Hsl agm

[matty_f]

Did anyone make it along? I couldn't make it as is hoped to go, just wondering if there were any updates?

[overdrive]

Vote was taken. The outcome is being counted and will be emailed to members tomorrow.

[matty_f]

Vote was taken. The outcome is being counted and will be emailed to members tomorrow.

Thanks :aok:

Was there much discussion around it or a steer on which way to vote?

[overdrive]

Thanks :aok:

Was there much discussion around it or a steer on which way to vote?

A fair bit of discussion. I think most people in the room weren’t happy with what the Club are proposing in terms of the dilution of HSLs shares, the pre-emption rights and the lack of information from the club on the Articles of Association.

That was just my impression of what was said plus who knows how folk voted in advance.

[RMQ1967]

Thanks :aok:

Was there much discussion around it or a steer on which way to vote?

Thought it was a pretty good night - maybe 50-60 or more in attendance. I thought Jim, Peter & Daniel handled things professionally & it was well organised.

Voting forms were handed out & Jim asked people to hold off voting until we'd had a discussion about the implications of the club resolutions. In terms of a steer, Jim asked people to consider whether the resolutions were beneficial to the objectives of HSL and I think its fair to say his view was that they would hinder HSL's objectives (to acquire shares on behalf of the members). It was probably accurate to make that statement but doesn't take into account that HSL's original objectives may need to adapt given the incoming investment. However, he did stress that everyone should make up their own minds as to how they preferred to vote. Myself and the few around me that I could see voted for the Hibs resolutions but that may not be representative of the rest.

Peter gave a run through the accounts, highlighted expenses which were mainly donations of one kind of another to Hibs Ladies, Community Foundation, Hanlon Stevenson Foundation, some legal advice on updates to Articles of Association, a table at Pioneers etc. All seemed appropriate and to the benefit of Hibs in general.

There were some voices that you could say were sceptical about the intentions of the the Gordons/Bill Foley and critical of the losses but only a few and hard to tell if a majority others in the room shared those views. There were also others who were clear they didn't want Hibs to miss out on the investment opportunity.

Jim gave some insights into conversations with Ron which clarified that Ron had no interest in the fan ownership model and didn't really understand why STF chose to go down that route. May explain why the current board are not interested in engaging with HSL in terms of allowing further share purchases.

The question was asked as to the future direction of HSL (if there will be no way to purchase additional shares) and the directors suggested that members reconvene at a later date to discuss what that direction or objective might be. One thing that was clarified is that should HSL decide to stop trading or whatever, the assets would pass to the Hibs Community Foundation (and maybe another organisation). I can't quite recall, but I think that what's was written into the update to the Articles of Association.

All in all I found it a pretty positive & informative meeting with plenty of decent discussion and views from both sides of the for/against vote.

[Brightside]

Did HSL members agree to those gifts of funds prior to them happening? Also in the event of HSL wrapping you mentioned all funds would go to another organisation (possibly HCF) - again was that ever agreed by HSL members?

I've only donated small amounts to HSL so its probably none of my business, I'd just be interested in the process that took place for those decisions.

I'd still rather see an HSL transfer kitty. But it sounds like I'm in the minority on that.

[CropleyWasGod]

Did HSL members agree to those gifts of funds prior to them happening? Also in the event of HSL wrapping you mentioned all funds would go to another organisation (possibly HCF) - again was that ever agreed by HSL members?

I've only donated small amounts to HSL so its probably none of my business, I'd just be interested in the process that took place for those decisions.

I'd still rather see an HSL transfer kitty. But it sounds like I'm in the minority on that.

It's in the Articles of Association

"such body.... with objects similar to the Company" is the wording.

[matty_f]

Thought it was a pretty good night - maybe 50-60 or more in attendance. I thought Jim, Peter & Daniel handled things professionally & it was well organised.

Voting forms were handed out & Jim asked people to hold off voting until we'd had a discussion about the implications of the club resolutions. In terms of a steer, Jim asked people to consider whether the resolutions were beneficial to the objectives of HSL and I think its fair to say his view was that they would hinder HSL's objectives (to acquire shares on behalf of the members). It was probably accurate to make that statement but doesn't take into account that HSL's original objectives may need to adapt given the incoming investment. However, he did stress that everyone should make up their own minds as to how they preferred to vote. Myself and the few around me that I could see voted for the Hibs resolutions but that may not be representative of the rest.

Peter gave a run through the accounts, highlighted expenses which were mainly donations of one kind of another to Hibs Ladies, Community Foundation, Hanlon Stevenson Foundation, some legal advice on updates to Articles of Association, a table at Pioneers etc. All seemed appropriate and to the benefit of Hibs in general.

There were some voices that you could say were sceptical about the intentions of the the Gordons/Bill Foley and critical of the losses but only a few and hard to tell if a majority others in the room shared those views. There were also others who were clear they didn't want Hibs to miss out on the investment opportunity.

Jim gave some insights into conversations with Ron which clarified that Ron had no interest in the fan ownership model and didn't really understand why STF chose to go down that route. May explain why the current board are not interested in engaging with HSL in terms of allowing further share purchases.

The question was asked as to the future direction of HSL (if there will be no way to purchase additional shares) and the directors suggested that members reconvene at a later date to discuss what that direction or objective might be. One thing that was clarified is that should HSL decide to stop trading or whatever, the assets would pass to the Hibs Community Foundation (and maybe another organisation). I can't quite recall, but I think that what's was written into the update to the Articles of Association.

All in all I found it a pretty positive & informative meeting with plenty of decent discussion and views from both sides of the for/against vote.

Thanks :aok:

[Stairway 2 7]

It's in the Articles of Association

"such body.... with objects similar to the Company" is the wording.

The community foundation has zero similarity to the objects of HSL surely. The objective of HSL was to get shares in hibs and also by doing so putting money into hibs kitty. Even if it's in the small print that no one reads giving all the money to charity instead of hibs should surely be voted on.

[RMQ1967]

The community foundation has zero similarity to the objects of HSL surely. The objective of HSL was to get shares in hibs and also by doing so putting money into hibs kitty. Even if it's in the small print that no one reads giving all the money to charity instead of hibs should surely be voted on.

As I understand this was approved by the membership at the previous AGM - I think that's what was said but apologies if that's not quite accurate. Hopefully Daniel or someone else who was there can confirm.

[Dmas]

Thought it was a pretty good night - maybe 50-60 or more in attendance. I thought Jim, Peter & Daniel handled things professionally & it was well organised.

Voting forms were handed out & Jim asked people to hold off voting until we'd had a discussion about the implications of the club resolutions. In terms of a steer, Jim asked people to consider whether the resolutions were beneficial to the objectives of HSL and I think its fair to say his view was that they would hinder HSL's objectives (to acquire shares on behalf of the members). It was probably accurate to make that statement but doesn't take into account that HSL's original objectives may need to adapt given the incoming investment. However, he did stress that everyone should make up their own minds as to how they preferred to vote. Myself and the few around me that I could see voted for the Hibs resolutions but that may not be representative of the rest.

Peter gave a run through the accounts, highlighted expenses which were mainly donations of one kind of another to Hibs Ladies, Community Foundation, Hanlon Stevenson Foundation, some legal advice on updates to Articles of Association, a table at Pioneers etc. All seemed appropriate and to the benefit of Hibs in general.

There were some voices that you could say were sceptical about the intentions of the the Gordons/Bill Foley and critical of the losses but only a few and hard to tell if a majority others in the room shared those views. There were also others who were clear they didn't want Hibs to miss out on the investment opportunity.

Jim gave some insights into conversations with Ron which clarified that Ron had no interest in the fan ownership model and didn't really understand why STF chose to go down that route. May explain why the current board are not interested in engaging with HSL in terms of allowing further share purchases.

The question was asked as to the future direction of HSL (if there will be no way to purchase additional shares) and the directors suggested that members reconvene at a later date to discuss what that direction or objective might be. One thing that was clarified is that should HSL decide to stop trading or whatever, the assets would pass to the Hibs Community Foundation (and maybe another organisation). I can't quite recall, but I think that what's was written into the update to the Articles of Association.

All in all I found it a pretty positive & informative meeting with plenty of decent discussion and views from both sides of the for/against vote.

Thanks for posting this.

[Brightside]

As I understand this was approved by the membership at the previous AGM - I think that's what was said but apologies if that's not quite accurate. Hopefully Daniel or someone else who was there can confirm.

Thats fine if thats the case. Be interesting which body they are talking about.

[overdrive]

As I understand this was approved by the membership at the previous AGM - I think that's what was said but apologies if that's not quite accurate. Hopefully Daniel or someone else who was there can confirm.

I think what they said last night was that it was originally just the HCF that was listed in the Articles of Association but that it was changed to be HCF or other similar organisation - albeit from what CWG posted that’s not quite how it appears in the articles as last night the impression given was an organisation similar to HCF but it seems it’s actually similar to HSL.

[Radium]

Did HSL members agree to those gifts of funds prior to them happening? Also in the event of HSL wrapping you mentioned all funds would go to another organisation (possibly HCF) - again was that ever agreed by HSL members?

I've only donated small amounts to HSL so its probably none of my business, I'd just be interested in the process that took place for those decisions.

I'd still rather see an HSL transfer kitty. But it sounds like I'm in the minority on that.

In the answers to questions around the engagement/ relationship with the club since the Gordon’s took over my pick up was that Ron thought that the funds held by HSL should simply be handed over to the club despite the articles stating that they were to purchase shares.

A proposal was developed by HSL which would have allowed members to indicate through the website that their donations should simply be sent to the club. The club’s response was that they were not interested in the proposal.

This seemed to be a good illustration that HSL is not part of the Gordon’s plan but also how the board have tried to have put different options in place for the members.

Hopefully I picked up your meaning around a transfer kitty. In terms of potential, HSL have received over £300k across the last two years so still a strong level of support.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[matty_f]

I really don't think HSL should be putting money in for nothing. It was different when STF owned Hibs, he never bought us because he wanted a football club, he did it to keep the club in existence and he was clear from the start that the club was to be self-sustaining, and we had years and years of strict budgeting and living within our means. It was a tough slog and the club needed all the help it could get. At that point, I had no problem with the idea of fans contributing towards transfers and getting money into the club.

Ron Gordon bought the club because he wanted a football club. The Gordons are an extremely wealthy family, certainly relative to the vast majority of the supporters. Ron came in with ambitions for the club but those were his ambitions. The Black Knights are now joining in, backed by billionaires.

They do not need to be taking more money out of the pockets of supporters. You need to comprehend how much money a billion pounds (or dollars) is. You could probably pool the collective wealth of the whole Hibs support and not scratch the surface of it.

I know nobody has a gun to their head to say they need to donate to HSL but we shouldn't look at the club as a charity case, and if we as a support are getting hundreds of thousands of pounds together, then that should be a transaction where we get something in return - be that shares or some other agreeable arrangement. There's no way we should be funding a vanity project for multi-millionaires and billionaires, IMHO.

[Alex Trager]

I really don't think HSL should be putting money in for nothing. It was different when STF owned Hibs, he never bought us because he wanted a football club, he did it to keep the club in existence and he was clear from the start that the club was to be self-sustaining, and we had years and years of strict budgeting and living within our means. It was a tough slog and the club needed all the help it could get. At that point, I had no problem with the idea of fans contributing towards transfers and getting money into the club.

Ron Gordon bought the club because he wanted a football club. The Gordons are an extremely wealthy family, certainly relative to the vast majority of the supporters. Ron came in with ambitions for the club but those were his ambitions. The Black Knights are now joining in, backed by billionaires.

They do not need to be taking more money out of the pockets of supporters. You need to comprehend how much money a billion pounds (or dollars) is. You could probably pool the collective wealth of the whole Hibs support and not scratch the surface of it.

I know nobody has a gun to their head to say they need to donate to HSL but we shouldn't look at the club as a charity case, and if we as a support are getting hundreds of thousands of pounds together, then that should be a transaction where we get something in return - be that shares or some other agreeable arrangement. There's no way we should be funding a vanity project for multi-millionaires and billionaires, IMHO.

Spot on.

[Glory Lurker]

Spot on.

Seconded

[RMQ1967]

I really don't think HSL should be putting money in for nothing. It was different when STF owned Hibs, he never bought us because he wanted a football club, he did it to keep the club in existence and he was clear from the start that the club was to be self-sustaining, and we had years and years of strict budgeting and living within our means. It was a tough slog and the club needed all the help it could get. At that point, I had no problem with the idea of fans contributing towards transfers and getting money into the club.

Ron Gordon bought the club because he wanted a football club. The Gordons are an extremely wealthy family, certainly relative to the vast majority of the supporters. Ron came in with ambitions for the club but those were his ambitions. The Black Knights are now joining in, backed by billionaires.

They do not need to be taking more money out of the pockets of supporters. You need to comprehend how much money a billion pounds (or dollars) is. You could probably pool the collective wealth of the whole Hibs support and not scratch the surface of it.

I know nobody has a gun to their head to say they need to donate to HSL but we shouldn't look at the club as a charity case, and if we as a support are getting hundreds of thousands of pounds together, then that should be a transaction where we get something in return - be that shares or some other agreeable arrangement. There's no way we should be funding a vanity project for multi-millionaires and billionaires, IMHO.

Yes I think the board and everyone else at the meeting was in agreement with that. It was stated HSL made a large donation to Hibs during COVID and have been contributing other much smaller amounts to I suppose what you'd call Hibs charity work but I don't think anyone was of the opinion that more money should be gifted to Hibs.

I'm not sure Hibs are asking for that either - it was from conversations between Ron & HSL some time in the past.

[Pretty Boy]

I really don't think HSL should be putting money in for nothing. It was different when STF owned Hibs, he never bought us because he wanted a football club, he did it to keep the club in existence and he was clear from the start that the club was to be self-sustaining, and we had years and years of strict budgeting and living within our means. It was a tough slog and the club needed all the help it could get. At that point, I had no problem with the idea of fans contributing towards transfers and getting money into the club.

Ron Gordon bought the club because he wanted a football club. The Gordons are an extremely wealthy family, certainly relative to the vast majority of the supporters. Ron came in with ambitions for the club but those were his ambitions. The Black Knights are now joining in, backed by billionaires.

They do not need to be taking more money out of the pockets of supporters. You need to comprehend how much money a billion pounds (or dollars) is. You could probably pool the collective wealth of the whole Hibs support and not scratch the surface of it.

I know nobody has a gun to their head to say they need to donate to HSL but we shouldn't look at the club as a charity case, and if we as a support are getting hundreds of thousands of pounds together, then that should be a transaction where we get something in return - be that shares or some other agreeable arrangement. There's no way we should be funding a vanity project for multi-millionaires and billionaires, IMHO.

Aye I'd agree with that 100%.

Times have changed. I've always argued that as clubs (that's all clubs not just Hibs) increasingly see and treat fans as customers then there has to be an expectation that fans will respond in kind and increasingly act like customers. For all his many, many faults at least Wallace Mercer was honest when he spoke about Hearts fans as customers 30+ years ago.

[Brightside]

So. Where should the money go then?

[Bostonhibby]

So. Where should the money go then?Returning it proportionately to the members and winding up this version of HSL might be an option for some?

Sent from my SM-A750FN using Tapatalk

[hibbydad]

So. Where should the money go then?
Good question

[CropleyWasGod]

To be clear, the latest version of the Articles doesn't specifically mention HCF, or anyone else.

They say what I said above.

"such body.... with objects similar to the Company"

[Pretty Boy]

So. Where should the money go then?

It should go to a members vote and I'd be pretty disappointed if that didn't happen. As a members organisation built on a principle of one member, one vote then that seems the fairest way to decide. Without wishing to offend anyone it really isn't the business of those who aren't members of HSL and they aren't in a position to demand or dictate what should be done with cash reserves.

The 3 options for me are gift it to the club, donate it to the HCF or return it to members on a basis proportional to their holding in HSL. Option 2 or 3 would be my choice but the beauty of a democratic vote among members is that it's what the majority want that happens and no one can say they weren't consulted or that a decision was taken unilaterally.

[Brightside]

Returning it proportionately to the members and winding up this version of HSL might be an option for some?

Sent from my SM-A750FN using Tapatalk

I think once the AGM votes are published it should certainly be the next discussion for HSL members. It sounds like most don’t want the money to go to Hibs. I’m not sure giving it all back to members would work either. It would be an admin nightmare.

[Alex Trager]

It should go to a members vote and I'd be pretty disappointed if that didn't happen. As a members organisation built on a principle of one member, one vote then that seems the only fair way to decide.

The 3 options for me are gift it to the club, donate it to the HCF or return it to members on a basis proportional to their holding in HSL. Option 2 or 3 would be my choice but the beauty of a democratic vote among members is that it's what the majority want that happens and no one can say they weren't consulted or that a decision was taken unilaterally.

I’m not a member ( I don’t think) but have donated a good few hundred pound to it.

Not sure my money would return to me.

I would be happy for it to go to the community foundation.

[Brightside]

It should go to a members vote and I'd be pretty disappointed if that didn't happen. As a members organisation built on a principle of one member, one vote then that seems the only fair way to decide.

The 3 options for me are gift it to the club, donate it to the HCF or return it to members on a basis proportional to their holding in HSL. Option 2 or 3 would be my choice but the beauty of a democratic vote among members is that it's what the majority want that happens and no one can say they weren't consulted or that a decision was taken unilaterally.

300k cash and about 700k of shares at current value. Would be a real shame if we couldn’t come to an agreement to perhaps part fund the indoor pitch at HTC for example.

[matty_f]

300k cash and about 700k of shares at current value. Would be a real shame if we couldn’t come to an agreement to perhaps part fund the indoor pitch at HTC for example.

In exchange for some shares, in the same way that Foley and the Gordons have put money in :wink:

[Chipper1875]

I really don't think HSL should be putting money in for nothing. It was different when STF owned Hibs, he never bought us because he wanted a football club, he did it to keep the club in existence and he was clear from the start that the club was to be self-sustaining, and we had years and years of strict budgeting and living within our means. It was a tough slog and the club needed all the help it could get. At that point, I had no problem with the idea of fans contributing towards transfers and getting money into the club.

Ron Gordon bought the club because he wanted a football club. The Gordons are an extremely wealthy family, certainly relative to the vast majority of the supporters. Ron came in with ambitions for the club but those were his ambitions. The Black Knights are now joining in, backed by billionaires.

They do not need to be taking more money out of the pockets of supporters. You need to comprehend how much money a billion pounds (or dollars) is. You could probably pool the collective wealth of the whole Hibs support and not scratch the surface of it.

I know nobody has a gun to their head to say they need to donate to HSL but we shouldn't look at the club as a charity case, and if we as a support are getting hundreds of thousands of pounds together, then that should be a transaction where we get something in return - be that shares or some other agreeable arrangement. There's no way we should be funding a vanity project for multi-millionaires and billionaires, IMHO.

Great post . Ron Gordon made it clear in his first meeting with fans , he didn’t like fans having shares . This will soon be the reality. I so real need to wipe out fans who have held shares since 1989 and have no power to stop majority shareholders following their chosen path.

Despite not liking us , he to quote him wanted us to “pony up”.

[leith lynx]

So. Where should the money go then?

How about funding a proper (well over due) Hibernian museum for the Hibernian historical society., keeping in mind the 150th anniversary is just round the corner, would also like to see a commemorative plaque on the outside wall of the St.Marys Street buildings. Would rather donate money into projects like this instead of disappearing into the ether, as it looks like the Gordon's don't want/need the HSL donations.

[7Hero]

300k cash and about 700k of shares at current value. Would be a real shame if we couldn’t come to an agreement to perhaps part fund the indoor pitch at HTC for example.

The millionaires and billionaires involved are happy to dilute the ownership of the fans , this applies to not only hsl but every minority shareholder and also happy to attempt stop any fans buying shares ever again, they are simply wanting fans out of ownership.

Why would it be a shame if these same fans didn't use the money they had contributed to build a new facility ? Surely with the investment Hibs now have they can do this themselves can't they .

[Pagan Hibernia]

How about funding a proper (well over due) Hibernian museum for the Hibernian historical society., keeping in mind the 150th anniversary is just round the corner, would also like to see a commemorative plaque on the outside wall of the St.Marys Street buildings. Would rather donate money into projects like this instead of disappearing into the ether, as it looks like the Gordon's don't want/need the HSL donations.

I would absolutely support that.

I see no reason whatsoever that the money should be just gifted to Hibs when we will have millionaires in charge who have progressively squeezed out the supporter shareholders.

[Chipper1875]

300k cash and about 700k of shares at current value. Would be a real shame if we couldn’t come to an agreement to perhaps part fund the indoor pitch at HTC for example.

Would be a real shame hibs fans who are shareholders aren’t about to get shafted . Up to each individual but why would anyone donate to millionaires, billionaires and trillionaires (owner of BK)

[Chipper1875]

I would absolutely support that.

I see no reason whatsoever that the money should be just gifted to Hibs when we will have millionaires in charge who have progressively squeezed out the supporter shareholders.

Yip a great suggestion.

[Hibs4185]

Don’t have the time to write a massive long post but HSL should use the funds to buy Edinburgh City.

No brainer for me.

Our youngsters/development players can play in league 1 or 2.

Fans can support our unofficial B team when Hibs are away.

The social club is a stones throw from Easter road.

HSL can buy them or donate it to the foundation on the condition fund are used to buy Edinburgh City.

Gives Hibs an even stronger community focus on this side of Edinburgh.

Edinburgh city were rumoured to be in financial trouble. Guaranteed gates would go up and our youngsters would benefit no end.

That’s a proper community initiative that has massive benefits to Hibs.

Why should we fund indoor training facilities for Foley and the Gordon’s?

Lastly….if it does go tits up with Foley/Gordon’s we have a ready made team sitting there to support. Like Man U fans with Salford.

No brainer for me

[Brightside]

The millionaires and billionaires involved are happy to dilute the ownership of the fans , this applies to not only hsl but every minority shareholder and also happy to attempt stop any fans buying shares ever again, they are simply wanting fans out of ownership.

Why would it be a shame if these same fans didn't use the money they had contributed to build a new facility ? Surely with the investment Hibs now have they can do this themselves can't they .

We all donate to Hibs as it is. If people want to fund a new museum then yeh thats great. But its still donations to the owners at the end of the day. The museum is apparently going to be in the ticket office which they will still own. I'm really non-plussed but it would be good to see HSL name against something in the Infra.

[Stairway 2 7]

One thing for hibs and HSL they really need to get into the 21 century and have an online AGM voting platform. Its one thing for HSL to have voting by counting hands and emails but for Hibs it's ridiculous. You can have membership of thousands and massive decisions made by a few dozen emails and a few dozen more turning up at an AGM, it's all very bowling club.

[Chipper1875]

We all donate to Hibs as it is. If people want to fund a new museum then yeh thats great. But its still donations to the owners at the end of the day. The museum is apparently going to be in the ticket office which they will still own. I'm really non-plussed but it would be good to see HSL name against something in the Infra.

No it’s not . HHT is totally independent of the football club. All assets were transferred to HHT

[SON OF PADDY]

Don’t have the time to write a massive long post but HSL should use the funds to buy Edinburgh City.

No brainer for me.

Our youngsters/development players can play in league 1 or 2.

Fans can support our unofficial B team when Hibs are away.

The social club is a stones throw from Easter road.

HSL can buy them or donate it to the foundation on the condition fund are used to buy Edinburgh City.

Gives Hibs an even stronger community focus on this side of Edinburgh.

Edinburgh city were rumoured to be in financial trouble. Guaranteed gates would go up and our youngsters would benefit no end.

That’s a proper community initiative that has massive benefits to Hibs.

Why should we fund indoor training facilities for Foley and the Gordon’s?

Lastly….if it does go tits up with Foley/Gordon’s we have a ready made team sitting there to support. Like Man U fans with Salford.

No brainer for me




Excellent idea 💡 👏🏼

[overdrive]

One thing for hibs and HSL they really need to get into the 21 century and have an online AGM voting platform. Its one thing for HSL to have voting by counting hands and emails but for Hibs it's ridiculous. You can have membership of thousands and massive decisions made by a few dozen emails and a few dozen more turning up at an AGM, it's all very bowling club.

Yep, I mentioned it at the time the Hibs AGM was announced when someone asked about how voting worked that it would probably be online voting software. I was really surprised when someone said it was being done by paper. HSL I can understand - although I did get caught out that I hadn't brought a pen with me to the HSL AGM last night and had to borrow one. :greengrin

The only thing I'd say, even though I'm an e-voting proponent, is it relies on people having the tech to do it. I imagine a large number of the Hibs shareholders are of an older generation. Would they have a smart phone?

My dad is turning 79. He has a smart phone but he's moaning that Hibs are charging £5 for a physical season ticket card next season and to save the £5 (he can afford it BTW) he has to try to work out whatever the google equivalent of Apple Wallet is :greengrin

[Brightside]

No it’s not . HHT is totally independent of the football club. All assets were transferred to HHT

So the plan is that the museum will move into the Ticket Office. Thats owned by Hibs.
I'm not talking about the individual items on show.

[Pagan Hibernia]

Don’t have the time to write a massive long post but HSL should use the funds to buy Edinburgh City.

No brainer for me.

Our youngsters/development players can play in league 1 or 2.

Fans can support our unofficial B team when Hibs are away.

The social club is a stones throw from Easter road.

HSL can buy them or donate it to the foundation on the condition fund are used to buy Edinburgh City.

Gives Hibs an even stronger community focus on this side of Edinburgh.

Edinburgh city were rumoured to be in financial trouble. Guaranteed gates would go up and our youngsters would benefit no end.

That’s a proper community initiative that has massive benefits to Hibs.

Why should we fund indoor training facilities for Foley and the Gordon’s?

Lastly….if it does go tits up with Foley/Gordon’s we have a ready made team sitting there to support. Like Man U fans with Salford.

No brainer for me

What would Edinburgh City fans think about this?

Maybe someone could ask the pair of them

[Brightside]

What would Edinburgh City fans think about this?

Maybe someone could ask the pair of them

It also ignores the fact that its a loss making business.

[Chipper1875]

So the plan is that the museum will move into the Ticket Office. Thats owned by Hibs.
I'm not talking about the individual items on show.

Yes that’s correct. However if HhT run in and it’s HHT memorabilia then no donations needed to millionaires and billionaires

[Chipper1875]

What would Edinburgh City fans think about this?

Maybe someone could ask the pair of them

Hahah they have circa 30 season ticket holders

[Jack]

What ever happened to the Famous Five statues idea?

[green day]

What ever happened to the Famous Five statues idea?

I think that was the Historical Trust, and think they have been completed.

[Hibs4185]

It also ignores the fact that its a loss making business.

Wouldn’t be loss making for ever, even if 1000 Hibs fans turned up every second week when Hibs were away I’m sure it would break even.

Also if most players were Hibs youngsters/development team, there wouldn’t be a huge wage bill.

As the unofficial Hibs team and the social club, I’m sure there turnover would grow.

[Brightside]

Yes that’s correct. However if HhT run in and it’s HHT memorabilia then no donations needed to millionaires and billionaires

So the millionaires will just spend money refurbing it for HHT? You see my point?

[Chipper1875]

So the millionaires will just spend money refurbing it for HHT? You see my point?

Or HHT could do it like they have funded previous projects. The club could
do it and the entrance fee could be split.

[Pagan Hibernia]

Wouldn’t be loss making for ever, even if 1000 Hibs fans turned up every second week when Hibs were away I’m sure it would break even.

Also if most players were Hibs youngsters/development team, there wouldn’t be a huge wage bill.

As the unofficial Hibs team and the social club, I’m sure there turnover would grow.

Would they change their name and start playing in green and white? If not, can't really see hibs fans being interested in watching them regularly, and if so, it's a bit Mercer-esque isn't it?

[Stairway 2 7]

Yep, I mentioned it at the time the Hibs AGM was announced when someone asked about how voting worked that it would probably be online voting software. I was really surprised when someone said it was being done by paper. HSL I can understand - although I did get caught out that I hadn't brought a pen with me to the HSL AGM last night and had to borrow one. :greengrin

The only thing I'd say, even though I'm an e-voting proponent, is it relies on people having the tech to do it. I imagine a large number of the Hibs shareholders are of an older generation. Would they have a smart phone?

My dad is turning 79. He has a smart phone but he's moaning that Hibs are charging £5 for a physical season ticket card next season and to save the £5 (he can afford it BTW) he has to try to work out whatever the google equivalent of Apple Wallet is :greengrin

98% of British adults use the Internet 87% use a smartphone. You just need a system for this that can't or don't have someone to help them. I suppose with Hibs it doesn't matter as only a few votes count really to get this passed

[Jack]

I think that was the Historical Trust, and think they have been completed.

The HHT have done, or are doing busts, of the FF.

A few years ago there was discussion around full size statues.

[HIBS NUTS]

Wouldn’t be loss making for ever, even if 1000 Hibs fans turned up every second week when Hibs were away I’m sure it would break even.

Also if most players were Hibs youngsters/development team, there wouldn’t be a huge wage bill.

As the unofficial Hibs team and the social club, I’m sure there turnover would grow.

Problem is I think there are only 300 seats at Edinburgh city, also I don’t think the social club is attached to Edinburgh city football team.
I think they had a dispute with them, and had to change their name.
I Could be wrong however.

[Bakerman]

What about a Ron Gordon Trust Fund, for Cancer Research, or to help families of those in palliative care etc? Just another idea, a good one I think.

[matty_f]

HSL are voting against the investment resolutions

[Brightside]

Not surprising based on what has been said in here and in the media. Not sure it will make any difference mind you.

[leith lynx]

The HHT have done, or are doing busts, of the FF.

A few years ago there was discussion around full size statues.

Was the late Hibs director Stephen Dunn heavily involved in this?

[JohnM1875]

Not surprising based on what has been said in here and in the media. Not sure it will make any difference mind you.

Really hope it doesn’t make a difference.

[cabbageandribs1875]

I’m not a member ( I don’t think) but have donated a good few hundred pound to it.

Not sure my money would return to me.

I would be happy for it to go to the community foundation.

same here, i only stopped when HSL took the paypal payment option away, jim(i think)did call me to explain but i even offered to pay the extra for paypal fees, but anyway, i hope HSL doesn't give the money to the club as they obviously don't appreciate HSL very much imo.

[RMQ1967]

HSL are voting against the investment resolutions

Yes a bit surprised by the size of the majority but have no issue with it. Would be interesting to know how many voted in the end.

Resolution 5
In relation to Resolution 5 members instructed us, by a significant majority (72.5%), to vote against the proposal. This proposal invited members to allow the club to disapply pre-emption rights - in other words to deprive themselves of the opportunity to buy new shares in the club.

Resolution 6
In relation to Resolution 6 members instructed us, again by a significant majority (75%), to vote against the proposal for the club to adopt new Articles of Association.

[TrinityHFC]

HSL are voting against the investment resolutions

It won’t make any odds and their members can do as they like but that is a very short sighted decision. It is based one part of what HSL was initially about and I do wonder what they would think would happen from here if we didn’t get investment. They get to retain a slightly bigger share of an average thing.

You also have to remember Hibs aren’t really asking for a vote on the investment. What they are voting against includes the dis application of pre emption rights. That’s a pretty poor thing to do as a shareholder when you don’t have the money to have bought the shares if offered them first.

Anyway, HSL will be even less relevant shortly but they’ve killed any future interaction with the club.

[TrinityHFC]

Yes a bit surprised by the size of the majority but have no issue with it. Would be interesting to know how many voted in the end.

Resolution 5
In relation to Resolution 5 members instructed us, by a significant majority (72.5%), to vote against the proposal. This proposal invited members to allow the club to disapply pre-emption rights - in other words to deprive themselves of the opportunity to buy new shares in the club.

Resolution 6
In relation to Resolution 6 members instructed us, again by a significant majority (75%), to vote against the proposal for the club to adopt new Articles of Association.

Doesn’t help when they are wrong about what 5 means.

[Pretty Boy]

HSL are voting against the investment resolutions

There's a degree of irony that a few of the people who were against HSL are also against these new proposals.

Had HSL been more successful then this vote could well have been a blocking vote. Thems the breaks I suppose.

It basically all comes down to Leslie Robb now. You will have Bydland in favour, HSL against and his percentage will now almost certainly be crucial. My gut is he will be on board, that 'routine enquiry' into discrepancies on the confirmation statements didn't happen for nothing.

Fwiw I voted for HSL to accept the proposals. There is risk; even though I trust the Gordon family it still leaves us in a risky position over the longer term without any collective fan blocking vote. There is risk to not pushing ahead though. We might be the first to do something like this but we won't be the last, plenty others will have to take comparable risks in the not too distant future.

[matty_f]

Yes a bit surprised by the size of the majority but have no issue with it. Would be interesting to know how many voted in the end.

Resolution 5
In relation to Resolution 5 members instructed us, by a significant majority (72.5%), to vote against the proposal. This proposal invited members to allow the club to disapply pre-emption rights - in other words to deprive themselves of the opportunity to buy new shares in the club.

Resolution 6
In relation to Resolution 6 members instructed us, again by a significant majority (75%), to vote against the proposal for the club to adopt new Articles of Association.

Yeah. I only posted that they had voted no, it was presented without an opinion, really.

If that's what the members voted, it is what it is.

[matty_f]

There's a degree of irony that a few of the people who were against HSL are also against these new proposals.

Had HSL been more successful then this vote could well have been a blocking vote. Thems the breaks I suppose.

It basically all comes down to Leslie Robb now. You will have Bydland in favour, HSL against and his percentage will now almost certainly be crucial. My gut is he will be on board, that 'routine enquiry' into discrepancies on the confirmation statements didn't happen for nothing.

Fwiw I voted for HSL to accept the proposals. There is risk; even though I trust the Gordon family it still leaves us in a risky position over the longer term without any collective fan blocking vote. There is risk to not pushing ahead though. We might be the first to do something like this but we won't be the last, plenty others will have to take comparable risks in the not too distant future.
:agree: same here.

[Pagan Hibernia]

It won’t make any odds and their members can do as they like but that is a very short sighted decision. It is based one part of what HSL was initially about and I do wonder what they would think would happen from here if we didn’t get investment. They get to retain a slightly bigger share of an average thing.

You also have to remember Hibs aren’t really asking for a vote on the investment. What they are voting against includes the dis application of pre emption rights. That’s a pretty poor thing to do as a shareholder when you don’t have the money to have bought the shares if offered them first.

Anyway, HSL will be even less relevant shortly but they’ve killed any future interaction with the club.

You're right, it's highly unlikely to make a difference to the outcome so absolutely no need for you to be bitter about how HSL members voted. As for future interaction with the club, that's a joke! Like the club have been so keen to interact with them recently!

[RMQ1967]

It won’t make any odds and their members can do as they like but that is a very short sighted decision. It is based one part of what HSL was initially about and I do wonder what they would think would happen from here if we didn’t get investment. They get to retain a slightly bigger share of an average thing.

You also have to remember Hibs aren’t really asking for a vote on the investment. What they are voting against includes the dis application of pre emption rights. That’s a pretty poor thing to do as a shareholder when you don’t have the money to have bought the shares if offered them first.

Anyway, HSL will be even less relevant shortly but they’ve killed any future interaction with the club.

Don't really disagree with your sentiments but HSL do have cash in the bank and Hibs weren't engaging in any dialogue with HSL anyway.

[TrinityHFC]

Don't really disagree with your sentiments but HSL do have cash in the bank and Hibs weren't engaging in any dialogue with HSL anyway.

HSL have nowhere near the funds available to have purchased the newly issued shares. Dialogue doesn’t really matter. This is a technical resolution to do with pre-emption rights specific to this new issue of shares.

[RMQ1967]

HSL have nowhere near the funds available to have purchased the newly issued shares. Dialogue doesn’t really matter. This is a technical resolution to do with pre-emption rights specific to this new issue of shares.

Not sure what you mean - HSL have £300k or whatever in the bank - surely that's enough to but shares if they were entitled to do so (which they won't be if resolution 5 passes)?

You made the point that it killed interaction with the club - I'm just pointing out there was no interaction anyway so it hasn't really killed anything.

[Chipper1875]

HSL have nowhere near the funds available to have purchased the newly issued shares. Dialogue doesn’t really matter. This is a technical resolution to do with pre-emption rights specific to this new issue of shares.

And you know they couldn’t have raised more funds ?

[TrinityHFC]

And you know they couldn’t have raised more funds ?

Correct - the investors are purchasing about £6m of new shares. HSL have raised nowhere near that since they started. If they believe the current shareholders, including them, could have purchased those now, then fine (although it ignores the point of the partnership in being part of a Group) but I know and you know they can’t have raised that right now, so they really shouldn’t vote against.

Although from the commentary they provided with the results of the vote I don’t think the people running HSL understood what the resolution meant.

[Hibs4185]

There is 11,000 season ticket holders, if a majority believed that a takeover was bad, it’s not inconceivable that 8000 season ticket holders could’ve coughed up £100-£300 each plus other supporters .

Like the gorgie tramps, if enough fans felt the takeover threatened the existence of the club then I’m sure enough money could’ve been raised by HSL to participate in the share issue

[Chipper1875]

Correct - the investors are purchasing about £6m of new shares. HSL have raised nowhere near that since they started. If they believe the current shareholders, including them, could have purchased those now, then fine (although it ignores the point of the partnership in being part of a Group) but I know and you know they can’t have raised that right now, so they really shouldn’t vote against.

Although from the commentary they provided with the results of the vote I don’t think the people running HSL understood what the resolution meant.

You come over as an expert in these matters, and continue to put HSL down. You should consider helping HSL and educate them on what they don’t understand. The resolutions that shareholders to vote on aren’t difficult to understand.

4000 hibs fans supported HSL. You are very disrespectful towards their efforts .

If you are an HSL member then you were entitled to vote . But if you aren’t it is literally none of your business what they do.

[matty_f]

You come over as an expert in these matters, and continue to put HSL down. You should consider helping HSL and educate them on what they don’t understand. The resolutions that shareholders to vote on aren’t difficult to understand.

4000 hibs fans supported HSL. You are very disrespectful towards their efforts .

If you are an HSL member then you were entitled to vote . But if you aren’t it is literally none of your business what they do.

I may be recollecting things wrong, but I'm sure Trinity had said already that they're an HSL member and have been supportive of it.

[Chipper1875]

I may be recollecting things wrong, but I'm sure Trinity had said already that they're an HSL member and have been supportive of it.

Which is good and paid his money he’s entitled to his vote . Also , to attend the AGM to persuade fellow HSL members, why this in his view is a good thing for HSL and Hibs

[Danderhall Hibs]

You come over as an expert in these matters, and continue to put HSL down. You should consider helping HSL and educate them on what they don’t understand. The resolutions that shareholders to vote on aren’t difficult to understand.

4000 hibs fans supported HSL. You are very disrespectful towards their efforts .

If you are an HSL member then you were entitled to vote . But if you aren’t it is literally none of your business what they do.

So there were 4000 available votes last night?

[Pagan Hibernia]

So there were 4000 available votes last night?

Anyone who reached the £225 milestone had a right to vote last night. Its doubtful that 4000 people paid in that much.

[Danderhall Hibs]

Anyone who reached the £225 milestone had a right to vote last night. Its doubtful that 4000 people paid in that much.

How many is that then? I didn’t think it reached the 1875 mark as there was a prize for that landmark and I don’t recall anyone ever winning it.

[RMQ1967]

Correct - the investors are purchasing about £6m of new shares. HSL have raised nowhere near that since they started. If they believe the current shareholders, including them, could have purchased those now, then fine (although it ignores the point of the partnership in being part of a Group) but I know and you know they can’t have raised that right now, so they really shouldn’t vote against.

Although from the commentary they provided with the results of the vote I don’t think the people running HSL understood what the resolution meant.

Not sure why you would say that - it was discussed at length & it seemed to me they understood exactly how it might impact the stated objectives of HSL.

[Pagan Hibernia]

How many is that then? I didn’t think it reached the 1875 mark as there was a prize for that landmark and I don’t recall anyone ever winning it.

No idea.

Clearly there are some who are members with voting rights who didn't vote and are now complaining about those who did.

My thoughts are if it meant so much to them then they should have found a way to vote.

In either case it's irrelevant. The investment will happen. It just seems like an easy excuse for some to have a pop at HSL

[Chipper1875]

No idea.

Clearly there are some who are members with voting rights who didn't vote and are now complaining about those who did.

My thoughts are if it meant so much to them then they should have found a way to vote.

In either case it's irrelevant. The investment will happen. It just seems like an easy excuse for some to have a pop at HSL

Spot on. Also , be many individual shareholders won’t vote or attend the AGM

[Danderhall Hibs]

No idea.

Clearly there are some who are members with voting rights who didn't vote and are now complaining about those who did.

My thoughts are if it meant so much to them then they should have found a way to vote.

In either case it's irrelevant. The investment will happen. It just seems like an easy excuse for some to have a pop at HSL

You’re right - if you can vote you should.

Will be interesting to hear what the turnout was.

[TrinityHFC]

Not sure why you would say that - it was discussed at length & it seemed to me they understood exactly how it might impact the stated objectives of HSL.

I say that because when they issued the voting results they added - in other words to deprive themselves of the opportunity to buy new shares in the club.

That isn’t an accurate summing up of what the resolution means.

[Paul1642]

If you are an HSL member then you were entitled to vote . But if you aren’t it is literally none of your business what they do.

I completely disagree with this. Most Hibs fans are not HSL members but when they are voting against investment in the club which most fans are in favour of that is very much so our business.

Is what the Gordon’s and Foley do with the club going forward also non of my, or any other Hibs fan’s business because we aren’t members of Bydland or the black nights?

I might never have even a fraction of an influence but as a lifelong Hibs fan, any decision about my club sure feels like my business to me.

[Golden Bear]

You’re right - if you can vote you should.

Will be interesting to hear what the turnout was.

I now have a vision of a tiny group of guys huddled in a corner plotting their latest strategy against these nasty rich folks who would dare consider investing in Hibs.😆

[hibsforeurope]

As a HSL member, who voted (by the proxy form), I’m really disappointed that the overall vote was to effectively block the investment. It was clear on the proxy voting form that going against the resolution would result in no BKFC investment.

Listening to longbangers today, Colin made a point that hsl should work in the interests of hibs as a whole, that’s a fair point.
Going against the clubs proposal could block the investment and harm the club as a whole.
Needless to say I’ve stopped my contributions as of today. And will use the money to fund a personal day out at the pioneers hospitality each season.

[Alex Trager]

As a HSL member, who voted (by the proxy form), I’m really disappointed that the overall vote was to effectively block the investment. It was clear on the proxy voting form that going against the resolution would result in no BKFC investment.

Listening to longbangers today, Colin made a point that hsl should work in the interests of hibs as a whole, that’s a fair point.
Going against the clubs proposal could block the investment and harm the club as a whole.
Needless to say I’ve stopped my contributions as of today. And will use the money to fund a personal day out at the pioneers hospitality each season.

HSL will go with what their members say.

You are conflating the club as being what Hibs want.

I would say the club are the owners and Hibs are the fans.

[Pagan Hibernia]

I completely disagree with this. Most Hibs fans are not HSL members but when they are voting against investment in the club which most fans are in favour of that is very much so our business.

Is what the Gordon’s and Foley do with the club going forward also non of my, or any other Hibs fan’s business because we aren’t members of Bydland or the black nights?

I might never have even a fraction of an influence but as a lifelong Hibs fan, any decision about my club sure feels like my business to me.

Re: your second paragraph. I mean, in the eyes of Foley, and the Gordons, it is almost certainly none of your, or my, or anyone else's business

[Chipper1875]

I completely disagree with this. Most Hibs fans are not HSL members but when they are voting against investment in the club which most fans are in favour of that is very much so our business.

Is what the Gordon’s and Foley do with the club going forward also non of my, or any other Hibs fan’s business because we aren’t members of Bydland or the black nights?

I might never have even a fraction of an influence but as a lifelong Hibs fan, any decision about my club sure feels like my business to me.

It’s Bydand sports ball and basically their ball. As harsh as it seems if you are others aren’t shareholders then you don’t have a say.

In reality Leslie robb is the powerbroker

[BoomtownHibees]

It’s Bydand sports ball and basically their ball. As harsh as it seems if you are others aren’t shareholders then you don’t have a say.

In reality Leslie robb is the powerbroker

And hopefully he has already been sounded out about where his vote will go

[GreenPJ]

I am an HSL member although did not actively vote although am in support of the investment as much because if we don't take it now we will be left behind and likely forced into a less favourable investor. However HSL members have the right to vote as they see fit and clearly the majority that made an effort don't agree with it. I would hope this in itself would not fail the overall vote but if it does it's because the vast majority of Hibs fans who have voting rights have determined in their view it's not right for the club.

[BoomtownHibees]

I am an HSL member although did not actively vote although am in support of the investment as much because if we don't take it now we will be left behind and likely forced into a less favourable investor. However HSL members have the right to vote as they see fit and clearly the majority that made an effort don't agree with it. I would hope this in itself would not fail the overall vote but if it does it's because the vast majority of Hibs fans who have voting rights have determined in their view it's not right for the club.

What made you not vote? If there was only a handful of folk who did vote then a few voting the other way may have swung it

[Chipper1875]

And hopefully he has already been sounded out about where his vote will go

Of course he has . This is all going through.

[hibbydad]

What made you not vote? If there was only a handful of folk who did vote then a few voting the other way may have swung it
The vast majority voted against it. I hope we won't regret it

[BoomtownHibees]

The vast majority voted against it. I hope we won't regret it

I get that however if there were only, for example, 50 folk who voted, it wouldn’t have taken many to swing it one way or the other

[bingo70]

I get that however if there were only, for example, 50 folk who voted, it wouldn’t have taken many to swing it one way or the other

Would there not have been a minimum number of votes required for the vote to be valid (quorum?)

[Danderhall Hibs]

Would there not have been a minimum number of votes required for the vote to be valid (quorum?)

Be interesting to hear. Maybe they can include that when they publish the “turnout”

[TrinityHFC]

Would there not have been a minimum number of votes required for the vote to be valid (quorum?)

Their website says a majority of members to inform how to vote at a Hibs AGM.

It doesn’t say a majority of those voting. Their articles doesn’t really cover it from what I can see.

They’ve also never asked about how to vote before so someone is choosing what members should be asked to vote on. It is all a bit of a mess.

[BoomtownHibees]

Would there not have been a minimum number of votes required for the vote to be valid (quorum?)

Not sure. The question about the volume of voters seems to have been ignored a few times on the thread

[Pretty Boy]

As a HSL member, who voted (by the proxy form), I’m really disappointed that the overall vote was to effectively block the investment. It was clear on the proxy voting form that going against the resolution would result in no BKFC investment.

Listening to longbangers today, Colin made a point that hsl should work in the interests of hibs as a whole, that’s a fair point.
Going against the clubs proposal could block the investment and harm the club as a whole.
Needless to say I’ve stopped my contributions as of today. And will use the money to fund a personal day out at the pioneers hospitality each season.

Who decides what is in the best interests of Hibs as a whole though?

The current majority shareholders have put forward a proposal they feel fits that brief. It's up to other shareholders now to vote on that based on their own opinion of the same. HSL acts on the wishes of it's members and a majority of those who bothered to vote (and in contrast to my own vote) decided they would prefer HSL in it's capacity as a minority shareholder votes against the proposals.

People can argue against that decision but those running HSL can't dictate what is and isn't in the bests interests of the club, that's up to the members and they have to act on the guidance from those who felt strongly enough to vote one way or another. Ultimately none of us really know if the Black Knights investment is in the best interest of the club long term. Based on the available information I think it's probably a risk we have to take but it's only really an opinion that it is in Hibs best interests.

There is no unifying answer as to what is in the 'best interests of the club'. If there was then sites like this probably wouldn't exist (which might be no bad thing I hear you say).

[CapitalGreen]

Their website says a majority of members to inform how to vote at a Hibs AGM.

It doesn’t say a majority of those voting. Their articles doesn’t really cover it from what I can see.

They’ve also never asked about how to vote before so someone is choosing what members should be asked to vote on. It is all a bit of a mess.

This is what I was getting at earlier. It’s all well and good saying they only do what the members vote to do, but if the members aren’t asked what they want to do then how can we have a say?

[TrinityHFC]

Who decides what is in the best interests of Hibs as a whole though?

The current majority shareholders have put forward a proposal they feel fits that brief. It's up to other shareholders now to vote on that based on their own opinion of the same. HSL acts on the wishes of it's members and a majority of those who bothered to vote (and in contrast to my own vote) decided they would prefer HSL in it's capacity as a minority shareholder votes against the proposals.

People can argue against that decision but those running HSL can't dictate what is and isn't in the bests interests of the club, that's up to the members and they have to act on the guidance from those who felt strongly enough to vote one way or another. Ultimately none of us really know if the Black Knights investment is in the best interest of the club long term. Based on the available information I think it's probably a risk we have to take but it's only really an opinion that it is in Hibs best interests.

There is no unifying answer as to what is in the 'best interests of the club'. If there was then sites like this probably wouldn't exist (which might be no bad thing I hear you say).

None of the resolutions were directly to do with the investment proposals though. Yeah they impact whether it happens or not but I think the way HSL presented this to members was leading.

[Pretty Boy]

None of the resolutions were directly to do with the investment proposals though. Yeah they impact whether it happens or not but I think the way HSL presented this to members was leading.

I don't disagree but then the way Hibs have presented the whole deal to shareholders is leading as well. The CEO talking up the new investment to the press whilst the stuff that could be perceived as the negatives was buried among jargon that most laypeople won't fully understand. It's to be expected in any situation in which a vote has to be held to determine multiple outcomes.

It's really on people who have a vote to be informed enough to use it wisely.

[CentreLine]

Correct - the investors are purchasing about £6m of new shares. HSL have raised nowhere near that since they started. If they believe the current shareholders, including them, could have purchased those now, then fine (although it ignores the point of the partnership in being part of a Group) but I know and you know they can’t have raised that right now, so they really shouldn’t vote against.

Although from the commentary they provided with the results of the vote I don’t think the people running HSL understood what the resolution meant.

Trinity, it seems to me that you do not understand what resolution 5 meant to the principal stated purpose of HSL. The principal purpose of HSL is to raise funds, through its membership, for the purchase of shares in Hibernian FC, if or when they become available for sale. Simple as that.
Resolution 5, being presented at the Hibernian FC AGM, specifically requires shareholders to suspend their right to buy shares.
In what world of logic would it be right for such an organisation as HSL to vote against their ability to perform their principal function?

Resolution 6, it became clear, has no relevance in the world where resolution 5 is passed and the new ownership hold 85% of shares.

Despite that, the club have chosen to add an unnecessary comment after the announcement of of these resolutions. I asked you earlier if you could help with why the club should have done that. Subscribers to this site will have noticed that you choose not to answer these reasonable questions. Let’s try again.

If you are a member of HSL then you, in common with every other HSL member, had the right to be present and present your views last night. Furthermore, present or not, you, in common with every other member, had the opportunity to email your views for consideration. You also had the opportunity to cast your vote.

Which of those options did you take advantage of?

[RMQ1967]

I say that because when they issued the voting results they added - in other words to deprive themselves of the opportunity to buy new shares in the club.

That isn’t an accurate summing up of what the resolution means.

You've missed a part of the sentence, the full statement said:

This proposal invited members to allow the club to disapply pre-emption rights - in other words to deprive themselves of the opportunity to buy new shares in the club.

It's perfectly correct and clear that it's saying that by voting for the Resolution 5, HSL members would deprive themselves of the opportunity to buy new shares (until 27th Feb 25 or earlier....)

That is a fact - agree?

[CapitalGreen]

I don't disagree but then the way Hibs have presented the whole deal to shareholders is leading as well. The CEO talking up the new investment to the press whilst the stuff that could be perceived as the negatives was buried among jargon that most laypeople won't fully understand. It's to be expected in any situation in which a vote has to be held to determine multiple outcomes.

It's really on people who have a vote to be informed enough to use it wisely.

The club are leading because they want people to back their proposal.

HSL shouldn’t be leading because it is supposed to act in its members interests and it wouldn’t know what those were until after a vote was taken.

[Chipper1875]

Their website says a majority of members to inform how to vote at a Hibs AGM.

It doesn’t say a majority of those voting. Their articles doesn’t really cover it from what I can see.

They’ve also never asked about how to vote before so someone is choosing what members should be asked to vote on. It is all a bit of a mess.

So instead of criticising HSL, if things are so bad help
Fix it

[Pretty Boy]

The club are leading because they want people to back their proposal.

HSL shouldn’t be leading because it is supposed to act in its members interests and it wouldn’t know what those were until after a vote was taken.

Aye I'm not really disagreeing and as I've said I voted for HSL to back the proposals.

There is always going to be an element of leading in these things though, for or against, it's the nature of the beast. Maintaining neutrality is nigh on impossible really.

[bingo70]

Aye I'm not really disagreeing and as I've said I voted for HSL to back the proposals.

There is always going to be an element of leading in these things though, for or against, it's the nature of the beast. Maintaining neutrality is nigh on impossible really.

How come?

I think it would be quite easy to hold a vote and be neutral.

Should add, I don’t really know what folk here are talking about for the most part and im not sure if the organisation are guilty of what they’re being accused of, I’m just disappointed to see the way the vote has gone.

[RMQ1967]

The club are leading because they want people to back their proposal.

HSL shouldn’t be leading because it is supposed to act in its members interests and it wouldn’t know what those were until after a vote was taken.

I'm not sure I agree. The way it was put across was that the mission of HSL was to purchase shares on behalf of the members and by voting for resolution 5 it would be going against the stated objectives of the the organisation. You can't really argue with HSL directors putting the stated interests of the organisation first.

I voted for resolution 5 & 6 but I understood the position of the directors to protect the interests of HSL first & foremost - although I didn't agree the resolutions should be considered in such fundamentally simplistic terms.

[HHT]

Was the late Hibs director Stephen Dunn heavily involved in this?

Hi all,

We've been made aware of the comments in this thread and just want to clear a few things up.

We are a completely separate entity from the Club. Our funding is donation led and currently paused due to a number of variables.

We would love a museum but are not aware of any plans for it.

The Famous Five Busts were commissioned and paid for by Stephen Dunn. They were completed shortly after he passed.

Thanks,
HHT

[TrinityHFC]

I'm not sure I agree. The way it was put across was that the mission of HSL was to purchase shares on behalf of the members and by voting for resolution 5 it would be going against the stated objectives of the the organisation. You can't really argue with HSL directors putting the stated interests of the organisation first.

I voted for resolution 5 & 6 but I understood the position of the directors to protect the interests of HSL first & foremost - although I didn't agree the resolutions should be considered in such fundamentally simplistic terms.

HSL don’t have the funds to purchase something like £4m of shares currently. In this specific offer they have no skin in the game. Their wording suggested fans were being stopped from buying future shares through this resolution. That’s not the case. Shares weren’t available to buy generally before and they aren’t going to be in the foreseeable future.

I think the onus is on HSL leadership to provide informed information to its members. The language they have been using and the fact they’ve suddenly decided to take a vote on what to do at AGMs has clearly indicated they wanted members to be against this.

[hibbydad]

I'm not sure I agree. The way it was put across was that the mission of HSL was to purchase shares on behalf of the members and by voting for resolution 5 it would be going against the stated objectives of the the organisation. You can't really argue with HSL directors putting the stated interests of the organisation first.

I voted for resolution 5 & 6 but I understood the position of the directors to protect the interests of HSL first & foremost - although I didn't agree the resolutions should be considered in such fundamentally simplistic terms.
I voted in the same manner as you. The emphasis by the HSL directors was the dilution of the shares from 15% to 7%. It really was played down that this could jepordise a significant investment in the club. I am a shareholder too but I am prepared to take the dilution in the interests of the club

[Radium]

HSL don’t have the funds to purchase something like £4m of shares currently. In this specific offer they have no skin in the game. Their wording suggested fans were being stopped from buying future shares through this resolution. That’s not the case. Shares weren’t available to buy generally before and they aren’t going to be in the foreseeable future.

I think the onus is on HSL leadership to provide informed information to its members. The language they have been using and the fact they’ve suddenly decided to take a vote on what to do at AGMs has clearly indicated they wanted members to be against this.

In a meeting that was just short of two hours everything from the technical details the resolutions were presented, along with notes added stating that the investment would not go ahead were discussed. Clarity around the impact of the resolutions, the future 85% shareholding and how that would change the operation of the club as well as details around the board and drag along rights in the articles. If there was any element missing from the meeting it was a voice from the club who are proposing the changes and it is clear that they had no interest in engaging with an organisation incorporating 4000 fans.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[TrinityHFC]

In a meeting that was just short of two hours everything from the technical details the resolutions were presented, along with notes added stating that the investment would not go ahead were discussed. Clarity around the impact of the resolutions, the future 85% shareholding and how that would change the operation of the club as well as details around the board and drag along rights in the articles. If there was any element missing from the meeting it was a voice from the club who are proposing the changes and it is clear that they had no interest in engaging with an organisation incorporating 4000 fans.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The club have put forward their position in the notice to shareholders and they have their own AGM where further detail will be given and there will be an opportunity to ask questions. It is HSLs own governance that has led to a decision on their vote before hearing that detail and being able to discuss and challenge the board direct.

[malcolm]

HSL don’t have the funds to purchase something like £4m of shares currently. In this specific offer they have no skin in the game. Their wording suggested fans were being stopped from buying future shares through this resolution. That’s not the case. Shares weren’t available to buy generally before and they aren’t going to be in the foreseeable future.

I think the onus is on HSL leadership to provide informed information to its members. The language they have been using and the fact they’ve suddenly decided to take a vote on what to do at AGMs has clearly indicated they wanted members to be against this.

It is no surprise that they sought to take counsel from members - this situation is completely at odds with their reason for existing! So to describe that almost pejoratively as ‘suddenly’ is unfair. To potentially close off any future possibility of meeting that reason for existing was never going to be a vote winner no matter how you communicate the position.

I never voted as it seemed somewhat pointless, I’m not voting at the club AGM either for the same reason. I’ll just frame my certificate and put it on the wall as symbol of my emotional commitment to the club (that will never ever be described as that of a customer.)

[hibbydad]

In a meeting that was just short of two hours everything from the technical details the resolutions were presented, along with notes added stating that the investment would not go ahead were discussed. Clarity around the impact of the resolutions, the future 85% shareholding and how that would change the operation of the club as well as details around the board and drag along rights in the articles. If there was any element missing from the meeting it was a voice from the club who are proposing the changes and it is clear that they had no interest in engaging with an organisation incorporating 4000 fans.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I don't think it was made really clear that the investment would not go ahead. It was suggested that if the club board did not get the 75% backing they would come back to it in a different manner. I was far from convinced about that and think there is a real danger of the club being deprived of a substantial investment

[RMQ1967]

HSL don’t have the funds to purchase something like £4m of shares currently. In this specific offer they have no skin in the game. Their wording suggested fans were being stopped from buying future shares through this resolution. That’s not the case. Shares weren’t available to buy generally before and they aren’t going to be in the foreseeable future.

I think the onus is on HSL leadership to provide informed information to its members. The language they have been using and the fact they’ve suddenly decided to take a vote on what to do at AGMs has clearly indicated they wanted members to be against this.

I'm not sure why you keep referring to HSL purchasing £4m in shares - no-one is saying that HSL have the funds to buy or want to buy £4m in shares.

They have around £300k in cash which they could use to buy shares in the upcoming offer as, “Section 561(1) of the Companies Act 2006 provides that if Directors wish to allow any equity securities or sell any treasury shares (if it holds any), for cash, the Company must first offer them to existing shareholders in proportion to their existing shareholdings

However, HSL will be stopped from buying any new shares from the upcoming offer if Resolution 5 is passed as Section 561(1) will be disapplied (until 27th Feb or earlier...)

I'm not sure why you think this isn't the case.

[Radium]

I don't think it was made really clear that the investment would not go ahead. It was suggested that if the club board did not get the 75% backing they would come back to it in a different manner. I was far from convinced about that and think there is a real danger of the club being deprived of a substantial investment

I distinctly remember the treasurer speaking to the note around the investment not proceeding.

Sorry, meant to add, there were occasional breakout conversations so points could be missed and the point was made that Billionaires have lawyers who would likely find a solution rather than walking away


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[RMQ1967]

The club have put forward their position in the notice to shareholders and they have their own AGM where further detail will be given and there will be an opportunity to ask questions. It is HSLs own governance that has led to a decision on their vote before hearing that detail and being able to discuss and challenge the board direct.

How could HSL attend the HFC AGM and vote on the resolutions on behalf of the HSL membership without first knowing how the membership wanted to vote?

[BoomtownHibees]

In a meeting that was just short of two hours everything from the technical details the resolutions were presented, along with notes added stating that the investment would not go ahead were discussed. Clarity around the impact of the resolutions, the future 85% shareholding and how that would change the operation of the club as well as details around the board and drag along rights in the articles. If there was any element missing from the meeting it was a voice from the club who are proposing the changes and it is clear that they had no interest in engaging with an organisation incorporating 4000 fans.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Does the 4000 fans include anyone who has ever made a payment to HSL?

[hibbydad]

I distinctly remember the treasurer speaking to the note around the investment not proceeding.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
It was the treasurer who suggested that the club would come back at it from a different angle if they failed to get the 75%. My own fear is that BK will just walk away in such a scenario and I would not blame them

[Lago]

It was the treasurer who suggested that the club would come back at it from a different angle if they failed to get the 75%. My own fear is that BK will just walk away in such a scenario and I would not blame them
Of course he would walk away and I wouldn't bet against his first port of call being Aberdeen, then watch the howls of despair come from the Hibs support.

[Radium]

Does the 4000 fans include anyone who has ever made a payment to HSL?

It is the number from the HSL website.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[007 Mickey Weir]

HSL payment stopped today. Rather put money direct into the club. I feel HSL is becoming a load of nonsense.

[Greencore]

Just cancelled my DD with them.

[Radium]

It was the treasurer who suggested that the club would come back at it from a different angle if they failed to get the 75%. My own fear is that BK will just walk away in such a scenario and I would not blame them

Sorry, I went back to acknowledge that.

If I am honest, I don’t think we are in the current position by accident.

Spending on big screens and hospitality, etc has generated a debt that allows the Gordon’s to secure total control of the club through a debt for equity swap. They have also found a partner that seems to have a better recruitment model than the one that they have implemented since coming in.

I believe that they simply see this as how business is done - their support of good causes in other areas shows a caring side, just not something that translated to the business engagement with HSL.

Having got to this stage they should have planned for all outcomes. The lack of engagement with HSL and the wider Shareholding group suggests that they have the votes but nobody is saying anything.

I do think that there are legitimate concerns across lots of aspects of how the club is being run but by Wednesday morning we are probably going to have moved to one show in town and hopefully they step up on the football front


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Brightside]

Sorry, I went back to acknowledge that.

If I am honest, I don’t think we are in the current position by accident.

Spending on big screens and hospitality, etc has generated a debt that allows the Gordon’s to secure total control of the club through a debt for equity swap. They have also found a partner that seems to have a better recruitment model than the one that they have implemented since coming in.

I believe that they simply see this as how business is done - their support of good causes in other areas shows a caring side, just not something that translated to the business engagement with HSL.

Having got to this stage they should have planned for all outcomes. The lack of engagement with HSL and the wider Shareholding group suggests that they have the votes but nobody is saying anything.

I do think that there are legitimate concerns across lots of aspects of how the club is being run but by Wednesday morning we are probably going to have moved to one show in town and hopefully they step up on the football front


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Good post.

[matty_f]

Sorry, I went back to acknowledge that.

If I am honest, I don’t think we are in the current position by accident.

Spending on big screens and hospitality, etc has generated a debt that allows the Gordon’s to secure total control of the club through a debt for equity swap. They have also found a partner that seems to have a better recruitment model than the one that they have implemented since coming in.

I believe that they simply see this as how business is done - their support of good causes in other areas shows a caring side, just not something that translated to the business engagement with HSL.

Having got to this stage they should have planned for all outcomes. The lack of engagement with HSL and the wider Shareholding group suggests that they have the votes but nobody is saying anything.

I do think that there are legitimate concerns across lots of aspects of how the club is being run but by Wednesday morning we are probably going to have moved to one show in town and hopefully they step up on the football front


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

:agree:

[IberianHibernian]

Of course he would walk away and I wouldn't bet against his first port of call being Aberdeen, then watch the howls of despair come from the Hibs support.Possible howls of despair from some of our supporters would depend on lots of factors - press campaign stirring things up , a few good / bad results on field , fans expressing doubts about direction club has taken in recent years etc etc but I`m pretty confident that there are enough of us who would back the club ( Hibernian FC as we`re about to celebrate our 150th anniversary ) sufficiently to make us as competitive as we`ve ever been and probably much more if handled properly .

[Forza Fred]

Got no doubt HSL was formed by people with the noblest of intentions, but their aims were, imho, always going to be a vision rather than be a reality.

These days, even to be successful in the SPFL requires a degree of investment that most supporters, can only picture when buying a lottery ticket.

If Foley gets knocked back, then I reckon he'd be likely to go tap on Hearts door who, despite what they have said previously, would, I think, be delighted to take his money.

Coupled with their current 'donations'' they would then leave us lightyears behind in their wake and we would be destined to be a struggling mid table team or even less.

Don't think anyone would want that.

The way I see it, Foley's investment allows us to play 'çatch up' with our rivals.

Without it,.........

Hope those that are considering voting 'No' at the club AGM reflect on that.

[Bostonhibby]

There's a degree of irony that a few of the people who were against HSL are also against these new proposals.

Had HSL been more successful then this vote could well have been a blocking vote. Thems the breaks I suppose.

It basically all comes down to Leslie Robb now. You will have Bydland in favour, HSL against and his percentage will now almost certainly be crucial. My gut is he will be on board, that 'routine enquiry' into discrepancies on the confirmation statements didn't happen for nothing.

Fwiw I voted for HSL to accept the proposals. There is risk; even though I trust the Gordon family it still leaves us in a risky position over the longer term without any collective fan blocking vote. There is risk to not pushing ahead though. We might be the first to do something like this but we won't be the last, plenty others will have to take comparable risks in the not too distant future.Same views here.

Sent from my SM-A750FN using Tapatalk

[Just_Jimmy]

I really don't think HSL should be putting money in for nothing. It was different when STF owned Hibs, he never bought us because he wanted a football club, he did it to keep the club in existence and he was clear from the start that the club was to be self-sustaining, and we had years and years of strict budgeting and living within our means. It was a tough slog and the club needed all the help it could get. At that point, I had no problem with the idea of fans contributing towards transfers and getting money into the club.

Ron Gordon bought the club because he wanted a football club. The Gordons are an extremely wealthy family, certainly relative to the vast majority of the supporters. Ron came in with ambitions for the club but those were his ambitions. The Black Knights are now joining in, backed by billionaires.

They do not need to be taking more money out of the pockets of supporters. You need to comprehend how much money a billion pounds (or dollars) is. You could probably pool the collective wealth of the whole Hibs support and not scratch the surface of it.

I know nobody has a gun to their head to say they need to donate to HSL but we shouldn't look at the club as a charity case, and if we as a support are getting hundreds of thousands of pounds together, then that should be a transaction where we get something in return - be that shares or some other agreeable arrangement. There's no way we should be funding a vanity project for multi-millionaires and billionaires, IMHO.More so, there may come a day, when HSL and the wider Hibs support needs ready access to a large sum of money for Hibernians sake.

I'm not suggesting that's soon or its even this ownership. It might not even ever happen - but I just think we should be positioning ourselves as a support to react to whatever we can if we need to.

Sent from my SM-G991B using Tapatalk

[Just_Jimmy]

It also ignores the fact that its a loss making business.And draws a parallel between Man Utd and Salford which are incorrect.

Sent from my SM-G991B using Tapatalk

[chippy]

I really don't think HSL should be putting money in for nothing. It was different when STF owned Hibs, he never bought us because he wanted a football club, he did it to keep the club in existence and he was clear from the start that the club was to be self-sustaining, and we had years and years of strict budgeting and living within our means. It was a tough slog and the club needed all the help it could get. At that point, I had no problem with the idea of fans contributing towards transfers and getting money into the club.

Ron Gordon bought the club because he wanted a football club. The Gordons are an extremely wealthy family, certainly relative to the vast majority of the supporters. Ron came in with ambitions for the club but those were his ambitions. The Black Knights are now joining in, backed by billionaires.

They do not need to be taking more money out of the pockets of supporters. You need to comprehend how much money a billion pounds (or dollars) is. You could probably pool the collective wealth of the whole Hibs support and not scratch the surface of it.

I know nobody has a gun to their head to say they need to donate to HSL but we shouldn't look at the club as a charity case, and if we as a support are getting hundreds of thousands of pounds together, then that should be a transaction where we get something in return - be that shares or some other agreeable arrangement. There's no way we should be funding a vanity project for multi-millionaires and billionaires, IMHO.
Totally agree Matty, great post

[Since90+2]

Has there even been any indication of what the Gordon family's wealth is? Normally you hear suggestions in the press but I can never remember it ever being mentioned. Are we thinking it runs to the hundreds of millions or more likely tens of millions?

[Pretty Boy]

Has there even been any indication of what the Gordon family's wealth is? Normally you hear suggestions in the press but I can never remember it ever being mentioned. Are we thinking it runs to the hundreds of millions or more likely tens of millions?

It was never really reported and Ron Gordon himself refused to answer when asked. Forbes reported the sale of the ZGS company was for $75M but I'm not sure that tells us much as they have other business interests.

High tens of millions seems likely but that's just idle speculation really.

[Leithenhibby]

Got no doubt HSL was formed by people with the noblest of intentions, but their aims were, imho, always going to be a vision rather than be a reality.

These days, even to be successful in the SPFL requires a degree of investment that most supporters, can only picture when buying a lottery ticket.

If Foley gets knocked back, then I reckon he'd be likely to go tap on Hearts door who, despite what they have said previously, would, I think, be delighted to take his money.

Coupled with their current 'donations'' they would then leave us lightyears behind in their wake and we would be destined to be a struggling mid table team or even less.

Don't think anyone would want that.

The way I see it, Foley's investment allows us to play 'çatch up' with our rivals.

Without it,.........

Hope those that are considering voting 'No' at the club AGM reflect on that.


Just to clarify and to be clear, it was Hibernian FC that formed HSL...:agree:

[MWHIBBIES]

Foley's investment sounds great. It would've been nicer in 2015/16 when we had competent people running the football side. Now we have idiots and it will probably get pissed away.

I don't think it's realistic to think is going to overnight change everything. We spend plenty money right now to be crap.

January brought some decent players but zero signs of a proper plan being in place.

And with how things have been run since the Gordon's arrived, I understand the hesitation from HSL members.

[Pagan Hibernia]

Foley's investment sounds great. It would've been nicer in 2015/16 when we had competent people running the football side. Now we have idiots and it will probably get pissed away.

I don't think it's realistic to think is going to overnight change everything. We spend plenty money right now to be crap.

January brought some decent players but zero signs of a proper plan being in place.

And with how things have been run since the Gordon's arrived, I understand the hesitation from HSL members.

My thoughts too. I'm cautiously optimistic but unless there's better decision making then getting handed x number of millions means absolutely nothing.

[Brightside]

Foley's investment sounds great. It would've been nicer in 2015/16 when we had competent people running the football side. Now we have idiots and it will probably get pissed away.

I don't think it's realistic to think is going to overnight change everything. We spend plenty money right now to be crap.

January brought some decent players but zero signs of a proper plan being in place.

And with how things have been run since the Gordon's arrived, I understand the hesitation from HSL members.

Idiots? A bit extreme surely.

[CapitalGreen]

Just to clarify and to be clear, it was Hibernian FC that formed HSL...:agree:

The same people who formed HSL were the same people who pulled the carpet from under its feet by selling all outstanding shares to RG. The club even had someone on the board of HSL at the time who knew the deal being negotiated would significantly dilute HSLs holding.

[JohnM1875]

Foley's investment sounds great. It would've been nicer in 2015/16 when we had competent people running the football side. Now we have idiots and it will probably get pissed away.

I don't think it's realistic to think is going to overnight change everything. We spend plenty money right now to be crap.

January brought some decent players but zero signs of a proper plan being in place.

And with how things have been run since the Gordon's arrived, I understand the hesitation from HSL members.

Aye, total idiots. A third place finish, two European runs, numerous enhancements to the stadium and record income forecasted for next years annual report. Total morons.

We wouldn’t have had this investment without the improvements made by the Gordon family.

[Chipper1875]

Aye, total idiots. A third place finish, two European runs, numerous enhancements to the stadium and record income forecasted for next years annual report. Total morons.

We wouldn’t have had this investment without the improvements made by the Gordon family.
You don’t know we wouldn’t have had this investment. Also , loss making business they are running. Terrible on the pitch . High turnover doesn’t mean a lot If loosing millions.

He’s spot on they made an total balls up on the park

[truehibernian]

How could HSL attend the HFC AGM and vote on the resolutions on behalf of the HSL membership without first knowing how the membership wanted to vote?

Just a quick question - were HSL shown the investment plans for the football club (first team, womens team and academy financial investment) , the redevelopment and improvements of HTC, and the wider community programme ?

Or was this just a ‘blind vote’ as such for/against outside investment?

Has HSL been shown or had dialogue with the Club and BK as to the investment strategy?

[bingo70]

Idiots? A bit extreme surely.

Course it is.

It’s also not likely Foley is going to give us millions and just allow ‘idiots’ to squander it away. There’ll be pressure on people to perform immediately and if they don’t, less idiotic people will be brought in to spend the money wiser.

[Stairway 2 7]

Course it is.

It’s also not likely Foley is going to give us millions and just allow ‘idiots’ to squander it away. There’ll be pressure on people to perform immediately and if they don’t, less idiotic people will be brought in to spend the money wiser.

Baffling that people think Foley will put in 6 million and not seek improvement in the footballing operations. He's ran a team that won the Stanley Cup in NHL and has a football team competing well in the EPL. The technical expertise at our disposal should be lightyears ahead of what we can afford. I think it shows the Gordons understand we need a better sporting set up. He might be a billionaire but he's not going to throw money without seeing footballing improvement.

Although voting against keeps us with what we have just now so..

[TrinityHFC]

How could HSL attend the HFC AGM and vote on the resolutions on behalf of the HSL membership without first knowing how the membership wanted to vote?

Well that’s a big issue with these collectives, unless you have a leadership mandated to take certain decisions. Voting in advance is fine but it does mean you do it without the opportunity to learn more and to ask questions.

As I’ve said this is just a protest vote against HSL being diluted.

If you take the resolutions as they lie then the investment has already been agreed, as has the issue of new shares. Resolution 5 was about not having to offer those shares to current shareholders first. When you don’t have that ability I think it is a bit naughty voting that way.

[Brightside]

Course it is.

It’s also not likely Foley is going to give us millions and just allow ‘idiots’ to squander it away. There’ll be pressure on people to perform immediately and if they don’t, less idiotic people will be brought in to spend the money wiser.

Some of the extreme views on here are just plain weird. If people really have this level of disdain go find another hobby. It’s just really unhealthy.

[Chipper1875]

Some of the extreme views on here are just plain weird. If people really have this level of disdain go find another hobby. It’s just really unhealthy.

What’s plain weird
Is you constantly telling hibs fans what To do. If that’s what people think and feel, that’s fine . We live in a democratic country.

[green day]

What’s plain weird
Is you constantly telling hibs fans what To do. If that’s what people think and feel, that’s fine . We live in a democratic country.

This is true, but the discussion relates to our club, which isnt (thank christ) a democracy.

And before anyone mentions Hearts and FoH, thats not a democracy either - they too have an executive board who implement strategy.

[Chipper1875]

This is true, but the discussion relates to our club, which isnt (thank christ) a democracy.

And before anyone mentions Hearts and FoH, thats not a democracy either - they too have an executive board who implement strategy.

Even if hibs fans held 51% of shares , ld expect a board of qualified professionals to run the club.

The jury is out if we have that

[Just Alf]

Just a quick question - were HSL shown the investment plans for the football club (first team, womens team and academy financial investment) , the redevelopment and improvements of HTC, and the wider community programme ?

Or was this just a ‘blind vote’ as such for/against outside investment?

Has HSL been shown or had dialogue with the Club and BK as to the investment strategy?No, they were given the same as all other shareholders.


As am aside, at the beginning of this thread hsl were getting questioned on here if the fans who'd contributed would get a chance to make their voice heard, then I read a post saying they were doing things "last minute " (the hsl agm) , ignoring the fact that dates were driven by the clubs announced and impending agm.... now there's a hint that holding the hsl agm was a waste of time as a discussion needs to be had at the club agm... ignoring the fact that the members should be allowed a say.. just imagine the grief if the hsl team ignored the membership and made thier own decision on the day.

For clarity I support the proposals, despite being a very very minor shareholder and abstained from the hsl vote as the proposal totally negates what hsl is/was about

[BoomtownHibees]

Foley's investment sounds great. It would've been nicer in 2015/16 when we had competent people running the football side. Now we have idiots and it will probably get pissed away.

I don't think it's realistic to think is going to overnight change everything. We spend plenty money right now to be crap.

January brought some decent players but zero signs of a proper plan being in place.

And with how things have been run since the Gordon's arrived, I understand the hesitation from HSL members.

Welcome back

[green day]

Even if hibs fans held 51% of shares , ld expect a board of qualified professionals to run the club.

The jury is out if we have that

Sure, I understand that - but I would be gobsmacked if the Foley cash doesnt come with some "control" strings (despite what we told the SFA etc) that would mean swift changes to how we operate.

Guys with their level of cash - especially US business people - do not suffer fools gladly.

[Chipper1875]

Sure, I understand that - but I would be gobsmacked if the Foley cash doesnt come with some "control" strings (despite what we told the SFA etc) that would mean swift changes to how we operate.

Guys with their level of cash - especially US business people - do not suffer fools gladly.

Correct. They will have people on the board and privately they will make changes . I wouldn’t trust whoever has made the football decisions over the last few years, with one cent of my money

[truehibernian]

No, they were given the same as all other shareholders.


As am aside, at the beginning of this thread hsl were getting questioned on here if the fans who'd contributed would get a chance to make their voice heard, then I read a post saying they were doing things "last minute " (the hsl agm) , ignoring the fact that dates were driven by the clubs announced and impending agm.... now there's a hint that holding the hsl agm was a waste of time as a discussion needs to be had at the club agm... ignoring the fact that the members should be allowed a say.. just imagine the grief if the hsl team ignored the membership and made thier own decision on the day.

For clarity I support the proposals, despite being a very very minor shareholder and abstained from the hsl vote as the proposal totally negates what hsl is/was about

Thanks for clarifying Alf 👍 seems to me that albeit HSL are absolutely entitled to submit the democratic view of their membership, it’s a vote cast without any of the detail - even in a democracy you vote on a manifesto or have at least done homework on what the proposal you’re voting for or against.

I withdrew from HSL, purely because there was no clear strategy, and (for me) a passive approach to driving the campaign forward, with no real creativity shown to enhance its membership - of course, the obvious retort to that is “well what did you do to improve it”. I just think they completely missed a trick getting in really good PR and investing some of the money in a promotional drive with clear milestones.

The Foley investment is very exciting and it’s very disheartening to hear some supporters are against it, however, they’re absolutely entitled to have that view.

[CentreLine]

Just a quick question - were HSL shown the investment plans for the football club (first team, womens team and academy financial investment) , the redevelopment and improvements of HTC, and the wider community programme ?

Or was this just a ‘blind vote’ as such for/against outside investment?

Has HSL been shown or had dialogue with the Club and BK as to the investment strategy?

That’s actually a very fare point but probably not a legitimate criticism of HSL. The club simply has not and does not engage with HSL. We have been told HSL have made approaches at various levels and been blanked. The directors had to get a steer from its members based on what little information was available. It was clear they had engaged in a great deal of digging not get comparisons of past and proposed articles. They presented all they could based on the sparse information broadcast by the club. Tragic really that the second largest current shareholder is blanked by the club.

[truehibernian]

That’s actually a very fare point but probably not a legitimate criticism of HSL. The club simply has not and does not engage with HSL. We have been told HSL have made approaches at various levels and been blanked. The directors had to get a steer from its members based on what little information was available. It was clear they had engaged in a great deal of digging not get comparisons of past and proposed articles. They presented all they could based on the sparse information broadcast by the club. Tragic really that the second largest current shareholder is blanked by the club.

Again, thanks for clarifying mate, and I didn’t mean that post to come across as a criticism of HsL, just wanted clarification as to whether they’d voted on any detailed proposal or just a blanket vote for or against investment.

[Glory Lurker]

I decided not to take part in the AGM. I'm unhappy about the drag along amendment to the Articles but couldn't bring myself to mandate a no vote as the investment should happen. I am supportive of the investment but holding my nose against it as in an ideal world it's not how I'd like to see our club go. But it's not an ideal world.

I didn't want to vote either way as I didn't want HSL to either.

[Brightside]

What’s plain weird
Is you constantly telling hibs fans what To do. If that’s what people think and feel, that’s fine . We live in a democratic country.

I’ll stay positive. Thanks.

[offshorehibby]

I think there's a lot of confusion surrounding the HSL vote on Thursday. The vote was to accept or not accept Resolution 5’ titled: “To authorise the Directors to disapply pre-emption
rights

and to vote for or against Resolution 6’ titled: “To adopt new Articles of Association

All information that is in the public domain.

People moaning that HSL should have waited till Tuesday AGM to listen to them. When do these people expect HSL to vote on it if the AGM vote is this Tuesday.

All HSL have done is vote against accepting the above resolutions not to not accept any incoming finance.

[CapitalGreen]

I think there's a lot of confusion surrounding the HSL vote on Thursday. The vote was to accept or not accept Resolution 5’ titled: “To authorise the Directors to disapply pre-emption
rights

and to vote for or against Resolution 6’ titled: “To adopt new Articles of Association

All information that is in the public domain.

People moaning that HSL should have waited till Tuesday AGM to listen to them. When do these people expect HSL to vote on it if the AGM vote is this Tuesday.

All HSL have done is vote against accepting the above resolutions not to not accept any incoming finance.

Do you understand the consequences of Resolution 5 & 6 failing? That information is also in the public domain.

[CentreLine]

I decided not to take part in the AGM. I'm unhappy about the drag along amendment to the Articles but couldn't bring myself to mandate a no vote as the investment should happen. I am supportive of the investment but holding my nose against it as in an ideal world it's not how I'd like to see our club go. But it's not an ideal world.

I didn't want to vote either way as I didn't want HSL to either.

Not one I’d thought of before your comment but perhaps it would have been a legitimate third choice for HSL members to ask its directors to abstain from the vote. It was never raised. I am happy that the directors, who are not HSL but simply very committed Hibs supporters and members of HSL, did everything they could to make the decision reflect the members’ view. The choice was by to support or reject the club but to support or reject the affect that the club proposals have on HSLs principal function.

[LewysGot2]

I decided not to take part in the AGM. I'm unhappy about the drag along amendment to the Articles but couldn't bring myself to mandate a no vote as the investment should happen. I am supportive of the investment but holding my nose against it as in an ideal world it's not how I'd like to see our club go. But it's not an ideal world.

I didn't want to vote either way as I didn't want HSL to either.

Where I am on this. HSL is in a bit of a spot now. I'm struggling to see how we can, as a club, turn down investment from a known quantity with a sports pedigree. I'm also sad that we live in a world now where no UK football team with ambition can ignore global investors. At least this isn't investment from sources with far greater implications morally and politically. Hibs we knew growing up is long gone, Scottish football as we knew growing up is on its way out. We're near the bottom of a very big global food chain and we're having to find new ways of surviving and thriving. It might indeed involve holding our noses at times. We'll all have our own lines in the sand re who and how investors are brought in. Some money might be a red line for me.

HSL I've struggled a bit with justifying my contributions any more. I'm still doing it but I feel there's little regular communication, I've never had a sniff of any hospitality prize draws yet know folk who've won more than once. They don't even publish who won. This latest episode has been unsettling again. I hope to get to the AGM for shareholders as I have my own shares as well as contributing to HSL but concerned that HSL won't be speaking for me anyway.

[hibbydad]

Do you understand the consequences of Resolution 5 & 6 failing? That information is also in the public domain.
That information is being completely ignored

[CentreLine]

Do you understand the consequences of Resolution 5 & 6 failing? That information is also in the public domain.

I think you have to ask yourself what the need was for the club to add the threat at the end of these published proposals. Neither proposal includes the threat, it is simply tacked on at the end. I really struggle to understand the need for that. It is that small addition that has taken me from totally enthusiastic about the investment to being borderline suspicious. It just doesn’t sit right and I cannot think of any occasion where I have seen a company add a threat to a proposed change to its articles of association.

I will be at the club AGM on Tuesday sincerely hoping to see a presentation for the future that will blow me away. I will then use my own vote and a proxy to vote accordingly.

[hibbydad]

I think you have to ask yourself what the need was for the club to add the threat at the end of these published proposals. Neither proposal includes the threat, it is simply tacked on at the end. I really struggle to understand the need for that.
They are making the position crystal clear

[CentreLine]

They are making the position crystal clear

Yes but why the need? It feels a bit gun to the head and totally alien to normal practice.

However, we have a game to concentrate on this afternoon. Time to abandon this stuff fir me.

[Ronniekirk]

Am going to wait till after the Hibs AGM before deciding whether to stop my direct debit I was on board early but mainly do extra money was going to the club to strengthen the playing squad Am not so interested in the politics of Tge situation
But we do need new investment and if this is stopped dead on its tracks at the AGM we need some clarity about how this situation is resolved nx we move forward together
Hearts are ahead of us partly because they have extra funding
They haven’t always spent it wisely but you don’t see them stopping backing the team

[CapitalGreen]

I think you have to ask yourself what the need was for the club to add the threat at the end of these published proposals. Neither proposal includes the threat, it is simply tacked on at the end. I really struggle to understand the need for that. It is that small addition that has taken me from totally enthusiastic about the investment to being borderline suspicious. It just doesn’t sit right and I cannot think of any occasion where I have seen a company add a threat to a proposed change to its articles of association.

I will be at the club AGM on Tuesday sincerely hoping to see a presentation for the future that will blow me away. I will then use my own vote and a proxy to vote accordingly.

A threat or simply highlighting the reality that the investment is conditional?

Resolutions 5 and 6 are conditional resolutions which are fairly common and its standard practice with such resolutions to highlight the potential consequence of them not passing - https://www.lawinsider.com/dictionary/conditional-resolutions#:~:text=The%20Conditional%20Resolution s%20(Resolutions%206,interconditionality%20of%20a% 20Conditional%20Resolution.

[GloryGlory]

I think there's a lot of confusion surrounding the HSL vote on Thursday. The vote was to accept or not accept Resolution 5’ titled: “To authorise the Directors to disapply pre-emption
rights

and to vote for or against Resolution 6’ titled: “To adopt new Articles of Association

All information that is in the public domain.

People moaning that HSL should have waited till Tuesday AGM to listen to them. When do these people expect HSL to vote on it if the AGM vote is this Tuesday.

All HSL have done is vote against accepting the above resolutions not to not accept any incoming finance.

But as has been pointed out the incoming finance from BKG is conditional on the issue of new shares, because the incoming finance is payment to Hibs for the new shares. If you vote against the new share issue you vote against the incoming finance.

[GloryGlory]

Where I am on this. HSL is in a bit of a spot now. I'm struggling to see how we can, as a club, turn down investment from a known quantity with a sports pedigree. I'm also sad that we live in a world now where no UK football team with ambition can ignore global investors. At least this isn't investment from sources with far greater implications morally and politically. Hibs we knew growing up is long gone, Scottish football as we knew growing up is on its way out. We're near the bottom of a very big global food chain and we're having to find new ways of surviving and thriving. It might indeed involve holding our noses at times. We'll all have our own lines in the sand re who and how investors are brought in. Some money might be a red line for me.

HSL I've struggled a bit with justifying my contributions any more. I'm still doing it but I feel there's little regular communication, I've never had a sniff of any hospitality prize draws yet know folk who've won more than once. They don't even publish who won. This latest episode has been unsettling again. I hope to get to the AGM for shareholders as I have my own shares as well as contributing to HSL but concerned that HSL won't be speaking for me anyway.

This is where I am, too. We're already way behind Hearts and Aberdeen in terms of turnover, nobody is putting money into Hibs anytime soon just for fun and a bit of a laugh. Like it or not, football is a business like any other.

If you don't keep up and invest to improve your own business, you fall behind your competitors. No amount of wishful thinking is going to change that simple fact of life.

I'm like you with a dual interest via HSL membership and a small individual shareholding. I didn't get my wish with the vote at HSL AGM (fair enough that's democracy), but I've already submitted my proxy for my individual shares to vote for the resolutions.

[HFC93]

I hope the folk running HSL are prepared for the heat coming there way if this falls through because of them.

[Stairway 2 7]

Saw someone on one of the Facebook groups say they will boycott the Hibs club due to them voting against the takeover doh!

He's been corrected and a committee member has said obviously hibs club just gave their hospitality and had no involvement. They say they will abstain from the vote with the shares they own, as not enough time to get a fair vote of members organised

[Pretty Boy]

I hope the folk running HSL are prepared for the heat coming there way if this falls through because of them.

There's no way the proposals can fall through solely because of HSL.

Reading social media there seems to be a lot of scapegoating of individuals involved with HSL for something that hasn't happened and is highly unlikely to happen and I don't really see why. People calling them out as 'power mad', 'a bowling club committee, 'sad cases' and a whole lot worse. It's unfair and yet more grief aimed at decent guys who have had to put up with far too much **** over the years. It might not feel like it now but I'm pretty sure the guys involved with HSL will be glad when it's all over.

[Greencore]

Can't be bothered reading through the bitching.



Whats it looking like?

Yay or nae?

[Pagan Hibernia]

There's no way the proposals can fall through solely because of HSL.

Reading social media there seems to be a lot of scapegoating of individuals involved with HSL for something that hasn't happened and is highly unlikely to happen and I don't really see why. People calling them out as 'power mad', 'a bowling club committee, 'sad cases' and a whole lot worse. It's unfair and yet more grief aimed at decent guys who have had to put up with far too much **** over the years. It might not feel like it now but I'm pretty sure the guys involved with HSL will be glad when it's all over.

It's sickening. Respectful debate is what is needed, and thankfully we have (mostly) had that in the threads on here.

Social media is a cesspit. Half of those spewing abuse at HSL probably don't even know who HSL are ffs

[Since452]

HSL toys out the pram? Boo ****ing hoo. Nobody was interested. Standing in the way of the club growing and becoming better is just pathetic sour grapes.

[Bostonhibby]

There's no way the proposals can fall through solely because of HSL.

Reading social media there seems to be a lot of scapegoating of individuals involved with HSL for something that hasn't happened and is highly unlikely to happen and I don't really see why. People calling them out as 'power mad', 'a bowling club committee, 'sad cases' and a whole lot worse. It's unfair and yet more grief aimed at decent guys who have had to put up with far too much **** over the years. It might not feel like it now but I'm pretty sure the guys involved with HSL will be glad when it's all over.Yep, the ones you are referring to haven't allowed a fundamental ignorance of arithmetic get in the way of their conclusion and nasty vitriol in some cases.


Sent from my SM-A750FN using Tapatalk

[IanM]

HSL toys out the pram? Boo ****ing hoo. Nobody was interested. Standing in the way of the club growing and becoming better is just pathetic sour grapes.

This
I’d be ashamed as well if I’d been conned out of money that’s been sitting in someone’s bank account - saving face by making a scene.

[Pagan Hibernia]

This
I’d be ashamed as well if I’d been conned out of money that’s been sitting in someone’s bank account - saving face by making a scene.

What on earth are you on about

[cabbageandribs1875]

It's sickening. Respectful debate is what is needed, and thankfully we have (mostly) had that in the threads on here.

Social media is a cesspit. Half of those spewing abuse at HSL probably don't even know who HSL are ffs


just finished reading comments on a fb page, booooo HSL, boooo bad bad HSL

HSL "in it for themselves" <<<<<< quite extraordinary ignorance

[nonshinyfinish]

Can't be bothered reading through the bitching.



Whats it looking like?

Yay or nae?

It's looking like, as expected, Leslie Robb's vote is the crucial one. The assumption is that the club have sounded him out and he's on board, which would mean that the AGM vote passes.

(Obviously it's possible the club don't know how he plans to vote, but it would represent a massive gamble on their part if so.)

[IanM]

What on earth are you on about

Fake news

[Pagan Hibernia]

Fake news

You're dribbling on about people being 'conned' out of money. Care to clarify?

[Greencore]

It's looking like, as expected, Leslie Robb's vote is the crucial one. The assumption is that the club have sounded him out and he's on board, which would mean that the AGM vote passes.

(Obviously it's possible the club don't know how he plans to vote, but it would represent a massive gamble on their part if so.) thanks mate.💚

[Lago]

SKY Sports headline,, 2nd biggest Hibernian share holder rejects investment proposal.

[Centre Hawf]

Some of the attacks on Social Media are poor and come from a lot of people who probably have no idea what on earth is actually being discussed and just think it's a case of HSL trying to block some sugar daddy making us the big force we dream about.

[Golden Bear]

SKY Sports headline,, 2nd biggest Hibernian share holder rejects investment proposal.

Who is that ?

[Lago]

who is that ?
hsl

[MWHIBBIES]

Aye, total idiots. A third place finish, two European runs, numerous enhancements to the stadium and record income forecasted for next years annual report. Total morons.

We wouldn’t have had this investment without the improvements made by the Gordon family.

Football wise, yes, total idiots. Only have to look at the last 2.5 season.

[LunasBoots]

Football wise, yes, total idiots. Only have to look at the last 2.5 season.

Our home record since 2018 is appalling

[cabbageandribs1875]

Dundee dafties chucking on smoke bombs

[LunasBoots]

I decided not to take part in the AGM. I'm unhappy about the drag along amendment to the Articles but couldn't bring myself to mandate a no vote as the investment should happen. I am supportive of the investment but holding my nose against it as in an ideal world it's not how I'd like to see our club go. But it's not an ideal world.

I didn't want to vote either way as I didn't want HSL to either.

I know a couple people going who are voting no, not that it's going to matter anyway.

[Greencore]

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/bill-foley-planned-hibs-investment-32201880

Not.good

[Lago]

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/bill-foley-planned-hibs-investment-32201880

Not.good
Awful headline, anyway if it's rejected mediocrity will for many season be Hibs future.

[Bostonhibby]

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/bill-foley-planned-hibs-investment-32201880

Not.goodThe actual headline might have been Daily Ranger having trouble adding up numbers?

Sent from my SM-A750FN using Tapatalk

[Pagan Hibernia]

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/bill-foley-planned-hibs-investment-32201880

Not.good

It's an attention grabbing headline of course, but everyone knows the deal isn't getting blocked. It's not "in the balance" as they put it. It's 99.9% done.

Crap article in my opinion.

[LunasBoots]

Awful headline, anyway if it's rejected mediocrity will for many season be Hibs future.

It doesn't matter what's voted for by them and others, it's already going through anyway is it not? It'll just be the case in a few years when everything may go tits up that they'll come back and say 'told you so'

[Lago]

It doesn't matter what's voted for by them and others, it's already going through anyway is it not?
So some on here say, however it's not over until the fat lady sings.

[matty_f]

There's no way the proposals can fall through solely because of HSL.

Reading social media there seems to be a lot of scapegoating of individuals involved with HSL for something that hasn't happened and is highly unlikely to happen and I don't really see why. People calling them out as 'power mad', 'a bowling club committee, 'sad cases' and a whole lot worse. It's unfair and yet more grief aimed at decent guys who have had to put up with far too much **** over the years. It might not feel like it now but I'm pretty sure the guys involved with HSL will be glad when it's all over.

Correct. That's a very good point, there's no need at all for the personal insults.

[CentreLine]

I hope the folk running HSL are prepared for the heat coming there way if this falls through because of them.

If it falls it will be because Robb, HSL and at least a proportion of small share holders voted against. Unlikely as that is. No need to polarise the debate

[nonshinyfinish]

If it falls it will be because Robb, HSL and at least a proportion of small share holders voted against. Unlikely as that is. No need to polarise the debate

There's no permutation where small shareholders' votes matter. If both HSL and Robb vote against it, it fails. If either vote for it, it passes. That's it.

[weecounty hibby]

Unless HSL can manage to help attract players like Emiliano and Maolida then they have made a big mistake. I stopped my DD about 3 months ago as they just seem to be a group with a decent t bank balance but nothing to spend it on. Very disappointed in this and if for some reason this helps block the deal then we can expect mediocrity and watching Hearts sail off in front of us

[MWHIBBIES]

Unless HSL can manage to help attract players like Emiliano and Maolida then they have made a big mistake. I stopped my DD about 3 months ago as they just seem to be a group with a decent t bank balance but nothing to spend it on. Very disappointed in this and if for some reason this helps block the deal then we can expect mediocrity and watching Hearts sail off in front of us

Hearts aren't Infront of us because they have more money.

They're Infront because we spend the money we have woefully and they haven't.

Our budget is miles more than Kilmarnock and st Mirren who have been well better than us this season.

[weecounty hibby]

Hearts aren't Infront of us because they have more money.

They're Infront because we spend the money we have woefully and they haven't.

Our budget is miles more than Kilmarnock and st Mirren who have been well better than us this season.
You keep believing that if you like. But in my opinion that is head in the sand stuff. We are as close as we are to them because they have spent ther 5 to 7 million a year more very very badly

[Pagan Hibernia]

You keep believing that if you like. But in my opinion that is head in the sand stuff. We are as close as we are to them because they have spent ther 5 to 7 million a year more very very badly

As close as we are to them? They're more than 20 points ahead of us..

[weecounty hibby]

As close as we are to them? They're more than 20 points ahead of us..

Exactly!! And that's what happens when you have between 5 and 7 million oer year more to spend

[MWHIBBIES]

You keep believing that if you like. But in my opinion that is head in the sand stuff. We are as close as we are to them because they have spent ther 5 to 7 million a year more very very badly

Hearts do not have 7 million more a year to spend than us. Let's not be silly.

Hibs have been run dreadfully on the pitch for 3 years now. That's why they, along with st Mirren and Kilmarnock, are miles ahead of us.

[Pagan Hibernia]

Exactly!! And that's what happens when you have between 5 and 7 million oer year more to spend

Your point was that Hearts have spent it badly. And they certainly did for a few years. I'm not sure that argument could be made now.

[weecounty hibby]

Hearts do not have 7 million more a year to spend than us. Let's not be silly.

Hibs have been run dreadfully on the pitch for 3 years now. That's why they, along with st Mirren and Kilmarnock, are miles ahead of us.

Hearts get donations worth approx 5 million per year. Donations above the usual tickets etc. We do not. They therefore have that much more money than us to spend. St Mirren and Kilmarnock are a blip. Hearts will co tinge to be above us if we don't get further investment. HSL while a worthy cause that I have paid a fair bit to, has been a failed effort due to a number of circumstances

[weecounty hibby]

Your point was that Hearts have spent it badly. And they certainly did for a few years. I'm not sure that argument could be made now.

They did spend badly for years and now they are spending better. Therefore miles ahead of us

[Nakedmanoncrack]

Hearts get donations worth approx 5 million per year. Donations above the usual tickets etc. We do not. They therefore have that much more money than us to spend. St Mirren and Kilmarnock are a blip. Hearts will co tinge to be above us if we don't get further investment. HSL while a worthy cause that I have paid a fair bit to, has been a failed effort due to a number of circumstances

I think it failed due to all those making a living from HSL, according to the experts/morons on Facebook.

[Pagan Hibernia]

This
I’d be ashamed as well if I’d been conned out of money that’s been sitting in someone’s bank account - saving face by making a scene.

Still nothing to add to add to this cryptic message IanM?.

Didn't think so. Another coward.

[weecounty hibby]

I think it failed due to all those making a living from HSL, according to the experts/morons on Facebook.

I agree, that was one of the issues and was a real shame because at the time it was the right thing to do

[Billy Whizz]

I don’t how accurate it is, but someone said HSL heve given around £500,000 to Hibs over the years
That’s quite a considerable amount if it’s true
I want the investment to go through, but I think Hibs have treated HSL really shabbily

[Pagan Hibernia]

I don’t how accurate it is, but someone said HSL heve given around £500,000 to Hibs over the years
That’s quite a considerable amount if it’s true
I want the investment to go through, but I think Hibs have treated HSL really shabbily

It was more than that Billy. I know it was around £700k before the gordons arrived, and I think several hundred thousand more between that and HSL members deciding to stop donations to the club and build cash reserves instead.

[Irish_Steve]

I haven't a scooby what is going on but I really need to know who I should be booing - is it HSL, the current board, Sir Tom, Rod Petrie or the wee bloke that sold me cold chips in the FFL kiosk today

[CropleyWasGod]

Hearts do not have 7 million more a year to spend than us. Let's not be silly.

Hibs have been run dreadfully on the pitch for 3 years now. That's why they, along with st Mirren and Kilmarnock, are miles ahead of us.


Hearts get donations worth approx 5 million per year. Donations above the usual tickets etc. We do not. They therefore have that much more money than us to spend. St Mirren and Kilmarnock are a blip. Hearts will co tinge to be above us if we don't get further investment. HSL while a worthy cause that I have paid a fair bit to, has been a failed effort due to a number of circumstances

£6m in donations in their last accounts.

[brog]

I've supported HSL from the start, currently £40 pm. Unfortunately their communication with me has been awful. I've reminded them I exist on several occasions, I receive a profound apology then I slip off the radar again. I received no notification of the HSL AGM and I've heard nothing from them regarding the proposed Foley investment. If my experience is the norm then I'm really not sure I want them involved in running our club. I'm also an individual shareholder and intend to vote in favour of the investment. I still believe in the HSL principle but I'm now considering stopping my HSL donations.

[Pagan Hibernia]

I've supported HSL from the start, currently £40 pm. Unfortunately their communication with me has been awful. I've reminded them I exist on several occasions, I receive a profound apology then I slip off the radar again. I received no notification of the HSL AGM and I've heard nothing from them regarding the proposed Foley investment. If my experience is the norm then I'm really not sure I want them involved in running our club. I'm also an individual shareholder and intend to vote in favour of the investment. I still believe in the HSL principle but I'm now considering stopping my HSL donations.

That's shocking mate. Ive been defending them on here and elsewhere but there's just no excuse for that

[McD]

Some of the extreme views on here are just plain weird. If people really have this level of disdain go find another hobby. It’s just really unhealthy.



Yep, some of the views I’ve seen expressed on here in the last few weeks is disheartening and in some cases very strange

[truehibernian]

I don’t how accurate it is, but someone said HSL heve given around £500,000 to Hibs over the years
That’s quite a considerable amount if it’s true
I want the investment to go through, but I think Hibs have treated HSL really shabbily

If it’s true that the club have refused to engage them then I totally agree Billy. Where HSL failed and will continue to fail is their lack of communication, PR and marketing, and setting realistic milestones against a cohesive marketing campaign - for me it was a great platform to invest however with no forward thinking and professional approach I decided to stop my payments. So many missed opportunities by a lack of real direction and building strategy.

Their vote against for me says “it’s aye been done this way so naw” - they’ve not seen the detail behind the proposals - which are tremendous- but that said, if the club hasn’t taken the time to engage and inform, then the doubters will doubt.

The investment proposed will go ahead, that I’ve no doubt 👍

[Chorley Hibee]

I've supported HSL from the start, currently £40 pm. Unfortunately their communication with me has been awful. I've reminded them I exist on several occasions, I receive a profound apology then I slip off the radar again. I received no notification of the HSL AGM and I've heard nothing from them regarding the proposed Foley investment. If my experience is the norm then I'm really not sure I want them involved in running our club. I'm also an individual shareholder and intend to vote in favour of the investment. I still believe in the HSL principle but I'm now considering stopping my HSL donations.

It mirrors my experience exactly and was the reason I gave up contributing.

The whole thing has been completely unprofessional (shambolic at times) and this (I believe) has had the biggest effect on not reaching its target.

[Hiber-nation]

I've supported HSL from the start, currently £40 pm. Unfortunately their communication with me has been awful. I've reminded them I exist on several occasions, I receive a profound apology then I slip off the radar again. I received no notification of the HSL AGM and I've heard nothing from them regarding the proposed Foley investment. If my experience is the norm then I'm really not sure I want them involved in running our club. I'm also an individual shareholder and intend to vote in favour of the investment. I still believe in the HSL principle but I'm now considering stopping my HSL donations.

Yep it's all been so amateurish. When I subscribed I heard nothing from them. When I stopped I kept getting emails treating me as a member, none asking me if I wanted to start up again. I got in touch, no reply. The whole thing has been so poorly run over the years.

[Bishop Hibee]

I don’t how accurate it is, but someone said HSL heve given around £500,000 to Hibs over the years
That’s quite a considerable amount if it’s true
I want the investment to go through, but I think Hibs have treated HSL really shabbily

It was said at the HSL AGM in 2023 that the club were gifted £500,000 to help them get through the Covid period. We were then told the club hoped for more HSL donations but that was not what HSL is for. It’s to buy enough shares to kibosh any hostile unwanted takeover.

HSL will never reach the 25% share ownership it hoped for so I’m not sure where that leaves things. They must have a few quid in the bank.

[TrinityHFC]

It was said at the HSL AGM in 2023 that the club were gifted £500,000 to help them get through the Covid period. We were then told the club hoped for more HSL donations but that was not what HSL is for. It’s to buy enough shares to kibosh any hostile unwanted takeover.

HSL will never reach the 25% share ownership it hoped for so I’m not sure where that leaves things. They must have a few quid in the bank.

I think to position the cash as a gift from HSL to Hibs is a little misleading in terms of how they accumulated that money.

They are doubling down now that the only purpose of HSL was to purchase shares in Hibs in order to reach at least 25%.

I don’t think that wholly reflects the motivation for each member who contributed. There will have been large numbers who also or even purely seen it as a way of providing that money to Hibs. I don’t know the numbers that eventually voted to stop money being given to Hibs but I’d be surprised if big numbers voted at all.

As I’ve said before their own principles as noted on their website are a bit conflicted. One of their main principles is that money to buy shares should go direct to the football club. That hasn’t been possible for a number of years. Any future opportunity to purchase shares is highly likely to mean purchasing them from an existing shareholder.

Agree that next week will see their purpose diminish further and they should consider what benefit there is in asking for continued contributions.

[Pretty Boy]

Yep it's all been so amateurish. When I subscribed I heard nothing from them. When I stopped I kept getting emails treating me as a member, none asking me if I wanted to start up again. I got in touch, no reply. The whole thing has been so poorly run over the years.

I think part of that, and in contrast to some of the utter pish spouted online over the last couple of days, is because no one was willing to 'feel important' enough to really drive it. There was always a committee feel to it, meetings in which the aim seemed to be to try to please all of the people all of the time rather than driving ahead with a clear vision and getting things done. Too much was done by volunteers when someone should have taken the bull by the horns and said that some money was to be spent employing someone to manage the day to day admin and so on.

I was involved in an arms length capacity at the start but the whole thing quickly ran out of steam. Some of that was beyond the control of HSL, some things could have been done better.

As I said above and again in this post none of that excuses the baseless attacks on those who have run HSL though. Claims one of them isn't a 'real fan' and is somehow hoarding money is the lastest nonsense doing the rounds. It largely seems to be coming from people who don't really seem to understand what HSL was and indeed seem to be under some delusion this Black Knights deal is just free money from a magic money fairy. I'm in favour of the deal but the intracies of the deal, particularly what form future funding will take and how it will potentially have to be paid back, should be at the forefront of everyone's mind and it's important we have people willing to ask questions rather than just being shouted down for 'lacking ambition' or whatever else.

[chippy]

I think part of that, and in contrast to some of the utter pish spouted online over the last couple of days, is because no one was willing to 'feel important' enough to really drive it. There was always a committee feel to it, meetings in which the aim seemed to be to try to please all of the people all of the time rather than driving ahead with a clear vision and getting things done. Too much was done by volunteers when someone should have taken the bull by the horns and said that some money was to be spent employing someone to manage the day to day admin and so on.

I was involved in an arms length capacity at the start but the whole thing quickly ran out of steam. Some of that was beyond the control of HSL, some things could have been done better.

As I said above and again in this post none of that excuses the baseless attacks on those who have run HSL though. Claims one of them isn't a 'real fan' and is somehow hoarding money is the lastest nonsense doing the rounds. It largely seems to be coming from people who don't really seem to understand what HSL was and indeed seem to be under some delusion this Black Knights deal is just free money from a magic money fairy. I'm in favour of the deal but the intracies of the deal, particularly what form funding will take and how it will potentially have to be paid back, should be at the forefront of everyone's mind and it's important we have people willing to ask questions rather than just being shouted down for 'lacking ambition' or whatever else.
Well said PB, some of the attacks on HS volunteers are disgusting.

[truehibernian]

Well said PB, some of the attacks on HS volunteers are disgusting.

I’d never attack or criticise anyone doing work to benefit Hibs but HSL were and are very unprofessional and lacking direction - they should have sought and invested a clear campaign with milestones and outcomes - they didn’t - hence they’ve a very poor uptake and membership. It was too amateurish for me hence I stopped payments. The sheer lack of communication which is paramount in driving a campaign to invite contributions was embarrassing mate, sorry 😔

[Pretty Boy]

I’d never attack or criticise anyone doing work to benefit Hibs but HSL were and are very unprofessional and lacking direction - they should have sought and invested a clear campaign with milestones and outcomes - they didn’t - hence they’ve a very poor uptake and membership. It was too amateurish for me hence I stopped payments. The sheer lack of communication which is paramount in driving a campaign to invite contributions was embarrassing mate, sorry 😔

That's certainly not the kind of criticism of HSL I was targeting in my post. I think much of that is fair.

The people questioning the character of those involved, stating HSL have 'done nothing' for Hibs and making claims that border on accusations of dishonesty are well out of line though. Thankfully there hasn't been much, if any, of that on here but it is rife on other platforms.

[matty_f]

Well said PB, some of the attacks on HS volunteers are disgusting.

:agree:

[CentreLine]

There's no permutation where small shareholders' votes matter. If both HSL and Robb vote against it, it fails. If either vote for it, it passes. That's it.

If the Gordons and all of the small share holders vote for it passes. Not that that will happen or need to happen. If it fails it is because a majority have made a business decision based on their judgment. It is a football club owned by shareholders. Unfortunate as that is people need to remember that. We are all invested, emotionally, in Hibs but in business decisions only the shareholders matter. Within the shareholding group, the major shareholder is king. However, there are rules that protect the smaller shareholder in circumstances. What the smaller shareholders are being asked to do is give up those protections for up to a year.
HSL, the second largest shareholder, have said they do not accept that. Other shareholders, including me and probably you, now have that same choice to make after hearing the presentation at the AGM.

[truehibernian]

That's certainly not the kind of criticism of HSL I was targeting in my post. I think much of that is fair.

The people questioning the character of those involved, stating HSL have 'done nothing' for Hibs and making claims that border on accusations of dishonesty are well out of line though. Thankfully there hasn't been much, if any, of that on here but it is rife on other platforms.

I agree, and I’d never ever question their integrity- I just think they were completely unprofessional in their approach from the outset - I invested from the start, but as the sheer lack of communication or vision was afforded to me, I decided to disinvest - I saw it as a really innovative vehicle to encourage fan ownership and investment into the club, but saw absolutely no creative thinking or any regular contact. Because of that amateur approach I left. As others have said, I’ve had more contact these last 2 weeks from HSL than any time I was contributing- which says it all PB.

[Cammy]

I've supported HSL from the start, currently £40 pm. Unfortunately their communication with me has been awful. I've reminded them I exist on several occasions, I receive a profound apology then I slip off the radar again. I received no notification of the HSL AGM and I've heard nothing from them regarding the proposed Foley investment. If my experience is the norm then I'm really not sure I want them involved in running our club. I'm also an individual shareholder and intend to vote in favour of the investment. I still believe in the HSL principle but I'm now considering stopping my HSL donations.

I agree with you, I am also a member of HSL and a shareholder and will be voting in favour of the investment. HSL unfortunately ran out of steam at the key time when a lot of lies were being spouted from some very empty vessels. We need to look forward though and not dwell on what might have been had it not been for the flat earthers!

[nonshinyfinish]

If the Gordons and all of the small share holders vote for it passes.

Unless you're counting Leslie Robb (who owns 10%) as a 'small shareholder', that's not true.

[matty_f]

Unless you're counting Leslie Robb (who owns 10%) as a 'small shareholder', that's not true.

What height is he?

[Bridge hibs]

What height is he?

Funny you mention height, I just played miniature golf with a short person, but he just called it golf

[matty_f]

Funny you mention height, I just played miniature golf with a short person, but he just called it golf

I'm frightened to ask what his handicap is.

[nonshinyfinish]

What height is he?If my arithmetic's correct, he's about 15% of the size of the Gordons collectively. Hope that helps.

[matty_f]

If my arithmetic's correct, he's about 15% of the size of the Gordons collectively. Hope that helps.

It does, thank you.

[Criswell]

If I perceive that HSL are in any way hindering outside investment being made in the club I will be cancelling my monthly direct debit immediately.

[Hibeesdaft16]

If I perceive that HSL are in any way hindering outside investment being made in the club I will be cancelling my monthly direct debit immediately.


HSL seem to be damned if they do and damned if they don't. The majority of it's members seem to have voted against the proposal, now it seems the members who the vote hasnae went their way are cancelling direct debits galore. Same probably would have happened had the vote went the other way, tae.

***** position for them to be in, losing a percentage of their stake in the club and people cancelling regardless.

[Torto7]

Nothings ever simple.

[Greencore]

Hsl can GTF.

[Hibeesdaft16]

Hsl can GTF.

Aye nae bother. :rolleyes:

[Greencore]

Aye nae bother. :rolleyes:
Lol.

[Pagan Hibernia]

Hsl can GTF.

Thanks for sharing.