Hsl

[Pagan Hibernia]

I think it's completely unfair the rubbishing this information has been given by some supporters.

Apart from stating the blindingly obvious fact that any increase in HSL's shareholding other than outright donations would require those shares to be bought from nominees or existing shareholders, it sets out exactly where HSL are thinking of going, going forward.

I think what it does do is highlight the danger I am going to allude to further of failing in its real purpose by trying to be all things to everyone and failing to be anything to anybody.

As a long-time advocate of HSL I have post-takeover made my feelings clear in what HSL should be doing going forward IMO

If HSL were to content themselves with raising funds to eventually drive their stake to the magical 25.1% and wield influence through their 15.4% present shareholding they would have my full backing and financial support.

I think the danger here is their attempting to garner a bigger hold of fans other donations to the club and I think that can only be to their detriment as they neither have the time, administrative capability, staff backing or skill set to do this.

IMO HSL needs to focus on their reason for existence and make it clear to all contributors that the only significant difference going forward is that their donations won't go to the team but will go to buy shareholdings from individuals/nominees to protect the clubs long term future.

Some contributors will accept this, others won't.

IMO anything other than this should be the preserve of the club through a scheme similar to Aberdeen's which gives something back to the fans.

HSL is not required for this and personally there is not a cats chance in hell of my contributing specifically for infrastructure projects which wee Ron can ram right up his arse.

I have seen enough crap Hibs teams hamstrung by infrastructure spending to last a lifetime and such projects predominantly benefit the majority owner by driving up the Net Book value of the business.

HSL need to do the job they were constructed to do, not the one they fancy inventing for themselves.

I get that some will argue that they were there to put funds into the team and that is what they propose to do but that came with the caveat that the clubs future was protected, raising funds without that quid pro quo is the clubs job.

couldnt agree more with this to be honest.

I joined HSL for the shares it was going to put in the safe hands of the Hibs supporting community.
And that would be the only reason I would continue to contribute. I am not interested in subsidising a millionaire owner. If he wants total control whilst shutting the door to HSL hitting their target of 25.1% then he can pay for it. It just seems ridiculous that we should pay to increase the value of Ron Gordon’s acquisition.

I have a feeling I’m very much in the minority there and full credit to anyone who wants to pump more money in for the transfer budget or whatever but it’s not for me.

If HSL give me the option to contribute to buying shares from other minority shareholders and nominee holdings then I’ll happily chip in for that.

[BT58]

I will continue paying, as long as its used for to help the player budget, not anything else
B

[malcolm]

couldnt agree more with this to be honest.

I joined HSL for the shares it was going to put in the safe hands of the Hibs supporting community.
And that would be the only reason I would continue to contribute. I am not interested in subsidising a millionaire owner. If he wants total control whilst shutting the door to HSL hitting their target of 25.1% then he can pay for it. It just seems ridiculous that we should pay to increase the value of Ron Gordon’s acquisition.

I have a feeling I’m very much in the minority there and full credit to anyone who wants to pump more money in for the transfer budget or whatever but it’s not for me.

If HSL give me the option to contribute to buying shares from other minority shareholders and nominee holdings then I’ll happily chip in for that.

Read this type of comment a few times and it makes no sense. The major shareholder’s obligation and financial commitment, is the same as any other shareholder, I.e limited to the capital they spent to buy the shares. I can see some issue if we were talking about ownership of shares that would deliver dividends or a business that aimed to make a profit. So what those comments are really referring to is subsiding the enjoyment the owners get from success on the park. Who would not want to share in that.:greengrin

Supporting Hibs for many if not most is an emotional connection tied up perhaps with feelings of community and family. For others, from some comments, it seems more of a commercial choice like which chocolate bar to choose! Personally none of the other clubs are at all to my taste and some downright unpleasantly flavoured. I can hope the joy of ownership will encourage fans and shareholders of any size to contribute to success.

[Bostonhibby]

Questions for HSL.

Do all other shares not held by the owner get us over the 25% threshold for certain?

If so, can you offer up a facility for existing shareholders to pledge in principle to convert all, or as many as is required, shares to you?

Can you legitimately extend the same invitation to nominees?

I'm really just looking to see if it's possible to actually get there as that might affect people's decision to actually go for it. Knowing what the nominees might do could be important.



Sent from my SM-A750FN using Tapatalk

[Eyrie]

I was wondering about this myself. Are we to have several vehicles for donations to be given to different streams of the business. Player budget, Infrastructure, and buying shares from the 17.4%.

If our objectives are still the same, surely we only have one vehicle and that's buying the shares from the 17.4% meaning zero cash goes to the club, apart from the donations button.


This from the statement.

Our principal objective remains the same. While we cannot buy any more shares from the Club there are still approximately 17.4 % shares in the hands of small shareholders and Nominee shareholders.

The objectives can be changed, following a vote of the members, and I'd vote to do so.

Right now my cash is helping fund a better team, and I can accept funding the right infrastructure, but if the only objective is to increase the HSL shareholding by buying out existing shareholders, then there are better causes for my spare cash.

[OfficialHSL]

Jim,

If I understand this what you are saying is that you will still collect the monthly subs but instead of those funds going to the club in exchange for new shares it will go to existing shareholders to buy their shares from them. Is that correct?

Argylehibby

No, this is not correct.

We have two issues to deal with, and with our Members patience and understanding they are relatively easy to deal with.

As you may know we were as surprised as anyone when the acquisition announcement was made. The result of this is that we are holding funds that we received just before the announcement and indeed after. While our Articles are clear enough to guide us your Directors feel that we do not wish to break the trust that we feel that we have earned over the last few years. By that we mean that it was clear to everyone making those donations that they believed that they were making those donations in the belief that we would be handing their money over to the Club and in return we would receive shares. For many of our Members, if not all, we would simply be breaking that trust. So, for hopefully a small temporary period only, we are retaining these funds while we are able to get an understanding from Members about how they wish us to proceed.

Going forward, once we have all developed a plan, that allows our Members and potential Members to know clearly know where their money is going, we can progress as normal. We have sufficient flexibility in our infrastructure to allow this. Thus the " Fan for all reasons"

We continue to receive share donations and to date have not received a single request from an existing shareholder to buy those shares from them.

Hibernian Shareholders

[OfficialHSL]

Where are the donations now going is the obvious question?

*this may be covered, I haven’t read earlier posts yet. Answer may be you don’t know yet!

Steve

Please see our previous reply.

Hibernian Supporters

[OfficialHSL]

Should have added, I'd rather monies go to the player budget than the infrastructure.

Baldy

Please come along to one of the planned meetings to see how that can happen.

Hibernian Supporters

[OfficialHSL]

Nothing really at this point. We know you’re going to be having meetings to decide the way forward. The statement didn’t really tell us much.
Let’s be honest there’s only a few things that people are waiting to hear, the main one being what’s our money is going to used for.

You decide.


Hibernian Supporters

[OfficialHSL]

This, plus what do HSL get in return for handing money to the club and who makes the decision in the club what the funds get spent on?

This is a little ambiguous.

By this do you mean "donators" in the true sense .i.e those who ticked the "donate only" button ?

[OfficialHSL]

I think it's completely unfair the rubbishing this information has been given by some supporters.

Apart from stating the blindingly obvious fact that any increase in HSL's shareholding other than outright donations would require those shares to be bought from nominees or existing shareholders, it sets out exactly where HSL are thinking of going, going forward.

I think what it does do is highlight the danger I am going to allude to further of failing in its real purpose by trying to be all things to everyone and failing to be anything to anybody.

As a long-time advocate of HSL I have post-takeover made my feelings clear in what HSL should be doing going forward IMO

If HSL were to content themselves with raising funds to eventually drive their stake to the magical 25.1% and wield influence through their 15.4% present shareholding they would have my full backing and financial support.

I think the danger here is their attempting to garner a bigger hold of fans other donations to the club and I think that can only be to their detriment as they neither have the time, administrative capability, staff backing or skill set to do this.

IMO HSL needs to focus on their reason for existence and make it clear to all contributors that the only significant difference going forward is that their donations won't go to the team but will go to buy shareholdings from individuals/nominees to protect the clubs long term future.

Some contributors will accept this, others won't.

IMO anything other than this should be the preserve of the club through a scheme similar to Aberdeen's which gives something back to the fans.

HSL is not required for this and personally there is not a cats chance in hell of my contributing specifically for infrastructure projects which wee Ron can ram right up his arse.

I have seen enough crap Hibs teams hamstrung by infrastructure spending to last a lifetime and such projects predominantly benefit the majority owner by driving up the Net Book value of the business.

HSL need to do the job they were constructed to do, not the one they fancy inventing for themselves.

I get that some will argue that they were there to put funds into the team and that is what they propose to do but that came with the caveat that the clubs future was protected, raising funds without that quid pro quo is the clubs job.

BSEJVT

Where do we start with is.

Can we first of all reiterate the point we have made so far. We do not believe any of our Members would thank us for immediately abandoning our principle objective as outlined in our Articles.

What we would say is that our Articles are broad enough to accommodate all of our Members wishes, we may just need a little time to agree things going forward and making things very clear to everyone so that they know exactly what will be happening to their hard earned cash.

Provided everyone takes the time to engage, inform themselves and express themselves we feel confident that everyone will be satisfied.

Ince acquisition, we now have more shares than we did before.

Hibernian Supporters

[OfficialHSL]

Fair play to those of you who want to keep donating but i can't get my head around working class folks donating their cash to a multi millionaire owner or to pay extra wages to highly paid footballers!

I know it's our club and we want to help but this is just ridiculous.

They should be saying a massive thank you but we no longer need your money, Ron's got it covered, cheers!!

While the Chief

Can't remember if we asked this before - are you a Member ?

Hibernian Supporters

[OfficialHSL]

I own a small amout of shares from the original Duff/Gray days 350/400. If i could keep a minamal amount of shares that would still entitle me to get to the AGM, i would be happy giftting X amount of shares to HSL.

offshorehibby

Thank you so much.

Could you email us at [email protected]

Same to any others so minded.

Hibernian Supporters

[OfficialHSL]

I can see why you would do that but personally, I wouldn't

As there are no further shares available for purchase to create even minimal "badge" shareholdings I would suggest either keeping them to pass on down through the generations, probably by dividing them up to grandchildren as I am or enabling fellow supporters to have their "badge"

By "badge" I mean sticking a share certificate on their wall as a "badge" of honour

BSEJVT

We know how much you are a supporter of us and we feel sure that once you attend our Consultation Meetings that everyone will feel better informed.


Hibernian Supporters

[OfficialHSL]

i have contributed to hsl sine the start. 225 initial and since then 48.75 a month. i am more than happy to consider ongoing support. but what worries me is how do the rank and file get to really understand the pkan going fwd? i am one of many and a member of hsa and travelling to every away game as well as home. but im not one of the hsa elite, just a punter. how do i know those invited to any meetings will speak for me? you cant possibly invite 2k plus people to 2 meetings? so how will my voice and that of others be heard and taken on board?

Rest assured we want to hear your voice. We think there will be plenty of opportunity at the Meetings and if not, after those Meetings we would be happy to have a conversation.

Hibernian Supporters

[OfficialHSL]

Me too. I want my small contribution to be going to getting better players and not for purchasing shares where the only beneficiary is the seller.

Hope we have answered this at a later/earlier post.

Hibernian Supporters

[OfficialHSL]

Looks like a fait accompli by Wee Ron

No chance of HSL buying anymore shares as none will be made available for sale so we are stuck on 15%

Any monies donated by HSL might be spent on players or may also be spent on infrastructure leaving Ron in total control as it is his train set

We have to simply trust that STF and RP left us in safe hands

I personally trust that they did but would rather given the above would rather that my small monthly contribution is spent on players

As others have said no one expects a return on this investment it is an emotional commitment as we love our club

Billy

This is not quite correct. Please read our earlier/later replies.

Hibernian Supporters

[OfficialHSL]

To be perfectly honest (perhaps it's been mentioned elsewhere already) but if/when HSL becomes officially purely a vehicle for enhancing the manager’s playing budget with no fannying about with shares, it'll be what I've wanted it to be from the get go and I'll pony up my £225 post haste.

Lyonhibs

It is and always has had that capability. If you want to simply give the Club £225 and not join Hibernian Supporters and become a Member it's easy. Go to our Donate page. When you progress to the next stage please ensure you click on the "donate" part rather than the "Membership" part. We will pass on your £225 donation to the Club.

Easy.

Hibernian Supporters

[OfficialHSL]

BSEJVT

If I could keep hold of enough shares to allow me to say, I still own a we chunk of Hibs I'd be more than happy to gift to HSL. This, if other fans were of a similar frame of mind would get HSL to their 25.1% desired holding.

To be honest while immediate family would like to call themselves Hibbys I know James that have put more money into Hibs than them.

Gifting family shares probably wouldn't raise an eyebrow with them and when I depart the terracing for good my share cert would end up at the bottom of a drawer never to be appreciated.

offshorehibby

In normal business most people acquire shares to make money and of course exercise a vote.


Hibernian Supporters

[OfficialHSL]

Hard to disagree with any of this. Clear and logical thinking.

I contribute to HSL do it can acquire the shareholding as thought this was a great offer. It was a bonus that the funds went to the playing budget.

Now that that is no longer possible, I dont think it's right that fans contribute to the club's budget without anything in return. I agree that the club running something like AberDNA is the way to go.

As for HSL, I think it should see what it can do to acquire existing shares and simply focus on being as powerful a voice as possible for Hibs supporters.

Are HSL still guaranteed a seat on the board if a certain percentage is obtained?

Sent from my SM-N960F using Tapatalk

In answer to your last point - yes.

Do remember that with the Aberdna scheme only about half the supporter donations goes to the Team. First 20p in the pound goes to the taxman ( VAT ).


Hibernian Supporters

[ahibby]

Billy

This is not quite correct. Please read our earlier/later replies.

Hibernian Supporters
Although dissimilar i remember days in the eighties when i and others made small donations to the club. I dont see any reason why supporters who can afford to donate dont continue as long as donations improve our standard.

[OfficialHSL]

I was wondering about this myself. Are we to have several vehicles for donations to be given to different streams of the business. Player budget, Infrastructure, and buying shares from the 17.4%.

If our objectives are still the same, surely we only have one vehicle and that's buying the shares from the 17.4% meaning zero cash goes to the club, apart from the donations button.


This from the statement.

Our principal objective remains the same. While we cannot buy any more shares from the Club there are still approximately 17.4 % shares in the hands of small shareholders and Nominee shareholders.

Do you really think we need several vehicles ?

Maybe just the one bus with different stop off points ?

Hibernian Supporters

[Baldy Foghorn]

Baldy

Please come along to one of the planned meetings to see how that can happen.

Hibernian Supporters

I plan to attend one. I have a question but probably not for public consumption, so I'll leave it until meeting up:aok:

[OfficialHSL]

I plan to attend one. I have a question but probably not for public consumption, so I'll leave it until meeting up:aok:

Look forward to seeing you at the Meeting.

On that note, Love Island awaits.

Hibernian Supporters

[Baldy Foghorn]

Look forward to seeing you at the Meeting.

On that note, Love Island awaits.

Hibernian Supporters

FFS:rolleyes:

[BSEJVT]

BSEJVT

Where do we start with is.

Can we first of all reiterate the point we have made so far. We do not believe any of our Members would thank us for immediately abandoning our principle objective as outlined in our Articles.

What we would say is that our Articles are broad enough to accommodate all of our Members wishes, we may just need a little time to agree things going forward and making things very clear to everyone so that they know exactly what will be happening to their hard earned cash.

Provided everyone takes the time to engage, inform themselves and express themselves we feel confident that everyone will be satisfied.

Ince acquisition, we now have more shares than we did before.

Hibernian Supporters

Official HSL

The last thing in the world I am suggesting you do it abandon your principal objective which afaik is to use the monies raised to acquire shares in Hibs

I am suggesting you stick steadfastly to it, even if that means stockpiling cash for a future opportunity

I got into HSL to safeguard the clubs future for our successors and the best way I could see of doing that was for HSL to acquire enough shares to provide a blocking vote.

If that had meant my contributions buying shares from whomsoever rather than the monies happily going into the team I would still have signed up

That is the situation we find ourselves in at present and if I cannot dissuade HSL from acting as a money funnel to pass donations not for this original purpose to the club then I want to ensure that the ability to contribute solely to have those contributions saved for future share purchasing opportunities from wherever remains open to me and any like-minded members

A Hibs team secure for our successors for eternity means everything to me whereas donating to the manager's fund does not.

My hope is that members will have these things fully explained to them and as part of the future consultations and will be given the chance to individually determine where their particular contributions are directed.

I appreciate and this thread has shown that others feel differently and whether through HSL or otherwise we should find a route that enables those willing and able to, to direct their contributions as they see fit.

[ronaldo7]

Do you really think we need several vehicles ?

Maybe just the one bus with different stop off points ?

Hibernian Supporters

So, you're going to take the money and deliver it to whichever stream we, as individuals want it delivered to...Player budget, Infrastructure, Tams new washing machine.

Thanks.

I'll be at a meeting to check. :aok:

[lord bunberry]

You decide.


Hibernian Supporters
My choice would be some kind of rewards scheme. I’ve had my fill of infrastructure projects at the expense of the team on the pitch. I’ll continue my payments for now, but it seems to me like the future of HS is going to be a fragmented mess of people deciding how they’d like they’re donations spent. Apologies if I’ve picked this up wrong.
Imo we need to start again with new approach that has one aim, and gives fans something back for the money they’re putting in. The original aim was something I completely bought into and it was disappointing that there was so much negativity around it, but that’s finished with now and personally I think HS would be better winding up and the club launching a new initiative.

[3pm]

FFS:rolleyes:

😂

[WhileTheChief..]

[QUOTE=BSEJVT;5850873] Appreciate the reply and whilst we disagree it’s good to talk instead of argue.

GGTTH'[/QUOTE

[BILLYHIBS]

Look forward to seeing you at the Meeting.

On that note, Love Island awaits.

Hibernian Supporters

:greengrin

Dearie me!

[Pagan Hibernia]

My choice would be some kind of rewards scheme. I’ve had my fill of infrastructure projects at the expense of the team on the pitch. I’ll continue my payments for now, but it seems to me like the future of HS is going to be a fragmented mess of people deciding how they’d like they’re donations spent. Apologies if I’ve picked this up wrong.
Imo we need to start again with new approach that has one aim, and gives fans something back for the money they’re putting in. The original aim was something I completely bought into and it was disappointing that there was so much negativity around it, but that’s finished with now and personally I think HS would be better winding up and the club launching a new initiative.

They can’t “wind up”, they own 15% of the club!

[oldbutdim]

Look forward to seeing you at the Meeting.

On that note, Love Island awaits.

Hibernian Supporters

I was quite supportive of HSL up until that.

I’m looking out my pitchfork now, and after the tar and feathering you’re getting a couple of points raised.

[WhileTheChief..]

While the Chief

Can't remember if we asked this before - are you a Member ?

Hibernian Supporters

I’m not, I’ve never hidden it and have been consistent in what I’ve said for ages, so much so that I bore people on here with it!

Fully accept that I hold the minority view and it’s really got nowt to do with me anyways now I suppose

I’ll take the earlier advice and give you guys peace from now on. Cheers.

[lord bunberry]

They can’t “wind up”, they own 15% of the club!
True.

[FilipinoHibs]

Although dissimilar i remember days in the eighties when i and others made small donations to the club. I dont see any reason why supporters who can afford to donate dont continue as long as donations improve our standard.

It's what FOH does. They donated £3 million for their new shed and won't get a single share or any influence in return.

[OfficialHSL]

Official HSL

The last thing in the world I am suggesting you do it abandon your principal objective which afaik is to use the monies raised to acquire shares in Hibs

I am suggesting you stick steadfastly to it, even if that means stockpiling cash for a future opportunity

I got into HSL to safeguard the clubs future for our successors and the best way I could see of doing that was for HSL to acquire enough shares to provide a blocking vote.

If that had meant my contributions buying shares from whomsoever rather than the monies happily going into the team I would still have signed up

That is the situation we find ourselves in at present and if I cannot dissuade HSL from acting as a money funnel to pass donations not for this original purpose to the club then I want to ensure that the ability to contribute solely to have those contributions saved for future share purchasing opportunities from wherever remains open to me and any like-minded members

A Hibs team secure for our successors for eternity means everything to me whereas donating to the manager's fund does not.

My hope is that members will have these things fully explained to them and as part of the future consultations and will be given the chance to individually determine where their particular contributions are directed.

I appreciate and this thread has shown that others feel differently and whether through HSL or otherwise we should find a route that enables those willing and able to, to direct their contributions as they see fit.

BSEJVT

We know you weren't, our point was really addressed to the wider audience.



Hibernian Supporters

[OfficialHSL]

So, you're going to take the money and deliver it to whichever stream we, as individuals want it delivered to...Player budget, Infrastructure, Tams new washing machine.

Thanks.

I'll be at a meeting to check. :aok:

ronaldo

If Tam's new washing machine is where you want your funds to go, so be it. Perhaps thats the clean start some are suggesting.

Seriously, please do come along to one of the meetings if you can.

Hibernian Supporters

[OfficialHSL]

I’m not, I’ve never hidden it and have been consistent in what I’ve said for ages, so much so that I bore people on here with it!

Fully accept that I hold the minority view and it’s really got nowt to do with me anyways now I suppose

I’ll take the earlier advice and give you guys peace from now on. Cheers.

WhileThe Chief

Thank you for your honesty and it's appreciated. It proves the point we continue to make. If someone can't or does not want to contribute additional funds to their Club, that is there absolute prerogative. It is their hard earned money and no one has the right to tell them directly, or indeed indirectly, what they should do with it. We only ask for the same in return.

At the end of the day, when we are all sitting at Easter Road together we want the same thing.

Hibernian Supporters

[southsider]

HSL, is there any way of finding out what percentage of shares are held by, like me, ordinary supporters ? I am sure that between us and HSL we must hold over the 25.1 %. Keep the fundraising going and get Ron to sell us, say, the centre circle to stop any hostile developement.

[OfficialHSL]

HSL, is there any way of finding out what percentage of shares are held by, like me, ordinary supporters ? I am sure that between us and HSL we must hold over the 25.1 %. Keep the fundraising going and get Ron to sell us, say, the centre circle to stop any hostile developement.

Southsider

Yes there is, it's a matter of public record at Companies House. It would seem to be :

Bydand Sports LLC - 67 %

Hibernian Supporters Ltd - 15.4 %

Nominee Shareholders - 10 %

Small shareholders - 7.6 %



Hibernian Supporters

[chippy]

It's what FOH does. They donated £3 million for their new shed and won't get a single share or any influence in return.

Is that strictly accurate. I thought there was some mechanism to transfer ownership to FOH I n the near future?

[son of haggart]

Is that strictly accurate. I thought there was some mechanism to transfer ownership to FOH I n the near future?


There is - by next year Ann Budge will have been paid off for her initial investment and control will pass to FOH.

However I think the point is correct in the sense that FOH agreed to defer the takeover to help fund the new stand, so funds were used for infrastructure not ownership, for that period.


It's a bit disingenuous to phrase it as 'that's what FOH does' - 'that's what FOH did as an exception' would be more accurate

[crash]

Southsider

Yes there is, it's a matter of public record at Companies House. It would seem to be :

Bydand Sports LLC - 67 %

Hibernian Supporters Ltd - 15.4 %

Nominee Shareholders - 10 %

Small shareholders - 7.6 %



Hibernian Supporters

So have you contacted Small/Nominee shareholders with your offer/plans. I would imagine most of them will be unaware of the situation unless they read fans messageboards.

[oldbutdim]

So have you contacted Small/Nominee shareholders with your offer/plans. I would imagine most of them will be unaware of the situation unless they read fans messageboards.

I don't quite understand the position of 'nominee shareholders'.
Why would one put money into Hibs this way?

:confused:

[Pagan Hibernia]

Southsider

Yes there is, it's a matter of public record at Companies House. It would seem to be :

Bydand Sports LLC - 67 %

Hibernian Supporters Ltd - 15.4 %

Nominee Shareholders - 10 %

Small shareholders - 7.6 %



Hibernian Supporters

this worries me. Even if we assume that the small shareholders would join with HSL to stop anything unsavoury from happening, that would still only take us to 23%. The nominee holdings hold the balance of power. And we don’t know anything about them, who they are or what their intentions might be..

[Bostonhibby]

So have you contacted Small/Nominee shareholders with your offer/plans. I would imagine most of them will be unaware of the situation unless they read fans messageboards.See post 507, I was wondering the same thing

Sent from my SM-A750FN using Tapatalk

[Bostonhibby]

I don't quite understand the position of 'nominee shareholders'.
Why would one put money into Hibs this way?

:confused:There's a host of reasons. Being anonymous is important to some. There's at least one person who just doesn't want his family to see even more money being spent on Hibs than usual .

Sent from my SM-A750FN using Tapatalk

[Crunchie]

Southsider

Yes there is, it's a matter of public record at Companies House. It would seem to be :

Bydand Sports LLC - 67 %

Hibernian Supporters Ltd - 15.4 %

Nominee Shareholders - 10 %

Small shareholders - 7.6 %



Hibernian Supporters

I bought £200 worth of shares a couple of years ago, I'm willing to transfer them over to you guys if it helps at all. :aok:

[oldbutdim]

There's a host of reasons. Being anonymous is important to some. There's at least one person who just doesn't want his family to see even more money being spent on Hibs than usual .

Sent from my SM-A750FN using Tapatalk


I can understand that motive - :greengrin but I am a bit suspicious of why other would wish to be anonymous, particularly if they have quite a lot of shares.

[Bostonhibby]

I can understand that motive - :greengrin but I am a bit suspicious of why other would wish to be anonymous, particularly if they have quite a lot of shares.Yep, there's endless reasons, hopefully most of them are for the protection of Hibs, they're not in a position to launch a hostile bid, or any bid!

Sent from my SM-A750FN using Tapatalk

[Arch Stanton]

this worries me. Even if we assume that the small shareholders would join with HSL to stop anything unsavoury from happening, that would still only take us to 23%. The nominee holdings hold the balance of power. And we don’t know anything about them, who they are or what their intentions might be..

Yea, but 80% of Nominees would need to side with Bydland for them to reach 75%. It's a pretty tall order.

Given that we know nothing about the Nominees it's maybe the best we can get.

[OfficialHSL]

I bought £200 worth of shares a couple of years ago, I'm willing to transfer them over to you guys if it helps at all. :aok:

Thats very kind.

Please drop us an email at [email protected]


Hibernian Supporters

[Billy Whizz]

HSL, how much money have we given to Hibs in the last 2 financial years
July 2017 to June 2018
July 2018 to June 2019

Sorry if it’s on this thread already

[Purple & Green]

Yea, but 80% of Nominees would need to side with Bydland for them to reach 75%. It's a pretty tall order.

Given that we know nothing about the Nominees it's maybe the best we can get.

What if it was one person?

[BSEJVT]

Yea, but 80% of Nominees would need to side with Bydland for them to reach 75%. It's a pretty tall order.

Given that we know nothing about the Nominees it's maybe the best we can get.

I don't think we can afford to be that complacent when there are potentially ways and means out there of reaching that magical 25.1%.

Trusting to luck has a habit of not working out as hoped for.

Bear in mind also that if wee Ron decides to hold a rights issue at some time in the future, then unless the non Bydland shareholders take up their allotment in full then that blocking stake slips further away.

We need to have HSL in a position whereby if that does happen they have the means to take up that allotment and hopefully somehow the allotments of nominees and ordinary shareholders who also pass.

[Arch Stanton]

I don't think we can afford to be that complacent when there are potentially ways and means out there of reaching that magical 25.1%.

Trusting to luck has a habit of not working out as hoped for.

Bear in mind also that if wee Ron decides to hold a rights issue at some time in the future, then unless the non Bydland shareholders take up their allotment in full then that blocking stake slips further away.

We need to have HSL in a position whereby if that does happen they have the means to take up that allotment and hopefully somehow the allotments of nominees and ordinary shareholders who also pass.

My point was that there may not be ways and means of upping fan's shares - complacency doesn't come into it.

I don't know what the score is regarding the unsold part of a rights issue. If HSL could be made a preferential buyer then it should be looked into, I agree.

[BSEJVT]

My point was that there may not be ways and means of upping fan's shares - complacency doesn't come into it.

I don't know what the score is regarding the unsold part of a rights issue. If HSL could be made a preferential buyer then it should be looked into, I agree.

There are presently no unsold shares.

All the Authorised shares which had not been previously issued were bought by Ron as part of the takeover.

I was alluding to a possible future Rights Issue event.

Shares already in existence can be bought and sold virtually anytime

Theoretically, there is nothing that a change voted for by members couldn't fix, to stop HSL seeking to buy nominee or individual shareholdings or indeed Ron's if he were a willing seller which he presently is not.

All I am saying is that we need to continue to fund HSL to enable it to take advantage of any such opportunities if they arise.

I would personally never help fund an infrastructure project and wouldn't contribute monies to the manager's fund without their being shares acquired as part of the transaction.

I will regret to my dying day that we did not secure the 25.1% stake when we had the chance to do so.

Many others will feel differently

[Bostonhibby]

I don't think we can afford to be that complacent when there are potentially ways and means out there of reaching that magical 25.1%.

Trusting to luck has a habit of not working out as hoped for.

Bear in mind also that if wee Ron decides to hold a rights issue at some time in the future, then unless the non Bydland shareholders take up their allotment in full then that blocking stake slips further away.

We need to have HSL in a position whereby if that does happen they have the means to take up that allotment and hopefully somehow the allotments of nominees and ordinary shareholders who also pass.Agree all of this.

Sent from my SM-A750FN using Tapatalk

[NAE NOOKIE]

Fair play to those of you who want to keep donating but i can't get my head around working class folks donating their cash to a multi millionaire owner or to pay extra wages to highly paid footballers!

I know it's our club and we want to help but this is just ridiculous.

They should be saying a massive thank you but we no longer need your money, Ron's got it covered, cheers!!

As things stand I will continue to donate to HSL in whatever form it continues, but I have to say I have some sympathy with your take on things, especially the last bit.

Our new owner with his very first action has made his position clear, 'I own this football club and I don't want no partners thanks very much' In view of that it wouldn't be an unreasonable reaction for Hibs fans like me, who were contributing to HSL with a meaningful say in the club's preservation very much at the forefront of our thinking, to look at that and say ( as you have here ) OK mate you get on with it then … if our input isn't welcome as a partner in the club what makes you think you have the right to still expect us to hand over free cash?

If you will accept nothing less than total control of the club then you totally take all the responsibility for funding it and all the flak that's inevitably going to come your way when that time comes ( as it surely will ) when failure on the park is blamed on your failure to put your hand in your pocket.

As I said, I will continue to contribute to HSL … but that doesn't mean I'll have much sympathy for Mr Gordon if I hear him moaning about ungrateful fans having a go at him if the team fails …. if you demand total control you have to accept total responsibility.

[marinello59]

Fair play to those of you who want to keep donating but i can't get my head around working class folks donating their cash to a multi millionaire owner or to pay extra wages to highly paid footballers!



I struggle with it as well. It’s a sad indictment of how our game has been run that clubs now have to ask the fans to treat them as charities.

[weecounty hibby]

I struggle with it as well. It’s a sad indictment of how our game has been run that clubs now have to ask the fans to treat them as charities.

Not all do, just the ones that want to compete at the top against clubs who have greater resources than they have. Alloa, todays opposition, don’t have a scheme like this but they probably don’t see themselves competing with celtic, rangers, hearts and Aberdeen. Football clubs have been asking for money from fans for years, sponsorship of all different kinds. Is it value for money? Strips, £50 for a t shirt. Etc etc.

[marinello59]

Not all do, just the ones that want to compete at the top against clubs who have greater resources than they have. Alloa, todays opposition, don’t have a scheme like this but they probably don’t see themselves competing with celtic, rangers, hearts and Aberdeen. Football clubs have been asking for money from fans for years, sponsorship of all different kinds. Is it value for money? Strips, £50 for a t shirt. Etc etc.

Regular donations by direct debit is a new thing though. I’m not sure we will be any closer to the Old Firm so we are fishing in the same pool as teams like Aberdeen and Hearts when it comes to signing players. And if we are all taking donations from fans will the standard of player improve significantly or will we still be getting the same players but at an inflated price?
I don’t know the answer by the way. :greengrin

[weecounty hibby]

Regular donations by direct debit is a new thing though. I’m not sure we will be any closer to the Old Firm so we are fishing in the same pool as teams like Aberdeen and Hearts when it comes to signing players. And if we are all taking donations from fans will the standard of player improve significantly or will we still be getting the same players but at an inflated price?
I don’t know the answer by the way. :greengrin
I agree it is a new thing, but so was buying replica strips in the 70s! We are up against Aberdeen and hearts for the same playing pool but I believe we have an advantage at the moment in our ground and training centre. Aberdeen need to build both and hearts will need serious investment for the 3/4 of Tiny that is a complete tip, and they still haven’t completed the 8th wonder of the world yet! I can afford to donate and will continue to do so and to be honest as I’ve said before Hibs can spend that money as they see fit because ultimately it means more money spent on the playing squad.

[NYHibby]

I don't think we can afford to be that complacent when there are potentially ways and means out there of reaching that magical 25.1%.

Trusting to luck has a habit of not working out as hoped for.

Bear in mind also that if wee Ron decides to hold a rights issue at some time in the future, then unless the non Bydland shareholders take up their allotment in full then that blocking stake slips further away.

We need to have HSL in a position whereby if that does happen they have the means to take up that allotment and hopefully somehow the allotments of nominees and ordinary shareholders who also pass.

Unless I am mistaken, Hibs, as a company under the 1985 CA, have issued all the shares authorised. If Ron decided to do a new share issue, the authorisation limit would need to be increased by an ordinary resolution. At that point, he might as well disapply pre-emption rights at the same time. So the new shares would not be offered to HSL nor other shareholders.

So that scenario of HSL needing funds in case of a future share issue is unlikely to happen in practice.

[NYHibby]

Slight mistake in my above post, shareholders already disapplied pre-emption rights when we authorised the directors to issue shares as part of the 2015 share issue.

Although the club’s solicitors and Jamie Marwick were very sloppy and used the wrong date throughout.
https://s3.eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/document-api-images-live.ch.gov.uk/docs/WV03URqedmqir6sB0drkoIdmiw6mdloy0fV-gNDY8Qo/application-pdf?X-Amz-Algorithm=AWS4-HMAC-SHA256&X-Amz-Content-Sha256=UNSIGNED-PAYLOAD&X-Amz-Credential=ASIAWRGBDBV3NSPCFCWT%2F20190721%2Feu-west-2%2Fs3%2Faws4_request&X-Amz-Date=20190721T130355Z&X-Amz-Expires=60&X-Amz-Security-Token=AgoJb3JpZ2luX2VjED0aCWV1LXdlc3QtMiJGMEQCIBUE NhPOboLntE57JbtQrIslN3Q2cL%2BCNzf4t8c8SarEAiAsoSgV tS7LNkqLL2engfhB0AUPaeD1qogbvEons60O8irjAwil%2F%2F %2F%2F%2F%2F%2F%2F%2F%2F8BEAEaDDQ0OTIyOTAzMjgyMiIM 69t9Fxb4W86xeC10KrcD8GrAIdHFwDPCf1eqYKvHQDnxItY1ds IDws%2FWZINHwGMmz9zAPelrKJg1v0ovliMYhATK9qqNMUdD%2 BXRUxRAvncrbIypEQBvTZvHuStS2BWIhRMMpO4PIs9PTj75Njn 0QA%2BRXgFOfxTdmaOEbtnimjO0nDuECrIGL8o1GSU1AxWrrSG 1v6pvsmu%2BBM9JX1ZBGhlKTxD47V14nIPohcSDAZCjZc%2B41 zaBypDxvrmDpMqweSQm8Lrav%2F3tvTtuxGMfcMVMd1TsVPMhZ igpOZXHciZvntTsmEPVfdi8KiXYEpAxB1uTTeAq1Zoy0qU5BEl RVwf9N2WEM9GHd4B9d5qZ0YTtWAKGbd07L6tMQlMObF7hFAsws 3mXaVmt7ZhkbZff5RpUX%2BWVTIF4VgBZOGLjXS7gmR4Zf%2BJ 7WQhel1%2BMqwaPmL7O3v%2BoeYL1WxTRunQ8%2BLhq9IYm8R2 sXOWfnKkl%2FOdqojRqC2Yg2YlQZHPFL%2Bvh39rkfoLv8HFjp c7lEHX%2Futy6K5LGsCgFqRZBtanbdV1%2FlGxm14TCs6ewaOb tAHztXXgKmfdVol%2BBIVl7RJy5dPk%2FFJ7x5zDDSsdHpBTq1 ARoy0OOZMk8PQDQlStimNyKiv4V76A6BDLTYb%2FEUu1m79zWd yCrMR959myJFfgAhI%2FqOyccEm37ZdtN9lusJ1Fjz8kGWCuXS DTT7falPpSmiTQUMu%2Bp49ajJX34JrHwUARw7dJ3ya5Uh2DKu %2FJcnT%2F1kG3YV5ISX3AuzzXyf%2BAhxi1g9okAC6yOCKTA9 WZnflS49uSepeZ5rxsFsxUIeRRpNka3Qu7kbocQl2Tvkn%2Fca dx%2Ff2Sc%3D&X-Amz-SignedHeaders=host&X-Amz-Signature=72d587f9b80c9f42fbd579c0992f0b957d3c1c40 1529eb843d6468730225aa15

[A Hi-Bee]

I struggle with it as well. It’s a sad indictment of how our game has been run that clubs now have to ask the fans to treat them as charities.

Why governments do the same with all the health charities and everything else that they should be bloody paying for.
So why not football clubs, unles we can get more T.V. money it no gonna change.

[One Day Soon]

Regular donations by direct debit is a new thing though. I’m not sure we will be any closer to the Old Firm so we are fishing in the same pool as teams like Aberdeen and Hearts when it comes to signing players. And if we are all taking donations from fans will the standard of player improve significantly or will we still be getting the same players but at an inflated price?
I don’t know the answer by the way. :greengrin

If we are to continue to donate to the club via HSL - or any other vehicle - then there has to be a good reason to do so. If it isn't increasing fan ownership with some pre-agreed objective in mind then what is it?

Don't get me wrong, I think this change of ownership looks good for a variety of reasons. However it unquestionably challenges the purpose of HSL and I think we need to look carefully at what its new purpose could be. In my view it has to result in something that would not happen were it not for that input, it should not simply be consumers of a product with an emotional commitment beyond standard commercial circumstances giving the owners of a company a free sub.

There's either a tangible return for all supporters collectively, a tangible return just for those contributing via HSL or a meaningful addition to the club that clearly would not be there without the intervention of HSL. Shares are the most obvious return but Ron doesn't want that. Next up would be matched funding being put in by Ron for every £1 that HSL contributes. Beyond that I'm a bit stuck.

Is it possible or even sensible for any money that goes in via HSL to be treated as deferred equity at the point when Ron sells? ie we get it all back in the form of shares when he sells? If there was some pathway toward our 25% it would unpick all of this and simplify everything.

[mim]

If we are to continue to donate to the club via HSL - or any other vehicle - then there has to be a good reason to do so. If it isn't increasing fan ownership with some pre-agreed objective in mind then what is it?

Don't get me wrong, I think this change of ownership looks good for a variety of reasons. However it unquestionably challenges the purpose of HSL and I think we need to look carefully at what its new purpose could be. In my view it has to result in something that would not happen were it not for that input, it should not simply be consumers of a product with an emotional commitment beyond standard commercial circumstances giving the owners of a company a free sub.

There's either a tangible return for all supporters collectively, a tangible return just for those contributing via HSL or a meaningful addition to the club that clearly would not be there without the intervention of HSL. Shares are the most obvious return but Ron doesn't want that. Next up would be matched funding being put in by Ron for every £1 that HSL contributes. Beyond that I'm a bit stuck.

Is it possible or even sensible for any money that goes in via HSL to be treated as deferred equity at the point when Ron sells? ie we get it all back in the form of shares when he sells? If there was some pathway toward our 25% it would unpick all of this and simplify everything.

What a superb post :agree:

[hibbyfraelibby]

I don't quite understand the position of 'nominee shareholders'.
Why would one put money into Hibs this way?

:confused:

To keep your details secret from nosey parkers...like you!😉

[Argylehibby]

Argylehibby

No, this is not correct.

We have two issues to deal with, and with our Members patience and understanding they are relatively easy to deal with.

As you may know we were as surprised as anyone when the acquisition announcement was made. The result of this is that we are holding funds that we received just before the announcement and indeed after. While our Articles are clear enough to guide us your Directors feel that we do not wish to break the trust that we feel that we have earned over the last few years. By that we mean that it was clear to everyone making those donations that they believed that they were making those donations in the belief that we would be handing their money over to the Club and in return we would receive shares. For many of our Members, if not all, we would simply be breaking that trust. So, for hopefully a small temporary period only, we are retaining these funds while we are able to get an understanding from Members about how they wish us to proceed.

Going forward, once we have all developed a plan, that allows our Members and potential Members to know clearly know where their money is going, we can progress as normal. We have sufficient flexibility in our infrastructure to allow this. Thus the " Fan for all reasons"

We continue to receive share donations and to date have not received a single request from an existing shareholder to buy those shares from them.

Hibernian Shareholders

That's good to hear, thanks for the clarification.

[Devonhibs]

I for one will keep up my payments as I am confident it will be used to support the product on the park. I am sure we will have clarity soon enough how the HS family think the new structure should work.

[Argylehibby]

I don't think we can afford to be that complacent when there are potentially ways and means out there of reaching that magical 25.1%.

Trusting to luck has a habit of not working out as hoped for.

Bear in mind also that if wee Ron decides to hold a rights issue at some time in the future, then unless the non Bydland shareholders take up their allotment in full then that blocking stake slips further away.

We need to have HSL in a position whereby if that does happen they have the means to take up that allotment and hopefully somehow the allotments of nominees and ordinary shareholders who also pass.

With HSL having bought their shares through donations the same people (or new members) would surely have to stump up for the new shares which I reckon is highly unlikely to happen to enable 100% of the rights to be taken up. Obviously with the rights issue the number of shares being offered wont necessarily be on a 1 for 1 basis so not suggesting that if you have donated £1000 that you would need to donate another £1000 to buy the new shares. However if Ron paid 16p per share I can't see any rights issue being priced at 4p either.

On the point of taking up rights for others who have let them lapse that isn't likely to be an option and those not taking up the rights would need to sell / donate them to HSL prior to the closing date for them to be taken up by HSL.

[jax67]

I for one will keep up my payments as I am confident it will be used to support the product on the park. I am sure we will have clarity soon enough how the HS family think the new structure should work.

I will be doing the same, every trust in HSL.

[worcesterhibby]

If we are to continue to donate to the club via HSL - or any other vehicle - then there has to be a good reason to do so. If it isn't increasing fan ownership with some pre-agreed objective in mind then what is it?

Don't get me wrong, I think this change of ownership looks good for a variety of reasons. However it unquestionably challenges the purpose of HSL and I think we need to look carefully at what its new purpose could be. In my view it has to result in something that would not happen were it not for that input, it should not simply be consumers of a product with an emotional commitment beyond standard commercial circumstances giving the owners of a company a free sub.

There's either a tangible return for all supporters collectively, a tangible return just for those contributing via HSL or a meaningful addition to the club that clearly would not be there without the intervention of HSL. Shares are the most obvious return but Ron doesn't want that. Next up would be matched funding being put in by Ron for every £1 that HSL contributes. Beyond that I'm a bit stuck.


This is an excellent post and is compatible what the HSL statement that has already been made, telling us that they will be retaining all donations for a short period of time while they come up with a coherent plan for how things will go forward. Clarity of exactly what HSL members get for their monthly donation is what is required and hopefully when decisions are made it will be something easily understandable and inspiring. Until then I will continue to donate and await an update from HSL.

If the "deal" ended up being matched funding, I would suggest that it should be far more than £1 per £1...HSL own just over 15% of Hibs, Ron owns 67% so if we contribute £1 he should be contributing about £4.50 of additional investment.

[BSEJVT]

With HSL having bought their shares through donations the same people (or new members) would surely have to stump up for the new shares which I reckon is highly unlikely to happen to enable 100% of the rights to be taken up. Obviously with the rights issue the number of shares being offered wont necessarily be on a 1 for 1 basis so not suggesting that if you have donated £1000 that you would need to donate another £1000 to buy the new shares. However if Ron paid 16p per share I can't see any rights issue being priced at 4p either.

On the point of taking up rights for others who have let them lapse that isn't likely to be an option and those not taking up the rights would need to sell/donate them to HSL prior to the closing date for them to be taken up by HSL.

Sorry, I am a bit lost on your first sentence?

I think I get what you are saying but maybe not.

If the shares are transferred to HSL following their purchase from these donations, the rights will also fall to HSL to pick up, that doesn't have to be the same people that pitched in money the first time but as all HSL donations are pooled, that could be from subsequent donators.

That is one of the main reasons that I don't advocate HSL just handing over the donations to Hibs, I would much prefer those monies be held in escrow for future share buying opportunities.

Why wouldn't those who weren't going to take up any options personally not sell/donate them to HSL?

I am really confident that the vast vast majority of ordinary (not nominee) shareholders are Hibs supporters like you and me who would want to secure the clubs future before any personal gain.

The nominee shareholdings concern me, afaik they control about 10% of the clubs shares and there is just no way of knowing what they would do.

[oldbutdim]

To keep your details secret from nosey parkers...like you!😉

That's a fair point.

:blushie:

[Rocky]

Sorry, I am a bit lost on your first sentence?

I think I get what you are saying but maybe not.

If the shares are transferred to HSL following their purchase from these donations, the rights will also fall to HSL to pick up, that doesn't have to be the same people that pitched in money the first time but as all HSL donations are pooled, that could be from subsequent donators.

That is one of the main reasons that I don't advocate HSL just handing over the donations to Hibs, I would much prefer those monies be held in escrow for future share buying opportunities.

Why wouldn't those who weren't going to take up any options personally not sell/donate them to HSL?

I am really confident that the vast vast majority of ordinary (not nominee) shareholders are Hibs supporters like you and me who would want to secure the clubs future before any personal gain.

The nominee shareholdings concern me, afaik they control about 10% of the clubs shares and there is just no way of knowing what they would do.

I see a lot of concerns mentioned about the nominee holdings but to be honest I'm struggling to imagine a scenario in which someone with intentions other than supporting Hibs would want to take up chunks of shareholding? Can anyone suggest a hypothetical reason why they would? To me it's much more likely that these are fairly wealthy Hibs supporters who either don't want friends / family / associates to know that they've lumped cash into the club or (more likely in my view) they don't want their names publicly known given the sort of abuse some of our fans have history of dishing out when things aren't going so well.

[hibee_nation]

Well it would be nice to know they are die hard hibs fans other than hibs minded business men who see no problem making a killing if available in future.

[Gerard]

FWIT I think HSL has an important part to play in the future development of our club. My preference would be for HSL to introduce a form of subscription with incentives applied. This could be similar to the Aberdeen model. I think this might attract new members and keep the current ones. If the existing members only want to donate to HSL they could have the option of continuing as a donation only member. The funds that are raised net of the costs of the membership scheme would be spent as directed by the majority of the membership of HSL. I look forward to the HSL meeting that will examine all the options open to HSL members.

[NYHibby]

However if Ron paid 16p per share I can't see any rights issue being priced at 4p either.

On the point of taking up rights for others who have let them lapse that isn't likely to be an option and those not taking up the rights would need to sell / donate them to HSL prior to the closing date for them to be taken up by HSL.

I wouldn't read anything into the price Ron paid per share for the new shares the club issued to him. Because the club was not reformed under the 2006 CA, there is still a cap on the number of shares the board can issue without going to the shareholders to increase the cap (which the parties probably preferred to avoid in this case). 16p is probably the result of Ron's agreement with STF and the remaining number of shares the board could allot.

We don't know the exact price Ron paid HFC Holdings for its shares right?



If the shares are transferred to HSL following their purchase from these donations, the rights will also fall to HSL to pick up, that doesn't have to be the same people that pitched in money the first time but as all HSL donations are pooled, that could be from subsequent donators.

Why wouldn't those who weren't going to take up any options personally not sell/donate them to HSL?


I'm sorry if my post about pre-emption rights was confusing, but these rights/options/whatever you want to call them do not exist. Because of a decision by shareholders in 2015, HSL and other shareholders have the same right as any random punter to buy any new shares. Ignoring my point above, the board could decide to issue all the new hypothetical shares to Ann Budge if it wanted and HSL basically couldn't do anything about it by itself.



Is it possible or even sensible for any money that goes in via HSL to be treated as deferred equity at the point when Ron sells? ie we get it all back in the form of shares when he sells? If there was some pathway toward our 25% it would unpick all of this and simplify everything.

I wouldn't call it deferred equity, but HSL could enter into a shareholder agreement with Ron's company to give it the right of first refusal if he wants to sell any shares. This is common and very straightforward. HSL could also buy options for Ron's shares with a bunch of conditions when they could be exercised.

[BlackSheep]

I think most would agree that we members of HSL want to see our donations impact the club in a noticeable way, most preferably now on the pitch now that the option of share holding seems to be out our hands.

Right now we have a situation where our manager has said we have basically been priced out of signing tow players that I am sure, again most, fans would like to see back at Hibs, namely McNulty and Omeonga.

Just what level of contributions are now been held in kind by HSL and would this lump sums increase our chances of signing any of said players? If so then lets splash the cash!

[BSEJVT]

I see a lot of concerns mentioned about the nominee holdings but to be honest I'm struggling to imagine a scenario in which someone with intentions other than supporting Hibs would want to take up chunks of shareholding? Can anyone suggest a hypothetical reason why they would? To me it's much more likely that these are fairly wealthy Hibs supporters who either don't want friends / family / associates to know that they've lumped cash into the club or (more likely in my view) they don't want their names publicly known given the sort of abuse some of our fans have history of dishing out when things aren't going so well.

It’s an easy way to acquire a hidden shareholding to create a position for a future takeover bid

IMO the club itself was sufficiently concerned about this to halt the dale of shares to all but HSL

Hopefully what you hypothesise is the case but I would prefer to have 25.1% gel in guaranteed friendly gands

[banchoryhibs]

FWIT I think HSL has an important part to play in the future development of our club. My preference would be for HSL to introduce a form of subscription with incentives applied. This could be similar to the Aberdeen model.

We need to be careful about how the "new" HSL model is constituted. The Aberdeen model loses the first 20% of all money received directly to HMRC in VAT payments. Our previous model was to raise funds to acquire shares by way of voluntary contributions. This did not attract VAT and was not income in the hands of our Club. All good!

If we are very closely tied into the Club and act as one of its fund/income generators then we may fall foul of HMRC's rules.

No doubt an accountant or two might suggest a suitable solution.

[Gerard]

We need to be careful about how the "new" HSL model is constituted. The Aberdeen model loses the first 20% of all money received directly to HMRC in VAT payments. Our previous model was to raise funds to acquire shares by way of voluntary contributions. This did not attract VAT and was not income in the hands of our Club. All good!

If we are very closely tied into the Club and act as one of its fund/income generators then we may fall foul of HMRC's rules.

No doubt an accountant or two might suggest a suitable solution.

If the vat issue can be resolved then I stand by my suggestion of members receiving incentives.
If it can not then perhaps the members can be given opportunities to be given free entry to competitions when they donate money at leves that makes this financially possible.

[Argylehibby]

Sorry, I am a bit lost on your first sentence?

I think I get what you are saying but maybe not.

If the shares are transferred to HSL following their purchase from these donations, the rights will also fall to HSL to pick up, that doesn't have to be the same people that pitched in money the first time but as all HSL donations are pooled, that could be from subsequent donators.

That is one of the main reasons that I don't advocate HSL just handing over the donations to Hibs, I would much prefer those monies be held in escrow for future share buying opportunities.

Why wouldn't those who weren't going to take up any options personally not sell/donate them to HSL?

I am really confident that the vast vast majority of ordinary (not nominee) shareholders are Hibs supporters like you and me who would want to secure the clubs future before any personal gain.

The nominee shareholdings concern me, afaik they control about 10% of the clubs shares and there is just no way of knowing what they would do.

Sorry I will try and explain my thinking. If there is a rights issue on a basis of 1 for 10 and HSL has 1m shares (figures just to make maths easy for me!) that means HSL has an entitlement to 100,000 shares @ whatever price they are offered at, lets say 10p. That means HSL have to find 100,000 x 10p = £10,000 to take up their rights. How they get that money I would assume comes from those donating at the time + any funds they are holding. Likelihood of everyone who is contributing say £20p/m having the spare cash to donate is I believe not that great.

With a rights issue firstly to transfer the shares the provisional allotment letter (PAL) the shareholder has received needs to get to the buyer in exchange for cash and then be lodged with the receiving agent (with using the example above the payment of 10p per rights share) ahead of the deadline. that's usually 2 weeks these days. It's a tough ask to get a large number of people to do that in the timescales available. By that I mean x hundred people need to receive the PAL, sign it and send to HSL who then has to collate and pay for them (without breaking money laundering limits). So yeah if HSL hold onto funds that's good in future proofing against that scenario but how many fans will want to see them keep cash and not pass to the club.

[Golden Bear]

We need to be careful about how the "new" HSL model is constituted. The Aberdeen model loses the first 20% of all money received directly to HMRC in VAT payments. Our previous model was to raise funds to acquire shares by way of voluntary contributions. This did not attract VAT and was not income in the hands of our Club. All good!

If we are very closely tied into the Club and act as one of its fund/income generators then we may fall foul of HMRC's rules.

No doubt an accountant or two might suggest a suitable solution.

But presumably Aberdeen would not be implementing such a scheme unless there was a significant financial benefit to the Club which it obviously is/has been.

Personally, I wish Hibs had done likewise.

[BSEJVT]

Sorry I will try and explain my thinking. If there is a rights issue on a basis of 1 for 10 and HSL has 1m shares (figures just to make maths easy for me!) that means HSL has an entitlement to 100,000 shares @ whatever price they are offered at, lets say 10p. That means HSL have to find 100,000 x 10p = £10,000 to take up their rights. How they get that money I would assume comes from those donating at the time + any funds they are holding. Likelihood of everyone who is contributing say £20p/m having the spare cash to donate is I believe not that great.

With a rights issue firstly to transfer the shares the provisional allotment letter (PAL) the shareholder has received needs to get to the buyer in exchange for cash and then be lodged with the receiving agent (with using the example above the payment of 10p per rights share) ahead of the deadline. that's usually 2 weeks these days. It's a tough ask to get a large number of people to do that in the timescales available. By that I mean x hundred people need to receive the PAL, sign it and send to HSL who then has to collate and pay for them (without breaking money laundering limits). So yeah if HSL hold onto funds that's good in future proofing against that scenario but how many fans will want to see them keep cash and not pass to the club.

Thanks for clarification

It was as I expected

You are absolutely correct in all you say

Nothing in life is easy these days, but with the correct preparation and a lot of effort most things can still be achieved

[Purple & Green]

I’m not sure the HSL can hold more than £10K in funds according to their a of a’s.

[ahibby]

I think most would agree that we members of HSL want to see our donations impact the club in a noticeable way, most preferably now on the pitch now that the option of share holding seems to be out our hands.

Right now we have a situation where our manager has said we have basically been priced out of signing tow players that I am sure, again most, fans would like to see back at Hibs, namely McNulty and Omeonga.

Just what level of contributions are now been held in kind by HSL and would this lump sums increase our chances of signing any of said players? If so then lets splash the cash!

Isnt it the case that we most likely could afford those two players, by that I mean the cash is actually there. Isnt it a case of the price is higher than our evaluation based on potential return?

[NYHibby]

Sorry I will try and explain my thinking. If there is a rights issue on a basis of 1 for 10 and HSL has 1m shares (figures just to make maths easy for me!) that means HSL has an entitlement to 100,000 shares @ whatever price they are offered at, lets say 10p.

With all due respect, you don't really have any idea of what you are talking about right? And you are completely ignoring my posts and I am wasting my time replying to you?

As I've said several times, HSL has no legal entitlement to be allotted share in the same way that Ann Budge has no entitlement to be allotted shares in Hibs. The only way HSL will be allotted any shares is if Ron voluntarily agrees to allow it.

In your completely artificial scenario, both Ron, as the shareholder with greater than 50%+1 shares, and the board would need to agree to allot shares to HSL. Why would they set an artificial deadline which was so short that HSL could not met it? That makes zero sense because in your scenario they want HSL to buy the share (or at least have the opportunity to buy the shares). They could give HSL all the time in the world to collect the money if they wanted.

Regardless, there is no reason why hundreds of people would need to sign anything if HSL is being allotted the shares. At most you would need two of HSL's directors (assuming HSL's articles don't say anything different).

[OfficialHSL]

With all due respect, you don't really have any idea of what you are talking about right? And you are completely ignoring my posts and I am wasting my time replying to you?

As I've said several times, HSL has no legal entitlement to be allotted share in the same way that Ann Budge has no entitlement to be allotted shares in Hibs. The only way HSL will be allotted any shares is if Ron voluntarily agrees to allow it.

In your completely artificial scenario, both Ron, as the shareholder with greater than 50%+1 shares, and the board would need to agree to allot shares to HSL. Why would they set an artificial deadline which was so short that HSL could not met it? That makes zero sense because in your scenario they want HSL to buy the share (or at least have the opportunity to buy the shares). They could give HSL all the time in the world to collect the money if they wanted.

Regardless, there is no reason why hundreds of people would need to sign anything if HSL is being allotted the shares. At most you would need two of HSL's directors (assuming HSL's articles don't say anything different).

This post isn't directed at any particular intervention it's simply a case that I don't know how to interject on anything other than a reply.

We think it makes best sense to allow matters to just rest while we arrange our Consultation Meetings. None of the above posts are 100% correct and once again there is the risk that existing Members or indeed potential new Members are put off by incorrect information. We know there is the desire for instant answers but if you want the best for us, or at least want to do us no harm, can we just ask for a little time.


Hibernian Supporters

[Rocky]

It’s an easy way to acquire a hidden shareholding to create a position for a future takeover bid

IMO the club itself was sufficiently concerned about this to halt the dale of shares to all but HSL

Hopefully what you hypothesise is the case but I would prefer to have 25.1% gel in guaranteed friendly gands
I still don't really understand the meat on that hypothesis. Are you thinking that perhaps someone approached STF offering to purchase the club with a view to selling the land but he saw through them and told them to bolt? And then they bought "some" shares in the public sale but didn't max out? Or were there limits on the public sale? (I can't remember, I stuck in £250 as it seemed like a nice number).

[Purple & Green]

This post isn't directed at any particular intervention it's simply a case that I don't know how to interject on anything other than a reply.

We think it makes best sense to allow matters to just rest while we arrange our Consultation Meetings. None of the above posts are 100% correct and once again there is the risk that existing Members or indeed potential new Members are put off by incorrect information. We know there is the desire for instant answers but if you want the best for us, or at least want to do us no harm, can we just ask for a little time.


Hibernian Supporters

You need to correct the misconceptions or misinterpretations. I’m not saying follow every post, but even a weekly post clarifying and correcting the mistakes would help everyone - especially you and I as HSL members.

[Gerard]

Dear HSL is it possible that at some time in the near future that the PSH Mr R Gordon can address a meeting of HSL so we can ask questions about how HSL can work together with the club in a meaningful way?

[BSEJVT]

I still don't really understand the meat on that hypothesis. Are you thinking that perhaps someone approached STF offering to purchase the club with a view to selling the land but he saw through them and told them to bolt? And then they bought "some" shares in the public sale but didn't max out? Or were there limits on the public sale? (I can't remember, I stuck in £250 as it seemed like a nice number).

None of the above

There was an open share issue

Folk were able to buy shares with afaik no limit, although there would have come a point at which any “concert party” needed to declare

My concern is that a large number of shares were bought and are held by various nominee companies and no one knows anything about them or whether that was a precursor to yet further holdings being taken.

I am suggesting the board didn’t like this as they didn’t want unknows acquiring a large voting block and the public sale ended.

[Lago]

But presumably Aberdeen would not be implementing such a scheme unless there was a significant financial benefit to the Club which it obviously is/has been.

Personally, I wish Hibs had done likewise.
Agree, but as of now further share acquisition by HSL is finished & the sooner a decision is made as to how to proceed the better.

[hibby6270]

On a lighter note to start with, I blame Brexit for all this confusion and suggested hypothesis of what is possible for the future of HSL.

Since the 52%-48% vote in June 2016, many so called ITK people have extolled the virtues of whether Brexit is a good or a bad way forward for the U.K. Basically though, all factual evidence uncovered since has proven to make the whole situation even more confusing than it was for a straight Yes/No (Remain/Leave) question.

Suddenly everyone who is interested has become an “expert” and has a voice on the rights and wrongs, to the point where the country is lurching into an unknown void.

To the serious points now, all this conjecture about the future of HSL is taking on a similar trait.

Everyone who has posted a suggestion is making public their own preference. The point is that due to the diverse nature of what these suggestions are, reaching a unanimous decision on how HSL should proceed going forward is going to have it’s difficulties because not everyone will agree on a common goal. Unlike the initial main objective of purchasing shares to obtain a stake in the club and the funds raised being used to fund player acquisitions.

I understand from what I’ve read, that the HSL primary objective is now blocked. Ron’s actions and words following his buyout of STF and RP have in my eyes confirmed that.

So how does it progress? I don’t have an opinion either way at the moment. However, whatever is proposed and/or decided, will for some, determine if they continue to contribute on a monthly basis.

I’m a relatively new contributor to HSL and I’m also an individual shareholder. I also appreciate that donating my shares would assist HSL in the short/medium term. However, and I’ve stated this previously, just the personal satisfaction I take from owning a tiny, tiny part of the club individually is a stance I would wish to continue. Contributing to HSL is again, on an individual basis, my way of being part of the common good we all want for the club.

I sincerely hope a mutual way forward for all HSL contributors can be attained and of course I’ll be keeping a watchful eye on what comes out in the next few weeks/months.

[BSEJVT]

With all due respect, you don't really have any idea of what you are talking about right? And you are completely ignoring my posts and I am wasting my time replying to you?

As I've said several times, HSL has no legal entitlement to be allotted share in the same way that Ann Budge has no entitlement to be allotted shares in Hibs. The only way HSL will be allotted any shares is if Ron voluntarily agrees to allow it.

In your completely artificial scenario, both Ron, as the shareholder with greater than 50%+1 shares, and the board would need to agree to allot shares to HSL. Why would they set an artificial deadline which was so short that HSL could not met it? That makes zero sense because in your scenario they want HSL to buy the share (or at least have the opportunity to buy the shares). They could give HSL all the time in the world to collect the money if they wanted.

Regardless, there is no reason why hundreds of people would need to sign anything if HSL is being allotted the shares. At most you would need two of HSL's directors (assuming HSL's articles don't say anything different).

Are you sure?

If it’s a rights issue existing shareholders have “right” to buy shares in proportion to holdings?

HSL would have “rights” to buy shares in relation to their shares.

Individual shareholders to theirs while they could sell/donate those rights to HSL they would have to individually sign off on doing so?

Shortened timescale would make no sense I agree unless this was a further back door dilution exercise but that is unlikely as same could be achieved under a different new share issue scenario where shares are bought off market before ever being issued

This is also unlikely IMO as to me that would look like a clear breach of faith.

At this point I am not too concerned about Ron Gordon, more what comes next and I fervently believe HSL having 25.1% of shares protects us in any scenario

[Argylehibby]

With all due respect, you don't really have any idea of what you are talking about right? And you are completely ignoring my posts and I am wasting my time replying to you?

As I've said several times, HSL has no legal entitlement to be allotted share in the same way that Ann Budge has no entitlement to be allotted shares in Hibs. The only way HSL will be allotted any shares is if Ron voluntarily agrees to allow it.

In your completely artificial scenario, both Ron, as the shareholder with greater than 50%+1 shares, and the board would need to agree to allot shares to HSL. Why would they set an artificial deadline which was so short that HSL could not met it? That makes zero sense because in your scenario they want HSL to buy the share (or at least have the opportunity to buy the shares). They could give HSL all the time in the world to collect the money if they wanted.

Regardless, there is no reason why hundreds of people would need to sign anything if HSL is being allotted the shares. At most you would need two of HSL's directors (assuming HSL's articles don't say anything different).

I'm sorry if you feel I'm ignoring you it wasn't intentional and no snub was meant. However now that you have my attention let me see if I can clarify my comments for you.

The post I replied to and indeed most other posts I have made on this thread are in response to comments about a rights issue. They are not a judgement on whether one can be offered but on the merits of holding one to achieve an increased share of the Issued Share Capital for shareholders other than our majority shareholder. I'm pretty certain my comments on the merit of holding one and the process involved including standard industry timescales and method of transferring rights with PAL's etc should one be offered are accurate. If you disagree then feel free to point out where I have got it so wrong as to indicate I have no idea what I'm talking about.

At no point in any of my posts have I suggested that Ron wants HSL to have more shares but if the club were to offer a rights issue then every shareholder including Ron would have the right to buy their entitlement.

So lets try another "artificial scenario" that allows me to use simple maths for the purpose of clarity and saving me time getting real figures.

If the club wanted to raise £3m via a rights issue Ron would have to stump up circa £2m for his rights if he wanted to take them up. (he owns just over 2/3rd of the ISC I believe so would be entitled to 2/3rds of the rights) The other shareholders including HSL and me would be offered rights based on the number of shares they held. If HSL owned 20% (just to be clear they don't but it's for example only) then their entitlement would be 20% of the rights being offered and cost them £600,000 (20% of the £3m all of the rights cost). My post that you believe proved I don't know what I am talking about asks how HSL funds that cost. If they have funds in the bank and they get members to donate in the timeframes then great but as I said it's a big ask and that's just to stand still. In response to a comment that HSL could be gifted or buy rights other shareholders didn't take up I explained the complexity of that process and why it is unlikely to work. Firstly gifting the rights is fine but HSL still has to pay the club to take them up. If it could happen then yes HSL would indeed increase their percentage. A rights issue will, again in my opinion, more likely increase Rons percentage of the ISC not decrease it and could be more of an issue if underwriters take up any unsold rights.

You seem to have got the wrong end of the stick judging on your "hundreds of people signing something" comment. In a rights issue the company issue every shareholder a Provisional Allotment Letter (PAL) which tells them how many shares they can buy, how much it will cost them and how it can be done. Now if I get my PAL and I decided I'm not going to spend the £100 needed to buy the shares if I do nothing they lapse. If I want to gift them to HSL I need to sign it and send it to HSL who put their details on it and send it in to the receiving agent with the payment. That could be hundreds of people. Just to be clear 2 HSL directors can probably sign and send in the cheque to pay for them. My other point was where does the cash come from IF the donations that members continue to receive are ploughed into the club as I believe most want to happen.

Your point,which I have not covered at any time prior to now in any post as far as I can recall, is that HSL cant be allotted new shares because Ron has bought all of the unissued shares and the only way to increase the number of new shares is with a resolution at a general meeting. Before you pick me up on that by general meeting I mean either AGM or EGM.

Now in the scenario I didn't propose but you seem to think I did where Ron wants to allow HSL to buy more shares then that can be covered pretty easily. Hold that General Meeting I mentioned above and approve the creation of new shares but don't allot them. Once HSL have the funds they buy those shiny new shares and the Issued Share Capital increases and Ron's percentage decreases. That bit in bold however is the reason that's unlikely to happen (In my opinion anyway.)

On your earlier post no company had to reform when the 2006 companies act came into force, they just had to follow the new rules. The 2006 act still requires the board to seek approval at a GM to create new shares which are unallotted until someone coughs up for them.

I think I have covered everything but if I have missed something please point out what and I will address later, probably on my lunch hour or in the 5 minutes before I leave work to head to ER tomorrow.

[DaveF]

Everyone (well members) get the recent email about the upcoming vote? I'm really not sure how this is going to pan out as a decision either way (attempt to purchase shares or donate to football budget) may well see the 'losing' side drop off their donations. Time will tell I suppose.

As for the test poll email - I just did this and one thing to point out. The poll asks for your membership number which wasn't something I knew. So you have to go into the main website and it's there beside your name \ address. The poll won't submit without it.

[Rocky]

Everyone (well members) get the recent email about the upcoming vote? I'm really not sure how this is going to pan out as a decision either way (attempt to purchase shares or donate to football budget) may well see the 'losing' side drop off their donations. Time will tell I suppose.

As for the test poll email - I just did this and one thing to point out. The poll asks for your membership number which wasn't something I knew. So you have to go into the main website and it's there beside your name \ address. The poll won't submit without it.

I don't think it's a winner takes all poll. The money will be split according to the share of vote. I'll be cancelling mine as I don't like either option but under the circumstances I think HSL have done a good job of managing it.

[DaveF]

I don't think it's a winner takes all poll. The money will be split according to the share of vote. I'll be cancelling mine as I don't like either option but under the circumstances I think HSL have done a good job of managing it.

Ah right, thanks.

Was struggling to read it on my phone so took the highlights only.

Out of interest which option would you prefer given neither suit you?

[MSK]

Everyone (well members) get the recent email about the upcoming vote? I'm really not sure how this is going to pan out as a decision either way (attempt to purchase shares or donate to football budget) may well see the 'losing' side drop off their donations. Time will tell I suppose.

As for the test poll email - I just did this and one thing to point out. The poll asks for your membership number which wasn't something I knew. So you have to go into the main website and it's there beside your name \ address. The poll won't submit without it.However there is also this option - There will be an option to indicate that funds should be split 50/50

I had to come out, copy and paste my membership number then go back in again

[DaveF]

However there is also this option - There will be an option to indicate that funds should be split 50/50

I had to come out, copy and paste my membership number then go back in again

Haha, looks like I got nothing right in my original post :-D

Where are my goggles...

[MSK]

Haha, looks like I got nothing right in my original post :-D

Where are my goggles...😆

[Rocky]

Ah right, thanks.

Was struggling to read it on my phone so took the highlights only.

Out of interest which option would you prefer given neither suit you?

There isn't really a possibility of an option that suits me. I was in it to achieve both objectives of handing cash to Hibs and increase fan ownership above 25%. I wasn't interested in outright fan ownership, just a protective holding.

Buying others' shareholdings only makes sense to me if there's a realistic chance of hitting 25%. If not we're just putting money into someone else's pocket. Giving money direct to Hibs is fine in principle but I'm not wholly comfortable (yet) in 67p of every pound I give effectively going to Ron as two thirds shareholder. I very much doubt he's in this to make money (and if he is I'm sure he'll be sorely disappointed) but ultimately he's a majority shareholder in a company, and it's not really in my nature to gift money to those!

I'm still going to put the money aside each month and if I either become convinced by Ron and his plans, or there's another share issue, I'll throw it in the pot. For now I'm sitting on the fence though.

Incidentally I do intend to contribute to get my son an HSL membership so that he gets to be a founder member and his name on the shirt, so that'd cover my next year's DDs anyway.

[Eric]

I don't think it's a winner takes all poll. The money will be split according to the share of vote. I'll be cancelling mine as I don't like either option but under the circumstances I think HSL have done a good job of managing it.

It's not a winner takes all poll. The poll gives each member the right to decide which option they wish their monthly donation to be paid into. If you want some of your monthly donation to be paid into each of the basic options you vote 50/50. Could not be simpler or more democratic.

[thebakerboy]

I did it all as requested and then was thanked for my partcipation but never saw any questions , and therefore didnt answer any ?????????????????????????????????????????????????? ?????????????????????????????????????????????????? ?????????????????????

[wallpaperman]

I don't think it's a winner takes all poll. The money will be split according to the share of vote. I'll be cancelling mine as I don't like either option but under the circumstances I think HSL have done a good job of managing it.

No wonder we’re miles behind Hearts in revenue and will continue to be so.

They may be an odd bunch but they don’t rush off and cancel their DD’s when something’s not to their liking, they’re willing to play the long game.

[Rocky]

No wonder we’re miles behind Hearts in revenue and will continue to be so.

They may be an odd bunch but they don’t rush off and cancel their DD’s when something’s not to their liking, they’re willing to play the long game.

You think they'd keep paying DDs if budgie said "actually I'm keeping ownership, youse keep chucking me cash though"

I'm not trying to influence anybody, each to their own. It's just no longer an option I'm into. If HSL introduced a "war chest" option to build up some cash and offer it to Ron at some point in the future in exchange for shares I'd keep chipping in. I don't think that's really a viable option though to have cash sitting in an account doing nothing so I'll do my own.

[green day]

A suggestion - simplify the poll - the requirement to put in a password is bad enough, then having to put in my account details..........which I dont really know...........is a pain in the arse.

Make it easier and you will get more responses:aok:

[Rocky]

A suggestion - simplify the poll - the requirement to put in a password is bad enough, then having to put in my account details..........which I dont really know...........is a pain in the arse.

Make it easier and you will get more responses:aok:

The survey site itself isn't secured so requiring some personal info is the only way to prevent people making multiple submissions. Your membership number is right above the link to survey so it's reasonably straightforward to copy and paste. Just as well as I wouldn't have a clue what mine was!

[Purple & Green]

It's not a winner takes all poll. The poll gives each member the right to decide which option they wish their monthly donation to be paid into. If you want some of your monthly donation to be paid into each of the basic options you vote 50/50. Could not be simpler or more democratic.

So members who are fully paid up but no longer contribute don’t get a vote?

That means new members are getting a membership share but their contributions aren’t being transferred into shares. Messy.

[Eric]

So members who are fully paid up but no longer contribute don’t get a vote?

That means new members are getting a membership share but their contributions aren’t being transferred into shares. Messy.

The forthcoming vote is to let existing members let HSL know where they want their monthly donations to go. If members are no longer contributing, they have at present no financial outgoings to HSL therefore nothing to vote on.

[Rocky]

The forthcoming vote is to let existing members let HSL know where they want their monthly donations to go. If members are no longer contributing, they have at present no financial outgoings to HSL therefore nothing to vote on.

It could be simpler and clearer then. They shouldn't call it a vote if it isn't one, that would make it clearer. If it's an election as to how you want your contributions apportioned it should be called that.

[lord bunberry]

My money comes off every month, but to be honest I’ve lost interest in the whole enterprise. It’s been badly promoted and badly run since the very beginning. It was a good idea that has failed to capture the imagination of the fans. Hearts version has been hugely popular due to the fact that they needed to save their club. Aberdeen didn’t have that pressing issue, but they’ve managed to make their scheme hugely popular. We’ve had amateur videos from one of the proclaimers and prize draws to win tickets to European games. I’ll keep up my donations but I really think there needs to be a new scheme launched that is more professional and something that matches the ones our rivals are running.

[The 90+2]

Busted flush now unfortunately. Should start up if possible with a completely different name and plan. Surely Ron having taken away the chance of getting the 25% might be open to an Aberdeen alternative and bring the two together?

[BILLYHIBS]

Anyone else baffled by their email?

What football stadium do you like to visit?

Pittodrie

Tannadice

Dens Park

Obvious answer none they are all dumps

Am I missing something or am I having a senior moment? :greengrin

[marinello59]

Anyone else baffled by their email?

What football stadium do you like to visit?

Pittodrie

Tannadice

Dens Park

Obvious answer none they are all dumps

Am I missing something or am I having a senior moment? :greengrin


It’s a test survey, what the question is doesn’t matter. So yes, you have missed the point and you are having a senior moment.:greengrin

[DanishJohn]

Anyone else baffled by their email?

What football stadium do you like to visit?

Pittodrie

Tannadice

Dens Park

Obvious answer none they are all dumps

Am I missing something or am I having a senior moment? :greengrin

Let me try and explain to you what they are trying to do. They are trying out the system.They are trying it out to see how voting works?

What I find utterly baffling with your post is you think they are all dumps.

The post was worded "Like to visit" .For a lot of fans that could take into accounts pubs nearby or standing areas etc etc. See previous posts for Morton and Cappielow.

Hope that has debaffled it for you and allowed you to get back to your Peoples Friend.

ps Are you a Jack or Victor?

[BILLYHIBS]

Let me try and explain to you what they are trying to do. They are trying out the system.They are trying it out to see how voting works?

What I find utterly baffling with your post is you think they are all dumps.

The post was worded "Like to visit" .For a lot of fans that could take into accounts pubs nearby or standing areas etc etc. See previous posts for Morton and Cappielow.

Hope that has debaffled it for you and allowed you to get back to your Peoples Friend.

ps Are you a Jack or Victor?
:aok:

Both actually

[BILLYHIBS]

It’s a test survey, what the question is doesn’t matter. So yes, you have missed the point and you are having a senior moment.:greengrin
:aok:

[OfficialHSL]

My money comes off every month, but to be honest I’ve lost interest in the whole enterprise. It’s been badly promoted and badly run since the very beginning. It was a good idea that has failed to capture the imagination of the fans. Hearts version has been hugely popular due to the fact that they needed to save their club. Aberdeen didn’t have that pressing issue, but they’ve managed to make their scheme hugely popular. We’ve had amateur videos from one of the proclaimers and prize draws to win tickets to European games. I’ll keep up my donations but I really think there needs to be a new scheme launched that is more professional and something that matches the ones our rivals are running.

Lord Burnberry

Thank you for your comments and we do of course respect your opinion.

We do look at our rival schemes to see if we can learn things to help us improve but they both pose dilemmas for us :

Hearts - their scheme was borne out of crisis and for their fans literally do or die. The other point to make is that their scheme supports majority fan ownership. We have no sense that Hibs fans have any appetite for this and indeed the recent transaction removes that possibility. Indeed we have had a couple of new Members join us as a result of this.

Aberdeen - while this on the face of looks like a good scheme we think if we adopted this approach we would lose Members. At the moment our Members who contribute , lets say £10 per month, know that nearly all of that goes to it's intended use ( last year our expenses were negligible). If we proposed to change that so that only 50p in the £1 would go in accordance with our Members intentions we are not sure what our Members would think. See attached article

https://www.eveningexpress.co.uk/fp/aberdeen-fc/donsnews/038ex0707eea_story__4/

We are looking at making changes as soon as we get this transitional exercise out of the way.

Hibernian Supporters

[OfficialHSL]

Busted flush now unfortunately. Should start up if possible with a completely different name and plan. Surely Ron having taken away the chance of getting the 25% might be open to an Aberdeen alternative and bring the two together?

90+2

We are not sure if you are a Member or not but see our reply to a previous post on this.

We do of course want to make things attractive for Hibs fans and plan to make changes. Do you have any particular ideas in mind ?


Hibernian Supporters

[tamig]

However there is also this option - There will be an option to indicate that funds should be split 50/50

I had to come out, copy and paste my membership number then go back in again

Just catching up on this. Got the email the other night and I’m sure it mentioned the 50/50 option. Haven’t been on the site yet but will do today.

[OfficialHSL]

It could be simpler and clearer then. They shouldn't call it a vote if it isn't one, that would make it clearer. If it's an election as to how you want your contributions apportioned it should be called that.


Rocky

Will do.


Hibernian Supporters

[GreenCastle]

So much confusion.

I feel it would make sense to start fresh and be clear with what’s happening with supporters money.

Clear information that helps the future of the club.

It’s all about trust and if fans don’t know or trust where the money is going then they are less likely to support a scheme.

[tamig]

So much confusion.

I feel it would make sense to start fresh and be clear with what’s happening with supporters money.

Clear information that helps the future of the club.

It’s all about trust and if fans don’t know or trust where the money is going then they are less likely to support a scheme.

You have your chance to decide what you want done with your money. This is your chance.

[Pagan Hibernia]

So much confusion.

I feel it would make sense to start fresh and be clear with what’s happening with supporters money.

Clear information that helps the future of the club.

It’s all about trust and if fans don’t know or trust where the money is going then they are less likely to support a scheme.

I'm pretty confused by how people find this confusing.

The communications from HSL seem pretty straightforward to me. Each contributor gets to elect where their money goes, either to the team or to a pot to purchase shares.

After the takeover I didn’t know how they were going to satisfy all members who might have differing views. This seems the best way for everyone.

[green day]

Anyone else baffled by their email?
Am I missing something or am I having a senior moment? :greengrin

Not baffled, I read the email, but understand why you find it unclear


It’s a test survey, what the question is doesn’t matter. So yes, you have missed the point and you are having a senior moment.:greengrin


Let me try and explain to you what they are trying to do. They are trying out the system.They are trying it out to see how voting works?


If an organisation sends something to its members, it should be incredibly clear and have an obvious purpose - otherwise you risk people lacking understanding, or simply switching off.

IMO, HSL should have a group of members who road test these communications before they go to the membership.

Giving them the "idiot test" if you like?

@OfficialHSL - is this a go-er? I would happily volunteer my time, and I am fairly sure other people ( Tamig ?) would too - we both have experience of working in large organisations which need to get messages out to thousands of people - and hence have seen lots of good..........and some incomprehensible.......communications.

[BILLYHIBS]

Not baffled, I read the email, but understand why you find it unclear





If an organisation sends something to its members, it should be incredibly clear and have an obvious purpose - otherwise you risk people lacking understanding, or simply switching off.

IMO, HSL should have a group of members who road test these communications before they go to the membership.

Giving them the "idiot test" if you like?

@OfficialHSL - is this a go-er? I would happily volunteer my time, and I am fairly sure other people ( Tamig ?) would too - we both have experience of working in large organisations which need to get messages out to thousands of people - and hence have seen lots of good..........and some incomprehensible.......communications.
Thank you

I thought it was unclear

[Eyrie]

The requirement to enter my membership number was a nuisance and I had to find my certificate on the HSL site to get it.


Our question will be simple. Indicate if you would like all of your donation to be passed to the Club for the football Department or if you would like your funds to be used to buy shares in the Club as and when they become available. There will be an option to indicate that funds should be split 50/50.

This will be a simple poll and funds received by us each month will be distributed in accordance with the result of this poll. It should be noted that we anticipate repeating this exercise regularly to ensure that Members funds are spent in the way they wish their money to be spent.

So if I understand this correctly, if the poll result is 50% split, 30% football and 20% shares my donation will be split accordingly?

I can understand that this will make administration easier for HSL, but I'd prefer to see two separate funds set up. One fund would be used for supporting the football operations and the other to purchase available shares. That would enable each member to contribute their money to the purpose that they want. The risk under the current proposed allocation is that members will stop paying if they feel that too much of their contribution is going to the "wrong" purpose.

[OfficialHSL]

So much confusion.

I feel it would make sense to start fresh and be clear with what’s happening with supporters money.

Clear information that helps the future of the club.

It’s all about trust and if fans don’t know or trust where the money is going then they are less likely to support a scheme.

GreenCastle

We are sorry if you are confused, please let us know what you are confused about and we will try to help.

In a sense we are starting afresh and the reason for this is quite simple. Previously our Members have donated on the strict understanding that their money would be used to by shares directly from the Club. The Club are no longer selling shares so we need to make sure that from 1st October onwards that Members/Donators are clear about where their money is gong. We will shortly invite members/donators to tell us how they would like their money distributed and from 1st October onwards we will distribute donations in accordance with the instructions given to us by those Members/Donators. e.g. x% to the Football Dept and y% for any shares available.

We believe we will only continue to earn your trust by operating in a transparent democratic manner. People will be very clear about where their money is going.

Hibernian Supporters

[Eric]

The requirement to enter my membership number was a nuisance and I had to find my certificate on the HSL site to get it.



So if I understand this correctly, if the poll result is 50% split, 30% football and 20% shares my donation will be split accordingly?

I can understand that this will make administration easier for HSL, but I'd prefer to see two separate funds set up. One fund would be used for supporting the football operations and the other to purchase available shares. That would enable each member to contribute their money to the purpose that they want. The risk under the current proposed allocation is that members will stop paying if they feel that too much of their contribution is going to the "wrong" purpose.

No your donation will go to whatever you select and will not be split. Your stated preference is exactly what HSL are proposing with a choice to split your donation 50/50 between those two separate funds.

[Just Alf]

The requirement to enter my membership number was a nuisance and I had to find my certificate on the HSL site to get it.



So if I understand this correctly, if the poll result is 50% split, 30% football and 20% shares my donation will be split accordingly?

I can understand that this will make administration easier for HSL, but I'd prefer to see two separate funds set up. One fund would be used for supporting the football operations and the other to purchase available shares. That would enable each member to contribute their money to the purpose that they want. The risk under the current proposed allocation is that members will stop paying if they feel that too much of their contribution is going to the "wrong" purpose.With regards to the % distribution, that's how I see it.

Re your last paragraph, I'm guessing the existing option to opt out of the share purchase could still be a possibility, I remember it being announced on here early doors to accommodate those that were against fan ownership but allowed them to gain HSL membership and pass money to the club.

Edit - looking at the replies looks like its all covered! :D


Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

[BT58]

i just voted for this dummy vote, however i put in my membership code, there where a lot of what i thought where O`S OR where they zeroes
why not just digits [ ie numbers]. so confusing, or is im just an auld moaning faced git :na na::na na::na na:
B

[MSK]

i just voted for this dummy vote, however i put in my membership code, there where a lot of what i thought where O`S OR where they zeroes
why not just digits [ ie numbers]. so confusing, or is im just an auld moaning faced git :na na::na na::na na:
BOr you could just have copied and pasted it 😆

[BT58]

Or you could just have copied and pasted it 😆

Had a pc for years, but still havent a clue how to do this
B

[hibby6270]

I joined and began contributing just before Ron Gordon took over the majority shareholding in the club.

From what I’ve read on this thread a few emails have been sent out to ‘members’ since then with updates. I haven’t received these emails. Is that because I’m not yet fully paid up?

As a monthly contributor I’d have thought I should be kept up to date with the ongoing process/deliberations. I can understand fully paid up members receiving the emails but there are bound to be some contributors, like myself, who haven’t reached the ‘members’ contribution threshold yet. Surely they should be consulted on any proposed changes rather than relying on picking up second hand info via this thread.

Could someone from HSL or even anyone on this thread explain where I stand as far as either continuing or stopping (as necessary) contributions to the HSL cause.

Thanks.

[OfficialHSL]

I joined and began contributing just before Ron Gordon took over the majority shareholding in the club.

From what I’ve read on this thread a few emails have been sent out to ‘members’ since then with updates. I haven’t received these emails. Is that because I’m not yet fully paid up?

As a monthly contributor I’d have thought I should be kept up to date with the ongoing process/deliberations. I can understand fully paid up members receiving the emails but there are bound to be some contributors, like myself, who haven’t reached the ‘members’ contribution threshold yet. Surely they should be consulted on any proposed changes rather than relying on picking up second hand info via this thread.

Could someone from HSL or even anyone on this thread explain where I stand as far as either continuing or stopping (as necessary) contributions to the HSL cause.

Thanks.

hibby6270

Thank you for bringing this to our attention.

All donators and Members are added to our database at the moment that you join. The Go Cardless database updates our system. We have had many situations where Members have had this issue but it turned out that their emails were in their "spam/junk" folder. In very few cases their servers have had very strict security settings and have rejected mails.

Please email us at [email protected] to allow us to investigate


Hibernian Supporters

[Lago]

My money comes off every month, but to be honest I’ve lost interest in the whole enterprise. It’s been badly promoted and badly run since the very beginning. It was a good idea that has failed to capture the imagination of the fans. Hearts version has been hugely popular due to the fact that they needed to save their club. Aberdeen didn’t have that pressing issue, but they’ve managed to make their scheme hugely popular. We’ve had amateur videos from one of the proclaimers and prize draws to win tickets to European games. I’ll keep up my donations but I really think there needs to be a new scheme launched that is more professional and something that matches the ones our rivals are running.
Agree 100%

[tamig]

Agree 100%

So what do you want the rebooted scheme to look like? Would be good to hear your views - and lord bunberry’s too. I think LB’s comment about the scheme being poorly run was unfair. The guys running the scheme do so voluntarily and put in a hell of a lot of effort. I commend them. It’s our scheme. Get involved and shape it’s future direction.

[lord bunberry]

So what do you want the rebooted scheme to look like? Would be good to hear your views - and lord bunberry’s too. I think LB’s comment about the scheme being poorly run was unfair. The guys running the scheme do so voluntarily and put in a hell of a lot of effort. I commend them. It’s our scheme. Get involved and shape it’s future direction.

I completely get that it’s run in voluntary basis and that’s the problem. It should be done in house as a rewards scheme. Monthly prize draws, social events, club shop discounts etc. I bet there’s a large number of hibs fans who don’t know HS even exists.

[Purple & Green]

The forthcoming vote is to let existing members let HSL know where they want their monthly donations to go. If members are no longer contributing, they have at present no financial outgoings to HSL therefore nothing to vote on.

So, to clarify, any new member who chooses to donate their £225 to the club coffers through HSL has the same rights and membership as the existing members who actually funded the share purchase. Still messy.

[Eyrie]

GreenCastle

We are sorry if you are confused, please let us know what you are confused about and we will try to help.

In a sense we are starting afresh and the reason for this is quite simple. Previously our Members have donated on the strict understanding that their money would be used to by shares directly from the Club. The Club are no longer selling shares so we need to make sure that from 1st October onwards that Members/Donators are clear about where their money is gong. We will shortly invite members/donators to tell us how they would like their money distributed and from 1st October onwards we will distribute donations in accordance with the instructions given to us by those Members/Donators. e.g. x% to the Football Dept and y% for any shares available.

We believe we will only continue to earn your trust by operating in a transparent democratic manner. People will be very clear about where their money is going.

Hibernian Supporters


No your donation will go to whatever you select and will not be split. Your stated preference is exactly what HSL are proposing with a choice to split your donation 50/50 between those two separate funds.
I'm still not reading it that way in either the email or the HSL post above. Both imply that my donation will be apportioned according to the result of the poll, and that further polls will be taken which will amend that allocation.

If it's purely my choice, then why the need for a poll to determine the split? Why can't I just nominate my choice?

[tamig]

I'm still not reading it that way in either the email or the HSL post above. Both imply that my donation will be apportioned according to the result of the poll, and that further polls will be taken which will amend that allocation.

If it's purely my choice, then why the need for a poll to determine the split? Why can't I just nominate my choice?
The email is quite clear. It says you can choose to donate to purchase shares if they become available or you can choose to donate to the football dept. It states there will also be an option to split your donation 50/50.

[Chorley Hibee]

The email is quite clear. It says you can choose to donate to purchase shares if they become available or you can choose to donate to the football dept. It states there will also be an option to split your donation 50/50.

So why the need for a poll then if it's up to me how my contribution is allocated?

Sadly, I agree with others who say the whole thing has become a mess, and I speak as somebody who has contributed to HSL for the last three years.

It needs torn up and started again (new name etc) and preferably in-house too.

[Bangkok Hibby]

How large will the pot containing money for a potential share purchase grow to?
My point being, what if people decide they want their money to go towards share purchase if and when available but that availability slows to a trickle...what then? Another vote?

[Bangkok Hibby]

The email is quite clear. It says you can choose to donate to purchase shares if they become available or you can choose to donate to the football dept. It states there will also be an option to split your donation 50/50.

What will the default option be for those who for one reason or another don't vote?

[malcolm]

So why the need for a poll then if it's up to me how my contribution is allocated?

Sadly, I agree with others who say the whole thing has become a mess, and I speak as somebody who has contributed to HSL for the last three years.

It needs torn up and started again (new name etc) and preferably in-house too.

Its the terminology that is confusing - it’s not a poll seeking a democratic result rather an election of your own of your own choice with you the only voter in your personal poll. :wink: It will help if it gets called something clearer but expect to be able to change your ‘vote’ as necessary.

Oh and p.s. I don’t want my contribution wasted on monthly prize draws or vouchers for the club shop all that does is dilute the value of the contribution and complicates things.

[hibby6270]

hibby6270

Thank you for bringing this to our attention.

All donators and Members are added to our database at the moment that you join. The Go Cardless database updates our system. We have had many situations where Members have had this issue but it turned out that their emails were in their "spam/junk" folder. In very few cases their servers have had very strict security settings and have rejected mails.

Please email us at [email protected] to allow us to investigate


Hibernian Supporters

Thanks. Email sent.

[ahibby]

Glad i am not the only one who was confused. I need to be sure that any contributions i make go to player budget. Some posts here make that clear but thw communication from HSL did not. Also is there any point in chasing shares now we kniw the club wont sell anymore and could dilute them again always making the target out if reach. To think that sums of money would just be sitting in a bank waiting in hope when they ciuld be used to make the team better us slightly baffling. But to each their own.

[IberianHibernian]

The email is quite clear. It says you can choose to donate to purchase shares if they become available or you can choose to donate to the football dept. It states there will also be an option to split your donation 50/50. Are you sure it`s so clear ? Post 634 for example from HSL doesn`t clarify it . You`ve interpreted it as meaning that HSL will obey the orders of each of their 2300 ( ? ) members as to how to spend their donations with 3 options - buy shares , money for team etc or 50 / 50 - so for example 800 choose first option , 800 the second and 700 ( if 2300 members ) the third without allowing for many who won`t vote for many reasons ( lack of interest , don`t know / care , technical problems etc ) . Other interpretation is that 2300 members are invited to vote with same 3 options and majority will prevail until next vote at least . Second interpretation is much less time consuming now and in future and will allow for non voters . Also worth remembering that voters include members who paid a lump sum at beginning or several times since but don`t pay every month so maybe they have contributed several thousand pounds already and their contributions have already been spent on shares and / or team .

[tamig]

Are you sure it`s so clear ? Post 634 for example from HSL doesn`t clarify it . You`ve interpreted it as meaning that HSL will obey the orders of each of their 2300 ( ? ) members as to how to spend their donations with 3 options - buy shares , money for team etc or 50 / 50 - so for example 800 choose first option , 800 the second and 700 ( if 2300 members ) the third without allowing for many who won`t vote for many reasons ( lack of interest , don`t know / care , technical problems etc ) . Other interpretation is that 2300 members are invited to vote with same 3 options and majority will prevail until next vote at least . Second interpretation is much less time consuming now and in future and will allow for non voters . Also worth remembering that voters include members who paid a lump sum at beginning or several times since but don`t pay every month so maybe they have contributed several thousand pounds already and their contributions have already been spent on shares and / or team .
You are providing HSL with an instruction as to what you want them to do with your ongoing donations. If someone doesn’t donate, there is no money for them to do anything with for that particular individual. That’s how I read it but maybe I’m over-simplifying. Most folk who are paid up will likely have done so before Ron’s arrival. So that cash will already have been used to purchase shares and will have been used to boost the football budget the same as all the HSL share money pre-Ron.

[Pagan Hibernia]

Glad i am not the only one who was confused. I need to be sure that any contributions i make go to player budget. Some posts here make that clear but thw communication from HSL did not. Also is there any point in chasing shares now we kniw the club wont sell anymore and could dilute them again always making the target out if reach. To think that sums of money would just be sitting in a bank waiting in hope when they ciuld be used to make the team better us slightly baffling. But to each their own.

the club can’t just dilute them again. To do so would require another share issue and that would need the approval of the remaining shareholders as RG owns less than 75%

[IberianHibernian]

You are providing HSL with an instruction as to what you want them to do with your ongoing donations. If someone doesn’t donate, there is no money for them to do anything with for that particular individual. That’s how I read it but maybe I’m over-simplifying. Most folk who are paid up will likely have done so before Ron’s arrival. So that cash will already have been used to purchase shares and will have been used to boost the football budget the same as all the HSL share money pre-Ron.Main thing which is causing confusion is whether vote is about how all money received by HSL ( since last donation to club to buy shares or to help club generally ) should be spent on possible future shares or club or 50 / 50 between both or whether everyone who donates now should be able to choose 1 of 3 above options for their own donation . I think some or many here think they can choose personally but I suppose that for practical reasons that is definitely not the case . Hopefully someone from HSL will clarify it here and directly to members . Other difference of opinion is who is an HSL member - someone may have given 1000 pounds 3 years ago while someone else gives 10 pounds a week since early this year . Main thing is that club is receiving money to invest in team , stadium etc

[DanishJohn]

Main thing which is causing confusion is whether vote is about how all money received by HSL ( since last donation to club to buy shares or to help club generally ) should be spent on possible future shares or club or 50 / 50 between both or whether everyone who donates now should be able to choose 1 of 3 above options for their own donation . I think some or many here think they can choose personally but I suppose that for practical reasons that is definitely not the case . Hopefully someone from HSL will clarify it here and directly to members . Other difference of opinion is who is an HSL member - someone may have given 1000 pounds 3 years ago while someone else gives 10 pounds a week since early this year . Main thing is that club is receiving money to invest in team , stadium etc

" Main thing is that club is receiving money to invest in team,stadium etc."

No not correct.

HSL should do what they were set up to do and that is buy shares in Hibs.

That was their primary purpose.

There is still a possibility of shares becoming available so any money received should be used for that purpose.
However, should an individual no longer want their contribution to go towards the purchase of shares then they can state what they want their money used for.

[ahibby]

You have your chance to decide what you want done with your money. This is your chance.

Chance or choice?

[ahibby]

" Main thing is that club is receiving money to invest in team,stadium etc."

No not correct.

HSL should do what they were set up to do and that is buy shares in Hibs.
Dusagree. The club has stated no more shares for sale. HSL no longer has a definite seller thin



That was their primary purpose.

There is still a possibility of shares becoming available so any money received should be used for that purpose.
However, should an individual no longer want their contribution to go towards the purchase of shares then they can state what they want their money used for.

Disagree. The club has made it clear no more shares for sale. HSL no longer has a definite seller. Things have changed. To cintinue to collect contributions for purchasung shares when none are currently for sale is at least suspucious and at worst wrong.

[OfficialHSL]

" Main thing is that club is receiving money to invest in team,stadium etc."

No not correct.

HSL should do what they were set up to do and that is buy shares in Hibs.

That was their primary purpose.

There is still a possibility of shares becoming available so any money received should be used for that purpose.
However, should an individual no longer want their contribution to go towards the purchase of shares then they can state what they want their money used for.

Danish John

This isn't quite correct. We were set up to do both i.e. buy shares and contribute to the Club. Because the shares were additional shares being sold by the Club it meant we were achieving both aims at the same time.

We are carrying out this exercise as we have donators who are motivated by both objectives to varying degrees. We want to make sure that donators are able to indicate how their future donations are apportioned.

As you say if an existing donator does not want their funds to go towards buying shares they will vote accordingly. Democracy in action.


Hibernian Supporters

[OfficialHSL]

Disagree. The club has made it clear no more shares for sale. HSL no longer has a definite seller. Things have changed. To cintinue to collect contributions for purchasung shares when none are currently for sale is at least suspucious and at worst wrong.

ahibby

Your statement is not correct. Yes, we are aware that the Club are no longer selling any shares however there are quite literally millions of shares in the hands of existing shareholders. We have have already increased our shareholding from both donators and sellers. We are hoping to get to 16% as soon as possible ( we had 15.4 at the takeover date). We are not sure what is wrong or suspicious about this particularly when we are making everyone aware of the changed circumstances and inviting donators to indicate how they would like their donations to be used.


Hibernian Supporters

[Baldy Foghorn]

ahibby

Your statement is not correct. Yes, we are aware that the Club are no longer selling any shares however there are quite literally millions of shares in the hands of existing shareholders. We have have already increased our shareholding from both donators and sellers. We are hoping to get to 16% as soon as possible ( we had 15.4 at the takeover date). We are not sure what is wrong or suspicious about this particularly when we are making everyone aware of the changed circumstances and inviting donators to indicate how they would like their donations to be used.


Hibernian Supporters

Jim, what is the thinking of buying shares from sellers, as in this scenario the money goes to seller and not the club. (Whilst I get we need to get to the required %), are you trying to acquire shares at a discounted value, or at nominal value? Whats the thoughts around this?

[OfficialHSL]

Jim, what is the thinking of buying shares from sellers, as in this scenario the money goes to seller and not the club. (Whilst I get we need to get to the required %), are you trying to acquire shares at a discounted value, or at nominal value? Whats the thoughts around this?

Baldy

The thinking is that as there are millions of shares out there we should at the very least try to acquire as many as we can, in accordance with our original objectives. In the first instance hopefully many small shareholders may be willing to help. It may be that some supporters holding larger chunks may seek to recover the money they paid for them and at our Consultation Meetings the feeling was that we should be prepared to pay this amount i.e. 4p per share.
We have at the moment only put out a plea to our own Members but we will widen this to all shareholders. We will of course only spend funds that have been given to us for this purpose.

Hibernian Supporters

[Baldy Foghorn]

Baldy

The thinking is that as there are millions of shares out there we should at the very least try to acquire as many as we can, in accordance with our original objectives. In the first instance hopefully many small shareholders may be willing to help. It may be that some supporters holding larger chunks may seek to recover the money they paid for them and at our Consultation Meetings the feeling was that we should be prepared to pay this amount i.e. 4p per share.
We have at the moment only put out a plea to our own Members but we will widen this to all shareholders. We will of course only spend funds that have been given to us for this purpose.

Hibernian Supporters

Cheers

[Bangkok Hibby]

How large will the pot containing money for a potential share purchase grow to?
My point being, what if people decide they want their money to go towards share purchase if and when available but that availability slows to a trickle...what then? Another vote?



What will the default option be for those who for one reason or another don't vote?


I think these are valid questions but haven't seen an answer, unless I've missed it.

[green day]

I think these are valid questions but haven't seen an answer, unless I've missed it.

On the first question, its a sensible one which HSL have clocked. As far as I understand it, HSL will keep an eye on things and update members as the situation develops - which seems sensible.


As to your second question - if you want a say in where HSL donations go, you need to vote.

If for some reason you dont vote then the destination of donations is determined by those who did vote - HSL cant hang on to our money forever.

[malcolm]

On the first question, its a sensible one which HSL have clocked. As far as I understand it, HSL will keep an eye on things and update members as the situation develops - which seems sensible.


As to your second question - if you want a say in where your own HSL donations go, you need to choose when the vote/election is opened.

If for some reason you dont vote then the destination of your donations seems as yet unclear - HSL cant hang on to our money forever.

I fixed this a bit but the default, if you don’t choose, needs to be made clear - it will be according to the ‘rules’ but I’d suspect that it would simply be used to secure available shares until that well appears to have run dry. At which point I’d expect HSL to come back to the membership anyway.

[craigiehibs]

[QUOTE=green day;5924778]On the first question, its a sensible one which HSL have clocked. As far as I understand it, HSL will keep an eye on things and update members as the situation develops - which seems sensible.

to be honest it all seems a bit of a mishmash to me. when i started to contribute way back at the start my driver was to increase the playing budget - if that achieved the secondary (for me anyway) benefit of increasing hsls stake in the club then great.
now though the plan of increasing hsls stake by buying shares from existing shareholders has no benefit to the playing budget as the cash goes to individuals. so until the pupose of donations is clearly focused on playing budget then im afraid im out.
we all want to see better product on the park and i do suspect that the proposed "split pot" will undermine this and whilst ladible in intent more shares to hsl is ultimately a distraction. bottom line is we need to trust stfs dilligence on our new owner and recognise that ultimately he will call the shots even if hsl were ever to reach its stated %age ownership goal. happy to be convinced otherwise but i am not at the moment im afraid. meantime we will continue to fish in a different pond to herts and aberdeen who for different reasons have galvinised their fans in terms of supplementary cash injections

[superfurryhibby]

Personally, I still question the ethics of the dilution of the HSL shareholding. Fans donated with an agreement that they were contributing to the future safeguarding if the club. At a stroke this was diminished. The shares cost a lot of money.

[madhatter]

I'm personally at the point of wanting to give up with the notion of safeguarding, I think that ship has likely sailed. What I'd like to see is a rewards scheme for fans. Prize raffles are great but why cant 25% of the money raised be put aside to reward fans with a "free" shirt. I honestly would sign up to a subscription model which meant most of the money was going to the playing squad but a small amount was set aside to "reward" us. Put into context, through HSL I give approximately £250 a year. Why cant some amount of that be attributed to me? Club cannot guarantee footballing success and entertainment but they could guarantee me a shirt or merchandise/club experiences. Fans will not stay on side with most things solely attributed to "footballing success" as that, unfortunately, is like selling Brexit to the masses. No certainties. More money does not equal sporting success.

[OfficialHSL]

I think these are valid questions but haven't seen an answer, unless I've missed it.
Bangkok Hibby
Perfectly valid questions.
On the first one we will simply monitor things. Clearly if we find ourselves in a position with no immediate prospect of shares we will review things.

Regarding those that choose not to vote , by doing so they accept that our funds will be distributed in accordance with the overall result from those that did vote.

Hibernian Supporters

[OfficialHSL]

[QUOTE=green day;5924778]On the first question, its a sensible one which HSL have clocked. As far as I understand it, HSL will keep an eye on things and update members as the situation develops - which seems sensible.

to be honest it all seems a bit of a mishmash to me. when i started to contribute way back at the start my driver was to increase the playing budget - if that achieved the secondary (for me anyway) benefit of

increasing hsls stake in the club then great.
now though the plan of increasing hsls stake by buying shares from existing shareholders has no benefit to the playing budget as the cash goes to individuals. so until the pupose of donations is clearly focused on playing budget then im afraid im out.
we all want to see better product on the park and i do suspect that the proposed "split pot" will undermine this and whilst ladible in intent more shares to hsl is ultimately a distraction. bottom line is we need to trust stfs dilligence on our new owner and recognise that ultimately he will call the shots even if hsl were ever to reach its stated %age ownership goal. happy to be convinced otherwise but i am not at the moment im afraid. meantime we will continue to fish in a different pond to herts and aberdeen who for different reasons have galvinised their fans in terms of supplementary cash injections
We are sorry that you feel this way and hope you can understand that we are dealing with events not of our making. What we would say is that you are seeing democracy in action. Your original intentions will still be achieved by simply voting that way.

This is simply a temporary exercise that will settle down going forward.
Hibernian Supporters

[Purple & Green]

See when we vote, will there be an option:

*Pay Efe Ambrose's wages?

I'd happily hand over money to the club if its to bring him in.

[OfficialHSL]

I'm personally at the point of wanting to give up with the notion of safeguarding, I think that ship has likely sailed. What I'd like to see is a rewards scheme for fans. Prize raffles are great but why cant 25% of the money raised be put aside to reward fans with a "free" shirt. I honestly would sign up to a subscription model which meant most of the money was going to the playing squad but a small amount was set aside to "reward" us. Put into context, through HSL I give approximately £250 a year. Why cant some amount of that be attributed to me? Club cannot guarantee footballing success and entertainment but they could guarantee me a shirt or merchandise/club experiences. Fans will not stay on side with most things solely attributed to "footballing success" as that, unfortunately, is like selling Brexit to the masses. No certainties. More money does not equal sporting success.
We are sorry that you feel this way.
We did consult Members at our recent meetings. As far as we could gather everyone wanted this to remain the same with nearly 100% of funds going to the stated purpose. Competitor schemes see 50% of funds going to the VAT and other costs. We think most fans want there money to be well used. We can and indeed have been offering some rewards. What would you like to see us offering ?

Hibernian Supporters

[Purple & Green]

I fixed this a bit but the default, if you don’t choose, needs to be made clear - it will be according to the ‘rules’ but I’d suspect that it would simply be used to secure available shares until that well appears to have run dry. At which point I’d expect HSL to come back to the membership anyway.

My understanding is that you won't be voting on your own contributions, but the overall pot of contributions. The vote will presumably be for all members, whether they currently contribute or not, given they are the "owners" of HSL - the notion that members who currently don't contribute would be excluded from an HSL decision, while part paid members can decide where contributions go sounds completely contradictory to fair company governance IMHO.

[ahibby]

ahibby

Your statement is not correct. Yes, we are aware that the Club are no longer selling any shares however there are quite literally millions of shares in the hands of existing shareholders. We have have already increased our shareholding from both donators and sellers. We are hoping to get to 16% as soon as possible ( we had 15.4 at the takeover date). We are not sure what is wrong or suspicious about this particularly when we are making everyone aware of the changed circumstances and inviting donators to indicate how they would like their donations to be used.


Hibernian Supporters

Do you know of any shares in Hibs that are currently up for sale?

[ROCKTILLDROP]

Personally I am happy with the way HSL are going forward

[ahibby]

Personally I am happy with the way HSL are going forward

Good. As I have said bfore to each their own. My view is that all contributions would be better goung towards players until such time as we know shares are for sale. Then we could be asked for help to buy those shares. Its only my view. I would contribute under those circumstances.

[matty_f]

Personally, I still question the ethics of the dilution of the HSL shareholding. Fans donated with an agreement that they were contributing to the future safeguarding if the club. At a stroke this was diminished. The shares cost a lot of money.

I can understand that point of view, but to be honest if we'd got our act together as a support we'd have had the shares bought.

From day one of the share issue, the amount of shares that HSL could have been massively reduced if individuals took up the offer at a higher rate.

[scoopyboy]

We are sorry that you feel this way.
We did consult Members at our recent meetings. As far as we could gather everyone wanted this to remain the same with nearly 100% of funds going to the stated purpose. Competitor schemes see 50% of funds going to the VAT and other costs. We think most fans want there money to be well used. We can and indeed have been offering some rewards. What would you like to see us offering ?

Hibernian Supporters

Wee bit of a tangent, can you remind me how I go about getting my certificate?

[Purple & Green]

I can understand that point of view, but to be honest if we'd got our act together as a support we'd have had the shares bought.

From day one of the share issue, the amount of shares that HSL could have been massively reduced if individuals took up the offer at a higher rate.

Fan blaming really irks me on this - this was a club led initiative, and the flaws and faults are down to the way it was set up by the club, not by the fans who took it on as best they could, and the fans who did contribute. I think the lack of take up reflects on the governance of the club over a long period.

[Billy Whizz]

Wee bit of a tangent, can you remind me how I go about getting my certificate?

Log onto your account, it will be on there

[matty_f]

Fan blaming really irks me on this - this was a club led initiative, and the flaws and faults are down to the way it was set up by the club, not by the fans who took it on as best they could, and the fans who did contribute. I think the lack of take up reflects on the governance of the club over a long period.

I don't agree, folk created a myriad of reasons, lies and mis-information about it from the word go.

The support could also have bought shares directly.

I just think it's a bit rich to say it was bad to dilute the shares when we've collectively had however many years to buy those shares ourselves.

They were right there, we had a vehicle to purchase them and we (collectively) didn't.

It's not about fan-blaming, we all had the opportunity - for years - to buy them, and only some of us did.

[ahibby]

I don't agree, folk created a myriad of reasons, lies and mis-information about it from the word go.

The support could also have bought shares directly.

I just think it's a bit rich to say it was bad to dilute the shares when we've collectively had however many years to buy those shares ourselves.

They were right there, we had a vehicle to purchase them and we (collectively) didn't.

It's not about fan-blaming, we all had the opportunity - for years - to buy them, and only some of us did.

Ok we didnt but nothing can be done about that now. It doesnt matter how much HSL has in the bank if no shares are currently up for sale. So what is the best way forward for HSL?

[lyonhibs]

Ok we didnt but nothing can be done about that now. It doesnt matter how much HSL has in the bank if no shares are currently up for sale. So what is the best way forward for HSL?

I'm not sure you're quite grasping the fact that the umpteen small individual share holders - Mr + Mrs Smith etc - that privately bought shares eons ago might be willing to part with them at an agreed price if contacted by HSL.

Mr + Mrs Smith haven't actively put the shares "up for sale", they aren't wandering around ER like ticket touts going "shares for sale here" but with a bit of proactive marketing/research from HSL they could be persuaded to sell their shares to increase the HSL % stakeholding.

[matty_f]

Ok we didnt but nothing can be done about that now. It doesnt matter how much HSL has in the bank if no shares are currently up for sale. So what is the best way forward for HSL?

Good question, few different opinions on it and I'm not sure which is best.

Personally, I'd like there to be an element of funds collected to buy up existing shares where and when possible, the rest I would like to see directed to the first team.

HS (no L, anymore after their re-brand :greengrin ) have to continue now as an organisation and significant shareholder in the club. It's member-led, so those that pay in/are members should set the course.

[ahibby]

Good question, few different opinions on it and I'm not sure which is best.

Personally, I'd like there to be an element of funds collected to buy up existing shares where and when possible, the rest I would like to see directed to the first team.

HS (no L, anymore after their re-brand :greengrin ) have to continue now as an organisation and significant shareholder in the club. It's member-led, so those that pay in/are members should set the course.

Can u c shares being for sale any time soon? I know perhaps I am asking u to guess but your opinion would be welcome.

[matty_f]

Can u c shares being for sale any time soon? I know perhaps I am asking u to guess but your opinion would be welcome.

I know that HS recently wrote to supporters asking to donate shares, and I know that the only shares becoming available any time soon will be private individuals looking to (or willing to) sell to HS.

The club definitely won't be creating new shares to sell, and Ron Gordon won't be selling any of his.

[ahibby]

I know that HS recently wrote to supporters asking to donate shares, and I know that the only shares becoming available any time soon will be private individuals looking to (or willing to) sell to HS.

The club definitely won't be creating new shares to sell, and Ron Gordon won't be selling any of his.

Thanks. I thought theyd have an answer from holders by now but thats me being impatient as usual.

[offshorehibby]

Thanks. I thought theyd have an answer from holders by now but thats me being impatient as usual.

I think it could be a slow burner getting current HS members to part with shares. I've had paperwork there for a few weeks now for donating X amount of my shares to HS.

The next stage will be to reach out to none HS share holders.

[madhatter]

We are sorry that you feel this way.
We did consult Members at our recent meetings. As far as we could gather everyone wanted this to remain the same with nearly 100% of funds going to the stated purpose. Competitor schemes see 50% of funds going to the VAT and other costs. We think most fans want there money to be well used. We can and indeed have been offering some rewards. What would you like to see us offering ?

Hibernian Supporters

I don’t mean to be one of those people criticising without any tangible suggestion of a way forward just it’s an easy position to fall into on this topic. It’s the million dollar question how you get people to part with their hard earned income to financially enhance a football club that they already financially support. Even those that are positive about the movement will ponder “maybe I’m better saving this money” each month. Two factors exacerbate this matter - personal struggles and poor football performance by club. As it currently stands, for a lot of people, life is a struggle and Hibs are performing well below necessary standards (we should not be getting thrashed by clubs with 1/3 of our ST numbers, losing is fine, thrashing isn’t). Club have actually had a poor 18 months, so this goes further than Hecky.

Wish I had the answer, added to the above you also have the “we have a rich owner who will profit from Hibs so why shouldn’t he fund the enhancement of the club?”. Ron got the club for cheap and barring horrendous mismanagement he’ll profit from it. Very difficult to get fans on the side of helping Ron to boost his coffers.

Only way I see it working is some kind of discount or reward scheme. I just don’t see why people would continue to sacrifice things in their life to then have the potential of gross mismanagement/misappropriation of funds from the club - all it takes is 1 bad CEO or 1 bad manager to have us flushing money down the drain.

As far as I’m aware club are not accountable for the suitability of spending so they are risking trust, something which Hibs fans have never really had much of (for obvious reasons). Lately, I’ve lost trust in the club. There was a shift from being a number to being a person. Now though I think it’s back to we are simply numbers.

This is why I personally think the donation model is starting to become a very awkward proposition. It was always going to be an uphill struggle as we didn’t go bust like Hearts. Takeover, Brexit and poor performance over an 18 month period doesn’t help matters either. Happy to be shot down on a lot of this, it’s just my opinion - for what it’s worth I’ve not stopped HSL donations.

[Michael]

I'm personally at the point of wanting to give up with the notion of safeguarding, I think that ship has likely sailed. What I'd like to see is a rewards scheme for fans. Prize raffles are great but why cant 25% of the money raised be put aside to reward fans with a "free" shirt. I honestly would sign up to a subscription model which meant most of the money was going to the playing squad but a small amount was set aside to "reward" us. Put into context, through HSL I give approximately £250 a year. Why cant some amount of that be attributed to me? Club cannot guarantee footballing success and entertainment but they could guarantee me a shirt or merchandise/club experiences. Fans will not stay on side with most things solely attributed to "footballing success" as that, unfortunately, is like selling Brexit to the masses. No certainties. More money does not equal sporting success.

Just donate £200 and buy a shirt?

[Eyrie]

My understanding is that you won't be voting on your own contributions, but the overall pot of contributions. The vote will presumably be for all members, whether they currently contribute or not, given they are the "owners" of HSL - the notion that members who currently don't contribute would be excluded from an HSL decision, while part paid members can decide where contributions go sounds completely contradictory to fair company governance IMHO.

That's my understanding of it as well.

Hopefully Official HSL will clarify whether an individual's contributions will be

a - 100% allocated according to their individual vote, or
b - allocated according to the overall vote of the membership.

[malcolm]

My understanding is that you won't be voting on your own contributions, but the overall pot of contributions. The vote will presumably be for all members, whether they currently contribute or not, given they are the "owners" of HSL - the notion that members who currently don't contribute would be excluded from an HSL decision, while part paid members can decide where contributions go sounds completely contradictory to fair company governance IMHO.

My understanding (albeit gleaned from rather imprecise communication) is that you do get to choose what happens to your own contribution. I think the use of ‘vote’ was acknowledged as being not an accurate or clear bit of terminology. I am working on the basis that I choose not anyone else.

I can’t see how individuals deciding what happens to their own individual stream of funds is in any way contradictory to good governance. Rather it is clear, offering flexibility to those currently contributing and reasonably confines the choice to the contributor not those who contributed in the past.

The fact that we are discussing this is an indictment on the clarity of the communication which I hope to be addressed when ‘mood in the camp’ becomes something like ‘elect what happens to any ongoing contributions you are making.’

[madhatter]

Just donate £200 and buy a shirt?

Don’t donate and buy 5 shirts? Interesting to know which one benefits club the most...

My donations do very little to build club’s profile unless club get footballing side right. Wearing 5 shirts at once will certainly gain people’s attention.

[Purple & Green]

My understanding (albeit gleaned from rather imprecise communication) is that you do get to choose what happens to your own contribution. I think the use of ‘vote’ was acknowledged as being not an accurate or clear bit of terminology. I am working on the basis that I choose not anyone else.

I can’t see how individuals deciding what happens to their own individual stream of funds is in any way contradictory to good governance. Rather it is clear, offering flexibility to those currently contributing and reasonably confines the choice to the contributor not those who contributed in the past.

The fact that we are discussing this is an indictment on the clarity of the communication which I hope to be addressed when ‘mood in the camp’ becomes something like ‘elect what happens to any ongoing contributions you are making.’

Agree on the last bit, especially.

If new members contribute to the club donations only, should they then be excluded from having a say on issues regarding the shareholding held by HSL? Can you see the paradox?

[tamig]

Good. As I have said bfore to each their own. My view is that all contributions would be better goung towards players until such time as we know shares are for sale. Then we could be asked for help to buy those shares. Its only my view. I would contribute under those circumstances.

Shares can become available at any time. HSL must be in a position to buy them when that happens.

[tamig]

I think it could be a slow burner getting current HS members to part with shares. I've had paperwork there for a few weeks now for donating X amount of my shares to HS.

The next stage will be to reach out to none HS share holders.

Sorry, I don’t get you. HS members don’t have shares to part with. They are part of the collective. Or are you an HS member who is also an individual shareholder - and you’ve gifted part of your individual shareholding to HS?

[superfurryhibby]

Fan blaming really irks me on this - this was a club led initiative, and the flaws and faults are down to the way it was set up by the club, not by the fans who took it on as best they could, and the fans who did contribute. I think the lack of take up reflects on the governance of the club over a long period.

With you all the way on this.


I don't agree, folk created a myriad of reasons, lies and mis-information about it from the word go.

The support could also have bought shares directly.

I just think it's a bit rich to say it was bad to dilute the shares when we've collectively had however many years to buy those shares ourselves.

They were right there, we had a vehicle to purchase them and we (collectively) didn't.

It's not about fan-blaming, we all had the opportunity - for years - to buy them, and only some of us did.

Given the circumstances and the poor marketing, the total uptake between HSL and small individual shareholders wasn’t bad at all, c 31% if IRCC? Not too bad really, wasn’t it?

[malcolm]

Agree on the last bit, especially.

If new members contribute to the club donations only, should they then be excluded from having a say on issues regarding the shareholding held by HSL? Can you see the paradox?

If they have paid in enough to be members of HSL then, based on the HSL approach that all members are equal regardless of amount contributed, I see no issue. The question about application of ongoing funding stream is quite rightly separate to membership status and the democracy that the rules apply to that.

Say the votes were overwhelmingly to fund the club rather than the purchase of shares, it would trigger much umbrage if those contributing on that basis to become members were only second class members. One member one vote is a sensible approach.

[Michael]

Don’t donate and buy 5 shirts? Interesting to know which one benefits club the most...

My donations do very little to build club’s profile unless club get footballing side right. Wearing 5 shirts at once will certainly gain people’s attention.

Diminishing returns - 5 shirts still only looks like one shirt when worn.

[tamig]

That's my understanding of it as well.

Hopefully Official HSL will clarify whether an individual's contributions will be

a - 100% allocated according to their individual vote, or
b - allocated according to the overall vote of the membership.

If you pay a tenner a month and you choose the 50/50 option, a fiver will go to the share pot and a fiver will go to the team budget. I think the comms issued so far are very clear on this. YOUR money will be distributed as you choose - not by what the majority decide.

[malcolm]

If you pay a tenner a month and you choose the 50/50 option, a fiver will go to the share pot and a fiver will go to the team budget. I think the comms issued so far are very clear on this. YOUR money will be distributed as you choose - not by what the majority decide.

I agree with your interpretation but what any communication means is whatever the recipient thinks it means. Clearly many seem to have perceived something different. Hence the comms have not been clear enough for all. It was an important message to get over and I’m sure it will be better when it comes to the actual election.

[Helensburghhibs]

I emailed last week to highlight that although I have raised it before I am still not receiving correspondence from HSL. I still haven't got a reply and haven't had any access to any the polls etc. I'm starting to assume they are that flush they don't need my monthly contribution

[matty_f]

With you all the way on this.



Given the circumstances and the poor marketing, the total uptake between HSL and small individual shareholders wasn’t bad at all, c 31% if IRCC? Not too bad really, wasn’t it?

The uptake was good depending on what point you’re making. If your arguing that it was harsh that the shareholding got diluted when the unsold shares got sold elsewhere then it’s not so good.

If you’re arguing that some Hibs fans stepped forward to support the cause at a time when there was no burning fire to motivate us then it’s fantastic.

[Golden Bear]

With you all the way on this.



Given the circumstances and the poor marketing, the total uptake between HSL and small individual shareholders wasn’t bad at all, c 31% if IRCC? Not too bad really, wasn’t it?

I'd hazard a guess that the vast majority of small shareholders held their "investment " long before the days of HSL.

[Purple & Green]

If they have paid in enough to be members of HSL then, based on the HSL approach that all members are equal regardless of amount contributed, I see no issue. The question about application of ongoing funding stream is quite rightly separate to membership status and the democracy that the rules apply to that.



But, you become a member when you’ve paid your £225. The goalposts are being moved and you can decide how your money is distributed before you are a member. Do we need to involve HSL in handling donations to the club? Why not just set up a Hibs Donations Limited and people can freely donate to the club.

I think we sooner we get this vote, and or emergency resolutions of members the quicker it can be cleared up.

[Just Alf]

But, you become a member when you’ve paid your £225. The goalposts are being moved and you can decide how your money is distributed before you are a member. Do we need to involve HSL in handling donations to the club? Why not just set up a Hibs Donations Limited and people can freely donate to the club.

I think we sooner we get this vote, and or emergency resolutions of members the quicker it can be cleared up.I'm slightly confused with your post, if you've just joined and paid a tenner last month, you'll have a vote like everyone else and any future payments will be attributed according to that vote?

What goal posts are being moved? (sorry if I've totally misunderstood your post - not the first time for me! )


Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

[superfurryhibby]

The uptake was good depending on what point you’re making. If your arguing that it was harsh that the shareholding got diluted when the unsold shares got sold elsewhere then it’s not so good.

If you’re arguing that some Hibs fans stepped forward to support the cause at a time when there was no burning fire to motivate us then it’s fantastic.

Can’t it be both?

31% of the share value must have been a substantial amount of money? Well done to those who put their cash in ( I’ll pat myself on the, ahem, back here)

Nothing I’ve read convinces me that fans being encouraged to invest, then having 6% of their stakeholding eliminated through a sell out is fair.

Maybe that happens all the time in business, I’m not sure, but it feels a bit disingenuous of the previous ownership to have allowed that. A kind of shifting of the goalposts.

[superfurryhibby]

I'd hazard a guess that the vast majority of small shareholders held their "investment " long before the days of HSL.

No chance. Most of them are people like me, who bought in during the recent share issues.

[hibby6270]

I emailed last week to highlight that although I have raised it before I am still not receiving correspondence from HSL. I still haven't got a reply and haven't had any access to any the polls etc. I'm starting to assume they are that flush they don't need my monthly contribution

I’m the same as you. Although I’ve not been a contributor for long (signed up just before Ron Gordon’s buyout - timing eh?), I’ve never received any emails either. I emailed HSL and got a reply today confirming my email address is on the distribution list and that an update email was being sent out today. I’ve still not received it yet but they did say give it until tomorrow (Saturday) before getting back to them.

[NadeAteMyLunch!]

I’m the same as you. Although I’ve not been a contributor for long (signed up just before Ron Gordon’s buyout - timing eh?), I’ve never received any emails either. I emailed HSL and got a reply today confirming my email address is on the distribution list and that an update email was being sent out today. I’ve still not received it yet but they did say give it until tomorrow (Saturday) before getting back to them.

I’m in this boat as well. My cash disappears out my account each month but never had any emails from them

[tamig]

I’m in this boat as well. My cash disappears out my account each month but never had any emails from them

Have you checked your junk/spam folder?

[offshorehibby]

Sorry, I don’t get you. HS members don’t have shares to part with. They are part of the collective. Or are you an HS member who is also an individual shareholder - and you’ve gifted part of your individual shareholding to HS?

I have my own shares which i intend to give up a large portion to HS and keeping a token amount that allows a certificate and gets me to the AGM if i wish to go.

[Eyrie]

If you pay a tenner a month and you choose the 50/50 option, a fiver will go to the share pot and a fiver will go to the team budget. I think the comms issued so far are very clear on this. YOUR money will be distributed as you choose - not by what the majority decide.

I'm hoping that is the case, but unfortunately it's only your interpretation of it and I'm not the only one who interprets it differently.

I'm asking Official HSL to clarify for all of us.

[OfficialHSL]

I'm hoping that is the case, but unfortunately it's only your interpretation of it and I'm not the only one who interprets it differently.

I'm asking Official HSL to clarify for all of us.
We can confirm that Tamig is correct.

Hibernian Supporters

[Eyrie]

We can confirm that Tamig is correct.

Hibernian Supporters

Thank you.

[wallpaperman]

Email received this morning, the real vote is now live.

Quite simple concept, each member’s vote is equal regardless of size of contribution. The final tally will be split proportionately between the two options going forward.

Not made my vote yet, have until Friday 27 September at 5pm to do this.

[Power]

https://www.hibeesbounce.com/attachments/6ab3e4d8-7ce7-4516-a78c-42e58f6546d4-jpeg.1363/

[Bangkok Hibby]

OK HSL help!! To cast your vote you need a password which I'm told can be found in "my account" There's no password there but there is my membership number. That doesn't work, neither does the password I use to log into the site. What am I doing wrong please?

Answer...not reading the page properly! Sorted

[mim]

I was quite relaxed about the distribution until I read the following in the HSL email


"For the avoidance of doubt please allow us to explain how this will work.

If we have 100 votes and they are cast as follows:

60 votes for the Football Dept
20 votes for shares
20 to be split 50/50 between the above options

the funds we receive each month will be distributed as follows:

• 70% to the Football Dept
• 30% for shares."

Bearing in mind that not everyone is contributing the same monthly amount, it seems to me that this vote cannot ensure that my contribution goes where I want it to. (Also, are HSL members who are no longer contributing allowed a vote? That could skew the result too.)

To take an extreme example:

I pay £10 monthly, my mate pays £100

We are the only voters.

I vote for the Football Dept
He votes for shares

the funds received each month are distributed as follows:

• 50% to the Football Dept (£55)
• 50% for shares (£55)

See the problem???

[DanishJohn]

I was quite relaxed about the distribution until I read the following in the HSL email



Bearing in mind that not everyone is contributing the same monthly amount, it seems to me that this vote cannot ensure that my contribution goes where I want it to. (Also, are HSL members who are no longer contributing allowed a vote? That could skew the result too.)

To take an extreme example:

I pay £10 monthly, my mate pays £100

We are the only voters.

I vote for the Football Dept
He votes for shares

the funds received each month are distributed as follows:

• 50% to the Football Dept (£55)
• 50% for shares (£55)

See the problem???

No I don't see the problem.

You want your tenner to go the football dept and thats where it will go.
Your mate wants his huner quid to go for shares and thats where that will go.

Am I wrong here ?

[green day]

I was quite relaxed about the distribution until I read the following in the HSL email



Bearing in mind that not everyone is contributing the same monthly amount, it seems to me that this vote cannot ensure that my contribution goes where I want it to. (Also, are HSL members who are no longer contributing allowed a vote? That could skew the result too.)

To take an extreme example:

I pay £10 monthly, my mate pays £100

We are the only voters.

I vote for the Football Dept
He votes for shares

the funds received each month are distributed as follows:

• 50% to the Football Dept (£55)
• 50% for shares (£55)

See the problem???

No, as thats exactly how I thought it would work.

Anyone thinking that HSL (or any fan run and volunteer run organisation for that matter) have the time / software / money to carve out and allocate your specific donation from thousands of donations every month............as well as dealing with the normal admin of joiners/direct debit problems etc............... hasnt really given it a lot of thought.

£X thousands coming in every month, and they will distribute it using the percentages as advised by the membership in this survey - cant see the problem.

In your scenario what would you suggest they do with the money from those that dont respond? Stick it in the bank and wait for an instruction?????

People getting hung up on utter minutiae

[mim]

That's my understanding of it as well.

Hopefully Official HSL will clarify whether an individual's contributions will be

a - 100% allocated according to their individual vote, or
b - allocated according to the overall vote of the membership.


If you pay a tenner a month and you choose the 50/50 option, a fiver will go to the share pot and a fiver will go to the team budget. I think the comms issued so far are very clear on this. YOUR money will be distributed as you choose - not by what the majority decide.


We can confirm that Tamig is correct.

Hibernian Supporters


No, as thats exactly how I thought it would work.

Anyone thinking that HSL (or any fan run and volunteer run organisation for that matter) have the time / software / money to carve out and allocate your specific donation from thousands of donations every month............as well as dealing with the normal admin of joiners/direct debit problems etc............... hasnt really given it a lot of thought.

£X thousands coming in every month, and they will distribute it using the percentages as advised by the membership in this survey - cant see the problem.

In your scenario what would you suggest they do with the money from those that dont respond? Stick it in the bank and wait for an instruction?????

People getting hung up on utter minutiae

As you can see from the HSL reply above they have already confirmed that the individual will decide where his/her contributions will go.
I don't have a 'scenario', I am pointing out the contradiction.

[Just Alf]

No, as thats exactly how I thought it would work.

Anyone thinking that HSL (or any fan run and volunteer run organisation for that matter) have the time / software / money to carve out and allocate your specific donation from thousands of donations every month............as well as dealing with the normal admin of joiners/direct debit problems etc............... hasnt really given it a lot of thought.

£X thousands coming in every month, and they will distribute it using the percentages as advised by the membership in this survey - cant see the problem.

In your scenario what would you suggest they do with the money from those that dont respond? Stick it in the bank and wait for an instruction?????

People getting hung up on utter minutiaeIn addition, there's only so many shares out there... I know from the the recent meetings that HSL are keen to have a fighting fund in place for the discussions they're try to arrange with the nominees so once that's in place the need to increase that element will fade and more can go to the team.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

[sixtwo]

Can HSL members choose to have their donations to go to the club to subsidise replacing this ball bag manager?

[Scotty Leither]

I was contributing to HSL and then my circumstances changed and I had to give up work for 2 years so my contribution had to be "suspended".

I'm now back working again and could afford £40/£50 (more if I had any confidence in this manager), but i'm slightly confused over this percentage allocation of donations/voting/not voting/HSL not buying shares at the moment or buying shares in future?

Can anyone from HSL provide me with unequivocal answers to the following:

If I contribute £50 per month, how nailed on is it that 100% of that goes to player purchases?

I'd also like to caveat that by saying that i'm only minded to donate if there's a guarantee from the Board that season ticket monies are exclusively for the player pot too - by extension, i'm not putting funds towards player acquisitions if the Board are diverting money from season tickets to fund infrastructure.

This last point is really important, and some clarity on it from the club and HSL would be useful; i'm not prepared to put money into the club to grow the capital asset base (i.e. the indoor centre). If the new owner wants to do that he should be funding that himself.

How much of an input do the club have in how HSL allocates funds?

[green day]

As you can see from the HSL reply above they have already confirmed that the individual will decide where his/her contributions will go.
I don't have a 'scenario', I am pointing out the contradiction.

I think you will find I am right :wink:

Happy to wait for confirmation.

[kaimendhibs]

Vote getting right on my tits. Keeps saying my password is wrong when I know it isnt

Sent from my VTR-L09 using Tapatalk

[green day]

Vote getting right on my tits. Keeps saying my password is wrong when I know it isnt

Sent from my VTR-L09 using Tapatalk

Are you mixing up the password and your membership No?

[OfficialHSL]

I was quite relaxed about the distribution until I read the following in the HSL email



Bearing in mind that not everyone is contributing the same monthly amount, it seems to me that this vote cannot ensure that my contribution goes where I want it to. (Also, are HSL members who are no longer contributing allowed a vote? That could skew the result too.)

To take an extreme example:

I pay £10 monthly, my mate pays £100

We are the only voters.

I vote for the Football Dept
He votes for shares

the funds received each month are distributed as follows:

• 50% to the Football Dept (£55)
• 50% for shares (£55)

See the problem???
MIM
Can we refer you to the reply given by Greenday as he/she has summarised things correctly.

The underlying premise of your consideration is that there is a material difference in voting between different donation levels. We have not found any evidence to support that.
You could not have picked a more extreme scenario to support your argument but by doing so it is not presenting an accurate picture to our donators. I’m sure that you would expect us to get more than two votes and I am sure we will have a much bigger divergence of donation levels. Yes we are using the poll as a surrogate of individual counting but we believe it to be a very, very accurate surrogate. We could spend £5 of your £10 to develop new systems but we don’t think our donators would think it was good use of their donations. We have not found any evidence to suggest that £10 donators will vote any differently from £18.75 donators.

Hibernian Supporters

[tamig]

Are you mixing up the password and your membership No?

And the password to get into the survey isn’t your own password.

[coldingham hibs]

Personally I’d like HSL to hold funds until we see what happens with the Managerial position. I wouldn’t want my donation going into club coffers to aid Heckinbottoms current signing policy and I don’t see the point of purchasing shares either at this moment in time.

If a new Manager is appointed I’d like him to receive the money to fund January or out of contract players (if that’s still possible).

[offshorehibby]

Vote getting right on my tits. Keeps saying my password is wrong when I know it isnt

Sent from my VTR-L09 using Tapatalk

It's wired, i got password not correct. Go back and read the text in the 'Mood in the camp' bit

'
Can you please indicate where you would like your donations to us from 1st October 2019 to be directed.
To cast your vote, please click the button and then enter the password "hibernian1875" when prompted.
Please note, responses are being monitored and multiple responses from the same user will be disregarded'

[#2 Double Tap]

if there are two options, football dept and shares, why not just open two bank accounts, let the donators choose where their money goes, problem solved without all the bull**** survey things.

[mim]

MIM
Can we refer you to the reply given by Greenday as he/she has summarised things correctly.

The underlying premise of your consideration is that there is a material difference in voting between different donation levels. We have not found any evidence to support that.
You could not have picked a more extreme scenario to support your argument but by doing so it is not presenting an accurate picture to our donators. I’m sure that you would expect us to get more than two votes and I am sure we will have a much bigger divergence of donation levels. Yes we are using the poll as a surrogate of individual counting but we believe it to be a very, very accurate surrogate. We could spend £5 of your £10 to develop new systems but we don’t think our donators would think it was good use of their donations. We have not found any evidence to suggest that £10 donators will vote any differently from £18.75 donators.

Hibernian Supporters

You completely misunderstand my point. I have no problem with what you are doing. My example was deliberately extreme in order to demonstrate that there is still confusion between whether individual's donations are allocated as per the individual's wishes (as suggested by your reply to Tamig) or allocated in proportion to the overall vote (as Greenday has suggested). It can't be both.

[Bangkok Hibby]

I thought I understood it but not so sure now.

I personally don't want any of my money to go to share purchase. Do you guarantee that will be the case, and the overall vote will have no bearing on my wishes?

[Eric]

You completely misunderstand my point. I have no problem with what you are doing. My example was deliberately extreme in order to demonstrate that there is still confusion between whether individual's donations are allocated as per the individual's wishes (as suggested by your reply to Tamig) or allocated in proportion to the overall vote (as Greenday has suggested). It can't be both.

The donations from those who state their wishes will be allocated accordingly and the donations from those who do not vote will allocated in
proportion to the final overall vote. Could not be simpler!

[Rocky]

The donations from those who state their wishes will be allocated accordingly and the donations from those who do not vote will allocated in
proportion to the final overall vote. Could not be simpler!

How comes all the people who keep saying how simple it is are the ones that are getting it wrong?

[mim]

The donations from those who state their wishes will be allocated accordingly and the donations from those who do not vote will allocated in
proportion to the final overall vote. Could not be simpler!

Makes perfect sense to me (if that is what is actually meant by the email)

[OfficialHSL]

You completely misunderstand my point. I have no problem with what you are doing. My example was deliberately extreme in order to demonstrate that there is still confusion between whether individual's donations are allocated as per the individual's wishes (as suggested by your reply to Tamig) or allocated in proportion to the overall vote (as Greenday has suggested). It can't be both.
MIM
To avoid any confusion can we once again confirm that Greenday has summarised things very well. We are satisfied that there will be no material difference in the end result using either method. We have no need to spend £000’s of our Members money to build a system that may have little use in the future. From 1st October all new joiners to Hibernian Supporters will do so in the knowledge that 100% of their donation will go to the Football Dept.


Hibernian Supporters

[OfficialHSL]

I was contributing to HSL and then my circumstances changed and I had to give up work for 2 years so my contribution had to be "suspended".

I'm now back working again and could afford £40/£50 (more if I had any confidence in this manager), but i'm slightly confused over this percentage allocation of donations/voting/not voting/HSL not buying shares at the moment or buying shares in future?

Can anyone from HSL provide me with unequivocal answers to the following:

If I contribute £50 per month, how nailed on is it that 100% of that goes to player purchases?

I'd also like to caveat that by saying that i'm only minded to donate if there's a guarantee from the Board that season ticket monies are exclusively for the player pot too - by extension, i'm not putting funds towards player acquisitions if the Board are diverting money from season tickets to fund infrastructure.

This last point is really important, and some clarity on it from the club and HSL would be useful; i'm not prepared to put money into the club to grow the capital asset base (i.e. the indoor centre). If the new owner wants to do that he should be funding that himself.

How much of an input do the club have in how HSL allocates funds?
Scotty Leither

Can we answer your questions as follows :

1.We are satisfied that we will be very “nailed on” in meeting your intentions for your donations.

2. We continue to have the Clubs assurance that all donations received from us are a supplement to the football budget. We have no reason to doubt this and it has not happened over the last four years.

3. Our donations will only be used for the two purposes outlined. Infrastructure is not an option. It is interesting to note that as part owners of the Club that we too benefit from any Capital improvements.

Hibernian Supporters

[OfficialHSL]

Personally I’d like HSL to hold funds until we see what happens with the Managerial position. I wouldn’t want my donation going into club coffers to aid Heckinbottoms current signing policy and I don’t see the point of purchasing shares either at this moment in time.

If a new Manager is appointed I’d like him to receive the money to fund January or out of contract players (if that’s still possible).
Coldingham Hibs

We think it is important to make it clear to all our donators and Members that we will never withhold funds from the Club subject to any qualifications. We give our funds to the Club on the basis that the Club Board run the Club, we are simply trying to give them some additional funding.

Hibernian Supporters

[A Hi-Bee]

if there are two options, football dept and shares, why not just open two bank accounts, let the donators choose where their money goes, problem solved without all the bull**** survey things.

Just a very strong reason to keep joe public away from running a fitba club.
Give money by all means but as for anything else it dont work.

[Purple & Green]

From 1st October all new joiners to Hibernian Supporters will do so in the knowledge that 100% of their donation will go to the Football Dept.


I don't understand the distinction? Why wouldn't new joiners "donations" be allocated in the same proportion as existing donators "donations" as per the vote?

[Pagan Hibernia]

Voted.

HSL were put in a very difficult position by the transfer of majority ownership but I’m happy with this arrangement. It’s not perfect but it’s the best way of trying to keep everyone happy.

[OfficialHSL]

Voted.

HSL were put in a very difficult position by the transfer of majority ownership but I’m happy with this arrangement. It’s not perfect but it’s the best way of trying to keep everyone happy.

Pagan
Thank you so much, we really appreciate your understanding. As you say, it’s not perfect but democracy never is.

Hibernian Supporters

[OfficialHSL]

I don't understand the distinction? Why wouldn't new joiners "donations" be allocated in the same proportion as existing donators "donations" as per the vote?

Because they didn’t get the benefit of voting. We do however need to have a clear proposition going forward so that new joiners know exactly where their money is going. If we carry out this exercise once a year everyone ( including those who joined since the last vote) can update their instruction.

Hibernian Supporters

[oldbutdim]

I've voted - chosen 100% for the footie option.


I'd quite like a receipt though, and the opportunity for a 'money back guarantee' if there are any more impostors signed.

:wink: