The Gordons

[GreenNWhiteArmy]

Thank you

3 "big" money transfers. Re-investing proceeds from sales.

They've backed the club probably more this window than any window in my 30 years watching. We really appreciate you

Over to you LJ...

[BILLYHIBS]

Legends

We love Ron

Thank you

[JimBHibees]

Totally agree

[brianmc]

Whilst I'm happy with the backing the Club has received so far this summer let's not all go full 'Russian hat' like our pink chums did.

[Since452]

They are delivering. We've never seen player investment like this. Fair play.

[Blaster]

And the new hybrid pitches

[Hibbyradge]

The Gordon's what? :dunno:

[ErinGoBraghHFC]

Whilst I'm happy with the backing the Club has received so far this summer let's not all go full 'Russian hat' like our pink chums did.

Cowboy hats and gingham shirts?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Garymcl]

So what we all must do is turn up in big numbers starting on Thursday and get right behind the team :flag:

[SHODAN]

Keeping on investing. Good lads.

[hibee-boys]

The fans backing has been great off late, the Gordon family has clearly signed off great financial support in this window. Time for the players and management team to repay that faith, no better way to honour Ron’s memory.

[WeeRussell]

The Gordon's what? :dunno:

Not done by sunrise….

[McGhee]

God Bless you Ron. A really good, honorable person, with good intentions.

[Frazerbob]

They’ve certainly ponied up!

[hibees 7062]

Cowboy hats and gingham shirts?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

And The Gordons tattoo on ma back in the morning

[NAE NOOKIE]

If you wan't folk to believe you are serious when you buy a club you have to do more than just talk.

Huge improvements to hospitality. Big Screens. Hybrid pitch.

Money made invested back into the team to the tune of near on 1.5 million quid spent securing Youan and 2 new players, probably more than we have ever spent in a single transfer window.

Still loads to do on and off the pitch .... but as it stands you can hardly question the Gordon's commitment.

All for bloody nothing of course if we can't put a team on the park capable of beating the 2nd best team in Andorra :confused:

The positive is in that game half the folk we will be looking to become first team regulars didn't play for various reasons.

Onwards and upwards starting on Thursday .... Or at least it bloody better had :confused::confused:

[BegbieHSC]

Pushing £2m in transfer fees this window, on top of £1.2m for the new pitch. Fair play, and thank you!

[Colr]

Thank you

3 "big" money transfers. Re-investing proceeds from sales.

They've backed the club probably more this window than any window in my 30 years watching. We really appreciate you

Over to you LJ...

Vente is the 4th most expensive Hibs transfer ever!

[Allant1981]

Vente is the 4th most expensive Hibs transfer ever!

4th? Who are the other 3?

[Jones28]

4th? Who are the other 3?

This puzzled me too. De La Cruz was £750k, so there are two in between him and Vente?

Is Boyle counted in this? We didn’t pay a fee but we effectively cancelled a significant portion of his fee didn’t we?

[Alex Trager]

Thank you

3 "big" money transfers. Re-investing proceeds from sales.

They've backed the club probably more this window than any window in my 30 years watching. We really appreciate you

Over to you LJ...

Are they backing the club?

Or are they allowing the club to spend the money it is generating?

Seems to me it is the second option.

That said, I am glad that is the case, obviously.

People (not you) seem to consistently thank the Gordons and the impression I get is that they are thanking them for putting money in.

I am not sure they are putting money in. They are allowing the club to spend its income and also taking out loans against the club.

I am happy they are doing so but it seems to me there are blurred limes between what is happening and what people think is happening.

I could be wrong on both fronts, the Gordons may well be giving us money for nothing and I am not seeing it. Or, people are genuinely thanking them for allowing us to spend our income.

[DanishJohn]

This puzzled me too. De La Cruz was £750k, so there are two in between him and Vente?

Is Boyle counted in this? We didn’t pay a fee but we effectively cancelled a significant portion of his fee didn’t we?

Joe Harper must be there or there about.

We paid Everton £120000 in 1974 and that equates to £875000 in todays terms.

[Dashing Bob S]

Got to love them

[nonshinyfinish]

This puzzled me too. De La Cruz was £750k, so there are two in between him and Vente?

Is Boyle counted in this? We didn’t pay a fee but we effectively cancelled a significant portion of his fee didn’t we?

Yeah, DLC would be more if you believe the originally reported fee – I've no idea either way but it seems to be a widely held view that the actual fee was less.

Assuming the reports are accurate that we let them off the remaining part of the fee, Boyle would technically have cost us £1–1.5m (the exact amount depending on how much of the fee was unpaid, which I doubt anyone knows for sure). It's a weird one to classify though, as we definitely wouldn't have spent that in a 'normal' transfer.

I can't think of any others – Keith Wright adjusted for inflation maybe?

[nonshinyfinish]

Joe Harper must be there or there about.

We paid Everton £120000 in 1974 and that equates to £875000 in todays terms.

Yeah, I guess a few players might come into contention if you start adjusting for inflation.

[Hibby Bairn]

Are they backing the club?

Or are they allowing the club to spend the money it is generating?

Seems to me it is the second option.

That said, I am glad that is the case, obviously.

People (not you) seem to consistently thank the Gordons and the impression I get is that they are thanking them for putting money in.

I am not sure they are putting money in. They are allowing the club to spend its income and also taking out loans against the club.

I am happy they are doing so but it seems to me there are blurred limes between what is happening and what people think is happening.

I could be wrong on both fronts, the Gordons may well be giving us money for nothing and I am not seeing it. Or, people are genuinely thanking them for allowing us to spend our income.

That's the way I see it.

Never really got the mass love in with "the Gordons". Good stewardship, yes. But that's what they should be doing.

[J-C]

Ron said at the beginning that he wanted to double the wages and start spending good money on transfers, it looks like that's starting to happen. The extra corporate money coming in has made a difference. A big thanks to the Gordon family for continuing the work Ron started.

[Stanton Spence]

Are they backing the club?

Or are they allowing the club to spend the money it is generating?

Seems to me it is the second option.

That said, I am glad that is the case, obviously.

People (not you) seem to consistently thank the Gordons and the impression I get is that they are thanking them for putting money in.

I am not sure they are putting money in. They are allowing the club to spend its income and also taking out loans against the club.

I am happy they are doing so but it seems to me there are blurred limes between what is happening and what people think is happening.

I could be wrong on both fronts, the Gordons may well be giving us money for nothing and I am not seeing it. Or, people are genuinely thanking them for allowing us to spend our income.
They are also in control of generating the income by signing players like Nisbet in the first place and then reinvesting the money made
There are far worse owners than the Gordons and they are due a bit of credit for what they have done so far this window

[GordonHFC]

People complaining that the Gordon's are only reinvesting money generated from transfers. When did Hibs do this to the same extent in the past. I remember Petrie coming out and saying 'the days of Hibs paying transfer fees are over'.

[Bobo]

Pat McGinlay was bought back from Celtic in 1994 for £420000 (just under £1069000 today) so is close to one of our highest purchases but if you do the same inflation calculation with the £700000 paid for De la Cruz, in 2001, it amounts to just over £1481000 now.

Tom Hart spent some amount of money on Hibs during his ownership of the club, the near £285000 (nowadays) on George Bests' wages alone, in 1979 was a very sizeable outlay at the time but a shrewd business move as he'd have more than covered the cost with the increased gate receipts while Best was at the club.

You need to speculate to accumulate, eventhough things may not always work out the way you'd planned for.

[Jack]

Are they backing the club?

Or are they allowing the club to spend the money it is generating?

Seems to me it is the second option.

That said, I am glad that is the case, obviously.

People (not you) seem to consistently thank the Gordons and the impression I get is that they are thanking them for putting money in.

I am not sure they are putting money in. They are allowing the club to spend its income and also taking out loans against the club.

I am happy they are doing so but it seems to me there are blurred limes between what is happening and what people think is happening.

I could be wrong on both fronts, the Gordons may well be giving us money for nothing and I am not seeing it. Or, people are genuinely thanking them for allowing us to spend our income.

I don't think you are wrong.

It's great we're in a position to do that these days. In the past there's been stands built and training centres. The unglorious stuff but needed anyway to get where we and the Gordon’s are now.

[Keepthefaith]

I don't think you are wrong.

It's great we're in a position to do that these days. In the past there's been stands built and training centres. The unglorious stuff but needed anyway to get where we and the Gordon’s are now.

I think what's helpful though is the shift in mentality that somehow they were trying to fleece the club. Was lots of outlandish claims being made and derogatory remarks so it's nice to see folk appreciate the owners are trying to do the best by the club

[Centre Hawf]

Are they backing the club?

Or are they allowing the club to spend the money it is generating?

Seems to me it is the second option.

That said, I am glad that is the case, obviously.

People (not you) seem to consistently thank the Gordons and the impression I get is that they are thanking them for putting money in.

I am not sure they are putting money in. They are allowing the club to spend its income and also taking out loans against the club.

I am happy they are doing so but it seems to me there are blurred limes between what is happening and what people think is happening.

I could be wrong on both fronts, the Gordons may well be giving us money for nothing and I am not seeing it. Or, people are genuinely thanking them for allowing us to spend our income.

The family have been thanked in a few recent signing announcements for their financial backing so I don't think it's a case of them doing nothing but give permission to spend club money. But I imagine the truth lies somewhere in the middle.

The chat was recently of recent loans being taken out from the holding company, it's perhaps a case that they've fronted up cash that they expect to come in over the next couple of seasons to spend now, ranging from the big stuff like Porteous, Doig, and Nisbets clauses/sell ons. To maybe even the smaller stuff we probably don't make public such as a Cabraja or Bradley maybe having sell ons.

Either way they're being proactive and putting money into the club to help grow us now rather than stall after the exits of key players.

[Stuart93]

Are they backing the club?

Or are they allowing the club to spend the money it is generating?

Seems to me it is the second option.

That said, I am glad that is the case, obviously.

People (not you) seem to consistently thank the Gordons and the impression I get is that they are thanking them for putting money in.

I am not sure they are putting money in. They are allowing the club to spend its income and also taking out loans against the club.

I am happy they are doing so but it seems to me there are blurred limes between what is happening and what people think is happening.

I could be wrong on both fronts, the Gordons may well be giving us money for nothing and I am not seeing it. Or, people are genuinely thanking them for allowing us to spend our income.

You raise a fair point mate kind of why I’ve held off with the over the top praise.

I feel though we finally have owners who’re letting the manager spend fees we have coming in and reinvesting them in the squad. Probably what owners should be doing but as we’ve seen that’s not always what happens

I’m not sure if the waters a being muddied in terms of what Anderson is doing at hearts and basically handing them money for free basically. It is an important point that loans are being taking out against the club as you’d imagine at some point the Gordon’s will want to start recouping those loans

That being said, it is a breath of fresh air seeing us spend decent fees on what should be good players

[One Day Soon]

The Gordon's what? :dunno:

The horror, the horror.

[basehibby]

I think what's helpful though is the shift in mentality that somehow they were trying to fleece the club. Was lots of outlandish claims being made and derogatory remarks so it's nice to see folk appreciate the owners are trying to do the best by the club

Ridiculous unfounded garbage spouted by a small but vocal minority that seem to like nothing better than talking down the club at any and every opportunity.

[Hibbyradge]

Are they backing the club?

Or are they allowing the club to spend the money it is generating?

Seems to me it is the second option.

That said, I am glad that is the case, obviously.

People (not you) seem to consistently thank the Gordons and the impression I get is that they are thanking them for putting money in.

I am not sure they are putting money in. They are allowing the club to spend its income and also taking out loans against the club.

I am happy they are doing so but it seems to me there are blurred limes between what is happening and what people think is happening.

I could be wrong on both fronts, the Gordons may well be giving us money for nothing and I am not seeing it. Or, people are genuinely thanking them for allowing us to spend our income.

Not so long ago, people were saying things like "The Gordons are killing our club" and suggesting that they were only here to make money.

That they're not filling their pockets but investing it, is something to be thankful for.

[WhileTheChief..]

People complaining that the Gordon's are only reinvesting money generated from transfers. When did Hibs do this to the same extent in the past. I remember Petrie coming out and saying 'the days of Hibs paying transfer fees are over'.

Nobody is complaining about anything.

People are questioning the notion that the Gordon family are putting their own money into the club.

I'd be hugely surprised if that's the case. RG never once said he would do so.

His plan, as alluded to above, was to double our turnover within 5 years and then to double our wage bill. The Covid season maybe knocked us off track a little, but it appears that we're on our way to achieving RGs goal.

I guess the accounts will show if there has been any capital injected into the club or loans taken out to to cover our spending.

My guess is that neither of these things have happened, and that we are living within our means.

[Brightside]

I'm not sure they are investing anymore in the club are they? I thought they were taking loans out against the club via their sporting company? Which just means when they sell it those funds will be due to them. Is that wrong?

[Blaster]

Nobody is complaining about anything.

People are questioning the notion that the Gordon family are putting their own money into the club.

I'd be hugely surprised if that's the case. RG never once said he would do so.

His plan, as alluded to above, was to double our turnover within 5 years and then to double our wage bill. The Covid season maybe knocked us off track a little, but it appears that we're on our way to achieving RGs goal.

I guess the accounts will show if there has been any capital injected into the club or loans taken out to to cover our spending.

My guess is that neither of these things have happened, and that we are living within our means.

Paid for the hybrid pitches out their own money

[WhileTheChief..]

Paid for the hybrid pitches out their own money

How is it possible to know that for sure?

[Blaster]

How is it possible to know that for sure?

How do we know anything for sure? I was told this information recently and have a strong belief that it’s correct. It may be a load of nonsense but based on where the info came from I think it’s true

[WhileTheChief..]

How often do any club owners put their own cash into the clubs they own?

Whenever I've read about it with clubs that have been in trouble, it's always described as directors loans that need to be paid back.

Rangers, Motherwell, Hamilton, Dundee Utd etc etc.

[Blaster]

How often do any club owners put their own cash into the clubs they own?

Whenever I've read about it with clubs that have been in trouble, it's always described as directors loans that need to be paid back.

Rangers, Motherwell, Hamilton, Dundee Utd etc etc.

How is it possible to know that for sure 😉

[Hibbyradge]

How often do any club owners put their own cash into the clubs they own?

Whenever I've read about it with clubs that have been in trouble, it's always described as directors loans that need to be paid back.

Rangers, Motherwell, Hamilton, Dundee Utd etc etc.

It's their club so, technically, it's their money. They don't have to reinvest it in the team.

[Billy Whizz]

It's their club so, technically, it's their money. They don't have to reinvest it in the team.

They are the majority share holders

[WhileTheChief..]

It's their club so, technically, it's their money. They don't have to reinvest it in the team.

No argument from me that they are reinvesting the club’s money. Money the club got in no small part from us.

That’s entirely different to them putting fresh, new money in that doesn’t need paid back though. That’s the bit that’s being questioned I think.

[Since90+2]

It's their club so, technically, it's their money. They don't have to reinvest it in the team.

They are the owners but it's not their club. The club wouldn't exist without the fans.

[CropleyWasGod]

To clear up a few things from the recent discussion.

As at 30 June 2022, the club owed Bydand (the majority shareholder, owned by the Gordon family) £1.9m. As for what has happened since then, any thought or opinions are mostly speculation.

Anything Bydand or the Gordons have paid for on behalf of the club is almost certainly treated as a loan to the club by them.

[Brightside]

To clear up a few things from the recent discussion.

As at 30 June 2022, the club owed Bydand (the majority shareholder, owned by the Gordon family) £1.9m. As for what has happened since then, that's speculation.

Anything Bydand or the Gordons have paid for on behalf of the club is almost certainly treated as a loan to the club by them.

Thats what I thought....and I don't really have an issue with them doing that.

[Hibees1973]

To clear up a few things from the recent discussion.

As at 30 June 2022, the club owed Bydand (the majority shareholder, owned by the Gordon family) £1.9m. As for what has happened since then, any thought or opinions are mostly speculation.

Anything Bydand or the Gordons have paid for on behalf of the club is almost certainly treated as a loan to the club by them.

What would this £1.9m have increased to given the upgrade on the pitch at ER & East Mains. Think I heard this was £1.5m and this was another loan to Hibs. Also any cost of buying players, but would have expected this to be offset by player sales.

Must admit to being confused about what debt is the club's and what debt is the Gordon's.

[CropleyWasGod]

What would this £1.9m have increased to given the upgrade on the pitch at ER & East Mains. Think I heard this was £1.5m and this was another loan to Hibs. Also any cost of buying players, but would have expected this to be offset by player sales.

Must admit to being confused about what debt is the club's and what debt is the Gordon's.

Like I said, any discussion of your first paragraph would be based on speculation.

Not sure what your second paragraph means. Our concern is the amount we owe to Bydand.

[Hibees1973]

My late old mum used to say 'If it's too good to be true, it probably isn't'.

I appreciate the ambition Hibs are showing. As others have said we seem to be spending money being brought in by player sales which hasn't really happened at the club since I've supported Hibs over 50 years ago.

Maybe it's been mentioned on here already or has been announced at an AGM in the past. But I would like clarification on how much is being loaned to Hibs/what debt Hibs are in/the amount of money, if any, being donated by the Gordon's/Bydand. Also, are the Gordon's/Bydand expecting the club to repay these loans back.

There are differences between a loans, investments and donations.

[CropleyWasGod]

Maybe it's been mentioned on here already or has been announced at an AGM in the past. But I would like clarification on 1. how much is being loaned to Hibs/what debt Hibs are in/ 2. the amount of money, if any, being donated by the Gordon's/Bydand. Also, 3. are the Gordon's/Bydand expecting the club to repay these loans back.

.

(I've added numbers to your questions to make my reply easier to understand.)

1. £1.9m due to Bydand, £1.4 m due to the SG.

2. nothing

3. yes.

All correct as at 30 June 22.

[Hibees1973]

(I've added numbers to your questions to make my reply easier to understand.)

1. £1.9m due to Bydand, £1.4 m due to the SG.

2. nothing

3. yes.

All correct as at 30 June 22.

Thanks for that Cropley.

[hibee-boys]

(I've added numbers to your questions to make my reply easier to understand.)

1. £1.9m due to Bydand, £1.4 m due to the SG.

2. nothing

3. yes.

All correct as at 30 June 22.

SG? Scottish Government? Bounce back loan during covid🤔

[007]

SG? Scottish Government? Bounce back loan during covid🤔

Essentially a Bounce Back Loan (though not like those given to regular businesses), interest free over 20 years.

All the Premiership clubs except Celtic applied for it.
https://www.gov.scot/publications/foi-202100213841/

[Paulie Walnuts]

Essentially a Bounce Back Loan (though not like those given to regular businesses), interest free over 20 years.

All the Premiership clubs except Celtic applied for it.
https://www.gov.scot/publications/foi-202100213841/

So £70k a year for 20 years. Pretty decent and no rush to pay back that sort of amount at all with it being interest free.

[tamig]

So many conspiracy theorists on here. Why do folk always have to suspect the worst? The family have said they are committed to fulfilling Ron’s ambitions for the club. That’s good enough for me.

And why do people insist on putting a bloody apostrophe in when referring to the family as a collective. Pain in the arse 😠

[Colr]

4th? Who are the other 3?

https://www.footballtransfers.com/en/teams/gb-sct/hibernian/transfers/most-expensive

Not sure where they got their numbers from. Some are different to the ones I heard quoted before but…..

[Billy Whizz]

https://www.footballtransfers.com/en/teams/gb-sct/hibernian/transfers/most-expensive

Not sure where they got their numbers from. Some are different to the ones I heard quoted before but…..

I wonder if the McGinn one includes all add ons

[Willis1875]

I wonder if the McGinn one includes all add ons

Looks a nonsense site,no listing of Scott Brown moving from Hibs to Celtic

[007]

https://www.footballtransfers.com/en/teams/gb-sct/hibernian/transfers/most-expensive

Not sure where they got their numbers from. Some are different to the ones I heard quoted before but…..

€1m for Magennis. 🤔

[Lester B]

So many conspiracy theorists on here. Why do folk always have to suspect the worst? The family have said they are committed to fulfilling Ron’s ambitions for the club. That’s good enough for me.

And why do people insist on putting a bloody apostrophe in when referring to the family as a collective. Pain in the arse 😠

Brilliant post. And I’m glad someone mentioned the apostrophe thing too. It’s even in the thread title.

[Conj]

Looks a nonsense site,no listing of Scott Brown moving from Hibs to Celtic

And I’m not having it that Peterhead paid £700.000 for Kevin Nicol

[Forza Fred]

I always thought Ron’s intentions were nothing but honourable

The rest of the Gordon family are honouring these intentions, and for that I am eternally grateful.

I am pleased what I have seen so far, and I hope that they long continue to retain that interest, and now feel fully part of the broader Hibs family.

Thank you Gordons.

[JimBHibees]

I always thought Ron’s intentions were nothing but honourable

The rest of the Gordon family are honouring these intentions, and for that I am eternally grateful.

I am pleased what I have seen so far, and I hope that they long continue to retain that interest, and now feel fully part of the broader Hibs family.

Thank you Gordons.

Completely agree they definitely seem very honourable and decent people and are obviously committed to the club when it may have been more understandable and easier to walk away after Ron sadly passed. They should get a lot of credit for that imo.

[flash]

And I’m not having it that Peterhead paid £700.000 for Kevin Nicol

At least 3 zeros too many on that one!

[Smartie]

So many conspiracy theorists on here. Why do folk always have to suspect the worst? The family have said they are committed to fulfilling Ron’s ambitions for the club. That’s good enough for me.

And why do people insist on putting a bloody apostrophe in when referring to the family as a collective. Pain in the arse 😠

I get what you’re saying, but I don’t think we can criticise some of our rival clubs’ fans, whose clubs later ended up in big trouble, for failing to scrutinise the actions of their owners if we’re not prepared to do the same with our own.

So if there is debt of any sort being applied to our club when it wasn’t there before, I think we’re entitled to discuss what exactly is going on, without necessarily getting the foil hats out.

We’ve been stitched up by the unscrupulous and the incompetent before, we should be guarded about doing so again until our current owners have a long track record of having our best interests at heart.

[Alex Trager]

To clear up a few things from the recent discussion.

As at 30 June 2022, the club owed Bydand (the majority shareholder, owned by the Gordon family) £1.9m. As for what has happened since then, any thought or opinions are mostly speculation.

Anything Bydand or the Gordons have paid for on behalf of the club is almost certainly treated as a loan to the club by them.

This is what my point was about yesterday, and apologies to all who responded that I am not responding to here.

My concern is about how much we owe them.

My confusion is why they are getting praise: if it is because they are putting their hand in their pocket, then it seems like that should be called out, because they’re not.

If it’s because they’re so far away from Rod Petrie, then sound. I agree.

I should add that I never bought into the whole idea that they were here to suck the money out of us, so never feel it’s worth even addressing it.

[GreenNWhiteArmy]

This is what my point was about yesterday, and apologies to all who responded that I am not responding to here.

My concern is about how much we owe them.

My confusion is why they are getting praise: if it is because they are putting their hand in their pocket, then it seems like that should be called out, because they’re not.

If it’s because they’re so far away from Rod Petrie, then sound. I agree.

I should add that I never bought into the whole idea that they were here to suck the money out of us, so never feel it’s worth even addressing it.

Just to clarify my original post, it was never about them being a cash cow and throwing money at us. So long as any repayments are steady and affordable then it shouldn't raise too big a concern to finances

It was an acknowledgement that the current regime are "allowing" us to be a bit more adventurous in the market. They've grown our income through multiple sources utilising their skillset and are giving the footballing structure the autonomy to go out and sign our targets, even if they come with a financial outlay. I certainly can't remember a window where we've spend well in excess of 1M on transfer fees

Does Doig moving on have a bearing on our projected figures for this year? Or could we potentially benefit more or better if he moved next summer for a (hopefully) higher fee?

[Alex Trager]

Just to clarify my original post, it was never about them being a cash cow and throwing money at us. So long as any repayments are steady and affordable then it shouldn't raise too big a concern to finances

It was an acknowledgement that the current regime are "allowing" us to be a bit more adventurous in the market. They've grown our income through multiple sources utilising their skillset and are giving the footballing structure the autonomy to go out and sign our targets, even if they come with a financial outlay. I certainly can't remember a window where we've spend well in excess of 1M on transfer fees

Does Doig moving on have a bearing on our projected figures for this year? Or could we potentially benefit more or better if he moved next summer for a (hopefully) higher fee?

NB. Thread title amended to please the grammar police.

Fair enough mate

[Brightside]

This is what my point was about yesterday, and apologies to all who responded that I am not responding to here.

My concern is about how much we owe them.

My confusion is why they are getting praise: if it is because they are putting their hand in their pocket, then it seems like that should be called out, because they’re not.

If it’s because they’re so far away from Rod Petrie, then sound. I agree.

I should add that I never bought into the whole idea that they were here to suck the money out of us, so never feel it’s worth even addressing it.

I don’t see any issue with what you are saying. Makes sense to ask theses qns. It’s certainly not as clear as them pumping money into Hibs. It’s loans against the club. Which I assume will get paid off when they eventually sell? Or when we somehow start making big profits. But a lot of the PR does sound like they are investing more money into the club to pay for all these signings.

[Smartie]

I'd suspected that the loans would have been bridging loans or cashflow loans ie they know there's an opportunity for the club to sign a player now (Youan springs to mind), they know that the club is likely to be due income in the not too distant future (instalments for Nisbet, sell on for Doig?) and instead of losing out on the transfer target they "loan" the club money with a view to it being paid back when some of that income is realised.

That seemed a bit more likely than just giving the club some money to go and treat itself to something for the weekend with either woolly or no plans made regarding the repayment of the loans.