Jump to content

Zbairn

Gold Members
  • Posts

    492
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Zbairn

  1. I know it's hard to believe.....but I think so. Maybe someone like Banta someone can confirm ??
  2. Think this has been designed by our PR guru on the Board ?
  3. This has alway sbeen my main cause for concern..... and Gary Deans, along with the rest of the supliant Board members, have handed them the key to the club.
  4. Me too....as longs as he stays injury free..
  5. There are definitely people on here with vested interests. The only interest I have is as a peripheral member of the orginal Back the Bairns Group. I remember what it was like to nearly have lost our club due to non-Falkirk owners who considered the club a plaything. From what I gather and read on here, the Navy Blue investment guys wanted parity with the Rawlins, but were stumping up double the cash the Rawlins paid in. Certain members of the Board have decided that they don't want to move on, even if it is in the best interests of the club. I agree that there is no guarantee the investors would run the club any better..... but if it does go pear shaped, I'd rather vent my anger at those who are sitting in the stand than 5000 miles away and dont give a toss, particularly when they have managed to get their hands on the club for a relative pittance.
  6. You would have thought that one of the greatst collapses in Scottish Football history and ending up 5th in the seaside league would be enough.... ..... but nope..... selling off the family silver for peanuts to people who are not Falkirk supporters, who have no connection to the town is a fantastic idea (where have we seen that before?). Then we come away with rejecting £600k from Falkirk fans when the club is financially in a precarious position. ...........and just to finish it off they are happy to watch as a group of fans whose sole aim is to honour a legend of the club and is one of our own, are hounded and villified to the point they walk away. Do folk on here actually support the above ???? The only ones I can think of, are those who have some connection or have a vested interest to the current Board. I really do despair !
  7. Apologies....but it's like sitting on a fence and hoping ! The investors offered the club £600k. Looking at where we are at the moment, are we really in a position of turning down that kind of cash ? The role of directors is to look after the well being of our club. That cash could be a lifeline for us and should have been welcomed, not pushed away. What the BoD's have effectively done is support The Rawlins in their ownership status (and perhaps their own status) to the detriment of the club. I have yet to see any real strategy from the club other than alienating fans. I remember Gary Deans statement that "They (The Rawlins) completely buy into what we are striving to do and in our vision of a balanced ownership structure, a structure that is only successful when fans get to invest and support simultaneously with outside investors" That statement sounds a bit hollow considering they have chased away significant investment from fans.
  8. The big question is will the club survive and in what form ? Rawlins has no track record in 3rd tier Scottish football. It's a damn sight different to the big cash available at Stoke or even in the MLS. We are a provincial Scottish Club whose main footballing organisation cannot even get half decent sponsores for their major competitions, if at all. If all the investors are doing is backing off and wallking away without a fight, letting the Rawlins and BoD dictate how our club progresses and accepting the abysmall way they treat our fans, then they don't deserve to have a say in the club.
  9. Ermmmmm naw! The idea was to have it up and running for the start of next season. The BoD’s have bolloxed it with their constant obstacles and personal attacks on the guys. From what I heard the CI guys wanted to completely walk, but then that would have also broken their agreement with Crunchie to get it done. The CI guys are doing the honourable thing in trying to keep it alive. Unfortunately I am not really sure Rawlins and the Board do. I think their last statement that indicated commitment was just to appease the fans and delay further.
  10. The Crunchie Initiative has only been going for one year. Talking to a couple of guys from the CI, the Rawlins and the BoD’s have put obstacle after obstacle in place, reneged on agreements. This is not a carry over for a decade. This was an open goal PR exercise for the club and they blew it big time.
  11. Forgot to add..... and why do they want to piss of a group of die-hard Falkirk fans, whose sole aim is to honour one our Legends by putting his name up on the South Stand ?. Is that in their great plan for liaising with the support and gaining their trust ???
  12. A few interesting comments in there. "They don't want to be investors or owners" ? - They are now effectively the owners, blocking investment. "Watch this space, that move will be coming" ? - You oviously have inside knowledge. Are you a Board Member privvy to this information ? Access young blood from the English transfer market ? - where have we heard that before - Oh yeah, the Brentford model. It's been tried at other clubs up here and failed miserably Shrewdness ? - I would say more devious in the way he manipulated the shareholders (with the BoD's backing) to agree to increasing the shareholding of the club by almost double. That is not an attempt to just have a say in proceedings, that is an attempt to take ownership by stealth. If it all goes pear shaped...we the long suffering fans will be the ones who have to pick up the pieces again.... if we can next time.
  13. "However, on the subject of ethics and morals you may be interested to know a FFC Director recorded one of the Teams meetings without permission, which is a serious misjudgement - stones and glass houses springs to mind" Funny that ... I heard they did the same with another fans group. Suggested that the phone call was private , but had some interested directors listening in. Devious to say the least.
  14. The problem is they can’t walk away without losing their initial investment. They need to get Board permission to sell their shares. Oh, I forgot, they effectively are the Board.
  15. I could be wrong, but I don’t think they wanted to advise, but at least be part of the process....which would be understandable in a “parity” stakeholding. From what I heard, several of the guys walked after the letter from Mrs Rawlins.
  16. Ethics and morals? Do you seriously think after reading Brockvillenomore’s post, that our current BoD’s are acting ethically and morally in turning down £600k and abusing long time fans by letter? If not Bantabairn account No.2.....then certainly another BoD plant. We already have had the mistakenly use of the word “us” in a previous post. We now have similar with “their” .
  17. More importantly, to get a balanced view, I would like to see a statement from our current BoD why they turned it down. Perhaps you could help us there ?
  18. People on here were wanting facts and a statement. This pretty much summarises the whole sorry affair.
  19. Good post ! .....pretty much sums up my thoughts
  20. We've been like that since I started watching ....... we had a black and white telly then !
  21. He is best pals with one of the directors
  22. Progression to the Premiership ? ....Is he a clone of Craig Campbell ? he couldnt even progress us out of Div 3 !!!!
×
×
  • Create New...