RC_Bairn Posted October 4, 2022 Share Posted October 4, 2022 2 minutes ago, Van_damage said: The Navy Blue offered £550k if memory serves right to gain the same level of ownership as the Rawlins. Are you saying they wouldn’t have formed to take up 25% at £350k if it was on the table? I never said the Rawlins were there for a quick buck but you said we should just thank them as though their investment was out of charity. Anyones money is welcome but it doesn’t mean the club then can become their plaything. If they want to run things then they still have to gain respect. The Rawlins input to the club could have set us further back than if they never invested. There's nothing stopping the Navy Blue group from investing £550k. In fact they could do it tomorrow if they wanted to. Let's see if they do... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LatapyBairn. Posted October 4, 2022 Share Posted October 4, 2022 (edited) 14 minutes ago, strichener said: Yes, just continue to argue with yourself. I don't think the investment from the Patrons was a bad thing but you can't take a position that it doesn't matter how much you contribute to the FSS, you have an equal say when the horse has already bolted. Your three legged stool model relies on this. What on earth are you slavering about, the patrons group and the FSS are two totaly separate things run in a separate way. The idea behind the FSS was to gain a 26% shareholding in the club to give the fans a voice equal to that of the other major shareholders. The principal behind the patrons group although having similarities is different, the focus was more on bringing in larger investment quickly while still being as democratic as possible and to that extent it’s achieved most of its goals having raised 300k of which 100% went into the club. Now as the FSS grows it’s shareholding both the Patrons Group and other major shareholders % control of the club will shrink in tandem, the FSS is a long term thing to safeguard the future of the club and give fans a voice. It’s an excellent concept in my opinion, not sure why you seem to have a problem with it. Edited October 4, 2022 by LatapyBairn. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Brockvillenomore Posted October 4, 2022 Share Posted October 4, 2022 7 minutes ago, strichener said: Yes, just continue to argue with yourself. I don't think the investment from the Patrons was a bad thing but you can't take a position that it doesn't matter how much you contribute to the FSS, you have an equal say when the horse has already bolted. Your three legged stool model relies on this. The model relies on over 1,000 supporters signing up to FSS. This increases the supporters % of the club. Reduces the % of the patrons, the Rawlins and the shareholders we used to call the msg. There’s no argument really on simple facts. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 4, 2022 Share Posted October 4, 2022 (edited) 11 minutes ago, RC_Bairn said: There's nothing stopping the Navy Blue group from investing £550k. In fact they could do it tomorrow if they wanted to. Let's see if they do... That’s another point to what we were discussing. We were talking about the Rawlins impact to the club. They took an active role in the commercial side which, from the podcast, dropped massively so sorry if I don’t share your sentiment if we are to thank them for getting involved with Falkirk. I think we would have been better off if they never set foot in the club to be honest. Edited October 4, 2022 by Guest 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shodwall cat Posted October 4, 2022 Share Posted October 4, 2022 As far as I'm aware the Rawlins are in no rush to get their money back. Happy to take a back seat and hope we go further up the leagues. I would think though that if things went pear shaped a bit and their investment was put at risk then they'd take up the board position they are due and have someone representing their corner . 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest FFC1965 Posted October 4, 2022 Share Posted October 4, 2022 I think I'll be due an increase in my take home pay next month as a result of the reversal of the National Insurance hike so I'll bump up my FSS subscription accordingly. Like others I guess I started at the minimum of £10 to see how it went, it feels like the right time now to bump it up. I imagine that there is as much potential growth in the FSS through existing members increasing their sub than via new members but both would be good. Like an earlier poster, I see the FSS subscription as a donation to the club, in order to try and protect it against a Romanov type scenario. Influence doesnt come into it. I thought the Directors were very good on the podcast. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 4, 2022 Share Posted October 4, 2022 3 minutes ago, Shodwall cat said: As far as I'm aware the Rawlins are in no rush to get their money back. Happy to take a back seat and hope we go further up the leagues. I would think though that if things went pear shaped a bit and their investment was put at risk then they'd take up the board position they are due and have someone representing their corner . Are the Rawlins still due a seat on the board? Thought they gave that up when they stepped down. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 4, 2022 Share Posted October 4, 2022 1 hour ago, strichener said: Aka The Patrons? The Patrons have two on the Board as do the FSS (or they should). They have absolutely no more influence than the FSS in this structure. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LatapyBairn. Posted October 4, 2022 Share Posted October 4, 2022 (edited) 4 minutes ago, Van_damage said: Are the Rawlins still due a seat on the board? Thought they gave that up when they stepped down. A 10% shareholding entitles you to a seat on the board so technically with twenty odd percent of the club they could place two people on the BOD if they wanted. Edited October 4, 2022 by LatapyBairn. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shodwall cat Posted October 4, 2022 Share Posted October 4, 2022 Airdries form seems to have fallen of a cliff since oor Charlie signed for them. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 4, 2022 Share Posted October 4, 2022 (edited) 13 minutes ago, LatapyBairn. said: A 10% shareholding entitles you to a seat on the board so technically with twenty odd percent of the club they could place two people on the BOD if they wanted. Not for too much longer though as if the FSS continue to invest more then their shareholding will soon drop below 20%. Edited October 4, 2022 by Guest 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
strichener Posted October 4, 2022 Share Posted October 4, 2022 15 minutes ago, Back Post Misses said: The Patrons have two on the Board as do the FSS (or they should). They have absolutely no more influence than the FSS in this structure. How much %age shareholding does each respective party hold? That is the true indication of power/influence, not board seats. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LatapyBairn. Posted October 4, 2022 Share Posted October 4, 2022 1 minute ago, strichener said: How much %age shareholding does each respective party hold? That is the true indication of power/influence, not board seats. When the FSS have purchased it’s full allocation of shares both groups will hold roughly 26% give or take. Obviously the patrons invested as a lump sum and the FSS are purchasing shares monthly as the money comes in. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RC_Bairn Posted October 4, 2022 Share Posted October 4, 2022 9 minutes ago, Van_damage said: Not for too much longer though as if the FSS continue to invest more then their shareholding will soon drop below 20%. As will the Patrons... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LatapyBairn. Posted October 4, 2022 Share Posted October 4, 2022 1 minute ago, RC_Bairn said: As will the Patrons... Of course it will, unless off course the patrons group grows as well. Either way it’s a positive thing having these two fan led organisations eventually having a majority shareholding in the club between them. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 4, 2022 Share Posted October 4, 2022 1 minute ago, RC_Bairn said: As will the Patrons... Yeh everyone’s shareholding will dilute but think the patrons have more shares than the Rawlins so be longer before they drop below 20%. Also the Patrons seats are not reliant on shares held. Similar to the FSS. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 4, 2022 Share Posted October 4, 2022 9 minutes ago, strichener said: How much %age shareholding does each respective party hold? That is the true indication of power/influence, not board seats. Again that is not correct as in reality unless you have 50% of the shares or even 75% of the shares to push some things through you can’t do anything with the fundamentals of the club. That is the whole point of the three legged stool. The Patrons appointed two people to the Board, you saw them in action last night. FSS has been given 2 Board seats immediately (without the required shareholding) to match that. Hardly an organisation determined to “run” the club on their own. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RC_Bairn Posted October 4, 2022 Share Posted October 4, 2022 5 minutes ago, Van_damage said: Yeh everyone’s shareholding will dilute but think the patrons have more shares than the Rawlins so be longer before they drop below 20%. Also the Patrons seats are not reliant on shares held. Similar to the FSS. No they don't. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LatapyBairn. Posted October 4, 2022 Share Posted October 4, 2022 (edited) 3 minutes ago, RC_Bairn said: No they don't. Your wrong here. The patrons do now hold a larger shareholding the the Rawlins. Edited October 4, 2022 by LatapyBairn. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 4, 2022 Share Posted October 4, 2022 1 minute ago, LatapyBairn. said: The patrons do now hold a larger shareholding the the Rawlins. Why let the facts get in the way. Patrons Group 1,004,659 shares 25.1% Stellar Blue Ltd 851,250 shares 21.3% 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.