagine he will be on the breadline if he's out of work tomorrow. If my boss repeatedly made an arse out of my work and then tried to blame me he would need surgery to remove his head from his anus. I cant imagine that this man who has a reputation for hard work and diligence would lie to cover up interference in his job. If he's not allowed to do his job independently surely thats breach of contract?

Arch Stanton
31-01-2011, 05:49 PM
"He decides who stays and who goes. He decides what staff the manager gets to work with, all the way down to the physios.He sets the budget, he carries out the negotiations and the scouts report to him rather than the manager."


So - if the above is true, and at the end of the day Mr Waddell could find himself in Court if this isn't true - we DO have a Director of Football and his name is Mr Petrie.


I mean the Scouts report to him - this is either true or it isn't and it will be very easy to find out. It really is an extraordinary situation to have the Chairman controlling these types of things.



As PaulSmith points out - yes he's the second largest shareholder, but actually he's just the current custodian of the Club. And if we get relegated he really should reconsider what he does and how he does it.

He appoints backroom staff - yes, and?
He sets the budget - absolutely, who else?
He carries out negotiations - again absolutely - this is a very skilled, time consuming and specialist task.
The scouts report to him - most of this will be checking their expenses - you seem to infer that things would be kept secret from the manager which is ludicrous.

However your biggie is "He decides who stays and who goes. " - journalists might freely make such grandiose claims but on here people will expect you to back it up - so I'm waiting.

Beefster
31-01-2011, 06:10 PM
He appoints backroom staff - yes, and?
He sets the budget - absolutely, who else?
He carries out negotiations - again absolutely - this is a very skilled, time consuming and specialist task.
The scouts report to him - most of this will be checking their expenses - you seem to infer that things would be kept secret from the manager which is ludicrous.

However your biggie is "He decides who stays and who goes. " - journalists might freely make such grandiose claims but on here people will expect you to back it up - so I'm waiting.

The bits in bold show that you know as much as the rest of us. The scouts report to him because of expenses?! Seriously?

Calderwood should be in charge of all footballing staff and who fills these roles - players, coaches, scouts, medics, physios, whoever. Rodders should be in charge of finances and contract negotiations.

There are too many stories coming out now about Rodders' way of working for, at least, some of it to be true.

greenlex
31-01-2011, 06:14 PM
The bits in bold show that you know as much as the rest of us. The scouts report to him because of expenses?! Seriously?

Calderwood should be in charge of all footballing staff and who fills these roles - players, coaches, scouts, medics, physios, whoever. Rodders should be in charge of finances and contract negotiations.

There are too many stories coming out now about Rodders' way of working for, at least, some of it to be true.

Calderwood should be in charge of playing matters (this should include first team coaching) and that should be it. He will and does ,like his predecessors, have the final say on who comes in and who goes.
The rest stay with the club should he leave so should not be his remit. It is right the board/chairman oversees the rest.

Kaiser1962
31-01-2011, 06:17 PM
Thats the team, Collins had huge success there, left and Tommy Craig took over later on, and he had more of the same success before leaving to seek pastures new.

Huge success? Like?

ancient hibee
31-01-2011, 06:49 PM
The fact that Yogi and Mixu were so easily bullied as players assures me that they are going to be terrified of a 15 stone,short sighted accountant.Does anyone really think that Ancelloti is the driving force for paying £50m for Torres?Does anyone think that Pardew wants to get rid of Carroll?

CropleyWasGod
31-01-2011, 06:59 PM
The bits in bold show that you know as much as the rest of us. The scouts report to him because of expenses?! Seriously?

Calderwood should be in charge of all footballing staff and who fills these roles - players, coaches, scouts, medics, physios, whoever. Rodders should be in charge of finances and contract negotiations.

There are too many stories coming out now about Rodders' way of working for, at least, some of it to be true.

Agreed on the first two paragraphs.

The last one, though, I'm not so sure. RP has never been one to mix with the media, as we know. That doesn't sit well with the journos, and they may have their own agenda as a result. Mix that in with disgruntled ex-employees, and one can understand where negative stories come from.

Mibbes Aye
31-01-2011, 07:05 PM
The bits in bold show that you know as much as the rest of us. The scouts report to him because of expenses?! Seriously?

Calderwood should be in charge of all footballing staff and who fills these roles - players, coaches, scouts, medics, physios, whoever. Rodders should be in charge of finances and contract negotiations.

There are too many stories coming out now about Rodders' way of working for, at least, some of it to be true.

Weren't there over a hundred applications for the job after Hughes left? That's an awful lot of people obviously prepared to work with him. Makes you think that maybe the truth is he's a useful scapegoat for the likes of Hughes' buddies. And let's face it, Petrie's been a scapegoat figure on here for years.

On another note, not related to your post Beefster, it doesn't make any sense to compare our transfer income and transfer expenditure.

If we sell a player for two million, he'll be going to a club that can afford two million on a transfer fee and pays wages accordingly. We're not able to pay the wages of a player costing two million pounds, pure and simple. That's why players move on from Hibs.

It's a useful stick for some posters who want to have a go at the club, but the simple fact is that we will never likely spend anything close to what we take in, on transfer fees.

Arch Stanton
31-01-2011, 07:09 PM
The bits in bold show that you know as much as the rest of us. The scouts report to him because of expenses?! Seriously?

Calderwood should be in charge of all footballing staff and who fills these roles - players, coaches, scouts, medics, physios, whoever. Rodders should be in charge of finances and contract negotiations.

There are too many stories coming out now about Rodders' way of working for, at least, some of it to be true.

Not what I said - I have no idea what happens with scouts, I was replying to a post that said he did.

There is a lot of work in managing any staff - why would you want your manager doing anything other than looking after the coaches and players? As long as he gets the scouting reports then he should be focussing on what matters.

Iain G
31-01-2011, 07:34 PM
Just read an article in the Sunday Mail where Waddell accused Rod of being a control freak basically.

Welcome to the real world... has he just noticed !!!

He makes the point that despite raking in millions for our top players over the years time and again only a tiny fraction has been re-invested in replacing them.

Once again this season over a million in for Stokes, Bamba and Zemmama and only £80k paid out. aye you could argue about wages but I bet there wages will more than cover who we have brought in.

He also made the point about Calderwood not being allowed to bring in his own tried and trusted assistance and that Rod decided who his assistance would be. I noticed a few weeks ago that the chemistry does not seem to be there between CC and DA and it looked to me as if DA was pushing to get subs on at Ayr but CC wasn't for it.

Liked all CCs new signings yesterday and believe if he is allowed to do it his way he can build a decent team.

All we need now is for ROD PETRIE to prove Waddell wrong and invest today to back his manager and keep us in the top flight. Mass clearout in the summer thereafter.

ROD IF YOU SHIRK YOUR DUTY TO THE FANS AND YOUR MANAGER THEN YOU SHOULD BE AS MR WADDELL HINTS ...... OUT THE DOOR

Is this what it has come to, our own supporters are now taking the sides of some 2 bit hack halfwit journalist who is doing no more than having a lazy trawl through these forums for ideas for a lazy article, instead of trusting our own club? :confused:

No it's not time for Petrie to prove Waddell wrong, it's time for lazy hacks like Waddell to prove that what he is saying is right...am getting damned fed up with this lazy muck raking, stories made up from no more research than reading this bleeding forum, but mostly of our fans believing this poor excuse for Sports coverage over ANYTHING said by anyone in connection with the football team they are supposed to support.

If he actually did his research it's time for him to name names and use direct quotes instead of inferring all of this bollox.

It's bloody sad that our own support have stopped actually supporting...

Iain G
31-01-2011, 07:36 PM
Can you name a single manager who has said they did not get financial backing from the board?

Thought not - just another red herring in the Defend the Board campaign

If anything we have suffered from :-


Too many players brought in
Too few of the first-team coach's first pick
Too many picked from the 'pot' of players whose agents came direct to Petrie
Lack of an overall squad building strategy


Did we really have to turn over 90 players and 4 coaching teams in 5 years?
Or is this just another example of our Director's lack of acumen in all matters football?

Maybe he thought that rebuilding a football club was as easy as selling all it's viable assets. It appears not.

Good grief, this is Celtic level paranoia kicking in now...

Kaiser1962
31-01-2011, 08:13 PM
Is this what it has come to, our own supporters are now taking the sides of some 2 bit hack halfwit journalist who is doing no more than having a lazy trawl through these forums for ideas for a lazy article, instead of trusting our own club? :confused:

No it's not time for Petrie to prove Waddell wrong, it's time for lazy hacks like Waddell to prove that what he is saying is right...am getting damned fed up with this lazy muck raking, stories made up from no more research than reading this bleeding forum, but mostly of our fans believing this poor excuse for Sports coverage over ANYTHING said by anyone in connection with the football team they are supposed to support.

If he actually did his research it's time for him to name names and use direct quotes instead of inferring all of this bollox.

It's bloody sad that our own support have stopped actually supporting...

That stopped a while ago.

joebakerforever
01-02-2011, 12:28 AM
For those of us not well versed in deciphering Annual Accounts, it appears to be very difficult to achieve like-for-like comparisons between various Clubs, depending on how the data is presented by each.

On a simplistic level is it possible to extract the following aggregate information from Hibs Annual Accounts since 2005:-


Player Wage Bill per season

Transfer Income received per season

Transfer expenditure per season

I am aware there are other factors involved in running a club, but the above figures are probably the most contentious on here.




On another note, not related to your post Beefster, it doesn't make any sense to compare our transfer income and transfer expenditure.

If we sell a player for two million, he'll be going to a club that can afford two million on a transfer fee and pays wages accordingly. We're not able to pay the wages of a player costing two million pounds, pure and simple. That's why players move on from Hibs.

It's a useful stick for some posters who want to have a go at the club, but the simple fact is that we will never likely spend anything close to what we take in, on transfer fees.

Aye just ignore that the original comparison requested, included the Player Wage Bill also.

Then it's embellished further with the bogus inference that a like-for-like sum would be expected to replace anyone sold.

No one is expecting the total monies taken in transfer fees to be completely reinvested, but some on here claim that £3m is the reinvestment figure so it would be useful to balance this figure (if it can be verified) against the actual transfer income over the same period.

It seems some on here are opposed to the fans having access to this information and will try to browbeat anyone who dares ask the questions.

RIP
01-02-2011, 12:33 PM
The fact that Yogi and Mixu were so easily bullied as players assures me that they are going to be terrified of a 15 stone,short sighted accountant.Does anyone really think that Ancelloti is the driving force for paying £50m for Torres?Does anyone think that Pardew wants to get rid of Carroll?

:faf: I once had a one-eyed gaffer who was a foot shorter than me. But he paid my wages and that meant he had control over me. The fact is that Petrie has all power - not just at Hibs, but within the corridors of power at the SPL. He may be an accountant but he is a long way short of accountable.

The comparisons with other clubs are irrelevant


Good grief, this is Celtic level paranoia kicking in now...

Why make that sort of statement when you could have just picked holes in my argument instead? :wink:

Mibbes Aye
01-02-2011, 01:09 PM
Aye just ignore that the original comparison requested, included the Player Wage Bill also.

Then it's embellished further with the bogus inference that a like-for-like sum would be expected to replace anyone sold.

No one is expecting the total monies taken in transfer fees to be completely reinvested, but some on here claim that £3m is the reinvestment figure so it would be useful to balance this figure (if it can be verified) against the actual transfer income over the same period.

It seems some on here are opposed to the fans having access to this information and will try to browbeat anyone who dares ask the questions.

My reply wasn't actually directed at you, so I wouldn't take it too personally :greengrin

I think we're in agreement about the crucial point - it's wages that make the difference in attracting players.

The difference between transfer fees in and transfer fees out is misleading, because our strategy should be to sell high, if we have to sell, and ideally focus on bringing in players who have let their contracts run down, so that we can put our money into signing-on fees to boost what is a limited wage budget and make us more attractive to players otherwise outwith our reach.

Phil D. Rolls
01-02-2011, 05:56 PM
Is this what it has come to, our own supporters are now taking the sides of some 2 bit hack halfwit journalist who is doing no more than having a lazy trawl through these forums for ideas for a lazy article, instead of trusting our own club? :confused:

No it's not time for Petrie to prove Waddell wrong, it's time for lazy hacks like Waddell to prove that what he is saying is right...am getting damned fed up with this lazy muck raking, stories made up from no more research than reading this bleeding forum, but mostly of our fans believing this poor excuse for Sports coverage over ANYTHING said by anyone in connection with the football team they are supposed to support.

If he actually did his research it's time for him to name names and use direct quotes instead of inferring all of this bollox.

It's bloody sad that our own support have stopped actually supporting...

:top marks


Aye just ignore that the original comparison requested, included the Player Wage Bill also.

Then it's embellished further with the bogus inference that a like-for-like sum would be expected to replace anyone sold.

No one is expecting the total monies taken in transfer fees to be completely reinvested, but some on here claim that £3m is the reinvestment figure so it would be useful to balance this figure (if it can be verified) against the actual transfer income over the same period.

It seems some on here are opposed to the fans having access to this information and will try to browbeat anyone who dares ask the questions.

With the greatest respect, what could the fans do with the information if they had it? Reading this forum, it appears that the only answer most want is the easiest one, with the least thought required.

I think it's one thing people criticising a player, or a manager's selections and results. The day we get into playing Fantasy Football Director is the day they might as well throw away the keys to the asylum.

The_Sauz
01-02-2011, 06:49 PM
Is this what it has come to, our own supporters are now taking the sides of some 2 bit hack halfwit journalist who is doing no more than having a lazy trawl through these forums for ideas for a lazy article, instead of trusting our own club? :confused:

No it's not time for Petrie to prove Waddell wrong, it's time for lazy hacks like Waddell to prove that what he is saying is right...am getting damned fed up with this lazy muck raking, stories made up from no more research than reading this bleeding forum, but mostly of our fans believing this poor excuse for Sports coverage over ANYTHING said by anyone in connection with the football team they are supposed to support.

If he actually did his research it's time for him to name names and use direct quotes instead of inferring all of this bollox.

It's bloody sad that our own support have stopped actually supporting...

The thing is....some on here believe what he says :agree: If he wrote a story about Deeks tomorrow about being in touble with the police......will they believe him then...nah!!

The_Sauz
01-02-2011, 06:52 PM
Have you ever tried to speak to Rodders about anything other than banal chit-chat? Unless you know him far better than most Hibs fans, he squirms, mumbles and moves on.



Whilst I'm sure that there's an element of revisionism going on, especially by Hughes, I'm fairly sure most folk, if asked in public and with their bosses watching, would say everything was hunky dory.

Yes I have spoken to him a few times, and I don't mean BTG :wink:

The_Sauz
01-02-2011, 07:12 PM
Can you name a single manager who has said they did not get financial backing from the board?

COLLINS/MIXU/HUGHES....all said it after they got sacked

Thought not - just another red herring in the Defend the Board campaign

If anything we have suffered from :-


Too many players brought in.....Who's fault is that?
Too few of the first-team coach's first pick.....How do you know this?
Too many picked from the 'pot' of players whose agents came direct to Petrie
Lack of an overall squad building strategy......Who's fault it that?


Did we really have to turn over 90 players and 4 coaching teams in 5 years?
Or is this just another example of our Director's lack of acumen in all matters football?

Maybe he thought that rebuilding a football club was as easy as selling all it's viable assets. It appears not.
Why do you bother supporting Hibs, when it's clear as day, you don't like the way it has been run.
It must have been a nightmare for you when we built East Mains/East Stand, and brought in players like Stokes & Millar or even when we brought back Deeks, not to mention Murray came back from Norwich, only to find out it was not the manager who wanted them here....but Petrie!!
I guess he must have got lucky with the bingo ball's back then!!:bitchy:

The Falcon
01-02-2011, 08:25 PM
Why do you bother supporting Hibs, when it's clear as day, you don't like the way it has been run.
It must have been a nightmare for you when we built East Mains/East Stand, and brought in players like Stokes & Millar or even when we brought back Deeks, not to mention Murray came back from Norwich, only to find out it was not the manager who wanted them here....but Petrie!!
I guess he must have got lucky with the bingo ball's back then!!:bitchy:


:tee hee:

The Falcon
01-02-2011, 08:38 PM
Too few of the first-team coach's first pick
Too many picked from the 'pot' of players whose agents came direct to Petrie
.

Can you provide names to back up these two points?

And please dont say Nish and Rankin as its been done to death with no proof provided.

Kaiser1962
01-02-2011, 08:40 PM
You can't be charged for stating the truth.
This being Scotland I think he will be alright unless he defames anyone.

As long as you have evidence that it is the truth.

Duffys13
01-02-2011, 08:58 PM
Only at the club rub by Vlad the mad , we used to laugh at the goings on across there but if this article is true then we are every bit as bad only we pay less !.

Behave

joebakerforever
02-02-2011, 06:25 PM
:top marks



With the greatest respect, what could the fans do with the information if they had it? Reading this forum, it appears that the only answer most want is the easiest one, with the least thought required.

I think it's one thing people criticising a player, or a manager's selections and results. The day we get into playing Fantasy Football Director is the day they might as well throw away the keys to the asylum.

Oh pompous one, with the greatest respect, it's called transparency and might avoid some apparent misconceptions due to lack of facts.

However us mere mortals will try to evade the asylum while know-alls like yourself have the keys :not worth

Phil D. Rolls
02-02-2011, 09:36 PM
Oh pompous one, with the greatest respect, it's called transparency and might avoid some apparent misconceptions due to lack of facts.

However us mere mortals will try to evade the asylum while know-alls like yourself have the keys :not worth

There is nothing more embarrassing than mock humility, and it seems that some people's only response to points they don't like is to play the "salt of the earth" or "mere mortals" card.

However, getting back to the original point, what will the fans do with all this information they have? The fact is the average Joe is not qualified to make any sense of them at all, and those that claim that they are, are the truly pompous ones in my book.

People who would seek to tell the club how to spend its money have lost the plot completely. We are customers, not shareholders.

Those who have invested in the club, of course, will have access to the figures and will have the power to bring change. Everyone else can just stop kidding themselves they are that important.

Hibby 2005
02-02-2011, 10:06 PM
There is nothing more embarrassing than mock humility, and it seems that some people's only response to points they don't like is to play the "salt of the earth" or "mere mortals" card.

However, getting back to the original point, what will the fans do with all this information they have? The fact is the average Joe is not qualified to make any sense of them at all, and those that claim that they are, are the truly pompous ones in my book.

People who would seek to tell the club how to spend its money have lost the plot completely. We are customers, not shareholders.

Those who have invested in the club, of course, will have access to the figures and will have the power to bring change. Everyone else can just stop kidding themselves they are that important.

Who exactly have invested in the club?

CropleyWasGod
02-02-2011, 10:11 PM
Who exactly have invested in the club?

The shareholders? :confused:

Hibby 2005
02-02-2011, 10:12 PM
The shareholders? :confused:

We still have shareholders?

CropleyWasGod
02-02-2011, 10:14 PM
We still have shareholders?

Yup. I'm one.

Most of those who attend the AGM are, too.

Hibby 2005
02-02-2011, 10:16 PM
How much do you think you can influence the club? Serious question.

CropleyWasGod
02-02-2011, 10:16 PM
How much do you think you can influence the club? Serious question.

Not much.

ScottB
02-02-2011, 10:19 PM
When complaining about our transfer income people tend to overlook one critical detail.

Take last year as an example, we spent £2million more than we made without transfer income. I would imagine this year would be even worse than that.

So sure, you can point out that we've brought a million or so in in fees. We spent £80k ish on a transfer fee for Scott, then however much in signing on fees and the like for the rest (because come on folks, free transfers do not mean the guy turns up for nothing!!), so yeah, if you want to skim the surface it looks like we are being tight, but we are spending beyond our means already, some 68% of last years income went on wages.

Not the signs of a Board obsessed with the balance sheet is it?

Hibby 2005
02-02-2011, 10:21 PM
Not much.

Farmer obviously holds the key and Petrie does his bidding but nobody else truly matters.

CropleyWasGod
02-02-2011, 10:23 PM
Farmer obviously holds the key and Petrie does his bidding but nobody else truly matters.

As one of many who put money in the club when they asked us to, I find that very insulting.

Hibby 2005
02-02-2011, 10:31 PM
As one of many who put money in the club when they asked us to, I find that very insulting.

It wasn't meant to be insulting, just reality. Farmer will sell, do what he wants, when the time comes.

The supporters will always come second.

joebakerforever
03-02-2011, 02:53 AM
There is nothing more embarrassing than mock humility, and it seems that some people's only response to points they don't like is to play the "salt of the earth" or "mere mortals" card.

However, getting back to the original point, what will the fans do with all this information they have? The fact is the average Joe is not qualified to make any sense of them at all, and those that claim that they are, are the truly pompous ones in my book.

People who would seek to tell the club how to spend its money have lost the plot completely. We are customers, not shareholders.

Those who have invested in the club, of course, will have access to the figures and will have the power to bring change. Everyone else can just stop kidding themselves they are that important.


Out of interest are you an "average Joe" (which btw, is a bit of a condescending insult by you regarding others on here :wink: ) ?

You erroneously assume that a request for information is in order "to tell the club how to spend its money".

Did it not enter your mind that the availability of such information would assist forum members to conclude who was making valid points on here, rather than spouting pretentious waffle.

Even you surely would have noticed that a lot off contradicting assertions made on here are of opinions that are presented as facts.

Obviously if you cannot understand that the availability of actual Club data on here might improve the quality of debate, then that is regrettable.

Suppose at the end of the day it depends on whether your philosophy is of sharing knowledge with others, or restricting it in order to retain a sense of self-superiority/power.

P.S. you may not be aware that there is already a Freedom of Information Act on the statute book which was deemed in the Public, as opposed to Private, Interest.

The Falcon
03-02-2011, 08:23 AM
What is the actual "club data" you would like published in the interests of "transparency".


Out of interest are you an "average Joe" (which btw, is a bit of a condescending insult by you regarding others on here :wink: ) ?

You erroneously assume that a request for information is in order "to tell the club how to spend its money".

Did it not enter your mind that the availability of such information would assist forum members to conclude who was making valid points on here, rather than spouting pretentious waffle.

Even you surely would have noticed that a lot off contradicting assertions made on here are of opinions that are presented as facts.

Obviously if you cannot understand that the availability of actual Club data on here might improve the quality of debate, then that is regrettable.

Suppose at the end of the day it depends on whether your philosophy is of sharing knowledge with others, or restricting it in order to retain a sense of self-superiority/power.

P.S. you may not be aware that there is already a Freedom of Information Act on the statute book which was deemed in the Public, as opposed to Private, Interest.

joebakerforever
03-02-2011, 08:00 PM
For those of us not well versed in deciphering Annual Accounts, it appears to be very difficult to achieve like-for-like comparisons between various Clubs, depending on how the data is presented by each.

On a simplistic level is it possible to extract the following aggregate information from Hibs Annual Accounts since 2005:-


Player Wage Bill per season

Transfer Income received per season

Transfer expenditure per season

I am aware there are other factors involved in running a club, but the above figures are probably the most contentious on here.


What is the actual "club data" you would like published in the interests of "transparency".

The above, if available, from a personal point of view would give a clearer picture regarding the claims and counter-claims on here, regarding the Club's overall transfer policy.

I'll admit to feeling less sympathetic towards RP's alleged stance, but I might be wrong, having never seen the above data, which could clear up any misconceptions.

Phil D. Rolls
04-02-2011, 11:57 AM
Out of interest are you an "average Joe" (which btw, is a bit of a condescending insult by you regarding others on here :wink: ) ?

You erroneously assume that a request for information is in order "to tell the club how to spend its money".

Did it not enter your mind that the availability of such information would assist forum members to conclude who was making valid points on here, rather than spouting pretentious waffle.

Even you surely would have noticed that a lot off contradicting assertions made on here are of opinions that are presented as facts.

Obviously if you cannot understand that the availability of actual Club data on here might improve the quality of debate, then that is regrettable.

Suppose at the end of the day it depends on whether your philosophy is of sharing knowledge with others, or restricting it in order to retain a sense of self-superiority/power.

P.S. you may not be aware that there is already a Freedom of Information Act on the statute book which was deemed in the Public, as opposed to Private, Interest.

Certainly wasn't being condescending, it wasn't me that adopted the cloth capped sons of toil, salt of the earth type stance. You were the one who sought to speak for "mere mortals".

I'm trying to keep things real, as people who are anxious about the team start getting into fields they don't understand. It's just wrong.

I don't know if I'm average, but I know squat about accounts, PLCs, the transfer market, how agents are remunerated, negotiation, or how to work a fax machine. In fact I know so little, I don't know what I don't know.

You've got a fair point about transparecy cutting down some of the utter rubbish that gets discussed on here. Would that transparency not work against Hibs though, in that it would give competitors information the club would rather they didn't have.

Anyway, I'm pretty sure that there are plenty of people who would still sniff conspiracies and not trust the information that the club gives out. Result we are no further forward, and probably a couple of steps back.

For example:


Farmer obviously holds the key and Petrie does his bidding but nobody else truly matters.


It wasn't meant to be insulting, just reality. Farmer will sell, do what he wants, when the time comes.

The supporters will always come second.

Is reasoned debate ever going to be possible on a forum like this? It always comes back to someone saying "XYZ happens because, because it just does, and I say so and I am never wrong". That's my opinion based on what I've seen on here.

It's not to say that no-one makes arguments and uses evidence, but a lot of posts on here are completely without any foundation other than the word of a friend of a friend, or a bloke in the pub.

I'm not really sure what the significance of the FOI Act is, I thought it was so that we could know what our elected representatives are up to. Are you saying that there should be one for companies like Hibs and Marks and Spencer as well.

I just think there is an incredible arrogance in this country where everybody is an expert on everyone else's job. Doesn't matter if you are a taxi driver, nurse or chef, there is always someone who thinks they can tell you how to do your job.

In fact they can't, and - on the whole - the things that they think you should be doing are laughable, and you have already thought of them long before the public. The irony is when you try to engage with them and explain what you are doing and why you are doing it, they immediately play the "not my job", "don't patronise me" or "I'm just an ordinary punter who doesn't go for that fancy language" cards.

These people are never wrong, even when they are. No amount of transparency or engagement or openness will change their viewpoint, as they cannot get beyond the fact they are not getting what they want.

I tend to go with what one of the founders of Sony said, "don't ask the public what they want, as they don't know what's possible". I don't go writing to Sony telling them what is wrong with their business strategy, I just decide whether I like their products in the shop.

The sooner people get back to supporting the team, and not making erchies of themselves talking about things they don't understand, the sooner we get back to some sanity.

I have yet to see an example of fan power leading to anything other than crisis at a club, and I have no doubt that it would be the same as Hibs.

bawheid
04-02-2011, 01:42 PM
Certainly wasn't being condescending, it wasn't me that adopted the cloth capped sons of toil, salt of the earth type stance. You were the one who sought to speak for "mere mortals".

I'm trying to keep things real, as people who are anxious about the team start getting into fields they don't understand. It's just wrong.

I don't know if I'm average, but I know squat about accounts, PLCs, the transfer market, how agents are remunerated, negotiation, or how to work a fax machine. In fact I know so little, I don't know what I don't know.

You've got a fair point about transparecy cutting down some of the utter rubbish that gets discussed on here. Would that transparency not work against Hibs though, in that it would give competitors information the club would rather they didn't have.

Anyway, I'm pretty sure that there are plenty of people who would still sniff conspiracies and not trust the information that the club gives out. Result we are no further forward, and probably a couple of steps back.

For example:





Is reasoned debate ever going to be possible on a forum like this? It always comes back to someone saying "XYZ happens because, because it just does, and I say so and I am never wrong". That's my opinion based on what I've seen on here.

It's not to say that no-one makes arguments and uses evidence, but a lot of posts on here are completely without any foundation other than the word of a friend of a friend, or a bloke in the pub.

I'm not really sure what the significance of the FOI Act is, I thought it was so that we could know what our elected representatives are up to. Are you saying that there should be one for companies like Hibs and Marks and Spencer as well.

I just think there is an incredible arrogance in this country where everybody is an expert on everyone else's job. Doesn't matter if you are a taxi driver, nurse or chef, there is always someone who thinks they can tell you how to do your job.

In fact they can't, and - on the whole - the things that they think you should be doing are laughable, and you have already thought of them long before the public. The irony is when you try to engage with them and explain what you are doing and why you are doing it, they immediately play the "not my job", "don't patronise me" or "I'm just an ordinary punter who doesn't go for that fancy language" cards.

These people are never wrong, even when they are. No amount of transparency or engagement or openness will change their viewpoint, as they cannot get beyond the fact they are not getting what they want.

I tend to go with what one of the founders of Sony said, "don't ask the public what they want, as they don't know what's possible". I don't go writing to Sony telling them what is wrong with their business strategy, I just decide whether I like their products in the shop.

The sooner people get back to supporting the team, and not making erchies of themselves talking about things they don't understand, the sooner we get back to some sanity.

I have yet to see an example of fan power leading to anything other than crisis at a club, and I have no doubt that it would be the same as Hibs.

That's an outstanding post FR.

The Falcon
04-02-2011, 01:50 PM
It wasn't meant to be insulting, just reality. Farmer will sell, do what he wants, when the time comes.

The supporters will always come second.

The reality is that we have been listening to this pash for 20 years about Farmer. I too am a shareholder but, at the end of the day, if it all goes tits up, who do you think will be footing the bill?

I dont feel that I am being shabbily treated by the club.

matty_f
04-02-2011, 02:03 PM
I just read the article, having avoided this thread on the assumption it would be going the same way as most other threads regarding Petrie, with regurgitated arguments filling pages without getting anywhere.

However, you'd have to say that the article largely ignores a fair amount of evidence to suggest that a lot of it is bollocks. Petrie picks the staff - like Calderwood's choice of fitness coach from Aston Villa?

Petrie picks who comes and goes - really? So when Hughes had De Graaf at Easter Road for a show-round long before he signed, that was on Petrie's say so. And of course, Petrie went for the players that were tried and tested under Yogi, players like Stokes, Gow, McBride, Cregg, and Duffy? Really?

That's shocking journalism from someone that's taken their view on things and presented it as fact. It mentions that Petrie met the players, but doesn't mention that he backed Collins against the players. Fair?

WindyMiller
04-02-2011, 02:06 PM
The above, if available, from a personal point of view would give a clearer picture regarding the claims and counter-claims on here, regarding the Club's overall transfer policy.

I'll admit to feeling less sympathetic towards RP's alleged stance, but I might be wrong, having never seen the above data, which could clear up any misconceptions.

Most of what you want is here; http://www.hibs.net/showthread.php?192245-****Hibs-Accounts-To-31st-July-2010-See-Them-Here****

Ray_
04-02-2011, 02:23 PM
The reality is that we have been listening to this pash for 20 years about Farmer. I too am a shareholder but, at the end of the day, if it all goes tits up, who do you think will be footing the bill?

I dont feel that I am being shabbily treated by the club.


With due respect, with the stadium about finished & the training centre, the club is worth far more now than it ever did when TF took over. The money for that has part, been paid by player sales & the supporters by having SUABC, with the remainder still to be paid, by the club, not TF, soi it'll take an awful lot to go wrong, for TF to have to dig deep.

This is not having a go at TF, but setting out the reality.

The Falcon
04-02-2011, 02:41 PM
With due respect, with the stadium about finished & the training centre, the club is worth far more now than it ever did when TF took over. The money for that has part, been paid by player sales & the supporters by having SUABC, with the remainder still to be paid, by the club, not TF, soi it'll take an awful lot to go wrong, for TF to have to dig deep.

This is not having a go at TF, but setting out the reality.

You are right in all that you say Ray but its only worth what someone will pay for it and, as a football/sports stadium, the number of potential purchasers are very limited. As a development of the land for housing/retail/business use everything that has been built is basically useless and would have to be levelled.

East Mains may prove a prudent investment as we have far more land there than we need. But I would counter that its only through sound management that the Club are in this position.

Ray_
04-02-2011, 02:44 PM
Certainly wasn't being condescending, it wasn't me that adopted the cloth capped sons of toil, salt of the earth type stance. You were the one who sought to speak for "mere mortals".

I'm trying to keep things real, as people who are anxious about the team start getting into fields they don't understand. It's just wrong.

I don't know if I'm average, but I know squat about accounts, PLCs, the transfer market, how agents are remunerated, negotiation, or how to work a fax machine. In fact I know so little, I don't know what I don't know.

You've got a fair point about transparecy cutting down some of the utter rubbish that gets discussed on here. Would that transparency not work against Hibs though, in that it would give competitors information the club would rather they didn't have.

Anyway, I'm pretty sure that there are plenty of people who would still sniff conspiracies and not trust the information that the club gives out. Result we are no further forward, and probably a couple of steps back.

For example:





Is reasoned debate ever going to be possible on a forum like this? It always comes back to someone saying "XYZ happens because, because it just does, and I say so and I am never wrong". That's my opinion based on what I've seen on here.

It's not to say that no-one makes arguments and uses evidence, but a lot of posts on here are completely without any foundation other than the word of a friend of a friend, or a bloke in the pub.

I'm not really sure what the significance of the FOI Act is, I thought it was so that we could know what our elected representatives are up to. Are you saying that there should be one for companies like Hibs and Marks and Spencer as well.

I just think there is an incredible arrogance in this country where everybody is an expert on everyone else's job. Doesn't matter if you are a taxi driver, nurse or chef, there is always someone who thinks they can tell you how to do your job.

In fact they can't, and - on the whole - the things that they think you should be doing are laughable, and you have already thought of them long before the public. The irony is when you try to engage with them and explain what you are doing and why you are doing it, they immediately play the "not my job", "don't patronise me" or "I'm just an ordinary punter who doesn't go for that fancy language" cards.

These people are never wrong, even when they are. No amount of transparency or engagement or openness will change their viewpoint, as they cannot get beyond the fact they are not getting what they want.

I tend to go with what one of the founders of Sony said, "don't ask the public what they want, as they don't know what's possible". I don't go writing to Sony telling them what is wrong with their business strategy, I just decide whether I like their products in the shop.

The sooner people get back to supporting the team, and not making erchies of themselves talking about things they don't understand, the sooner we get back to some sanity.

I have yet to see an example of fan power leading to anything other than crisis at a club, and I have no doubt that it would be the same as Hibs.

I won't go in to any more than the bit highlighted, it works both ways, some people, who have the power to do as they wish, presume they know best, no matter what others think.

One quick example of this is Prescott & Brown, with PPP for London Underground, despite almost universal rejection, they went ahead with it & it cost the country tens of millions.

Rod Petrie was/is an accountant and he had no link with football as an industry & as you would expect, most of the fans would have knew more about Hibs than he did. The fact the club had to employ consultants to gain a relationship with their own fans, tells its own story. His apprenticeship at the club, has no doubt cost a packet, which the club has had to pick up the tab.

There has been good parts of Rod's stewardship,but there's also been bad & to say that people can't distinguish the difference is arrogance in itself, you just need to look at the market forces & income generated to get an idea how a company is doing, no need for big diploma's for that insight.

Ray_
04-02-2011, 02:48 PM
You are right in all that you say Ray but its only worth what someone will pay for it and, as a football/sports stadium, the number of potential purchasers are very limited. As a development of the land for housing/retail/business use everything that has been built is basically useless and would have to be levelled.

East Mains may prove a prudent investment as we have far more land there than we need. But I would counter that its only through sound management that the Club are in this position.

Agreed, but the whole point was the risk to TF, when, in reality, there is no risk.

CropleyWasGod
04-02-2011, 03:13 PM
Agreed, but the whole point was the risk to TF, when, in reality, there is no risk.

There is no risk now, agreed, but when he took us over, there probably was. Not just financial (although I am sure he did his due diligence), but reputation wise as well... the whole "saving it for the community" thing could have blown up in his face.

Stevie Reid
04-02-2011, 03:35 PM
Certainly wasn't being condescending, it wasn't me that adopted the cloth capped sons of toil, salt of the earth type stance. You were the one who sought to speak for "mere mortals".

I'm trying to keep things real, as people who are anxious about the team start getting into fields they don't understand. It's just wrong.

I don't know if I'm average, but I know squat about accounts, PLCs, the transfer market, how agents are remunerated, negotiation, or how to work a fax machine. In fact I know so little, I don't know what I don't know.

You've got a fair point about transparecy cutting down some of the utter rubbish that gets discussed on here. Would that transparency not work against Hibs though, in that it would give competitors information the club would rather they didn't have.

Anyway, I'm pretty sure that there are plenty of people who would still sniff conspiracies and not trust the information that the club gives out. Result we are no further forward, and probably a couple of steps back.

For example:





Is reasoned debate ever going to be possible on a forum like this? It always comes back to someone saying "XYZ happens because, because it just does, and I say so and I am never wrong". That's my opinion based on what I've seen on here.

It's not to say that no-one makes arguments and uses evidence, but a lot of posts on here are completely without any foundation other than the word of a friend of a friend, or a bloke in the pub.

I'm not really sure what the significance of the FOI Act is, I thought it was so that we could know what our elected representatives are up to. Are you saying that there should be one for companies like Hibs and Marks and Spencer as well.

I just think there is an incredible arrogance in this country where everybody is an expert on everyone else's job. Doesn't matter if you are a taxi driver, nurse or chef, there is always someone who thinks they can tell you how to do your job.

In fact they can't, and - on the whole - the things that they think you should be doing are laughable, and you have already thought of them long before the public. The irony is when you try to engage with them and explain what you are doing and why you are doing it, they immediately play the "not my job", "don't patronise me" or "I'm just an ordinary punter who doesn't go for that fancy language" cards.

These people are never wrong, even when they are. No amount of transparency or engagement or openness will change their viewpoint, as they cannot get beyond the fact they are not getting what they want.

I tend to go with what one of the founders of Sony said, "don't ask the public what they want, as they don't know what's possible". I don't go writing to Sony telling them what is wrong with their business strategy, I just decide whether I like their products in the shop.

The sooner people get back to supporting the team, and not making erchies of themselves talking about things they don't understand, the sooner we get back to some sanity.

I have yet to see an example of fan power leading to anything other than crisis at a club, and I have no doubt that it would be the same as Hibs.

Excellent post.

greenlex
04-02-2011, 03:37 PM
With due respect, with the stadium about finished & the training centre, the club is worth far more now than it ever did when TF took over. The money for that has part, been paid by player sales & the supporters by having SUABC, with the remainder still to be paid, by the club, not TF, soi it'll take an awful lot to go wrong, for TF to have to dig deep.

This is not having a go at TF, but setting out the reality.
Sorry Ray do t agree about the part payed by Supporters. The money paid into the club by supporters would barely cover players wages. Player sales have covered infrastructure. Run at a loss last year and this year will be even worse. We maybe SUABC but where it went isn't rocket science.

The Falcon
04-02-2011, 03:45 PM
Agreed, but the whole point was the risk to TF, when, in reality, there is no risk.

Agreed there is little risk but that is in stark contrast to the financial risk when he bought the club, or even 10 years ago but again we have gone from the BoS about to withdraw banking facilities, which was stopped by Farmer personally agreeing to make good any losses incurred by BoS, to being one of the most credit worthy football clubs in Scotland, if not the UK.

If we suffer some sort of catastrophic event and the money dries up it will be Farmer left holding the baby. Unlikely scenario though that it is.

ancienthibby
04-02-2011, 03:55 PM
Agreed there is little risk but that is stark contrast to the financial risk when he bought the club, or even 10 years ago but again we have gone from the BoS about to withdraw banking facilities, which was stopped by Farmer personally agreeing to make good any losses incurred by BoS, to being one of the most credit worthy football clubs in Scotland, if not the UK.

That's you in your full 'board apologist mode'!!.:devil:

Shurely you know by now that that's the job exclusively claimed by Andy 74, (of course, alongside his greater role as world-renowed apologist for Freddy Goodwin):aok:

I doubt that there is a single football club in Scotland that you could describe as 'credit worthy'.

I don't for a minute think Hibs are. Their Balance Sheet and Cash Flows tell me otherwise.

And I'd add this, the credit stability of Hibs will be down to CC and the team on the park, in the next few months, not to RP or STF:agree: That means that revenue through the turnstiles is now desparately needed!!

greenlex
04-02-2011, 04:02 PM
Agreed there is little risk but that is stark contrast to the financial risk when he bought the club, or even 10 years ago but again we have gone from the BoS about to withdraw banking facilities, which was stopped by Farmer personally agreeing to make good any losses incurred by BoS, to being one of the most credit worthy football clubs in Scotland, if not the UK.

That's you in your full 'board apologist mode'!!.:devil:

Shurely you know by now that that's the job exclusively claimed by Andy 74, (of course, alongside his greater role as world-renowed apologist for Freddy Goodwin):aok:

I doubt that there is a single football club in Scotland that you could describe as 'credit worthy'.

I don't for a minute think Hibs are. Their Balance Sheet and Cash Flows tell me otherwise.

And I'd add this, the credit stability of Hibs will be down to CC and the team on the park, in the next few months, not to RP or STF:agree: That means that revenue through the turnstiles is now desparately needed!!

That doesn't make sense Auld Yin. I am told frequently on this very message board that RP is directly responsible for appointing CC as manager. I really am confused now.

The Falcon
04-02-2011, 04:04 PM
[/QUOTE]That's you in your full 'board apologist mode'!!.:devil:

Shurely you know by now that that's the job exclusively claimed by Andy 74, (of course, alongside his greater role as world-renowed apologist for Freddy Goodwin):aok:

I doubt that there is a single football club in Scotland that you could describe as 'credit worthy'.

I don't for a minute think Hibs are. Their Balance Sheet and Cash Flows tell me otherwise.

And I'd add this, the credit stability of Hibs will be down to CC and the team on the park, in the next few months, not to RP or STF:agree: That means that revenue through the turnstiles is now desparately needed!![/QUOTE]

No apology neccessary as the facts stand for themselves. While the team is required to do well and thats a financial benefit to the club and what we all want to see, the club will survive if they dont. And thats down to successful business management. :greengrin

ancienthibby
04-02-2011, 04:18 PM
[QUOTE=ancienthibby;2726942]

That doesn't make sense Auld Yin. I am told frequently on this very message board that RP is directly responsible for appointing CC as manager. I really am confused now.

Your confused Green One??

I am now even more confused!!:rolleyes:

Can't find in my earlier post where I made any refence to RP appointing CC?:confused:

greenlex
04-02-2011, 04:29 PM
[QUOTE=greenlex;2726949]

Your confused Green One??

I am now even more confused!!:rolleyes:

Can't find in my earlier post where I made any refence to RP appointing CC?:confused:
I never suggested you did make a reference to that. I was suggesting that the credit stability of Hibs is in the hands of CC. He was appointed by RP so by definition is a direct link to the clubs credit stability to RP. He has been the direct link to our misfortunes on the park for around a year now.
There are some on this message board that only credit RP with pish things that may happen from time to time and he is or will be conveniently forgotten about if/when it is turned round. The stock answer is usually it's his fault we are in the mess we are in anyway. I am not saying you are one if these people but only using your post to highlight this.

ancienthibby
04-02-2011, 04:43 PM
[QUOTE=ancienthibby;2726957]
I never suggested you did make a reference to that. I was suggesting that the credit stability of Hibs is in the hands of CC. He was appointed by RP so by definition is a direct link to the clubs credit stability to RP. He has been the direct link to our misfortunes on the park for around a year now.
There are some on this message board that only credit RP with pish things that may happen from time to time and he is or will be conveniently forgotten about if/when it is turned round. The stock answer is usually it's his fault we are in the mess we are in anyway. I am not saying you are one if these people but only using your post to highlight this.

Do not disagree with you first point as emboldend.

However, given your use of 'he' you seem to be implying CC has been a direct link to our misfortunes on the park this year'!!

The problems on the park are due, IMHO, to Yogi and no other.:devil:

ancient hibee
04-02-2011, 04:49 PM
With due respect, with the stadium about finished & the training centre, the club is worth far more now than it ever did when TF took over. The money for that has part, been paid by player sales & the supporters by having SUABC, with the remainder still to be paid, by the club, not TF, soi it'll take an awful lot to go wrong, for TF to have to dig deep.

This is not having a go at TF, but setting out the reality.

I don't think you realise that some of the long term debt was provided by one of Farmer's companies because there was no chance of anyone else providing it.Whether he insists on repayment or not will be interesting.

Phil D. Rolls
04-02-2011, 05:44 PM
I won't go in to any more than the bit highlighted, it works both ways, some people, who have the power to do as they wish, presume they know best, no matter what others think.

One quick example of this is Prescott & Brown, with PPP for London Underground, despite almost universal rejection, they went ahead with it & it cost the country tens of millions.

Rod Petrie was/is an accountant and he had no link with football as an industry & as you would expect, most of the fans would have knew more about Hibs than he did. The fact the club had to employ consultants to gain a relationship with their own fans, tells its own story. His apprenticeship at the club, has no doubt cost a packet, which the club has had to pick up the tab.

There has been good parts of Rod's stewardship,but there's also been bad & to say that people can't distinguish the difference is arrogance in itself, you just need to look at the market forces & income generated to get an idea how a company is doing, no need for big diploma's for that insight.

You're right of course, and what I should have said is that some people (IMO most) can't tell the difference.

This thing about accountability is what really gets my goat though. People come on here making out that because they chose to spend their leisure time following a football team it gives them the right to say how the team is run.

Ray_
04-02-2011, 05:52 PM
I don't think you realise that some of the long term debt was provided by one of Farmer's companies because there was no chance of anyone else providing it.Whether he insists on repayment or not will be interesting.

At no point was I having a go at TF, what I said was based solely on the fact that now Hibs do not represent a risk & it would be a massive shift if he ended up [unintentionally] out-of-pocket.

With regard to whether he does or not reclaim the loan, the fact he used money from the car park sale, to reduce the clubs debt, speaks volumes about his intentions & I've not the slightest doubt that they are totally honourable.

Ray_
04-02-2011, 05:58 PM
You're right of course, and what I should have said is that some people (IMO most) can't tell the difference. The main difference between Brown/Prescott and Petrie, is that the first two are elected representatives answerable to the people.

Although Petrie isn't an elected representative, he holds the key to a major part many people's life & although he isn't answerable, it is a position that has responsibilities, especially when the owner committed himself to the club, because of the Leith community.

clerriehibs
04-02-2011, 06:02 PM
Certainly wasn't being condescending, it wasn't me that adopted the cloth capped sons of toil, salt of the earth type stance. You were the one who sought to speak for "mere mortals".

I'm trying to keep things real, as people who are anxious about the team start getting into fields they don't understand. It's just wrong.

I don't know if I'm average, but I know squat about accounts, PLCs, the transfer market, how agents are remunerated, negotiation, or how to work a fax machine. In fact I know so little, I don't know what I don't know.

You've got a fair point about transparecy cutting down some of the utter rubbish that gets discussed on here. Would that transparency not work against Hibs though, in that it would give competitors information the club would rather they didn't have.

Anyway, I'm pretty sure that there are plenty of people who would still sniff conspiracies and not trust the information that the club gives out. Result we are no further forward, and probably a couple of steps back.

For example:





Is reasoned debate ever going to be possible on a forum like this? It always comes back to someone saying "XYZ happens because, because it just does, and I say so and I am never wrong". That's my opinion based on what I've seen on here.

It's not to say that no-one makes arguments and uses evidence, but a lot of posts on here are completely without any foundation other than the word of a friend of a friend, or a bloke in the pub.

I'm not really sure what the significance of the FOI Act is, I thought it was so that we could know what our elected representatives are up to. Are you saying that there should be one for companies like Hibs and Marks and Spencer as well.

I just think there is an incredible arrogance in this country where everybody is an expert on everyone else's job. Doesn't matter if you are a taxi driver, nurse or chef, there is always someone who thinks they can tell you how to do your job.

In fact they can't, and - on the whole - the things that they think you should be doing are laughable, and you have already thought of them long before the public. The irony is when you try to engage with them and explain what you are doing and why you are doing it, they immediately play the "not my job", "don't patronise me" or "I'm just an ordinary punter who doesn't go for that fancy language" cards.

These people are never wrong, even when they are. No amount of transparency or engagement or openness will change their viewpoint, as they cannot get beyond the fact they are not getting what they want.

I tend to go with what one of the founders of Sony said, "don't ask the public what they want, as they don't know what's possible". I don't go writing to Sony telling them what is wrong with their business strategy, I just decide whether I like their products in the shop.

The sooner people get back to supporting the team, and not making erchies of themselves talking about things they don't understand, the sooner we get back to some sanity.

I have yet to see an example of fan power leading to anything other than crisis at a club, and I have no doubt that it would be the same as Hibs.

:top marks

lapsedhibee
04-02-2011, 06:03 PM
I know squat about accounts, PLCs, the transfer market, how agents are remunerated, negotiation, or how to work a fax machine.

This last is the most serious flaw in a business context. Without this knowledge you will be unable to bring vast empires down by the mere act of sending them black faxes! :bitchy:

Ray_
04-02-2011, 06:05 PM
This thing about accountability is what really gets my goat though. People come on here making out that because they chose to spend their leisure time following a football team it gives them the right to say how the team is run.

A lot of people have spent many years putting money in to the club they support & of course they will talk about how it is run. The only thing that has changed is the internet brings a lot more people in the conversations that have traditionally gone on, for generations, over a few beers, in the local boozer.

We mentioned politics on another post, how many people discuss how they would run the country differently, in the pub, no different to what goes on, on here.

Phil D. Rolls
04-02-2011, 06:05 PM
Although Petrie isn't an elected representative, he holds the key to a major part many people's life & although he isn't answerable, it is a position that has responsibilities, especially when the owner committed himself to the club, because of the Leith community.

True, but at the end of the day it is a major part in people's life by choice. It's not the same as a politician who is responsible for their health or employment.

Ray_
04-02-2011, 06:18 PM
True, but at the end of the day it is a major part in people's life by choice. It's not the same as a politician who is responsible for their health or employment.

I don't really know where this is going, yes supporting a football team is a matter of choice, but so is staying in this country, being governed by the politicians of the day, but regardless, both remain hot topics in pubs up and down this country, along with countless others.

Kaiser1962
04-02-2011, 06:31 PM
I don't really know where this is going, yes supporting a football team is a matter of choice, but so is staying in this country, being governed by the politicians of the day, but regardless, both remain hot topics in pubs up and down this country, along with countless others.

While it is undoubtedly a choice its amazing how many of us stick with Hibs despite being free to choose to go elsewhere. The truth is we dont, we mump and moan and girn and greet but we go back. If Hibernian Football Club was a woman I would have thrown her out years ago. I sometimes think that I could prosecute my father, for taking me to Easter Road when I was a child and getting me hooked, under child abuse legislation. But I wont and dont and, like the rest of us, will be lost this weekend without a Hibs game to go to.

GGTTH

Phil D. Rolls
04-02-2011, 06:33 PM
I don't really know where this is going, yes supporting a football team is a matter of choice, but so is staying in this country, being governed by the politicians of the day, but regardless, both remain hot topics in pubs up and down this country, along with countless others.

I think my concern is that transparency makes people think they have a right to say how the club is run, and the evidence suggests that when that happens it ends in tears. Mind you we don't do too well in chosing politicians either.

Ray_
04-02-2011, 06:46 PM
I think my concern is that transparency makes people think they have a right to say how the club is run, and the evidence suggests that when that happens it ends in tears. Mind you we don't do too well in chosing politicians either.

Politicians, there, I typed it out without spitting, one thing Billy Connolly was 100% right with.

With regard to the rest, I'm totally at odds with you there [in a nice way]. Professionally, I have always found it far better & more rewarding to let people have their say, 95% of it may be total nonsense, but it is when you think you know it all & don't encourage input, that is when, in my experience, things go **** up.

Phil D. Rolls
04-02-2011, 06:58 PM
Politicians, there, I typed it out without spitting, one thing Billy Connolly was 100% right with.

With regard to the rest, I'm totally at odds with you there [in a nice way]. Professionally, I have always found it far better & more rewarding to let people have their say, 95% of it may be total nonsense, but it is when you think you know it all & don't encourage input, that is when, in my experience, things go **** up.

I'd be very concerned if too many people agreed with me. I agree that, in the real world, people should be given their say, if only to prove that 95% of it is total nonsense.

It's when those people, having been shot down in flames, still insist they are right that the real trouble starts. I just think that Petrie and Hibs do not bad at balancing things up. I also accept that not too many people seem to agree with me.

7Hero
04-02-2011, 07:03 PM
While it is undoubtedly a choice its amazing how many of us stick with Hibs despite being free to choose to go elsewhere. The truth is we dont, we mump and moan and girn and greet but we go back. If Hibernian Football Club was a woman I would have thrown her out years ago. I sometimes think that I could prosecute my father, for taking me to Easter Road when I was a child and getting me hooked, under child abuse legislation. But I wont and dont and, like the rest of us, will be lost this weekend without a Hibs game to go to.

GGTTH
brilliant post, exactly how i feel.

and we all went to watch a football club not a business, bring back the days of trying to win and not worrying about losing money !

Ray_
04-02-2011, 07:13 PM
I'd be very concerned if too many people agreed with me. I agree that, in the real world, people should be given their say, if only to prove that 95% of it is total nonsense.

It's when those people, having been shot down in flames, still insist they are right that the real trouble starts. I just think that Petrie and Hibs do not bad at balancing things up. I also accept that not too many people seem to agree with me.

Perhaps they don't accept that they have been shot down in flames.

With regard to doing well at balancing things up, that would be true if we weren't performing so poorly as a business, however, hopefully the wind of change has hit & things will start to improve, the fact we have so much room for improvement suggests we haven't done as well as we could have done.

Phil D. Rolls
04-02-2011, 07:35 PM
Perhaps they don't accept that they have been shot down in flames.

With regard to doing well at balancing things up, that would be true if we weren't performing so poorly as a business, however, hopefully the wind of change has hit & things will start to improve, the fact we have so much room for improvement suggests we haven't done as well as we could have done.

There's no doubt about that. :agree: But IMO, we haven't done as badly as we could have either. I'm probably scarred by the fallout from Duff and Gray forever.

Iain G
04-02-2011, 07:36 PM
Coming to a movie theatre near you (don't move!) this fall, STF productions are pround to have, well, produced, for your occasional entertainment ''Attack of the Paranoid Hi-Bees"

Set in the traditional Scotchland Soccer scene, it tells the story of 2 men and their partnership to save their local rundown Soccer franchise, the stresses and strains, exhaust fittings and trips to Greggs of their everyday life, their quest to build shiny metal stands towering to the heavens!

Along the way they are derailed by Bodysnatchers from another world who take the form of once reasonable footballers but steal their heart and soul and become vacuous husks, shadows of their former selves. Then the local waters are poluted by a secret chemical from a local sewerage plant (Parkhead) which gives all who drink it severe levels of paranoia, and the fans turn against our two unlikely hero's...

Then a new hero walks into town, a man known only as Colin, can he identify and remove the bodysnatchers, can he cleans the water supply and remove the paranoia that is infesting everyone, only time will tell....

Starring Tom Selleck as Rod, David Jason as The Farmer, Dougray Scott as Colin, Dolf Lundgren as Mixu, Bingo from the Banana Splits as Yogi, David Carusso as Big Eck, Ronnie Corbett as The Yam and introducing Philida Rolles as girl in Greggs....

The Falcon
04-02-2011, 07:41 PM
Coming to a movie theatre near you (don't move!) this fall, STF productions are pround to have, well, produced, for your occasional entertainment ''Attack of the Paranoid Hi-Bees"

Set in the traditional Scotchland Soccer scene, it tells the story of 2 men and their partnership to save their local rundown Soccer franchise, the stresses and strains, exhaust fittings and trips to Greggs of their everyday life, their quest to build shiny metal stands towering to the heavens!

Along the way they are derailed by Bodysnatchers from another world who take the form of once reasonable footballers but steal their heart and soul and become vacuous husks, shadows of their former selves. Then the local waters are poluted by a secret chemical from a local sewerage plant (Parkhead) which gives all who drink it severe levels of paranoia, and the fans turn against our two unlikely hero's...

Then a new hero walks into town, a man known only as Colin, can he identify and remove the bodysnatchers, can he cleans the water supply and remove the paranoia that is infesting everyone, only time will tell....

Starring Tom Selleck as Rod, David Jason as The Farmer, Dougray Scott as Colin, Dolf Lundgren as Mixu, Bingo from the Banana Splits as Yogi, David Carusso as Big Eck, Ronnie Corbett as The Yam and introducing Philida Rolles as girl in Greggs....

You, Sir, have too much time on your hands.......


Good post though :greengrin

Iain G
04-02-2011, 08:03 PM
You, Sir, have too much time on your hands.......


Good post though :greengrin

Wait til I write the sequel, working title is "Hey Mr Submarine Man" :wink:

joebakerforever
04-02-2011, 09:14 PM
Most of what you want is here; http://www.hibs.net/showthread.php?192245-****Hibs-Accounts-To-31st-July-2010-See-Them-Here****

Thanks - page two contained most of personal interest.