Notice of AGM

[Chipper1875]

Don't agree that it is the best thing that could happen. The best thing would have been to never run the debt up in the first place. We had over £5m in the bank and seem to have gotten through that and the new debt in the years since the takeover.

Even allowing for the new corporate facilities, scoreboards, TVs etc that is a massive debt to run up.

I wonder how long it will take for the higher income created by these new facilities to cover the initial outlay?

Based on the small local companies , who do a great job (l use them ) , I’m struggling to understand how much income the big screens bring in. Be good to get info on this at the AGM

[Tyler Durden]

Loans from Bydand always made me concerned, especially borrowing against our securities. Never made much Business sense to me

And yet it’s all worked out absolutely fine. What was your concern?

How do people or businesses normally fund capital/long term expenditure without debt?

[Billy Whizz]

And yet it’s all worked out absolutely fine. What was your concern?

How do people or businesses normally fund capital/long term expenditure without debt?

Your not telling me this was the plan all along

[Baldy Foghorn]

And yet it’s all worked out absolutely fine. What was your concern?

How do people or businesses normally fund capital/long term expenditure without debt?

You think it's worked out fine?

[Tyler Durden]

You think it's worked out fine?

What were your concerns with HIbs taking a loan from our parent company? What’s unusual about that?

I do think it’s worked out fine yes. What is the issue/downside with the debt for equity swap?

[Billy Whizz]

You think it's worked out fine?

And that’s without adding in the dilution of shares

[Tyler Durden]

Your not telling me this was the plan all along

It’s quite normal for loans between group companies. They’d either be repaid over a mortgage type period or via a debt for equity type arrangement as we are seeing.

What’s the problem with how it’s played out? The club have had new facilities developed which will help us grow revenues over a long term period. What have we given up in return that concerns anyone?

[Sergio sledge]

Loans from Bydand always made me concerned, especially borrowing against our securities. Never made much Business sense to me

It’s pretty standard practice isn’t it? In theory it should give us more flexibility and potentially better rates than a commercial loan from a bank. We had loans from the holding company (STF and the Tache) back in the day and it was never an issue.

[Tyler Durden]

Yes. It's a curious mixture of those who demand Hibs spend more money on players with those who don't like the accounts showing a loss with those who are scathing when a new investment opportunity comes along and this then induces an attack of the vapours in others about "dilution of ownership control" as if they had any ownership control in the first place.

This is a perfect summary.

People who want something to complain about but can’t go into any specifics about what we should have done differently. Other than employ better managers of course

[TrinityHFC]

Your not telling me this was the plan all along

Do you think the capital expenditure was a surprise to those arranging it? Of course the plan was to put money in now for a long term return on it for the club.

The specifics around a DfE with additional investment, a DfE with a future exit or a write off of the debt - I'm sure the owners were pretty open about the method of making sure the debt wasn't going to be called in to the club's detriment.

[Baldy Foghorn]

What were your concerns with HIbs taking a loan from our parent company? What’s unusual about that?

I do think it’s worked out fine yes. What is the issue/downside with the debt for equity swap?

The interest and borrowing against our assets. I thought our owner was a billionaire, so borrowing from Parent Company just didn't sit well with me.

I wouldn't say it's working fine, we pay a ridiculous amount of wages, for not particularly much to show for it

[Tyler Durden]

The interest and borrowing against our assets. I thought our owner was a billionaire, so borrowing from Parent Company just didn't sit well with me.

I wouldn't say it's working fine, we pay a ridiculous amount of wages, for not particularly much to show for it

The “worked out fine” was in relation to the Bydand loans. Obviously the teams performance is not fine.

[Billy Whizz]

The “worked out fine” was in relation to the Bydand loans. Obviously the teams performance is not fine.

Your last line is the most important one. We’re a football team, and a successful team on the park, improves revenues off it
It’s been a circus since the Gordon’s came in, I wouldn’t be unhappy to see the back of them
It’s absolute torture following Hibs of late

[Baldy Foghorn]

The “worked out fine” was in relation to the Bydand loans. Obviously the teams performance is not fine.

Ah sorry, misunderstood:aok:

[Tyler Durden]

Your last line is the most important one. We’re a football team, and a successful team on the park, improves revenues off it
It’s been a circus since the Gordon’s came in, I wouldn’t be unhappy to see the back of them
It’s absolute torture following Hibs of late

I get all that. But nothing we’ve learned today in the accounts really changes matters IMO

If anything to me it reinforces that the club have been doing their utmost to invest in the team, aswell as the wider projects which ultimately help us fund a better team. Which again is all in line with what Ron Gordon promised.

Unfortunately they’ve made some awful decisions on the first team and it’s taking a while to turn that around.

[Chipper1875]

I get all that. But nothing we’ve learned today in the accounts really changes matters IMO

If anything to me it reinforces that the club have been doing their utmost to invest in the team, aswell as the wider projects which ultimately help us fund a better team. Which again is all in line with what Ron Gordon promised.

Unfortunately they’ve made some awful decisions on the first team and it’s taking a while to turn that around.

Also, made terrible decisions on the development team
failure, which didn’t come cheap

[007]

If our new set of accounts are to the end of June surely we will have received a large chunk of season ticket money so they will be like for like. And we should have cash in the bank at that point? I think it is not unreasonable to count the £5m we had in the bank at the point of sale as an asset if we are counted any cash we had at the end of June as an asset.

It is unreasonable because you are ignoring the deferred income liability for the season ticket sales.

[Lago]

Your last line is the most important one. We’re a football team, and a successful team on the park, improves revenues off it
It’s been a circus since the Gordon’s came in, I wouldn’t be unhappy to see the back of them
It’s absolute torture following Hibs of late
I'm afraid the days of Tom Hart, Kenny Waugh etc are long gone.

[Billy Whizz]

Also, made terrible decisions on the development team
failure, which didn’t come cheap

Was just about to add that, and Ian Gordon being head of recruitment, with no experience. They’ve made us a laughing stock
If this was happening across the road we’d all be killing ourselves!
Wish they’d sell up and move on

[Chipper1875]

Was just about to add that, and Ian Gordon being head of recruitment, with no experience. They’ve made us a laughing stock
If this was happening across the road we’d all be killing ourselves!
Wish they’d sell up and move on

Add in one million quid to pay off Jack Ross, Maloney and their backroom
Staff . Still to find out cost to sack LJ.

[TrinityHFC]

Was just about to add that, and Ian Gordon being head of recruitment, with no experience. They’ve made us a laughing stock
If this was happening across the road we’d all be killing ourselves!
Wish they’d sell up and move on

Could be yours for about £25m?!

[Glory Lurker]

You were too quick, I needed to fix the link after I posted it😀

Got caught up after you gave me the links. Belated thanks. Shows the value of group stage in Europe.

[PatHead]

It is unreasonable because you are ignoring the deferred income liability for the season ticket sales.

Is there no deferred income liability shown in the accounts? Genuine question.

[CropleyWasGod]

The interest and borrowing against our assets. I thought our owner was a billionaire, so borrowing from Parent Company just didn't sit well with me.

I wouldn't say it's working fine, we pay a ridiculous amount of wages, for not particularly much to show for it

Where should we have borrowed from?

The interest rate on the Bydand loan was much better than we could have got externally. And the repayment terms were more flexible also.

[brianmc]

The interest and borrowing against our assets. I thought our owner was a billionaire, so borrowing from Parent Company just didn't sit well with me.

I wouldn't say it's working fine, we pay a ridiculous amount of wages, for not particularly much to show for it

You thought our owner was a billionaire?

Why??

[Brightside]

Was just about to add that, and Ian Gordon being head of recruitment, with no experience. They’ve made us a laughing stock
If this was happening across the road we’d all be killing ourselves!
Wish they’d sell up and move on

When was it better Billy?

[Hibeesdaft16]

When was it better Billy?

That doesn't make it okay.

[RMQ1967]

I'm afraid the days of Tom Hart, Kenny Waugh etc are long gone.

Can you remind us how long they were in charge and what success we had under them?

Wondering how it compares to the 4 years the Gordons have had so far.

[flash]

I'm afraid the days of Tom Hart, Kenny Waugh etc are long gone.

The glory days. Said nobody ever.

[Hibeesdaft16]

The glory days. Said nobody ever.

That would also describe the current era too.

[Ringothedog]

That would also describe the current era too.

This “era” has not ended yet. Come back in 10 years and then we can discuss whether it was good or bad

[Hibeesdaft16]

This “era” has not ended yet. Come back in 10 years and then we can discuss whether it was good or bad

So we can't discuss how much of a failure it has been in the current era until it ends? :confused:

Talk about sicking your head in the sand.

[RMQ1967]

That would also describe the current era too.

No-one is claiming that but some are suggesting that it was all so much better in the past. In fact it's been grim for 50+ years outside of a few cup wins.

We now have record investment & more chance of actually seeing a decent team on the pitch.

Truly incredible that people can't appreciate the potential that the Gordon's have created & harp back to decades of mediocrity & failure as if they were golden times.

The Gordons vision of the future is 100% more inviting than the **** of the past 50 years.

[Hibeesdaft16]

No-one is claiming that but some are suggesting that it was all so much better in the past. In fact it's been grim for 50+ years outside of a few cup wins.

We now have record investment & more chance of actually seeing a decent team on the pitch.

Truly incredible that people can't appreciate the potential that the Gordon's have created & harp back to decades of mediocrity & failure as if they were golden times.

The Gordons vision of the future is 100% more inviting than the **** of the past 50 years.

That doesn't make it okay though.

We have record investment but still making massive losses? What potential have they helped created? Investment in hospitality? We are now seasonally falling further behind Aberdeen and Hertz in terms of income, partially down to the ongoing failure in the footballing department.

Is their vision really? So far their vision has produced total failure on the pitch with the team going further and further backwards. Their vision has 80% of turnover being spent on wages of a squad that is that absolutely ridiculously poor that we just had to loan six players in January. What they have contributed to the club is nowhere near was contributed to the club by whom they took over from. They came into a club that had a complete stadium and had it's training facilities developed. Ready made to hit the ground running, instead we have went backwards.

[RMQ1967]

So much absolute guff there I don't know where to begin 😂

See if you can persuade a Hart, Waugh or Farmer to come back & do better.

I won't hold my breath while I wait for you to come up with a better option 👍

[Hibeesdaft16]

So much absolute guff there I don't know where to begin 😂

See if you can persuade a Hart, Waugh or Farmer to come back & do better.

I won't hold my breath while I wait for you to come up with a better option 👍

Charming.

Away back to sticking your head in the sand and pretending everything is great. Must be amazing on the planet you live on. :aok:

The good old "you find us someone better" retort too. Class.

[matty_f]

You thought our owner was a billionaire?

Why??

The Gordon family are not billionaires.

[Rumble de Thump]

This place is riddled with Jambos :greengrin

[Col2]

This place is riddled with Jambos :greengrin

Yup reeking with them. You can always tell when they drop hearts and Aberdeen into the 2nd sentence “I know it hurts but we are miles away from Hearts…”

[Hibeesdaft16]

This place is riddled with Jambos :greengrin

The standard response from a group who fail to hear anything negative about the club. :agree:

[El Gubbz]

For the special resolutions to be voted through the board need 75% of shareholders to agree

The Gordons at present have 67.23% (needing 7.77%).

Which means if either HSL (15.41%) or Leslie Robb (10%) vote with the resolution it will pass. The combined amount of other fans falls short at (7.36%) so even if we all vote together our vote counts for nothing.

I believe HSL are unsighted on this resolution and would be against their mission statement so assuming they’re voting against.

So on the assumption the board wouldn’t table a motion without being confident in it proceeding that leaves Robb as the Shareholder to vote through.

Does anyone know much about him? If my cooncil Sherlock senses are right then he must have confidence this is an excellent move for us as doesn’t seem he is selling any shares to The Gordons/Foley (ie. Not pocketing any cash himself) and his own shares being diluted.

There’s too many unknowns for fans and shareholders at the moment - the club would be wise to be as transparent as possible ahead of the vote as the optics atm suggest they’re trying to pull the wool over our eyes using catchy buzz words like “billionaire”.

[El Gubbz]

Could be yours for about £25m?!

Or a fraction of that if we’re going by the “investments” made by the Gordons

[matty_f]

Was just about to add that, and Ian Gordon being head of recruitment, with no experience. They’ve made us a laughing stock
If this was happening across the road we’d all be killing ourselves!
Wish they’d sell up and move on

I can’t get my head around that line of thinking.
We’re that much of a laughing stock we’ve had numerous Hampden trips, European football and a third place finish under them (and missed out on it by tiny margin last season).


We’re rubbish at the minute but have just had a transfer window to fix that in which we’ve had one game since it closed.

There hasn’t been any indication from the Gordon family that they’ll act in anything other than the best long term interests of the club to the extent that they’re about to write off almost £6m of loans in order that the club gets investment that is designed to make us better than we are today and better than the clubs we’re competing with.

I’d have loved it if we got fan ownership. It was on the table for us, folk didn’t care enough about it then but now we’ve got the chance to be good it’s important.

I’m a shareholder and I’m a member of HSL and was/am a big supporter of them and I’ll be voting for the changes and that’s based on what I’ve seen from the Gordons to date, what I’ve read and listened to about the investment and that there are “Hibs people” on the board who i do not believe would put the club at risk.

There are questions that need to be answered, of course, but the noise around this is reminiscent from some folk of the stuff that was thrown at STF and HSL which ultimately caused it to fail (along with other factors).


I’d just like to see us be good for a change. Progress isn’t bad, we’ve not had fan ownership in the history of the club and we’re still here through good times and bad.

[Alex Trager]

I can’t get my head around that line of thinking.
We’re that much of a laughing stock we’ve had numerous Hampden trips, European football and a third place finish under them (and missed out on it by tiny margin last season).


We’re rubbish at the minute but have just had a transfer window to fix that in which we’ve had one game since it closed.

There hasn’t been any indication from the Gordon family that they’ll act in anything other than the best long term interests of the club to the extent that they’re about to write off almost £6m of loans in order that the club gets investment that is designed to make us better than we are today and better than the clubs we’re competing with.

I’d have loved it if we got fan ownership. It was on the table for us, folk didn’t care enough about it then but now we’ve got the chance to be good it’s important.

I’m a shareholder and I’m a member of HSL and was/am a big supporter of them and I’ll be voting for the changes and that’s based on what I’ve seen from the Gordons to date, what I’ve read and listened to about the investment and that there are “Hibs people” on the board who i do not believe would put the club at risk.

There are questions that need to be answered, of course, but the noise around this is reminiscent from some folk of the stuff that was thrown at STF and HSL which ultimately caused it to fail (along with other factors).


I’d just like to see us be good for a change. Progress isn’t bad, we’ve not had fan ownership in the history of the club and we’re still here through good times and bad.

I don’t agree.

I think the behaviour exhibited by the Gordons and Kensell has be questionable and I do not find myself getting excited about them writing off debt for a few reasons.

I agree with most on the forum that the Gordons and Kensell are not malicious. I think they have shown they don’t know how to run a FOOTBALL club.

I am not an accountant but reading the takes from accountants of the accounts yesterday, it certainly doesn’t make good reading. Though I know others have said ‘next year will be much better’ I hope so.

I also believe that only Romanov and Ashley have worked with a share issue which is hardly sterling company. Not an indicator of malice in itself but perhaps a warning shot.

As I said, I don’t think the club needs to be protected from the Gordon’s and Kensell from a malicious point of view, but more from a ‘stupidity’ point of view. (You can use whatever word you want in they quote marks).

They may not think they are potentially damaging the club in the future but they may be.

Ultimately, it boils down to them diluting the security that we have of HSL and other Hibbys with a say, and there are other ways they can achieve the investment to avoid that.

[CallumLaidlaw]

I can’t get my head around that line of thinking.
We’re that much of a laughing stock we’ve had numerous Hampden trips, European football and a third place finish under them (and missed out on it by tiny margin last season).


We’re rubbish at the minute but have just had a transfer window to fix that in which we’ve had one game since it closed.

There hasn’t been any indication from the Gordon family that they’ll act in anything other than the best long term interests of the club to the extent that they’re about to write off almost £6m of loans in order that the club gets investment that is designed to make us better than we are today and better than the clubs we’re competing with.

I’d have loved it if we got fan ownership. It was on the table for us, folk didn’t care enough about it then but now we’ve got the chance to be good it’s important.

I’m a shareholder and I’m a member of HSL and was/am a big supporter of them and I’ll be voting for the changes and that’s based on what I’ve seen from the Gordons to date, what I’ve read and listened to about the investment and that there are “Hibs people” on the board who i do not believe would put the club at risk.

There are questions that need to be answered, of course, but the noise around this is reminiscent from some folk of the stuff that was thrown at STF and HSL which ultimately caused it to fail (along with other factors).


I’d just like to see us be good for a change. Progress isn’t bad, we’ve not had fan ownership in the history of the club and we’re still here through good times and bad.

I agree Matty

I think it’s clear that the overall club has grown. Yes we’re yet to see a consistent improvement but the building blocks are in place. We’re increasing our wage spend, improving our training facilities.

There’s acknowledgement that they’ve got things wrong, hence bringing in a Director of Football.

We have everything in place to be successful, we just need a couple more things to fall into place and there’s more chance of that happening now than previously.

People wanting the old days to return. Our previous “era” was what, 30 years under Tom Farmer?
We won 3 cups in that time - most would agree that’s around what you’d expect us to win in our history. We saw 2 relegations, 3 years in the championship, no improvement in our derby record, some unbelievably embarrassing results such as 2012 and Malmo.

Yeah it would be better if the debt hadn’t been built up, but the stadium now looks better than it ever has and is continuing to be upgraded, and the owners have then wiped out the cost of it.

I’m pretty certain them upstairs will be pretty frustrated that they haven’t hit the success they’d have wanted on the park so far considering the money spent. While it feels pretty grim right now after Saturday, I’m really keen to see what will be done in the summer.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Hibeesdaft16]

I can’t get my head around that line of thinking.
We’re that much of a laughing stock we’ve had numerous Hampden trips, European football and a third place finish under them (and missed out on it by tiny margin last season).


We’re rubbish at the minute but have just had a transfer window to fix that in which we’ve had one game since it closed.

There hasn’t been any indication from the Gordon family that they’ll act in anything other than the best long term interests of the club to the extent that they’re about to write off almost £6m of loans in order that the club gets investment that is designed to make us better than we are today and better than the clubs we’re competing with.

I’d have loved it if we got fan ownership. It was on the table for us, folk didn’t care enough about it then but now we’ve got the chance to be good it’s important.

I’m a shareholder and I’m a member of HSL and was/am a big supporter of them and I’ll be voting for the changes and that’s based on what I’ve seen from the Gordons to date, what I’ve read and listened to about the investment and that there are “Hibs people” on the board who i do not believe would put the club at risk.

There are questions that need to be answered, of course, but the noise around this is reminiscent from some folk of the stuff that was thrown at STF and HSL which ultimately caused it to fail (along with other factors).


I’d just like to see us be good for a change. Progress isn’t bad, we’ve not had fan ownership in the history of the club and we’re still here through good times and bad.

The majority of your argument about on field success was as they took over and had no part to play.

We have had three trips to hampden since they took over, two down to Jack Ross, the guy they sacked before a final and the other another shafting off them. Not much to gloat about. Since they started making footballing decisions we have failed spectacularly. You mention European trips, you forget we have failed grab group stage football and the £5-£6m that our two closest rivals have the last two years and who them are about to grab again this season. There's been no progress on the footballing side since our owners came in and it's deteriorating further. Fantastic intentions or not.

[matty_f]

I don’t agree.

I think the behaviour exhibited by the Gordons and Kensell has be questionable and I do not find myself getting excited about them writing off debt for a few reasons.

I agree with most on the forum that the Gordons and Kensell are not malicious. I think they have shown they don’t know how to run a FOOTBALL club.

I am not an accountant but reading the takes from accountants of the accounts yesterday, it certainly doesn’t make good reading. Though I know others have said ‘next year will be much better’ I hope so.

I also believe that only Romanov and Ashley have worked with a share issue which is hardly sterling company. Not an indicator of malice in itself but perhaps a warning shot.

As I said, I don’t think the club needs to be protected from the Gordon’s and Kensell from a malicious point of view, but more from a ‘stupidity’ point of view. (You can use whatever word you want in they quote marks).

They may not think they are potentially damaging the club in the future but they may be.

Ultimately, it boils down to them diluting the security that we have of HSL and other Hibbys with a say, and there are other ways they can achieve the investment to avoid that.

What are the questionable behaviours from the Gordons and Kensell?

There was no security from HSL anyway, diluting the shares isn’t a game changer here.

[matty_f]

The majority of your argument about on field success was as they took over and had no part to play.

We have had three trips to hampden since they took over, two down to Jack Ross, the guy they sacked before a final and the other another shafting off them. Not much to gloat about. Since they started making footballing decisions we have failed spectacularly. You mention European trips, you forget we have failed grab group stage football and the £5-£6m that our two closest rivals have the last two years and who them are about to grab again this season. There's been no progress on the footballing side since our owners came in and it's deteriorating further. Fantastic intentions or not.

I don’t agree that you can just talk down the achievements like that as a reasonable argument, tbh.

[superfurryhibby]

The glory days. Said nobody ever.

Strange comparisons with a bygone age, but I would suggest you read a book about Hibs and absorb some history. Hart's tenure included a spell which ranks amongst the best in our history. It had some lows too, but they were memorable years and players of his era are remembered as being amongst our best ever.

[Hibeesdaft16]

I don’t agree that you can just talk down the achievements like that as a reasonable argument, tbh.


There's been no achievements though. Finishing 5th and losing a Semi Final to them isn't an achievement.

Jack Ross got us third on a budget set by Dempster and the others in charge of the club. To pin that on the owners that took over but had no input is insincere.

[Up-the-slope]

The glory days. Said nobody ever.

The days of poly bags used to collect the cash from the turnstiles and 'official' attendances appearing smaller than the naked eye would suggest... allegedly ...

[matty_f]

There's been no achievements though. Finishing 5th and losing a Semi Final to them isn't an achievement.

Jack Ross got us third on a budget set by Dempster and the others in charge of the club. To pin that on the owners that took over but had no input is insincere.
Fifth isn’t an achievement but it was in line with our budget versus the other teams so it’s also not making us a laughing stock. Jack Ross got third while Ron Gordon was the owner, that’s the facts of the matter.

[Hibeesdaft16]

Fifth isn’t an achievement but it was in line with our budget versus the other teams so it’s also not making us a laughing stock. Jack Ross got third while Ron Gordon was the owner, that’s the facts of the matter.

If not being a laughing stock is what is good enough for you fair enough. 5th, emptied out the league cup off lower league dross and pumped 0-3 to them at home in the Scottish Cup overall is embarrassing though.

He was the owner though, but to pin third on him is clutching massively. His regime including the ceo and his son playing football manager, since 3rd has been nothing but failure. Great hospitality, ***** on the pitch and missed out on a complete fortune our rivals got instead. They are facts too.

[superfurryhibby]

What are the questionable behaviours from the Gordons and Kensell?

There was no security from HSL anyway, diluting the shares isn’t a game changer here.

Let's not delude ourselves. The combined shareholding of HSL, Robb and small shareholders were substantial. The dilution at a stroke wiped out hundreds of thousands of pounds worth of investment from people like you and me. That was questionable to me at the time and remains so now. It also ensures that Gordon's do as they please with the club, including further share issue which continues to dilute the only voice which might dissent.

If we stick to the known facts, we have a significant debt, no idea when/if all their commercial activities will bear fruit and we have a team that is in freefall.

[Alex Trager]

What are the questionable behaviours from the Gordons and Kensell?

There was no security from HSL anyway, diluting the shares isn’t a game changer here.

The questionable behaviour is the quality they’ve shown on the footballing side.

Appreciate that may not have come across in that way. They have shown decidedly bad judgement there.

You’re right HSL itself sits at 15.1% but Robb has shares of 10% which combined with HSL would protect the club from baddies.

There are also other fans who total 7.36% which takes you well beyond the level required.

[Chipper1875]

Let's not delude ourselves. The combined shareholding of HSL, Robb and small shareholders were substantial. The dilution at a stroke wiped out hundreds of thousands of pounds worth of investment from people like you and me. That was questionable to me at the time and remains so now. It also ensures that Gordon's do as they please with the club, including further share issue which continues to dilute the only voice which might dissent.

If we stick to the known facts, we have a significant debt, no idea when/if all their commercial activities will bear fruit and we have a team that is in freefall.
Excellent post

[Chipper1875]

Fifth isn’t an achievement but it was in line with our budget versus the other teams so it’s also not making us a laughing stock. Jack Ross got third while Ron Gordon was the owner, that’s the facts of the matter.

The old budget joker card …

[matty_f]

If not being a laughing stock is what is good enough for you fair enough. 5th, emptied out the league cup off lower league dross and pumped 0-3 to them at home in the Scottish Cup overall is embarrassing though.

He was the owner though, but to pin third on him is clutching massively. His regime including the ceo and his son playing football manager, since 3rd has been nothing but failure. Great hospitality, ***** on the pitch and missed out on a complete fortune our rivals got instead. They are facts too.

I never said it was good enough, i was making the point that it’s not laughing stock levels.

[matty_f]

The old budget joker card …

Aye, some context of realism into where we should be. What a get out of jail that is.

[matty_f]

Let's not delude ourselves. The combined shareholding of HSL, Robb and small shareholders were substantial. The dilution at a stroke wiped out hundreds of thousands of pounds worth of investment from people like you and me. That was questionable to me at the time and remains so now. It also ensures that Gordon's do as they please with the club, including further share issue which continues to dilute the only voice which might dissent.

If we stick to the known facts, we have a significant debt, no idea when/if all their commercial activities will bear fruit and we have a team that is in freefall.
So we all blindly trust Robb, then to assume he’d vote with HSL?

[Alex Trager]

So we all blindly trust Robb, then to assume he’d vote with HSL?

We hope he would.

He would be the only option to safeguard the club should some malice come to pass.

[Chipper1875]

Aye, some context of realism into where we should be. What a get out of jail that is.

Football isn’t played on a balance sheet. It’s played on the pitch . Is criticism of hibs not allowed, perhaps people concerned won’t get someone from hibs on a podcast

[Chipper1875]

So we all blindly trust Robb, then to assume he’d vote with HSL?
Both of these holdings are hibs through and through and don’t want hibs to come to harm . From day one Ron Gordon made it clear he didn’t like HSL and hibs fans having shares. Refused to engage with them
. Ignored shareholders with 33% holding. Unheard of in any business context.

[matty_f]

Football isn’t played on a balance sheet. It’s played on the pitch . Is criticism of hibs not allowed, perhaps people concerned won’t get someone from hibs on a podcast

Who is concerned about that? We refused the last podcast with Kensell so **** knows what sort of point you’re trying to make there. Criticism is absolutely allowed, you’ll find loads of it from me on here so again, I’m not sure what point you’re trying to make.

[Jones28]

Football isn’t played on a balance sheet. It’s played on the pitch . Is criticism of hibs not allowed, perhaps people concerned won’t get someone from hibs on a podcast

Criticism of Hibs most definitely allowed and deserved, as are rebuttals to that criticism.

You want to keep chipping away at the club and the Gordon’s that’s fine but others are well within their rights to offer a bit of context.

[matty_f]

Both of these holdings are hibs through and through and don’t want hibs to come to harm . From day one Ron Gordon made it clear he didn’t like HSL and hibs fans having shares. Refused to engage with them
. Ignored shareholders with 33% holding. Unheard of in any business context.

Yeah and i believe Robb is going to vote in favour of the resolution, so what does that tell you about it?

[matty_f]

We hope he would.

He would be the only option to safeguard the club should some malice come to pass.

In the same way we hope the Gordons won’t allow malice to come to pass?

[Hibeesdaft16]

I never said it was good enough, i was making the point that it’s not laughing stock levels.


The season as a whole when you put into context, was a laughing stock. Yes we finished 5th, in line with our budget so what excuse was there for the league cup shambles which included a loss to a league one team and a forefit because the amazing off the park team allowed us to field an illegible play we signed by mistake? That's the very definition of laughing stock mate. That's not even including the home Scottish cup game.

[TrinityHFC]

We hope he would.

He would be the only option to safeguard the club should some malice come to pass.

We?

Robb is a sensible guy and a Hibs supporter. He won’t be voting against these resolutions.

What makes you think HSL will vote against? Their target of reaching a certain percentage? Compared against something that the owners and the Board are putting forward as beneficial for the future of the club. They’d better have a well put together argument.

[matty_f]

The season as a whole when you put into context, was a laughing stock. Yes we finished 5th, in line with our budget so what excuse was there for the league cup shambles which included a loss to a league one team and a forefit because the amazing off the park team allowed us to field an illegible play we signed by mistake? That's the very definition of laughing stock mate. That's not even including the home Scottish cup game.
The league cup I’ll give you, was a ****ing shambles. The rest of the season, not so much.

[Hibeesdaft16]

The league cup I’ll give you, was a ****ing shambles. The rest of the season, not so much.

:aok: we won't agree on this one but cheers for the measured and balanced replies regardless mate.

[Chipper1875]

Yeah and i believe Robb is going to vote in favour of the resolution, so what does that tell you about it?

How do you believe that ? Yes l agree lve no doubt he will. It tells me he thinks it’s a good thing. That’s his perogative. Time will tell. As a foot soldier who fought mercer, I trust nobody until it’s earned .

Time will tell if it’s a good thing. But lve no confidence in Ben or Ian spending the money wisely on the team

[Daniel 1875]

We?

Robb is a sensible guy and a Hibs supporter. He won’t be voting against these resolutions.

What makes you think HSL will vote against? Their target of reaching a certain percentage? Compared against something that the owners and the Board are putting forward as beneficial for the future of the club. They’d better have a well put together argument.

The views of HSL members will determine the ways in which HSL votes at the AGM on their behalf.

[matty_f]

We?

Robb is a sensible guy and a Hibs supporter. He won’t be voting against these resolutions.

What makes you think HSL will vote against? Their target of reaching a certain percentage? Compared against something that the owners and the Board are putting forward as beneficial for the future of the club. They’d better have a well put together argument.

:agree:

I’ll make my point as an HSL member that i want to see them vote in favour of it.

I’m not saying that the Gordons aren’t without flaws or that the situation is perfect, but I’m concerned that we’re seeing the same innuendo and suggestions of underhand acts that were saw when STF was selling up, the sort of chat that undermined what could have been a very powerful fan movement which would have, ironically, meant that today we’d be confident that we had a blocking vote.

We could have done it and all this chat would have been avoided. But we didn’t, folk actively campaigned against it and so it seems mental to me that we’re now hearing similar comments about the next thing.

[matty_f]

How do you believe that ? Yes l agree lve no doubt he will. It tells me he thinks it’s a good thing. That’s his perogative. Time will tell. As a foot soldier who fought mercer, I trust nobody until it’s earned .

Time will tell if it’s a good thing. But lve no confidence in Ben or Ian spending the money wisely on the team
I believe that because i don’t think the proposal would get this far without the owners being sure that it’ll be approved.

[Alex Trager]

In the same way we hope the Gordons won’t allow malice to come to pass?

Ofc but the Gordon’s are looking after their pocket (rightly so) and are not Hibs fans.

I trust a fellow Hibby more than an outsider. Maybe that’s wrong.

[Chipper1875]

The views of HSL members will determine the ways in which HSL votes at the AGM on their behalf.

Which is what should happen. HSL need to start being more vocal and challenge Ben and Ian on the bits they are failing on: player recruitment , manager recruitment, allowing weedgies to behave how they do in our home… I’m sure they are more

[Chipper1875]

I believe that because i don’t think the proposal would get this far without the owners being sure that it’ll be approved.

Spot on

[TrinityHFC]

The views of HSL members will determine the ways in which HSL votes at the AGM on their behalf.

Look forward to the comms on this.

[TrinityHFC]

I believe that because i don’t think the proposal would get this far without the owners being sure that it’ll be approved.

Has anyone thought about what happens next if this is voted against? I suspect that might be a much more dangerous position....

[matty_f]

Ofc but the Gordon’s are looking after their pocket (rightly so) and are not Hibs fans.

I trust a fellow Hibby more than an outsider. Maybe that’s wrong.

There are fellow Hibs fans on the board mate, who are obliged to act in the best interests of the club.

The Gordons pockets are much safer and healthier with a successful and healthy Hibernian than one that’s mismanaged and put at risk.

[matty_f]

Spot on

Do you want to clarify your dig about the podcast? Totally unnecessary and unfounded and there’s no evidence to back it up.

[Chipper1875]

Do you want to clarify your dig about the podcast? Totally unnecessary and unfounded and there’s no evidence to back it up.

Look at the time all podcasters got chance to interview Ron , my opinion is it was weak and bottled it to grill him. I also believe you guys support the board as if you are too critical you won’t get access to Hibs players etc . You may disagree, which is fine. But that’s how l see it , rightly or wrongly.

[matty_f]

Look at the time all podcasters got chance to interview Ron , my opinion is it was weak and bottled it to grill him. I also believe you guys support the board as if you are too critical you won’t get access to Hibs players etc . You may disagree, which is fine. But that’s how l see it , rightly or wrongly.

Well it’s wrong, when we interviewed Ron we had a handful of questions we could ask, go back and look at the questions and they weren’t soft - asked about failed recruitment and underperformance - folk heard what they wanted to hear with it but again, the evidence doesn’t support it.

Ron took offence to my first question, ffs.

We are critical all the time, we say what we think, believe it or not. I’m not bothered my arse if the club don’t give us an interview and you can go back and check, the last interview with Kensell that was offered, we turned down because we felt it was a PR exercise, we weren’t happy with the format with the other podcasts and so we said no to it.

How does that stand up to being worried about getting people on?


Edit - actually forget it. The thread’s not about that and i don’t want to take it off track. I’ve said what i have to say, you think what you want to think, the evidence is out there.

[Rumble de Thump]

Ofc but the Gordon’s are looking after their pocket (rightly so) and are not Hibs fans.

I trust a fellow Hibby more than an outsider. Maybe that’s wrong.

Why would they not be Hibs fans? They might not have grown up as Hibs fans like some but they are certainly Hibs fans now.

[Alex Trager]

We?

Robb is a sensible guy and a Hibs supporter. He won’t be voting against these resolutions.

What makes you think HSL will vote against? Their target of reaching a certain percentage? Compared against something that the owners and the Board are putting forward as beneficial for the future of the club. They’d better have a well put together argument.

I’m not saying anyone will vote against it.

Nor am I saying they SHOULD vote against it.

I am making the point, badly (on reflection), that punters should be made well aware of the damage that this could potentially lead to.

I don’t think that is unreasonable.

I also don’t think it is unreasonable to want Hibs supporters to be represented on the board to protect the club from any malice.

I am not suggesting that the Gordons or Black Knights will be malicious, but it is prudent to act as if they will.

Perhaps the gordon’s could sell enough shares to drop their holding to 50% (majority) and then do a share issue to see them up to 20% which I believe is enough to get a seat on the board.

[Ringothedog]

I have emailed my voting intentions for the small holding of 5100 shares that I have. They will be in favour of all the resolutions on the form. I want my club to be the best it can be and achieve as much success as possible. This investment is the next step on that road, if we turn it down we are left with the status quo and rest assured that money will go to another club in Scotland. Don’t take it and we will be left behind. I don’t want that.

[matty_f]

Has anyone thought about what happens next if this is voted against? I suspect that might be a much more dangerous position....

Well we know from the shareholder pack that came out that the investment won’t go ahead, and nor will the debt for equity on the loan from Bydand. What happens to that isn’t known.

Foley is one of a number of people looking to try into Scottish football so i suspect he’ll turn his attention to a competitor and we will be able to watch what happens to them, good or bad.

[flash]

I reckon we are a bawhair away from stickers on lampposts about Ponzi schemes again.

[Sergio sledge]

I’m not saying anyone will vote against it.

Nor am I saying they SHOULD vote against it.

I am making the point, badly (on reflection), that punters should be made well aware of the damage that this could potentially lead to.

I don’t think that is unreasonable.

I also don’t think it is unreasonable to want Hibs supporters to be represented on the board to protect the club from any malice.

I am not suggesting that the Gordons or Black Knights will be malicious, but it is prudent to act as if they will.

Perhaps the gordon’s could sell enough shares to drop their holding to 50% (majority) and then do a share issue to see them up to 20% which I believe is enough to get a seat on the board.

On your last point are you meaning that instead of the current proposal the Gordons should sell a stake to Black Knights and issue shares to get the Black Knights up to 20%?If the Gordons sell some of their shares then that money (for the shares they sell) goes to them. The way they are doing it all the money goes to Hibs and not into their pocket.

As a club we get more money doing it this way than if the Gordons sold some of their holding to take their percentage down to 50%.

If my basic maths are correct, then (based on a value of 6.8p/share which is what the debt for equity proposal values them at) under your proposal Bydand would receive around £935,000 from the Black Knights for an 11% stake. Then an additional 14,125,000 shares would be issued by the club and the club would receive £960,500 from the Black Knights. The club would still have a £5.75m debt to Bydand but would have just under £1m additional cash.

HSL's share would be down to 13.8% and LR down to 9%.

We'd still have to find a way to clear the debt to Bydand and find the most tax efficient way for the Black Knights to invest the money into the club.

Under the current proposal Bydand's shareholding is reduced to 60% but the £5.75m debt to them is cleared. the Black Knights get a 25% shareholding for £4.76m which goes straight into the club. So the club is effectively £9.5m better off than it would be under your proposal.

Or, were you meaning the Gordons should sell some of their shares to HSL and do a rights issue to get HSL up to 20%? I think that would be extremely difficult if we still want the Black Knights investment and would involve HSL having to raise quite a few million to get in on the act. Having seen the response previously I don't think that would ever be possible.

[18Craig75]

Ofc but the Gordon’s are looking after their pocket (rightly so) and are not Hibs fans.

I trust a fellow Hibby more than an outsider. Maybe that’s wrong.

Hold on; if they were looking after their own pockets, surely they’d not be doing a debt for equity swap and would instead be taking repayments from the club, plus interest, for as long as possible to maximise their return? Tom Farmer paid off the mortgage and although we weren’t paying interest we still had to pay him back. By your measure doesn’t that make him less of a Hibs fan than the Gordon family?

Fair amount of sabre rattling on this thread and if I was Ian or Kit reading through I’d be pretty offended to be honest. They’ve got far far far more skin in the game when it comes to Hibs compared to anyone. Has it been anywhere near good enough on the pitch? No - but all along the way they’ve taken steps to try and rectify mistakes; Director Of Football, higher budget, better facilities, outside investment now.

It’s easy to sit on the sidelines and snipe, the hard facts are that Hibs fans had their chance to gain more control over the club and essentially blew it.

Football is a changing landscape and is already unrecognisable from 10 years ago and beyond. We can either evolve with it or stagnate and put up with mediocrity for another 20 years.

I personally am sick of it and excited by the new possibilities and I’m actually delighted that we’re nowhere near a fan ownership model given some of the rotten takes on this thread. Theres good, successful Hibs fans on the board and around the club that will be privy to the details of the new investment, if they’re happy that’s good enough for me.

[Stuart93]

Has anyone thought about what happens next if this is voted against? I suspect that might be a much more dangerous position....

The way our finances seem to currently be going I’d agree

[flash]

The way our finances seem to currently be going I’d agree

It would send out a message that the supporters don't trust the owners.

The fallout from that doesn't bare thinking about.

[CropleyWasGod]

The way our finances seem to currently be going I’d agree

How do you mean? They're improving.

[Stuart93]

How do you mean? They're improving.

You know a lot better than me

But in what way is a 3.9m loss improving? Or 81% wages to turnover?

[CropleyWasGod]

You know a lot better than me

But in what way is a 3.9m loss improving? Or 81% wages to turnover?

Those figures are historic, in some cases 18 months old.

Currently, we are on course for about £15m in turnover (European run, LC semi) and have our wages-turnover ratio at 65%.

That's improvement.

[Stuart93]

Those figures are historic, in some cases 18 months old.

Currently, we are on course for about £15m in turnover (European run, LC semi) and have our wages-turover ratio at 65%.

That's improvement.

Are they figures confirmed? Or just projections?

[CropleyWasGod]

Are they figures confirmed? Or just projections?

We're not much more than halfway through the year, so the turnover can't be confirmed for the full year. But we've had the football income I mentioned, so that's set. The sponsorship, and most of the commercial income, will also be known. The only real unknown will be football income for the rest of the seaon.

"Record-breaking" is what the AGM papers say.

And the W/T ratio will be pretty much established.

[Stuart93]

We're not much more than halfway through the year, so the turnover can't be confirmed for the full year. But we've had the football income I mentioned, so that's set. The sponsorship, and most of the commercial income, will also be known. The only real unknown will be football income for the rest of the seaon.

"Record-breaking" is what the AGM papers say.

And the W/T ratio will be pretty much established.

That all sounds more positive than the 22-23 results

[superfurryhibby]

We're not much more than halfway through the year, so the turnover can't be confirmed for the full year. But we've had the football income I mentioned, so that's set. The sponsorship, and most of the commercial income, will also be known. The only real unknown will be football income for the rest of the seaon.

"Record-breaking" is what the AGM papers say.

And the W/T ratio will be pretty much established.

I suppose we just have to trust the clubs projections and hope that their financial calculations are better than their football insights.

There are more variables than just football income (low league finish and knocked out the cup on Saturday v 5th place and a semi final-got to be a fair whack difference there) before those stats have any real meaning though, including the probable sacking of yet an other manager and backroom team. That won't come cheap if it happens.

I would be interested to know more about how much has been spent on infrastructure and what the projections are in terms of returns. Hospitality, revenue from electronic signage etc. I haven't received the material sent in lieu of the AGM (had to ask them where my invite etc has gone). A proper breakdown would help dispel doubts.

In my simple thought process, we spend say 2 million on facilities. How many years before that expenditure pays for itself, based on current income being generated? Is it ten years, ten months? can anyone actually breakdown the stats so that we know?

[Lago]

Boy there are some angry people on here now, some keyboards have taken a fair old pounding.

[RMQ1967]

I have emailed my voting intentions for the small holding of 5100 shares that I have.

They will be in favour of all the resolutions on the form. I want my club to be the best it can be and achieve as much success as possible.

This investment is the next step on that road, if we turn it down we are left with the status quo and rest assured that money will go to another club in Scotland. Don’t take it and we will be left behind. I don’t want that.

Great to hear and exactly right on all points.

There's no point debating it any further on here, more than a few have questionable motives and allegiances. Some of the guff being spouted shows they either don't understand how to create a successful business or they don't have the best interests of Hibs at heart.

Absolutely reeks of jealousy a lot of this stuff - Hibs will become the third richest club in Scotland and there a some on here that can't bear that thought of the success that might bring.

Yes we're still as sh** on the park as we have been for decades but it's not going to improve by lashing out at the people who are ploughing the money in. It's going to take time but I'm going to sit back & enjoy the ride :scarf:

[Lago]

:top marks
Great to hear and exactly right on all points.

There's no point debating it any further on here, more than a few have questionable motives and allegiances. Some of the guff being spouted shows they either don't understand how to create a successful business or they don't have the best interests of Hibs at heart.

Absolutely reeks of jealousy a lot of this stuff - Hibs will become the third richest club in Scotland and there a some on here that can't bear that thought of the success that might bring.

Yes we're still as sh** on the park as we have been for decades but it's not going to improve by lashing out at the people who are ploughing the money in. It's going to take time but I'm going to sit back & enjoy the ride :scarf:

[CropleyWasGod]

I suppose we just have to trust the clubs projections and hope that their financial calculations are better than their football insights.

There are more variables than just football income (low league finish and knocked out the cup on Saturday v 5th place and a semi final-got to be a fair whack difference there) before those stats have any real meaning though, including the probable sacking of yet an other manager and backroom team. That won't come cheap if it happens.



Our football income this season will probably be more than last . Semi-final of the LC, European income, home game vs Villa already.

[18Craig75]

Our football income this season will probably be more than last . Semi-final of the LC, European income, home game vs Villa already.

Scottish Cup win to come as well.

[Ringothedog]

Great to hear and exactly right on all points.

There's no point debating it any further on here, more than a few have questionable motives and allegiances. Some of the guff being spouted shows they either don't understand how to create a successful business or they don't have the best interests of Hibs at heart.

Absolutely reeks of jealousy a lot of this stuff - Hibs will become the third richest club in Scotland and there a some on here that can't bear that thought of the success that might bring.

Yes we're still as sh** on the park as we have been for decades but it's not going to improve by lashing out at the people who are ploughing the money in. It's going to take time but I'm going to sit back & enjoy the ride :scarf:

As am I. This could be the best time ever to be a Hibs supporter. The potential of our club is fantastic and as Foley said “ he sets unrealistic expectations and then wants to exceed them “. That is my sort of investor

[JKeatings]

Hold on; if they were looking after their own pockets, surely they’d not be doing a debt for equity swap and would instead be taking repayments from the club, plus interest, for as long as possible to maximise their return? Tom Farmer paid off the mortgage and although we weren’t paying interest we still had to pay him back. By your measure doesn’t that make him less of a Hibs fan than the Gordon family?

Fair amount of sabre rattling on this thread and if I was Ian or Kit reading through I’d be pretty offended to be honest. They’ve got far far far more skin in the game when it comes to Hibs compared to anyone. Has it been anywhere near good enough on the pitch? No - but all along the way they’ve taken steps to try and rectify mistakes; Director Of Football, higher budget, better facilities, outside investment now.

It’s easy to sit on the sidelines and snipe, the hard facts are that Hibs fans had their chance to gain more control over the club and essentially blew it.

Football is a changing landscape and is already unrecognisable from 10 years ago and beyond. We can either evolve with it or stagnate and put up with mediocrity for another 20 years.

I personally am sick of it and excited by the new possibilities and I’m actually delighted that we’re nowhere near a fan ownership model given some of the rotten takes on this thread. Theres good, successful Hibs fans on the board and around the club that will be privy to the details of the new investment, if they’re happy that’s good enough for me.
The way I gathered it was the debt would turn into shares - shares would be sold to Black Knights group - money back to the Gordons. Ron Gordons money will be tied up with his wife I’d imagine. Who knows tho, I’m not expecting us to have a war chest in the summer, I’d rather they spent extra money on a manager that would get more out of our average players. Have a three year plan with a decent manager, chopping and changing managers no real vision for the club. Him having two windows to get “his type of players in” while spending a lot of money will never work. Have to be patient only way fans will accept is if it’s a manager with a good pedigree.

[CropleyWasGod]

The way I gathered it was the debt would turn into shares - shares would be sold to Black Knights group - money back to the Gordons. Ron Gordons money will be tied up with his wife I’d imagine. Who knows tho, I’m not expecting us to have a war chest in the summer, I’d rather they spent extra money on a manager that would get more out of our average players. Have a three year plan with a decent manager, chopping and changing managers no real vision for the club. Him having two windows to get “his type of players in” while spending a lot of money will never work. Have to be patient only way fans will accept is if it’s a manager with a good pedigree.

That would take them above the allowed maximum, and wouldn't result in any cash to us.

[leftpeg]

Strange comparisons with a bygone age, but I would suggest you read a book about Hibs and absorb some history. Hart's tenure included a spell which ranks amongst the best in our history. It had some lows too, but they were memorable years and players of his era are remembered as being amongst our best ever.Exactly,at the time growing up in the late sixties early seventies,it felt that Hibs were a big club,matching the English teams on the pitch,when we signed Joe Harper,it was a big transfer in British terms.

Sent from my Pixel 6 using Tapatalk

[JKeatings]

That would take them above the allowed maximum, and wouldn't result in any cash to us.

The deals agreed but isn’t actually signed yet tho is it? We have been giving the green light for the deal to go through. I know it wouldn’t result in cash for us but they would have their shares which they’re paying for… I’m just not right behind this deal yet, be happier when the plan is made public for us all to see

[CropleyWasGod]

The deals agreed but isn’t actually signed yet tho is it? We have been giving the green light for the deal to go through. I know it wouldn’t result in cash for us but they would have their shares which they’re paying for… I’m just not right behind this deal yet, be happier when the plan is made public for us all to see

Not sure what you mean.

I was replying to the previous poster whose understanding wasn't, IMO, correct.

The deal, as proposed, does mean cash for us.

[McD]

That doesn't make it okay though.

We have record investment but still making massive losses? What potential have they helped created? Investment in hospitality? We are now seasonally falling further behind Aberdeen and Hertz in terms of income, partially down to the ongoing failure in the footballing department.

Is their vision really? So far their vision has produced total failure on the pitch with the team going further and further backwards. Their vision has 80% of turnover being spent on wages of a squad that is that absolutely ridiculously poor that we just had to loan six players in January. What they have contributed to the club is nowhere near was contributed to the club by whom they took over from. They came into a club that had a complete stadium and had it's training facilities developed. Ready made to hit the ground running, instead we have went backwards.

Where to start? We qualified for Europe last year. We didn’t loan 6 players in January. What they have contributed vs whom they took over from - STF was here for decades, they’ve had half a decade, it’s not really a fair comparison.



Charming.

Away back to sticking your head in the sand and pretending everything is great. Must be amazing on the planet you live on. :aok:

The good old "you find us someone better" retort too. Class.

The good old ‘I want to stamp my feet and have tantrums and do nothing but tear down and criticise, but don’t dare ask me to offer some kind of a solution’ retort. No doubt you’ll tell me it’s not your job to improve things next. Hasn’t stopped you slating everything about the club though. Wonder why.



There's been no achievements though. Finishing 5th and losing a Semi Final to them isn't an achievement.

Jack Ross got us third on a budget set by Dempster and the others in charge of the club. To pin that on the owners that took over but had no input is insincere.

Here’s something for you to consider. I would say that Kevin Nisbet missing a penalty at hampden and another against Aberdeen had greater impact on winning that semi final and on finishing higher than 5 last season. Are you trying to tell us the Gordons are to blame for those misses? (For the record, this isn’t a dig at KN)

[El Gubbz]

Not sure what you mean.

I was replying to the previous poster whose understanding wasn't, IMO, correct.

The deal, as proposed, does mean cash for us.

Correct - a short term, potential one off investment which sees “fan ownership” drop by 18% with no chance of stopping any potential malice ever.

Only for the Gordons and the black knights to “invest” via loans in the future to get us back into debt for another season of Money Ball.

Depends if you think that’s a good deal or not. Seems short sighted to me

[superfurryhibby]

Our football income this season will probably be more than last . Semi-final of the LC, European income, home game vs Villa already.

Fair enough, extra revenue generated there, but the sacking of LJ and his team and then recruitment of NM and his will undoubtedly offset some of that?

Any thoughts on the infrastructure investment-costs v returns, is it possible to unpick some of that from the info the club make public via accounts?

It feels like there are considerable variables and proviso's attached to the record turnover projection. Some might consider it spin to deflect from the criticism that has rightly been directed at our footballing operations.

[McD]

Ofc but the Gordon’s are looking after their pocket (rightly so) and are not Hibs fans.

I trust a fellow Hibby more than an outsider. Maybe that’s wrong.



Aren’t they about to (vote notwithstanding) write off several million pounds they’ve loaned to the club?

[CropleyWasGod]

Fair enough, extra revenue generated there, but the sacking of LJ and his team and then recruitment of NM and his will undoubtedly offset some of that?

Any thoughts on the infrastructure investment-costs v returns, is it possible to unpick some of that from the info the club make public via accounts?

It feels like there are considerable variables and proviso's attached to the record turnover projection. Some might consider it spin to deflect from the criticism that has rightly been directed at our footballing operations.

Not a clue :greengrin That needs to be asked, though.

On your last sentence..... of course it is :cb

[hibeerealist]

Hold on; if they were looking after their own pockets, surely they’d not be doing a debt for equity swap and would instead be taking repayments from the club, plus interest, for as long as possible to maximise their return? Tom Farmer paid off the mortgage and although we weren’t paying interest we still had to pay him back. By your measure doesn’t that make him less of a Hibs fan than the Gordon family?

Fair amount of sabre rattling on this thread and if I was Ian or Kit reading through I’d be pretty offended to be honest. They’ve got far far far more skin in the game when it comes to Hibs compared to anyone. Has it been anywhere near good enough on the pitch? No - but all along the way they’ve taken steps to try and rectify mistakes; Director Of Football, higher budget, better facilities, outside investment now.

It’s easy to sit on the sidelines and snipe, the hard facts are that Hibs fans had their chance to gain more control over the club and essentially blew it.

Football is a changing landscape and is already unrecognisable from 10 years ago and beyond. We can either evolve with it or stagnate and put up with mediocrity for another 20 years.

I personally am sick of it and excited by the new possibilities and I’m actually delighted that we’re nowhere near a fan ownership model given some of the rotten takes on this thread. Theres good, successful Hibs fans on the board and around the club that will be privy to the details of the new investment, if they’re happy that’s good enough for me.


Great post and I agree 100%

[CropleyWasGod]

Correct - a short term, potential one off investment which sees “fan ownership” drop by 18% with no chance of stopping any potential malice ever.

Only for the Gordons and the black knights to “invest” via loans in the future to get us back into debt for another season of Money Ball.

Depends if you think that’s a good deal or not. Seems short sighted to me

Is that what is definitely happening?

[McD]

Hold on; if they were looking after their own pockets, surely they’d not be doing a debt for equity swap and would instead be taking repayments from the club, plus interest, for as long as possible to maximise their return? Tom Farmer paid off the mortgage and although we weren’t paying interest we still had to pay him back. By your measure doesn’t that make him less of a Hibs fan than the Gordon family?

Fair amount of sabre rattling on this thread and if I was Ian or Kit reading through I’d be pretty offended to be honest. They’ve got far far far more skin in the game when it comes to Hibs compared to anyone. Has it been anywhere near good enough on the pitch? No - but all along the way they’ve taken steps to try and rectify mistakes; Director Of Football, higher budget, better facilities, outside investment now.

It’s easy to sit on the sidelines and snipe, the hard facts are that Hibs fans had their chance to gain more control over the club and essentially blew it.

Football is a changing landscape and is already unrecognisable from 10 years ago and beyond. We can either evolve with it or stagnate and put up with mediocrity for another 20 years.

I personally am sick of it and excited by the new possibilities and I’m actually delighted that we’re nowhere near a fan ownership model given some of the rotten takes on this thread. Theres good, successful Hibs fans on the board and around the club that will be privy to the details of the new investment, if they’re happy that’s good enough for me.


:applause:


Terrific post, your last paragraph is exactly my take and where I’m at

[Jones28]

I reckon we are a bawhair away from stickers on lampposts about Ponzi schemes again.

I think there are those among us who are already there.

[McD]

The way I gathered it was the debt would turn into shares - shares would be sold to Black Knights group - money back to the Gordons. Ron Gordons money will be tied up with his wife I’d imagine. Who knows tho, I’m not expecting us to have a war chest in the summer, I’d rather they spent extra money on a manager that would get more out of our average players. Have a three year plan with a decent manager, chopping and changing managers no real vision for the club. Him having two windows to get “his type of players in” while spending a lot of money will never work. Have to be patient only way fans will accept is if it’s a manager with a good pedigree.



The debt will turn into shares, that the Gordons will own. It is new shares that are being created for BK to buy, not the shares converted from debts.

Foley has already said we will have a couple of million to spend in the summer, that’s more than we’ve ever had in one window, I’d say a war chest is a decent description.

What’s a good pedigree? Did Mowbray have a successful run as a manager before he got the Hibs job? What about Stubbs? Jack Ross hadn’t ever managed a club of our size before he came to us, yet finished 3rd and got hampden a few times.

[Up-the-slope]

On your last point are you meaning that instead of the current proposal the Gordons should sell a stake to Black Knights and issue shares to get the Black Knights up to 20%?If the Gordons sell some of their shares then that money (for the shares they sell) goes to them. The way they are doing it all the money goes to Hibs and not into their pocket.

As a club we get more money doing it this way than if the Gordons sold some of their holding to take their percentage down to 50%.

If my basic maths are correct, then (based on a value of 6.8p/share which is what the debt for equity proposal values them at) under your proposal Bydand would receive around £935,000 from the Black Knights for an 11% stake. Then an additional 14,125,000 shares would be issued by the club and the club would receive £960,500 from the Black Knights. The club would still have a £5.75m debt to Bydand but would have just under £1m additional cash.

HSL's share would be down to 13.8% and LR down to 9%.

We'd still have to find a way to clear the debt to Bydand and find the most tax efficient way for the Black Knights to invest the money into the club.

Under the current proposal Bydand's shareholding is reduced to 60% but the £5.75m debt to them is cleared. the Black Knights get a 25% shareholding for £4.76m which goes straight into the club. So the club is effectively £9.5m better off than it would be under your proposal.

Or, were you meaning the Gordons should sell some of their shares to HSL and do a rights issue to get HSL up to 20%? I think that would be extremely difficult if we still want the Black Knights investment and would involve HSL having to raise quite a few million to get in on the act. Having seen the response previously I don't think that would ever be possible.

Bit in bold is the entire crux of it! In what way can the club we all support not be benefitting when this is the underlying fact in all the other piles of conjecture :rolleyes:

It is a completely separate issue whether the financial benefit to our club is utilised in a way that will bring development and change (and we are entitled to ask / question / challenge decisions made about it) ... but its hardly a risk to us supporters, but it is most certainly a risk to those who are putting up such large sums and will be looking to see it spent well. The only way full return can be got is through Europe - and I for one was heartened to hear Foley clearly state regular Europe was the goal...

[McD]

I think there are those among us who are already there.



Aye, definite shades of what was being said back then

[JKeatings]

The debt will turn into shares, that the Gordons will own. It is new shares that are being created for BK to buy, not the shares converted from debts.

Foley has already said we will have a couple of million to spend in the summer, that’s more than we’ve ever had in one window, I’d say a war chest is a decent description.

What’s a good pedigree? Did Mowbray have a successful run as a manager before he got the Hibs job? What about Stubbs? Jack Ross hadn’t ever managed a club of our size before he came to us, yet finished 3rd and got hampden a few times.

2 million would get us maybe two good players if we got it right, hardly going to set the league alight.

A good pedigree for me would be someone like Knutsen and letting him build a team over a couple of years. Oh Great! is Stubbs or Ross available? If you think the current format of hiring and firing manager is going to work to cement 3rd you have to have a word with yourself. Stubbs apart from the Scottish cup win took us years to get out a championship that had a play off system in place! With probably the best midfield we will see for the next 20 years.

[superfurryhibby]

Aye, definite shades of what was being said back then

Not really seeing that myself, sorry.

[McD]

2 million would get us maybe two good players if we got it right, hardly going to set the league alight.

A good pedigree for me would be someone like Knutsen and letting him build a team over a couple of years. Oh Great! is Stubbs or Ross available? If you think the current format of hiring and firing manager is going to work to cement 3rd you have to have a word with yourself. Stubbs apart from the Scottish cup win took us years to get out a championship that had a play off system in place! With probably the best midfield we will see for the next 20 years.


I don’t agree with the current hiring and firing, but good deflection on the points made. You said that ‘fans won’t accept anything except good pedigree’ - good of you to appoint yourself spokesperson for the entire fan base, and as I demonstrated, successful managers don’t necessarily come with pedigree. Do you think Knutsen will give up champions league football to come to what you’re describing as a mess of a club with owners lining their pockets (paraphrasing based on what you’ve said across multiple posts)?


2 million is more money than we’ve ever had in a single window, and you’re turning your nose up at it? Perhaps you should have that word with yourself first.

[McD]

Not really seeing that myself, sorry.



Nothing to apologise for mate, wasn’t referring to yourself :aok:

I do think there is similar tones to the ponzi chat that was doing the rounds when the HSL was launched.


I think sensible scrutiny and criticism of the club is healthy and should be welcomed, however that’s not all there is on this thread or others.

[Ringothedog]

The deals agreed but isn’t actually signed yet tho is it? We have been giving the green light for the deal to go through. I know it wouldn’t result in cash for us but they would have their shares which they’re paying for… I’m just not right behind this deal yet, be happier when the plan is made public for us all to see

It does result in cash for us, the current owners are asking for new shares to created and allotted. 86 million shares to Bydand which will then be used to clear our loans to them of 5.75million. We are already £5.75m better off after this transaction. Another 70.2m shares are being created which would be allotted to the Black Knight investors. They are paying £6 million for those shares . This is new shares so the money goes direct to the club. That means we are in effect £11.75m better off as we have no loans and the investment money. The only downside is that it dilutes the ownership of the other shareholders

[JKeatings]

It does result in cash for us, the current owners are asking for new shares to created and allotted. 86 million shares to Bydand which will then be used to clear our loans to them of 5.75million. We are already £5.75m better off after this transaction. Another 70.2m shares are being created which would be allotted to the Black Knight investors. They are paying £6 million for those shares . This is new shares so the money goes direct to the club. That means we are in effect £11.75m better off as we have no loans and the investment money. The only downside is that it dilutes the ownership of the other shareholders
I get you I was worried this wouldn’t be the case

[JKeatings]

I don’t agree with the current hiring and firing, but good deflection on the points made. You said that ‘fans won’t accept anything except good pedigree’ - good of you to appoint yourself spokesperson for the entire fan base, and as I demonstrated, successful managers don’t necessarily come with pedigree. Do you think Knutsen will give up champions league football to come to what you’re describing as a mess of a club with owners lining their pockets (paraphrasing based on what you’ve said across multiple posts)?


2 million is more money than we’ve ever had in a single window, and you’re turning your nose up at it? Perhaps you should have that word with yourself first.
So you’d be happy with another manager without a good pedigree and hope that an unproven manager might just turn it around? Not all managers we have had have had that your right! but I bet my list of managers that hasn’t worked out is at least quadruple yours that has worked out! A manager with a good pedigree would get all fans behind him, why wouldn’t it? If you can think of a reason it wouldn’t then yes I suppose I am talking for all the fan base.
Not lining their pockets simply getting back money they’ve lost in the process… For the right wage I recon we could attract a better manager and see the benefits of it yes I do.

[overdrive]

Anyone still not received the notification through the post? I thought mine come yesterday. It didn't and hasn't come today either.

[superfurryhibby]

Anyone still not received the notification through the post? I thought mine come yesterday. It didn't and hasn't come today either.

Not received anything yet.

[Golden Bear]

Anyone still not received the notification through the post? I thought mine come yesterday. It didn't and hasn't come today either.

Likewise.

[andrew70]

Who do you contact re change of address I am sure I done it last year but no letter yet so just want to fire off an email.

Cheers

[offshorehibby]

Anyone still not received the notification through the post? I thought mine come yesterday. It didn't and hasn't come today either.

Did they not used to get posted out alphabetically with the days staggered. I'm sure i got mine a couple of days after the first ones dropped through doors in previous years.

[Bostonhibby]

Anyone still not received the notification through the post? I thought mine come yesterday. It didn't and hasn't come today either.Nothing received, we have 3 separate shareholdings.

Sent from my SM-A750FN using Tapatalk

[El Gubbz]

Is that what is definitely happening?

No but it’s effectively what the Gordons have done to date. Have they put any money in that hasn’t been secured against an asset? They may be writing off these loans to get into bed with a billionaire but ultimately they’re only doing this because they feel it will be more profitable for them long term - as is their right. But I’m growing tired of reading about how philanthropic our great overlords are - because they aren’t.

It’s not often I thank Nationwide for being a great investor in my house that they have securities on.

Bit scunnered by it all - think they’re taking us for granted tbh

[ancient hibee]

No but it’s effectively what the Gordons have done to date. Have they put any money in that hasn’t been secured against an asset? They may be writing off these loans to get into bed with a billionaire but ultimately they’re only doing this because they feel it will be more profitable for them long term - as is their right. But I’m growing tired of reading about how philanthropic our great overlords are - because they aren’t.

It’s not often I thank Nationwide for being a great investor in my house that they have securities on.

Bit scunnered by it all - think they’re taking us for granted tbh

As Bydland is the majority shareholder they effectively own most of the assets anyway.Their writing off the loans and taking shares will only be profitable if the club does well and becomes more valuable which is what we all want.

[McD]

So you’d be happy with another manager without a good pedigree and hope that an unproven manager might just turn it around? Not all managers we have had have had that your right! but I bet my list of managers that hasn’t worked out is at least quadruple yours that has worked out! A manager with a good pedigree would get all fans behind him, why wouldn’t it? If you can think of a reason it wouldn’t then yes I suppose I am talking for all the fan base.
Not lining their pockets simply getting back money they’ve lost in the process… For the right wage I recon we could attract a better manager and see the benefits of it yes I do.



Mate, this is Hibs, saying that the list of managers who’ve failed is 4 times as long as the list of managers who’ve succeeded is stating the obvious, if anything it’s far more than 4 times as long. It’s hardly ‘my list’ vs ‘your list’.

At our level, pedigree is virtually meaningless, as we won’t ever get a manager with pedigree of the sort you’ve suggested (knutsen). Terry butcher had pedigree at our level, that worked out well.

So to answer your question, I’d be happy with a manager who will do well. What he’s done elsewhere isn’t really relevant to how he’ll perform at Hibs. Experience would be preferable, but as we’ve seen, not necessarily crucial. I also doubt we can offer a wage so attractive that we’ll get someone like Knutsen to come here. That’s not to say we couldn’t attract someone at a slightly lower level with pedigree, if we so wished.

[McD]

No but it’s effectively what the Gordons have done to date. Have they put any money in that hasn’t been secured against an asset? They may be writing off these loans to get into bed with a billionaire but ultimately they’re only doing this because they feel it will be more profitable for them long term - as is their right. But I’m growing tired of reading about how philanthropic our great overlords are - because they aren’t.

It’s not often I thank Nationwide for being a great investor in my house that they have securities on.

Bit scunnered by it all - think they’re taking us for granted tbh


That’s not a fair comparison. You own your house, nationwide loaned you money to buy it and hold a security on it.

Bydand effectively own the club, stadium and HTC, so they’ve loaned the club money, secured against assets that Bydand already own (67% of). By doing that, they’re protecting that money in the event of something catastrophic happening to the club, and it being sold off piecemeal to cover its debts - Bydand would be a creditor.

However, by converting those loans into equity, they will be effectively writing that money off. The club will no longer have those loans outstanding, and the Gordons won’t see that money again (unlike mrs nudge who not only got her money paid back in full, she also charged Hearts interest on the balance she provided).

Even in gaining more equity, the creation and sale of shares to BK means Bydand/the Gordons will own less of Hibs than they do just now. The only way they would make a profit would be if the value of the club increased significantly, which would mean we’ve been very successful, which we all want, no?

[Ringothedog]

That’s not a fair comparison. You own your house, nationwide loaned you money to buy it and hold a security on it.

Bydand effectively own the club, stadium and HTC, so they’ve loaned the club money, secured against assets that Bydand already own (67% of). By doing that, they’re protecting that money in the event of something catastrophic happening to the club, and it being sold off piecemeal to cover its debts - Bydand would be a creditor.

However, by converting those loans into equity, they will be effectively writing that money off. The club will no longer have those loans outstanding, and the Gordons won’t see that money again (unlike mrs nudge who not only got her money paid back in full, she also charged Hearts interest on the balance she provided).

Even in gaining more equity, the creation and sale of shares to BK means Bydand/the Gordons will own less of Hibs than they do just now. The only way they would make a profit would be if the value of the club increased significantly, which would mean we’ve been very successful, which we all want, no?

You would be as well to go out to piss into a gale force wind. There are 2 camps on here. For and against. Nobody is willing to be flexible in their stance. The shareholders will vote in the way that they believe is best for the club. HSL will have to be transparent and have a vote by all their members to decide on a yes or no. All this infighting on here whether it’s team performance or BK investment is demoralising. I have never known our support to be so divided. It’s really sad when we should all be getting behind the team to try and get us out this slump we are in.

[matty_f]

You would be as well to go out to piss into a gale force wind. There are 2 camps on here. For and against. Nobody is willing to be flexible in their stance. The shareholders will vote in the way that they believe is best for the club. HSL will have to be transparent and have a vote by all their members to decide on a yes or no. All this infighting on here whether it’s team performance or BK investment is demoralising. I have never known our support to be so divided. It’s really sad when we should all be getting behind the team to try and get us out this slump we are in.

FWIW, I’m for at the moment but completely open to being against if the facts of the matter make me think it’s a bad idea. Absolutely nothing set in stone for me as far as I’m concerned, despite my opinion today.

[Chipper1875]

You would be as well to go out to piss into a gale force wind. There are 2 camps on here. For and against. Nobody is willing to be flexible in their stance. The shareholders will vote in the way that they believe is best for the club. HSL will have to be transparent and have a vote by all their members to decide on a yes or no. All this infighting on here whether it’s team performance or BK investment is demoralising. I have never known our support to be so divided. It’s really sad when we should all be getting behind the team to try and get us out this slump we are in.

This is a done deal . AGM is a tick in the box excercise.

I got behind my team last night at ER and will do the same on Saturday at Inverness.

[CropleyWasGod]

This is a done deal . AGM is a tick in the box excercise.

I got behind my team last night at ER and will do the same on Saturday at Inverness.

IMO, it's only the Ordinary Resolutions that are done.

The Special Resolutions might still be up for grabs.

[Chipper1875]

IMO, it's only the Ordinary Resolutions that are done.

The Special Resolutions might still be up for grabs.

This is true , l find it hard to believe they have went this far and Ben doing interviews with Sky Sports, if Mr Robb isn’t in the bag . If they have spoken to Mr Robb and not HSL it just cements they don’t like HSL , as they haven’t engaged with them to date. It’s negligent by the board not to engage with significant shareholders.

[CropleyWasGod]

This is true , l find it hard to believe they have went this far and Ben doing interviews with Sky Sports, if Mr Robb isn’t in the bag . If they have spoken to Mr Robb and not HSL it just cements they don’t like HSL , as they haven’t engaged with them to date. It’s negligent by the board not to engage with significant shareholders.

I've just received my AGM papers. They tell me that the Board will be voting, individually, in favour of all the Resolutions. I'm not sure how many shares that accounts for, but it's a wee drop nearer the 75%. (Edit. Only Malcolm MacPherson has shares, 5000, so it's not a great deal)

Incidentally, we're told that the vote won't be by show of hands, but "by way of a poll".

Does anyone know the practicalities of that?

[Chipper1875]

I've just received my AGM papers. They tell me that the Board will be voting, individually, in favour of all the Resolutions. I'm not sure how many shares that accounts for, but it's a wee drop nearer the 75%.

Interesting, l don’t think, at last time of checking all the board members held shares ? Back in the day soon as you became a director you got 5000 shares .

Not that hibs have shared the news, finance director isn’t on the board now . I was told he’s leaving, not sure if he has

[MelbourneHibees]

Could the Gordon's be seeking this Debt for equity swap and new shares purely to reduce the holdings for HSL?

[nonshinyfinish]

I've just received my AGM papers. They tell me that the Board will be voting, individually, in favour of all the Resolutions. I'm not sure how many shares that accounts for, but it's a wee drop nearer the 75%.

Don't think that makes any difference – the only permutation that can get 25% together to block it would be HSL (15.2%) and Robb (10%). The other smaller shareholders (7.6% total) could all vote for it or all vote against it but it makes no difference either way.

[CropleyWasGod]

Interesting, l don’t think, at last time of checking all the board members held shares ? Back in the day soon as you became a director you got 5000 shares .

Not that hibs have shared the news, finance director isn’t on the board now . I was told he’s leaving, not sure if he has

Only Malcom MacPherson has shares (5,000)

I had heard that about Chris Gaunt, maybe read it on here.

He's still in post, and active. Also still listed at CH.

[Ringothedog]

Could the Gordon's be seeking this Debt for equity swap and new shares purely to reduce the holdings for HSL?

Out of interest why would they do that? HSL are no threat and never will be. In the scheme of things they are small shareholder and probably no more than a minor irritance.

[CropleyWasGod]

Don't think that makes any difference – the only permutation that can get 25% together to block it would be HSL (15.2%) and Robb (10%). The other smaller shareholders (7.6% total) could all vote for it or all vote against it but it makes no difference either way.

Yeah, you're right. Just trying to get a Succession-vibe going :greengrin

[McD]

Could the Gordon's be seeking this Debt for equity swap and new shares purely to reduce the holdings for HSL?



I believe (someone will correct me I’m sure) that by creating new shares, the money to purchase them (from BK) goes to the club, if they sold existing shares technically the money would go to the shareholder.


As for the debt for equity swap, that’s anyone’s guess - could be that BK have pushed for that to happen before they’d put their money in, or could be the gordons want the club to have a clean slate and clean accounts before the investment takes place :dunno:

[Chipper1875]

Only Malcom MacPherson has shares (5,000)

I had heard that about Chris Gaunt, maybe read it on here.

He's still in post, and active. Also still listed at CH.

Intersting not listed as a director, perhaps CH still to be updated

[Glory Lurker]

Yeah, you're right. Just trying to get a Succession-vibe going :greengrin

Good point. Everyone is forgetting about Logan Roy. How will he vote in this? Will Rom get involved, to try to atone for his last football venture in the hope of earning his dad's favour for the big choice?

[nonshinyfinish]

Yeah, you're right. Just trying to get a Succession-vibe going :greengrin

"You better be smelling your f***¡ng armpit, Romulus"

[CropleyWasGod]

"You better be smelling your f***¡ng armpit, Romulus"

Hearts. Go you lovely *******s.

[DanishJohn]

Out of interest why would they do that? HSL are no threat and never will be. In the scheme of things they are small shareholder and probably no more than a minor irritance.

minor irritance ?

They handed over to the club £500,000 for nothing in return. Just for love.
Despicable way to speak of fellow Hibs fans.

[overdrive]

I've just received my AGM papers. They tell me that the Board will be voting, individually, in favour of all the Resolutions. I'm not sure how many shares that accounts for, but it's a wee drop nearer the 75%. (Edit. Only Malcolm MacPherson has shares, 5000, so it's not a great deal)

Incidentally, we're told that the vote won't be by show of hands, but "by way of a poll".

Does anyone know the practicalities of that?

I'm assuming that it'll either be a paper vote, i.e. you will get given a ballot paper when you register on the night (time consuming to count), or probably more likely they will use an online voting solution that uses a form of secure authentication (easy/quick to count). My accountancy institute uses one for its AGM. Easy to do with that as you are emailed two secure codes in advance to use and allows those absent to vote. Hibs won't necessarily have email addresses for everyone so I reckon we might be issued with a paper slip on registration on the night with some security codes.

If they do go down the e-vote route then I'm not sure what they'll do when it becomes apparent that some shareholders in attendance don't have a smart phone.

Edit: although I'm saying it would more likely be an online voting solution, I would have thought they would have issued instructions as to how to register with the documentation that was sent through the post. I received mine (the notice of the AGM) this morning but I've not read it yet.

[CropleyWasGod]

Intersting not listed as a director, perhaps CH still to be updated

His Linkedin profile has him as "Finance Director, Hibernian" (that said, he hasn't posted there in months).

Definitely still dealing with finance and AGM queries, though.

[overdrive]

His Linkedin profile has him as "Finance Director, Hibernian" (that said, he hasn't posted there in months).

Definitely still dealing with finance and AGM queries, though.

He's potentially stepped down as a board member but his job title kept as director. There was something in the proposed articles of association specifically covering that situation (it would definitely cover BMcD's situation as he has the job title Director of Football but is not a director of the company). He's also potentially working his notice in terms of his employment contract if he is indeed leaving but stepped down from the board whilst he works his notice.

We don't seem to keep FDs very long.

[CropleyWasGod]

I'm assuming that it'll either be a paper vote, i.e. you will get given a ballot paper when you register on the night (time consuming to count), or probably more likely they will use an online voting solution that uses a form of secure authentication (easy/quick to count). My accountancy institute uses one for its AGM. Easy to do with that as you are emailed two secure codes in advance to use and allows those absent to vote. Hibs won't necessarily have email addresses for everyone so I reckon we might be issued with a paper slip on registration on the night with some security codes.

If they do go down the e-vote route then I'm not sure what they'll do when it becomes apparent that some shareholders in attendance don't have a smart phone.

Edit: although I'm saying it would more likely be an online voting solution, I would have thought they would have issued instructions as to how to register with the documentation that was sent through the post. I received mine this morning but I've not read it yet.

How would thsat system cope with the fact that people have different numbers of votes?

[JGS56]

I'm assuming that it'll either be a paper vote, i.e. you will get given a ballot paper when you register on the night (time consuming to count), or probably more likely they will use an online voting solution that uses a form of secure authentication (easy/quick to count). My accountancy institute uses one for its AGM. Easy to do with that as you are emailed two secure codes in advance to use and allows those absent to vote. Hibs won't necessarily have email addresses for everyone so I reckon we might be issued with a paper slip on registration on the night with some security codes.

If they do go down the e-vote route then I'm not sure what they'll do when it becomes apparent that some shareholders in attendance don't have a smart phone.

Edit: although I'm saying it would more likely be an online voting solution, I would have thought they would have issued instructions as to how to register with the documentation that was sent through the post. I received mine this morning but I've not read it yet.

You just fill in the "Form of Proxy", scan it and email it to the agm email address and they do the counting. Has to be in by the 25th February.
All instructions in the documents you have received.

[Ringothedog]

minor irritance ?

They handed over to the club £500,000 for nothing in return. Just for love.
Despicable way to speak of fellow Hibs fans.

Get a grip, I have shares and contribute to HSL monthly. I was talking from their perspective.

[CropleyWasGod]

He's potentially stepped down as a board member but his job title kept as director. There was something in the proposed articles of association specifically covering that situation (it would definitely cover BMcD's situation as he has the job title Director of Football but is not a director of the company). He's also potentially working his notice in terms of his employment contract if he is indeed leaving but stepped down from the board whilst he works his notice.

We don't seem to keep FDs very long.

Jeezo, something else :greengrin

[DanishJohn]

This question is directed to Chairman of the board.

For the sake of transparency, could you confirm please that Mr Robb holds 10% of the shares ?
Secondly, when were these shares offered to him for sale ?

I'm aware these posts are viewed by members of your staff or indeed by you, so looking for a quick reply to an easy couple of questions.

Many thanks

[overdrive]

How would thsat system cope with the fact that people have different numbers of votes?

That's why you would have the security codes. Security code would be set up against a record for each shareholder. Each record would include no. of shares held.

These are now quite common in PLCs and became more popular following covid.

But see someone else's response below where it seems we all have to fill in the proxy form and submit it in advance.

[CropleyWasGod]

This question is directed to Chairman of the board.

For the sake of transparency, could you confirm please that Mr Robb holds 10% of the shares ?
Secondly, when were these shares offered to him for sale ?

I'm aware these posts are viewed by members of your staff or indeed by you, so looking for a quick reply to an easy couple of questions.

Many thanks

He does own 10%. It's on the club's Confirmation Statements.


https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/SC005323/filing-history

By looking at these, you will be able to see when he bought them.

[overdrive]

You just fill in the "Form of Proxy", scan it and email it to the agm email address and they do the counting. Has to be in by the 25th February.
All instructions in the documents you have received.

Cheers. Old school method. I'm surprised given the number of e-solutions available. Especially since it isn't a simple 1 ballot, 1 vote type arrangement.

[MelbourneHibees]

Out of interest why would they do that? HSL are no threat and never will be. In the scheme of things they are small shareholder and probably no more than a minor irritance.

This will reduce them to around 7%.

Before hand they would be over 10% and could easily veto the current 90% threshold.

[Rocky]

I'm assuming that it'll either be a paper vote, i.e. you will get given a ballot paper when you register on the night (time consuming to count), or probably more likely they will use an online voting solution that uses a form of secure authentication (easy/quick to count). My accountancy institute uses one for its AGM. Easy to do with that as you are emailed two secure codes in advance to use and allows those absent to vote. Hibs won't necessarily have email addresses for everyone so I reckon we might be issued with a paper slip on registration on the night with some security codes.

If they do go down the e-vote route then I'm not sure what they'll do when it becomes apparent that some shareholders in attendance don't have a smart phone.

Edit: although I'm saying it would more likely be an online voting solution, I would have thought they would have issued instructions as to how to register with the documentation that was sent through the post. I received mine (the notice of the AGM) this morning but I've not read it yet.
There's a paper form with the AGM papers. It doesn't matter anyway, they only need to count two ballot papers, the Bydand one and the Leslie Robb one. Between them those account for 77% of the shares currently in existence. If, somehow, Leslie Robb ends up voting against, they'll end up in an absolute buggers muddle of trying to match the paper forms to the shareholders register.

[nonshinyfinish]

There's a paper form with the AGM papers. It doesn't matter anyway, they only need to count two ballot papers, the Bydand one and the Leslie Robb one. Between them those account for 77% of the shares currently in existence. If, somehow, Leslie Robb ends up voting against, they'll end up in an absolute buggers muddle of trying to match the paper forms to the shareholders register.

In the case where Robb votes against, all they have to do is check HSL's vote. These are the only relevant possibilities:

Bydand + either of HSL or Robb vote for – vote passes
Both HSL and Robb vote against – vote fails

The other votes can't make a difference either way.

[Rocky]

In the case where Robb votes against, all they have to do is check HSL's vote. These are the only relevant possibilities:

Bydand + either of HSL or Robb vote for – vote passes
Both HSL and Robb vote against – vote fails

The other votes can't make a difference either way.
Good point. HSL will vote for in the end anyway, it would be madness to turn away £10 million and leave the club carrying £6m of debt with a pissed off majority shareholder looking to get out.

[DanishJohn]

He does own 10%. It's on the club's Confirmation Statements.


https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/SC005323/filing-history

By looking at these, you will be able to see when he bought them.

I will go through them and see if I can note a date.

Could you help me with something else pertinent to the shares. Apart from Mr Robb, were others offered the chance to buy a large tranche?
For the life of me I can't remember ever being offered the chance.

Cheers .

[JGS56]

I will go through them and see if I can note a date.

Could you help me with something else pertinent to the shares. Apart from Mr Robb, were others offered the chance to buy a large tranche?
For the life of me I can't remember ever being offered the chance.

Cheers .

Do not think Mr Robb was offered the option to buy all those shares. Ever since the shares were sold there were a lot of "Nominee" holdings under various names. These have all now disappeared to be replaced by Leslie Robb. Difficult to tell if these were within the rules.
Personally, I do not think these were allowed as I was under the impression that HSL were the only grouping that could buy more than the maximum allowed number of Shares.

[CapitalGreen]

I will go through them and see if I can note a date.

Could you help me with something else pertinent to the shares. Apart from Mr Robb, were others offered the chance to buy a large tranche?
For the life of me I can't remember ever being offered the chance.

Cheers .

Yes, Leeann Dempster was quoted ag the time of the share issue asking any fans who wish to invest a larger amount to contact the club directly. LD was also a director of HSL at this time.

27677

[CapitalGreen]

Do not think Mr Robb was offered the option to buy all those shares. Ever since the shares were sold there were a lot of "Nominee" holdings under various names. These have all now disappeared to be replaced by Leslie Robb. Difficult to tell if these were within the rules.
Personally, I do not think these were allowed as I was under the impression that HSL were the only grouping that could buy more than the maximum allowed number of Shares.

This is not correct, see my reply above. LD was encouraging fans who wished to invest more to contact the club. She was on the board of HSL at this time.

[DanishJohn]

Yes, Leeann Dempster was quoted ag the time of the share issue asking any fans who wish to invest a larger amount to contact the club directly. LD was also a director of HSL at this time.

27677

Yes that's what LD said. However at the share issue time the limit was £125,00 . What you might be getting confused about was yes LD did say if you want to make a larger investment contact the club. I very much doubt anyone would have told someone that the club would break this agreement. ?

So back to the point. How did Mr Robb end up with 10% ?

[Stairway 2 7]

Yes that's what LD said. However at the share issue time the limit was £125,00 . What you might be getting confused about was yes LD did say if you want to make a larger investment contact the club. I very much doubt anyone would have told someone that the club would break this agreement. ?

So back to the point. How did Mr Robb end up with 10% ?

Eh. She said get in touch if you want a bigger investment, looks like he did

[Sioux]

Yes that's what LD said. However at the share issue time the limit was £125,00 . What you might be getting confused about was yes LD did say if you want to make a larger investment contact the club. I very much doubt anyone would have told someone that the club would break this agreement. ?

So back to the point. How did Mr Robb end up with 10% ?

He likely bought them over a period of time whilst using nominees for each purchase.

[WhileTheChief..]

I think the max you were allowed to buy was £250k worth.

Maybe L Robb and family / friends all bought the max allowed, and subsequently transferred them into L Robb's name?

Or maybe it was just a good bunch of wealthy Hibs fans who all got together and bought £250k each with a view to holding a significant amount in case anything dodgy happened in future?

Or maybe STF knew some folk that all wanted to buy a sizeable chunk. It's not like the club was floated on the market, so any rule about how many shares people could buy, would have been set by STF and be subject to change, I'd have thought.

[Since90+2]

Is it permissable to ask an existing shareholder how they plan to vote ahead of an official AGM? The reason I ask is I can't see them getting to this stage without asking Robb how he plans to vote.

[matty_f]

Is it permissable to ask an existing shareholder how they plan to vote ahead of an official AGM? The reason I ask is I can't see them getting to this stage without asking Robb how he plans to vote.

Yeah, it’s not unusual to get assurances etc for things like this.

[Since90+2]

Yeah, it’s not unusual to get assurances etc for things like this.

I think we can take it then that Robb will be voting for it.

[Lago]

I think we can take it then that Robb will be voting for it.
Hope so.

[MelbourneHibees]

I think we can take it then that Robb will be voting for it.

He must have had some assurances from the club going forward because remember his shareholding is going to be significantly reduced from this as well. The club will use his property exclusively or something. If the Black Knight Group do plan to take full control however he will be unable to block them and need to sell his shares at that point presumably any assurances will be able to be walked away from.

[JGS56]

This is not correct, see my reply above. LD was encouraging fans who wished to invest more to contact the club. She was on the board of HSL at this time.

The official documents sent out at the time of the sale of shares specifically stated there was a maximum that an individual could buy (I have still got these in my filing system [that makes me a sad b*****d] and the official line was a maximum.
What LD stated in the press would probably be against the public rules of the sale.

[Daniel 1875]

You just fill in the "Form of Proxy", scan it and email it to the agm email address and they do the counting. Has to be in by the 25th February.
All instructions in the documents you have received.

There surely has to be a way to vote either at the meeting or after the meeting has concluded. How can they ask shareholders to submit a vote by proxy two days before the meeting occurs where the proposals shareholders are being asked to vote on are going to be discussed?

[Hibiza]

Keep Dan Mackay .

[Rocky]

There surely has to be a way to vote either at the meeting or after the meeting has concluded. How can they ask shareholders to submit a vote by proxy two days before the meeting occurs where the proposals shareholders are being asked to vote on are going to be discussed?
Note 2 in the notes says voting will be conducted by way of a poll at the AGM. I know this might come across as rude but you guys are sitting on voting rights for about £1.4 million of shares so I'm a little troubled that you're asking that on here.

[JGS56]

There surely has to be a way to vote either at the meeting or after the meeting has concluded. How can they ask shareholders to submit a vote by proxy two days before the meeting occurs where the proposals shareholders are being asked to vote on are going to be discussed?

I suggest, Daniel, that you and the other board members of HSL read the documentation recently sent out by the club.

On page 3 of the documentation it states the voting arrangements - the resolutions "will be voted on by way of a poll, rather than a show of hands. This means that Shareholders will have one vote for each Ordinary Share held".

This means everybody has to make up their mind how they are going to vote before the AGM.

I believe that HSL are now holding their AGM on Thursday 22 February in order to discuss these new developments. I will be there.

As a final note, as Resolutions 1 - 4 are "Ordinary Resolutions" they only need 50% +1 share to pass. Therefore these Resolutions will pass as the major shareholder in the club owns over 65% of all current shares.

[Daniel 1875]

I suggest, Daniel, that you and the other board members of HSL read the documentation recently sent out by the club.

On page 3 of the documentation it states the voting arrangements - the resolutions "will be voted on by way of a poll, rather than a show of hands. This means that Shareholders will have one vote for each Ordinary Share held".

This means everybody has to make up their mind how they are going to vote before the AGM.

I believe that HSL are now holding their AGM on Thursday 22 February in order to discuss these new developments. I will be there.

As a final note, as Resolutions 1 - 4 are "Ordinary Resolutions" they only need 50% +1 share to pass. Therefore these Resolutions will pass as the major shareholder in the club owns over 65% of all current shares.
After reading and responding to your earlier post, which prompted my reply - your info isn’t correct. As I thought, everybody doesn’t need to make up their mind before the AGM, you only need to do this if you’re not attending the meeting in person.

I’ve read the documentation from the club more than once, and just reread again.

I will be at the meeting in person and therefore will be voting on the night.

Hibernian Supporters are having their AGM on 22nd February in order to discuss the proposals ahead of the club AGM the following week.

[Rocky]

After reading and responding to your earlier post, which prompted my reply - your info isn’t correct. As I thought, everybody doesn’t need to make up their mind before the AGM, you only need to do this if you’re not attending the meeting in person.

I’ve read the documentation from the club more than once, and just reread again.

I will be at the meeting in person and therefore will be voting on the night.

Hibernian Supporters are having their AGM on 22nd February in order to discuss the proposals ahead of the club AGM the following week.
Are Hibernian Supporters engaging any specialists (eg commercial lawyers) prior to the AGM on 22nd to enable an informed discussion? If not, it won't be any different to the chat on here so I doubt I'll attend.

[Allant1981]

Who is the best contact at the club, I moved house and forgot to update my details so wont get anything for the agm

[brianmc]

*apologies for not reading the whole thread...

Has anyone already questioned why the AGM is scheduled for "6.00pm BST" whilst we're currently in GMT??

[Chipper1875]

Who is the best contact at the club, I moved house and forgot to update my details so wont get anything for the agm

[email protected]

[MelbourneHibees]

*apologies for not reading the whole thread...

Has anyone already questioned why the AGM is scheduled for "6.00pm BST" whilst we're currently in GMT??

🤣

[Stairway 2 7]

*apologies for not reading the whole thread...

Has anyone already questioned why the AGM is scheduled for "6.00pm BST" whilst we're currently in GMT??

There is a resolution at the AGM to stick with BST all year round and I'm all for it

[Allant1981]

[email protected]

Cheers ta

[JGS56]

After reading and responding to your earlier post, which prompted my reply - your info isn’t correct. As I thought, everybody doesn’t need to make up their mind before the AGM, you only need to do this if you’re not attending the meeting in person.

I’ve read the documentation from the club more than once, and just reread again.

I will be at the meeting in person and therefore will be voting on the night.

Hibernian Supporters are having their AGM on 22nd February in order to discuss the proposals ahead of the club AGM the following week.

I have reread the documentation, and it appears correct that there will voting on the night (but not very clear).
The process for voting will be complicated (I believe) as every person there will have to vote, then someone cross references your name against the shareholder list to ascertain the number of shares you have and then add them all up for each resolution along with all the proxy votes.
Do you think we will get the results at the meeting. Although it is only Resolution 5 & 6 that need doing as the major shareholder owns over 65% of the shares.

[brianmc]

There is a resolution at the AGM to stick with BST all year round and I'm all for it

Good for you.

But if you turn up to cast your vote and find out you're an hour late I'm sure we'll all see the funny side 😀

[Rocky]

I have reread the documentation, and it appears correct that there will voting on the night (but not very clear).
The process for voting will be complicated (I believe) as every person there will have to vote, then someone cross references your name against the shareholder list to ascertain the number of shares you have and then add them all up for each resolution along with all the proxy votes.
Do you think we will get the results at the meeting. Although it is only Resolution 5 & 6 that need doing as the major shareholder owns over 65% of the shares.
As covered on another thread there's only 2 bits of paper that are going to need counted, the Bydand one and the Leslie Robb one.

[CropleyWasGod]

To pick up a discussion from earlier, Chris Gaunt is leaving on the 16th February. He is, however, staying as Company Secretary until the AGM.

[Pretty Boy]

To pick up a discussion from earlier, Chris Gaunt is leaving on the 16th February.

The [email protected] email address has also been disabled as I was informed when I emailed it this morning. A bit odd it isn't forwarded or a message stating where to redirect queries to. I believe he was the person that dealt with that previously.

Maybe just a coincidence of course.

[CropleyWasGod]

The [email protected] email address has also been disabled as I was informed when I emailed it this morning. A bit odd it isn't forwarded or a message stating where to redirect queries to. I believe he was the person that dealt with that previously.

Maybe just a coincidence of course.

I edited my previous post :greengrin

He's staying as Company Secretary until the AGM, so you could get him directly.

[Chipper1875]

The [email protected] email address has also been disabled as I was informed when I emailed it this morning. A bit odd it isn't forwarded or a message stating where to redirect queries to. I believe he was the person that dealt with that previously.

Maybe just a coincidence of course.

[email protected]

[Pretty Boy]

[email protected]

I emailed that arranging a proxy for someone and that worked.

The shares email was re a different query not specifically about the AGM.

[CropleyWasGod]

I emailed that arranging a proxy for someone and that worked.

The shares email was re a different query not specifically about the AGM.

[email protected]

[Pretty Boy]

[email protected]

:aok: