PDA

View Full Version : 'Financial Stability' - Another Petrie Myth?



Nailrod
02-06-2014, 08:09 AM
One of the few crumbling props still shoring up the tottering Petrie edifice is the claim that he has brought 'financial stability' to the club. This belief is not restricted to his active supporters - many people who now want him out qualify their criticism by acknowledging that he has given us financial stability.

I don't buy this. I suspect that we are in a very precarious financial position, and that this will have a direct impact on our ability to get back up into the SPL, and I want to subject my view to wider scrutiny.

Firstly, it must have cost us a very large sum of money to buy out the Butcher trio from ICT. Possibly running into hundreds of thousands. I don't believe this money came out of cash in hand - I suspect it was budgeted on an anticipated boom in season ticket sales based on a wave of Butchermania.

Secondly, we must have offered a very substantial package to the Butcher trio. They can't have come cheap. I recall one poster who said that the sums involved 'would make our eyes water', although I don't recall if it was someone who has genuine access to inside info, or just a blether. Whatever the sum, again I don't believe it came out of cash in hand. Again, I suspect it was budgeted on an anticipated boom in season ticket sales based on a wave of Butchermania. And I wonder if Petrie had the foresight to include a relegation clause in the management salaries - even if he did, we'll still be spending more than we can afford.

Thirdly, we have brought in Leeann Dempster. That can't have been something that was negotiated on the back of a fag packet. The discussions must have been ongoing for some time. Again, I don't believe she came for peanuts. Again, I suspect her cost was budgeted on an anticipated boom in season ticket sales based on a wave of Butchermania.

So we have committed a sum of money that must run into several hundred thousands of pounds, predicated on an increase in revenues, and instead we face a substantial fall in revenues. The gap must be enormous, and there is nowhere to bridge it from other than wage costs. I suspect that we will be trying to get out of the Championship with a squad that is getting paid half as much as the guys who got us into it.

It wasn't lack of money that dug us into the hole in which we find ourselves today, but it will take money to dig us out again, and there isn't any.

flash
02-06-2014, 08:11 AM
You suspect yet finish with a statement in bold.

Which is it? Suspicion or fact?

Lucius Apuleius
02-06-2014, 08:12 AM
Guess we need to buy some season tickets ti give Leeann some money then?

Phil D. Rolls
02-06-2014, 08:17 AM
One of the few crumbling props still shoring up the tottering Petrie edifice is the claim that he has brought 'financial stability' to the club. This belief is not restricted to his active supporters - many people who now want him out qualify their criticism by acknowledging that he has given us financial stability.

I don't buy this. I suspect that we are in a very precarious financial position, and that this will have a direct impact on our ability to get back up into the SPL, and I want to subject my view to wider scrutiny.

Firstly, it must have cost us a very large sum of money to buy out the Butcher trio from ICT. Possibly running into hundreds of thousands. I don't believe this money came out of cash in hand - I suspect it was budgeted on an anticipated boom in season ticket sales based on a wave of Butchermania.

Secondly, we must have offered a very substantial package to the Butcher trio. They can't have come cheap. I recall one poster who said that the sums involved 'would make our eyes water', although I don't recall if it was someone who has genuine access to inside info, or just a blether. Whatever the sum, again I don't believe it came out of cash in hand. Again, I suspect it was budgeted on an anticipated boom in season ticket sales based on a wave of Butchermania. And I wonder if Petrie had the foresight to include a relegation clause in the management salaries - even if he did, we'll still be spending more than we can afford.

Thirdly, we have brought in Leeann Dempster. That can't have been something that was negotiated on the back of a fag packet. The discussions must have been ongoing for some time. Again, I don't believe she came for peanuts. Again, I suspect her cost was budgeted on an anticipated boom in season ticket sales based on a wave of Butchermania.

So we have committed a sum of money that must run into several hundred thousands of pounds, predicated on an increase in revenues, and instead we face a substantial fall in revenues. The gap must be enormous, and there is nowhere to bridge it from other than wage costs. I suspect that we will be trying to get out of the Championship with a squad that is getting paid half as much as the guys who got us into it.

It wasn't lack of money that dug us into the hole in which we find ourselves today, but it will take money to dig us out again, and there isn't any.

I suspect that you have absolutely nothing to base your hypothesis on, other than guesses.

FACT

Iain G
02-06-2014, 08:19 AM
One of the few crumbling props still shoring up the tottering Petrie edifice is the claim that he has brought 'financial stability' to the club. This belief is not restricted to his active supporters - many people who now want him out qualify their criticism by acknowledging that he has given us financial stability.

I don't buy this. I suspect that we are in a very precarious financial position, and that this will have a direct impact on our ability to get back up into the SPL, and I want to subject my view to wider scrutiny.

Firstly, it must have cost us a very large sum of money to buy out the Butcher trio from ICT. Possibly running into hundreds of thousands. I don't believe this money came out of cash in hand - I suspect it was budgeted on an anticipated boom in season ticket sales based on a wave of Butchermania.

Secondly, we must have offered a very substantial package to the Butcher trio. They can't have come cheap. I recall one poster who said that the sums involved 'would make our eyes water', although I don't recall if it was someone who has genuine access to inside info, or just a blether. Whatever the sum, again I don't believe it came out of cash in hand. Again, I suspect it was budgeted on an anticipated boom in season ticket sales based on a wave of Butchermania. And I wonder if Petrie had the foresight to include a relegation clause in the management salaries - even if he did, we'll still be spending more than we can afford.

Thirdly, we have brought in Leeann Dempster. That can't have been something that was negotiated on the back of a fag packet. The discussions must have been ongoing for some time. Again, I don't believe she came for peanuts. Again, I suspect her cost was budgeted on an anticipated boom in season ticket sales based on a wave of Butchermania.

So we have committed a sum of money that must run into several hundred thousands of pounds, predicated on an increase in revenues, and instead we face a substantial fall in revenues. The gap must be enormous, and there is nowhere to bridge it from other than wage costs. I suspect that we will be trying to get out of the Championship with a squad that is getting paid half as much as the guys who got us into it.

It wasn't lack of money that dug us into the hole in which we find ourselves today, but it will take money to dig us out again, and there isn't any.

Did you see this? :confused: http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/football/27578902

RIP Bestie
02-06-2014, 11:34 AM
We have already heard this from you. Starting a new thread on it doesn't make it any more factual or believable.

Geo_1875
02-06-2014, 12:27 PM
It's all relative and relative to most other clubs we're financially stable.

ALF TUPPER
02-06-2014, 12:29 PM
Guess we need to buy some season tickets ti give Leeann some money then?
i'll be getting mine :agree:

Keith_M
02-06-2014, 12:33 PM
Did you see this? :confused: http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/football/27578902


"I don't think they will [lose money]," Glen told BBC Scotland."


Oh well, that's me re-assured.

ehf
02-06-2014, 12:37 PM
One of the few crumbling props still shoring up the tottering Petrie edifice is the claim that he has brought 'financial stability' to the club. This belief is not restricted to his active supporters - many people who now want him out qualify their criticism by acknowledging that he has given us financial stability.

I don't buy this. I suspect that we are in a very precarious financial position, and that this will have a direct impact on our ability to get back up into the SPL, and I want to subject my view to wider scrutiny.

Firstly, it must have cost us a very large sum of money to buy out the Butcher trio from ICT. Possibly running into hundreds of thousands. I don't believe this money came out of cash in hand - I suspect it was budgeted on an anticipated boom in season ticket sales based on a wave of Butchermania.

Secondly, we must have offered a very substantial package to the Butcher trio. They can't have come cheap. I recall one poster who said that the sums involved 'would make our eyes water', although I don't recall if it was someone who has genuine access to inside info, or just a blether. Whatever the sum, again I don't believe it came out of cash in hand. Again, I suspect it was budgeted on an anticipated boom in season ticket sales based on a wave of Butchermania. And I wonder if Petrie had the foresight to include a relegation clause in the management salaries - even if he did, we'll still be spending more than we can afford.

Thirdly, we have brought in Leeann Dempster. That can't have been something that was negotiated on the back of a fag packet. The discussions must have been ongoing for some time. Again, I don't believe she came for peanuts. Again, I suspect her cost was budgeted on an anticipated boom in season ticket sales based on a wave of Butchermania.

So we have committed a sum of money that must run into several hundred thousands of pounds, predicated on an increase in revenues, and instead we face a substantial fall in revenues. The gap must be enormous, and there is nowhere to bridge it from other than wage costs. I suspect that we will be trying to get out of the Championship with a squad that is getting paid half as much as the guys who got us into it.

It wasn't lack of money that dug us into the hole in which we find ourselves today, but it will take money to dig us out again, and there isn't any.

Well I think the OP has a point: phoney Butchermania has bitten the dust...

Nailrod
02-06-2014, 12:49 PM
You suspect yet finish with a statement in bold.

Which is it? Suspicion or fact?Each of the questions below has a direct bearing on the issue:

1. Q. How much money have we made in the past few years?
A. None - we've been breaking even at best;
or Loads - we've been turning over a healthy profit and putting together a substantial war chest for a rainy day.

2. Q. How much did it cost us to prise the Butcher team away from ICT?
A. A lot of money, as we were denuding them of their whole very successful management team in a seller's market - probably a six figure sum;
or None - ICT were happy to see the back of them.

3. Q. How much did we have to offer the Butcher team as a package?
A. A lot of money in a seller's market - a very large six figure sum;
or None - they were happy to come for the same as Paddy Fenlon had been earning between the three of them.

4. Q. Did Petrie have the foresight to include a relegation clause in the Butcher teams' package?
A. Unfortunately not; or
Of course he did - what do you take him for, a fool?

5. Q. How much did it cost us to recruit Leeann Dempster and George Craig?
A. Into six figures - both were headhunted precisely because they had a track record of success;
or Next to nothing - the pair of them were grateful to be offered a job.

6. Q. How do our revenues look for next year?
A. Terrible - there's going to be a massive shortfall in comparison with expectations;
or Terrific - we're going to have money flowing out of our bottom orifice.

In each case the answer to the question lies somewhere between the two extremes. I take the view that in each case it tends towards the first answer. Then I add up 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 and the total I get is that there is going to be a very substantial shortfall in our budget next season, and that the gap is going to be closed by taking costs out of the playing budget, as it is the only substantial item on the cost side where significant savings can easily be made.

But you're absolutely free to explain to me why I'm wrong. As is anybody else on the .net.

Keith_M
02-06-2014, 12:53 PM
Weren't we told on another thread that Hibs are about to be sold to some American Billionaire?

inglisavhibs
02-06-2014, 01:13 PM
One of the few crumbling props still shoring up the tottering Petrie edifice is the claim that he has brought 'financial stability' to the club. This belief is not restricted to his active supporters - many people who now want him out qualify their criticism by acknowledging that he has given us financial stability.

I don't buy this. I suspect that we are in a very precarious financial position, and that this will have a direct impact on our ability to get back up into the SPL, and I want to subject my view to wider scrutiny.

Firstly, it must have cost us a very large sum of money to buy out the Butcher trio from ICT. Possibly running into hundreds of thousands. I don't believe this money came out of cash in hand - I suspect it was budgeted on an anticipated boom in season ticket sales based on a wave of Butchermania.

Secondly, we must have offered a very substantial package to the Butcher trio. They can't have come cheap. I recall one poster who said that the sums involved 'would make our eyes water', although I don't recall if it was someone who has genuine access to inside info, or just a blether. Whatever the sum, again I don't believe it came out of cash in hand. Again, I suspect it was budgeted on an anticipated boom in season ticket sales based on a wave of Butchermania. And I wonder if Petrie had the foresight to include a relegation clause in the management salaries - even if he did, we'll still be spending more than we can afford.

Thirdly, we have brought in Leeann Dempster. That can't have been something that was negotiated on the back of a fag packet. The discussions must have been ongoing for some time. Again, I don't believe she came for peanuts. Again, I suspect her cost was budgeted on an anticipated boom in season ticket sales based on a wave of Butchermania.

So we have committed a sum of money that must run into several hundred thousands of pounds, predicated on an increase in revenues, and instead we face a substantial fall in revenues. The gap must be enormous, and there is nowhere to bridge it from other than wage costs. I suspect that we will be trying to get out of the Championship with a squad that is getting paid half as much as the guys who got us into it.

It wasn't lack of money that dug us into the hole in which we find ourselves today, but it will take money to dig us out again, and there isn't any.
So you are blaming the club for going out and getting the management team the majority of us wanted (showing ambition). Yet that's one of the main reasons many fans want rid of Petrie. As for stability, we have more than most. Hibs have said over the last few years that they will spend what we as fans put in to the club and they have. It's the football side that has let us down badly with Butcher making a grave error by telling the majority of our players they were not wanted before our safety was secure.

Nailrod
02-06-2014, 01:36 PM
I suspect that you have absolutely nothing to base your hypothesis on, other than guesses... FACTWell in a sense you're right, but far from being a dagger driven into the very bowels of my argument, as you no doubt imagine it to be, in fact it tends to highlight the problem.

One of the things that happens when the head of an organisation has been around too long is that he starts to see the organisation as his personal fiefdom, to be ruled as he pleases. It is very clear that this happened to Petrie long ago.

I see no sign whatsoever that he is in any way conscious of the fact that the vast majority of the money he spends each year comes not from himself (I don't believe he has ever put so much as the cost of a season ticket into the club), or even from STF, but from the fans. The money that he spends every year is the fans' money, but he behaves as if it was his.

Is he down-to-earth, inclusive, forthcoming? No. He is aloof, high-handed, and arrogant. Information is power, and Rod likes power. Rod doesn't like circulating information. Did he ever give even a hint of what his 'Five-Year Plan' was, to the fans who paid for it?

Instead of letting the fans know, within the bounds of commmercial confidence and reasonable privacy, exactly what he is doing with their money, he treats them as an impertinence. How dare they question how he spends his money!

So in a sense you are right. My analysis is largely based on guesswork, although I would contend that it is at least educated guesswork. But I would suggest that instead of gloating over the fact, you would be better employed reflecting on it, and asking yourself why that is, and asking yourself whether it's really a good thing.

Anyway, if it's any comfort to you the last thing I was expecting was an intelligent reply from you, so I'm not disappointed.

Vini1875
02-06-2014, 01:45 PM
During Petrie's early time at Hibs we have gone heavily into debt. We then made a lot from player sales (Golden Generation mainly) where Petrie got lucky IMHO. We made a lot from the car park sale. We have continued to sell players, but over the course of various managers it is obvious we have traded poorly in terms of signing and selling players. We have spend a lot on managers again investing poorly. Player contracts being allowed to run down, Derek Riordan and Ian Murray in particular and the sectacular blunder over CC contract. Very little of what RP has done has actually brought much money to the club.

Yes we have an infrastructure to be proud, which RP has rightly taken credit for, but it has been done at the expense of the team and this is the place where stability and everything has to flow from. This is RPs greatest flaw, he has run the club as a business, pure and simple, when it is actually a club to be run for the benefit of its members ie us, the supporters. I get that it is a balancing act, but when there is a choice RP has one go to position - caution and cheap options, along with hope for the best on the pitch. I'm no stranger to a Hail Mary or a Novenna to St. Jude, but it is not a business plan or how to run a club.

It is no wonder STF likes him, because STF does not have to listen to any pleas for funds. Hibs run themselves and STF never has to dig into his multi millions to help us.

Peevemor
02-06-2014, 01:50 PM
Well in a sense you're right, but far from being a dagger driven into the very bowels of my argument, as you no doubt imagine it to be, in fact it tends to highlight the problem.

First my "rapier like thrusts" and now FR's dagger? Bit if a jaggy thing fixation maybe?


One of the things that happens when the head of an organisation has been around too long is that he starts to see the organisation as his personal fiefdom, to be ruled as he pleases. It is very clear that this happened to Petrie long ago.

Except STF is the boss.


I see no sign whatsoever that he is in any way conscious of the fact that the vast majority of the money he spends each year comes not from himself (I don't believe he has ever put so much as the cost of a season ticket into the club), or even from STF, but from the fans. The money that he spends every year is the fans' money, but he behaves as if it was his.

Can you give me an example of how other clubs differ?


Is he down-to-earth, inclusive, forthcoming? No. He is aloof, high-handed, and arrogant. Information is power, and Rod likes power. Rod doesn't like circulating information. Did he ever give even a hint of what his 'Five-Year Plan' was, to the fans who paid for it?

Instead of letting the fans know, within the bounds of commmercial confidence and reasonable privacy, exactly what he is doing with their money, he treats them as an impertinence. How dare they question how he spends his money!

Apart, of course, from the audited accounts that are published each year.


So in a sense you are right. My analysis is largely based on guesswork, although I would contend that it is at least educated guesswork. But I would suggest that instead of gloating over the fact, you would be better employed reflecting on it, and asking yourself why that is, and asking yourself whether it's really a good thing.

Anyway, if it's any comfort to you the last thing I was expecting was an intelligent reply from you, so I'm not disappointed.


And you call RP arrogant? Hello Pot this is kettle, did you say black? Over.

Geo_1875
02-06-2014, 01:50 PM
Well in a sense you're right, but far from being a dagger driven into the very bowels of my argument, as you no doubt imagine it to be, in fact it tends to highlight the problem.

One of the things that happens when the head of an organisation has been around too long is that he starts to see the organisation as his personal fiefdom, to be ruled as he pleases. It is very clear that this happened to Petrie long ago.

I see no sign whatsoever that he is in any way conscious of the fact that the vast majority of the money he spends each year comes not from himself (I don't believe he has ever put so much as the cost of a season ticket into the club), or even from STF, but from the fans. The money that he spends every year is the fans' money, but he behaves as if it was his.

Is he down-to-earth, inclusive, forthcoming? No. He is aloof, high-handed, and arrogant. Information is power, and Rod likes power. Rod doesn't like circulating information. Did he ever give even a hint of what his 'Five-Year Plan' was, to the fans who paid for it?

Instead of letting the fans know, within the bounds of commmercial confidence and reasonable privacy, exactly what he is doing with their money, he treats them as an impertinence. How dare they question how he spends his money!

So in a sense you are right. My analysis is largely based on guesswork, although I would contend that it is at least educated guesswork. But I would suggest that instead of gloating over the fact, you would be better employed reflecting on it, and asking yourself why that is, and asking yourself whether it's really a good thing.

Anyway, if it's any comfort to you the last thing I was expecting was an intelligent reply from you, so I'm not disappointed.

But as soon as you hand it over whether through purchasing a season ticket or as a walk up it becomes Hibs money. It becomes the property of the majority shareholders STF and RP. RP then allocates a budget to the manager of the day to spend as he sees fit. When he ****s up the fans protest, RP panics and pays off the manager of the day. He then pays compensation to the employers of our next manager who then pays off half the first team squad and pays out more to bring "his" players in. When our latest manager of the day ****s up, the fans protest, RP panics and ...............

I think we'd have been better off if RP had stuck by his guns and kept Mixu. We would still be in the Premiership and probably be more financially stable than we currently are.

greenpaper55
02-06-2014, 02:07 PM
First my "rapier like thrusts" and now FR's dagger? Bit if a jaggy thing fixation maybe?



Except STF is the boss.



Can you give me an example of how other clubs differ?



Apart, of course, from the audited accounts that are published each year.



And you call RP arrogant? Hello Pot this is kettle, did you say black? Over.


You can search the accounts from top to bottom but you will not find a hint of the 5 year plan.

Nailrod
02-06-2014, 02:14 PM
Did you see this? :confused: http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/football/27578902Yes I saw it. Did you read it?


Their biggest cost is the players and generally it's written into their contracts either that players' wages will fall, or players leave, and generally they try to cut their cloth equally.
It bears out what I've said - that we'll make up the budget shortfall by cutting the players budget. Or perhaps slashing would be more appropriate, if the information about the survivors of the cull is accurate - young players who had only just arrived at a decent wage seeing the whole lot taken back from them.

Last year we had a group of players who weren't even good enough to compete with Championship level sides, managed by a complete dunce. We have decimated our first team squad. Next season we will replace it with a group of players who are a lot better than the previous lot, but for some strange reason are only being paid half as much, and will be recruited and managed by the same dunce.

I've raised this point several times, and I'm still waiting for somebody - Petrie hater or Petrie acolyte - to explain to me how it's going to work.

Peevemor
02-06-2014, 02:14 PM
You can search the accounts from top to bottom but you will not find a hint of the 5 year plan.

As far as I know, the 5 year plan was mentioned once by RP in response to a supporter's question.

There was no heralded announcement from the club, no statement on the official site and no press release.

People keep going on about it, but the chances are that that plan was abandoned when SL & FH went.

Peevemor
02-06-2014, 02:15 PM
Yes I saw it. Did you read it?


It bears out what I've said - that we'll make up the budget shortfall by cutting the players budget. Or perhaps slashing would be more appropriate, if the information about the survivors of the cull is accurate - young players who had only just arrived at a decent wage seeing the whole lot taken back from them.

Last year we had a group of players who weren't even good enough to compete with Championship level sides, managed by a complete dunce. We have decimated our first team squad. Next season we will replace it with a group of players who are a lot better than the previous lot, but for some strange reason are only being paid half as much, and will be recruited and managed by the same dunce.

I've raised this point several times, and I'm still waiting for somebody - Petrie hater or Petrie acolyte - to explain to me how it's going to work.

There you go again? Have you spoken to anyone about this?

jacomo
02-06-2014, 02:27 PM
Did you see this? :confused: http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/football/27578902

I hadn't seen this before - a little more substance to it than the similar article from Neil Patey... Suggests that income won't be too badly affected from being in the 2nd tier next season. This is largely due to the parachute payment so if we don't get promoted things look bleaker...

Credit to Petrie where it is due, Scottish football is hardly a money-making environment, and most professional clubs seem to be under some sort of financial stress. In that context he has done ok, though of course we have paid a heavy price by spending money on hiring and firing managers and journeymen.

Businessmen in almost any field will say that identifying and retaining key talent is one of the most important roles of a leader. In this respect, we have done less well...

Nailrod
02-06-2014, 02:46 PM
We have already heard this from you. Starting a new thread on it doesn't make it any more factual or believable.

No you haven't. I've never posted in detail before about my concerns regarding our 'financial stability'. Take off your Petrie blinkers and try to read what people are actually saying.

Hibercelona
02-06-2014, 02:46 PM
He's made us financially stable by cutting corners to make up for his mistakes. That's not a job well done. That's a man saving his own job at the expense of the supporters.

His naivety when it comes to negotiations has cost the club dearly. Cutting corners to make the balance sheets look more steady, doesn't change a thing.

Nailrod
02-06-2014, 02:58 PM
Apart, of course, from the audited accounts that are published each year...Unwittingly, you raise a good point.

The accounts are a good example of what I am talking about. They provide only the bare minimum information that they are legally required to. One piece of information that they do not specify, for example, is whether Rod Petrie is being paid a salary.

I would have thought it was the bare minimum courtesy to tell people who are paying your salary that you are paying them a salary. Saying nothing on the subject might lead to a belief that you are not being paid a salary.

The consequences of this silence are confusion on the part of fans that can lead to the risk of real fallouts. Very recently a fellow Hibee subjected Hibercelona to what I can only describe as a volley of abuse for suggesting that Petrie might be getting a salary from Hibs, while you capered around in the background chipping in noddys and smileys, for all the world like a playground bully's hanger-on.

If Rod Petrie had made it clear, as he is perfectly capable of doing, whether or not he is being paid a salary, this unsavoury incident would never have arisen. But that would involve telling people stuff.

Knowledge is power, and a dilution of knowledge leads to a diminishing of power. Never tell anybody anything unless they absolutely have to know it, and all that...

CropleyWasGod
02-06-2014, 03:05 PM
Unwittingly, you raise a good point.

The accounts are a good example of what I am talking about. They provide only the bare minimum information that they are legally required to. One piece of information that they do not specify, for example, is whether Rod Petrie is being paid a salary.

I would have thought it was the bare minimum courtesy to tell people who are paying your salary that you are paying them a salary. Saying nothing on the subject might lead to a belief that you are not being paid a salary.

.

Why stop at Rod? Why not publish the players' wages, those of the TO staff, and the cleaners? After all, we (and the television companies and the sponsors) are paying those as well.

Nailrod
02-06-2014, 03:09 PM
There you go again? Have you spoken to anyone about this?Peevemore there is a conditional in that sentence. Either you didn't read it, or you don't know what is the purpose of a conditional clause in English.

I didn't make up the story that young players have seen their wages slashed. It has been widely reported and discussed. But I don't know for certain whether it is a fact or not. That is why I put a conditional clause in the relevant sentence.

Nailrod
02-06-2014, 03:19 PM
Why stop at Rod? Why not publish the players' wages, those of the TO staff, and the cleaners? After all, we (and the television companies and the sponsors) are paying those as well.You do understand that I'm not suggesting that Rod should give the full details of his salary? Just confirm whether or not he is being paid a salary.

In the case of the players, there isn't really any confusion. If you're a professional player registered with and playing for a football club, then it's reasonable to assume that you're being paid by that football club.

And personally, I would see it as a good thing if the amorphous mass of 'wages' was subdivided into different categories, with number of employees and total wage bill. That would maintain the privacy of the individuals concerned, while making it clear what the budget for the playing staff was, and how it was evolving. The playing budget is a critical element of a football club's success, and being able to increase the playing budget is a critical measure of how well the executives are running the club.

Do you think it would be a bad thing? Perhaps you could explain why.

Saorsa
02-06-2014, 03:21 PM
As far as I know, the 5 year plan was mentioned once by RP in response to a supporter's question.

There was no heralded announcement from the club, no statement on the official site and no press release.

People keep going on about it, but the chances are that that plan was abandoned when SL & FH went.mair like it never existed in the first place and was made up on the hoof along with the rest of the flannel and spin for that last question and nae answer session.

Peevemor
02-06-2014, 03:33 PM
Unwittingly, you raise a good point.

The accounts are a good example of what I am talking about. They provide only the bare minimum information that they are legally required to. One piece of information that they do not specify, for example, is whether Rod Petrie is being paid a salary.

I would have thought it was the bare minimum courtesy to tell people who are paying your salary that you are paying them a salary. Saying nothing on the subject might lead to a belief that you are not being paid a salary.

You're talking guff again. In the past full details of RP's salary, including payments to pension plans, were detailed in the accounts. During the period when he wasn't salaried, this wasn't advertised by RP/the club. This came out in response to a questioned raised by a disgruntled shareholder at the AGM.

In any case, specific details aren't published of any other employee's salary, so why should it be any different for RP? I haven't seen you scrambling to know how much Leeann Dempster is being paid.


The consequences of this silence are confusion on the part of fans that can lead to the risk of real fallouts. Very recently a fellow Hibee subjected Hibercelona to what I can only describe as a volley of abuse for suggesting that Petrie might be getting a salary from Hibs, while you capered around in the background chipping in noddys and smileys, for all the world like a playground bully's hanger-on.

OK. Cut that out now. I've already addressed this here.

http://www.hibs.net/showthread.php?284896-Who-On-Here-Wants-Petrie-To-Stay&p=4044081&viewfull=1#post4044081



If Rod Petrie had made it clear, as he is perfectly capable of doing, whether or not he is being paid a salary, this unsavoury incident would never have arisen. But that would involve telling people stuff.

Knowledge is power, and a dilution of knowledge leads to a diminishing of power. Never tell anybody anything unless they absolutely have to know it, and all that...


What's the point if clowns like you don't listen anyway?

Nailrod
02-06-2014, 03:35 PM
So you are blaming the club for going out and getting the management team the majority of us wanted (showing ambition)...FWIW I was opposed to the Butcher signing at the time, and I said so. I wasn't opposed to it because I thought he would be a useless manager, although if I had checked his track record and seen 17 years of failure and 18 months of success I might have had my doubts.

I was opposed to it because going into a smaller club with fewer resources than us and stripping them of their whole successful management team, just because we were too useless and stupid to build our own, stank of Old Firmery. And it still does.

Exactly the sort of thing we all bitch and squeal about when the OF do it to Hibs, and there we were doing it ourselves.

Peevemor
02-06-2014, 03:36 PM
Peevemore there is a conditional in that sentence. Either you didn't read it, or you don't know what is the purpose of a conditional clause in English.

I didn't make up the story that young players have seen their wages slashed. It has been widely reported and discussed. But I don't know for certain whether it is a fact or not. That is why I put a conditional clause in the relevant sentence.

You're not paying attention are you.

You include "nail" in your user name, you referred to my "rapier like thrusts", Filled Rolls' dagger to the bowels of your argument and now you're on about slashing!

There's an underlying theme there....

Nailrod
02-06-2014, 03:56 PM
mair like it never existed in the first place and was made up on the hoof along with the rest of the flannel and spin for that last question and nae answer session.If I was the Chairman of Hibernian Football Club I would make absolutely sure that the fans knew with certainty whether I was being paid a salary out of the money they contribute to the club or not. And I would tell them how much I was being paid, out of principle, even if I wasn't under any obligation to do so.

If I was the Chairman of Hibernian Football Club and I had a Five-year plan I would make absolutely sure that the fans knew that I had a plan, and within the bounds of commercial confidence and individual privacy, what the plan was. And then if I completely failed to achieve the plan, I would resign.

It's called leadership, and taking responsibility for your decision-making.

I can't really put it much simpler than that.

Nailrod
02-06-2014, 04:07 PM
You're talking guff again. In the past full details of RP's salary, including payments to pension plans, were detailed in the accounts. During the period when he wasn't salaried, this wasn't advertised by RP/the club. This came out in response to a questioned raised by a disgruntled shareholder at the AGM... In any case, specific details aren't published of any other employee's salary, so why should it be any different for RP? I haven't seen you scrambling to know how much Leeann Dempster is being paid.

OK. Cut that out now. I've already addressed this here.

http://www.hibs.net/showthread.php?284896-Who-On-Here-Wants-Petrie-To-Stay&p=4044081&viewfull=1#post4044081

What's the point if clowns like you don't listen anyway?1. Most of this is irrelevant, because I've never suggested that Rod should provide the details of what he is being paid. Just out of courtesy, you know, make sure that the fans know if he's being paid or not.

2. If you didn't do anything wrong, why did you apologise?

3. I'm ready to listen to anything Rod says, at any time.

Is he being paid, or not?
Does he have a five-year plan, or not?
Are we on track, or not?
Did he include a relegation clause in the management team's package, or not?
Are revenues next year expected to rise, or not?
Will our players budget for next season be increased, or not?
At what point, if ever, would he consider that his position at the club has been so badly compromised that he should resign?

If you think you can answer any of these questions, feel free to do so.

If you can't, feel free to explain why the fans shouldn't have this information.

The Modfather
02-06-2014, 04:25 PM
As far as I know, the 5 year plan was mentioned once by RP in response to a supporter's question.

There was no heralded announcement from the club, no statement on the official site and no press release.

People keep going on about it, but the chances are that that plan was abandoned when SL & FH went.

Therein lies the main point. Petrie is and, never has been, accountable for anything since he has carte blanche under Farmer.

There might have been a plan, it might have changed, it might have been utter bull when the heat was on. Who knows, because Petrie will never let us know anything worth knowing if it means being held to account.

Petrie's own phrase is one of the most apt he ever said "unworkable legacie"

Peevemor
02-06-2014, 04:31 PM
1. Most of this is irrelevant, because I've never suggested that Rod should provide the details of what he is being paid. Just out of courtesy, you know, make sure that the fans know if he's being paid or not.

2. If you didn't do anything wrong, why did you apologise?

3. I'm ready to listen to anything Rod says, at any time.

Is he being paid, or not?
Does he have a five-year plan, or not?
Are we on track, or not?
Did he include a relegation clause in the management team's package, or not?
Are revenues next year expected to rise, or not?
Will our players budget for next season be increased, or not?
At what point, if ever, would he consider that his position at the club has been so badly compromised that he should resign?

If you think you can answer any of these questions, feel free to do so.

If you can't, feel free to explain why the fans shouldn't have this information.

I can't be bothered wasting any more of my time on you. Just stick your fingers in your ears, go "'na na na na..." and carry on believing what you want.

Nailrod
02-06-2014, 04:38 PM
I can't be bothered wasting any more of my time on you. Just stick your fingers in your ears, go "'na na na na..." and carry on believing what you want.Is he being paid, or not?
Does he have a five-year plan, or not?
Are we on track, or not?
Did he include a relegation clause in the management team's package, or not?
Are revenues next year expected to rise, or not?
Will our players budget for next season be increased, or not?
At what point, if ever, would he consider that his position at the club has been so badly compromised that he should resign?

If you think you can answer any of these questions, feel free to do so.

If you can't, feel free to explain why the fans shouldn't have this information.

Waxy
02-06-2014, 04:44 PM
One of the few crumbling props still shoring up the tottering Petrie edifice is the claim that he has brought 'financial stability' to the club. This belief is not restricted to his active supporters - many people who now want him out qualify their criticism by acknowledging that he has given us financial stability.

I don't buy this. I suspect that we are in a very precarious financial position, and that this will have a direct impact on our ability to get back up into the SPL, and I want to subject my view to wider scrutiny.

Firstly, it must have cost us a very large sum of money to buy out the Butcher trio from ICT. Possibly running into hundreds of thousands. I don't believe this money came out of cash in hand - I suspect it was budgeted on an anticipated boom in season ticket sales based on a wave of Butchermania.

Secondly, we must have offered a very substantial package to the Butcher trio. They can't have come cheap. I recall one poster who said that the sums involved 'would make our eyes water', although I don't recall if it was someone who has genuine access to inside info, or just a blether. Whatever the sum, again I don't believe it came out of cash in hand. Again, I suspect it was budgeted on an anticipated boom in season ticket sales based on a wave of Butchermania. And I wonder if Petrie had the foresight to include a relegation clause in the management salaries - even if he did, we'll still be spending more than we can afford.

Thirdly, we have brought in Leeann Dempster. That can't have been something that was negotiated on the back of a fag packet. The discussions must have been ongoing for some time. Again, I don't believe she came for peanuts. Again, I suspect her cost was budgeted on an anticipated boom in season ticket sales based on a wave of Butchermania.

So we have committed a sum of money that must run into several hundred thousands of pounds, predicated on an increase in revenues, and instead we face a substantial fall in revenues. The gap must be enormous, and there is nowhere to bridge it from other than wage costs. I suspect that we will be trying to get out of the Championship with a squad that is getting paid half as much as the guys who got us into it.

It wasn't lack of money that dug us into the hole in which we find ourselves today, but it will take money to dig us out again, and there isn't any.Do you think the city will make a yearly profit on the trams? If so, by what year will they have paid for themselves?

Just Alf
02-06-2014, 04:45 PM
Is he being paid, or not?
Does he have a five-year plan, or not?
Are we on track, or not?
Did he include a relegation clause in the management team's package, or not?
Are revenues next year expected to rise, or not?
Will our players budget for next season be increased, or not?
At what point, if ever, would he consider that his position at the club has been so badly compromised that he should resign?

If you think you can answer any of these questions, feel free to do so.

If you can't, feel free to explain why the fans shouldn't have this information.

I'm thinking a lot of these questions are now better aimed at Leeann D?

Cropley10
02-06-2014, 04:47 PM
Except STF is the boss.


Boss, or absent landlord? Or extremely dis-interested owner? Notwithstanding his age and/or health issues.

I hear this all the time, but I don't believe it has any basis in fact. STF saved Hibs, as his forefathers before him did. I don't think he gives two figs about the Club, provided it doesn't cost him hard cash OR go bust. He's the owner but being an 'owner' doesn't make you a boss and vice versa, of course.

STF probably goes to less games a year than you do.

Nailrod
02-06-2014, 05:00 PM
The question whether we are in rude financial health thanks to the genius of Rod Petrie (as many believe), or gingerly approaching the edge of a very dodgy-looking financial precipice (as I believe) is of critical importance to the mid-to-long term future of the club. That is why I am trying to raise the issue.

So far I've been condemned in a series of one-liners by a group of Rod Petrie supporters (none of whom attempted to engage with a single one of the substantive points I raised). Peevemore has come along and raised many excellent though not strictly relevant points. CropleywasGod made a brief appearance to half-accuse me of wanting to be told stuff that I've never suggested I should be told, and then disappeared (which is a pity, as I am sure he could offer some useful insights into our current financial position). And a few people have taken the opportunity to emphasise their opposition to Petrie's future involvement with the club (a position I myself heartily endorse).

Nobody has tried to address the actual purpose of the thread. Are we in good financial health, or not? So I would like to try to refocus the discussion:

1. Q. How much money have we made in the past few years?
A. None - we've been breaking even at best;
or Loads - we've been turning over a healthy profit and putting together a substantial war chest for a rainy day.

2. Q. How much did it cost us to prise the Butcher team away from ICT?
A. A lot of money, as we were denuding them of their whole very successful management team in a seller's market - probably a six figure sum;
or None - ICT were happy to see the back of them.

3. Q. How much did we have to offer the Butcher team as a package?
A. A lot of money in a seller's market - a very large six figure sum;
or None - they were happy to come for the same as Paddy Fenlon had been earning between the three of them.

4. Q. Did Petrie have the foresight to include a relegation clause in the Butcher teams' package?
A. Unfortunately not; or
Of course he did - what do you take him for, a fool?

5. Q. How much did it cost us to recruit Leeann Dempster and George Craig?
A. Into six figures - both were headhunted precisely because they had a track record of success;
or Next to nothing - the pair of them were grateful to be offered a job.

6. Q. How do our revenues look for next year?
A. Terrible - there's going to be a massive shortfall in comparison with expectations;
or Terrific - we're going to have money flowing out of our bottom orifice.

In each case the answer to the question lies somewhere between the two extremes. I take the view that in each case it tends towards the first answer. Then I add up 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 and the total I get is that there is going to be a very substantial shortfall in our budget next season, and that the gap is going to be closed by taking costs out of the playing budget, as it is the only substantial item on the cost side where significant savings can easily be made.

But you're absolutely free to explain to me why I'm wrong. As is anybody else on the .net.

Cropley10
02-06-2014, 05:08 PM
The question whether we are in rude financial health thanks to the genius of Rod Petrie (as many believe), or gingerly approaching the edge of a very dodgy-looking financial precipice (as I believe) is of critical importance to the mid-to-long term future of the club. That is why I am trying to raise the issue.

So far I've been condemned in a series of one-liners by a group of Rod Petrie supporters (none of whom attempted to engage with a single one of the substantive points I raised). Peevemore has come along and raised many excellent though not strictly relevant points. CropleywasGod made a brief appearance to half-accuse me of wanting to be told stuff that I've never suggested I should be told, and then disappeared (which is a pity, as I am sure he could offer some useful insights into our current financial position). And a few people have taken the opportunity to emphasise their opposition to Petrie's future involvement with the club (a position I myself heartily endorse).

Nobody has tried to address the actual purpose of the thread. Are we in good financial health, or not? So I would like to try to refocus the discussion:

1. Q. How much money have we made in the past few years?
A. None - we've been breaking even at best;
or Loads - we've been turning over a healthy profit and putting together a substantial war chest for a rainy day.

2. Q. How much did it cost us to prise the Butcher team away from ICT?
A. A lot of money, as we were denuding them of their whole very successful management team in a seller's market - probably a six figure sum;
or None - ICT were happy to see the back of them.

3. Q. How much did we have to offer the Butcher team as a package?
A. A lot of money in a seller's market - a very large six figure sum;
or None - they were happy to come for the same as Paddy Fenlon had been earning between the three of them.

4. Q. Did Petrie have the foresight to include a relegation clause in the Butcher teams' package?
A. Unfortunately not; or
Of course he did - what do you take him for, a fool?

5. Q. How much did it cost us to recruit Leeann Dempster and George Craig?
A. Into six figures - both were headhunted precisely because they had a track record of success;
or Next to nothing - the pair of them were grateful to be offered a job.

6. Q. How do our revenues look for next year?
A. Terrible - there's going to be a massive shortfall in comparison with expectations;
or Terrific - we're going to have money flowing out of our bottom orifice.

In each case the answer to the question lies somewhere between the two extremes. I take the view that in each case it tends towards the first answer. Then I add up 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 and the total I get is that there is going to be a very substantial shortfall in our budget next season, and that the gap is going to be closed by taking costs out of the playing budget, as it is the only substantial item on the cost side where significant savings can easily be made.

But you're absolutely free to explain to me why I'm wrong. As is anybody else on the .net.

OK here goes

1. Q. How much money have we made in the past few years?
I don't believe we've made any money. Perhaps the opposite, we may have to add to our debt.


2. Q. How much did it cost us to prise the Butcher team away from ICT?
A small amount - six figures, but only just.


3. Q. How much did we have to offer the Butcher team as a package?
Probably more than we've ever paid any team like this - the best don't come cheap


4. Q. Did Petrie have the foresight to include a relegation clause in the Butcher teams' package?
Unfortunately not, to quote RP himself, he thought, 'it ain't going to happen'.


5. Q. How much did it cost us to recruit Leeann Dempster and George Craig?
Both will be well paid, but not telephone numbers, Motherwell are skint, for example.


6. Q. How do our revenues look for next year?
Who knows. Galvanise the support and they could be as healthy if not better than last year.

WHUHibs
02-06-2014, 05:13 PM
As far as I know, the 5 year plan was mentioned once by RP in response to a supporter's question.

There was no heralded announcement from the club, no statement on the official site and no press release.

People keep going on about it, but the chances are that that plan was abandoned when SL & FH went.

Doesn't make sense,,why would the chairman create a5 year plan with his management team and then abandon it? Just because personnel leave a plan still continues or does it just collapse?

Your thoughts?

Nailrod
02-06-2014, 05:22 PM
Do you think the city will make a yearly profit on the trams? If so, by what year will they have paid for themselves?No.

There is no chance that the tram will make an annual operating profit, even if you discount the whole of the investment.

They can never pay for themselves. They cost a billion pounds. The system will have a maximum lifespan of 50 years. The tram would have to generate a profit of £20 million pounds a year plus cost of capital just to pay off the investment. In order for that to happen everybody in Edinburgh would have to spend their whole life riding to-and-fro on the tram. Every tram would have to be full on every trip it ever makes. With twice as many passengers as it can actually carry.

Intelligent governments invest in infrastructure projects because the indirect benefits to the economy make it worthwhile. The tram will never generate any indirect economic benefits in Edinburgh.

I don't know what else to say. Maybe: "I'm Spartacus/Nailrod!"

Alfred E Newman
02-06-2014, 05:25 PM
One of the few crumbling props still shoring up the tottering Petrie edifice is the claim that he has brought 'financial stability' to the club. This belief is not restricted to his active supporters - many people who now want him out qualify their criticism by acknowledging that he has given us financial stability.

I don't buy this. I suspect that we are in a very precarious financial position, and that this will have a direct impact on our ability to get back up into the SPL, and I want to subject my view to wider scrutiny.

Firstly, it must have cost us a very large sum of money to buy out the Butcher trio from ICT. Possibly running into hundreds of thousands. I don't believe this money came out of cash in hand - I suspect it was budgeted on an anticipated boom in season ticket sales based on a wave of Butchermania.

Secondly, we must have offered a very substantial package to the Butcher trio. They can't have come cheap. I recall one poster who said that the sums involved 'would make our eyes water', although I don't recall if it was someone who has genuine access to inside info, or just a blether. Whatever the sum, again I don't believe it came out of cash in hand. Again, I suspect it was budgeted on an anticipated boom in season ticket sales based on a wave of Butchermania. And I wonder if Petrie had the foresight to include a relegation clause in the management salaries - even if he did, we'll still be spending more than we can afford.

Thirdly, we have brought in Leeann Dempster. That can't have been something that was negotiated on the back of a fag packet. The discussions must have been ongoing for some time. Again, I don't believe she came for peanuts. Again, I suspect her cost was budgeted on an anticipated boom in season ticket sales based on a wave of Butchermania.

So we have committed a sum of money that must run into several hundred thousands of pounds, predicated on an increase in revenues, and instead we face a substantial fall in revenues. The gap must be enormous, and there is nowhere to bridge it from other than wage costs. I suspect that we will be trying to get out of the Championship with a squad that is getting paid half as much as the guys who got us into it.

It wasn't lack of money that dug us into the hole in which we find ourselves today, but it will take money to dig us out again, and there isn't any.

I'm getting confused now. I thought Petrie was under fire for being tight fisted and running the club on the cheap. Now he is being critisised for blowing money we don't have.

Iain G
02-06-2014, 05:33 PM
You're not paying attention are you.

You include "nail" in your user name, you referred to my "rapier like thrusts", Filled Rolls' dagger to the bowels of your argument and now you're on about slashing!

There's an underlying theme there....

Oh you missed stab-ility off that list too ;-)

Peevemor
02-06-2014, 05:35 PM
Doesn't make sense,,why would the chairman create a5 year plan with his management team and then abandon it? Just because personnel leave a plan still continues or does it just collapse?

Your thoughts?

It makes sense to me though I'm obviously speculating in any case.

LD's appointment is the second time in recent years that RP has tried to pass the running of the club on to someone else. Things possibly didn't work with SL & FH because they evolved into their respective roles , therefore there were grey areas over who decided what (I'm guessing).

They went and now LD has been brought as CEO but with, I'm sure, a more clearly defined role.

So comings and goings behind the scenes as well as the obvious (but unexpected) failure on the pitch has meant that any plan may have been delayed but is still on the agenda, or perhaps it's been scrapped altogether with another being hastily assembled we post.

I've no idea, but both scenarios are possible.

Nailrod
02-06-2014, 05:35 PM
I'm getting confused now. I thought Petrie was under fire for being tight fisted and running the club on the cheap. Now he is being critisised for blowing money we don't have.That's how Petrie likes it. The truth is that he's both. He'll chuck away hundreds of thousands of pounds rather than admit that he was wrong (Calderwood), and then scrimp on a couple of hundred pounds on player wages and see us relegated.

He is running a fiefdom, not a football club.

Peevemor
02-06-2014, 05:37 PM
The question whether we are in rude financial health thanks to the genius of Rod Petrie (as many believe), or gingerly approaching the edge of a very dodgy-looking financial precipice (as I believe) is of critical importance to the mid-to-long term future of the club. That is why I am trying to raise the issue.

So far I've been condemned in a series of one-liners by a group of Rod Petrie supporters (none of whom attempted to engage with a single one of the substantive points I raised). Peevemore has come along and raised many excellent though not strictly relevant points. CropleywasGod made a brief appearance to half-accuse me of wanting to be told stuff that I've never suggested I should be told, and then disappeared (which is a pity, as I am sure he could offer some useful insights into our current financial position). And a few people have taken the opportunity to emphasise their opposition to Petrie's future involvement with the club (a position I myself heartily endorse).

Nobody has tried to address the actual purpose of the thread. Are we in good financial health, or not? So I would like to try to refocus the discussion:

1. Q. How much money have we made in the past few years?
A. None - we've been breaking even at best;
or Loads - we've been turning over a healthy profit and putting together a substantial war chest for a rainy day.

2. Q. How much did it cost us to prise the Butcher team away from ICT?
A. A lot of money, as we were denuding them of their whole very successful management team in a seller's market - probably a six figure sum;
or None - ICT were happy to see the back of them.

3. Q. How much did we have to offer the Butcher team as a package?
A. A lot of money in a seller's market - a very large six figure sum;
or None - they were happy to come for the same as Paddy Fenlon had been earning between the three of them.

4. Q. Did Petrie have the foresight to include a relegation clause in the Butcher teams' package?
A. Unfortunately not; or
Of course he did - what do you take him for, a fool?

5. Q. How much did it cost us to recruit Leeann Dempster and George Craig?
A. Into six figures - both were headhunted precisely because they had a track record of success;
or Next to nothing - the pair of them were grateful to be offered a job.

6. Q. How do our revenues look for next year?
A. Terrible - there's going to be a massive shortfall in comparison with expectations;
or Terrific - we're going to have money flowing out of our bottom orifice.

In each case the answer to the question lies somewhere between the two extremes. I take the view that in each case it tends towards the first answer. Then I add up 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 and the total I get is that there is going to be a very substantial shortfall in our budget next season, and that the gap is going to be closed by taking costs out of the playing budget, as it is the only substantial item on the cost side where significant savings can easily be made.

But you're absolutely free to explain to me why I'm wrong. As is anybody else on the .net.

Jeezo! You really do take yourself seriously don't you. That's the second time on this thread (that I've noticed) that you've copy and pasted your own nonsense.

Nailrod
02-06-2014, 05:38 PM
Doesn't make sense,,why would the chairman create a5 year plan with his management team and then abandon it? Just because personnel leave a plan still continues or does it just collapse?

Your thoughts?Peevemore's thoughts:

You have two consecutive commas and no space before the next word. Therefore Petrie was right to abandon his 5-year plan and pretend it had never existed.

Peevemor
02-06-2014, 05:41 PM
Boss, or absent landlord? Or extremely dis-interested owner? Notwithstanding his age and/or health issues.

I hear this all the time, but I don't believe it has any basis in fact. STF saved Hibs, as his forefathers before him did. I don't think he gives two figs about the Club, provided it doesn't cost him hard cash OR go bust. He's the owner but being an 'owner' doesn't make you a boss and vice versa, of course.

STF probably goes to less games a year than you do.

Ultimately RP will get his remit from STF. How closely he is monitored is anyone's guess.

Peevemor
02-06-2014, 05:42 PM
I'm getting confused now. I thought Petrie was under fire for being tight fisted and running the club on the cheap. Now he is being critisised for blowing money we don't have.

Don't try to follow Nailrod's logic. There isn't any.

Peevemor
02-06-2014, 05:44 PM
Peevemore's thoughts:

You have two consecutive commas and no space before the next word. Therefore Petrie was right to abandon his 5-year plan and pretend it had never existed.

If you're going to try to be smart, at least spell my user name correctly. I told you before, you're crap at pedantry.

Just Alf
02-06-2014, 05:45 PM
Jeezo! You really do take yourself seriously don't you. That's the second time on this thread (that I've noticed) that you've copy and pasted your own nonsense.

Whew! Not just me then! :-)

Nailrod
02-06-2014, 05:45 PM
I'm thinking a lot of these questions are now better aimed at Leeann D?She wouldn't have the authority to answer most (any?) of them without Board approval. She's the Chief Executive, not Il Duce. She can't just come in and stomp over everybody and do as she pleases.

Just Alf
02-06-2014, 05:48 PM
She wouldn't have the authority to answer most (any?) of them without Board approval. She's the Chief Executive, not Il Duce. She can't just come in and stomp over everybody and do as she pleases.

I'm lost, that's exactly the authority she has been given?

Nailrod
02-06-2014, 05:48 PM
OK here goes

1. Q. How much money have we made in the past few years?
I don't believe we've made any money. Perhaps the opposite, we may have to add to our debt.


2. Q. How much did it cost us to prise the Butcher team away from ICT?
A small amount - six figures, but only just.


3. Q. How much did we have to offer the Butcher team as a package?
Probably more than we've ever paid any team like this - the best don't come cheap


4. Q. Did Petrie have the foresight to include a relegation clause in the Butcher teams' package?
Unfortunately not, to quote RP himself, he thought, 'it ain't going to happen'.


5. Q. How much did it cost us to recruit Leeann Dempster and George Craig?
Both will be well paid, but not telephone numbers, Motherwell are skint, for example.


6. Q. How do our revenues look for next year?
Who knows. Galvanise the support and they could be as healthy if not better than last year.Thanks for this (genuinely). But you missed out the bottom line. So where do you think we stand financially, as we go into our season in the Championship?

Cropley10
02-06-2014, 05:48 PM
Ultimately RP will get his remit from STF. How closely he is monitored is anyone's guess.

Not wishing to split hairs but I think the remit is pretty clear; don't go bust and don't ask me to write cheques for my hard-earned.

No need to monitor anything if the accounts look OK.

STF isn't interested in being the Boss, he's not really interested in Hibs, beyond his philanthropic one, or I should say, he's done nothing to suggest he is. If he had we wouldn't be in this mess.

Nailrod
02-06-2014, 05:51 PM
Jeezo! You really do take yourself seriously don't you. That's the second time on this thread (that I've noticed) that you've copy and pasted your own nonsense.The thing I admire most about you Peevemore is your consistency:

I can't be bothered wasting any more of my time on you. Just stick your fingers in your ears, go "'na na na na..." and carry on believing what you want.

Cropley10
02-06-2014, 05:51 PM
Thanks for this (genuinely). But you missed out the bottom line. So where do you think we stand financially, as we go into our season in the Championship?

In a bad, but not critical place. There are some parachutes and sweetners, maybe some salary clauses too. Ask the same question in 3 or 4 weeks, as I'm holding off my ST renewals until I see what LD has to say, as I'm certain of one thing completely it will be more than RP ever said.

Hibs fans have proved time and again that we support the Club. So get it right on the Park and the revenue will come back...

Nailrod
02-06-2014, 05:53 PM
If you're going to try to be smart, at least spell my user name correctly. I told you before, you're crap at pedantry.The thing I admire most about you Peevemore is your consistency:
I can't be bothered wasting any more of my time on you. Just stick your fingers in your ears, go "'na na na na..." and carry on believing what you want.

Nailrod
02-06-2014, 06:01 PM
I'm lost, that's exactly the authority she has been given?She's coming in as Chief Executive, and she'll be responsible for "the day-to-day running of the club". She will report to the Board. She will have no authority over the Board. She will have no authority over long-term strategic issues unless the Board (under Petrie's direction) grants it to her, and the Board (under Petrie's direction) will be able to rescind that authority whenever it chooses.

Just Alf
02-06-2014, 06:04 PM
She's coming in as Chief Executive, and she'll be responsible for "the day-to-day running of the club". She will report to the Board. She will have no authority over the Board. She will have no authority over long-term strategic issues unless the Board (under Petrie's direction) grants it to her, and the Board (under Petrie's direction) will be able to rescind that authority whenever it chooses.

I hear what your saying but (from direct involvement) that's not totally the case. That's not say there won't be some "robust" discussions but she's now the boss.



Edit: direct involvement means in industry in general, not Hibs.

Hibrandenburg
02-06-2014, 06:15 PM
As far as I know, the 5 year plan was mentioned once by RP in response to a supporter's question.

There was no heralded announcement from the club, no statement on the official site and no press release.

People keep going on about it, but the chances are that that plan was abandoned when SL & FH went.

:agree:

Every company I know has a five year plan, it's normal business practice.

RIP Bestie
02-06-2014, 06:16 PM
I can't be bothered wasting any more of my time on you. Just stick your fingers in your ears, go "'na na na na..." and carry on believing what you want.
To be honest, I admire your resilience. I congratulate you on lasting so long and wasting the time that you did.

Peevemor
02-06-2014, 06:20 PM
:agree:

Every company I know has a five year plan, it's normal business practice.

I know we have one. It's recently taken a dunt as a guy that was recently taken on with a view to eventually taking over (in part) the business has turned out to be a waste of space and has been given his jotters. Back to the drawing board...

Nailrod
02-06-2014, 06:43 PM
To be honest, I admire your resilience. I congratulate you on lasting so long and wasting the time that you did.
Too soon Beastie, too soon. Despite his protestations that he can't be bothered wasting any more of his time on me, Peevemore is still relentlessly on my case.

He's like Inspector Clouseau. I'll never foil him.

Nailrod
02-06-2014, 06:45 PM
I know we have one. It's recently taken a dunt as a guy that was recently taken on with a view to eventually taking over (in part) the business has turned out to be a waste of space and has been given his jotters. Back to the drawing board...Scott Lindsay? Fyfe Hyland? Leeann Dempster?

Cropley10
02-06-2014, 06:49 PM
I know we have one. It's recently taken a dunt as a guy that was recently taken on with a view to eventually taking over (in part) the business has turned out to be a waste of space and has been given his jotters. Back to the drawing board...

Do you have an owner who is the boss?

Cropley10
02-06-2014, 06:52 PM
So has Rod wasted more money on a succession of useless players and poor managers than he's managed to save being the arch negotiator that he is?

Peevemor
02-06-2014, 06:53 PM
Do you have an owner who is the boss?

Yes. Majority shareholder and boss who's looking to retire.

Peevemor
02-06-2014, 06:55 PM
To be honest, I admire your resilience. I congratulate you on lasting so long and wasting the time that you did.

Thanks. I did my best but I realise I'm simply not up to the task.

greenpaper55
02-06-2014, 07:00 PM
Yes. Majority shareholder and boss who's looking to retire.

Hes'e not much of a boss who lets his underlings ruin one of his businesses.

Peevemor
02-06-2014, 07:06 PM
Hes'e not much of a boss who lets his underlings ruin one of his businesses.

Eh ? Maybe that's why he's emptying the guy?

Cropley10
02-06-2014, 07:19 PM
Yes. Majority shareholder and boss who's looking to retire.

Sounds like he's struggling to liquidate his asset.

Meanwhile STF has acted as an absent landlord whose tenant has managed to ruin the property's value.

Peevemor
02-06-2014, 07:35 PM
Sounds like he's struggling to liquidate his asset.

Meanwhile STF has acted as an absent landlord whose tenant has managed to ruin the property's value.

Not at all. I have a shareholding which he basically gifted me. He doesn't need the money (he already came out of early retirement 8 years ago, primarily because he was bored). What he wants most of all is to assure the future of the business for the sake of the employees (we're a pretty tight crew) but in order to do so we need another key player - basically to replace himself in a way.

Lester B
02-06-2014, 08:51 PM
Sounds like he's struggling to liquidate his asset.

Meanwhile STF has acted as an absent landlord whose tenant has managed to ruin the property's value.

I like that analogy. And sadly I think it's accurate too.

One Day Soon
02-06-2014, 09:44 PM
She's coming in as Chief Executive, and she'll be responsible for "the day-to-day running of the club". She will report to the Board. She will have no authority over the Board. She will have no authority over long-term strategic issues unless the Board (under Petrie's direction) grants it to her, and the Board (under Petrie's direction) will be able to rescind that authority whenever it chooses.


There is no way to force Rod Petrie out other than to buy out Sir Tom Farmer. All the demonstrations, emails etc in the world won't change that. The one glimpse of possibilty otherwise would be a boycott of season tickets and walk ups. The chances are that the one approach that might force him out would simultaneously guarantee a prolonged spell in the Championship by depriving us of limited finds which are badly needed to rebuild a team and squad that can get us out at first time of asking.

If all of that is correct I come to my next hypothesis which is this - Leanne Dempster is in an incredibly powerful position. Not only is she the Chief Executive and therefore in charge of the running of the club in almost every regard, but she also has the power of resignation. In other words, imagine the effect at this juncture in our history if Leanne Dempsey threatens to resign - or resigns - because Rod Petrie obstructs or attempts to control her in her capacity as Chief Executive. Just now I would say it is very likely that most fans will still buy season tickets and attend games as walk ups providing that they see an attractive squad being drawn together and genuine change in the way the club is run - even if Petrie remains. They won't like it but I think they will support the club nonetheless.

If the new Chief Executive were to resign or threaten to do so then I think it would be game over in terms of the mood and will of the support. She knows this and Rod knows this. The real question here is just how much steel Leanne Dempsey has.

Global Hibby
03-06-2014, 02:45 AM
There is no way to force Rod Petrie out other than to buy out Sir Tom Farmer. All the demonstrations, emails etc in the world won't change that. The one glimpse of possibilty otherwise would be a boycott of season tickets and walk ups. The chances are that the one approach that might force him out would simultaneously guarantee a prolonged spell in the Championship by depriving us of limited finds which are badly needed to rebuild a team and squad that can get us out at first time of asking.

If all of that is correct I come to my next hypothesis which is this - Leanne Dempster is in an incredibly powerful position. Not only is she the Chief Executive and therefore in charge of the running of the club in almost every regard, but she also has the power of resignation. In other words, imagine the effect at this juncture in our history if Leanne Dempsey threatens to resign - or resigns - because Rod Petrie obstructs or attempts to control her in her capacity as Chief Executive. Just now I would say it is very likely that most fans will still buy season tickets and attend games as walk ups providing that they see an attractive squad being drawn together and genuine change in the way the club is run - even if Petrie remains. They won't like it but I think they will support the club nonetheless.

If the new Chief Executive were to resign or threaten to do so then I think it would be game over in terms of the mood and will of the support. She knows this and Rod knows this. The real question here is just how much steel Leanne Dempsey has.

Fantastic last paragraph and could not agree more !!

RIP Bestie
03-06-2014, 02:52 AM
There is no way to force Rod Petrie out other than to buy out Sir Tom Farmer. All the demonstrations, emails etc in the world won't change that. The one glimpse of possibilty otherwise would be a boycott of season tickets and walk ups. The chances are that the one approach that might force him out would simultaneously guarantee a prolonged spell in the Championship by depriving us of limited finds which are badly needed to rebuild a team and squad that can get us out at first time of asking.

If all of that is correct I come to my next hypothesis which is this - Leanne Dempster is in an incredibly powerful position. Not only is she the Chief Executive and therefore in charge of the running of the club in almost every regard, but she also has the power of resignation. In other words, imagine the effect at this juncture in our history if Leanne Dempsey threatens to resign - or resigns - because Rod Petrie obstructs or attempts to control her in her capacity as Chief Executive. Just now I would say it is very likely that most fans will still buy season tickets and attend games as walk ups providing that they see an attractive squad being drawn together and genuine change in the way the club is run - even if Petrie remains. They won't like it but I think they will support the club nonetheless.

If the new Chief Executive were to resign or threaten to do so then I think it would be game over in terms of the mood and will of the support. She knows this and Rod knows this. The real question here is just how much steel Leanne Dempsey has.
Fantastic post

Nailrod
03-06-2014, 03:04 AM
Fantastic last paragraph and could not agree more !!It's just not going to happen. You don't arrive in a new organisation and start on Day 1 by telling the person who just hired you that you're gunning for him.

Everything that matters will have been discussed and agreed between Rod and LD before she took up the post. That will include the full package in terms of her role and responsibilities, and also the matters that are reserved for Rod. Which are that he will continue to oversee far-reaching change, he will focus on helping to facilitate the Change Agenda identified by the Board, and he will continue to be the conduit between the Club and STF.

As the 90% shareholder and owner of the club, STF is the only person who can sign off on top-level changes, and LD won't even have access to him without Rod's say-so.

Peevemor
03-06-2014, 05:48 AM
...

If the new Chief Executive were to resign or threaten to do so then I think it would be game over in terms of the mood and will of the support. She knows this and Rod knows this. The real question here is just how much steel Leanne Dempsey has.


Fantastic last paragraph and could not agree more !!


It's just not going to happen. You don't arrive in a new organisation and start on Day 1 by telling the person who just hired you that you're gunning for him.

Everything that matters will have been discussed and agreed between Rod and LD before she took up the post. That will include the full package in terms of her role and responsibilities, and also the matters that are reserved for Rod. Which are that he will continue to oversee far-reaching change, he will focus on helping to facilitate the Change Agenda identified by the Board, and he will continue to be the conduit between the Club and STF.

As the 90% shareholder and owner of the club, STF is the only person who can sign off on top-level changes, and LD won't even have access to him without Rod's say-so.

Nail(rod) on the head again ....... or maybe not...

Nailrod
03-06-2014, 07:31 AM
Nail(rod) on the head again ....... or maybe not...For somebody who 'couldn't be bothered wasting any more time on me', (http://www.hibs.net/showthread.php?284999-Financial-Stability-Another-Petrie-Myth&p=4044721&viewfull=1#post4044721) you seem to spend an inordinate amount of time stalking me around the forums.

Lester B
03-06-2014, 09:47 AM
I'm not an admin on here so probably overstepping the mark but...

Can the two of you desist with the bitch slap fest?

You have both make interesting and telling contributions to the debate previously but this stuff is unedifying and tedious to wade through. It adds nothing.

And feel free to reply with a variation on 'It's not me it's him', 'he started it', etc

People's Front of Judea anyone?

Peevemor
03-06-2014, 09:48 AM
I'm not an admin on here so probably overstepping the mark but...

Can the two of you desist with the bitch slap fest?

You have both make interesting and telling contributions to the debate previously but this stuff is unedifying and tedious to wade through. It adds nothing.

And feel free to reply with a variation on 'It's not me it's him', 'he started it', etc

People's Front of Judea anyone?

It's not me it's him.

Lester B
03-06-2014, 09:56 AM
It's not me it's him.

Very good. :wink:You understand my point though?

Peevemor
03-06-2014, 10:00 AM
Very good. :wink:You understand my point though?

You started it!

Lester B
03-06-2014, 10:11 AM
You started it!

I'm Brian and so is my wife.

WestEndHibee
03-06-2014, 12:19 PM
Well I think the OP has a point: phoney Butchermania has bitten the dust...

:thumbsup: We could do a parody.

"Nailrod calling to the underworld, come out of the cupboard you boys and girls"

WestEndHibee
03-06-2014, 12:24 PM
There is no way to force Rod Petrie out other than to buy out Sir Tom Farmer. All the demonstrations, emails etc in the world won't change that. The one glimpse of possibilty otherwise would be a boycott of season tickets and walk ups. The chances are that the one approach that might force him out would simultaneously guarantee a prolonged spell in the Championship by depriving us of limited finds which are badly needed to rebuild a team and squad that can get us out at first time of asking.

If all of that is correct I come to my next hypothesis which is this - Leanne Dempster is in an incredibly powerful position. Not only is she the Chief Executive and therefore in charge of the running of the club in almost every regard, but she also has the power of resignation. In other words, imagine the effect at this juncture in our history if Leanne Dempsey threatens to resign - or resigns - because Rod Petrie obstructs or attempts to control her in her capacity as Chief Executive. Just now I would say it is very likely that most fans will still buy season tickets and attend games as walk ups providing that they see an attractive squad being drawn together and genuine change in the way the club is run - even if Petrie remains. They won't like it but I think they will support the club nonetheless.

If the new Chief Executive were to resign or threaten to do so then I think it would be game over in terms of the mood and will of the support. She knows this and Rod knows this. The real question here is just how much steel Leanne Dempsey has.

Hole in one!

I imagine that to get where she has in a male dominated arena she will have plenty steel.

SunshineOnLeith
03-06-2014, 05:03 PM
We're on the verge of administration.

Kickback told me.

147lothian
04-06-2014, 11:50 AM
Therein lies the main point. Petrie is and, never has been, accountable for anything since he has carte blanche under Farmer.

There might have been a plan, it might have changed, it might have been utter bull when the heat was on. Who knows, because Petrie will never let us know anything worth knowing if it means being held to account.

Petrie's own phrase is one of the most apt he ever said "unworkable legacie"

Good point mate, a chairman who would never have been near a football club if it wasn't for an owner who isn't interested in football is not a good combination, we don't need this aloof buffoon in any non executive role acting as conduit between club and owner, it's been his legacy that he has got us relegated from the worst spl even and made us a mid table championship club

Peevemor
04-06-2014, 11:54 AM
Good point mate, a chairman who would never have been near a football club if it wasn't for an owner who isn't interested in football is not a good combination, we don't need this aloof buffoon in any non executive role acting as conduit between club and owner,

Unless the owner decides otherwise.


it's been his legacy that he has got us relegated from the worst spl even and made us a mid table championship club

Is that a fact? I must have missed something.

nribs
04-06-2014, 11:55 AM
We're on the verge of administration.

Kickback told me.

Just tell me when I need to switch on the oven. Been dying to try out a new Victoria sandwich recipe

147lothian
04-06-2014, 02:20 PM
Unless the owner decides otherwise.



Is that a fact? I must have missed something.

There's a lot you have missed peevemor, why are you so sensitive to criticism of petrie? Do you not realize, he has been in the post for too long and that giving him carte blanch to run the club as his very own personal fiefdom hasn't worked, there's maybe not much that you can do about that in Brittany but there are things being done to change all this back here, it won't stop until the toxic brand petrie has been completely removed from the club

Peevemor
04-06-2014, 02:24 PM
There's a lot you have missed peevemor, why are you so sensitive to criticism of petrie? Do you not realize, he has been in the post for too long and that giving him carte blanch to run the club as his very own personal fiefdom hasn't worked, there's maybe not much that you can do about that in Brittany but there are things being done to change all this back here, it won't stop until the toxic brand petrie has been completely removed from the club

I said nothing about RP, and even from Brittany I would have noticed if we were already mid table in the championship (which is the point you seem to have chosen to ignore).

CropleyWasGod
04-06-2014, 02:33 PM
I said nothing about RP, and even from Brittany I would have noticed if we were already mid table in the championship (which is the point you seem to have chosen to ignore).

Given that the league hasn't started, it will be arranged in alphabetical order.

On that basis, I think you will find that we are 6th in the table. Sounds mid-table to me. :greengrin So there....

Lester B
04-06-2014, 02:35 PM
Is that a fact? I must have missed something.

It's not a fact but it's certainly a fear.

Lester B
04-06-2014, 02:36 PM
Given that the league hasn't started, it will be arranged in alphabetical order.

On that basis, I think you will find that we are 6th in the table. Sounds mid-table to me. :greengrin So there....

A classic number cruncher's answer :greengrin

Turkish Green
04-06-2014, 02:42 PM
As a moot point let's accept that RP is a good accountant and puts having good balance sheets ahead of putting a winning team on the pitch to maintain the financial position of the club. My question is: with all his accountancy training gained with Ernst & Young and being club chairman since 2004, did he do any risk assessment of the possibility of Hibs being relegated when he put together TB's budget?

Was the signing of loan players and players on short term contracts just RP being careful with the finances or was it because it made a clear-out easier in the event of being relegated?

Personally, I feel that RP took his eye of the ball in January by going along with Butcher in not spending until the summer transfer window. He has been too long in control and despite belatedly bringing in Leeanne Dempster as CEO the damage has been done. Sadly it looks like RP has his eye on maintaining his jacket on the seat at the SFA high table and will use his position at Hibs to keep it despite of the feelings of the majority of supporters (myself included). .


PETRIE OUT

Peevemor
04-06-2014, 02:42 PM
It's not a fact but it's certainly a fear.

I can't recall the poster I quoted showing any positivity whatsoever toward Hibs on here. If I shared his fears I'd probably try to forget to wake up ever again.

Lester B
04-06-2014, 03:03 PM
I can't recall the poster I quoted showing any positivity whatsoever toward Hibs on here. If I shared his fears I'd probably try to forget to wake up ever again.

Well look on the bright side. You have someone new to goad.

Peevemor
04-06-2014, 03:06 PM
Well look on the bright side. You have someone new to goad.

Or someone else to try hard not to. :angelic:

Lester B
04-06-2014, 03:09 PM
Or someone else to try hard not to. :angelic:

You're trying hard not to? :stirrer:

Anyway I'm Brian and so is my wife.

Keith_M
04-06-2014, 03:18 PM
Well look on the bright side. You have someone new to goad.


He needs it, his previous Nemesis has been launched.


I'd be careful what you say to him Lester, you might be next :wink:

Lester B
04-06-2014, 03:25 PM
He needs it, his previous Nemesis has been launched.


I'd be careful what you say to him Lester, you might be next :wink:

That guy launched himself I understand. Realised he was getting into destructive rather than constructive discussion. Have to admire his self awareness in some ways

Next? Little me? Doubt it! :aok:

Peevemor
04-06-2014, 03:26 PM
He needs it, his previous Nemesis has been launched.


I'd be careful what you say to him Lester, you might be next :wink:

Wow, I hadn't realised.

:rotflmao:


'mon the admins!

Peevemor
04-06-2014, 03:27 PM
That guy launched himself I understand. Realised he was getting into destructive rather than constructive discussion. Have to admire his self awareness in some ways

Next? Little me? Doubt it! :aok:

Pity, he brought to such to the table. :agree:

Stonewall
04-06-2014, 03:59 PM
Shame - just read through it and was quite enjoying the spat.

Was tempted to get involved with him myself but elected to take a few days off the board instead.

RIP Bestie
04-06-2014, 04:01 PM
That guy launched himself I understand. Realised he was getting into destructive rather than constructive discussion. Have to admire his self awareness in some ways

Next? Little me? Doubt it! :aok:
Who did?

Pete
04-06-2014, 04:23 PM
I don't believe that. Rods minions got to him and sorted him out.

147lothian
04-06-2014, 05:19 PM
Given that the league hasn't started, it will be arranged in alphabetical order.

On that basis, I think you will find that we are 6th in the table. Sounds mid-table to me. :greengrin So there....

Class, I can almost hear our pedantic friend scratching his head!

CropleyWasGod
04-06-2014, 05:26 PM
Class, I can almost hear our pedantic friend scratching his head!

Which one?

147lothian
04-06-2014, 05:28 PM
Which one?

peevemor

Lewis77
04-06-2014, 05:44 PM
The club's finance is the one thing that really does make my bum squeak as I never want the club to be in the position it has been in the past.

As for Petrie, well in my eyes in relation to finance his job is obvious! He must prevent the club from falling into financial troubles and that is a juggling act between spending money and cutting corners where needed so that the club can prosper.

Is he doing a good job of that ? Well at the moment no, because the club has gone down, thus the potential prosperity of the club is hindered.

Stonewall
04-06-2014, 05:45 PM
Class, I can almost hear our pedantic friend scratching his head!


Which one?


peevemor

Peevemor's got two heads?:dunno:

Peevemor
04-06-2014, 06:19 PM
peevemor

Do you know what pedantic means? Away and look it up and then give us all some examples of my pedantry.

Hibrandenburg
04-06-2014, 06:38 PM
I don't believe that. Rods minions got to him and sorted him out.

Slanderous, we never laid a finger on him!

:duck:

Kaiser1962
04-06-2014, 07:20 PM
Sounds like he's struggling to liquidate his asset.

Meanwhile STF has acted as an absent landlord whose tenant has managed to ruin the property's value.

I suspect the value of the property is the only thing that's held up.

Lester B
04-06-2014, 10:35 PM
Pity, he brought to such to the table. :agree:

No. I've read this several times. Still none the wiser. Can you redo it in English?

Peevemor
04-06-2014, 10:59 PM
No. I've read this several times. Still none the wiser. Can you redo it in English?

Sorry.

Pity, he brought so much to the table. :greengrin

Lester B
05-06-2014, 07:12 AM
Sorry.

Pity, he brought so much to the table. :greengrin

Right. Read it back. Got it now.

Interesting that everyone else was too frightened to point out your typo though


:duck:

Peevemor
05-06-2014, 08:01 AM
Right. Read it back. Got it now.

Interesting that everyone else was too frightened to point out your typo though


:duck:

It's more likely that no one pays any attention to me :boo hoo:.

Lester B
05-06-2014, 09:26 AM
It's more likely that no one pays any attention to me :boo hoo:.

Oh the humanity!!

Greenworld
05-06-2014, 09:48 AM
Each of the questions below has a direct bearing on the issue:

1. Q. How much money have we made in the past few years?
A. None - we've been breaking even at best;
or Loads - we've been turning over a healthy profit and putting together a substantial war chest for a rainy day.

2. Q. How much did it cost us to prise the Butcher team away from ICT?
A. A lot of money, as we were denuding them of their whole very successful management team in a seller's market - probably a six figure sum;
or None - ICT were happy to see the back of them.

Not as much as you think they were running down contracts

3. Q. How much did we have to offer the Butcher team as a package?
A. A lot of money in a seller's market - a very large six figure sum;
or None - they were happy to come for the same as Paddy Fenlon had been earning between the three of them.

Only slightly more so more or less cost neutral

4. Q. Did Petrie have the foresight to include a relegation clause in the Butcher teams' package?
A. Unfortunately not; or
Of course he did - what do you take him for, a fool?

Yes it is a success based package so relegation hits the management too

5. Q. How much did it cost us to recruit Leeann Dempster and George Craig?
A. Into six figures - both were headhunted precisely because they had a track record of success;
or Next to nothing - the pair of them were grateful to be offered a job.

Cost hibs nothing contract free and Rod now takes no salary so cost neutral

6. Q. How do our revenues look for next year?
A. Terrible - there's going to be a massive shortfall in comparison with expectations;
or Terrific - we're going to have money flowing out of our bottom orifice.

Revenues are expected to be on a par with the previous season.....all the financial experts predict:cb

In each case the answer to the question lies somewhere between the two extremes. I take the view that in each case it tends towards the first answer. Then I add up 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 and the total I get is that there is going to be a very substantial shortfall in our budget next season, and that the gap is going to be closed by taking costs out of the playing budget, as it is the only substantial item on the cost side where significant savings can easily be made.

But you're absolutely free to explain to me why I'm wrong. As is anybody else on the .net.

Hope this helps