FOH named preferred bidder

[Paolo]

 

 

Surely an AGM would be required to authorize the sale in the first place. Given that the stated purpose of the Foundation from the start has been to own HMFC a reversal of that should probably be the kind of thing that the membership should have to approve.

 

I don't expect a referendum every time we change caterer or sign a full back but something that dramatic should probably require consent from the wider membership.

 

If that's not covered in the initial constitution then we should sort that out.

 

I'd also suggest that a fixed formula for distributing the receipts from any sale should be adopted to avoid carpet baggers joining and forcing through a sale.

 

I'd say that if the club is sold the foundation should be wound up and any surplus funds distributed amongst members in proportion with their total subscription paid over the previous 10 years.

 

I think we need to remember, regardless of the subject, that the Hearts Board and FoH Board are different. Any decision made by Hearts will be decided by their board, and possibly require a vote. Any decision made by FoH will be decided by their board, and possibly require a vote.

[Francis Albert]

 

 

Surely an AGM would be required to authorize the sale in the first place. Given that the stated purpose of the Foundation from the start has been to own HMFC a reversal of that should probably be the kind of thing that the membership should have to approve.

 

I don't expect a referendum every time we change caterer or sign a full back but something that dramatic should probably require consent from the wider membership.

 

If that's not covered in the initial constitution then we should sort that out.

 

I'd also suggest that a fixed formula for distributing the receipts from any sale should be adopted to avoid carpet baggers joining and forcing through a sale.

 

I'd say that if the club is sold the foundation should be wound up and any surplus funds distributed amongst members in proportion with their total subscription paid over the previous 10 years.

I agree with all that, though not sure why there needs to be a ten year cut off for "ownership" entitlement. As I understand the latest plan ownership will pass from Bidco to FoH/Fanco as the debt is repaid. I am not sure why ownership doesn't pass to the pledgers whose funds are being used to repay the loan in the same way. But these are nitpicking little points that can be sorted out when we gain control. However I wouldn't view a future sale as such a remote possibility that it doesn't need to be considered. If say 10 years down the road we are in a bit of a slump, if we have made some poor investment or management decisions (it could happen!) I can't see the majority of fans turning aside a Jack Walker type investor who wanted to spend ?50m of his own dosh on the club to take out of its slump and to a new level.

[Watt-Zeefuik]

Surely an AGM would be required to authorize the sale in the first place. Given that the stated purpose of the Foundation from the start has been to own HMFC a reversal of that should probably be the kind of thing that the membership should have to approve.

 

I don't expect a referendum every time we change caterer or sign a full back but something that dramatic should probably require consent from the wider membership.

 

If that's not covered in the initial constitution then we should sort that out.

 

I'd also suggest that a fixed formula for distributing the receipts from any sale should be adopted to avoid carpet baggers joining and forcing through a sale.

 

I'd say that if the club is sold the foundation should be wound up and any surplus funds distributed amongst members in proportion with their total subscription paid over the previous 10 years.

 

Yes, while I was responding to the dismissive tone of the question, I don't think these are bad questions at all to raise at the AGM. One thing would be to lay out in a charter statement that the purpose of FoH/FANCO is to hold the shares of HMFC in perpetuity and operate it as a football club in west Edinburgh, and that any major action which is not in keeping with the charter statement requires a special dispensation at the AGM. I'm not a lawyer, and don't know the best way to sort that out, but hopefully someone with a better sense of writing bylaws could work that out. Ideally this would protect not only against rogue board action in deciding to sell off HMFC for a profit, but also against a hostile takeover by huns deciding to get 20k pledgers overnight and vote to liquidate the club or some such.

 

The biggest point is that when it comes to the operation of FANCO, these questions can all be decided and encoded in bylaws by the fans well before FANCO actually own any substantial number of shares in HMFC. That gives us some time sort out the structure before it would become profitable for some kind of smash-and-grab, either by a rogue board or by marauding non-Hearts fans.

[Watt-Zeefuik]

I agree with all that, though not sure why there needs to be a ten year cut off for "ownership" entitlement. As I understand the latest plan ownership will pass from Bidco to FoH/Fanco as the debt is repaid. I am not sure why ownership doesn't pass to the pledgers whose funds are being used to repay the loan in the same way. But these are nitpicking little points that can be sorted out when we gain control. However I wouldn't view a future sale as such a remote possibility that it doesn't need to be considered. If say 10 years down the road we are in a bit of a slump, if we have made some poor investment or management decisions (it could happen!) I can't see the majority of fans turning aside a Jack Lord type investor who wanted to spend ?50m of his own dosh on the club to take out of its slump and to a new level.

 

Three quick points here. First, at a pedantic, nitpicking level, the money passing from FANCO to BIDCO isn't strictly a paying off of debt, it's the purchase of equity shares. Strictly, those aren't the same thing. Practically, there's not much of a difference.

 

Second, I completely agree that worst-case scenarios should at least be contemplated in either the charter or the bylaws, although I don't see a need to spend huge amounts of time on them. Simply put, there should be some binders on the board for what the expected normal course of operations will be (holding the shares of the club, appointing board members, communicating with members, collecting pledges), and that operations outside of that normal course require confirmation by the membership at the AGM.

 

Third, the reason why shares don't pass to the pledgers is to maintain the democratic structure of the organization. It's not the only way to do this, but if you're going for fan ownership, you don't want someone to be able to come along and buy up shares from lots of pledgers and gain control of the club that way. A big part of cooperative/supporter/community ownership is keeping any person or entity from being able to accumulate a controlling percentage of shares. The other reason, of course, is that the ongoing pledge model provides an ongoing revenue injection into the club, giving us a better chance to be competitive than if we were relying strictly on football-related revenue.

[JamboGraham]

I think we need to remember, regardless of the subject, that the Hearts Board and FoH Board are different.

 

Yes, I think this a point that gets over looked too often.

[Paolo]

 

 

Yes, I think this a point that gets over looked too often.

 

It does. I urge people not to be surprised or pissed off when they learn that, as advised, the FoH board will not take a remuneration, but the Hearts board will, correctly, in my opinion.

[mitch41]

I thank FOH for coming up with this fantasic plan to takeover Hearts. these fans are doing us proud and i'd like to thank them for all their efforts.

[topcat]

I agree with all that, though not sure why there needs to be a ten year cut off for "ownership" entitlement. As I understand the latest plan ownership will pass from Bidco to FoH/Fanco as the debt is repaid. I am not sure why ownership doesn't pass to the pledgers whose funds are being used to repay the loan in the same way. But these are nitpicking little points that can be sorted out when we gain control. However I wouldn't view a future sale as such a remote possibility that it doesn't need to be considered. If say 10 years down the road we are in a bit of a slump, if we have made some poor investment or management decisions (it could happen!) I can't see the majority of fans turning aside a Jack Walker type investor who wanted to spend ?50m of his own dosh on the club to take out of its slump and to a new level.

 

The ten year thing was off the top of my head. The details aren't that important.

[Francis Albert]

 

 

 

Three quick points here. First, at a pedantic, nitpicking level, the money passing from FANCO to BIDCO isn't strictly a paying off of debt, it's the purchase of equity shares. Strictly, those aren't the same thing. Practically, there's not much of a difference.

 

Second, I completely agree that worst-case scenarios should at least be contemplated in either the charter or the bylaws, although I don't see a need to spend huge amounts of time on them. Simply put, there should be some binders on the board for what the expected normal course of operations will be (holding the shares of the club, appointing board members, communicating with members, collecting pledges), and that operations outside of that normal course require confirmation by the membership at the AGM.

 

Third, the reason why shares don't pass to the pledgers is to maintain the democratic structure of the organization. It's not the only way to do this, but if you're going for fan ownership, you don't want someone to be able to come along and buy up shares from lots of pledgers and gain control of the club that way. A big part of cooperative/supporter/community ownership is keeping any person or entity from being able to accumulate a controlling percentage of shares. The other reason, of course, is that the ongoing pledge model provides an ongoing revenue injection into the club, giving us a better chance to be competitive than if we were relying strictly on football-related revenue.

 

As you say there are other ways a predator could be avoided (eg a limit on the percentage of shares anyone could own, maybe as low as say 2%).

[Hartley Jambo.]

Can someone point me in the direction where it's confirmed how ownership will be transferred by the purchasing of shares.

I must have missed this, would be good for a slap down tomorrow for a colleague.

[Paolo]

Can someone point me in the direction where it's confirmed how ownership will be transferred by the purchasing of shares.

I must have missed this, would be good for a slap down tomorrow for a colleague.

 

How the transfer will take place has not yet confirmed. I don't doubt it will happen, but I don't know how it will or how long it will take.

[Russian Hats]

Can someone point me in the direction where it's confirmed how ownership will be transferred by the purchasing of shares.

I must have missed this, would be good for a slap down tomorrow for a colleague.

 

They really are still clutching at straws!! I notice on Hibs net the number of posts and the number of 'Guaranteed liquidation' type stances have reduced to about zero now. Another fail my hobo friends - get it right up ye.

 

I think the minute a price is agreed with FOH (hopefully) and its public this will finish some of them off completely. We may end up relegated (but also maybe not) but the club will be saved, in safe hands, looking to build and playing at tynie.

 

 

 

[Guest Bilel Mohsni]

 

 

They really are still clutching at straws!! I notice on Hibs net the number of posts and the number of 'Guaranteed liquidation' type stances have reduced to about zero now. Another fail my hobo friends - get it right up ye.

 

I think the minute a price is agreed with FOH (hopefully) and its public this will finish some of them off completely. We may end up relegated (but also maybe not) but the club will be saved, in safe hands, looking to build and playing at tynie.

 

They have another thread on the Private Members Board. They plan wee schemes to float rumours and propaganda on the private board, then make them public on the public thread... It's deliciously sad.

 

All the main chompers like SirGay and co do their most weird shit on the hidden forum.

 

An utterly ruined set of supporters who will probably never truly recover.

[casper]

Can someone point me in the direction where it's confirmed how ownership will be transferred by the purchasing of shares.

I must have missed this, would be good for a slap down tomorrow for a colleague.

 

One thing that was said in the interview the other day was that FOH would 100% own the club.

If that's the case there won't be any need for shares.

I have no idea how the transfer to FANCO will work though, but it was said it would have binding contracts.

[davieholt]

One thing that was said in the interview the other day was that FOH would 100% own the club.

If that's the case there won't be any need for shares.

I have no idea how the transfer to FANCO will work though, but it was said it would have binding contracts.

 

I have no idea either but there will be shares - they already exist. Without a transfer of existing shares we would be talking about a newco.

 

Whether they will be dripped across from Bidco to Fanco over time by sale against pledged cash coming in or Fanco hold 100% from the outset and simply pay off a debt which is secured against the assets of the company is anyone's guess. Not sure it matters much.

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

 

 

One thing that was said in the interview the other day was that FOH would 100% own the club.

If that's the case there won't be any need for shares.

I have no idea how the transfer to FANCO will work though, but it was said it would have binding contracts.

They will not own 100% of the club.

[sniffer]

 

They will not own 100% of the club.

Correct. Romanov, through Quantum, still holds approximately 15% of the shares and ordinary shareholders account for another 1%. I believe FOH plan to acquire the shares from Quantum but these are not a priority. They have no plans to acquire the 1%.

[gorgie rd eh11]

They have another thread on the Private Members Board. They plan wee schemes to float rumours and propaganda on the private board, then make them public on the public thread... It's deliciously sad.

 

All the main chompers like SirGay and co do their most weird shit on the hidden forum.

 

An utterly ruined set of supporters who will probably never truly recover.

 

 

 

They take themselves very seriously.

 

 

5-1

[The Gasman]

They have another thread on the Private Members Board. They plan wee schemes to float rumours and propaganda on the private board, then make them public on the public thread... It's deliciously sad.

 

All the main chompers like SirGay and co do their most weird shit on the hidden forum.

 

An utterly ruined set of supporters who will probably never truly recover.

 

Wow, just wow..!

[Francis Albert]

 

Correct. Romanov, through Quantum, still holds approximately 15% of the shares and ordinary shareholders account for another 1%. I believe FOH plan to acquire the shares from Quantum but these are not a priority. They have no plans to acquire the 1%.

 

I thought we bought about 5% of the shares last November/December.

[Guest Bilel Mohsni]

Id like to know more about this second bidder to be honest.

[Don Dan]

Well done FoH lets hope the message get out at the game.

 

DIRECTORS of the Foundation of Hearts have dug deep to sponsor this weekend?s Hearts v Aberdeen SPFL Premiership game at Tynecastle.

 

The directors and advisors to the Foundation have personally paid for the package, which will see FoH chairman Ian Murray step out onto the Tynecastle pitch at half-time to address the club?s supporters. As part of the package, the Foundation has their logo displayed on the front cover of the matchday programme, left, and a full-page advert inside. Also, there will be leaflets placed in all hospitality suites in the stadium.

 

FoH will give fans a chance to vote for their man of the match on Twitter by tweeting #FOHMOM and adding the surname of the player they have chosen.

 

The Foundation view the sponsorship deal as the chance to promote their drive to take control of the club and to encourage other businesses to add their support.

 

And Murray, who is the MP for Edinburgh South, said: ?We?re delighted to be supporting the club, and at the same time using the excellent rights afforded through this sponsorship package to promote the Foundation.

 

?I?d like to thank the Foundation?s directors and advisors who have kindly agreed to shoulder the cost for this.?

 

Rory Donaldson, commercial manager at Hearts, added: ?The Foundation of Hearts as preferred bidders are clearly leading the way by demonstrating to the business community just how much can be done with a matchday sponsorship package. We?re looking forward to welcoming them on Saturday and we hope that other businesses will see the real value this package can offer.?

 

The Foundation of Hearts were last week given preferred bidder status by BDO and Murray yesterday revealed that he is 80 per cent certain that his group can deliver a Creditors? Voluntary Agreement (CVA) to enable Hearts to exit administration.

 

Supporters who want to back the Foundation?s bid can set up their direct debit at www.foundationofhearts.org

[Watt-Zeefuik]

Well done FoH lets hope the message get out at the game.

 

DIRECTORS of the Foundation of Hearts have dug deep to sponsor this weekend?s Hearts v Aberdeen SPFL Premiership game at Tynecastle.

 

The directors and advisors to the Foundation have personally paid for the package, which will see FoH chairman Ian Murray step out onto the Tynecastle pitch at half-time to address the club?s supporters. As part of the package, the Foundation has their logo displayed on the front cover of the matchday programme, left, and a full-page advert inside. Also, there will be leaflets placed in all hospitality suites in the stadium.

 

FoH will give fans a chance to vote for their man of the match on Twitter by tweeting #FOHMOM and adding the surname of the player they have chosen.

 

The Foundation view the sponsorship deal as the chance to promote their drive to take control of the club and to encourage other businesses to add their support.

 

And Murray, who is the MP for Edinburgh South, said: ?We?re delighted to be supporting the club, and at the same time using the excellent rights afforded through this sponsorship package to promote the Foundation.

 

?I?d like to thank the Foundation?s directors and advisors who have kindly agreed to shoulder the cost for this.?

 

Rory Donaldson, commercial manager at Hearts, added: ?The Foundation of Hearts as preferred bidders are clearly leading the way by demonstrating to the business community just how much can be done with a matchday sponsorship package. We?re looking forward to welcoming them on Saturday and we hope that other businesses will see the real value this package can offer.?

 

The Foundation of Hearts were last week given preferred bidder status by BDO and Murray yesterday revealed that he is 80 per cent certain that his group can deliver a Creditors? Voluntary Agreement (CVA) to enable Hearts to exit administration.

 

Supporters who want to back the Foundation?s bid can set up their direct debit at www.foundationofhearts.org

 

Fantastic on so many levels. Great for getting the word out, great for doing it in a way that puts money into the club, and as Donaldson says, great for demonstrating that sponsorship packages are good marketing.

 

On the issue of shares, I too was wondering about the share sale last year. I assume those will still be valid?

[Don Dan]

I ask this before and was told the shares were never registered and I don't think they ever will be.

 

 

Fantastic on so many levels. Great for getting the word out, great for doing it in a way that puts money into the club, and as Donaldson says, great for demonstrating that sponsorship packages are good marketing.

 

On the issue of shares, I too was wondering about the share sale last year. I assume those will still be valid?

[Watt-Zeefuik]

I ask this before and was told the shares were never registered and I don't think they ever will be.

 

Ugh. I had heard that share certificates hadn't been sent, but I didn't realize that the shares weren't even registered.

 

Absolute fraud by the previous regime. But Vlad saved us from the Pieman so I guess defrauding Hearts fans out of over ?1m is just fine then...

[Guest Bilel Mohsni]

 

 

Ugh. I had heard that share certificates hadn't been sent, but I didn't realize that the shares weren't even registered.

 

Absolute fraud by the previous regime. But Vlad saved us from the Pieman so I guess defrauding Hearts fans out of over ?1m is just fine then...

 

Let the old mask slip there!

 

 

[Guest Bilel Mohsni]

"Defrauding"

 

Spectacular fail.

 

Also... don't you mean; US. Not "Hearts fans"?

[topcat]

Does that make us creditors?

[Watt-Zeefuik]

"Defrauding"

 

Spectacular fail.

 

Also... don't you mean; US. Not "Hearts fans"?

 

I decided not to participate in the share issue because it didn't carry with it a seat on the board or any other measure of control or any promise of transfer of ownership to the fans, which meant it was basically a donation to UBIG. It was a hard decision, as the club was clearly in need of money, so instead I bought a couple of supporters scarfs for my cousins.

 

I've been pretty clear about my feelings towards VR since my first post on JKB, so it's not like I'm opening new ground here.

 

And help me out with how it's a "spectacular fail" -- IIRC, the "share issue" promised shares of HOMFC Ltd. in exchange for funds, and those shares never arrived. How is that not criminal fraud?

[Mr Romanov Saviour of HMFC]

What's your story ua, are you an ex pat?

[iainmac]

 

 

 

I decided not to participate in the share issue because it didn't carry with it a seat on the board or any other measure of control or any promise of transfer of ownership to the fans, which meant it was basically a donation to UBIG. It was a hard decision, as the club was clearly in need of money, so instead I bought a couple of supporters scarfs for my cousins.

 

I've been pretty clear about my feelings towards VR since my first post on JKB, so it's not like I'm opening new ground here.

 

And help me out with how it's a "spectacular fail" -- IIRC, the "share issue" promised shares of HOMFC Ltd. in exchange for funds, and those shares never arrived. How is that not criminal fraud?

I think the Directors at the time covered themselves with a statement within the first few paragraphs of the proposal document by stating "this is NOT a share prospectus: this is a financial promotion" or words to that effect. Fiscal law is not my speciality area though so I'm sure someone can comment on whether this does indeed save them from going to jail?

[Guest Bilel Mohsni]

HOMFC

 

Defrauding

 

Hearts fans

 

Sorry, Chief. I've read your blurb and believe there is probably a market for your story... but I'm just not buying it myself.

[Watt-Zeefuik]

What's your story ua, are you an ex pat?

 

I've posted it here elsewhere, but no, native North Carolinian, but both my wife and I independently and together have visited Scotland multiple times (and may move there in a few years depending on how things work out). About 10 years ago I started getting interested in association football but the MLS was (and still is) crap, and the money shenanigans at the EPL level made it unattractive, so I started following SPL. (Plus, we got tired of the whole tartans and clans schtick pretty quickly and football seemed like a place you could get to know actual Scottish people, not just the tourist crap.) It didn't take me long to realize I wanted nothing to do with either OF team, and we both really liked Edinburgh, so I started following Hearts and got more into it over the years, mostly via satellite TV in the local soccer bars and by reading the Scotsman online.

 

I have a friend who's the sports editor for the local alt-weekly (http://www.indyweek.com/indyweek/david-fellerath-indy-culture-and-sports-editor/Profile?oid=1224347) who got me into the merits of fan ownership separately, and when the shit started to hit the fan last year financially, it was apparent that there was a lot of news I was missing in the Scotsman (as I'm sure you can guess). So I started lurking on JKB to try to hear more about FoH and other sundry things, and eventually started commenting because I'm too much of a big mouth to shut up.

 

I was just starting to follow the team when the stuff with Robinson went down, so I don't have the sense of gratitude towards VR that a lot of you do. In general, though, I really hate owners that treat clubs like their personal toys, and I'm doubly leery of the financial snake oil salesmen that wrecked the economy in 2008. Vlad always seemed like both to me, but it's not like I have detailed knowledge into how UBIG was set up beyond what I can dig up on the internet. It's things like soliciting money for shares from the fans and then never registering them that just pisses me off, even if I didn't send any money myself. But again, it's not like I know the details of what happened, so I could be falsely accusing the whole regime. Wouldn't be the first time I was totally wrong...

[Watt-Zeefuik]

HOMFC

 

Defrauding

 

Hearts fans

 

Sorry, Chief. I've read your blurb and believe there is probably a market for your story... but I'm just not buying it myself.

 

I had thought that HOMFC was the official name of the corp. Out of curiosity, what exactly do you think I am? A hibee or something? If anyone actually cares that much about me or checking up on me, here's the blog I used to write, in case you want even more of my long-winded drivel to read (and has absolutely nothing to do with Hearts)... (http://bullinfull.typepad.com/) Not that I care much, but this whole, "you're not really American" thing that keeps coming up has me totally confused...

[Mr Romanov Saviour of HMFC]

 

 

I've posted it here elsewhere, but no, native North Carolinian, but both my wife and I independently and together have visited Scotland multiple times (and may move there in a few years depending on how things work out). About 10 years ago I started getting interested in association football but the MLS was (and still is) crap, and the money shenanigans at the EPL level made it unattractive, so I started following SPL. (Plus, we got tired of the whole tartans and clans schtick pretty quickly and football seemed like a place you could get to know actual Scottish people, not just the tourist crap.) It didn't take me long to realize I wanted nothing to do with either OF team, and we both really liked Edinburgh, so I started following Hearts and got more into it over the years, mostly via satellite TV in the local soccer bars and by reading the Scotsman online.

 

I have a friend who's the sports editor for the local alt-weekly (http://www.indyweek.com/indyweek/david-fellerath-indy-culture-and-sports-editor/Profile?oid=1224347) who got me into the merits of fan ownership separately, and when the shit started to hit the fan last year financially, it was apparent that there was a lot of news I was missing in the Scotsman (as I'm sure you can guess). So I started lurking on JKB to try to hear more about FoH and other sundry things, and eventually started commenting because I'm too much of a big mouth to shut up.

 

I was just starting to follow the team when the stuff with Robinson went down, so I don't have the sense of gratitude towards VR that a lot of you do. In general, though, I really hate owners that treat clubs like their personal toys, and I'm doubly leery of the financial snake oil salesmen that wrecked the economy in 2008. Vlad always seemed like both to me, but it's not like I have detailed knowledge into how UBIG was set up beyond what I can dig up on the internet. It's things like soliciting money for shares from the fans and then never registering them that just pisses me off, even if I didn't send any money myself. But again, it's not like I know the details of what happened, so I could be falsely accusing the whole regime. Wouldn't be the first time I was totally wrong...

 

Fair enough man. You should try and get to understand the pieman era though, might change your perspective a bit, although loads that experienced it hold your views.

[Davie749]

Just to back UA up, Romonov is a total ***** in my eyes. A ******* charlatan of the highest order.

[Jezza]

Just to back UA up, Romonov is a total ***** in my eyes. A ******* charlatan of the highest order.

 

a late night noise up of the rimmers gets my thumbs up

[Davie749]

 

 

 

a late night noise up of the rimmers gets my thumbs up

 

I'm off to bed, early start the morn, you can hold fort now

 

 

[Jezza]

 

 

 

I'm off to bed, early start the morn, you can hold fort now

 

Nah your alright mate. I'm away to watch the spannish super cup and avoid all the amazing picture replies.

[Mr Romanov Saviour of HMFC]

 

 

a late night noise up of the rimmers gets my thumbs up

 

Hibs fan.

[jambali]

One thing that was said in the interview the other day was that FOH would 100% own the club.

If that's the case there won't be any need for shares.

I have no idea how the transfer to FANCO will work though, but it was said it would have binding contracts.

 

If FoH own 100% of the club then they will have to buy out all existing shareholders or start a "newco" - cue major seethe on here normally!!!

[jambali]

I thought we bought about 5% of the shares last November/December.

 

Correct

[Bootboy100]

Novel idea here for those with questions that they want answers too.

 

Why don't you contact FOH or Ian Murray with your question so they can give you an answer rather than debating it.

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

Novel idea here for those with questions that they want answers too.

 

Why don't you contact FOH or Ian Murray with your question so they can give you an answer rather than debating it.

Some of the questions you refer to are speculation so fora are the appropriate place to discuss them.

[Bootboy100]

 

Some of the questions you refer to are speculation so fora are the appropriate place to discuss them.

Questions are questions so to dispel the speculation (which on jkb can easily lead to mass hysteria) then ask the correct people

[Guest Bilel Mohsni]

Is fora the plural for forum?

[pumped4-1]

 

 

I had thought that HOMFC was the official name of the corp. Out of curiosity, what exactly do you think I am? A hibee or something? If anyone actually cares that much about me or checking up on me, here's the blog I used to write, in case you want even more of my long-winded drivel to read (and has absolutely nothing to do with Hearts)... (http://bullinfull.typepad.com/) Not that I care much, but this whole, "you're not really American" thing that keeps coming up has me totally confused...

 

I would just ignore the guy. Him and his wee super fan troll / wind up squad go around flaming people on here all the time.

Mentions hibs more than a hibs fan mentions hearts, its pathetic really.

 

[Special Agent Dale Cooper]

Is fora the plural for forum?

 

Can of worms:

 

http://www.mediacollege.com/internet/forum/forums-vs-fora.html

[Cut The Crap]

Is fora the plural for forum?

 

Only in 1955 - or Australia, which are much the same thing.

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

 

 

Only in 1955 - or Australia, which are much the same thing.

Closer to the truth than you realise - just take a look at the idiots vying to be Australian PM

 

PS I studied Latin at school.