Jump to content

Hibs Offer 51% Ownership To Fans


div

Recommended Posts

http://www.hibernianfc.co.uk/news/5060

Real shame that the selling consortium couldn't have structured a similar deal for St.Mirren fans when they put the club on the market 5 years ago.

We would have had no bank debt to repay or convert. Perhaps easy to say in hindight but with monthly payments I dare say the fans would have stepped up to the mark and raised the £1.5m in that period if it meant fan ownership and security over the stadium and Ralston.

£300k a year for 5 years, 2000 members, achievable at £12.50 per month.

Too late now I guess, and SG and Co couldn't have imagined the club still being in situ after 5 years but it shows that it COULD have been done IMO.

And please, for the love of god, don't let this become ANOTHER 10000Hours bitchfest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Rather frustrating to see Hibs join Aberdeen and Killie in being debt free while we had to leave Love Street in order to do so.

I hope SG calls the allegedly imminent sale of the club correctly or the board really will not be remembered well. A fan ownership model like this could still work, it requires the board to be happy with a more realistic price for the club & accepting payments in instalments over 5 or 6 years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.hibernianfc.co.uk/news/5060

Real shame that the selling consortium couldn't have structured a similar deal for St.Mirren fans when they put the club on the market 5 years ago.

We would have had no bank debt to repay or convert. Perhaps easy to say in hindight but with monthly payments I dare say the fans would have stepped up to the mark and raised the £1.5m in that period if it meant fan ownership and security over the stadium and Ralston.

£300k a year for 5 years, 2000 members, achievable at £12.50 per month.

Too late now I guess, and SG and Co couldn't have imagined the club still being in situ after 5 years but it shows that it COULD have been done IMO.

And please, for the love of god, don't let this become ANOTHER 10000Hours bitchfest.

Aye, I caught a bit of that on the wireless earlier.

To be honest, I think the consortium placed an unrealistic price tag on their shares from the outset and, as a result, limited the options in terms of potential buyers, and this has come back and bitten them on the arse. It seems to me that they never considered the option of fan ownership, for whatever reason. As you say, its a missed opportunity but I think that ship has sailed, sadly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rather frustrating to see Hibs join Aberdeen and Killie in being debt free while we had to leave Love Street in order to do so.

I hope SG calls the allegedly imminent sale of the club correctly or the board really will not be remembered well. A fan ownership model like this could still work, it requires the board to be happy with a more realistic price for the club & accepting payments in instalments over 5 or 6 years.

To be fair to the BoD - sure, they sold Love Street while Hibs and Aberdeen are still at home - but... If they hadn't sold it, where would we be now? The modern stadium and new training complex we now play in has undoubtably helped impress prospective signings, has become the home of the Scotland U21s, has seen Tommy Doc' win awards and not fight fires every week, and has seen a fresh, clean corporate suite deliver an all-round better experience for those guests. The dome and a huge car park too.

Five years down the line, would our old main stand still be fit for purpose? How much money would have been required to keep the place going? The dressing rooms were decrepit....

I still back the decision to sell Love Street, but my problem is that having done so, five years in our new home and all the benefits I listed above benefit the players, staff, groundsman or corporate guests. We are worse off. We are in smaller public areas behind the stands, we lose catering and toilet facilities when the BoD turn parts of the West Stand over to opposition fans, we broke up the traditional middle-of-the-North-Bank singing area, and we are in a field away from traditional watering holes, and still no fan bar/cafe/meeting area.

The merchandise was better at Love Street, with Provan Sports shop and mobile shop on matchdays.

But hold on... We have bricks with messages on the shoebox walls, so we should doff our caps, eat our gruel and be seen and not heard... Unless it's further ideas from fans, in the shape of individuals or the fan council.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aye, I caught a bit of that on the wireless earlier.

To be honest, I think the consortium placed an unrealistic price tag on their shares from the outset and, as a result, limited the options in terms of potential buyers, and this has come back and bitten them on the arse. It seems to me that they never considered the option of fan ownership, for whatever reason. As you say, its a missed opportunity but I think that ship has sailed, sadly.

If the current Argie bid & rumours of other bids were not to materialize, at five years and running since they declared their wish to sell what other option would the Board have but to return to us?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the current Argie bid & rumours of other bids were not to materialize, at five years and running since they declared their wish to sell what other option would the Board have but to return to us?

Hard to see what other option they would have,apart from dissolving Douglas Street Ltd, and selling their shares individually,they would have less bargaining power then and that would present a good opportunity for fans to club together with SMISA and buy some of those shares and gain a place on the board,then move ahead from there. The best deal all round - if it comes down to the situation where no consortiums are buying the Douglas Street package - would be a staged buyout of their shares at a realistic price,i would only support this if it were set up and run by SMISA though, i dont want to see a figurehead and a host of small business owners wanting to get in for their own gain (financially or otherwise) SMISA where one member really means one vote whether it's a £2 a month member or a business member who pays more (and we in turn support their businesss) is the only option i would support

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The best deal all round - if it comes down to the situation where no consortiums are buying the Douglas Street package - would be a staged buyout of their shares at a realistic price,i would only support this if it were set up and run by SMISA though...

But SMISA don't want to own St Mirren, more's the pity.

Would like to help organise something like this with other fans, rather than businesses, so that it would be genuine fan ownership without vested interests, real or perceived.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But SMISA don't want to own St Mirren, more's the pity.

Would like to help organise something like this with other fans, rather than businesses, so that it would be genuine fan ownership without vested interests, real or perceived.

I'm aware they have no interest in buying the club,but they would be the best option if it were ever a possibility. They have stated they want to buy shares and if a major amount of shares become available it may be that they then have an interest in raising more money and buying as much as possible then proceed from there. I need to have a word and see what the feeling is, now that i am a member.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But SMISA don't want to own St Mirren, more's the pity.

Would like to help organise something like this with other fans, rather than businesses, so that it would be genuine fan ownership without vested interests, real or perceived.

although it's never been stated as something SMiSA want to do, that's really because it has never had enough members to make it a practical proposition.

If, in the region of 2000 saints fans were prepared to become members it would be an option

Link to comment
Share on other sites

although it's never been stated as something SMiSA want to do, that's really because it has never had enough members to make it a practical proposition.

If, in the region of 2000 saints fans were prepared to become members it would be an option

I like that john,any general meetings planned in the near future ? getting 2000 fans to sign up would be a massive task though

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like that john,any general meetings planned in the near future ? getting 2000 fans to sign up would be a massive task though

the SMiSA AGM is due around early March when hopefully by then the membership has increased further and hopefully a good turnout will allow things like the current subject to be discussed

the more members and the more people being actively involved the more that can be done

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the SMiSA AGM is due around early March when hopefully by then the membership has increased further and hopefully a good turnout will allow things like the current subject to be discussed

the more members and the more people being actively involved the more that can be done

Isn't that the same Catch 22 situation that 10000hours faced? SMiSA need approximately 2000 members willing to pledge approximately £12.50 a month to make any scheme work, but unless SMiSA announce they are willing to start a scheme in the first place, how are they going to attract anyone?

So far, REA has been the only person willing to front a scheme and be the figurehead for a scheme, leaving himself open to praise / support and abuse / scorn in possibly equal measure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did anyone actually read the Statement on the Hibs website?

Money raised will not be used to buy shares from existing shareholders. Instead, the money raised will go into the Club in return for new shares. Existing shareholders, including the holding company, will retain their existing shares but their percentage ownership of the Club will be reduced as new shares are issued. New shares up to the value of £2.5m will be made available so that over time the holding company’s ownership will be diluted to less than 50% of the enlarged share capital of the Club.

The existing shareholders won't make a penny from the scheme. They'll retain their shares but will see their control and influence within the club diluted. Now put that into a St Mirren context where the Douglas Street consortium was created specifically to increase the control and influence of the five members in the group in order to achieve the highest possible price for their shares. There is no way in hell Gilmour, Purves, McAusland, Campbell and Marshall would entertain anything like this at St Mirren.

On top of that further on in the article its clear that Hibs won't be debt free. What has actually happened is that a Holding Company has been created and it has repaid the clubs bank debt to the Bank Of Scotland and then converted half of the debt into shares which are to be sold to the fans and the rest of the debt will be financed by the Holding Company in the form of a mortgage which will presumably be secured against the stadium and the training ground. In effect this means that Hibs fans will be taking control of a club that will still have a large debt on the books, and for all that they have done they still won't have managed to secure the two main assets the club owes.

Div is right in so much as the Hibs fans won't be inheriting a BANK DEBT, but they will be inheriting a large mortgage to a Holding Company repayable on terms that are to be agreeable to the 'club' where only two Hibs fans are going to be allowed to participate in the decision as non executive directors. What I'd be wanting to know if I were a Hibs fan is what is the name of this Holding Company? Who are the main beneficiaries within the Holding Company? And I'd be very concerned about the potential for the participants in the scheme getting ripped off.

The 10000Hours proposal was torpedoed and lampooned by a handful of individuals in and around the club, many of them acting to protect their own self interests. I have no problem with that, but the 10000Hours proposal for all it's flaws had one massive advantage over the Hibs offering - 10000Hours would have secured the stadium and the training ground for the club and the community in Paisley through the CIC.

The Club is pleased to confirm that it has agreed a settlement with Bank of Scotland and that the Club is now free of Bank debt. That settlement was funded by new loans provided by the holding company to the Club and by a payment made direct to the Bank. The fixed securities held by the Bank over Easter Road Stadium and the Hibernian Training Centre have been released.

Following the settlement with the Bank, the holding company has agreed to halve the Club’s debt by converting £4.5 million of loans into new ordinary shares in the Club. A formal written resolution to give effect to this will be sent to shareholders with the papers for the AGM. The remaining loans will be refinanced as a single £5m mortgage provided by the holding company on terms acceptable to the Club.

Edited by Stuart Dickson
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Isn't that the same Catch 22 situation that 10000hours faced? SMiSA need approximately 2000 members willing to pledge approximately £12.50 a month to make any scheme work, but unless SMiSA announce they are willing to start a scheme in the first place, how are they going to attract anyone?

So far, REA has been the only person willing to front a scheme and be the figurehead for a scheme, leaving himself open to praise / support and abuse / scorn in possibly equal measure.

Agree 100% Poz. Would join SMISA if they put forward such a scheme.

At the moment it seems a bit wishy-washy... something that could be discussed if there were enough members. Think we need to make something happen. It's no good, IMO, hoping that SMISA will come up with something (though if they did I would get behind it).

Yes, 10000 Hours didn't work, but that doesn't have to mean that the chance for fan ownership has gone. That is only the case if everyone believes it to be so.

As a fanbase I'm positive we can come up with a new proposal. It might work, it might not. But what have we to lose.

Sorry if I'm boring everyone to tears, but if anyone fancies discussing it PM me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did anyone actually read the Statement on the Hibs website?

The existing shareholders won't make a penny from the scheme. They'll retain their shares but will see their control and influence within the club diluted. Now put that into a St Mirren context where the Douglas Street consortium was created specifically to increase the control and influence of the five members in the group in order to achieve the highest possible price for their shares. There is no way in hell Gilmour, Purves, McAusland, Campbell and Marshall would entertain anything like this at St Mirren.

On top of that further on in the article its clear that Hibs won't be debt free. What has actually happened is that a Holding Company has been created and it has repaid the clubs bank debt to the Bank Of Scotland and then converted half of the debt into shares which are to be sold to the fans and the rest of the debt will be financed by the Holding Company in the form of a mortgage which will presumably be secured against the stadium and the training ground. In effect this means that Hibs fans will be taking control of a club that will still have a large debt on the books, and for all that they have done they still won't have managed to secure the two main assets the club owes.

Div is right in so much as the Hibs fans won't be inheriting a BANK DEBT, but they will be inheriting a large mortgage to a Holding Company repayable on terms that are to be agreeable to the 'club' where only two Hibs fans are going to be allowed to participate in the decision as non executive directors. What I'd be wanting to know if I were a Hibs fan is what is the name of this Holding Company? Who are the main beneficiaries within the Holding Company? And I'd be very concerned about the potential for the participants in the scheme getting ripped off.

The 10000Hours proposal was torpedoed and lampooned by a handful of individuals in and around the club, many of them acting to protect their own self interests. I have no problem with that, but the 10000Hours proposal for all it's flaws had one massive advantage over the Hibs offering - 10000Hours would have secured the stadium and the training ground for the club and the community in Paisley through the CIC.

No, I don't think they have read it Stuart.

St. Mirren have offered way more than 51% of the shares in the club in the 3 previous share issues.

The fans had the opportunity to buy into the club then - and the club was on its knees at the first share issue.

But every time, the fans ignored the share issues. They just weren't interested.

God knows why anyone thinks this would be any different.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Isn't that the same Catch 22 situation that 10000hours faced? SMiSA need approximately 2000 members willing to pledge approximately £12.50 a month to make any scheme work, but unless SMiSA announce they are willing to start a scheme in the first place, how are they going to attract anyone?

So far, REA has been the only person willing to front a scheme and be the figurehead for a scheme, leaving himself open to praise / support and abuse / scorn in possibly equal measure.

bearing in mind SMiSA are not currently making any plans to implement this but what they are doing is trying to build a creditable base line of members for the collective benefit to St.Mirren, what level that attains is determined by the membership based both on numbers capabilities or opinions

Anyone willing to start such a scheme needs the time and commitment and background knowledge to implement. right now (and for a number of years) there are about four or five guys on the committee of SMiSA, who mostly all have full time jobs, who have families etc etc and maintaining the trust in its current format is difficult enough, meanwhile the 130 + members also contribute and help where they can, but as with any voluntary organisation it is limited on the available time of the people involved,

however, as the numbers increase, it was only 65 this time last year, it also follows that there are more people able to be more actively involved and potentially with more expertise in certain fields. hence results and information will be in place for discussion at SMiSA agm where the previous years performance will be reviewed and next years objectives put in place

there is just not the manpower right now to announce a full blown fan takeover scheme, although personally I hope for this in the future for St.mirren.

also agree on the REA point you made

Link to comment
Share on other sites

sorry, meant to add, on a positive side SMiSA do already have a legal and binding constitution which has been in place since the start of the trust, is a registered I.P.S., has people already paying monthly subscriptions and a voting structure that has proved to work. To have these kind of things in place is a reasonably solid base to start with

we need to go on the principle it is not a sprint but a marathon

Link to comment
Share on other sites

sorry, meant to add, on a positive side SMiSA do already have a legal and binding constitution which has been in place since the start of the trust, is a registered I.P.S., has people already paying monthly subscriptions and a voting structure that has proved to work. To have these kind of things in place is a reasonably solid base to start with

we need to go on the principle it is not a sprint but a marathon

Definitely think that, in an ideal world, SMISA is the vehicle that a proposed fan takeover should be taken forward, but the impression I got was that this was not something SMISA wanted in principle (as opposed to just not having the numbers/time/expertise). If you could allay my fears then I'd definitely sign up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whiteman: I should add that I am not berating the SMiSA leadership for not picking up the 10000hours baton and running with it. I am also not saying that it is disappointing that the SMiSA leadership have not put together a fresh take on the 10000hours failed bid.

It is clear that we had REA with some other visible individuals fronting our only credible 'community' bid, with a large amount of ordinary fans willing to jump on board to the tune of a tenner a month. It is also clear that 'fan ownerships' at Hearts and Hibs would most likely be absolutely nowhere without the involvement of Ann Budge and Tom Farmer.

We don't have an Ann Budge or Tom Farmer. We don't have a St Mirren minded individual with the individual clout to front a new bid, engage the fanbase, and pick up the 10000hours baton and run with it.

Again, I understand the SMiSA leadership's reluctance for many reasons to be the 'new face' of a new fan-centric bid, but if SMiSA don't do it, who will?

Unless of course Div wins Euromillions, it turns out Bill Gates is a Buddie, or StuDick's posts in the referendum thread are officially classified 'priceless' and he punts them on Ebay for a hundred million.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whiteman: I should add that I am not berating the SMiSA leadership for not picking up the 10000hours baton and running with it. I am also not saying that it is disappointing that the SMiSA leadership have not put together a fresh take on the 10000hours failed bid.

It is clear that we had REA with some other visible individuals fronting our only credible 'community' bid, with a large amount of ordinary fans willing to jump on board to the tune of a tenner a month. It is also clear that 'fan ownerships' at Hearts and Hibs would most likely be absolutely nowhere without the involvement of Ann Budge and Tom Farmer.

We don't have an Ann Budge or Tom Farmer. We don't have a St Mirren minded individual with the individual clout to front a new bid, engage the fanbase, and pick up the 10000hours baton and run with it.

Again, I understand the SMiSA leadership's reluctance for many reasons to be the 'new face' of a new fan-centric bid, but if SMiSA don't do it, who will?

.

I didn't take it as criticism, your point was valid

I think regarding the next two points, that the presence of a 'wealthy fan' has allowed hibs and hearts to move quickly to put something in place. in the absence of someone to put the money up front thus allowing fans to gradually pay back over time, that the other alternative is the slower method of accumulating the cash first or at least coming to some agreement with the sellers to accept payment over that period of time

I agree SMiSA currently seem to be the best placed to undertake this for a number of reasons, hopefully, being an open membership fans group thus having the trust and confidence of all St.mirren supporters being the main one ?

Edited by thewhiteman
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
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...
×
×
  • Create New...