Loyalty Scheme - Back To The Drawing Board

[CentreLine]

Just stop the whole thing. ST Holders get first dibs to everything... free for all after that.

Mostly agree with this. I think season ticket holders should always be first in line. Then a second tier starts with the loyalty points system. Loyalty should bring an advantage but it also allows the club to police its I own to some extent. Loyalty points should be stripped from supporters who step out of line in a way that endangers others or damaged the club in the same way as ST rights can be removed. All IMHO

[CapitalGreen]

If you want to start going down the route of legal status, etc etc etc then there are obviously differences, nobody here is ignorant to that. But when you are talking about someone that owns a couple of hundred shares from stock of millions then can you honestly say that the shareholding has any "real" difference?

Everything you've claimed HSL doesn't have (AGM, votes, accounts) they do have access to. Maybe you as an individual doesn't, but wasn't the whole point of HSL was strength in numbers? And that strength is more than small shareholders have. Even if they all grouped together they wouldn't have the guarantee of a member on the board of directors. And of course they wouldn't have the power to allocate loyalty points either.

Hiding behind the "legal status" of shareholders is exactly that .. hiding.

I'm glad you finally agree that there is a difference between the two.

[Andy74]

If you want to start going down the route of legal status, etc etc etc then there are obviously differences, nobody here is ignorant to that. But when you are talking about someone that owns a couple of hundred shares from stock of millions then can you honestly say that the shareholding has any "real" difference?

Everything you've claimed HSL doesn't have (AGM, votes, accounts) they do have access to. Maybe you as an individual doesn't, but wasn't the whole point of HSL was strength in numbers? And that strength is more than small shareholders have. Even if they all grouped together they wouldn't have the guarantee of a member on the board of directors. And of course they wouldn't have the power to allocate loyalty points either.

Hiding behind the "legal status" of shareholders is exactly that .. hiding.

I'm not sure why you are getting quite so angry about this - there's nothing here to do with hiding.

It's a simple fact that as a small shareholder I get a direct piece of Hibs - I am a legal owner of those shares.

I personally get an invite to the AGM.

I personally get a copy of the accounts.

I personally have other direct rights attaching to shareholders.

I ger a share certificate from Hibs.

I don't get any of those things with HSL. It's no big deal but it is different. I've gone both routes to get the best of both worlds, as others have too.

Yes, HSL have rights and they offer thir members a say as to how they use those - but you aren't really correct that there's no difference in the small holders in both routes.

[Ozyhibby]

I'm not sure why you are getting quite so angry about this - there's nothing here to do with hiding.

It's a simple fact that as a small shareholder I get a direct piece of Hibs - I am a legal owner of those shares.

I personally get an invite to the AGM.

I personally get a copy of the accounts.

I personally have other direct rights attaching to shareholders.

I ger a share certificate from Hibs.

I don't get any of those things with HSL. It's no big deal but it is different. I've gone both routes to get the best of both worlds, as others have too.

Yes, HSL have rights and they offer thir members a say as to how they use those - but you aren't really correct that there's no difference in the small holders in both routes.

There are advantages to both, I don't think it's that hard to understand.
What is easy to understand is the massive difference the regular monthly payments of £25k into Allan Stubbs's budget is making to the quality we are watching on the pitch. That's what's important here. The more people we can sign up to HSL, the better the team gets. That should make shareholders and HSL members exactly the same in their happiness.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[StevieC]

I'm not sure why you are getting quite so angry about this

Let me explain ..

Hibs offer fan ownership opportunity .. great news.

On day one a fan wants to be involved and parts with a couple of hundred quid of his hard earned cash to be involved .. up front.

Roll on a couple of weeks and HSL is born to give fans a simple way of getting involved without the need for a financial advisor.. great news.

Fans have the opportunity to pay up in installments over one or two years .. even better news for those that might have struggled to pay it all up front.

Roll on a few months .. fans are told that signing up to HSL will get them 100 loyalty points .. but controversial but hey ho results in a large uptake ..

But hang on .. those fans that bought into the fan ownership on day one, and paid their money up front (in the same way season ticket holders do) are told that their input to fan ownership does not warrant them getting loyalty points??

"But you're different" they are told. Your shares have legal status. You will get the accounts through your door. You can go to the AGM. You can submit a vote (regardless of the fact that vote is worthless). You don't deserve the loyalty points because you have all these amazing benefits of being a shareholder.

However, don't worry .. just fork out another couple of hundred pounds of your hard earned cash and you'll be entitled to loyalty points with the rest of us.

Anybody getting it yet?

[CapitalGreen]

Let me explain ..

Hibs offer fan ownership opportunity .. great news.

On day one a fan wants to be involved and parts with a couple of hundred quid of his hard earned cash to be involved .. up front.

Roll on a couple of weeks and HSL is born to give fans a simple way of getting involved without the need for a financial advisor.. great news.

Fans have the opportunity to pay up in installments over one or two years .. even better news for those that might have struggled to pay it all up front.

Roll on a few months .. fans are told that signing up to HSL will get them 100 loyalty points .. but controversial but hey ho results in a large uptake ..

But hang on .. those fans that bought into the fan ownership on day one, and paid their money up front (in the same way season ticket holders do) are told that their input to fan ownership does not warrant them getting loyalty points??

"But you're different" they are told. Your shares have legal status. You will get the accounts through your door. You can go to the AGM. You can submit a vote (regardless of the fact that vote is worthless). You don't deserve the loyalty points because you have all these amazing benefits of being a shareholder.

However, don't worry .. just fork out another couple of hundred pounds of your hard earned cash and you'll be entitled to loyalty points with the rest of us.

Anybody getting it yet?

I'm sorry but you are again incorrect. Applications to purchase shares were accepted from 2nd February 2014, HSL was launched on January 14th 2014.

http://www.hibernianfc.co.uk/news/5107
http://www.hibernianfc.co.uk/news/5158

[Brightside]

I was actually joking earlier about getting rid but after reading this thread Hibs really should just do away with it. What a loads of nonsense when we struggle to half fill the stadium most weeks!

[Andy74]

I was actually joking earlier about getting rid but after reading this thread Hibs really should just do away with it. What a loads of nonsense when we struggle to half fill the stadium most weeks!

Correct. Some strange attitudes and arguments coming out of it. A shame.

[matty_f]

Let me explain ..

Hibs offer fan ownership opportunity .. great news.

On day one a fan wants to be involved and parts with a couple of hundred quid of his hard earned cash to be involved .. up front.

Roll on a couple of weeks and HSL is born to give fans a simple way of getting involved without the need for a financial advisor.. great news.

Fans have the opportunity to pay up in installments over one or two years .. even better news for those that might have struggled to pay it all up front.

Roll on a few months .. fans are told that signing up to HSL will get them 100 loyalty points .. but controversial but hey ho results in a large uptake ..

But hang on .. those fans that bought into the fan ownership on day one, and paid their money up front (in the same way season ticket holders do) are told that their input to fan ownership does not warrant them getting loyalty points??

"But you're different" they are told. Your shares have legal status. You will get the accounts through your door. You can go to the AGM. You can submit a vote (regardless of the fact that vote is worthless). You don't deserve the loyalty points because you have all these amazing benefits of being a shareholder.

However, don't worry .. just fork out another couple of hundred pounds of your hard earned cash and you'll be entitled to loyalty points with the rest of us.

Anybody getting it yet?

I don't think that's correct, Stevie, again I'll point out that I'm speaking from the point of view of being a shareholder and not at this point an HSL member.

The schemes launched at broadly the same time, HSL was positioned as an alternative to buying shares directly, a) because of the limitations of having to either be an existing shareholder or requiring IFA sign-off to purchase the shares, and b) to act as a vehicle for those that didn't want to - or couldn't - buy shares directly, and c) to form a body that would represent a large body of supporters in a fan-ownership scheme.

I know there's a link above about the actual dates, but if memory serves me right when the fan ownership opportunity was announced, both options were outlined at that point.

The schemes are different, and there are fundamental differences between being an HSL member and a shareholder, as has been pointed out above. HSL as a body will enjoy shareholder rights - but the individual members of HSL do not.

Neither is a lesser segment of the support - they are different.

In terms of how the money goes to the club, you could say that HSL is now providing a steady income stream to the club, with many of the members setting their direct debits to pay indefinitely, whereas your share purchase and mine were one-off purchases. Of course, you can argue that your share purchase might have been of a value that would take an HSL member many months or even years to equal. The point is, there are differences.

The club is/was under no obligation to give loyalty points to either segment, and if they chose to do so for one there is no obligation to feel that they have to do it for the other. That's nothing to do with fairness.

Fairness is giving the shareholder what they expected to get when they made the purchase. It was a clear and transparent purchase - give us this much money, we'll give you this many shares. Job's a good 'un.

HSL is different, they could theoretically offer a free strip to new members as a sign-up offer, they've already changed minimum contribution options, and given people the option to donate indefinitely rather than stopping once membership has been reached. It evolves and is a different entity to shareholders. What HSL does does not have to be mirrored by the shareholders.

It was also fair that the opportunity to get the loyalty points was given to everyone - if you or anyone else wanted them, it was crystal clear that you needed to sign up to HSL for it. That was how you got them. The same if Hibs said today that if you buy an away strip you'd get 20% off it. If you bought a home top you'd have no claim on that discount, you'd need to buy the away top to get it.

Making it clear and transparent for everyone is why it was fair. If people made the choice that they didn't want to contribute that's absolutely fine, but complaining that someone got something for buying something different and you didn't (not you, specifically) is just sour grapes IMHO, and is unreasonable.

[matty_f]

Correct. Some strange attitudes and arguments coming out of it. A shame.

Definitely seems more hassle than it's worth. :agree:

[lucky]

I don't think that's correct, Stevie, again I'll point out that I'm speaking from the point of view of being a shareholder and not at this point an HSL member.

The schemes launched at broadly the same time, HSL was positioned as an alternative to buying shares directly, a) because of the limitations of having to either be an existing shareholder or requiring IFA sign-off to purchase the shares, and b) to act as a vehicle for those that didn't want to - or couldn't - buy shares directly, and c) to form a body that would represent a large body of supporters in a fan-ownership scheme.

I know there's a link above about the actual dates, but if memory serves me right when the fan ownership opportunity was announced, both options were outlined at that point.

The schemes are different, and there are fundamental differences between being an HSL member and a shareholder, as has been pointed out above. HSL as a body will enjoy shareholder rights - but the individual members of HSL do not.

Neither is a lesser segment of the support - they are different.

In terms of how the money goes to the club, you could say that HSL is now providing a steady income stream to the club, with many of the members setting their direct debits to pay indefinitely, whereas your share purchase and mine were one-off purchases. Of course, you can argue that your share purchase might have been of a value that would take an HSL member many months or even years to equal. The point is, there are differences.

The club is/was under no obligation to give loyalty points to either segment, and if they chose to do so for one there is no obligation to feel that they have to do it for the other. That's nothing to do with fairness.

Fairness is giving the shareholder what they expected to get when they made the purchase. It was a clear and transparent purchase - give us this much money, we'll give you this many shares. Job's a good 'un.

HSL is different, they could theoretically offer a free strip to new members as a sign-up offer, they've already changed minimum contribution options, and given people the option to donate indefinitely rather than stopping once membership has been reached. It evolves and is a different entity to shareholders. What HSL does does not have to be mirrored by the shareholders.

It was also fair that the opportunity to get the loyalty points was given to everyone - if you or anyone else wanted them, it was crystal clear that you needed to sign up to HSL for it. That was how you got them. The same if Hibs said today that if you buy an away strip you'd get 20% off it. If you bought a home top you'd have no claim on that discount, you'd need to buy the away top to get it.

Making it clear and transparent for everyone is why it was fair. If people made the choice that they didn't want to contribute that's absolutely fine, but complaining that someone got something for buying something different and you didn't (not you, specifically) is just sour grapes IMHO, and is unreasonable.

Spot on

[Kojock]

Definitely seems more hassle than it's worth. :agree:

And the club are perfectly aware of the amount of hassle it has caused as they are on the receiving end of it hence the reason I think there will be a complete revamp of the scheme.

[Kojock]

Just checked and I have had 100 points added for my HSL contribution. Do I agree with it? No. Will I take advantage of it? Yes.

[Billy Whizz]

Correct. Some strange attitudes and arguments coming out of it. A shame.

Because it doesn't suit you

[NAE NOOKIE]

How's it nonsense? The input to the club is different in that one pays directly to the club (the shareholder, who then gets shareholder rights, set of accounts, right to attend AGM, dividends should they be payable). The other gives money to HSL for membership to HSL, has no shareholder rights, has no right to attend the AGM and all the rest of it.

The end result is that the club gets the money, but you could then say the same for hospitality, or strip sales, or ticket purchases.

It's hardly inconsequential. There was no expectation when purchasing shares directly during the period that the option was available, that you or anyone else buying shares directly would in any way, shape, or form be entitled to loyalty points for that purchase. That was entirely transparent. HSL was positioned as an alternative option to buying shares directly. It was never sold as the same thing.

Can you explain how they are "exactly the same"?

That would be all well & good if the argument was about things that are on the periphery of being a Hibs fan, like getting a nice meal if you pay for a more expensive hospitality package or getting to attend the AGM if you hold shares ... but that is a side issue in this debate, the crux of which is the ability to attend matches. You might as well be saying that folk who buy a ticket for hospitality shouldn't get loyalty points because they get a nice meal and a free programme'

This is about a share issue by the club is it not? This is about attracting people to buy into that share issue is it not? If Hibs are going to use the loyalty points scheme to encourage and reward people for buying into that share issue they have to reward everybody who does it, not just some people who do it .... because they are all doing the same thing ..... the reward is for input to the club and has nothing to do with the different things that come with the different ways a person chooses to do it ..... that is why they are exactly the same.

Can you imagine the outcry there would have been from the 1,400 HSL members if Hibs had announced that they were giving individual shareholders 100 loyalty points but not them. Their argument wouldn't have been 'that's not fair, they can attend the AGM' ...... It would have been 'wait a minute, are Hibs saying our input to the club is of lesser value than that of individual shareholders?' ...... you know it would. They would be right to think that way and my support of their case would have been no less vociferous than it currently is of mine on this issue.

Its not that I don't understand what you are saying Matty, I do. Its that I don't agree that in this scenario your argument is valid and to be honest I don't see how any fair minded person could think it was.

[matty_f]

That would be all well & good if the argument was about things that are on the periphery of being a Hibs fan, like getting a nice meal if you pay for a more expensive hospitality package or getting to attend the AGM if you hold shares ... but that is a side issue in this debate, the crux of which is the ability to attend matches. You might as well be saying that folk who buy a ticket for hospitality shouldn't get loyalty points because they get a nice meal and a free programme'

This is about a share issue by the club is it not? This is about attracting people to buy into that share issue is it not? If Hibs are going to use the loyalty points scheme to encourage and reward people for buying into that share issue they have to reward everybody who does it, not just some people who do it .... because they are all doing the same thing ..... the reward is for input to the club and has nothing to do with the different things that come with the different ways a person chooses to do it ..... that is why they are exactly the same.

Can you imagine the outcry there would have been from the 1,400 HSL members if Hibs had announced that they were giving individual shareholders 100 loyalty points but not them. Their argument wouldn't have been 'that's not fair, they can attend the AGM' ...... It would have been 'wait a minute, are Hibs saying our input to the club is of lesser value than that of individual shareholders?' ...... you know it would. They would be right to think that way and my support of their case would have been no less vociferous than it currently is of mine on this issue.

Its not that I don't understand what you are saying Matty, I do. Its that I don't agree that in this scenario your argument is valid and to be honest I don't see how any fair minded person could think it was.

We'll just need to agree to disagree then. How you can say they're exactly the same thing when fundamental differences have been pointed out tells me there's no point in debating it further.

Again, I'll point out that I've not benefited from the loyalty points - I bought shares direct. I have absolutely zero qualms about HSL getting loyalty points and me not, same if HSL wanted to give members a free ticket to a game in the future - that's their prerogative. I don't feel disadvantaged, if I wanted that ticket I can sign up for HSL same as everyone else could.

Whether it was right to issue loyalty points at all is a separate issue, but it's just not right that just because HSL get something then it somehow stands to reason that shareholders should get it too.

Treating people fairly doesn't mean treating them the same.

[Andy74]

Because it doesn't suit you

It suits me fine actually most of the time, that's not my concern.

To turn it round though, the direction of it seems to be led by a samll group of people who it suits really well.

Great, but it wasn't really a big probalem that needed solving and it has caused way more trouble than was worth in solving it.

The attitude side of it isn't right though is it?

The sort of comments I've had from you about what type of supporter I am.

I've had a season ticket since I was able to go to games on my own, I buy one for my child even though she doesn't really go, I pay for Hibs TV even though I don't really use it, use hospitality, pay into HSL, bought shares direct, go to the majority of away games and havent missed a European trip.

Now though, since loyalty points came in I have to get comments from people like you about picking and choosing games and don't deserve to be though of in the same way who's circumstances suit going to all away games and buying those in advance from Hibs.

There's some of us that have just met a few times from being at games, Euro trips, Hibs meeting or whatever who should all really apprecaite the thing that we share in common instead of this sort of chat. It's a bit puzzling.

[ronaldo7]

Ive just heard new members to HSL are to get 200 extra points.

[Billy Whizz]

It suits me fine actually most of the time, that's not my concern.

To turn it round though, the direction of it seems to be led by a samll group of people who it suits really well.

Great, but it wasn't really a big probalem that needed solving and it has caused way more trouble than was worth in solving it.

The attitude side of it isn't right though is it?

The sort of comments I've had from you about what type of supporter I am.

I've had a season ticket since I was able to go to games on my own, I buy one for my child even though she doesn't really go, I pay for Hibs TV even though I don't really use it, use hospitality, pay into HSL, bought shares direct, go to the majority of away games and havent missed a European trip.

Now though, since loyalty points came in I have to get comments from people like you about picking and choosing games and don't deserve to be though of in the same way who's circumstances suit going to all away games and buying those in advance from Hibs.

There's some of us that have just met a few times from being at games, Euro trips, Hibs meeting or whatever who should all really apprecaite the thing that we share in common instead of this sort of chat. It's a bit puzzling.

You're not having another dig at our core supporters, who will do anything to go and watch Hibs on a Saturday. You're really going to get their back up if you continue writing in this vain

[Billy Whizz]

Ive just heard new members to HSL are to get 200 extra points.

Are you in now😄

[HH81]

Just checked and I have had 100 points added for my HSL contribution. Do I agree with it? No. Will I take advantage of it? Yes.

It doesn't matter who agrees with it. The club own the scheme and if they want to offer it through HSL then they will and did do. It was clear from the start how any supporter could claim these points so many did and signed up.

No one is bigger than the club on here but the issues it has caused is laughable. Some people were actually unhappy they were going to lose their superstatus as fans could get points and take them above them!

My 100 points are on just checked. Might screenshot the page and have it as the background on my phone as I am so happy.

[HH81]

Ive just heard new members to HSL are to get 200 extra points.

Haha. That would be funny.

[StevieC]

I'm sorry but you are again incorrect.

You're awfy keen on telling people how "incorrect" they are .. and nice of you to post your smug links again ..

However .. you forgot to factor in the fact that existing shareholders received their invitations through the post before the dates of the links that you kindly posted.

Maybe I'm not "incorrect" after all?

[CapitalGreen]

You're awfy keen on telling people how "incorrect" they are .. and nice of you to post your smug links again ..

However .. you forgot to factor in the fact that existing shareholders received their invitations through the post before the dates of the links that you kindly posted.

Maybe I'm not "incorrect" after all?

"Existing shareholders: The Club has 1700 shareholders, and it is open to them to buy more shares. The Club has issued an Information Memorandum to existing shareholders, explaining how they could subscribe for shares as of February 2nd. This process is not governed by the same level of regulation which applies to non-shareholders."

[StevieC]

"Existing shareholders: The Club has 1700 shareholders, and it is open to them to buy more shares. The Club has issued an Information Memorandum to existing shareholders, explaining how they could subscribe for shares as of February 2nd. This process is not governed by the same level of regulation which applies to non-shareholders."

Yes, that's what I said. Thank you for confirming that your claim that I was "incorrect" was actually incorrect.

Existing shareholders received letters through the post that allowed them to complete and return forms requesting additional shares prior to the the date that the new shares were issued. Therefore forms were completed, cheques were posted, and these were in the hands of Hibernian prior to the date your above quote was even released.

[Bostonhibby]

Yes, that's what I said. Thank you for confirming that your claim that I was "incorrect" was actually incorrect.

Existing shareholders received letters through the post that allowed them to complete and return forms requesting additional shares prior to the the date that the new shares were issued. Therefore forms were completed, cheques were posted, and these were in the hands of Hibernian prior to the date your above quote was even released.
Correct, or at least that's what happened with me.

[StevieC]

Correct, or at least that's what happened with me.

Me too.

Although CG might be along shortly to provide a link telling you that you are incorrect.

Tell me though, if you'd known you could have got 100 loyalty points for an alternative way of giving the club a couple of hundred pounds you'd never see again .. would you have told them you'd much rather have had a (worthless) vote, a copy of the accounts 2 days before they went on public view and an invitation for a 100+ mile round trip to a midweek AGM?
Or might you have considered the alternative way?

[BoomtownHibees]

Me too.

Although CG might be along shortly to provide a link telling you that you are incorrect.

Tell me though, if you'd known you could have got 100 loyalty points for an alternative way of giving the club a couple of hundred pounds you'd never see again .. would you have told them you'd much rather have had a (worthless) vote, a copy of the accounts 2 days before they went on public view and an invitation for a 100+ mile round trip to a midweek AGM?
Or might you have considered the alternative way?

The 100 points weren't spoken about at the outset. It was used as an attraction for extra members to HSL

[StevieC]

The 100 points weren't spoken about at the outset. It was used as an attraction for extra members to HSL

My understanding is that existing members will also receive the loyalty points though?

If you retrospectively issue loyalty points for one group that contributed at the initial stage of the share issue then surely you need to do it for all groups?

[BoomtownHibees]

My understanding is that existing members will also receive the loyalty points though?

If you retrospectively issue loyalty points for one group that contributed at the initial stage of the share issue then surely you need to do it for all groups?

I agree

[Ozyhibby]

The 100 points weren't spoken about at the outset. It was used as an attraction for extra members to HSL

And it worked. HSL grew by about a third and is now making a massive difference to the quality we can put on the park.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Brightside]

There is a guy on eBay selling loyalty points.

[Ozyhibby]

There is a guy on eBay selling loyalty points.

Maybe it's HSL, drumming up a bit of extra cash[emoji23]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Andy74]

My understanding is that existing members will also receive the loyalty points though?

If you retrospectively issue loyalty points for one group that contributed at the initial stage of the share issue then surely you need to do it for all groups?

The same differences (if that makes sense) can also be seen with away tickets though.

If you buy from Hibs you get points, if you buy on the day you don't.

Same loyalty, same support given to the team etc but a different points outcome.

[BoomtownHibees]

And it worked. HSL grew by about a third and is now making a massive difference to the quality we can put on the park.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Also agree with this however this would still have happened if the club chose to give all share holders the points and not just HSL members

[marinello59]

Me too.

Although CG might be along shortly to provide a link telling you that you are incorrect.

Tell me though, if you'd known you could have got 100 loyalty points for an alternative way of giving the club a couple of hundred pounds you'd never see again .. would you have told them you'd much rather have had a (worthless) vote, a copy of the accounts 2 days before they went on public view and an invitation for a 100+ mile round trip to a midweek AGM?
Or might you have considered the alternative way?

I'd honestly rather have the share certificate on the wall than 100 loyalty points. :greengrin
I do think giving 100 points to HSL was a mistake but given the reported increase in money it raised for the club I can live with it.
I do wonder if this would have been more acceptable if they had only given these points to people who signed up during the promotional period rather than giving them to all HSL members regardless of when they joined.

[BoomtownHibees]

The same differences (if that makes sense) can also be seen with away tickets though.

If you buy from Hibs you get points, if you buy on the day you don't.

Same loyalty, same support given to the team etc but a different points outcome.

That's a logistics issue more than anything and the buyer had the choice in which way he/she wants to buy their ticket. This wasn't an option for share holders was it?

[blackpoolhibs]

Just checked, i have 105 points. :thumbsup: Anyone want to buy some? :wink:

[BoomtownHibees]

I'd honestly rather have the share certificate on the wall than 100 loyalty points. :greengrin
I do think giving 100 points to HSL was a mistake but given the reported increase in money it raised for the club I can live with it.
I do wonder if this would have been more acceptable if they had only given these points to people who signed up during the promotional period rather than giving them to all HSL members regardless of when they joined.

Why not give the points to all share holders rather than separating them? That would solve it in a much easier way IMO

[Ozyhibby]

That's a logistics issue more than anything and the buyer had the choice in which way he/she wants to buy their ticket. This wasn't an option for share holders was it?

I believe there may have been a logistics aspect to giving to shareholders as well as there are a lot of shareholders who were gifted their shares by STF after their old shares became worthless. Don't know the finer detail of that but it may have been a consideration.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[StevieC]

The same differences (if that makes sense) can also be seen with away tickets though.

If you buy from Hibs you get points, if you buy on the day you don't.

Same loyalty, same support given to the team etc but a different points outcome.

The main difference being that you know that if you purchase on the day you won't get the loyalty points so you have a choice.

Listen, we could go backwards and forwards all day with comaprisons to tickets, discounts on Hibs strips, even Boots loyalty points getting reclaimed if you keep your receipt .. but the bottom line is that the club/HSL have decided that one set of supporters purchasing shares is MORE LOYAL than another set of supporters purchasing the same shares.

Some of us get it, some of us don't .. and for that reason .. I'M OUT.

[marinello59]

Why not give the points to all share holders rather than separating them? That would solve it in a much easier way IMO

You think? See if Petrie ends up ahead of me for Dumbarton tickets, I won't be accountable for my actions.

[StevieC]

That's a logistics issue more than anything

Certainly is for me.

Being an out of town Hibby I have to make a decision as to whether I miss out on the loyalty points on offer or ..
pay a £5 special delivery charge
pay £1.50 and take a chance on normal postage
or make a 90 mile round trip to the ticket office

More often than not I've went for PATG and lost out on loyalty .. frustrating, but I know I have the choice.

Can't praise the club enough for their home ticket procedures though.
Go online, pick my seats, print at home, and 10 loyalty points added. :aok:

[ronaldo7]

Are you in now

Who says I wasn't?:wink:

[Bostonhibby]

Me too.

Although CG might be along shortly to provide a link telling you that you are incorrect.

Tell me though, if you'd known you could have got 100 loyalty points for an alternative way of giving the club a couple of hundred pounds you'd never see again .. would you have told them you'd much rather have had a (worthless) vote, a copy of the accounts 2 days before they went on public view and an invitation for a 100+ mile round trip to a midweek AGM?
Or might you have considered the alternative way?
See post 231 above. I already got the AGM invite etc regardless as I was a shareholder for years before.

[Andy74]

The main difference being that you know that if you purchase on the day you won't get the loyalty points so you have a choice.

Listen, we could go backwards and forwards all day with comaprisons to tickets, discounts on Hibs strips, even Boots loyalty points getting reclaimed if you keep your receipt .. but the bottom line is that the club/HSL have decided that one set of supporters purchasing shares is MORE LOYAL than another set of supporters purchasing the same shares.

Some of us get it, some of us don't .. and for that reason .. I'M OUT.

The choice aspect of that isn't really true for all although I appreciate it will be a minority who just can't make a firm call on going until nearer the day.

The point was more that the scheme isn't necessarily equitable for people who are ultimately doing the same thing.

[DH1875]

I've no problem how we go about getting loyalty points and have accepted that no longer being a ST holder just about rules me out of getting a ticket for ibrox or the pbs. Thing that annoys me is that I have points but that wasn't or isn't relevant for the biggest home game of the season and I've missed out on a ticket. Having loyalty points have become pointless to me :boo hoo::boo hoo:

[Danderhall Hibs]

Loads of "trolling" going on here.

[Danderhall Hibs]

I don't think that's correct, Stevie, again I'll point out that I'm speaking from the point of view of being a shareholder and not at this point an HSL member.

The schemes launched at broadly the same time, HSL was positioned as an alternative to buying shares directly, a) because of the limitations of having to either be an existing shareholder or requiring IFA sign-off to purchase the shares, and b) to act as a vehicle for those that didn't want to - or couldn't - buy shares directly, and c) to form a body that would represent a large body of supporters in a fan-ownership scheme.

I know there's a link above about the actual dates, but if memory serves me right when the fan ownership opportunity was announced, both options were outlined at that point.

The schemes are different, and there are fundamental differences between being an HSL member and a shareholder, as has been pointed out above. HSL as a body will enjoy shareholder rights - but the individual members of HSL do not.

Neither is a lesser segment of the support - they are different.

In terms of how the money goes to the club, you could say that HSL is now providing a steady income stream to the club, with many of the members setting their direct debits to pay indefinitely, whereas your share purchase and mine were one-off purchases. Of course, you can argue that your share purchase might have been of a value that would take an HSL member many months or even years to equal. The point is, there are differences.

The club is/was under no obligation to give loyalty points to either segment, and if they chose to do so for one there is no obligation to feel that they have to do it for the other. That's nothing to do with fairness.

Fairness is giving the shareholder what they expected to get when they made the purchase. It was a clear and transparent purchase - give us this much money, we'll give you this many shares. Job's a good 'un.

HSL is different, they could theoretically offer a free strip to new members as a sign-up offer, they've already changed minimum contribution options, and given people the option to donate indefinitely rather than stopping once membership has been reached. It evolves and is a different entity to shareholders. What HSL does does not have to be mirrored by the shareholders.

It was also fair that the opportunity to get the loyalty points was given to everyone - if you or anyone else wanted them, it was crystal clear that you needed to sign up to HSL for it. That was how you got them. The same if Hibs said today that if you buy an away strip you'd get 20% off it. If you bought a home top you'd have no claim on that discount, you'd need to buy the away top to get it.

Making it clear and transparent for everyone is why it was fair. If people made the choice that they didn't want to contribute that's absolutely fine, but complaining that someone got something for buying something different and you didn't (not you, specifically) is just sour grapes IMHO, and is unreasonable.

Good post mate.

[Golden Bear]

I've no problem how we go about getting loyalty points and have accepted that no longer being a ST holder just about rules me out of getting a ticket for ibrox or the pbs. Thing that annoys me is that I have points but that wasn't or isn't relevant for the biggest home game of the season and I've missed out on a ticket. Having loyalty points have become pointless to me :boo hoo::boo hoo:

Exactly. It's not really such a big deal whether you have them or not. If we are to be involved in the play off fixtures then the loyalty points tally could come into play again but other than that there's no real panic.

[Hibbyradge]

I've no problem how we go about getting loyalty points and have accepted that no longer being a ST holder just about rules me out of getting a ticket for ibrox or the pbs. Thing that annoys me is that I have points but that wasn't or isn't relevant for the biggest home game of the season and I've missed out on a ticket. Having loyalty points have become pointless to me :boo hoo::boo hoo:

How did you miss out?

[DH1875]

How did you miss out?

Messed up and thought it was only ST holders who could buy at first. Turns out it was a free for all and think folks could buy as many as as they wanted. I except this is/was my fault and my point to this thread was that having loyalty points was pointless when it came to the club selling tickets for the biggest home game of the season. If there was ever a point to having points it's for games like this IMO. As it stands there's plenty folks with points not got tickets and plenty folks have who haven't been to a game for years have.

[Ken]

I don't know what the issue is with the 100 extra points for joining HSL.....these will expire in Feb 2019 anyway!

If that's before or after this thread is closed that's another matter!!!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[NAE NOOKIE]

I don't think that's correct, Stevie, again I'll point out that I'm speaking from the point of view of being a shareholder and not at this point an HSL member.

The schemes launched at broadly the same time, HSL was positioned as an alternative to buying shares directly, a) because of the limitations of having to either be an existing shareholder or requiring IFA sign-off to purchase the shares, and b) to act as a vehicle for those that didn't want to - or couldn't - buy shares directly, and c) to form a body that would represent a large body of supporters in a fan-ownership scheme.

I know there's a link above about the actual dates, but if memory serves me right when the fan ownership opportunity was announced, both options were outlined at that point.

The schemes are different, and there are fundamental differences between being an HSL member and a shareholder, as has been pointed out above. HSL as a body will enjoy shareholder rights - but the individual members of HSL do not.

Neither is a lesser segment of the support - they are different.

In terms of how the money goes to the club, you could say that HSL is now providing a steady income stream to the club, with many of the members setting their direct debits to pay indefinitely, whereas your share purchase and mine were one-off purchases. Of course, you can argue that your share purchase might have been of a value that would take an HSL member many months or even years to equal. The point is, there are differences.

The club is/was under no obligation to give loyalty points to either segment, and if they chose to do so for one there is no obligation to feel that they have to do it for the other. That's nothing to do with fairness.

Fairness is giving the shareholder what they expected to get when they made the purchase. It was a clear and transparent purchase - give us this much money, we'll give you this many shares. Job's a good 'un.

HSL is different, they could theoretically offer a free strip to new members as a sign-up offer, they've already changed minimum contribution options, and given people the option to donate indefinitely rather than stopping once membership has been reached. It evolves and is a different entity to shareholders. What HSL does does not have to be mirrored by the shareholders.

It was also fair that the opportunity to get the loyalty points was given to everyone - if you or anyone else wanted them, it was crystal clear that you needed to sign up to HSL for it. That was how you got them. The same if Hibs said today that if you buy an away strip you'd get 20% off it. If you bought a home top you'd have no claim on that discount, you'd need to buy the away top to get it.

Making it clear and transparent for everyone is why it was fair. If people made the choice that they didn't want to contribute that's absolutely fine, but complaining that someone got something for buying something different and you didn't (not you, specifically) is just sour grapes IMHO, and is unreasonable.

It has everything to do with fairness .... What you are doing here is trying to justify why the club can run the loyalty points scheme unfairly if it wants, you are making no case whatsoever to show that what they have done is in any way is fair.

[matty_f]

It has everything to do with fairness .... What you are doing here is trying to justify why the club can run the loyalty points scheme unfairly if it wants, you are making no case whatsoever to show that what they have done is in any way is fair.

I'm sorry, i don't think i can make the case any clearer. Several others appear to have understood the point.

[NAE NOOKIE]

I'm sorry, i don't think i can make the case any clearer. Several others appear to have understood the point.

Me neither and it appears quite a few agree with me .... there ye go eh.

[Danderhall Hibs]

I'm sorry, i don't think i can make the case any clearer. Several others appear to have understood the point.

See if tesco offer 500 extra clubcard points for buying a 40" Samsung telly would I also get them for the 40" Sony tv?

Seems unfair if not.

[NAE NOOKIE]

I'm sorry, i don't think i can make the case any clearer. Several others appear to have understood the point.

Me neither and it appears quite a few agree with me .... there ye go eh.

Oh and as I said before Matty its not that I don't understand your point .... I understand it perfectly as I'm sure most people reading your posts have, I just fundamentally disagree with it.

PS .... This was meant to be an edit of post 306 .. sorry

[marinello59]

It has everything to do with fairness .... What you are doing here is trying to justify why the club can run the loyalty points scheme unfairly if it wants, you are making no case whatsoever to show that what they have done is in any way is fair.

Matty does address the fairness issue. If you were happy with what you got at the point of sale then it was fair. You wouldn't complain to your travel agent about others getting the same holiday as you cheaper on a last minute deal would you? You entered in to a deal that was clear and transparent and you got exactly what you paid for. Would you have refused to buy shares if you weren't getting 100 loyalty points?
I agree with you, this was an ill thought out move by our club but building it up in to some fundamental point of principle is over-egging it a bit. In my opinion of course. :greengrin

[NAE NOOKIE]

Matty does address the fairness issue. If you were happy with what you got at the point of sale then it was fair. You wouldn't complain to your travel agent about others getting the same holiday as you cheaper on a last minute deal would you? You entered in to a deal that was clear and transparent and you got exactly what you paid for. Would you have refused to buy shares if you weren't getting 100 loyalty points?
I agree with you, this was an ill thought out move by our club but building it up in to some fundamental point of principle is over-egging it a bit. In my opinion of course. :greengrin

The rules that apply on the high street cannot be applied to a football clubs loyalty points scheme mate, for obvious reasons.

[Danderhall Hibs]

The rules that apply on the high street cannot be applied to a football clubs loyalty points scheme mate, for obvious reasons.

I'm not being smart here - honest - but I don't think the reasons are obvious. What are they?

[MassHibsteria]

It has everything to do with fairness .... What you are doing here is trying to justify why the club can run the loyalty points scheme unfairly if it wants, you are making no case whatsoever to show that what they have done is in any way is fair.


OK then; define fairness.

[StevieC]

OK then; define fairness.

That supporters that contribute equal sums, at the same time, during a share issue are treated equally?

[marinello59]

The rules that apply on the high street cannot be applied to a football clubs loyalty points scheme mate, for obvious reasons.

The principle is exactly the same. You entered in to a transparent contract when you bought your shares. Would 100 loyalty points have been a deal breaker for you?

[matty_f]

That supporters that contribute equal sums, at the same time, during a share issue are treated equally?

Like by giving one lot shares, and the others no shares, you mean?

[hibee_nation]

If shareholders get the loyalty points I will demand access to the agm and expect the yearly results posted to my home as my hsl money is just as good as theirs surely

[Bostonhibby]

OK then; define fairness.

Nae point offered up for fairness unfortunately.

Someone somewhere said define loyalty, how much would an individual give to a cause that they were passionate about for nothing in return? That's loyalty and commitment.

The Clubs commendable effort at recognising those that turned up to watch their team has got embroiled in the wider and more emotive term, and for me, they are interchangeable as well. Swap what we call it for something that recognises only those who at this particular moment in our history are able to get along to see the team often enough to get points, and leave everyone else to quietly play their part for whatever reason they choose to.

The last thing we want is an inward gazing session that could create division at a time when we could be looking at a decent time to be a Hibby. Doesn't happen often in a decade.

[StevieC]

The principle is exactly the same. You entered in to a transparent contract when you bought your shares. Would 100 loyalty points have been a deal breaker for you?

Sorry to use this post as a reply .. but all these "Samsung TV", "transparent contract", " Tesco clubcard" replies just don't get it.

Everybody entered into their agreements, nobody expected loyalty points, and nobody is regretting what they've done in supporting the club with their hard earned cash.

If we want to throw random examples out to try and make points .. lets say that after Tuesdays game the club decide to give everyone in the East Stand an extra 50 loyalty points because they made more noise. Nobody bought a ticket expecting any loyalty points, so nobody could argue when they didn't get them .. but would it be "fair"? And would those in the West and FF be out of order for expecting the club to reward every supporter that bought a ticket, and not be entitled to be a bit miffed about it?

[MassHibsteria]

If shareholders get the loyalty points I will demand access to the agm and expect the yearly results posted to my home as my hsl money is just as good as theirs surely


That depends on the terms upon which the shares were bought and the terms that the HSL shares were bought. If one gives you equity in the club and the other doesn't, you're going to be disappointed.

I'm not saying it's right or just, rather that's how it is. The moral to the tale is read the small print as well as the headlines.

[matty_f]

Sorry to use this post as a reply .. but all these "Samsung TV", "transparent contract", " Tesco clubcard" replies just don't get it.

Everybody entered into their agreements, nobody expected loyalty points, and nobody is regretting what they've done in supporting the club with their hard earned cash.

If we want to throw random examples out to try and make points .. lets say that after Tuesdays game the club decide to give everyone in the East Stand an extra 50 loyalty points because they made more noise. Nobody bought a ticket expecting any loyalty points, so nobody could argue when they didn't get them .. but would it be "fair"? And would those in the West and FF be out of order for expecting the club to reward every supporter that bought a ticket, and not be entitled to be a bit miffed about it?

That would be different because everyone would have bought the same thing, i.e. a ticket to the match.

You bought shares. HSL members didn't.

[StevieC]

Like by giving one lot shares, and the others no shares, you mean?

HSL aren't getting any shares? :confused:

Okay, a bit sarky so apologies .. but do you think that the actual shares are why supporters joined up?

It's not like we are dabbling in the stock markets, it's not like anyone is going to cash in if share prices rise. The actual share is a non-entity that has no real worth to a football supporter. It's the ideal of being a part of the club that is why supporters buy in. Doesn't matter whether it's 10 shares or 10,000 shares, it's the "being part of the club" that keeps you content. It's the same as buying a stone in the East Stand, has no value but it makes you feel more a part of the club you love. All these things have no real value, wouldn't ever be sold on, but it's just a mental feeling of being a part of something big.

[marinello59]

Sorry to use this post as a reply .. but all these "Samsung TV", "transparent contract", " Tesco clubcard" replies just don't get it.

Everybody entered into their agreements, nobody expected loyalty points, and nobody is regretting what they've done in supporting the club with their hard earned cash.

If we want to throw random examples out to try and make points .. lets say that after Tuesdays game the club decide to give everyone in the East Stand an extra 50 loyalty points because they made more noise. Nobody bought a ticket expecting any loyalty points, so nobody could argue when they didn't get them .. but would it be "fair"? And would those in the West and FF be out of order for expecting the club to reward every supporter that bought a ticket, and not be entitled to be a bit miffed about it?

I'm not saying nobody should be miffed. I have said several times the club got this wrong. i just don't think it's that serious in the great scheme of things. I know why I bought shares instead of going down the HSL route initially and the 100 points would have made no difference what so ever to that decision.

[Bostonhibby]

One last thought before I get back to just supporting Hibs.

I see up to 1700 shareholders being the quoted figure pre the current share offer - of that group never more than a couple ever influenced a thing, but everyone else in there knew they had a part of something special to them - many of them had held this benefit free asset for decades, some for generations - they expected, sought, and got, absolutely nothing - nae points, nae easier access to tickets.........................

[ronaldo7]

One last thought before I get back to just supporting Hibs.

I see up to 1700 shareholders being the quoted figure pre the current share offer - of that group never more than a couple ever influenced a thing, but everyone else in there knew they had a part of something special to them - many of them had held this benefit free asset for decades, some for generations - they expected, sought, and got, absolutely nothing - nae points, nae easier access to tickets.........................

:agree: You'd think the club would treat these guys with a bit more respect. They were on the front line when Mercer came calling.

The club can still rectify this, if they wanted to.

[matty_f]

HSL aren't getting any shares? :confused:

Okay, a bit sarky so apologies .. but do you think that the actual shares are why supporters joined up?

It's not like we are dabbling in the stock markets, it's not like anyone is going to cash in if share prices rise. The actual share is a non-entity that has no real worth to a football supporter. It's the ideal of being a part of the club that is why supporters buy in. Doesn't matter whether it's 10 shares or 10,000 shares, it's the "being part of the club" that keeps you content. It's the same as buying a stone in the East Stand, has no value but it makes you feel more a part of the club you love. All these things have no real value, wouldn't ever be sold on, but it's just a mental feeling of being a part of something big.

HSL get shares, joe punter making the donation doesn't though. That's a very big point.

I bought shares because i wanted to directly own a piece of the club. That is something that an HSL member will never be able to lay claim to - they will have an indirect ownership.

[Bostonhibby]

If shareholders get the loyalty points I will demand access to the agm and expect the yearly results posted to my home as my hsl money is just as good as theirs surely

Needs HSL to rewrite their articles of association. As a member I am not against the idea in principle but they were clear about it at the start and crucially why they were setting up as they were.

[matty_f]

:agree: You'd think the club would treat these guys with a bit more respect. They were on the front line when Mercer came calling.

The club can still rectify this, if they wanted to.

In what way have the club disrespected shareholders? That's mental.

[blackpoolhibs]

Am i the only one who bought into HSL because they were handing out 100 loyalty points? :confused:

[Bostonhibby]

:agree: You'd think the club would treat these guys with a bit more respect. They were on the front line when Mercer came calling.

The club can still rectify this, if they wanted to.

I do agree with your point, but my personal take was that I expected nothing in return for my original share holding as I wasn't looking to graft a few points onto it, nothing to do with how the shares were held or came my way.

On the plus side, I forgot to mention, there was a couple of earlier shareholders meetings where I think pies were available.

[StevieC]

You bought shares. HSL members didn't.

I should have copied this into my reply above .. but saw it later.

HSL members are buying shares, they are just doing it through the HSL medium. But as I say, no supporter buys shares because of the value (or perceived benefits) of those shares. The second they are purchased by a football supporter they are effectively worthless. They're never going to be sold, never going to make money, it's all to do with a feeling of belonging and being a part of the club.

Stripping it down to the bare bones, it's exactly what both sets of supporters are doing.

[BoomtownHibees]

Am i the only one who bought into HSL because they were handing out 100 loyalty points? :confused:

Best £15 I've ever spent

[ronaldo7]

In what way have the club disrespected shareholders? That's mental.

What's mental is what's occurring. The club are getting pelters and have been since they decided to offer the extra points for the select few. Now that's mental.

[matty_f]

I forgot to mention, there was a couple of meetings where I think pies were available.

Were shareholders not in a priority group for cup final tickets in 2012? I might be wrong, and in hindsight that wasn't much of a reward, but i have a faint recollection that they could get tickets.

[marinello59]

Am i the only one who bought into HSL because they were handing out 100 loyalty points? :confused:

No. It raised a lot of money for the club which which has been spent on the team.

[ronaldo7]

Am i the only one who bought into HSL because they were handing out 100 loyalty points? :confused:

Nope...Someone I know did likewise.

[matty_f]

What's mental is what's occurring. The club are getting pelters and have been since they decided to offer the extra points for the select few. Now that's mental.

It wasn't a select few - the offer was open to everyone - including shareholders - to get the points. They just had to sign up to HSL. If they chose not to, that's entirely their right, but they definitely had the opportunity to get them.

The offer was completely indescriminate.

[matty_f]

I should have copied this into my reply above .. but saw it later.

HSL members are buying shares, they are just doing it through the HSL medium. But as I say, no supporter buys shares because of the value (or perceived benefits) of those shares. The second they are purchased by a football supporter they are effectively worthless. They're never going to be sold, never going to make money, it's all to do with a feeling of belonging and being a part of the club.

Stripping it down to the bare bones, it's exactly what both sets of supporters are doing.

It's not - as i replied to another post - you own a piece of the club. An HSL member does not. The HSL member will never own a share purchased by HSL.

[ronaldo7]

It wasn't a select few - the offer was open to everyone - including shareholders - to get the points. They just had to sign up to HSL. If they chose not to, that's entirely their right, but they definitely had the opportunity to get them.

The offer was completely indescriminate.

Apart from those living on the bread line of course.

[Bostonhibby]

Were shareholders not in a priority group for cup final tickets in 2012? I might be wrong, and in hindsight that wasn't much of a reward, but i have a faint recollection that they could get tickets.

I wish we were! - Wouldn't have had to wear an ill fitting suit and pay through the nose to sit in Corporate hospitality because it was the only (soulless) way to get a ticket!

If there genuinely was a deal for shareholders it must have been the in crowd only -and that ain't me!

[matty_f]

Apart from those living on the bread line of course.

Well, yes, but i'd imagine that those on the breadline weren't piling into the share offer either. In fact, HSL represented a much more affirdable way to contribute.

[Danderhall Hibs]

Apart from those living on the bread line of course.

It was still open to them.

[Bostonhibby]

Apart from those living on the bread line of course.

:agree:

[matty_f]

I wish we were! - Wouldn't have had to wear an ill fitting suit and pay through the nose to sit in Corporate hospitality because it was the only (soulless) way to get a ticket!

If there genuinely was a deal for shareholders it must have been the in crowd only -and that ain't me!

Might have been Hibernians members i'm thinking of in that case. :agree:

[matty_f]

It was still open to them.

:agree:

Those on the breadline probably can't get to Livi tomorrow as well but we should just give them the points for attending rather than giving them to the select few who are able to attend. :greengrin

[Billy Whizz]

Apart from those living on the bread line of course.

Or under 16's who don't have an income

[Danderhall Hibs]

Or under 16's who don't have an income

Can under 16s invest in shares or HSL?

[Bostonhibby]

Might have been Hibernians members i'm thinking of in that case. :agree:

Freeloaders, probably haven't got a loyalty point between them :wink:

[matty_f]

Freeloaders, probably haven't got a loyalty point between them :wink:

:tee hee:

[ronaldo7]

:agree:

Those on the breadline probably can't get to Livi tomorrow as well but we should just give them the points for attending rather than giving them to the select few who are able to attend. :greengrin

The points should be given to EVERYONE who joins HSL and bought shares. It gives the chance to the guy who was on the breadline and is now in a job to feel the same as everyone else. Not 100 points short.

[MassHibsteria]

I should have copied this into my reply above .. but saw it later.

HSL members are buying shares, they are just doing it through the HSL medium. But as I say, no supporter buys shares because of the value (or perceived benefits) of those shares. The second they are purchased by a football supporter they are effectively worthless. They're never going to be sold, never going to make money, it's all to do with a feeling of belonging and being a part of the club.

Stripping it down to the bare bones, it's exactly what both sets of supporters are doing.

Stevie, the issue seems to be that some supporters DO expect a return for the money they bought shares with.

I essentially agree with you; if you buy shares in a football club, it's dead money.

[Billy Whizz]

Can under 16s invest in shares or HSL?

Probably not, so they can't get 100 loyalty points

[matty_f]

The points should be given to EVERYONE who joins HSL and bought shares. It gives the chance to the guy who was on the breadline and is now in a job to feel the same as everyone else. Not 100 points short.

No they shouldn't. I'm not saying that the points were a good idea - they weren't, but if the person was on the breadline they would have been better doing HSL - in which case they'd have got the points - than buying shares.

[ronaldo7]

No they shouldn't. I'm not saying that the points were a good idea - they weren't, but if the person was on the breadline they would have been better doing HSL - in which case they'd have got the points - than buying shares.

Yes they should. Keeps everyone equal. Bread or Hsl...hmmm

[Bostonhibby]

Stevie, the issue seems to be that some supporters DO expect a return for the money they bought shares with.

I essentially agree with you; if you buy shares in a football club, it's dead money.

:agree: These are not financial investments but investments of the heart.

Ironically, this time around, if we could just stick to what we were meant to get in return for new shares (however you buy them) we at least get:-

1) potentially influence, 2) potentially ownership, 3) the guarantee that the money strengthens the team however much we buy up.

[matty_f]

Yes they should. Keeps everyone equal. Bread or Hsl...hmmm

I thought the choice was shares or HSL. We're ****ing stretching it if folk want points for their groceries.

[Danderhall Hibs]

I thought the choice was shares or HSL. We're ****ing stretching it if folk want points for their groceries.

Back to the tesco clubcard point.

[Ozyhibby]

I keep reading there are 1700 shareholders? Only 150 people bought shares in the last issue.
That would mean the club would have to give loyalty points to about 1500 people who were gifted their shares?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[matty_f]

Back to the tesco clubcard point.

Mair likely to be Lidl, mate.

[Billy Whizz]

Back to the tesco clubcard point.

You're not suggesting Tesco pay for this? It's the manufacturers who fund it

[Bostonhibby]

I keep reading there are 1700 shareholders? Only 150 people bought shares in the last issue.
That would mean the club would have to give loyalty points to about 1500 people who were gifted their shares?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

probably not all of the 1500, I wasn't gifted any shares pre the current issue, went out my way to buy them, bought the new issue too and know others who did as well. Frankly, not interested in the points and think they have casued more bother than they are worth.

[matty_f]

probably not all of the 1500, I wasn't gifted any shares pre the current issue, went out my way to buy them, bought the new issue too and know others who did as well. Frankly, not interested in the points and think they have casued more bother than they are worth.

I wasn't looking for points when i bought shares, or for any re-sell value, i just wanted to own a part of the club directly, which was something HSL couldn't offer me. That was a fundamental difference between the two options.

[Billy Whizz]

I wasn't looking for points when i bought shares, or for any re-sell value, i just wanted to own a part of the club directly, which was something HSL couldn't offer me. That was a fundamental difference between the two options.

Can you donate the 100 points to another family member

[Bostonhibby]

I thought the choice was shares or HSL. We're ****ing stretching it if folk want points for their groceries.

Morrisons in Lincoln were doing a decent set of kitchen knives in return for points but you had to buy something like 500 tins of prunes from Bulgaria in one go to get enough points - when you went to get the knives all they had left was half a dozen cheese knives, and we think Hibs are bad.

I blame Rod Petrie.

[blackpoolhibs]

No. It raised a lot of money for the club which which has been spent on the team.

Which i was happy to contribute towards, but im not sure if i would have bothered had the points not been advertised as an incentive?

[HH81]

Might have been Hibernians members i'm thinking of in that case. :agree:

I was a Hibernians member and got a ticket through that.

[Bostonhibby]

I wasn't looking for points when i bought shares, or for any re-sell value, i just wanted to own a part of the club directly, which was something HSL couldn't offer me. That was a fundamental difference between the two options.

Eureka.!

[matty_f]

Can you donate the 100 points to another family member

I can't - i never got them. I bought shares.

I believe you can hamd on both the HSL membership and/or shares though.

[ronaldo7]

I thought the choice was shares or HSL. We're ****ing stretching it if folk want points for their groceries.
You see it as shares or hsl for points. I see it as treating everyone equally. Anyone who joins hsl from now on should get the points. If it's been as successful as they say it's been why stop now.

[matty_f]

You see it as shares or hsl for points. I see it as treating everyone equally. Anyone who joins hsl from now on should get the points. If it's been as successful as they say it's been why stop now.

Probably because practically everyone criticised the decision to award them, and they were awarded as a limited time offer, which was clearly explained at the time.

I don't see it as shares or HSL for points either. You've completely misunderstood the point if you think that.

My point has consistently been that the share purchase was different to paying into HSL, and therefore there is no reason why the club should be obliged to retrospectively award shareholders loyalty points.

[ronaldo7]

Probably because practically everyone criticised the decision to award them, and they were awarded as a limited time offer, which was clearly explained at the time.

If its such a success, why stop?

[HH81]

If its such a success, why stop?

The offer ended. I was quite gutted when it was 2 for 1 on prawn pringles and hope they do it again at ASDA.

[matty_f]

If its such a success, why stop?

Good question - maybe they should keep it going.

Maybe they recognised how widely unpopular the decision was and decided not to repeat what was always intended as a limited time incentive.

[ronaldo7]

Good question - maybe they should keep it going.

Maybe they recognised how widely unpopular the decision was and decided not to repeat what was always intended as a limited time incentive.
Nice.

They cocked up big style, could have rectified it but chose not to.

[matty_f]

Nice.

They cocked up big style, could have rectified it but chose not to.

They decided to do something and did it. They don't need to do anything else. There's nothing to put right, other than in the eyes of a few folk whose noses have been put out of joint.

[ronaldo7]

They decided to do something and did it. They don't need to do anything else. There's nothing to put right, other than in the eyes of a few folk whose noses have been put out of joint.

They admitted they got it wrong, it was also in their power to rectify it but decided not to, its ok though, I've got mine.

[Ozyhibby]

Good question - maybe they should keep it going.

Maybe they recognised how widely unpopular the decision was and decided not to repeat what was always intended as a limited time incentive.

I hope they repeat it. Not so that I can get more points, I honestly couldn't give a flying one about that, but so that we can try and boost the numbers signing up for HSL.
For me it's all about putting a better team on the park and the more members we can get, the better players we can sign.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[matty_f]

They admitted they got it wrong, it was also in their power to rectify it but decided not to, its ok though, I've got mine.

They didn't admit that they got it wrong because of shareholders not getting the points though, it was about the amount of points and the impact that potentially had on ticket prioritisation with the loyalty points scheme (as in, theoretically, an HSL member could jump ahead of a regular attender for tickets).

[matty_f]

I hope they repeat it. Not so that I can get more points, I honestly couldn't give a flying one about that, but so that we can try and boost the numbers signing up for HSL.
For me it's all about putting a better team on the park and the more members we can get, the better players we can sign.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I don't think points are the vehicle to use to boost membership, but i think they can look at other perks to incentivise take-up.

I agree, the more the merrier.

[ronaldo7]

They didn't admit that they got it wrong because of shareholders not getting the points though, it was about the amount of points and the impact that potentially had on ticket prioritisation with the loyalty points scheme (as in, theoretically, an HSL member could jump ahead of a regular attender for tickets).

They got it wrong, and it's still wrong. New members to hsl should get the points. They'll rectify it though when they need more sign ups.

[matty_f]

They got it wrong, and it's still wrong. New members to hsl should get the points. They'll rectify it though when they need more sign ups.

Why should new members get it? The offer was over a specified time, if folk took it up then, then they got points, if they didn't then they won't. That's fair enough.

[ronaldo7]

Why should new members get it? The offer was over a specified time, if folk took it up then, then they got points, if they didn't them they won't. That's fair enough.

When they need more sign ups it will roll out again. It'll be on offer again.

[matty_f]

When they need more sign ups it will roll out again. It'll be on offer again.

You think? What makes you say that?

[ronaldo7]

You think? What makes you say that?

Yip. They've seen the take up on the last offer. They'd be daft not to. Cash is king.

[matty_f]

Yip. They've seen the take up on the last offer. They'd be daft not to. Cash is king.

I don't think there is any chance it'll be done again.

[ronaldo7]

I don't think there is any chance it'll be done again.

Fair do's. We'll see.

[marinello59]

HSL aren't getting any shares? :confused:

Okay, a bit sarky so apologies .. but do you think that the actual shares are why supporters joined up?

It's not like we are dabbling in the stock markets, it's not like anyone is going to cash in if share prices rise. The actual share is a non-entity that has no real worth to a football supporter. It's the ideal of being a part of the club that is why supporters buy in. Doesn't matter whether it's 10 shares or 10,000 shares, it's the "being part of the club" that keeps you content. It's the same as buying a stone in the East Stand, has no value but it makes you feel more a part of the club you love. All these things have no real value, wouldn't ever be sold on, but it's just a mental feeling of being a part of something big.

I get the sentiment of this. Those of us who have signed up for either scheme or both have all done so knowing it's the dumbest investment ever.:greengrin
I don't agree that there are no differences between buying direct and donating via HSL though. People have made a conscious decision to support one or the other or both. Unless those decisions were made by coin toss there must have been reasons for going down a particular route that were particularly attractive to each individual. If it was a good deal at the point of contract then unless 100 loyalty points would have made a difference then surely it is still a good deal.

[StevieC]

People have made a conscious decision to support one or the other or both. Unless those decisions were made by coin toss there must have reasons for going down a particular route that were particularly attractive to each individual.

It's been mentioned previously .. for some that chose the route of buying shares directly there wasn't the HSL option. Existing shareholders received an invitation through the post to purchase additional shares as part of a club share initiative to allow fan ownership. Shareholders could send in a form to purchase these shares before HSL was an option.
I could be wrong but I think that HSL evolved in the following weeks (partly?) because financial rules dictated that non-shareholders had to purchase them through a financial advisor. HSL was born as a way of purchasing shares without having to find an independent financial advisor, and very quickly became the HSL of today. If I'm not mistaken there was actually another fan led group (can't remember their name) that appeared at the outset of the share issue, and possibly even before HSL, but they never got off the ground as the club promoted HSL.

So in short .. no, not everyone had a choice.

[Eyrie]

My shares in Hibs are effectively a donation to the club because I will never get a return on them and they will have minimal value if I try to sell them. I also donated money to the club by joining HSL at a time when there was no mention of loyalty points.

I don't see the difference between the donations, and regard it as unfair that only one of the two donations provides loyalty points.

[Andy74]

My shares in Hibs are effectively a donation to the club because I will never get a return on them and they will have minimal value if I try to sell them. I also donated money to the club by joining HSL at a time when there was no mention of loyalty points.

I don't see the difference between the donations, and regard it as unfair that only one of the two donations provides loyalty points.

Can't argue with that.

[Andy74]

It's been mentioned previously .. for some that chose the route of buying shares directly there wasn't the HSL option. Existing shareholders received an invitation through the post to purchase additional shares as part of a club share initiative to allow fan ownership. Shareholders could send in a form to purchase these shares before HSL was an option.
I could be wrong but I think that HSL evolved in the following weeks (partly?) because financial rules dictated that non-shareholders had to purchase them through a financial advisor. HSL was born as a way of purchasing shares without having to find an independent financial advisor, and very quickly became the HSL of today. If I'm not mistaken there was actually another fan led group (can't remember their name) that appeared at the outset of the share issue, and possibly even before HSL, but they never got off the ground as the club promoted HSL.

So in short .. no, not everyone had a choice.

I don't think that's right. I think there were both options at the same time. I certainly choose to do both at the same time.

You bring up another point to take into account. A lot of fans who bought shares direct also went to the expense of getting the form signed off by a financial advisor.

[marinello59]

It's been mentioned previously .. for some that chose the route of buying shares directly there wasn't the HSL option. Existing shareholders received an invitation through the post to purchase additional shares as part of a club share initiative to allow fan ownership. Shareholders could send in a form to purchase these shares before HSL was an option.
I could be wrong but I think that HSL evolved in the following weeks (partly?) because financial rules dictated that non-shareholders had to purchase them through a financial advisor. HSL was born as a way of purchasing shares without having to find an independent financial advisor, and very quickly became the HSL of today. If I'm not mistaken there was actually another fan led group (can't remember their name) that appeared at the outset of the share issue, and possibly even before HSL, but they never got off the ground as the club promoted HSL.

So in short .. no, not everyone had a choice.

I thought HSL was launched at the same time as the share issue. My memory is poor though. I'm not so sure it is that bad though. I do recall discussions on here about the merits of both options.
Actually I am sure the choice was there from the start of the share issue.

[marinello59]

I don't think that's right. I think there were both options at the same time. I certainly choose to do both at the same time.

You bring up another point to take into account. A lot of fans who bought shares direct also went to the expense of getting the form signed off by a financial advisor.

The fact that there was a choice and people still felt it worthwhile paying a financial adviser suggests that for some direct share ownership had a very strong attraction compared to donating via HSL. It makes it harder to claim there is no difference between the schemes.

[Bostonhibby]

I thought HSL was launched at the same time as the share issue. My memory is poor though. I'm not so sure it is that bad though. I do recall discussions on here about the merits of both options.
Actually I am sure the choice was there from the start of the share issue.
The offer pack for both arrived around the same time but existing shareholders could buy more shares direct immediately as they didn't have to get an IFA to put them through the advice process.

[marinello59]

The offer pack for both arrived around the same time but existing shareholders could buy more shares direct immediately as they didn't have to get an IFA to put them through the advice process.

That's how I remember it. HSL was mentioned as an option at the same time.

[Ozyhibby]

The fact that there was a choice and people still felt it worthwhile paying a financial adviser suggests that for some direct share ownership had a very strong attraction compared to donating via HSL. It makes it harder to claim there is no difference between the schemes.

Funny thing is, STF doesn't even have direct shares in Hibs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[HappyHanlon]

When they need more sign ups it will roll out again. It'll be on offer again.

^^^^

This :agree:

What better way to get sign ups - entice the punters in with the lure of loyalty points.

"Short of points cause you haven't bothered yer erse all season?......sign up to HSL and we'll give you some!"

Guaranteed to be seen again at some point in the later stages of the season.

[marinello59]

Funny thing is, STF doesn't even have direct shares in Hibs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Attracted to HSL by the power of the loyalty point. Hopefully he gets enough for a cup final ticket. :greengrin

[StevieC]

The offer pack for both arrived around the same time but existing shareholders could buy more shares direct immediately as they didn't have to get an IFA to put them through the advice process.

I'm pretty sure existing shareholders received the letter and invitation first. Can't remember if it was required or just courtesy. Can't remember if the rest of the support received the rest of the information automatically or if they had to ask for it? Maybe it was a download?
Anyway, the IFA aspect is correct and I think that anyone that wasn't a shareholder was told they had to consult one before going down either route. As time progressed I think that they got round the IFA stumbling block and eventually you could buy into HSL without one.

My memory might not be perfect on this, but certainly wasn't as straight forward a choice as some are trying to make out.

[marinello59]

I'm pretty sure existing shareholders received the letter and invitation first. Can't remember if it was required or just courtesy. Can't remember if the rest of the support received the rest of the information automatically or if they had to ask for it? Maybe it was a download?
Anyway, the IFA aspect is correct and I think that anyone that wasn't a shareholder was told they had to consult one before going down either route. As time progressed I think that they got round the IFA stumbling block and eventually you could buy into HSL without one.

My memory might not be perfect on this, but certainly wasn't as straight forward a choice as some are trying to make out.

HSL definitely did not evolve as a means of getting around the financial advisor thing. The choice between HSL and direct shareholding was there from the start of the share issue.

[Andy74]

HSL definitely did not evolve as a means of getting around the financial advisor thing. The choice between HSL and direct shareholding was there from the start of the share issue.

Yep. A bit too much overthinking going on with this one I think.

The share offer was trailed and most were excited about getting the chance to buy direct into the club.

When it was actually announced that you could buy direct but it was going to be tricky but HSL was an option many were disappointed. After a bit the idea of a collective in the long term became a bit more attractive.

Many were still wedded to buying direct just for that extra feeling of being a real shareholder. Some decided both was a good option. Others fancied just HSL and I'm sure others just had to settle for HSL.

No option deserves any particular praise over another. I think that's just the point about the loyalty points.

[matty_f]

Yep. A bit too much overthinking going on with this one I think.

The share offer was trailed and most were excited about getting the chance to buy direct into the club.

When it was actually announced that you could buy direct but it was going to be tricky but HSL was an option many were disappointed. After a bit the idea of a collective in the long term became a bit more attractive.

Many were still wedded to buying direct just for that extra feeling of being a real shareholder. Some decided both was a good option. Others fancied just HSL and I'm sure others just had to settle for HSL.

No option deserves any particular praise over another. I think that's just the point about the loyalty points.

You're absolutely right that no option deserved particular praise over the other. They were, clearly, viewed as different though. For a start, buying shares directly was only on offer for a limited period of time (with a caveat that the club could extend the window if there was an appetite for it).

Due to the restrictions around buying shares directly, and the fact that HSL gave a pay monthly option, HSL was (and is) seen as a slow burner. It is HSL which will, over time, get the percentage to a point where the support has control (along with the shareholders).

There were and are benefits to both options depending on what your own views and priorities are. At launch, my priority was to take the chance to directly own a piece of the club, which ruled HSL out for me.

Now, i see the momentum that is building around HSL and the positive impact it's having on the club - and crucially the long term benefit of thousands of supporters plowing money into the club - I think HSL is a viable option for me.

I have no issue with Hibs giving HSL a boost by offering an incentive. Was 100 points the right one, all things considered? Probably not, but not because of any notion that shareholders should have got the points. I think it was wrong because it could have upset the balance of the loyalty points scheme (in theory).

Even then, i'd think the practical impact of the 100 points is minimal. I'd guess that a large portion of our home and away support probably got involved with HSL to some extent, and for those that aren't home and away supporters that joined HSL, I'd be surprised if they all of a sudden wanted to go to whichever ground we might have a ticketing issue with.

[Kojock]

Meanwhile back on topic, I'm not against the idea that the fans who attend most games should have an advantage for limited tickets. What the scheme has created is an exclusive club of around 800 fans who are guaranteed tickets. IMO when tickets are limited, for arguments sake let's say 1000. The system means that we have loads of fans basically fighting over 200 tickets. An idea would be to lower the first wave threshold so that around 3000 would be in with a chance. That still gives fans with high points an advantage but not an exclusivity.