PDA

View Full Version : Fan ownership



O'Rourke3
17-03-2016, 11:17 PM
Can Motherwell fans make a success of owning their club? - http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/35838545

I hadn't picked up that LH was giving his shareholding away furra poon. It's the thoroughness of the investigation that staggers me. I'll give them FOH but sticking the The Gers in there without mentioning an actual scheme at Hibs that actually has shares and a published plan to give up 51 percent seems odd....

Sent via the bushes @ EM

Jack
18-03-2016, 07:43 AM
Hearts are 100% fan owned.

Just that one fan owns 100%.

Viva_Palmeiras
18-03-2016, 07:51 AM
What separates Hibs from the others (and possibly why we're not in the article?)

"The impetus for the organisations came from moments of financial crisis."

Sergio sledge
18-03-2016, 08:04 AM
What separates Hibs from the others (and possibly why we're not in the article?)

"The impetus for the organisations came from moments of financial crisis."

Also, they talk about fan ownership being "more than 50% of the club being owned by a group that operates along democratic, one member, one vote lines." Hibs have a route to fans owning more than 50%, but a certain % of the will be individual shareholders and less than 50% held by HSL. Still seems strange that there's no mention of hibs at all though.

marinello59
18-03-2016, 08:08 AM
Also, they talk about fan ownership being "more than 50% of the club being owned by a group that operates along democratic, one member, one vote lines." Hibs have a route to fans owning more than 50%, but a certain % of the will be individual shareholders and less than 50% held by HSL. Still seems strange that there's no mention of hibs at all though.

That's the flaw in our scheme for me. HSL should have had the target of owning 51% of the club.

offshorehibby
18-03-2016, 08:54 AM
That's the flaw in our scheme for me. HSL should have had the target of owning 51% of the club.

As far as i'm aware we are after a target of 51% and always have been. The only mention i can point you to at the moment is Q 16 here -
http://www.hiberniansupporters.co.uk/faq.html

Found this which is confusing - http://www.hiberniansupporters.co.uk/about.html


The Board of Hibernian announced on 29 December 2014 that it intended to widen the ownership of the Club by issuing new shares which would enable the Holding Company’s shareholding in Hibernian to be diluted below 50%.

marinello59
18-03-2016, 09:10 AM
As far as i'm aware we are after a target of 51% and always have been. The only mention i can point you to at the moment is Q 16 here -
http://www.hiberniansupporters.co.uk/faq.html

Found this which is confusing - http://www.hiberniansupporters.co.uk/about.html

The 51% will include HSL and hundreds of individual shareholders. That's different from a single, coherent fan ownership model offering one member, one vote. If they continue to offer shares to individuals on a regular basis HSL will become less and less effective.

ihibs7
18-03-2016, 09:24 AM
The 51% will include HSL and hundreds of individual shareholders. That's different from a single, coherent fan ownership model offering one member, one vote. If they continue to offer shares to individuals on a regular basis HSL will become less and less effective.

The definition of ownership and control are interesting in this context imho, as we head towards 51% fan ownership but the 49% will retain control as long as it stays in one block.

I'm not sure where it goes from that point, though.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

CropleyWasGod
18-03-2016, 09:46 AM
The 51% will include HSL and hundreds of individual shareholders. That's different from a single, coherent fan ownership model offering one member, one vote. If they continue to offer shares to individuals on a regular basis HSL will become less and less effective.

HSL voting as "one block" does have its problems, though. Here's a scenario:-

HSL (with, say, 41% of the shares) decide to vote a certain way on an issue; that decision is carried by a slim majority of its members, say 55-45.

The independent shareholders (with 10%) decide to vote the other way. That way happens to co-incide with the view of the 49% non-fans. So HSL's view is defeated.

Overall, though, the decision would actually go with the views of the majority of the fans, even though HSL (as a block) didn't vote for it.

I realise that this is an unlikely scenario, but the point I'm making is two-fold 1. that the independent shareholders can act as an alternative voice to HSL. That voice, although not powerful in itself, could be very important. 2. HSL won't necessarily always reflect the views of fans.

marinello59
18-03-2016, 10:25 AM
HSL voting as "one block" does have its problems, though. Here's a scenario:-

HSL (with, say, 41% of the shares) decide to vote a certain way on an issue; that decision is carried by a slim majority of its members, say 55-45.

The independent shareholders (with 10%) decide to vote the other way. That way happens to co-incide with the view of the 49% non-fans. So HSL's view is defeated.

Overall, though, the decision would actually go with the views of the majority of the fans, even though HSL (as a block) didn't vote for it.

I realise that this is an unlikely scenario, but the point I'm making is two-fold 1. that the independent shareholders can act as an alternative voice to HSL. That voice, although not powerful in itself, could be very important. 2. HSL won't necessarily always reflect the views of fans.

As you say that is an unlikely scenario. :greengrin
I actually think what you are saying here backs up my point. If we are to achieve genuine ownership of the club by the community of fans then that can only happen if a single vehicle is used. Having one smaller group of fans act as a check on another group of fans would just be a recipe for conflict. The individual shareholdings may well raise money for the club but given that it is possible to buy, I think , 125000 pounds worth if you wanted then that's far removed from the one member one vote concept. As has been already said, having a fractured fan ownership means that control will effectively remain with the 49%.
It's good that money is being raised for the club but for me the whole thing now lacks just a wee bit of focus on the final outcome.

madhibby
18-03-2016, 10:39 AM
I do intend to invest in shares and am likely to do it in the next week or two.
I am going to make a one off payment.
I previously was going to do it via direct purchase of shares but was deterred by the finding and having to pay for the financial adviser bit.
I think I would prefer to be an individual shareholder as I would get the share certificates which i can then pass on to my family in years to come.
Do any fans here think I should do it through the HSL route (again as a one off payment) rather than as an individual shareholder? And if you do think that why do you think its better doing it that way?

Pretty Boy
18-03-2016, 10:48 AM
I do intend to invest in shares and am likely to do it in the next week or two.
I am going to make a one off payment.
I previously was going to do it via direct purchase of shares but was deterred by the finding and having to pay for the financial adviser bit.
I think I would prefer to be an individual shareholder as I would get the share certificates which i can then pass on to my family in years to come.
Do any fans here think I should do it through the HSL route (again as a one off payment) rather than as an individual shareholder? And if you do think that why do you think its better doing it that way?

It will come as no surprise to anyone that I would say do ot through HSL.

First and foremost I would encourage anyone to get cash into the club in whatever way suits them best. However whilst I understand the pull of having your own share certificate, which I have, I firmly believe the collective is better than the individual and a block of fans acting together is better than a fractured ownership. It's also worth remembering that your £225 to HSL buys you the same number of votes as someone who has paid in £1000, that's not the case when you buy direct.

Either way I would encourage you to 'donate' what you can. The club needs money and whether it goes through HSL or buying shares direct I'd encourage people to take up the offer.

CropleyWasGod
18-03-2016, 11:15 AM
I do intend to invest in shares and am likely to do it in the next week or two.
I am going to make a one off payment.
I previously was going to do it via direct purchase of shares but was deterred by the finding and having to pay for the financial adviser bit.
I think I would prefer to be an individual shareholder as I would get the share certificates which i can then pass on to my family in years to come.
Do any fans here think I should do it through the HSL route (again as a one off payment) rather than as an individual shareholder? And if you do think that why do you think its better doing it that way?

You have the option to do both, if you can afford it

jodjam
18-03-2016, 11:18 AM
As you say that is an unlikely scenario. :greengrin
I actually think what you are saying here backs up my point. If we are to achieve genuine ownership of the club by the community of fans then that can only happen if a single vehicle is used. Having one smaller group of fans act as a check on another group of fans would just be a recipe for conflict. The individual shareholdings may well raise money for the club but given that it is possible to buy, I think , 125000 pounds worth if you wanted then that's far removed from the one member one vote concept. As has been already said, having a fractured fan ownership means that control will effectively remain with the 49%.
It's good that money is being raised for the club but for me the whole thing now lacks just a wee bit of focus on the final outcome.

Your last sentence sums it up for me. I'm a shareholder from the Duff and Gray era. I've not bought any more or joined HSL because there are too many questions unanswered about the end game.

Keith_M
18-03-2016, 11:19 AM
As a theoretical question....


If a single Hibs Fan had loads of money and invested 1m in the new shares, then bought out STF*, would you still consider the club 'Fan Owned'?





*Leaving aside for now any rules on the new shares that could possibly disallow such a scenario.

CropleyWasGod
18-03-2016, 11:22 AM
As a theoretical question....


If a single Hibs Fan had loads of money and invested 1m in the new shares, then bought out STF*, would you still consider the club 'Fan Owned'?





*Leaving aside for now any rules on the new shares that could possibly disallow such a scenario.

I think the media, and hence the general public, wouldn't.

As an example, Hearts aren't considered fan-owned, despite the fact that their major shareholder is a fan.

Arch Stanton
18-03-2016, 11:24 AM
As you say that is an unlikely scenario. :greengrin
I actually think what you are saying here backs up my point. If we are to achieve genuine ownership of the club by the community of fans then that can only happen if a single vehicle is used. Having one smaller group of fans act as a check on another group of fans would just be a recipe for conflict. The individual shareholdings may well raise money for the club but given that it is possible to buy, I think , 125000 pounds worth if you wanted then that's far removed from the one member one vote concept. As has been already said, having a fractured fan ownership means that control will effectively remain with the 49%.
It's good that money is being raised for the club but for me the whole thing now lacks just a wee bit of focus on the final outcome.

At least any conflict would be resolved by a vote at the end of it - not like the 20+ pager disagreements on Hibs net. :greengrin

However, I do agree that any future share sales should be though HSL - otherwise a 2% block purchase could be added to the %49 to take control back away from the fans.

Ozyhibby
18-03-2016, 11:27 AM
While we are on voting scenario's, I'll use the percentages above as an example.
Say the 49% propose a wholly unpopular motion for the agm (club to change colours to maroon) and the fans are unanimous in their opposition.
HSL have a vote among their members and its agreed to vote against. That's 41% def voting to retain green.
All we need are the other 10% to vote against. Problem is some of them have died, some no longer bother with the footy, some forget, some can't make the agm etc.
The 49% win the day and we start playing in maroon.
It seems silly but very few of the fan shareholders from the existing share issue ever vote.
If you buy through HSL you can be assured that the power of your purchase will be used in every single vote in a way that is backed by the other members of HSL who are all fans.

http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160318/ec32648d20c4a897e2e12e1d674c6cf4.jpg
http://www.hiberniansupporters.co.uk/phone/donate.html



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ozyhibby
18-03-2016, 11:35 AM
Another thing worth pointing out is that the club say we are now more than 20% fan owned. However because it is split between individual shareholders and HSL we are not entitled to a seat on the board. If everyone had purchased through HSL we would have a legally protected representative on the club's board by now.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Leithenhibby
18-03-2016, 11:45 AM
I do intend to invest in shares and am likely to do it in the next week or two.
I am going to make a one off payment.
I previously was going to do it via direct purchase of shares but was deterred by the finding and having to pay for the financial adviser bit.
I think I would prefer to be an individual shareholder as I would get the share certificates which i can then pass on to my family in years to come.
Do any fans here think I should do it through the HSL route (again as a one off payment) rather than as an individual shareholder? And if you do think that why do you think its better doing it that way?

This should help you make up your mind. CHOOSE HSL
:) GGTTH

http://www.hibs.net/showthread.php?308742-Let-s-Support-Leeann-and-Alan

NAE NOOKIE
18-03-2016, 11:48 AM
The aim of the Hibs share issue was first and foremost to ensure that the clubs fans would have the ability in years to come to block any attempt by a Wallace Mercer type to gain total control of the club for nefarious purposes ..... if it achieves that it will be a good thing whatever else happens.

I have no idea how these things work, but once all the shares have been bought and say HSL hold 30% of the 51% and individual fans hold the other 20% what's to stop HSL being dissolved and a new body being formed that brings everybody together ( HSL members and individual shareholders ) in a one man one vote organisation, where the option is still there for anybody who wants to, to make monthly donations to a club fund.

Probably simplistic .... but something along those lines?

FranckSuzy
18-03-2016, 11:53 AM
The aim of the Hibs share issue was first and foremost to ensure that the clubs fans would have the ability in years to come to block any attempt by a Wallace Mercer type to gain total control of the club for nefarious purposes ..... if it achieves that it will be a good thing whatever else happens.

I have no idea how these things work, but once all the shares have been bought and say HSL hold 30% of the 51% and individual fans hold the other 20% what's to stop HSL being dissolved and a new body being formed that brings everybody together ( HSL members and individual shareholders ) in a one man one vote organisation, where the option is still there for anybody who wants to, to make monthly donations to a club fund.

Probably simplistic .... but something along those lines?

I am no expert but I wouldn't have thought that was possible. Being an individual shareholder means you own part of the club directly but being a member of HSL means you do indirectly, if that makes sense :greengrin

CropleyWasGod
18-03-2016, 11:56 AM
The aim of the Hibs share issue was first and foremost to ensure that the clubs fans would have the ability in years to come to block any attempt by a Wallace Mercer type to gain total control of the club for nefarious purposes ..... if it achieves that it will be a good thing whatever else happens.

I have no idea how these things work, but once all the shares have been bought and say HSL hold 30% of the 51% and individual fans hold the other 20% what's to stop HSL being dissolved and a new body being formed that brings everybody together ( HSL members and individual shareholders ) in a one man one vote organisation, where the option is still there for anybody who wants to, to make monthly donations to a club fund.

Probably simplistic .... but something along those lines?

People buy individual shares for a range of reasons. They wouldn't give up that ownership lightly.

Ozyhibby
18-03-2016, 12:19 PM
People buy individual shares for a range of reasons. They wouldn't give up that ownership lightly.

Besides they can do that now if they want by signing their shares over to HSL. That way their vote would always count and they would have that shiny certificate still on the wall.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Andy74
18-03-2016, 12:33 PM
At least any conflict would be resolved by a vote at the end of it - not like the 20+ pager disagreements on Hibs net. :greengrin

However, I do agree that any future share sales should be though HSL - otherwise a 2% block purchase could be added to the %49 to take control back away from the fans.

Presumably it would be a fan that bought the 2% though?

I'm not bothered if it is HSL or a collection fans - I don't ever think the ultimate goal was to have one large body buy up the shareholdings available to fans. Not a great fan of these type of collective committees anyway.

I think almost all fans would have the same intentions in terms of wanting to safeguard the club.

Sergio sledge
18-03-2016, 12:41 PM
Besides they can do that now if they want by signing their shares over to HSL. That way their vote would always count and they would have that shiny certificate still on the wall.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If You are just interested in the share certificate and saying you own a small portion of the club but broadly support HSL and what they stand for, it is fairly easy to proxy your shareholding to them for the AGM, although if you are that engaged in the process then you will probably be likely to be engaged enough to vote with them anyway.

Do you have to re-proxy (is that a word?) every year, or can someone give their proxy voting rights to HSL indefinitely, or for a proscribed period?

Keith_M
18-03-2016, 12:41 PM
While we are on voting scenario's, I'll use the percentages above as an example.
Say the 49% propose a wholly unpopular motion for the agm (club to change colours to maroon) and the fans are unanimous in their opposition.
HSL have a vote among their members and its agreed to vote against. That's 41% def voting to retain green.
All we need are the other 10% to vote against. Problem is some of them have died, some no longer bother with the footy, some forget, some can't make the agm etc.
The 49% win the day and we start playing in maroon.
It seems silly but very few of the fan shareholders from the existing share issue ever vote.
If you buy through HSL you can be assured that the power of your purchase will be used in every single vote in a way that is backed by the other members of HSL who are all fans.




That's a highly unlikely scenario... but just wait till we have a vote on the shade of green the team should wear :greengrin

NAE NOOKIE
18-03-2016, 12:55 PM
I am no expert but I wouldn't have thought that was possible. Being an individual shareholder means you own part of the club directly but being a member of HSL means you do indirectly, if that makes sense :greengrin

I know .... my idea was to make it so that being in HSL or an individual shareholder didn't matter. You are a member of the coverall group and every member gets one vote which then decides what the groups stance is on each matter at the AGM or in the boardroom.

That's how it would work if HSL held the whole 51% ... this is just a way to get to the same goal but including everybody.

Ozyhibby
18-03-2016, 01:08 PM
That's a highly unlikely scenario... but just wait till we have a vote on the shade of green the team should wear :greengrin

Obviously it very unlikely but the point I was making is that HSL will always vote and always vote with the wishes of fans. Someone buying shares just now may move to Canada and in 20 years time not be engaged enough to bother voting.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Colr
18-03-2016, 01:16 PM
Can Motherwell fans make a success of owning their club? - http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/35838545

I hadn't picked up that LH was giving his shareholding away furra poon. It's the thoroughness of the investigation that staggers me. I'll give them FOH but sticking the The Gers in there without mentioning an actual scheme at Hibs that actually has shares and a published plan to give up 51 percent seems odd....

Sent via the bushes @ EM

I think fan ownership's a good model if you are the scale and profile of club who will not attract a wealthy benefactor. It's better than being passed round the league of dodgy local used car salesmen with successive owners trying not to lose their shirt and, at the same time, work out some way to parcel off the stadium for a buck or two or given them loans at enhanced rates of interest.

Doubt its the route to build the team into a national force but at the same time, its less likely to go bust.

Ozyhibby
18-03-2016, 01:26 PM
I think fan ownership's a good model if you are the scale and profile of club who will not attract a wealthy benefactor. It's better than being passed round the league of dodgy local used car salesmen with successive owners trying not to lose their shirt and, at the same time, work out some way to parcel off the stadium for a buck or two or given them loans at enhanced rates of interest.

Doubt its the route to build the team into a national force but at the same time, its less likely to go bust.

There are fan owned clubs that are huge and some that are tiny.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

ihibs7
18-03-2016, 02:39 PM
What do the shareholders actually vote on though? Adopting the accounts is all I can think of. What else has been voted on in the last 25 years?

The board run the club, and the composition of the board is decided by STF and Frank, Amit and and an HSL rep would only be there on his say so?

Also, the two fans reps are non executive - I presume an HSL rep would be too.

I don't have any issue with all of the above, but I worry that fans have unrealistic expectations of what the outcomes will be; I don't see the running of the club is going to change much - the second phase post 51% could be very interesting.


HSL voting as "one block" does have its problems, though. Here's a scenario:-

HSL (with, say, 41% of the shares) decide to vote a certain way on an issue; that decision is carried by a slim majority of its members, say 55-45.

The independent shareholders (with 10%) decide to vote the other way. That way happens to co-incide with the view of the 49% non-fans. So HSL's view is defeated.

Overall, though, the decision would actually go with the views of the majority of the fans, even though HSL (as a block) didn't vote for it.

I realise that this is an unlikely scenario, but the point I'm making is two-fold 1. that the independent shareholders can act as an alternative voice to HSL. That voice, although not powerful in itself, could be very important. 2. HSL won't necessarily always reflect the views of fans.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

CropleyWasGod
18-03-2016, 02:42 PM
What do the shareholders actually vote on though? Adopting the accounts is all I can think of. What else has been voted on in the last 25 years?

The board run the club, and the composition of the board is decided by STF and Frank, Amit and and an HSL rep would only be there on his say so?

Also, the two fans reps are non executive - I presume an HSL rep would be too.

I don't have any issue with all of the above, but I worry that fans have unrealistic expectations of what the outcomes will be; I don't see the running of the club is going to change much - the second phase post 51% could be very interesting.






Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The shareholders have the power to elect the Board. If the fans have 51%, that's a significant power.

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

Geo_1875
18-03-2016, 02:58 PM
What do the shareholders actually vote on though? Adopting the accounts is all I can think of. What else has been voted on in the last 25 years?

The board run the club, and the composition of the board is decided by STF and Frank, Amit and and an HSL rep would only be there on his say so?

Also, the two fans reps are non executive - I presume an HSL rep would be too.

I don't have any issue with all of the above, but I worry that fans have unrealistic expectations of what the outcomes will be; I don't see the running of the club is going to change much - the second phase post 51% could be very interesting.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Non-exec only means they don't have a day job at the club. They still have full voting rights afaik.

Anyway, when the HSA is reorganised surely there will be the possibly of an alignment with HSL to form a single voting block for fans. Is there a facility to assign a permanent proxy on individual shareholdings whereby if you agree with HSL and their overall aims you could give them voting rights over your holding? Would this count toward the 20 % for a seat on the board?

Ozyhibby
18-03-2016, 03:12 PM
Non-exec only means they don't have a day job at the club. They still have full voting rights afaik.

Anyway, when the HSA is reorganised surely there will be the possibly of an alignment with HSL to form a single voting block for fans. Is there a facility to assign a permanent proxy on individual shareholdings whereby if you agree with HSL and their overall aims you could give them voting rights over your holding? Would this count toward the 20 % for a seat on the board?

When HSL get to 20% shareholding they have a legal right to a board member. This board member can't be voted off by STF or Petrie.
Frank and Amit can be removed at any time. Not that I'm saying they would be.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

CMac1988
18-03-2016, 04:07 PM
If You are just interested in the share certificate and saying you own a small portion of the club but broadly support HSL and what they stand for, it is fairly easy to proxy your shareholding to them for the AGM, although if you are that engaged in the process then you will probably be likely to be engaged enough to vote with them anyway.

Do you have to re-proxy (is that a word?) every year, or can someone give their proxy voting rights to HSL indefinitely, or for a proscribed period?

Good question, was just about to ask the same.

How exactly does 'proxying' work? Are there set time periods that a proxy is in effect, can it be reverted/removed etc, can it be prescribed indefinitely?

OfficialHSL
18-03-2016, 06:03 PM
I do intend to invest in shares and am likely to do it in the next week or two.
I am going to make a one off payment.
I previously was going to do it via direct purchase of shares but was deterred by the finding and having to pay for the financial adviser bit.
I think I would prefer to be an individual shareholder as I would get the share certificates which i can then pass on to my family in years to come.
Do any fans here think I should do it through the HSL route (again as a one off payment) rather than as an individual shareholder? And if you do think that why do you think its better doing it that way?
Madhibby

Can we encourage you to read the thread below headed ''Lets support Leeann and Alan''. It covers all of the points raised in this thread and also confirms that with HSL you will get an ownership Certificate that proves you are a part owner of the Club and can be passed on to your family. It is ideal and appropriate for a social enterprise such as Hibernian Supporters Ltd. If you have any questions - just ask.

HSL

marinello59
18-03-2016, 06:28 PM
Madhibby

Can we encourage you to read the thread below headed ''Lets support Leeann and Alan''. It covers all of the points raised in this thread and also confirms that with HSL you will get an ownership Certificate that proves you are a part owner of the Club and can be passed on to your family. It is ideal and appropriate for a social enterprise such as Hibernian Supporters Ltd. If you have any questions - just ask.

HSL

That bit in bold makes HSL even more attractive IMHO.

DaveF
18-03-2016, 06:31 PM
That bit in bold makes HSL even more attractive IMHO.

:agree: and when I'm paid up it means I'll have 2 worthless but Hibee pricless bits of paper to hand down to my ungrateful kids :greengrin

GreenOnions
18-03-2016, 06:32 PM
HSL voting as "one block" does have its problems, though. Here's a scenario:-

HSL (with, say, 41% of the shares) decide to vote a certain way on an issue; that decision is carried by a slim majority of its members, say 55-45.

The independent shareholders (with 10%) decide to vote the other way. That way happens to co-incide with the view of the 49% non-fans. So HSL's view is defeated.

Overall, though, the decision would actually go with the views of the majority of the fans, even though HSL (as a block) didn't vote for it.

I realise that this is an unlikely scenario, but the point I'm making is two-fold 1. that the independent shareholders can act as an alternative voice to HSL. That voice, although not powerful in itself, could be very important. 2. HSL won't necessarily always reflect the views of fans.

Sounds like the small-ish band (in terms of ownership %) of individual shareholders could potentially have influence greater than their numbers in certain circumstances. Kind of like the small number of marginal seats in a general election.

I think it's quite important though that an HSL vote will always carry the full weight of its entire shareholding no matter how many members have actively participated in decision-making.

marinello59
18-03-2016, 06:49 PM
:agree: and when I'm paid up it means I'll have 2 worthless but Hibee pricless bits of paper to hand down to my ungrateful kids :greengrin


Be sure to spend everything else. :greengrin

Andy74
18-03-2016, 07:19 PM
Madhibby

Can we encourage you to read the thread below headed ''Lets support Leeann and Alan''. It covers all of the points raised in this thread and also confirms that with HSL you will get an ownership Certificate that proves you are a part owner of the Club and can be passed on to your family. It is ideal and appropriate for a social enterprise such as Hibernian Supporters Ltd. If you have any questions - just ask.

HSL

Not quite true. You are part owner of HSL who in turn own part of the club.

marinello59
18-03-2016, 07:22 PM
Not quite true. You are part owner of HSL who in turn own part of the club.

Eh? If you part own the vehicle that owns the shares then you are a part owner of the club. Nit picking at its best there.

Andy74
18-03-2016, 07:24 PM
Eh? If you part own the vehicle that owns the shares then you are a part owner of the club. Nit picking at its best there.

There are fundamental differences in buying direct or going through HSL. I don't think it is helpful muddying the waters with terms that aren't correct. Both ways are very good in own ways but best to be up front.

Ozyhibby
18-03-2016, 07:36 PM
There are fundamental differences in buying direct or going through HSL. I don't think it is helpful muddying the waters with terms that aren't correct. Both ways are very good in own ways but best to be up front.

STF doesn't own direct. If it's good enough for him it's good enough for me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

ihibs7
18-03-2016, 07:43 PM
Regarding passing down your membership....

How does that work?

If I own 1 membership how does it pass to my kids, do they become 1/3 members or members in their own right?

Similarly if me and the wife are members and we only had one bairn - we don't but bear with me - could we both pass memberships onto him/her.

Or am I fundamentally misunderstanding how membership of HSL works?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

marinello59
18-03-2016, 07:45 PM
There are fundamental differences in buying direct or going through HSL. I don't think it is helpful muddying the waters with terms that aren't correct. Both ways are very good in own ways but best to be up front.

Aye, OK, whatever makes you happy.

Andy74
18-03-2016, 07:46 PM
STF doesn't own direct. If it's good enough for him it's good enough for me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That's true but he does have control of the entity that owns on his behalf.

Andy74
18-03-2016, 07:48 PM
Aye, OK, whatever makes you happy.

People giving their money to Hibs makes me happy. Decisions should be informed though. A lot of people maybe don't understand the differences so being straight on those differences helps.

Ozyhibby
18-03-2016, 07:52 PM
Regarding passing down your membership....

How does that work?

If I own 1 membership how does it pass to my kids, do they become 1/3 members or members in their own right?

Similarly if me and the wife are members and we only had one bairn - we don't but bear with me - could we both pass memberships onto him/her.

Or am I fundamentally misunderstanding how membership of HSL works?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Just give the HSL membership to your favourite. [emoji23]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

CropleyWasGod
18-03-2016, 07:55 PM
.

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

marinello59
18-03-2016, 08:00 PM
People giving their money to Hibs makes me happy. Decisions should be informed though. A lot of people maybe don't understand the differences so being straight on those differences helps.

It seemed perfectly clear to me and I don't see anything that wasn't straight. :confused:

CropleyWasGod
18-03-2016, 08:06 PM
It seemed perfectly clear to me and I don't see anything that wasn't straight. :confused:
The issue is, IMO, over the use of the word "ownership ". Members of HSL are that, and not owners.

However, the important point is that they have "control". That's what matters :)

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

marinello59
18-03-2016, 08:44 PM
The issue is, IMO, over the use of the word "ownership ". Members of HSL are that, and not owners.

However, the important point is that they have "control". That's what matters :)

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

Agreed, having the control is what matters.

Andy74
18-03-2016, 09:07 PM
Agreed, having the control is what matters.

Yep and the advantages of both schemes should be able to be discussed without the belittling of others. There seems to be a slight move to try and outdo the buy direct option. I don't think it's necessary. Both ways will suit whatever is important to individuals.

marinello59
18-03-2016, 09:09 PM
Yep and the advantages of both schemes should be able to be discussed without the belittling of others. There seems to be a slight move to try and outdo the buy direct option. I don't think it's necessary. Both ways will suit whatever is important to individuals.

I am belittling neither. I've done both.

Ozyhibby
18-03-2016, 10:04 PM
Yep and the advantages of both schemes should be able to be discussed without the belittling of others. There seems to be a slight move to try and outdo the buy direct option. I don't think it's necessary. Both ways will suit whatever is important to individuals.

If I think HSL is a better option I'm going to say so. That's not belittling anything, just me giving my opinion.
A strong HSL with a permanent board member would be good for our club in my humble opinion.
For twenty odd years there has been only one opinion that counted at Easter road, I think it would be good if there was another.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

marinello59
18-03-2016, 10:14 PM
If I think HSL is a better option I'm going to say so. That's not belittling anything, just me giving my opinion.
A strong HSL with a permanent board member would be good for our club in my humble opinion.
For twenty odd years there has been only one opinion that counted at Easter road, I think it would be good if there was another.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Aye. I don't know where the belittling is going on but I haven't seen it on here. Just a healthy difference of opinion.

Bishop Hibee
18-03-2016, 10:19 PM
The ideal for me is a billionaire Hibs fanatic. The idea of a true fan being the one who spends crazy money to bring success is the dream of the majority of fans of every club.

The Murderwell experiment will be interesting to follow.

Ozyhibby
18-03-2016, 10:23 PM
The ideal for me is a billionaire Hibs fanatic. The idea of a true fan being the one who spends crazy money to bring success is the dream of the majority of fans of every club.

The Murderwell experiment will be interesting to follow.

I honestly wouldn't like that and hate that it happens in football. Usually it ends in disaster when they get board anyway. I like that we are a club and not someone's plaything.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Bishop Hibee
18-03-2016, 10:51 PM
I honestly wouldn't like that and hate that it happens in football. Usually it ends in disaster when they get board anyway. I like that we are a club and not someone's plaything.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Not if it was a real fan, minuscule chance that that is. You'd be hard pushed to find a Man City fan whose unhappy at how things are there and that's with a morally dodgy bunch in charge.

Ozyhibby
18-03-2016, 11:34 PM
Not if it was a real fan, minuscule chance that that is. You'd be hard pushed to find a Man City fan whose unhappy at how things are there and that's with a morally dodgy bunch in charge.

You'd be hard pushed to find a Man City fan who knew who Man City were before the Arabs arrived.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Argylehibby
18-03-2016, 11:42 PM
How does HSL decide on how to vote? I know it's 1 vote per member rather than being based on how much you have invested but what is the mechanism for deciding how the shares held by HSL are voted?

I assume all HSL members get to say how they want HSL to vote? If so does HSL then vote all of their shares how the majority had requested or split their votes based on the instructions given by the members? I.e. If HSL holds 1000 shares and has 100 members. 50 members say vote for, 30 say vote against and 20 don't give any instructions how does the 1000 votes get cast?

Ozyhibby
19-03-2016, 12:11 AM
How does HSL decide on how to vote? I know it's 1 vote per member rather than being based on how much you have invested but what is the mechanism for deciding how the shares held by HSL are voted?

I assume all HSL members get to say how they want HSL to vote? If so does HSL then vote all of their shares how the majority had requested or split their votes based on the instructions given by the members? I.e. If HSL holds 1000 shares and has 100 members. 50 members say vote for, 30 say vote against and 20 don't give any instructions how does the 1000 votes get cast?

All votes go with the majority.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

lucky
19-03-2016, 07:05 AM
How does HSL decide on how to vote? I know it's 1 vote per member rather than being based on how much you have invested but what is the mechanism for deciding how the shares held by HSL are voted?

I assume all HSL members get to say how they want HSL to vote? If so does HSL then vote all of their shares how the majority had requested or split their votes based on the instructions given by the members? I.e. If HSL holds 1000 shares and has 100 members. 50 members say vote for, 30 say vote against and 20 don't give any instructions how does the 1000 votes get cast?

HSL would hold a emergency meeting if the club called a meeting to decide on a big issue. HSL will be fully democratic. 1 member 1 vote. Joining the collective gives us strength to have a major say in our club, if you choose to go down the individual route your voice will struggle to be heard.

Eyrie
19-03-2016, 09:26 AM
HSL would hold a emergency meeting if the club called a meeting to decide on a big issue. HSL will be fully democratic. 1 member 1 vote. Joining the collective gives us strength to have a major say in our club, if you choose to go down the individual route your voice will struggle to be heard.

The same applies to HSL - I'm one member out of 1400+, so my voice will struggle to be heard amongst the collective in the same way that my small shareholding will struggle to be heard amongst all the other shareholdings.

That won't stop me voting to help decide how the HSL shares will vote, or voting directly with my own shares. If the HSL majority agrees with me then I' happy, and if it doesn't then I can still express my different opinion.

Ozyhibby
19-03-2016, 09:47 AM
On the subject of your voice being heard, joining HSL does indeed make your voice stronger.
If you paid £220 to join HSL and it has 1400 members and 7.5% of the club then you are currently exercising a bit more power than if you had bought the same amount in shares. That's because of the one member one vote set up. There are HSL members chipping in over £100 a month who are helping boost the voice of those who are in for £10 a month. Add to that the fact that HSL works as one voice then it make far more sense to join HSL than buy individually.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Andy74
19-03-2016, 09:56 AM
On the subject of your voice being heard, joining HSL does indeed make your voice stronger.
If you paid £220 to join HSL and it has 1400 members and 7.5% of the club then you are currently exercising a bit more power than if you had bought the same amount in shares. That's because of the one member one vote set up. There are HSL members chipping in over £100 a month who are helping boost the voice of those who are in for £10 a month. Add to that the fact that HSL works as one voice then it make far more sense to join HSL than buy individually.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

On the other hand your vote if different to the majority means nothing in the voting actually recorded with Hibs.

Holding direct means that your vote, however small, is directly registered.

Anyway, as said above most AGM business is fairly dull and routine.

Eyrie
19-03-2016, 09:59 AM
On the subject of your voice being heard, joining HSL does indeed make your voice stronger.
If you paid £220 to join HSL and it has 1400 members and 7.5% of the club then you are currently exercising a bit more power than if you had bought the same amount in shares. That's because of the one member one vote set up. There are HSL members chipping in over £100 a month who are helping boost the voice of those who are in for £10 a month. Add to that the fact that HSL works as one voice then it make far more sense to join HSL than buy individually.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

But only if that voice agrees with your own opinion.

I'm in favour of HSL, having joined last year and would encourage others to do so - providing they understand that they will still only have a very small vote in determining the view of the large HSL holding. It would be a different matter if the HSL holding voted proportionately, which was made clear from the start won't happen. It's winner takes all.

Argylehibby
19-03-2016, 10:11 PM
HSL would hold a emergency meeting if the club called a meeting to decide on a big issue. HSL will be fully democratic. 1 member 1 vote. Joining the collective gives us strength to have a major say in our club, if you choose to go down the individual route your voice will struggle to be heard.

You may struggle but it would be heard. If however you are in the minority on HSL then you are mute.

If HSL were to reach a position where they owned say 41% of the shares you could have a situation where as much as 20% of the people investing in the club would have their views ignored. Worse than being ignored is that their "shares" are being voted in complete opposite way to how they view the item.

Let's take that a bit further. There is a vote to move away from ER and 49.9 % of HSL members vote to stay. They lose so all HSL shares get voted to move. 10% of other shareholders vote to move so Hibs leave ER despite only 31% voting to leave. Is that democratic?

so talk of not being heard, small shareholders having no power etc is a little misleading. I have nothing against HSL, far from it intact. Anything that brings much needed cash into the club is obviously to be encouraged and applauded but if you have the ability to buy shares outright and want to have a say the running of the club in my opinion the only way to do that is to buy direct.

Ozyhibby
20-03-2016, 12:52 AM
You may struggle but it would be heard. If however you are in the minority on HSL then you are mute.

If HSL were to reach a position where they owned say 41% of the shares you could have a situation where as much as 20% of the people investing in the club would have their views ignored. Worse than being ignored is that their "shares" are being voted in complete opposite way to how they view the item.

Let's take that a bit further. There is a vote to move away from ER and 49.9 % of HSL members vote to stay. They lose so all HSL shares get voted to move. 10% of other shareholders vote to move so Hibs leave ER despite only 31% voting to leave. Is that democratic?

so talk of not being heard, small shareholders having no power etc is a little misleading. I have nothing against HSL, far from it intact. Anything that brings much needed cash into the club is obviously to be encouraged and applauded but if you have the ability to buy shares outright and want to have a say the running of the club in my opinion the only way to do that is to buy direct.

You would need 75% of the vote to leave Easter Road.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

CropleyWasGod
20-03-2016, 07:07 AM
You would need 75% of the vote to leave Easter Road.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Is that in the Mem and Arts?

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

Argylehibby
20-03-2016, 09:31 AM
You would need 75% of the vote to leave Easter Road.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You're avoiding the main point being made Ozzy, are you in politics? HSL members who are not in the majority don't just have their opinion ignored but they have their votes cast against their opinion to strengthen the position of the other view. It's like having a player sent off and the opposition being allowed to bring on someone else making it 12 against 10.

I will repeat I'm all for HSL, I think its a great way to get fans involved and put money in but stop selling it as something it is clearly not. It is only a way to get your voice heard if your singing the same song as the majority of others.

Leithenhibby
20-03-2016, 02:46 PM
What do the shareholders actually vote on though? Adopting the accounts is all I can think of. What else has been voted on in the last 25 years?

The board run the club, and the composition of the board is decided by STF and Frank, Amit and and an HSL rep would only be there on his say so?

Also, the two fans reps are non executive - I presume an HSL rep would be too.

I don't have any issue with all of the above, but I worry that fans have unrealistic expectations of what the outcomes will be; I don't see the running of the club is going to change much - the second phase post 51% could be very interesting.






Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


No, once HSL, reach 20% they will get a Director on the board. A meaningful voice that will actually have some teeth. :wink:

http://www.hiberniansupporters.co.uk/index.html

CropleyWasGod
20-03-2016, 02:50 PM
No, once HSL, reach 20% they will get a Director on the board. A meaningful voice that will actually have some teeth. :wink:

http://www.hiberniansupporters.co.uk/index.html
Are you saying that the director will be executive?

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

Leithenhibby
20-03-2016, 03:48 PM
Are you saying that the director will be executive?

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

No, but the HSL appointment will be permanent. Where as Frank & Amit, will be up for re-election come Feb next year should the club continue to have fan representatives.

http://www.hiberniansupporters.co.uk/donate.html

OfficialHSL
20-03-2016, 04:06 PM
You may struggle but it would be heard. If however you are in the minority on HSL then you are mute.

If HSL were to reach a position where they owned say 41% of the shares you could have a situation where as much as 20% of the people investing in the club would have their views ignored. Worse than being ignored is that their "shares" are being voted in complete opposite way to how they view the item.

Let's take that a bit further. There is a vote to move away from ER and 49.9 % of HSL members vote to stay. They lose so all HSL shares get voted to move. 10% of other shareholders vote to move so Hibs leave ER despite only 31% voting to leave. Is that democratic?

so talk of not being heard, small shareholders having no power etc is a little misleading. I have nothing against HSL, far from it intact. Anything that brings much needed cash into the club is obviously to be encouraged and applauded but if you have the ability to buy shares outright and want to have a say the running of the club in my opinion the only way to do that is to buy direct.

Argylehibby

I hope you don't mind us taking the opportunity to clarify a point here. There are various numbers quoted in the various scenarios but we hope that our Members who may read this thread are assured that HSL is completely democratic. If 2000 Members are asked to vote on an issue and the outcome is 50.1 (1002) in favour and 49.9 (998) against then the motion will be carried. While we appreciate that the 49.9 may be disappointed we trust that they would accept that democracy had prevailed. We should add that it is a highly unrealistic scenario but by using the extreme scenario we are still able to illustrate that we are democratic.

HSL

Argylehibby
20-03-2016, 04:53 PM
Argylehibby

I hope you don't mind us taking the opportunity to clarify a point here. There are various numbers quoted in the various scenarios but we hope that our Members who may read this thread are assured that HSL is completely democratic. If 2000 Members are asked to vote on an issue and the outcome is 50.1 (1002) in favour and 49.9 (998) against then the motion will be carried. While we appreciate that the 49.9 may be disappointed we trust that they would accept that democracy had prevailed. We should add that it is a highly unrealistic scenario but by using the extreme scenario we are still able to illustrate that we are democratic.

HSL

I don't mind at all,

My issue is in the main with the argument being put forward that HSL is better option and the various posts saying that HSL provides a stronger voice.

Whether it is a better option or not is absolutely down to the individual and everyone can choose which is best for them. We all have a right to an opinion and the right to express it on here and while those who have said it's better will have their reasons I personally feel it is not IF you want to spend a set amount and you want to have a direct say in the running of the club. What I absolutely disagree with however is the claim that it provides a stronger voice. Pure and simply it doesn't unless you agree with the majority. I have bought shares direct and if I wanted to vote against something put forward at the AGM or a GM then I get a direct vote. If it goes to a poll then every one of my shares counts against the resolution, my voice is heard and if I am in the minority I lose. That's democracy :wink:. If I paid the same into HSL and I am in the minority in voting against, not only do I not get my vote counted against but all of my "shares" get voted in favour. I agree that's the rules that HSL members have signed up to and it is democratic in the running of HSL and on gathering how HSL should vote their shares BUT I say again if you do not hold the view of the majority then it is not a method for your voice to be heard.

I thought long and hard about getting involved in this thread as the last thing I want to do is put people off joining HSL. I do however feel strongly that some of the comments in favour of HSL over buying direct are misleading and it was only right to put the other side of the debate forward. IF HSL is the best option for you then please sign up today. I genuinely don't see this as HSL v Direct, they are not or certainly should not be in competition. It is and should always be about getting as much investment in the club as possible.

kj79
20-03-2016, 05:22 PM
As someone with little to no clue on how it all worked I appreciate the time ArgyleHibby put in explaining there. I'm going direct purchase option to ensure my voice will always be heard but HSL very worthy also :flag:

lucky
20-03-2016, 10:21 PM
A small shareholding does not have the ability to influence the board but hundreds or hopefully thousands joining HSL certainly does. HSL has the chance to control the destination of our club.

Eyrie
20-03-2016, 11:23 PM
A small shareholding does not have the ability to influence the board but hundreds or hopefully thousands joining HSL certainly does. HSL has the chance to control the destination of our club.

The point that has been made repeatedly is that a single member has no more ability to influence HSL than a small shareholder does the Club.

Both are good ways to donate money to the Club, but let's not pretend that either gets the donor anything other than a very small vote.

CropleyWasGod
21-03-2016, 09:27 AM
You would need 75% of the vote to leave Easter Road.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Been through the Mem and Arts, and I don't think this is the case.

As far as I can see, it wouldn't be a shareholder decision, as it's not specifically referred to in the M&A. In that light, it could be a Board decision.

However, it would be daft of the Board not to call a Special General Meeting on such a scenario. Again, looking at the M&A, it looks as if 50.1% would be sufficient. The Board (again, the Board), MAY decide that such a decision be decided on by a Special Resolution (which is where the 75% majority comes in), but they don't have to.

Happy to be proved wrong, though.... there are 6 or 7 versions of the M&A online, and they're tough reading. :cb

Andy74
21-03-2016, 09:39 AM
Been through the Mem and Arts, and I don't think this is the case.

As far as I can see, it wouldn't be a shareholder decision, as it's not specifically referred to in the M&A. In that light, it could be a Board decision.

However, it would be daft of the Board not to call a Special General Meeting on such a scenario. Again, looking at the M&A, it looks as if 50.1% would be sufficient. The Board (again, the Board), MAY decide that such a decision be decided on by a Special Resolution (which is where the 75% majority comes in), but they don't have to.

Happy to be proved wrong, though.... there are 6 or 7 versions of the M&A online, and they're tough reading. :cb

I think private compnaies require removal to happen at a General Meeting as oposed to any written resoution. I believe an ordinary reosolution would be fine but would require special notice.

Turkish Green
21-03-2016, 10:58 AM
I thought long and hard about getting involved in this thread as the last thing I want to do is put people off joining HSL. I do however feel strongly that some of the comments in favour of HSL over buying direct are misleading and it was only right to put the other side of the debate forward. IF HSL is the best option for you then please sign up today. I genuinely don't see this as HSL v Direct, they are not or certainly should not be in competition. It is and should always be about getting as much investment in the club as possible.

I am of the same mind. HSL is acting like an investment trust in that you invest money in them rather than buying shares in a company directly. If an Investment Trust can demonstrate a good history of share dealing in diverse commodities then it is likely you will see a profit for your investment.

However, we are talking about investing in a single commodity: Hibernian FC. As I have dabbled in the stockmarket I will continue to buy shares directly, but for those less sure who want to help their club then HSL is an option to consider. As Argylehibby advises, the important thing is for supporters to invest in the club either by HSL or by buying shares directly. Help to make Hibernian your club in perpetuity.

big-mo
21-03-2016, 01:55 PM
No, once HSL, reach 20% they will get a Director on the board. A meaningful voice that will actually have some teeth. :wink:

http://www.hiberniansupporters.co.uk/index.html

Can you please tell me where you get this strange idea that all members on the board have differing influence on any decisions made? And if that was true, which I very much doubt, what makes you think that any HSL representive would have any more infulance that anyone else.

Ozyhibby
21-03-2016, 02:17 PM
Can you please tell me where you get this strange idea that all members on the board have differing influence on any decisions made? And if that was true, which I very much doubt, what makes you think that any HSL representive would have any more infulance that anyone else.

Do you think Frank or Amit have the same influence as Rod Petrie?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

WhileTheChief..
21-03-2016, 03:10 PM
If you want to go to the AGM to shout 'Petrie Oot' you need to buy shares directly and not via HSL ;)

Andy74
21-03-2016, 03:29 PM
Do you think Frank or Amit have the same influence as Rod Petrie?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That's a slightly different question though isn't it? What some have been suggesting is that the HSL rep would have more power than those directors who are fan reps or the other non exec positions.

The position in law is that all directors have the same say. Board decisions are collegiate and should be one view reached by discussion. In practice on boards i've been involved in they rarely take a vote.

When we talk about a chairman, such as Rod, and the word influence, then yes, I dare say the chairman generally has some added influence, though this largely comes from the character and experince provided by the chair. At the end of the day he has the same 'vote' as the other members. I haven't read the articles to know if he has a casting vote.

CropleyWasGod
21-03-2016, 03:37 PM
That's a slightly different question though isn't it? What some have been suggesting is that the HSL rep would have more power than those directors who are fan reps or the other non exec positions.

The position in law is that all directors have the same say. Board decisions are collegiate and should be one view reached by discussion. In practice on boards i've been involved in they rarely take a vote.

When we talk about a chairman, such as Rod, and the word influence, then yes, I dare say the chairman generally has some added influence, though this largely comes from the character and experince provided by the chair. At the end of the day he has the same 'vote' as the other members. I haven't read the articles to know if he has a casting vote.

From my reading of them, he doesn't. It's a simple "one member-one vote".

You're right about the vote, as well. The Articles state that a vote can be taken, if one member demands it. However, like you, I've rarely seen that happen.

hibee_nation
21-03-2016, 03:56 PM
From my reading of them, he doesn't. It's a simple "one member-one vote".

You're right about the vote, as well. The Articles state that a vote can be taken, if one member demands it. However, like you, I've rarely seen that happen.

Well if we get to 20% and get an HSL rep on the board he will be able to ask for a vote and make it known how people voted.

Baldy Foghorn
21-03-2016, 04:04 PM
Do you think Frank or Amit have the same influence as Rod Petrie?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Would HSL rep have same influence then?

big-mo
21-03-2016, 04:05 PM
Well if we get to 20% and get an HSL rep on the board he will be able to ask for a vote and make it known how people voted.

All directors, exec and non-exec, have one vote, so any such proposal would have to be agreed by the majority of the board members. Having said that, i am sure that there are a lot of things discussed at board meeting that would be comercially sensative and should and would not be discussed out with the boardroom.

CropleyWasGod
21-03-2016, 04:05 PM
Well if we get to 20% and get an HSL rep on the board he will be able to ask for a vote and make it known how people voted.

Not sure that's allowed.

http://www.brodies.com/blog/corporate/company-records-can-shareholder-see/

The starting point is the company’s articles of association. Normally, these do not give any special rights to shareholders to see company information. In fact, it’s usually the opposite. For example, the government’s model articles of association for private companies say:

“Except as provided by law or authorised by the directors or an ordinary resolution of the company, no person is entitled to inspect any of the company’s accounting or other records or documents merely by virtue of being a shareholder.”

Not sure our own M&A say anything different. And, as has been said, with good reason.

hibee_nation
21-03-2016, 04:09 PM
TBH, I'm not sure if Board meetings are confidential.

Shareholders can ask to see minutes of Board meetings, IIRC. However, it's not something I've ever seen done, other than in the voluntary sector.

There will be lots of things that will be confidential, gonna be hard not to spill the beans on the QT for whoever gets the gig.

CropleyWasGod
21-03-2016, 04:11 PM
There will be lots of things that will be confidential, gonna be hard not to spill the beans on the QT for whoever gets the gig.

I edited my original post, after taking legal advice :greengrin

I would suggest that, if anyone did "spill the beans", they'd be liable for a red card..... :cb

Baldy Foghorn
21-03-2016, 04:12 PM
There will be lots of things that will be confidential, gonna be hard not to spill the beans on the QT for whoever gets the gig.

Director's have to sign documents re confidentiality and anyone spilling the beans on the QT would be breaking the rules..........

Ozyhibby
21-03-2016, 04:13 PM
Would HSL rep have same influence then?

I would imagine the HSL board member would be somewhere in between.
The fans rep board members can be removed if Rod and STF wish it but the HSL board member could not. That may encourage them to work more closely with the HSL board member.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Baldy Foghorn
21-03-2016, 04:15 PM
I would imagine the HSL board member would be somewhere in between.
The fans rep board members can be removed if Rod and STF wish it but the HSL board member could not. That may encourage them to work more closely with the HSL board member.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Cool, suppose we won't know how it will work, until 20% is achieved

CropleyWasGod
21-03-2016, 04:16 PM
I would imagine the HSL board member would be somewhere in between.
The fans rep board members can be removed if Rod and STF wish it but the HSL board member could not. That may encourage them to work more closely with the HSL board member.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That's not the case, though.

I've been reading a lot of the M&A's today. The only situation where an individual has the power to remove a director is where that person owns more than half of the company, and is a Board member.

That doesn't apply in our case.

Andy74
21-03-2016, 04:17 PM
I would imagine the HSL board member would be somewhere in between.
The fans rep board members can be removed if Rod and STF wish it but the HSL board member could not. That may encourage them to work more closely with the HSL board member.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Sorry, but where are you getting this stuff from?

It is one thing to promote HSL but another just to be providing misleading information.

Ozyhibby
21-03-2016, 04:21 PM
That's not the case, though.

I've been reading a lot of the M&A's today. The only situation where an individual has the power to remove a director is where that person owns more than half of the company, and is a Board member.

That doesn't apply in our case. The removal of a director would require a Board decision.

You said yourself earlier that the reality of a situation can be different from how it is supposed to, did you not?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ozyhibby
21-03-2016, 04:24 PM
Sorry, but where are you getting this stuff from?

It is one thing to promote HSL but another just to be providing misleading information.

If I'm being misleading then it is entirely unintentional and I'm happy to be corrected by CWG as he is far more knowledgable about these things than I.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

CropleyWasGod
21-03-2016, 04:24 PM
You said yourself earlier that the reality of a situation can be different from how it is supposed to, did you not?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If you mean earlier today, I don't think so.

If you mean earlier than that, no chance I'll remember :greengrin

lucky
21-03-2016, 04:26 PM
The point that has been made repeatedly is that a single member has no more ability to influence HSL than a small shareholder does the Club.

Both are good ways to donate money to the Club, but let's not pretend that either gets the donor anything other than a very small vote.

Disagree, a shareholder holding £400 has little influence as its the amount of shares that counts. Under HSL it's 1 member 1 vote. So all 1800 have the same amount of power. But I do agree both put money into the club. But if Hibs fans are going to have a say in the running of our club then the collective of HSL is a better way forward

Baldy Foghorn
21-03-2016, 04:28 PM
Disagree, a shareholder holding £400 has little influence as its the amount of shares that counts. Under HSL it's 1 member 1 vote. So all 1800 have the same amount of power. But I do agree both put money into the club. But if Hibs fans are going to have a say in the running of our club then the collective of HSL is a better way forward

A shareholder who spent £400 has 1 vote too....?

Ozyhibby
21-03-2016, 04:29 PM
If you want to go to the AGM to shout 'Petrie Oot' you need to buy shares directly and not via HSL ;)

HSL can send reps to the AGM and shout it for you though.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ozyhibby
21-03-2016, 04:31 PM
If you mean earlier today, I don't think so.

If you mean earlier than that, no chance I'll remember :greengrin

I did mean earlier today but now I'm not so sure. I can't find what I thought you said. I may have to lie down. [emoji23]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

WhileTheChief..
21-03-2016, 04:33 PM
Does it matter if there is an HSL member on the board?

All this forensic analysis of voting rights / who can do what etc. just seems pointless.

I want to own a tiny wee bit of my club - I want absolutely nothing to do with running it.

We need strong leadership, something that LD appears to be delivering. Having 2 fans reps on the board is two too many already, we don't need a 3rd.

OfficialHSL
21-03-2016, 04:34 PM
I don't mind at all,

My issue is in the main with the argument being put forward that HSL is better option and the various posts saying that HSL provides a stronger voice.

Whether it is a better option or not is absolutely down to the individual and everyone can choose which is best for them. We all have a right to an opinion and the right to express it on here and while those who have said it's better will have their reasons I personally feel it is not IF you want to spend a set amount and you want to have a direct say in the running of the club. What I absolutely disagree with however is the claim that it provides a stronger voice. Pure and simply it doesn't unless you agree with the majority. I have bought shares direct and if I wanted to vote against something put forward at the AGM or a GM then I get a direct vote. If it goes to a poll then every one of my shares counts against the resolution, my voice is heard and if I am in the minority I lose. That's democracy :wink:. If I paid the same into HSL and I am in the minority in voting against, not only do I not get my vote counted against but all of my "shares" get voted in favour. I agree that's the rules that HSL members have signed up to and it is democratic in the running of HSL and on gathering how HSL should vote their shares BUT I say again if you do not hold the view of the majority then it is not a method for your voice to be heard.

I thought long and hard about getting involved in this thread as the last thing I want to do is put people off joining HSL. I do however feel strongly that some of the comments in favour of HSL over buying direct are misleading and it was only right to put the other side of the debate forward. IF HSL is the best option for you then please sign up today. I genuinely don't see this as HSL v Direct, they are not or certainly should not be in competition. It is and should always be about getting as much investment in the club as possible.

You are absolutely right to say that it is down to the individual supporter. What is important to one supporter may not be so important to another so every case is different. For example, for one supporter it may be that the one and only thing that is of interest is attending the Club's AGM. While HSL have been allocated some "observer" positions we could not absolutely guarantee a Member's attendance at the Club's AGM. In that case, for that supporter the "right" decision is to buy shares directly because that is appropriate for them. In another post we have tried to highlight what we have anticipated as key factors for supporters to help them make an informed choice. This debate is healthy because it teases out information that allows supporters to make an informed choice.
Regarding having a "voice" we suspect that there are two issues to consider. At the individual level this probably means a vote. In the HSL environment it is nice and simple. One member, one vote. An individuals' vote can only be out-voted by two or more fellow supporters. As we have said earlier this is simple democracy.The vote or votes in the minority are not wasted, or mute or unheard they are simply out-voted and therefore the motion is carried. In a shares environment the issue is similar. Those who have cast there vote and find themselves in the minority have still been heard but they have simply been out-voted. The slight difference in the shares environment is that the votes of several hundred supporters could be outvoted by one supporter. Now none of this will matter if you are a supporter who has no interest at all in voting on any issue. The second issue in terms of having a voice probably relates to having an influence on Club issues. HSL have a legally binding agreement that provides for Boardroom representation once a certain sum has been achieved. Again, this may be of no interest to some supporters but for some it may be a compelling point. This is why we would encourage each supporter to think about what is important to them and once they establish that, the decision is much more straight forward. In both cases the money goes to the Club and not existing shareholders.

HSL

CropleyWasGod
21-03-2016, 04:41 PM
Does it matter if there is an HSL member on the board?

All this forensic analysis of voting rights / who can do what etc. just seems pointless.

I want to own a tiny wee bit of my club - I want absolutely nothing to do with running it.

We need strong leadership, something that LD appears to be delivering. Having 2 fans reps on the board is two too many already, we don't need a 3rd.

There are many (I would suggest the majority) who agree with your point about running the club. I certainly don't want to be doing that, either.

If you feel so strongly about the number of fans on the Board, though, as a shareholder(or HSL member) you can voice your concerns and let the rest of the ownership discuss it.

OfficialHSL
21-03-2016, 04:54 PM
There are many (I would suggest the majority) who agree with your point about running the club. I certainly don't want to be doing that, either.

If you feel so strongly about the number of fans on the Board, though, as a shareholder(or HSL member) you can voice your concerns and let the rest of the ownership discuss it.

From a previous post:

As many supporters may be aware the Club launched a new share issue on 25th February 2016. We are often asked what is the best way to invest in Hibs – buy shares directly or through HSL ?

Well the first and most obvious thing to say is not to consider any contribution as an “investment” in the normal sense of the word. This is essentially a donation to provide additional financial support to your Club. Having said this, we make no apology for pointing any supporter with a spare £225 firmly in the direction of HSL, and here is why :



Proof of Ownership

In both cases, supporters will be given a Certificate with their own name on it. A Share Certificate and a Membership Certificate are legal equivalents. When joining HSL with £225 a member will own a part of their Club in the same sense as a fellow supporter acquiring £225 worth of shares. An HSL Member is not in any sense an inferior owner. They have slightly different ownership rights but they are both owners. And in both cases supporters can pass on their part ownership of the Club to their family. HSL Members proudly display their Ownership Certificate on their walls at home or office or work place.



Voting Rights/Democracy

For many supporters, one of the reasons for becoming financially involved with their Club is to have some sort of say or influence in how their Club is run. A fundamental principle of HSL is our belief that every single supporter should have an equal voice. No matter who you are, your opinion is just as important as any other supporter. This means that when we have matters that we are required to vote upon each member has one vote. One member who has contributed £1000 cannot overrule the votes of four other members who have each contributed £225.
This was the very principles on which our great Club was established. More able members of the Community were able to assist those who were less able. Supporters buying shares however must be aware that one individual wealthy supporter who has many more shares can overrule the will of hundreds of other supporters, especially those who have bought the minimum of £200.



Supporter Representation

Apart from those occasions that require formal voting, the ongoing running of the Club falls to the Board of Directors. HSL has an exclusive formal agreement with the Club that entitles HSL to appoint a Director to the Board on a permanent basis once our shareholding and donations have reached a certain level. This means that there is a formal process for introducing the views of many ordinary Hibs fans. Supporters buying individual shares do not have this legal entitlement.






Accessible to All

The reality of a Football Club operating in the environment that we do is that we all have a responsibility for our Club. We cannot for ever look towards an individual to financially support our Club. HSL gives a realistic prospect to all fans to share this responsibility by offering the facility to pay a small amount each month. Not many supporters actually have a spare £200 which means that direct Shareholding is limited to the more affluent supporters. HSL gives all supporters the chance to own part of their Club and as stated earlier, owning it on an equal basis with our fellow supporters.



Loss of Voting Rights

One of the principle benefits of HSL is the certainty that none of our voting rights will ever be wasted. Whatever ownership stake we end up with 10%, 25% or 35% our entire voting block will always be exercised. This means that if we owned 26% of our Club and a contentious issue arose, even if only 1800 Members out of a 2000 Membership voted, our 26% voting rights would still be exercised. For those supporters owning, in the same example, the remaining 25% of the Club it is very unlikely that every single shareholder will cast a vote ( many have died, or have been passed on to those who don’t have an interest).


These are all the reasons why it feels great to be a part of HSL and an owner of our Club.

CropleyWasGod
21-03-2016, 04:59 PM
From a previous post:

As many supporters may be aware the Club launched a new share issue on 25th February 2016. We are often asked what is the best way to invest in Hibs – buy shares directly or through HSL ?

Well the first and most obvious thing to say is not to consider any contribution as an “investment” in the normal sense of the word. This is essentially a donation to provide additional financial support to your Club. Having said this, we make no apology for pointing any supporter with a spare £225 firmly in the direction of HSL, and here is why :



Proof of Ownership

In both cases, supporters will be given a Certificate with their own name on it. A Share Certificate and a Membership Certificate are legal equivalents. When joining HSL with £225 a member will own a part of their Club in the same sense as a fellow supporter acquiring £225 worth of shares. An HSL Member is not in any sense an inferior owner. They have slightly different ownership rights but they are both owners. And in both cases supporters can pass on their part ownership of the Club to their family. HSL Members proudly display their Ownership Certificate on their walls at home or office or work place.



Voting Rights/Democracy

For many supporters, one of the reasons for becoming financially involved with their Club is to have some sort of say or influence in how their Club is run. A fundamental principle of HSL is our belief that every single supporter should have an equal voice. No matter who you are, your opinion is just as important as any other supporter. This means that when we have matters that we are required to vote upon each member has one vote. One member who has contributed £1000 cannot overrule the votes of four other members who have each contributed £225.
This was the very principles on which our great Club was established. More able members of the Community were able to assist those who were less able. Supporters buying shares however must be aware that one individual wealthy supporter who has many more shares can overrule the will of hundreds of other supporters, especially those who have bought the minimum of £200.



Supporter Representation

Apart from those occasions that require formal voting, the ongoing running of the Club falls to the Board of Directors. HSL has an exclusive formal agreement with the Club that entitles HSL to appoint a Director to the Board on a permanent basis once our shareholding and donations have reached a certain level. This means that there is a formal process for introducing the views of many ordinary Hibs fans. Supporters buying individual shares do not have this legal entitlement.






Accessible to All

The reality of a Football Club operating in the environment that we do is that we all have a responsibility for our Club. We cannot for ever look towards an individual to financially support our Club. HSL gives a realistic prospect to all fans to share this responsibility by offering the facility to pay a small amount each month. Not many supporters actually have a spare £200 which means that direct Shareholding is limited to the more affluent supporters. HSL gives all supporters the chance to own part of their Club and as stated earlier, owning it on an equal basis with our fellow supporters.



Loss of Voting Rights

One of the principle benefits of HSL is the certainty that none of our voting rights will ever be wasted. Whatever ownership stake we end up with 10%, 25% or 35% our entire voting block will always be exercised. This means that if we owned 26% of our Club and a contentious issue arose, even if only 1800 Members out of a 2000 Membership voted, our 26% voting rights would still be exercised. For those supporters owning, in the same example, the remaining 25% of the Club it is very unlikely that every single shareholder will cast a vote ( many have died, or have been passed on to those who don’t have an interest).


These are all the reasons why it feels great to be a part of HSL and an owner of our Club.

Not sure why you're quoting me. I was responding to another poster.

You already have my money. :greengrin

Andy74
21-03-2016, 06:11 PM
From a previous post:

As many supporters may be aware the Club launched a new share issue on 25th February 2016. We are often asked what is the best way to invest in Hibs – buy shares directly or through HSL ?

Well the first and most obvious thing to say is not to consider any contribution as an “investment” in the normal sense of the word. This is essentially a donation to provide additional financial support to your Club. Having said this, we make no apology for pointing any supporter with a spare £225 firmly in the direction of HSL, and here is why :



Proof of Ownership

In both cases, supporters will be given a Certificate with their own name on it. A Share Certificate and a Membership Certificate are legal equivalents. When joining HSL with £225 a member will own a part of their Club in the same sense as a fellow supporter acquiring £225 worth of shares. An HSL Member is not in any sense an inferior owner. They have slightly different ownership rights but they are both owners. And in both cases supporters can pass on their part ownership of the Club to their family. HSL Members proudly display their Ownership Certificate on their walls at home or office or work place.



Voting Rights/Democracy

For many supporters, one of the reasons for becoming financially involved with their Club is to have some sort of say or influence in how their Club is run. A fundamental principle of HSL is our belief that every single supporter should have an equal voice. No matter who you are, your opinion is just as important as any other supporter. This means that when we have matters that we are required to vote upon each member has one vote. One member who has contributed £1000 cannot overrule the votes of four other members who have each contributed £225.
This was the very principles on which our great Club was established. More able members of the Community were able to assist those who were less able. Supporters buying shares however must be aware that one individual wealthy supporter who has many more shares can overrule the will of hundreds of other supporters, especially those who have bought the minimum of £200.



Supporter Representation

Apart from those occasions that require formal voting, the ongoing running of the Club falls to the Board of Directors. HSL has an exclusive formal agreement with the Club that entitles HSL to appoint a Director to the Board on a permanent basis once our shareholding and donations have reached a certain level. This means that there is a formal process for introducing the views of many ordinary Hibs fans. Supporters buying individual shares do not have this legal entitlement.






Accessible to All

The reality of a Football Club operating in the environment that we do is that we all have a responsibility for our Club. We cannot for ever look towards an individual to financially support our Club. HSL gives a realistic prospect to all fans to share this responsibility by offering the facility to pay a small amount each month. Not many supporters actually have a spare £200 which means that direct Shareholding is limited to the more affluent supporters. HSL gives all supporters the chance to own part of their Club and as stated earlier, owning it on an equal basis with our fellow supporters.



Loss of Voting Rights

One of the principle benefits of HSL is the certainty that none of our voting rights will ever be wasted. Whatever ownership stake we end up with 10%, 25% or 35% our entire voting block will always be exercised. This means that if we owned 26% of our Club and a contentious issue arose, even if only 1800 Members out of a 2000 Membership voted, our 26% voting rights would still be exercised. For those supporters owning, in the same example, the remaining 25% of the Club it is very unlikely that every single shareholder will cast a vote ( many have died, or have been passed on to those who don’t have an interest).


These are all the reasons why it feels great to be a part of HSL and an owner of our Club.

I think some of this is again unhelpful.

HSL is a great avenue if you want to be part of a collective, and very importably, if you want your contribution to be ongoing. I think HSL should focus on the things that are unique to the scheme and which are really attractive.

The things you are saying about ownership and voting are quite misleading. I don't think there is a need for it - supporters should be encouraged to do what suits them best but each scheme is unique and that shouldn't be covered up in misinformation.

lucky
21-03-2016, 06:19 PM
A shareholder who spent £400 has 1 vote too....?

No a shareholders vote is based on the number of shares. HSL is 1 member 1 vote

Andy74
21-03-2016, 06:22 PM
No a shareholders vote is based on the number of shares. HSL is 1 member 1 vote

In HSL, not Hibs.

Eyrie
21-03-2016, 08:28 PM
Disagree, a shareholder holding £400 has little influence as its the amount of shares that counts. Under HSL it's 1 member 1 vote. So all 1800 have the same amount of power. But I do agree both put money into the club. But if Hibs fans are going to have a say in the running of our club then the collective of HSL is a better way forward

I'll disagree with your disagreement :greengrin

I'm one member out of 1400 at the moment (and hopefully one out of 1800 or more in the future) so my ability to influence a HSL vote is minimal. It's effectively on a par with the level of influence that my £400 of shares has on a Hibs vote. That won't stop me exercising my right to vote in both cases, even when I expect the democratic outcome to disagree with me.

Now, when is Petrie up for re-election? :cb

Jack
21-03-2016, 09:23 PM
For something that was quite simple a couple of days ago it's all of a sudden looking very complicated.

If someone wants to be part of the collective join HSL.

If someone wants to be an individual and/or independent shareholder buy shares.

For the average punter I can't see the influence being much different either way.

If you want to be in with the nitty gritty buy shares.

If you want to contribute to the club on an on-going basis join HSL.

All for one and one for all and all that.

Either way my/our/your club benefits.

I'm in both camps.

If you can afford it ... be like Jack ... do both.