Zbairn
-
Posts
789 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by Zbairn
-
-
Just now, HonestAl said:
Haven’t clicked on the links, but iirc Brian is the brother of Robin Guthrie of top class The Cocteau Twins.
Yep, thats right. Think Brian used to organise concerts in the area as well.
2 -
1 hour ago, MrDust said:
Extra cash ?
Unless the sponsorship money has went up drastically, there won't be extra cash.
This cup has a history of teams only making money out of it only if you get to the final.
I won't cry if we go out on Tuesday,our squads too light in numbers to risk our league challenge for me
Got my cups mixed up
….
0 -
28 minutes ago, GunnerBairn said:
This is exactly what McGlynn did when McCann went off injured. Shuffled Hendo to LB, moved Yeats to CM and Bisland to RB. We’re fortunate to have versatile players to keep balance in the team. Glad Leon’s only got a dead leg, but it does show the relative small squad numbers we have if a few of the lads get injured or suspended. A welcome break in the League and time to recover for QOS game. The Ayr game, I’d be happy to throw on all the kids and subs, and give the regular first XI some down time. The League is the priority and McGlynn’s interview suggests he’s thinking along similar lines. Top of the league and it feels good!
️
I think Ayr are beatable. Go for them and win. The extra cash will be handy. We then have a good break to recover.
0 -
5 minutes ago, Bairnardo said:
Top. Now let's fucking stay there.
2 horse race..... let hope Hamilton fall at the next hurdle and it turns into a stroll.
0 -
Good results all round
Also, nice to see our Max K get 2 for St Johnstone to stop Dundee (boo hiss) from winning. Once a Bairn always a Bairn
2 -
2 minutes ago, Van_damage said:
That was an important point that maybe got lost in the debate. Take my own point of principle aside, getting to 25% and maintaining it is important so any future share issue should at least ensure there are 25% of shares ringfenced for FSS and that any money paid in is converted in exchange for some or all of those shares(depending the amount).
I was actually thinking the other night too about why we’re so tied to this 3 legged stool model. One leg was/is the Rawlins who aren’t involved and quite frankly I wouldn’t want them to be.
The other 2 legs are the FSS and the patrons. The FSS however will be the only leg to continuously put money in to the club and in 3 years time could have put in 2/3 times as much as the other legs yet still have the same percentage.
Would it be such a bad thing to allow FSS to continue to buy shares to get more of a percentage in the club. At the end of the day if you external investment was needed then wouldn’t matter what each leg had as more shares would have to be issued anyway. At least if the FSS owned all the shares then they could sell for whatever price and put the money back in the club as capital.
The 3rd leg is major shareholders......i.e Rawlins, Sandy A, Martin R and Willie Moffat. Not sure if anyone else is included in that group ????
0 -
Just now, Reggie Perrin said:
I would go for an under 21 £5 fee.
maybe U-18 ?
0 -
20 minutes ago, Bairn in Exile said:
How old would you say most of the Ultras are? School age? Late teens? Early 20s? When the camera panned onto them at TFS they looked like 20 somethings but the ones at the Rec looked much younger, school age.
The reason that I am asking is that guys in their late teens and early 20s who are working have a reasonable amount of disposable income after paying their digs. At least they did in my day. Do they really need a reduced monthly subscription to get them to join?
Think what we ended up proposing was a "Junior" subscription of £5 a month.
Harder to target those of working age that look a lot younger
1 -
1 minute ago, AJ1981 said:
It's disappointing that a factual account of the events and discussions with other fans is being read this way. This is quite a stretch, I'm not attacking anybody.
Don't think the comment from Van is aimed at you....... but at another poster on here .
0 -
1
-
31 minutes ago, LatapyBairn. said:
It is but there’s a minority of usefully used idiots that can’t admit when they were wrong. Ignore or don’t respond on this subject is my suggestion. It does not deserve any more air, let’s move on.
"Usefully used idiots" ; "Can't admit when they are wrong" ..... Do you want to elaborate who the idiots are and why they are wrong?
"move on" .....Trying to stifle debate and discussion ?
Rather be thought of as a useful idiot and facilitate a discussion about the governance of the FSS/club, than be a Board sycophant.
1 -
43 minutes ago, Shodwall cat said:
I've not seen anything yet that makes me want to stop putting my cash into FSS and then the club. At the end of the day the club relies on FSS cash to keep going at the moment and give the manager a competitive budget so I wouldn't want to endanger that. My biggest concern is that the bod is going to end up being the same reps for years with either noone wanting to do it or one group or another constantly appointing the same individuals. I think it's important we have fresh faces in there regularly.
Compared to previous Boards, this one is like night and day. I have the utmost respect for them and what they have done.
However, on this aspect with the 25%+1 share issue and the FSS I think they have got it wrong. It may not be everyones opinion, but its mine.
After last nights meeting, I have more of an issue with Board of the FSS as they have let this happen. They could have insisted on getting the shares or refuse to hand over the cash that is in the bank. Plus, donations to the club without any recourse to what happens to the fans cash is just what Falkirk Forever was designed to do. To me it's not the FSS anymore, it's Falkirk Forever.
I'll still be paying my cash in , but by other means.
0 -
1 hour ago, Van_damage said:
That was the assumption that the club made too, that FSS agreed to.
Would have been ok with it, if we were asked and the majority agreed to hand over the money for no shares, but that never happened so unfortunately I’m out. There’s simply no democratic process when members aren’t consulted first.
Anyway enough said, onwards to Edinburgh and another hopefully a third win on the bounce.
I'm of the same opinion.
I've made my feelings known on several posts on here re the FSS share issue.
The FSS has effectively been taken over by Falkirk Forever. I'm out as well !
As an aside, COYB and lets get 3 points
-5 -
11 minutes ago, Bainsfordbairn said:
I wasn't at the meeting as I was watching the U16s against Alloa and football always takes priority for me.
However, my assumption is that the club will get the FSS money anyway, but by selling the small number of available shares elsewhere they bring in additional revenue that otherwise wouldn't have been available to them. Extra money which helped them sign a player this week.
Is that assumption wrong? If not, then apart from the fact that it put some noses out of joint for a while, it would seem to be a prudent move.
The 0.4% required by the FSS equates to around £14k. Not unsubstantial, but hardly going to bankrupt the club and stop them from getting a player in.
-1 -
Just to add about tonight.
There was a debate about social media and the dissemination of information. The BoD rep thought it was divisive and negative.
I had a think about this driving home....and if we hadn't had that debate, I'm pretty sure that the Patrons would not be asked to "gift" shares to let the FSS get to 25%+1
As a member of the FSS, I was sold on the fact that we would have the ability to have a "blocking vote" i.e. the 25+% (i.r.c. on 26% shareholding). My gripe was that the club refused to sell the FSS the requisite number of shares to get there. More so, that the FSS actually got the club out a financial hole last season with the Govt. loan.
I'm not sure how it will pan out, but looks like it may happen.
7 -
1 minute ago, Van_damage said:
I was certain I was spelling it correctly too but kept coming up with an a. That explains it then ya smart prack!
Joozy and smart prack ? ...surely an oxymaroon ?
1 -
2 minutes ago, Bairn in Exile said:
Do you have any friends?
Asking for a friend.
I think BPM is his pal
2 -
2 minutes ago, falkirkzombie said:
I guess when we know the answer to this we will see the best way forward. I certainly think the goal should be maximising the total ££ the club will receive.
Exactly. My concern is that many have joined and donated to the FSS explicitly for fan ownership i.e. purchase of shares as outlined in the original presentations.
Removing that option by not selling shares may be detrimental to the cash flow. I already know of two fans who have handed their resignation of the FSS in based on not being happy that the FSS cannot buy these shares and no real guarantee of what may happen in the future.
Therefore, trying to maximise the ££ by refusal to sell shares may actually be counter productive.
0 -
2 hours ago, falkirkzombie said:
Correct me if I'm wrong, as I may well be but doesn't that mean additional monies for the club doing it that way? as the fss monthly contributions will be accounted for and if the patrons bought the shares its new money which isn't. I would say that's a good reason to do it as the donation will bring fss to the 25 + 1, and then everybody gets what they want, seems like a good compromise - something that will be need if this model is to work long term.
No, I think you are right. This will bring additional cash into the club based on the fact that Patrons (or others) buy the shares and then the FSS cash effectively doubles the amount.
However, what doesn’t make sense to me is that by doing this means that the Patrons are effectively paying double for the privilege of donating shares to the FSS for free and then purchasing the free shares. The Patrons could just buy the free shares, then there are none left for the FSS. Same scenario of getting 2 x the cash. There is no need to donate except for altruistic reasons in getting the FSS to 25%.
I’m not sure how many will be interested in doing that.
2nd edit
- If there is no great interest in the Patrons buying the available shares then they are up for grabs. Why not just sell them to the FSS and be done with this whole discussion ?
1 -
11 minutes ago, Forever_Blue_ said:
Fully agree with this. It's actually starting to feel like a bit of a vandetta towards the club / FSS by the same person. If the member is so unhappy then he should withdraw his membership from the FSS and stop causing unnecessary negativity. Sometimes a minority of our fans always have to be toxic, even when a solution is offered they're not happy it's not being done in the way they specifically want it done. Look at the bigger picture here. Let's move forward together and focus on getting behind this team now and out of this f**king league.
This is not a vandetta against the Club / FSS.
This is the opinion from a poster who has raised serious and valid questions regarding the relationship between FSS and the Club. As a member (and from what I read, an active participant) of the FSS he is entitled to make his feelings known. This is called democracy.
I would argue that the majority of posters on here have an opinion that supports his view for clarity regarding the reasons for joining FSS and what their cash is being used for. I certainly do not see those who support this discussion as being in the minority.
5 -
25 minutes ago, Van_damage said:
That’s what doesn’t make sense either. If the shares are ringfenced for the patrons then it seems daft to allow the patrons to then transfer their own shares. Would cause the exact same imbalance.
This is the thing...... the Patrons donate shares to FSS and then are asked to buy their shareholding back from the shares that are up for grabs?
Doesn't make sense to me.
-2 -
8 minutes ago, LatapyBairn. said:
Surely if the club voted on a share issue it would be to create shares with the intention of selling them to raise funds? So surely in this instance the share issue would become pointless and no money would be raised if the club then had to hand over all the shares created to the FSS? …Think I’d need some convincing on that one should members be asked to vote. Do you know if any other fan owned clubs do this? Had a quick look online and it just seems most eventually reach a point where it becomes a donation based thing.
No it doesn't. The convertible loan should only protect the % shareholding for the FSS.
It's unlikely that the Patrons would increase their % and this would reduce as new shares are sold.
Any new investor can purchase the remaining shares that are made available and thus put funds into the club.
2 -
7 minutes ago, LatapyBairn. said:
I’ve a feeling the club might have external investor(s) interested in the remaining few shares, that would obviously bring more money in so makes sense for the club to go down that route then look at other avenues for to help the FSS gain the tiny shareholding they are looking for whether it be through share donation or something else. The FSS are obviously pretty content with the situation going by that statement and to be honest so am I. Pretty certain the FSS will get to the 25% they are aiming for sooner rather than later anyway.
Will be interesting to find out who a potential investor might be, for around only a 1% shareholding. It certainly won't be anyone thinking about "buying" the club
Bringing more money makes sense as the club might expect to get the monthly subs from the FSS as well as the selling of the shares (only if they can sell).
My point is that the Club could sell the requisite number of shares to the FSS and have some left over for external funding.
With respect to the FSS statement, it has mixed messages and going by some of the comments on FB....not everyone in the membership is happy with the situation.
What happens in the future to the FSS cash, is another topic altogether and one that should be addressed by the FSS membership, not just the FSS Board.
3 -
13 minutes ago, LatapyBairn. said:
I’d actually always presumed this would be the case with my monthly direct debit once the shares were bought up, I’m more just happy in the knowledge I’m supporting the club and didn’t really expect anything more tangible than that in return. …….Out of interest what happens with the money each month in the fan ownership schemes at Hearts, St Mirren, Motherwell, Aberdeen ect? Surely they can’t just be creating never ending share issues?
The point is that the shares are not bought up. The comment is that they are "ring fenced" for the Patrons Group.
If they are not buying, then why not sell to the FSS and allow them to achieve the 25%+1, which was one of the aims of the FSS?
In the great scheme of things, we are only taking about a small %
2
….
The Falkirk FC Thread
in Scottish League 1 General Chatter
Posted
Maybe a Mickey Mouse cup….but always the chance we could get drawn against The Pars….spicy!