Foster Gillette bid to buy club

[Lone Striker]

17 hours ago, Cruyff said:

So what do we need? Because clearly the status quo isn't doing the job where it counts. We've been an epic failure for the last 4 years. 

What we need is competent and experience people in key positions in the "football dept".   Get a decent team on the pitch, and our income will rise, and the fans will be happy.  Nothing else needed 

[Lone Striker]

3 hours ago, will-i-am-a-jambo said:

 

Don't get me wrong l'd love it if we were fan-owned and it lead to glory but in my opinion we need serious investment to get anywhere near challenging at the top end. Look at the millions Romanov put in and we still didn't manage a title. I'm just trying to be realistic.

 

ps l don't think this Gillet guy is the answer.

Dearie me ....   have you forgotten already what the Romanov era was all about ?   He didn't "put in" millions, other than a couple of write offs of debt to keep us solvent - everything else was loans from  Ukio and his other dodgy companies.Hearts were a captive customer for his bank.   His interfering ego was the main reason we failed to win the league, and got gradually worse.  Grateful for the 2 cup wins, but you only need to win 5 games to do that.

[Heartsofgold]

14 hours ago, JJ93 said:

If he’d pump money into us, sell. 

 

 

Like Romanov did?  see how well that ended up.

[Lone Striker]

1 hour ago, Special Officer Doofy said:

So he wants to put money in as an investment? So how will he realise a profit then?

"Invest" is an alarming word in the context of football clubs.   The user tends to be a shyster with no interest in the club's wellbeing , and just wants to generate income for himself through various clever finance/tax schemes.

 

Back in 2004 we were desperate and beggars can't be choosers.  Different this time though, It's a no from me.

 

 

[JJ93]

22 minutes ago, Heartsofgold said:

 

 

Like Romanov did?  see how well that ended up.

Inductive reasoning is not wise. 

[Heartsofgold]

5 minutes ago, JJ93 said:

Inductive reasoning is not wise. 

 

Once bitten. twice shy.

[Des' Dad]

35 minutes ago, Lone Striker said:

Dearie me ....   have you forgotten already what the Romanov era was all about ?   He didn't "put in" millions, other than a couple of write offs of debt to keep us solvent - everything else was loans from  Ukio and his other dodgy companies.Hearts were a captive customer for his bank.   His interfering ego was the main reason we failed to win the league, and got gradually worse.  Grateful for the 2 cup wins, but you only need to win 5 games to do that.

 

Don't go anywhere near this guy. These people don't invest just to give the club a boost, he will want a controlling interest. Tell him to jog on.

[will-i-am-a-jambo]

2 hours ago, Special Officer Doofy said:

Definitely fine with investors, and agree that they are a nice addition to our fan ownership model. I prefer benefactors though.

 

Tell you what though, Budge has made mistakes, but she has grown the business massively (more than doubled our turnover), and the benefactors have pumped in outrageous amounts of cash. Even the sponsorship deal with the benefactors/StC is a huge increase on previous sponsorship deals. We’d be hard pushed to find investors who would put in more than the benefactors, and not want anything in return.

 

Thats good point well made. I agree with that. We really are lucky to have these people on board. 

[will-i-am-a-jambo]

59 minutes ago, Lone Striker said:

Dearie me ....   have you forgotten already what the Romanov era was all about ?   He didn't "put in" millions, other than a couple of write offs of debt to keep us solvent - everything else was loans from  Ukio and his other dodgy companies.Hearts were a captive customer for his bank.   His interfering ego was the main reason we failed to win the league, and got gradually worse.  Grateful for the 2 cup wins, but you only need to win 5 games to do that.

 

He is a bad example l accept. There may or may not be investors that are as egotistical as him. What l really mean is and ideally to be fan-owned but with some investors to push us on. Do you think we can challenge as we are with just the FOH? I Don't think FOH alone will take us to the next level but l live in hope.

[Whatever]

What’s wrong with talking to him and listening to what he has to say?

 

Once our position is made clear I doubt he’d consider us to be what he’s looking for but until discussions are held, you don’t know.

 

Talking’s good.

 

Who’s to say he couldn’t or wouldn’t work alongside us?

[Guest ToqueJambo]

Everybody should ask themselves “why now?”

Amazing coincidence he suddenly develops an interest in Hearts and scottish football at this time.

Edited May 29, 2020 by ToqueJambo

[Kiwidoug]

On 29/05/2020 at 01:33, 1971fozzy said:

Exactly why the FOH is brilliant and every pledger a hero. 
 

leave the likes of these bids to the likes of the vermin.

What a post.  What a monumentally superb post.  Succinct and accurate to a fault.

 

Top of the class.  If we had Ron or this chancer, I'd be injecting myself with bleach.

[Lone Striker]

6 hours ago, will-i-am-a-jambo said:

 

He is a bad example l accept. There may or may not be investors that are as egotistical as him. What l really mean is and ideally to be fan-owned but with some investors to push us on. Do you think we can challenge as we are with just the FOH? I Don't think FOH alone will take us to the next level but l live in hope.

IMO, folk who have gazillions of money have most likely got it through being ruthless (bullies basically)  in their business life - is that sort of person likely to sit in the background at Hearts and let other people on the board make the decisions ?   Money buys power and influence, no matter what the business is - a bit of an ego-trip and adventure into something new for these types.  

 

You ask about whether Hearts can challenge the OF with just the fans backing through FOH .....  I'd say probably not in terms of finishing above them in the league, but we can certainly do a lot better than we have done these last 2-3  years.  Celtic are on a completely different planet financially - untouchable probably. They shouldn't be our yardstick anyway - 3rd place and regular cup semi-finals (& beyond) would  represent success for us.  To some, that might sound like having very little ambition, but  just look at where we are right now - a complete shambles despite millions of "extra" money being available.

[McCrae]

I don’t see any harm in talking to him. It would be good to hear why he wants to invest in Hearts and what steps he would take to improve things. He could be a very good long term contact for Hearts and it would be a good idea to have him onside.  You just never know where he could end up, he maybe able to help or hinder Hearts. No need to leave him with any bad feeling towards the club...many different ways to say no and the FOH approach is not the smartest one.

[mitch41]

Very true and of course FOH obviously could see a time when an offer would come from somewhere. To protect the FOH members a 75% majority was voted in and the FOH members would have to vote to sell shares in Hearts with a 75% plus majority. Now if any time in the future a bid comes in it should be  thoroughly scrutinised by the Board of FOH then if it looks genuine and could be beneficial to Heart of Midlothian it would be put to every FOH member to read and decide if the bid was to be accepted or declined.

Ann Budge has stated that when the present crisis is over she will sign over the clubs majority shares to FOH. The Hearts fans in the FOH will then have to start taking decisions.

[davemclaren]

1 minute ago, mitch41 said:

Very true and of course FOH obviously could see a time when an offer would come from somewhere. To protect the FOH members a 75% majority was voted in and the FOH members would have to vote to sell shares in Hearts with a 75% plus majority. Now if any time in the future a bid comes in it should be  thoroughly scrutinised by the Board of FOH then if it looks genuine and could be beneficial to Heart of Midlothian it would be put to every FOH member to read and decide if the bid was to be accepted or declined.

Ann Budge has stated that when the present crisis is over she will sign over the clubs majority shares to FOH. The Hearts fans in the FOH will then have to start taking decisions.

The super majority required is still 90%. 

[mitch41]

2 minutes ago, davemclaren said:

The super majority required is still 90%. 

A SUPER majority. That’s a new one on me.

[redjambo]

3 hours ago, mitch41 said:

A SUPER majority. That’s a new one on me.

 

Noun

supermajority (plural supermajorities)

1. Any qualified majority, specified in advance of a vote, required for the vote to be passed

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/supermajority

[gorgie rd eh11]

Do people really believe this boy would "pump money in".

 

[mitch41]

5 hours ago, redjambo said:

 

Noun

supermajority (plural supermajorities)

1. Any qualified majority, specified in advance of a vote, required for the vote to be passed

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/supermajority

I ment supermajority 90% being in the FOH rules. I thought there was a ballot by members and a 75% vote would be enough for a major decision like selling our shares.

[Guest ToqueJambo]

5 hours ago, gorgie rd eh11 said:

Do people really believe this boy would "pump money in".

 

 

He would do what the D Utd guy is doing. State he plans to make money by trading in the transfer market and developing players but in reality gets them into massive debt.

[Famous 1874]

Budge owns 75%, who owns the other 25?

[Unknown user]

Ann can't sell to him because she has a legally binding agreement to sell to us.

 

We can't sell to him because we don't own the club.

 

The FoH could sell after transfer but they won't because people like me would say no. I mean, say he offers 20 million - where does that money go? Do we divvy it up? Do we go "let's put it into the club" so this guy's 20m asset is worth more and it makes more and more sense to sell for profit?

 

We're in this for the long haul. Apart from anything else, there's no easy way out of it!

[Mister Dee]

The last thing we need is another private investor ‘wanting to pump millions in’.

if it sounds too good to be true -it probably is.  
 

let’s see how Hibs new owner does. 

[redjambo]

38 minutes ago, mitch41 said:

I ment supermajority 90% being in the FOH rules. I thought there was a ballot by members and a 75% vote would be enough for a major decision like selling our shares.

 

Ah, sorry Mitch. I'm not sure the change has been formally voted on yet - does any change in the articles of association not need to be approved at a general meeting?

 

[OTT]

If he's genuinely interested in getting involved with the club, why not sponsor something, like the stadium name and go from there. If he likes it then he can get serious later down the road and both sides can begin to sound each other out. Having a wealthy partner involved with the club could be hugely positive in continuing to grow. I think with the right investment we could really kick on. 

 

I think the Foundation retaining control is non-negotiable though. If he wants to invest to grow the club (and his share price) then fine. If he expects to get money back from his investment from the club he's delusional. Scottish football doesn't make money. I've not got any issues with an investor joining the board though. Hell, even as CEO assuming the foundations majority is binding (i.e he can't dilute the shares to himself).

[TWF]

On 28/05/2020 at 19:54, redjambo said:

 

U missed an N.

Point taken. I can see Not as an "extra" component, however I "merged" within Don't.

I will try and remember for future use, as I have no doubt some other issue will require the same response!!!!!!

[TWF]

14 hours ago, Famous 1874 said:

Budge owns 75%, who owns the other 25?

A multitude of small shareholders, many if not all are Supporters and possibly their families.

[stevie1874]

On 29/05/2020 at 22:59, Lone Striker said:

IMO, folk who have gazillions of money have most likely got it through being ruthless (bullies basically)  in their business life - is that sort of person likely to sit in the background at Hearts and let other people on the board make the decisions ?   Money buys power and influence, no matter what the business is - a bit of an ego-trip and adventure into something new for these types.  

 

You ask about whether Hearts can challenge the OF with just the fans backing through FOH .....  I'd say probably not in terms of finishing above them in the league, but we can certainly do a lot better than we have done these last 2-3  years.  Celtic are on a completely different planet financially - untouchable probably. They shouldn't be our yardstick anyway - 3rd place and regular cup semi-finals (& beyond) would  represent success for us.  To some, that might sound like having very little ambition, but  just look at where we are right now - a complete shambles despite millions of "extra" money being available.

Your right when you say Celtic & probably Rangers are on a different planet financially, if you look at the Spanish league about 10 maybe more there was only two teams realistically looking at winning the league, Real & Barcelona this is purely down to finances. A third force truly exists now in Atletico Madrid who regularly are in the mix with the big 2 but still cannot rival them financially. I’m not saying we are Athletico Madrid I’m just saying it can be done and we are in the best position of all the clubs in Scotland to make it happen, we just need the right people in charge of football. 

[Footballfirst]

14 hours ago, Famous 1874 said:

Budge owns 75%, who owns the other 25?

 

AB controls circa 92.5%. the rest are held across more than 8000 small shareholders

[mitch41]

14 hours ago, redjambo said:

 

Ah, sorry Mitch. I'm not sure the change has been formally voted on yet - does any change in the articles of association not need to be approved at a general meeting?

 

I went through the Articles of Association and couldn’t find any percentages, maybe I missed it.

[redjambo]

46 minutes ago, mitch41 said:

I went through the Articles of Association and couldn’t find any percentages, maybe I missed it.

 

Me too. I get the impression that the Articles on the site might not be the most up-to-date articles though.

[redjambo]

1 hour ago, TWF said:

Point taken. I can see Not as an "extra" component, however I "merged" within Don't.

I will try and remember for future use, as I have no doubt some other issue will require the same response!!!!!!

 

And it never even registered with me that the "D" could stand for "Don't".

 

I hope that our erstwhile suitor got the message in any case.

[Dusk_Till_Dawn]

This guy is a joker. **** him off

[Famous 1874]

On 31/05/2020 at 11:57, Footballfirst said:

 

AB controls circa 92.5%. the rest are held across more than 8000 small shareholders

Cheers FF. Isn’t Budge giving the FOH 75%, which will mean she still has circa 17.5%?

[Footballfirst]

3 hours ago, Famous 1874 said:

Cheers FF. Isn’t Budge giving the FOH 75%, which will mean she still has circa 17.5%?

It's not a case of AB giving FOH anything. There is a agreement between the parties that FOH will pay AB £100k (circa the same as AB paid for them) for the shares.

 

AB will retain a shareholding of over 17% following the completion of the share transfer.

[Famous 1874]

6 minutes ago, Footballfirst said:

It's not a case of AB giving FOH anything. There is a agreement between the parties that FOH will pay AB £100k (circa the same as AB paid for them) for the shares.

 

AB will retain a shareholding of over 17% following the completion of the share transfer.

Interesting. Has she said what she will do with the remaining 17%?