Mr Sifter Posted July 8, 2019 Share Posted July 8, 2019 1 hour ago, Tommy Brown said: Corners? Filled. Duh ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inch Hearts Posted July 8, 2019 Share Posted July 8, 2019 54 minutes ago, Cade said: The fans ARE the club. Hearts are just making that official. Fan ownership is the way forward for football. You can’t really say that with much certainty to be honest it’s much of an unknown model which the club got forced into and now embraces as there was no alternative. Let’s not begin saying fan ownership is amazing and all this was done through choice. I’m delighted that the club will be in safe hands for many years to come but nobody knows what the future holds and what is the way forward for football. Celtic are the biggest and most successfully ran club in the country for example and they will never be fan owned while at the other extreme you have Rangers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
letsalldothebeattie Posted July 8, 2019 Share Posted July 8, 2019 No simple as that Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ribble Posted July 8, 2019 Share Posted July 8, 2019 38 minutes ago, Francis Albert said: Thanks. Although I think Articles of Association can be changed with the approval of (75%?) of the Shareholders. Obviously FoH will therefore be able to block any change but on the other hand could presumably with the super majority of its members approval make a change as it will own 75.1% of the shares. But as I say hopefully pretty academic ... but on the other hand maybe it is not completely impossible for ownership to change in circumstances other than financial disaster. Full quote from FOH Governance document below which is what I was going on, looks to be set in stone that 90% of votes would always be required before a sale 'Any sale by the Foundation of shares in the Club acquired from Bidco would require to be sanctioned by a vote of the Foundation members, and the majority required will be not less than 90% of the votes cast. So far as permitted by law, this restriction will be entrenched in the Foundation’s articles so that it cannot be amended or removed. The articles will also provide that the proceeds of any disposal cannot be distributed to the members of the Foundation.' Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Footballfirst Posted July 8, 2019 Share Posted July 8, 2019 (edited) 1 hour ago, Ribble said: The 90% rule regarding the sale of shares acquired from Bidco is entrenched in the articles of association and cannot be changed. The proceeds of any sale won't go anywhere, the intention being that we never return to a non-fan ownership model and the non distribution of profits used to prevent the 8000 FOH members selling the club for a personal profit (not that I could ever see the FOH members taking that approach) , I'd guess that if it was the case that somehow the club was in financial trouble to an extent that FOH had no option but to sell the club to an investor then the sale price would be set at Debt + administration costs of the transfer of ownership, meaning that the FOH would have a retained profit from the sale of exactly £0 The Articles of Association are not set in stone. The proposed FOH governance model makes multiple changes to the Articles of Association. It will get the required 75% vote to adopt those changes at the next AGM, a couple of months before the share transfer. You are correct that the members currently cannot benefit from a sale or winding up. Any profit or dividend can only go to a like minded community or charitable group. The Articles could still be changed as above. FOH also added the protection of allowing lapsed members to vote in key matters in their latest draft of the proposals, thus reducing the risk of such an event should membership numbers fall dramatically in the future. Edited July 8, 2019 by Footballfirst Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommy Brown Posted July 8, 2019 Share Posted July 8, 2019 35 minutes ago, Mr Sifter said: Filled. Duh ? I meant Do you intend taking them... Obviously, you'll be playing Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rudi must stay Posted July 8, 2019 Share Posted July 8, 2019 If the price is right then sure. You'd have to, and I'm sure the FOH continue to run us solidly and the price goes up then there will be interest Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Sifter Posted July 8, 2019 Share Posted July 8, 2019 30 minutes ago, Tommy Brown said: I meant Do you intend taking them... Obviously, you'll be playing ??? It’s that kind of thinkin that’s gonnae get you a gig as “Head of Ideas” once I take over Tommy ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ribble Posted July 8, 2019 Share Posted July 8, 2019 38 minutes ago, Footballfirst said: The Articles of Association are not set in stone. The proposed FOH governance model makes multiple changes to the Articles of Association. It will get the required 75% vote to adopt those changes at the next AGM, a couple of months before the share transfer. You are correct that the members currently cannot benefit from a sale or winding up. Any profit or dividend can only go to a like minded community or charitable group. The Articles could still be changed as above. FOH also added the protection of allowing lapsed members to vote in key matters in their latest draft of the proposals, thus reducing the risk of such an event should membership numbers fall dramatically in the future. That one clause is however Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Francis Albert Posted July 8, 2019 Share Posted July 8, 2019 12 minutes ago, Ribble said: That one clause is however " so far as permitted by law". I am not sure the articles can over-ride Company Law. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tasavallan Posted July 8, 2019 Share Posted July 8, 2019 When Romanov arrived I spread my shares far and wide so that Vlad could never get his hands on them. He got to 82% and then stopped trying to get 100%. My feeling is the same for FOH, I may be a 1954 Club member but they will never own 100% of Hearts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Footballfirst Posted July 8, 2019 Share Posted July 8, 2019 47 minutes ago, Tasavallan said: When Romanov arrived I spread my shares far and wide so that Vlad could never get his hands on them. He got to 82% and then stopped trying to get 100%. My feeling is the same for FOH, I may be a 1954 Club member but they will never own 100% of Hearts. He peaked at 98.4% following the 2nd DFE swap. He could have forced everyone to sell their shares once he got to 90%. Likewise I can't see FOH ever looking to get 100%. The likeliest block of shares to change hands will probably be Ann's residual 17%, although I'd hope that she, or her family, would be selective about any prospective buyer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint Jambo Posted July 8, 2019 Share Posted July 8, 2019 6 hours ago, Francis Albert said: " so far as permitted by law". I am not sure the articles can over-ride Company Law. Yes, I agree with this. No clause is set in stone. FOH chose not to adopt the Community Interest Company model which I think might have genuinely allowed for the "no profit" to be guaranteed. As FF points out the decision to introduce the new membership category for lapsed pledgers (who contributed a certain amount in the first years of FOH) is crucial to making this work in practice. The risk would be if membership dropped to a level where a small number could change the articles then approve a sale and walk away with the proceeds. The key is that the decisions the initial members have a say in includes approving changes to FOH's articles. (Might still be an issue once all us early pledgers are dead, but would like to think that is a long way off.) As someone mentioned if the club was I'm financial difficulty we'd probably be looking for a new owner to just take the club off our hands. I think in the case of a multimillionaire it would be similar. The option would basically be to give away the club. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mscjambo Posted July 9, 2019 Share Posted July 9, 2019 (edited) Once the club is handed over to the FOH I believe financially we are in a solid sustainable financial situation. Don't see the need to ever sell to an individual or anyone else.... The control that the FOH will have will stop any potential buyer coming in as they'd have to go through them, I think it ensures we survive and move forward Edited July 9, 2019 by mscjambo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seymour M Hersh Posted July 9, 2019 Share Posted July 9, 2019 FSG would do me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomaso Posted July 9, 2019 Share Posted July 9, 2019 On 08/07/2019 at 11:26, Smithee said: ...... enough to absorb mistakes, gambles etc. Levein would rub his hands..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unknown user Posted July 9, 2019 Share Posted July 9, 2019 3 minutes ago, Cruickshank for Scotland said: Levein would rub his hands..... That would be my only condition, a lifetime manager contract for levein Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomaso Posted July 9, 2019 Share Posted July 9, 2019 16 minutes ago, Smithee said: That would be my only condition, a lifetime manager contract for levein 👍😂 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OTT Posted July 9, 2019 Share Posted July 9, 2019 On 08/07/2019 at 11:14, Armageddon said: So, with all the chatter on Hubs and their new : Would you want somebody to buy us? After all the amazing work done so far we are a very attractive brand IMO, but after what happened before would we ever want a return to that potential? What kind of money would it take for somebody to come in and buy us? Would you still pledge your FOH if it was directed to a specific part of the club and used effectively? Or maybe filtered into an account and left to build for many years with an annual contribution being made to the club for a specific purpose. 1.) No. We have stability. Our income is rising, and we're not subject to the whims of a temperamental owner. 2.) I would be open to adopting the 50+1 rule they have in Germany, which I understand to be that no investor can own the majority of the club. That would IMO insulate the club from the potential owner getting bored of his new toy eventually. 3.) I'd like to think so, I want to see the club grow in such a way that alternative income streams begin to dwarf ticket sales. In Scotland we're too reliant on ticket sales compared to other leagues. A better tv deal would obviously help solve this issue, but we should be pursuing a growth strategy which emphasises alternate streams of revenue. I really think the Edinburgh clubs are sleep giants in a sense. Celtic obviously have the sustained marketing of themselves as an Irish club and therefore have pretty much captured that market. I think though, domestically, with sustained growth and success we could legitimately rival the huns (with the size of edinburgh already and with it being set to grow + Lothians theres no reason why in the right circumstances we couldn't get 30, 40 thousand -obviously stadium size would factor in here) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Psychedelicropcircle Posted July 9, 2019 Share Posted July 9, 2019 I &7999 others own this club & I speak on behalf of them when I say not for sale. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Beni of Gorgie Posted July 10, 2019 Share Posted July 10, 2019 On 08/07/2019 at 11:36, Cruyff Turn said: I’d prefer the fans had a controlling majority stake in the club, say 51% but would happily allow some rich bugger to buy the other 49%, if their intentions were to invest and improve the club. I think it would be silly to ever deny that opportunity. Correct answer and probably necessary somewhere down the line if we want to progress competitively Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Beni of Gorgie Posted July 10, 2019 Share Posted July 10, 2019 10 hours ago, Psychedelicropcircle said: I &7999 others own this club & I speak on behalf of them when I say not for sale. You don't for me Happy to go 50 50 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1971fozzy Posted July 10, 2019 Share Posted July 10, 2019 Never again sell. We are on an amazing track to gain ownership and I would never want to be owned by an egomaniac or become reliant on someone’s wealth / personal circumstances. Robinson and Romanov have been done to death on other threads though. we live within our means and with the new stand finally about to be finished the income that will generate along with (hopefully) continued FOH income will see us in a fantastic place. leave clubs like the uglies and hibs at the mercy of private owners Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gorgie rd eh11 Posted July 10, 2019 Share Posted July 10, 2019 Nobody knows what the future holds. But it’s very reassuring that it will be Jambos who make the decision as to what direction we take. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.