Jump to content

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Stylish Kid said:

How come? I assume because he pushed some kind of ownership/takeover?

Pia, and one or two other influential Hibs fans, were pushing the "its a ponzi scheme" narrative about HSL at the time. 

He had a longstanding personal beef with Tom Farmer and - using his newspaper column and position - managed to convince the gullible and stupid that raising a few million to buy 50% of the club was in some way an enrichment scam from the - already incredibly wealthy - philanthropist Tom Farmer, who had already spent millions of his own cash doing things like rebuilding the stadium, building a training centre etc.

They didnt really know what a Ponzi scheme actually was, neither did they even understand the scheme. Of course, Pia wrote a paper column, so he must have been intelligent, eh?

He/They basically fucked HSL at birth and de facto kicked it into the long grass permanently - it currently brings in about 10% of the FOH contributions. 

Whats laughable is that fans could have owned half the club for something like £2.5m at the time.

 

Edited by Leith Green
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Lyle Lanley said:

HSL are voting against the Foley proposal.

I don’t think their vote was about voting for or against the proposal, rather the right for HSL to have the option to buy shares in the upcoming issue because Hibs are asking all shareholders to give up pre-emotion rights at the AGM till February, hopefully that makes sense?

Either way it’s a protest vote and I believe it’s more about how the investment has been presented rather than the investment itself.

At the end of the day it’s a small amount of Hibs fans, whether the majority feel the same way I’m not sure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, GreenGray said:

At the end of the day it’s a small amount of Hibs fans, whether the majority feel the same way I’m not sure.

What the majority of fans think is not that relevant tbh.

Obviously a number of Hibs fans own a small part of HSL, who control ~15% of the shares. There is also one individual shareholder who holds just over 10% in his own name.

Obviously the Gordon family own the largest %age of shares.

The proposals for the Black Knights investment (and associated dilution of shareholdings) require at least one of HSL or that other person vote FOR it in order to pass.

We are now in the situation where - If that one guy doesnt like the proposals - they dont pass on Wednesday.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can understand HSLs vote in honesty, they’re being fucked over with this and their already diluted share is being majorly reduced whereas the Gordon’s isn’t.

I would certainly rather HSL retained more shares than the Gordon’s.

Plus under the current regime we’re just pissing away money for no success, time will tell if Foleys money improves anything but I don’t trust the people in charge at the moment to use it wisely.

We’ve a far bigger budget than Kilmarnock, Dundee & St Mirren yet being outperformed by them this season due to these idiots so my faith that this will change anything unless changes are made in the boardroom is non existent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Les Cabbage said:

and their already diluted share is being majorly reduced whereas the Gordon’s isn’t.

All the shares are being diluted but nobody is losing any money.

Lets be honest, HSL (I am a full member and contribute monthly) wasnt allowed to buy more shares already, so its not like theres some step change there either.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 24/02/2024 at 19:36, Leith Green said:

All the shares are being diluted but nobody is losing any money.

Lets be honest, HSL (I am a full member and contribute monthly) wasnt allowed to buy more shares already, so its not like theres some step change there either.

 

HSL’s are being reduced a lot more than the Gordon’s in terms of proportions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, Les Cabbage said:

HSL’s are being reduced a lot more than the Gordon’s in terms of proportions.

Only because the plan proposes a debt for equity swap for the Gordons (hospitality upgrades, pitch, screens etc).

If their shares were simply proposed to be diluted in the same way as HSLs shares, the club would have £millions of debt...............I know which route I prefer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Tommy Tappin said:

It was only ever going this way. 

Best quote tonight was the explanation of being in a network not a club foodchain.

'We sign who we want, we play who we want, we sell to who we want' 

Certain people on this site won’t like to hear that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’m not for a second thinking that as a result of this we are suddenly going to turn into “The third force” in Scotland, and success is guaranteed on the back of it, that’s fairytale stuff.

BUT, it all sounds positive to me; No debt, no loans from Foley, all sustainable.

We retain controlling interest and Foley will likely never become majority shareholder.

Sounds like Foley genuinely loves football and views this as an exciting opportunity (obviously there are benefits for Bournemouth too)
 

Blind faith maybe, but bring it on.

Edited by GreenGray
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...