kila Posted May 27, 2016 Share Posted May 27, 2016 RESOLUTION TO APPROVE STADIUM FUNDING PROPOSAL The vote on the stadium funding proposal closed on Wednesday and we would like to thank everyone who voted. The results are as follows: Total votes cast: 3790 Total votes for the proposal: 3747 Total votes against the proposal: 43 Percentage of votes for the proposal: 98.86 per cent Percentage of votes against the proposal: 1.14 per cent The resolution is therefore passed and we will now formalise with Bidco the changes to the financial agreement. From 1 June, our funds will be paid to the club for application to the Tynecastle Redevelopment Project. We are absolutely delighted that the Foundation members have given such a resounding vote in favour of the offer from Ann. We thank you for this response and we are now very much looking forward to proceeding with the amended financial arrangements as authorised by the members. The last two years have been historic on all fronts for the club and the Foundation. This vote is yet another very significant milestone on the road we are all travelling together and reconfirms our commitment to supporting the club with its ambitious developments at our spiritual home, Tynecastle. Once again, Hearts? supporters have demonstrated that they share ? and wish to deliver - the positive vision which has been forged for this club from what was only two years ago the bleakest of circumstances. The future is looking very bright. Thank you again. Yours faithfully Brian Cormack Chair Foundation of Hearts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikey1874 Posted May 27, 2016 Share Posted May 27, 2016 Good turnout ie. amount of people voting happy days Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pcw1874 Posted May 27, 2016 Share Posted May 27, 2016 Delighted Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Sifter Posted May 27, 2016 Share Posted May 27, 2016 Delighted with that. Fair play to those who felt the need to vote against, but personally, I'm delighted that such a massive majority voted in favour. Onwards and upwards :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poseidon Posted May 27, 2016 Share Posted May 27, 2016 Technically it's 99% if you're rounding Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OmiyaHearts Posted May 27, 2016 Share Posted May 27, 2016 ban those 43 from the stadium. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cade Posted May 27, 2016 Share Posted May 27, 2016 ban those 43 from the stadium. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Juanjo Posted May 27, 2016 Share Posted May 27, 2016 Voting turnout must be about 40%. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo Bill Posted May 27, 2016 Share Posted May 27, 2016 Voting turnout must be about 40%. About 50% of those eligible to vote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Sifter Posted May 27, 2016 Share Posted May 27, 2016 About 50% of those eligible to vote. Why wouldn't people vote? It's a simple two click job ffs! I presume they just assumed it would pass successfully without their input? Luckily it did, nae thanks to the stay away voters tho!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skabala Posted May 27, 2016 Share Posted May 27, 2016 The 1.14%, your reasons please? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drewboy Posted May 27, 2016 Share Posted May 27, 2016 ban those 43 from the stadium.This type of post is out of order imo! Good result but pretty poor turn out. That is assuming that everyone who could vote actually got notified. It would be good to see the turnout percentage using the number of emails sent out. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Natural Order Posted May 27, 2016 Share Posted May 27, 2016 Joseph Stalin would approve of this result. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disco Dave Posted May 27, 2016 Share Posted May 27, 2016 The 1.14%, your reasons please? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk They must have read the case for voting no thread with all of FA's compounding reasons to vote no. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Francis Albert Posted May 27, 2016 Share Posted May 27, 2016 They must have read the case for voting no thread with all of FA's compounding reasons to vote no.I always said I was For so even I didn't think the reasons for voting Against were compelling. Just worth debating. But well done to the 43 who were prepared to risk exile to the Gulag Archipelago! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homme Posted May 27, 2016 Share Posted May 27, 2016 Even more of a swing towards the proposal than I thought. It's the best way forward, absolutely brilliant to see Hearts fans recognise this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paolo Posted May 27, 2016 Share Posted May 27, 2016 Good turnout ie. amount of people voting happy days I don't think it is. An overwhelming majority (of those who voted), but would have been even more fantastic if there was a similar result with a higher turnout. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homme Posted May 27, 2016 Share Posted May 27, 2016 I think it's a very good turnout. It's not like chat about the vote is in the papers, on the radio and tv every single day reminding folk about it. Just a mention on the club website and emails going out. I barely look at the club website myself, get all my info (lies) through jkb. Well done Jambos. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paolo Posted May 27, 2016 Share Posted May 27, 2016 I think it's a very good turnout. It's not like chat about the vote is in the papers, on the radio and tv every single day reminding folk about it. Just a mention on the club website and emails going out. I barely look at the club website myself, get all my info (lies) through jkb. Well done Jambos. If I was on the FoH board, whilst I would be delighted with the overwhelming result, I would be disappointed in the turn out, and be looking to see how it could be boosted for any future vote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jambof3tornado Posted May 27, 2016 Share Posted May 27, 2016 Pleased with the result but think maybe more people didn't vote as they were confident the motion would be passed without them bothering. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homme Posted May 27, 2016 Share Posted May 27, 2016 If I was on the FoH board, whilst I would be delighted with the overwhelming result, I wood be disappointed in the turn out, and be looking to see how it could be boosted for any future vote. I do agree with you. Ways to get the word out there should definitely be looked at for future scenarios. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paolo Posted May 27, 2016 Share Posted May 27, 2016 I do agree with you. Ways to get the word out there should definitely be looked at for future scenarios.Thanks for quoting me, before I edited my post for my typo. 'Wood'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disco Dave Posted May 27, 2016 Share Posted May 27, 2016 I always said I was For so even I didn't think the reasons for voting Against were compelling. Just worth debating. But well done to the 43 who were prepared to risk exile to the Gulag Archipelago! :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamboelite Posted May 27, 2016 Share Posted May 27, 2016 If I was on the FoH board, whilst I would be delighted with the overwhelming result, I would be disappointed in the turn out, and be looking to see how it could be boosted for any future vote. Taking the under 16's out i think people didnt vote cause they have confidence in FOH, the board and were comfortable it would be a landslide For so didnt feel the need. A different question proposed i suspect would have had a heavier turnout if there was more debate on the outcome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paolo Posted May 27, 2016 Share Posted May 27, 2016 Taking the under 16's out i think people didnt vote cause they have confidence in FOH, the board and were comfortable it would be a landslide For so didnt feel the need. A different question proposed i suspect would have had a heavier turnout if there was more debate on the outcome. Quite possibly. If I was on the FoH Board, though, I would rather they expressed that confidence, rather than remain passive, because as it stands, as overwhelming as it is, less than half the FoH members voted in favour. Clearly, that is based on all members, so it would be interesting to know what percent jaw of those who were eligible to vote, did vote, rather than just an overall number. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homme Posted May 27, 2016 Share Posted May 27, 2016 Thanks for quoting me, before I edited my post for my typo. 'Wood'. Spell it as you say it mate Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cookieboy Posted May 27, 2016 Share Posted May 27, 2016 I forgot to vote sorry guys , it was a yes for what its worth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XB52 Posted May 27, 2016 Share Posted May 27, 2016 Great news for our club. I would have liked a higher turnout but there have been a few guys on here saying they never knew about it or how to vote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kila Posted May 27, 2016 Author Share Posted May 27, 2016 Taking the under 16's out i think people didnt vote cause they have confidence in FOH, the board and were comfortable it would be a landslide For so didnt feel the need. A different question proposed i suspect would have had a heavier turnout if there was more debate on the outcome. I think because the voting method and that the email for some members ended up either in spam or stupidity filtered by the likes of Gmail, not everyone who wanted to voted. They need to come up with a better system in house: log into the FoH website as a member and cast your vote there, as well as email reminders for those still to vote (unless someone explicitly opt out of voting that particular time). If they need help with that, they could ask if any FoH members would give their IT ability for free during the new stand and Bidco buyout phase (I would if asked). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Footballfirst Posted May 27, 2016 Share Posted May 27, 2016 I think because the voting method and that the email for some members ended up either in spam or stupidity filtered by the likes of Gmail, not everyone who wanted to voted. They need to come up with a better system in house: log into the FoH website as a member and cast your vote there, as well as email reminders for those still to vote (unless someone explicitly opt out of voting that particular time). If they need help with that, they could ask if any FoH members would give their IT ability for free during the new stand and Bidco buyout phase (I would if asked). I think the process was as simple as it could be.. If you introduced a login before being able to cast your vote, then I believe that the turnout would be lower. A near 50% turnout is an encouraging one from my viewpoint. The only other comparable vote was the election of Louise Strutt to the FoH Board when iirc the turnout was significantly lower. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gjcc Posted May 27, 2016 Share Posted May 27, 2016 I think because the voting method and that the email for some members ended up either in spam or stupidity filtered by the likes of Gmail, not everyone who wanted to voted. They need to come up with a better system in house: log into the FoH website as a member and cast your vote there, as well as email reminders for those still to vote (unless someone explicitly opt out of voting that particular time). If they need help with that, they could ask if any FoH members would give their IT ability for free during the new stand and Bidco buyout phase (I would if asked). My email address had a typo at the time of registering(probably my own fat fingered fault). I'd never noticed the lack of emails before this due to finding out news on kickback. Quickly remedied by B Cormack though. Glad there's such a resounding voice in favour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo Bill Posted May 27, 2016 Share Posted May 27, 2016 Why wouldn't people vote? It's a simple two click job ffs! I presume they just assumed it would pass successfully without their input? Luckily it did, nae thanks to the stay away voters tho!! I really don't know, but as you said, probably complacency or dis-interest. I'm a great believer in that if people don't want to vote, they shouldn't have to, but they can never complain about the outcome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kila Posted May 27, 2016 Author Share Posted May 27, 2016 I think the process was as simple as it could be.. If you introduced a login before being able to cast your vote, then I believe that the turnout would be lower. A near 50% turnout is an encouraging one from my viewpoint. The only other comparable vote was the election of Louise Strutt to the FoH Board when iirc the turnout was significantly lower. The downside to their method is folk can abuse the system (if you know someone's name and email, which plenty folk do) and I imagine Hibs fans probably spammed it too. That wouldn't affect the turn out of course, but the current system is definitely not ideal if we were to start voting on more serious matters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Footballfirst Posted May 27, 2016 Share Posted May 27, 2016 The downside to their method is folk can abuse the system (if you know someone's name and email, which plenty folk do) and I imagine Hibs fans probably spammed it too. That wouldn't affect the turn out of course, but the current system is definitely not ideal if we were to start voting on more serious matters. Sending out a unique reference with the email link might be a compromise solution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PTBCAL Posted May 27, 2016 Share Posted May 27, 2016 Why wouldn't people vote? It's a simple two click job ffs! I presume they just assumed it would pass successfully without their input? Luckily it did, nae thanks to the stay away voters tho!! My email arrived 2 hours after the vote closed unfortunately Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luckydug Posted May 27, 2016 Share Posted May 27, 2016 Why wouldn't people vote? It's a simple two click job ffs! I presume they just assumed it would pass successfully without their input? Luckily it did, nae thanks to the stay away voters tho!! I didn't get the chance to vote. I was away on holiday and didn't get home until after the vote. The WiFi at the hotel was useless and couldn't get my tablet to work. I wasn't too bothered as I knew that common sense would prevail and a positive vote was a formality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rudolf's Mate Posted May 27, 2016 Share Posted May 27, 2016 There'd have been another in favour however I emptied my spam folder, which is where all FoH emails go! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo Bill Posted May 27, 2016 Share Posted May 27, 2016 Just what where the 43 thinking. Oh wait they weren't thinking at all. Fookin numptys. Who knows, but whatever their motives, when the magnificent new stand opens, they can look at it and say "I tried to stop this". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bowmans_Boot Posted May 27, 2016 Share Posted May 27, 2016 Who knows, but whatever their motives, when the magnificent new stand opens, they can look at it and say "I tried to stop this". Or they can look at it proudly and say, "I helped to pay for this", as all FOH contributors can. Your comments here are, at absolute best, both unhelpful and harmful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iainmac Posted May 27, 2016 Share Posted May 27, 2016 There'd have been another in favour however I emptied my spam folder, which is where all FoH emails go! You know you can tell the email programme "this email is not spam" and it remembers your choice going forward? At least all of my email clients do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo Bill Posted May 27, 2016 Share Posted May 27, 2016 Or they can look at it proudly and say, "I helped to pay for this", as all FOH contributors can. Your comments here are, at absolute best, both unhelpful and harmful. How about "I helped to pay for this, even though I tried to stop it"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Watt-Zeefuik Posted May 27, 2016 Share Posted May 27, 2016 Honestly, if I hadn't seen the discussion here on JKB, I might easily have missed the email, or seen it and missed the deadline. 50% turnout is solid for something like this, I think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rudolf's Mate Posted May 27, 2016 Share Posted May 27, 2016 You know you can tell the email programme "this email is not spam" and it remembers your choice going forward? At least all of my email clients do. Yep and I was sure I'd done that a few months back. Despite this I normally always scan to make sure there's nothing in there that shouldn't be. Normally! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poseidon Posted May 27, 2016 Share Posted May 27, 2016 Just what where the 43 thinking. Oh wait they weren't thinking at all. Fookin numptys. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Maybe they were against it to try and force a rethink of the capacity of the new stand which some people were quite vocal about Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kila Posted May 27, 2016 Author Share Posted May 27, 2016 Who knows, but whatever their motives, when the magnificent new stand opens, they can look at it and say "I tried to stop this". Harsh. The votes against were not because they didn't want a new stand, but because they believed fan ownership should remain the top priority and that the new stand should be funded via other means. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GarryJ-o-s Posted May 27, 2016 Share Posted May 27, 2016 Joseph Stalin would approve of this result. Was about to post the same, but was heading for the Mugabe route. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bowmans_Boot Posted May 27, 2016 Share Posted May 27, 2016 How about "I helped to pay for this, even though I tried to stop it"? The other alternative would be that you stop thinking that everything you believe is 100% gospel and start respecting other people who have contributed to FOH from day 1. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo Bill Posted May 27, 2016 Share Posted May 27, 2016 Harsh. The votes against were not because they didn't want a new stand, but because they believed fan ownership should remain the top priority and that the new stand should be funded via other means. I'm not suggesting they don't want a new stand per se. I'm suggesting that they didn't want the new stand that will be built in 2017. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Francis Albert Posted May 27, 2016 Share Posted May 27, 2016 I'm not suggesting they don't want a new stand per se. I'm suggesting that they didn't want the new stand that will be built in 2017. Or they believed a new stand in 2017 (or 2018 - there is no guarantee the new stand will be delivered in 2017) could be funded in other ways? The bizarre reaction to 43 people voting against raises the question of what sort of reaction there will be if or when there is a really divisive disagreement between FoH members. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maroonlegions Posted May 27, 2016 Share Posted May 27, 2016 Who the feck were the 43 that voted no. Bet it was those idiots that you sit next to at games and berate every kick of the ball from Hearts players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.