FAO The Foundation of Hearts (Changes Required)

[WageThief]

3 minutes ago, Dusk_Till_Dawn said:

Wage Thief: Everything is positive

 

People with eyes: We’re in the Championship, our head coach is shit and we’ve been in decline for ages under She Who Shall Not Be Named or Blamed

 

Wage Thief: Everything is positive

 

Ha ha - you just proved my point!

[Davie Deans]

Dusk_Till_Dawn: I live hundreds of miles away, haven’t bought a season ticket for donkeys years and haven’t seen us in half the games this season that I’m bumping my rancid gums online about.

 

 

[Footballfirst]

2 hours ago, Jambo-Fox said:

Will they make a formal offer for the remaining 24.9% of the shares they won’t own?

That's a very valid question to ask of FOH, although not in the context of the post that you were responding to. 

 

The Takeover Code requires anyone acquiring more than 30% of a company's shares to make an offer of the remainder of the share capital.  Vladimir Romanov (via HMFC 2005) and Ann Budge (via Bidco1874) were both required to make such an offer when they took on majority ownership in 2005 and 2014 respectively, so why should FOH not have to do the same?

 

My understanding is that they will not be required to make such an offer, as the Takeover Code only applies to companies "listed" on an exchange (HMFC isn't), or have been listed on an exchange within the previous 10 years (HMFC hasn't).  The reason that Ann Budge was required to make an offer but FOH won't is the 10 year rule.  Romanov delisted Hearts in January 2006, so Ann Budge's purchase fell within the 10 year time limit, but FOH's eventual purchase will be beyond the 10 year mark. 

[Dusk_Till_Dawn]

Just now, Davie Deans said:

Dusk_Till_Dawn: I live hundreds of miles away, haven’t bought a season ticket for donkeys years and haven’t seen us in half the games this season that I’m bumping my rancid gums online about.

 

 

I do live hundreds of miles away, I’ve got a season ticket this season, I’ve watched most of the games this season. Not sure what the **** you’re up to but maybe rugby is the game for you.

[Section Q]

On 20/02/2021 at 18:53, maroonplatoon87 said:

For £18 per match id expect a better stream personally 

This.

[WageThief]

8 minutes ago, Dusk_Till_Dawn said:

I do live hundreds of miles away, I’ve got a season ticket this season, I’ve watched most of the games this season. Not sure what the **** you’re up to but maybe rugby is the game for you.

 

So you're saying it's all great then, happy clapping away with your stream while you fund Shan Budge's empty empire?

 

You are obviously easily pleased by stuff like the Raith performance at home.

 

(REPEAT UNTIL AUDIENCE LEAVES)

[Nobreath]

On 20/02/2021 at 18:53, maroonplatoon87 said:

For £18 per match id expect a better stream personally 

 

My stream was perfect. I had to suffer the game with a perfect picture.

[sadj]

1 hour ago, Geoff Kilpatrick said:

I've no plans to cancel my subs but to say people are weaponising their donations is a little rich given FoH won't fulfil its purpose of buying the club, despite having all funds in place.

Won’t? 
 

Geoff you are not a daft bloke , would you rather keep some stability through the pandemic or change things and risk losing that stability? 

[Francis Albert]

55 minutes ago, sadj said:

Won’t? 
 

Geoff you are not a daft bloke , would you rather keep some stability through the pandemic or change things and risk losing that stability? 

The main reason given by FOH for the indefinite delay is that at present they can't have a party.

[sandylejambo]

yesterday was brutal and it's not the first time we've had to put up with this shite on the park, Ann Budge thinks the sun shines out the arse of the man with the flash suit, I don't, he is a product of Levein and you can see that in the way we play football. The FOH should really represent us and they're not, we are unhappy at the way the game is being played and the FOH should be making sure it changes, but they're not and we are seeing this shit more and more, not less and less. remember when we had Levein and it went on for months if not years? well the same seems to be happening again.

[sadj]

21 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

The main reason given by FOH for the indefinite delay is that at present they can't have a party.

😒🤣

[Jambo-Fox]

1 hour ago, Footballfirst said:

That's a very valid question to ask of FOH, although not in the context of the post that you were responding to. 

 

The Takeover Code requires anyone acquiring more than 30% of a company's shares to make an offer of the remainder of the share capital.  Vladimir Romanov (via HMFC 2005) and Ann Budge (via Bidco1874) were both required to make such an offer when they took on majority ownership in 2005 and 2014 respectively, so why should FOH not have to do the same?

 

My understanding is that they will not be required to make such an offer, as the Takeover Code only applies to companies "listed" on an exchange (HMFC isn't), or have been listed on an exchange within the previous 10 years (HMFC hasn't).  The reason that Ann Budge was required to make an offer but FOH won't is the 10 year rule.  Romanov delisted Hearts in January 2006, so Ann Budge's purchase fell within the 10 year time limit, but FOH's eventual purchase will be beyond the 10 year mark. 

Thanks you’ve answered a question that was lurking somewhere in my head!

I declined both the Romanov and Budge offers .... so if any FOH offer materialised I don’t think I’d accept that either!

[Jambo-Fox]

3 hours ago, David Black said:

You've lost me. 

♥️Poor lost sole♥️let’s find you♥️
 

You said, “The only way FOH are going to increase membership is by becoming the owners of the club ...”

 

I asked you how you thought that might happen? ie how Hearts might be wholly owned by the FOH? 

 

Simple ......

 

[David Black]

4 hours ago, Francis Albert said:

Not sure what we could do with 100% that we can't do with 75.1% and so why it would be worth buying out Ann and the thousands of small shareholders.

With 75.1% we can determine who is on the Board of the club and get rid of all or any of them if they are not up to the job.

TBH I am not convinced FOH needs direct club board representatives or that a minority on the club board does any more than create a danger of them being captured as part of the insider team.

My argument has always been why have 2 separate boards. I honestly can't see the need after the share transfer. How many other fan owned clubs throughout the world operate this system. If its in the constitution, then we can raise the issue at an AGM and vote to change it. Nothing is set in stone surely. At this time the "let's have a big party" is just an excuse to hang to the same, failing system. 

[David Black]

5 minutes ago, Jambo-Fox said:

♥️Poor lost sole♥️let’s find you♥️
 

You said, “The only way FOH are going to increase membership is by becoming the owners of the club ...”

 

I asked you how you thought that might happen? ie how Hearts might be wholly owned by the FOH? 

 

Simple ......

 

Never been lost mate, but I suspect you might be. FOH already own 75.1% of the shares, albeit waiting on the official transfer. AB and others own the remaining 24.9% of which AB owns the majority of those. She is also a member of FOH as I suspect many of the others are as well. We don't need to "wholly" own the club. How many clubs in Germany are "wholly" owned by the supporters? Answer-none. Simples. 

[Jambo-Fox]

8 minutes ago, David Black said:

Never been lost mate, but I suspect you might be. FOH already own 75.1% of the shares, albeit waiting on the official transfer. AB and others own the remaining 24.9% of which AB owns the majority of those. She is also a member of FOH as I suspect many of the others are as well. We don't need to "wholly" own the club. How many clubs in Germany are "wholly" owned by the supporters? Answer-none. Simples. 

Interesting but not very!

 

Lots of JKB members are members of the FOH .... perhaps one day JKB will own Hearts! Now that’s an idea ...

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

2 hours ago, sadj said:

Won’t? 
 

Geoff you are not a daft bloke , would you rather keep some stability through the pandemic or change things and risk losing that stability? 

What is this "stability" you refer to? We've already changed the CEO. We could leave Ann Budge as chair if she chooses to be so. We are talking about a share transfer which is what FoH committed to. I get that the 1.5M per month is going towards the club's working capital at present but the rationale that that would stop if the share transfer was completed is just daft. Would the benefactors stop being as philanthropic if Ann Budge only kept 24% and was still in the chair? I doubt it. Therefore, the only issue seems to be the self-publicising nature of FoH in terms of completion given that fans can't attend but, to be frank, who cares about that other than them? If they are so concerned about making a splash with headlines, perhaps they should then concentrate, for now, on communicating to their membership? Just a thought.

[Francis Albert]

27 minutes ago, Jambo-Fox said:

Interesting but not very!

 

Lots of JKB members are members of the FOH .... perhaps one day JKB will own Hearts! Now that’s an idea ...

Bizarre post.

[Francis Albert]

52 minutes ago, David Black said:

My argument has always been why have 2 separate boards. I honestly can't see the need after the share transfer. How many other fan owned clubs throughout the world operate this system. If its in the constitution, then we can raise the issue at an AGM and vote to change it. Nothing is set in stone surely. At this time the "let's have a big party" is just an excuse to hang to the same, failing system. 

I think there have to be two separate boards. HMFC is a plc which under company law must have a board. FOH is a members organisation which will in time presumably own a controlling majority of HMFC shares and has structured itself with a board. Once FOH decides to take majority ownership there will still be two separate boards. The question is what exactly does a minority FOH representation on the HMFC board  achieve over and above the right of FOH as controlling owner to appoint and if needed sack all or some of the HMFC board members. What greater influence do the minority FOH board members actually give us over the running of HMFC? 

 

[Jambo-Fox]

37 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

Bizarre post.

It was!

I just don’t think DB ‘gets it’! Keep up the good work on educating DB I admire your persistence!

[Francis Albert]

6 minutes ago, Jambo-Fox said:

It was!

I just don’t think DB ‘gets it’! Keep up the good work on educating DB I admire your persistence!

Another bizarre post. Also not by DB. As of course you know.

[davemclaren]

36 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

I think there have to be two separate boards. HMFC is a plc which under company law must have a board. FOH is a members organisation which will in time presumably own a controlling majority of HMFC shares and has structured itself with a board. Once FOH decides to take majority ownership there will still be two separate boards. The question is what exactly does a minority FOH representation on the HMFC board  achieve over and above the right of FOH as controlling owner to appoint and if needed sack all or some of the HMFC board members. What greater influence do the minority FOH board members actually give us over the running of HMFC? 

 

It’s a good point but a lot of majority owners have ‘one of their own’ on boards, but not necessarily an employee/Director of the owner. 

[davemclaren]

4 minutes ago, Zlatanable said:

I am happy to pay money to FoH, have done for years. 

But the future terrifies me. 

 

I think I might be an active participant in the destruction of Hearts. 

 

This thread, for instance. 

I am happy I helped save Hearts, but I have no interest whatsoever in running it. And I don't want any of you to have any say in running it either.

 

Supporting Hearts is deeply miserable at the moment. 

You don’t have to vote for anyone on this thread. 

[sadj]

3 minutes ago, Zlatanable said:

I am happy to pay money to FoH, have done for years. 

But the future terrifies me. 

 

I think I might be an active participant in the destruction of Hearts. 

 

This thread, for instance. 

I am happy I helped save Hearts, but I have no interest whatsoever in running it. And I don't want any of you to have any say in running it either.

 

Supporting Hearts is deeply miserable at the moment. 

Wouldn’t say deeply miserable , more miserable than normal but its no worse than seasons like the Velicka season. The amount of FOH contributors who think they should have a direct say in the running of the club is as you say terrifying. 
 

I do think a Fan rep would be a good idea along with the elected members of the FoH being responsible for selecting the CEO etc would make sense but once thats done we should be letting them do their jobs. 

[sadj]

3 minutes ago, davemclaren said:

You don’t have to vote for anyone on this thread. 

Ffs Dave 🤣🤣🤣 You have been on form the day

[sadj]

Just now, Zlatanable said:

Dave, say that after ownership moves over to FoH, let's see how scary it is then. 

The JkB FOH thread to decide who we should have in goal , what formation , subs during the game , buttons beside every seat in the stadium so we can select who to come off or go on but disabled if you arent a FOH member etc. 
 

When put like that surely people can understand why its insanity to want to much input

[Baxfee]

9 hours ago, Jambo-Fox said:

Interesting but not very!

 

Lots of JKB members are members of the FOH .... perhaps one day JKB will own Hearts! Now that’s an idea ...

And hearts would be dead within the hour

[Footballfirst]

8 hours ago, sadj said:

Wouldn’t say deeply miserable , more miserable than normal but its no worse than seasons like the Velicka season. The amount of FOH contributors who think they should have a direct say in the running of the club is as you say terrifying. 
 

I do think a Fan rep would be a good idea along with the elected members of the FoH being responsible for selecting the CEO etc would make sense but once that's done we should be letting them do their jobs. 

I don't think many people are really asking for a say in running the club. They just want change.  No matter how successful you were when you set out i.e. 2014/15, and 2015/16 it has been a downward trajectory ever since.  Football fans all over just want to see progress year on year. What they have got at Hearts for the last five seasons is the opposite.  There is little evidence of even shoots of recovery such as the much vaunted investment in the academy producing returns. Remember when Ann Budge said of Robbie that finishing 4th "wouldn't be very good". 

 

First team football is the core business of the club and its main revenue generator.  You can have a shiny new stand and award winning restaurant, but if that isn't coupled with on field success then they won't be filled.

[Mr Rabbit]

Whilst there’s some legitimate questions on this thread the majority are being pushed for the wrong reasons.

 

Fan ownership falls down on the expectation of some fans thinking they will have an input into the day-to-day decisions of the club. It’s not feasible and even once the transfer happens we will not get to decide to sack a manager every time we lose a game. 

[scottg71]

Skimmed over this. Deary me. If they ever want proof why fan ownership is completely unworkable then this thread is it.

[sadj]

38 minutes ago, Footballfirst said:

I don't think many people are really asking for a say in running the club. They just want change.  No matter how successful you were when you set out i.e. 2014/15, and 2015/16 it has been a downward trajectory ever since.  Football fans all over just want to see progress year on year. What they have got at Hearts for the last five seasons is the opposite.  There is little evidence of even shoots of recovery such as the much vaunted investment in the academy producing returns. Remember when Ann Budge said of Robbie that finishing 4th "wouldn't be very good". 

 

First team football is the core business of the club and its main revenue generator.  You can have a shiny new stand and award winning restaurant, but if that isn't coupled with on field success then they won't be filled.

 

I agree entirely FF

[David Black]

12 hours ago, Jambo-Fox said:

Interesting but not very!

 

Lots of JKB members are members of the FOH .... perhaps one day JKB will own Hearts! Now that’s an idea ...

Where exactly did I say otherwise re JKB members?

Edited February 22, 2021 by David Black

[David Black]

1 hour ago, Footballfirst said:

I don't think many people are really asking for a say in running the club. They just want change.  No matter how successful you were when you set out i.e. 2014/15, and 2015/16 it has been a downward trajectory ever since.  Football fans all over just want to see progress year on year. What they have got at Hearts for the last five seasons is the opposite.  There is little evidence of even shoots of recovery such as the much vaunted investment in the academy producing returns. Remember when Ann Budge said of Robbie that finishing 4th "wouldn't be very good". 

 

First team football is the core business of the club and its main revenue generator.  You can have a shiny new stand and award winning restaurant, but if that isn't coupled with on field success then they won't be filled.

Exactly. No one in their right mind would say otherwise, the facts are staring us in the face and those who persist in denying this or take offence at various issues being criticised of both FOH and the club, are simply sticking their heads in the sand and you know what people see if someone always has their head in the sand, an arse.