Jump to content

The Falkirk FC Thread


Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, LatapyBairn. said:

Presuming you approve of the share issue and the Rawlins investment put an x in the box’s and vote FOR the resolutions. You can take a picture and email it to the club or drop it off at the stadium before 5pm tomorrow. 

Ive looked at my other AGM letters for other companies , the proxy form says, I (insert full name) of (insert address and postcode) it makes sense now!

our one looks like a club official might have to fill in that part. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Andreas Kelevra said:

Ive looked at my other AGM letters for other companies , the proxy form says, I (insert full name) of (insert address and postcode) it makes sense now!

our one looks like a club official might have to fill in that part. 

You’ll obviously need to fill out your name and address as well 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Falkirk09Bairn said:

You wouldn’t vote in the GE without reading a manifesto ffs.  

That’s a pretty debatable proposition given the results in the UK and US recently.

 

Just as a matter of interest, thinking back to MC and how quickly the holes in his proposal were located, and knowing that Rawlin’s proposal seems to have had no holes found, no wonder it’s bloody depressing to likely see this whole proposal shitcanned. Shadwell’s right, this does smell a bit, the no answers before the deadline...but who is pushing what narrative and which timeline from the club side. With a club insider reportedly involved in torpedoing this bid, how was the voting deadline arrived at?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Presuming you approve of the share issue and the Rawlins investment put an x in the box’s and vote FOR the resolutions. You can take a picture and email it to the club or drop it off at the stadium before 5pm tomorrow. 

I think if you don’t put X s in the box you give Gary Deans free reign to vote as needed on your behalf.
That’s what I did anyway....
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So hypothetically let’s say the worst case pans out and the resolution doesn’t pass. What happens next?......Could we call an EGM and try to force the issue again perhaps with a few tweaks to the resolution or does Rawlins just take his money elsewhere and we remain with the status quo and same stagnant, disinterested leadership rotting away in the seaside leagues for ever more, could we turn into to an Airdrie or a Clyde? It’s a depressing thought! 

Edited by LatapyBairn.
Mid type
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really can’t understand why people would not want this to pass. Not just for the Rawlins money, but Phil’s knowledge as well would be crucial. He’s got clear pedigree with Stoke and in America. Utterly baffling if you vote against this and then claim “to want the best for the club”.

Edited by CC52 FFC
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, CC52 FFC said:

I really can’t understand why people would not want this to pass. Not just for the Rawlins money, but Phil’s knowledge as well would be crucial. He’s got clear pedigree with Stoke and in America. Utterly baffling if you vote against this and then claim “to want the best for the club”.

Aye but whats best for the club isnt whats best for those thats trying to derail it.  If this gets derailed then i take it the opportunity for Gowsers indian backers to get their feet even more involved in the club.

You really couldnt make it up go all out to woo a f**king idiot like MC announce him as preferred bidder last year and just when you think we have turned a corner and get someone with someone with a proven track record in football and business and arse it up 

 

Edited by AL-FFC
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know we all received another letter regarding the vote etc but I'm still not sure that the majority of folk will understand what is actually going on here. There has been no mention by the bod of people wanting to vote against it or again rival bids.  If I'm a shareholder who doesn't use social media then I doubt I'd see an urgency in voting as I probably wouldn't think that anyone would be thinking of blocking it.

Edited by Shadwell Dog
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So in the grand scheme of things those voting against Rawlins investment are basically endorsing the past few years of mismanagement and okaying lex and co's stewardship and the f**k ups they have presided over 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Shadwell Dog said:

I know we all received another letter regarding the vote etc but I'm still not sure that the majority of folk will understand what is actually going on here. There has been no mention by the bod of people wanting to vote against it or again rival bids.  If I'm a shareholder who doesn't use social media then I doubt I'd see an urgency in voting as I probably wouldn't think that anyone would be thinking of blocking it.

Agree with this, a lot of minor shareholders will presume the 6 in the MSG will vote together as is the norm however knowing that two of them plus Paul Healy are planning to vote against the resolution changes everything. For it to pass votes from smaller shareholders are needed. I feel the club should have been canvassing and informing all shareholders over the past couple of weeks so they knew they’re vote mattered if they wanted this change and Rawlins investment.
               We did get a letter from GD encouraging us to vote for the resolutions but the full back story was not explained, I think of it had been far more shareholders would have made the effort to vote in favour. 

Edited by LatapyBairn.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the Rawlings plan on the table was a takeover I could understand some people having worries.  But it's not.  They are throwing money at the club for a less than controlling share in the club with the long term plan of increasing the value of their investment as the team get more successful.  There are NO downsides.  The detractors must be relatives of Alan Gow.  Speaking of Gow, get him out of the club.  It seems to me he is only there for what he can get for himself.

Edited by Long Suffering Bairn
mistake
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Long Suffering Bairn said:

If the Rawlings plan on the table was a takeover I could understand some people having worries.  But it's not.  They are throwing money at the club for a less than controlling share in the club with the long term plan of increasing the value of their investment as the team get more successful.  There are NO downsides.  The detractors must be relatives of Alan Gow.  Speaking of Gow, get him out of the club.  It's clear he is only there for what he can get for himself.

As much as he is director of football what is his specific job and what has he actually achieved so far 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Long Suffering Bairn said:

If the Rawlings plan on the table was a takeover I could understand some people having worries.  But it's not.  They are throwing money at the club for a less than controlling share in the club with the long term plan of increasing the value of their investment as the team get more successful.  There are NO downsides.  The detractors must be relatives of Alan Gow.  Speaking of Gow, get him out of the club.  It seems to me he is only there for what he can get for himself.

Anyone with a brain would understand that, unfortunately it’s questionable whether people actually use theirs. 

Edited by CC52 FFC
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.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...