The Hibernian Thread

[Tommy Tappin]

Again fairly straightforward stuff.

The Gordons bought to sell. Ron said that at the start. He saw it as a 10 year project. We're 5 years in. He didn't factor in Covid though. I don't know if that changes the Gordon family timeframe or not. 

We are definitely in the hands of the Gordon family/Foley. Every club are in the hands of their owners obviously. 

Is it Romanov-esque? Could be, but we lack the magic sticks, the fax machine, the stiffing creditors, sinking local businesses and no actual money of that comparison. 

The bottom line is, we spent money in the hunt for third. It was money we had in the bank. We spent it badly, we got the consequences. 

Now we'll spend someone else's money in an attempt to do the same. Will it fail again? Might do, but its STILL better than the status quo. 

1 hour ago, Zing. said:

I had no clue about this bit, wasn't covered in any of the media coverage I’ve seen today. 

 It was in the letter to shareholders about the AGM, Zing. 

[AndyM]

23 minutes ago, Tommy Tappin said:

Again fairly straightforward stuff.

The Gordons bought to sell. Ron said that at the start. He saw it as a 10 year project. We're 5 years in. He didn't factor in Covid though. I don't know if that changes the Gordon family timeframe or not. 

We are definitely in the hands of the Gordon family/Foley. Every club are in the hands of their owners obviously. 

Is it Romanov-esque? Could be, but we lack the magic sticks, the fax machine, the stiffing creditors, sinking local businesses and no actual money of that comparison. 

The bottom line is, we spent money in the hunt for third. It was money we had in the bank. We spent it badly, we got the consequences. 

Now we'll spend someone else's money in an attempt to do the same. Will it fail again? Might do, but its STILL better than the status quo. 

 It was in the letter to shareholders about the AGM, Zing. 

The club is worth way more than when Ron bought us. Infrastructure has been upgraded substantially and new revenue streams have been opened.

It's not remotely Romanov-esque. There are way too many checks and balances at Hibs for us to lose it spectacularly like that.

What I would question is the sensibility of chasing third place aka The Baldman's Comb , in the manner we did. Going forward I do want to see is Foley's team having more of a say on player recruitment, if not directing it. 

 

[Tommy Tappin]

2 minutes ago, AndyM said:

The club is worth way more than when Ron bought us. Infrastructure has been upgraded substantially and new revenue streams have been opened.

It's not remotely Romanov-esque. There are way too many checks and balances at Hibs for us to lose it spectacularly like that.

What I would question is the sensibility of chasing third place aka The Baldman's Comb , in the manner we did. Going forward I do want to see is Foley's team having more of a say on player recruitment, if not directing it. 

 

And yet our compatriots scream at the club for not 'pushing the boat out' or 'breaking the bank' accusing the board of showing no ambition.

So we do (nearly) break the bank and show plenty of ambition; build the top line, record a loss and the hoards only increase in ignorance and criticism towards the ownership.

Try to debate them and you become an 'Kensel loving apologist'. Hibees fair boil ma piss.  

[Tony Wonder]

Would a debt for equity swap not dilute the HSL shares further? Genuine question. If so, surely that's out of order given why people contributed their hard earned to it in the first place.

[Tommy Tappin]

Just now, Tony Wonder said:

Would a debt for equity swap not dilute the HSL shares further? Genuine question. If so, surely that's out of order given why people contributed their hard earned to it in the first place.

That's the big question. I suspect it will but I don't know. HSL had plenty of chance to do something about it though when Farmer offered the opportunity. 

[Tony Wonder]

1 minute ago, Tommy Tappin said:

That's the big question. I suspect it will but I don't know. HSL had plenty of chance to do something about it though when Farmer offered the opportunity. 

Not disputing they never utilised it properly, but if fans have contributed their hard earned for a specific purpose and that's diluted without their say so it's not a great look.

[Tommy Tappin]

Just now, Tony Wonder said:

Not disputing they never utilised it properly, but if fans have contributed their hard earned for a specific purpose and that's diluted without their say so it's not a great look.

Very true but not new. Ron Gordon politely told HSL to **** off 5 years ago. 

[AndyM]

5 minutes ago, Tommy Tappin said:

That's the big question. I suspect it will but I don't know. HSL had plenty of chance to do something about it though when Farmer offered the opportunity. 

Think HSL got to about 20% of ownership so yes after the new shares are issued they'll have less of a share than before. The two biggest stakes are held by the Gordons and Foley.  Small shareholders like myself all combined make up less than 8% of the ownership.

Edited February 6 by AndyM

[Tommy Tappin]

Just now, AndyM said:

Think HSL got to about 20% of ownership so yes after the new shares are issued they'll have less of a share than before. The two biggest stakes are help by the Gordons and Foley.  Small shareholders like myself all combined make up less than 8% of the ownership.

That sounds about right. I hold shares both independently and via the HSL vehicle and neither will make a blind bit of difference to what happens to the club. 

[AndyM]

3 minutes ago, Tommy Tappin said:

That sounds about right. I hold shares both independently and via the HSL vehicle and neither will make a blind bit of difference to what happens to the club. 

Yep. No real change from the Farmer/Petrie era in that respect.  I did think that after Ron passed that the Gordon's would look to sell but they've doubled down on that. 

[Markymark1874]

The club said spending was increased “to bolster sporting performance”

That went well

Hibs should build in the hiring of a new manager into their annual budget. 

Edited February 6 by Markymark1874

[Galajambo]

1 hour ago, gannonball said:

I would disagree in the specifics of writing off the debt at least. Owners especially down south in the past are happy to rack up debt against a club then they usually use more physical assets like the stadium to wipe it off and are then hamstrung with renting it off the owner (or some dodgy shell company of his/hers) with no way of changing it. At least if they are looking to get out they don't seem to looking to leave a bad legacy.

 

They appear to have dropped their knickers to the first big money bid that came along, and Foley doesn't exactly stick his own cash into Bournemouth with his French adventure all but being an utter disaster, aye, what could possibly go wrong? 

Edited February 6 by Galajambo

[gannonball]

7 minutes ago, Galajambo said:

 

They appear to e to have dropped their knickers to the first big money bid that came along, and Foley doesn't exactly stick his own cash into Bournemouth with his French adventure all but being an utter disaster, aye, what could possibly go wrong? 

I wouldnt expect any owners to be chucking cash at Scottish football tbh. Lorient appear to be a yo yo team so again I think utter disaster is a bit of a stretch. I personally don't like the idea of all these linked up franchise clubs and think Hibs will probably continue to be meh but  I don't think there is anything too alarming going on here.

[craigkillie]

41 minutes ago, AndyM said:

Think HSL got to about 20% of ownership so yes after the new shares are issued they'll have less of a share than before. The two biggest stakes are held by the Gordons and Foley.  Small shareholders like myself all combined make up less than 8% of the ownership.

So the new owners have come in, ran up enormous debts, and are now essentially using those debts that they created to increase the amount of the club they own and simultaneously reduce the amount owned by supporters. All of this comes at the same time that they have sold off a chunk of the club to external investors whose vision for Hibs revolves around how they can be used to help a different club in a different country.

And people are saying there's nothing concerning about that?

[Galajambo]

2 minutes ago, gannonball said:

I wouldnt expect any owners to be chucking cash at Scottish football tbh. Lorient appear to be a yo yo team so again I think utter disaster is a bit of a stretch. I personally don't like the idea of all these linked up franchise clubs and think Hibs will probably continue to be meh but  I don't think there is anything too alarming going on here.

 

I'm not so sure, the Gordon's lost a chunk of cash and all of a sudden they're looking for major investment, I wouldn't be shocked if this led to something else in the long run like a proper takeover, Ron Gordon seemed like a good guy with good intentions, his son doesn't appear to have the same interests. Foley has big plans for Bournemouth apparently, but we've yet to see any wheels in motion for them, and Lorient had their prize asset sold to Bournemouth for £20M, an asset that could have kept them up, it's not so much that they're a yo-yo team in the French leagues, it's the fact that Foley promised them the Earth, top 6 football, and a place in Europe, and he's delivered nothing. 

 

I guess only time will tell, but if I was a Hibs fan I'd be more than a tad concerned where the club is heading because no one makes money out of Scottish football. 

[Lyle Lanley]

Kensall should be leaving with the wages he's on. 

[Tony Wonder]

10 minutes ago, Lyle Lanley said:

Kensall should be leaving with the wages he's on. 

I read earlier he's on £300k+ a year. Surely that's bollocks?

[Zing.]

Just now, Tony Wonder said:

I read earlier he's on £300k+ a year. Surely that's bollocks?

It’s sadly very true.

[Lyle Lanley]

19 minutes ago, Tony Wonder said:

I read earlier he's on £300k+ a year. Surely that's bollocks?

For that reason alone. He should be leaving with immediate effect. 

[Tommy Tappin]

5 minutes ago, Lyle Lanley said:

For that reason alone. He should be leaving with immediate effect. 

Why?

Is the formula for this opinion: It seems like lots of money + we're shite = he should be sacked?

 

1 hour ago, craigkillie said:

So the new owners have come in, ran up enormous debts, and are now essentially using those debts that they created to increase the amount of the club they own and simultaneously reduce the amount owned by supporters. All of this comes at the same time that they have sold off a chunk of the club to external investors whose vision for Hibs revolves around how they can be used to help a different club in a different country.

And people are saying there's nothing concerning about that?

That's not what's happened though. They haven't ran up debt. They've spent the money in the bank and as a result made an operating loss.