Jump to content

FoH poll - Short term direction


Poseidon

Short term direction of FoH  

268 members have voted

  1. 1. What should be the short term direction of FoH when we become majority shareholders upon repayment of the loan?

    • Immediately look to call and EGM and ask for a change in CEO
    • Leave CEO in charge but ask/campaign for more FoH representation on the Hearts board
    • Leave things as they are with current processes and representation in place
    • Other (add comments below)


Recommended Posts

Following some comments on another thread, I was interested to put this out there to gauge opinion

Edited by Poseidon
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The AGM is later this month - raise any questions there.

 

I seem to recall the governance arrangements were voted through overwhelmingly at the time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hopefully she stays on until we have time to find her replacement. Not looking forward to the Gorgie Suite committee types all jostling for position at the trough. :yucky:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, jambobob61 said:

Read the structure of the governance going forwards.........the FoH has a minority on the board and no right to interfere in the running of the club, then work out what influence there might be for yourself!

 

 

Myself? I'm seeking no influence. 

 

Interested to see what the current thinking is. 

 

If there was a large majority of FoH members that wanted to change things for example, I would hypothesise that pressure could be put on the current FoH board to review the governance so that more influence on the Hearts board could be sought. To suggest that 75% owners of a football club have no right to 'interfere' is an interesting opinion though, thanks.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Poseidon said:

Myself? I'm seeking no influence. 

 

Interested to see what the current thinking is. 

 

If there was a large majority of FoH members that wanted to change things for example, I would hypothesise that pressure could be put on the current FoH board to review the governance so that more influence on the Hearts board could be sought. To suggest that 75% owners of a football club have no right to 'interfere' is an interesting opinion though, thanks.

 

 

They have the same rugh to interfere ss any 75% owner of a limited company. It’s what choose they choose to do that is important. The current governance ‘choice’ was overwhelmingly confirmed by FoH members last December. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, davemclaren said:

They have the same rugh to interfere ss any 75% owner of a limited company. It’s what choose they choose to do that is important. The current governance ‘choice’ was overwhelmingly confirmed by FoH members last December. 

Agreed. Not denying any of that. There may be a shift in peoples opinions however. 

 

Out of interest, does anyone have the number of votes cast for and against the governance proposal last December?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Poseidon said:

Agreed. Not denying any of that. There may be a shift in peoples opinions however. 

 

Out of interest, does anyone have the number of votes cast for and against the governance proposal last December?

I looked on the FoH website but couldn’t find anything. I think it might have been only 5% or so voted against ( of those who voted ) but @Footballfirst will know I imagine. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, jambobob61 said:

https://www.foundationofhearts.org/governance/

 

Try reading it, it opened my eyes, if it ever came to it (and we obviously hope not) and Hearts are sold the FoH are due nothing from any sale. Look at Blackburn, left in trust by Jack Walker but only years later that was set aside! The future is not 'set'.

From the info available it appears the 25% minority are the only shareholders with rights?

All shareholders at Hearts have the same rights legally. It’s what people choose to do with those rights that is the important bit. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, jambobob61 said:

https://www.foundationofhearts.org/governance/

 

Try reading it, it opened my eyes, if it ever came to it (and we obviously hope not) and Hearts are sold the FoH are due nothing from any sale. Look at Blackburn, left in trust by Jack Walker but only years later that was set aside! The future is not 'set'.

From the info available it appears the 25% minority are the only shareholders with rights?

I know, I disagreed with large parts of the governance and still do

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, jambobob61 said:

Bar-room expertise counts for nothing, read the documents!

I did, when I voted on them. FoH as 75% shareholder has constrained how it will influence the club via a vote of its membership. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, jambobob61 said:

Was that not my original point?

People assume the FoH can sort this mess out at will, or could have prevented it, but it cannot and did not!

The future direction is not within the remit or control of FoH, who is in control is for me the actual question????

I thought that your original point was that FoH had no right to interfere in the running of Hearts? My original point is that the FoH has the same right as any 75% shareholder in a company but has chosen to constrain itself as per its member agreed constitution. 
 

Did you vote on the governance arrangements last year, assuming you are a member?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, i8hibsh said:

FoH are fantastic but I feel they are too far up Budge's backside. There, I said it.

For about the 50th time. 🤪

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hampden Demolition

As I said on another thread, I would be happy for Budge to be appointed club president but we need a football minded CEO who can make decisions for footballing reasons. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Dunks said:

The AGM is later this month - raise any questions there.

 

I seem to recall the governance arrangements were voted through overwhelmingly at the time.

Yes they were. However I agreed just to keep the show on the road. Being informed that the club would be fan owned and not fan run of which we have been informed never asked to vote on. Common sense would tell us this but we should decide not be told. Also the show is no longer on the road but in the ditch. Been a member of FOH for 5 years now and have felt a bit manipulated and all too cosy at times. Very carefull thought required as to the role of Foh for the future. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, davemclaren said:

For about the 50th time. 🤪

 

 

How dare you say I repeat myself

How dare you say I repeat myself

How dare you say I repeat myself

How dare you say I repeat myself

How dare you say I repeat myself

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, o1djambo said:

Yes they were. However I agreed just to keep the show on the road. Being informed that the club would be fan owned and not fan run of which we have been informed never asked to vote on. Common sense would tell us this but we should decide not be told. Also the show is no longer on the road but in the ditch. Been a member of FOH for 5 years now and have felt a bit manipulated and all too cosy at times. Very carefull thought required as to the role of Foh for the future. 

FoH was always going to be a challenge when we hit big problems. Didn’t expect it quite so soon though. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, o1djambo said:

And Me.

I didn’t agree with all of it but felt it was ultimately, after revision, a reasonable compromise. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Obviously not been running for a long but looks to be a decent proportion that would like some of change, although as we know, FoH has voted itself to have no real influence at the moment which is a shame.

 

Timing not great either given that no candidate has chosen to stand for the FoH board with a view to challenging the norm/governance but there's always the chance to contact the existing fan members on the FoH board to voice opinions.

 

If all that fails and we are (god forbid) in the same situation on the park (probably the biggest contributing factor) next time round then that'll be a good manifesto for someone to stand on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Poseidon said:

Obviously not been running for a long but looks to be a decent proportion that would like some of change, although as we know, FoH has voted itself to have no real influence at the moment which is a shame.

 

Timing not great either given that no candidate has chosen to stand for the FoH board with a view to challenging the norm/governance but there's always the chance to contact the existing fan members on the FoH board to voice opinions.

 

If all that fails and we are (god forbid) in the same situation on the park (probably the biggest contributing factor) next time round then that'll be a good manifesto for someone to stand on.

I was very surprised that there were no new candidates this time 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

scott herbertson

I voted other

 

We are better led as a business than any time in my lifetime. I do believe in fan ownership though. My preference would be a transition where things remain the same in the first year and AB is paid as CEO. She then moves up to an honorary function (?President?)  and a new CEO appointed by FOH takes the lead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, jambobob61 said:

Yes I am a member so by your inference a genuine supporter, hence my interest in the governance and the lack of opportunity for the FoH board and ordinary FoH members to present a view that Anne B would possibly listen to. I lost faith when Anne B declared in the papers that she would not be influenced over Levein.

By your own admission the 75% chose to be constrained and are therefore an underclass of shareholder and absolutely not in a position to influence the football board and running of Hearts!

There was no inference meant. I was more interested in whether you had just read the governance document now as opposed to a year ago. 
 

The 75% shares will be owned by FoH as an organisation which is, rightly, constrained by its members as per its constitution/governance. The members of FoH are not shareholders of Hearts. Not sure what you mean by underclass of shareholder. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, scott herbertson said:

I voted other

 

We are better led as a business than any time in my lifetime. I do believe in fan ownership though. My preference would be a transition where things remain the same in the first year and AB is paid as CEO. She then moves up to an honorary function (?President?)  and a new CEO appointed by FOH takes the lead.

I think something like that is pretty likely given where we are now. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, jambobob61 said:

Gibberish!

The FoH members own the FoH. The FoH will  'own' the 75% of Hearts you say.

The 25% have full rights protected and possibly more?

The 75% have agreed an arms length relationship within a minority on the board(s) and no effective influence.

If it all goes wrong the 75% have no rights to any amount raised on sale of assets.

If that isn't 2 distinct levels of shareholder be it in person or in trust then I am at a loss as to what you are talking about and how you expect FoH to challenge the Hearts board?

The individual members of FoH aren’t shareholders so there’s no ‘level’ to be considered for them. 
 

FoH, as 75% shareholder, has the same shareholder rights as the 25% and can use it’s majority as it wishes. It’s members has agreed a governance structure that limits how it will act with respect to the club and also how any proceeds will be used should the members agree  ( a super majority required iirc ) to sell the FoH share to another party. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, jambobob61 said:

FoH does not appoint the CEO. It is included in the decision but has no majority!

Correct. The company ( Hearts ) board appoints the CEO which is what happens in all/most companies. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, jambobob61 said:

https://www.foundationofhearts.org/governance/

 

Try reading it, it opened my eyes, if it ever came to it (and we obviously hope not) and Hearts are sold the FoH are due nothing from any sale. Look at Blackburn, left in trust by Jack Walker but only years later that was set aside! The future is not 'set'.

From the info available it appears the 25% minority are the only shareholders with rights?

That’s (sale) ok if it’s done properly.

 

The most important thing would be to sell to the correct new owner. And the second most important thing would be to sell at the best price. All money raised would go into the club (not pockets of FoH members).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, highlandjambo3 said:

Let’s leave the thinking to the thinkers

 

Woah woah stop. Rewind.

 

We have thinkers?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

highlandjambo3
Just now, i8hibsh said:

 

Woah woah stop. Rewind.

 

We have thinkers?

Course we do.......

I think it’s very important to think...

what do you think?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, jambobob61 said:

This thread is about short term influence of FoH on Hearts.

Short term, none! It's Annes baw, she wants it she gets it!

Longer term little. FoH own 75% of next to nowt with 40% of any minor vote and an impossible dream to achieving a win on a major vote! The 25% hold sway, have the majority in decision making.

Who owns it, who controls it, who might benefit from it are all red herrings if it comes to another crash!

This mess has been created under Anne. She seems to have learned little on the football side in 5 years and for the past 3 made no preparation for life without Levein. The current manager recruitment debacle defies words. She is crushing hope and trust!

 

Ann currently has the majority holding but when she sells to FoH ( A few months away dependant on contributions ) they will have the majority holding. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shame this poll couldn't be limited to those that actually make contributions to the FoH, might change the voting percentages a fair bit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, jambobob61 said:

And minority vote, you can't be that thick!

How can a 75% shareholding be a minority holding or vote at an agm/egm?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, jambobob61 said:

This thread is about short term influence of FoH on Hearts.

Short term, none! It's Annes baw, she wants it she gets it!

Longer term little. FoH own 75% of next to nowt with 40% of any minor vote and an impossible dream to achieving a win on a major vote! The 25% hold sway, have the majority in decision making.

Who owns it, who controls it, who might benefit from it are all red herrings if it comes to another crash!

This mess has been created under Anne. She seems to have learned little on the football side in 5 years and for the past 3 made no preparation for life without Levein. The current manager recruitment debacle defies words. She is crushing hope and trust!

 

 

Are you suggesting that the 25% minority shareholders will make-up/ appoint the other 60% of the Board?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Saint Jambo said:

 

Are you suggesting that the 25% minority shareholders will make-up/ appoint the other 60% of the Board?

Who knows?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We can only really answer this poll on the assumption that nothing will change between now and the repayment of the loan.

 

If we are in the top flight, with a decent/competent manager in place, winning most of the matches that we are expected to win and put up a decent fight in the ones we aren't then the vast majority won't give two hoots what the FOH does, who the CEO is, or how much influence each one of us has individually.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Currently 6 active members on the Hearts board following CL no longer being on it.

 

2 of them (33%) are Directors of FoH, S Wallace and D Cumming.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, jambobob61 said:

 

19 minutes ago, jambobob61 said:

You say you have read the documents, did you read the part of 2 FoH reps and 3 others on the board?

Yes. Did you read how they would appointed?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, jambobob61 said:

Yep, it is in the governance agreement!

 

I don't think that is right. I looked in detail at the FOH governance document when it was out for consultation and made a lengthy submission highlighting some of my concernsand suggesting some improvements. Fairly sure there is a sub-committee to recruit some of the Board members. That sub-committe includes at least one of the FOH Board members. The remaining board members are not appointed by the minrotiy shareholders. It is fairly common for Boards to include members that aren't simply the representatives of various shareholdings. It is also normal in these situations for the representatives of a 75% shareholding to wield a influence beyond their one vote in board meetings. In part this is because if the Board did something they really didn't agree with, they always have the option of calling an EGM and using their 75% share at that meeting to force the company's hand.

 

I don't think there is anything that Davemaclaren has posted that I'd disagree with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jambof3tornado
4 hours ago, Dirty Deeds said:

I suspect that Budge will move on soon after the deal concludes.  She would have to be masochistic to stay.

She'll stay on if we are doing ok under the new manager.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Correction to above. FOH wouldn't even have to call an EGM for most things. They could simply use the written resolution procedures in the comapnies act to force the board's hand if it was acting in a way FOH disagreed with.

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.



×
×
  • Create New...