Jump to content

The Falkirk FC Thread


Recommended Posts

18 hours ago, Harry Kinnear said:

Kelty on Saturday is huge, given the way we have played against them in the previous two games. We have to win the physical battle and take our chances. I think the squad is better placed mentally to do this, Henderson in midfield makes a big difference.

I know you're correct.

And I've been away too long (10 years) and need a reality check.

But that just seems wild to me. 

Kelty? Remember we played Ajax once........and won. 

  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Hank von Hell said:

I know you're correct.

And I've been away too long (10 years) and need a reality check.

But that just seems wild to me. 

Kelty? Remember we played Ajax once........and won. 

  

I know and agree totally, but unfortunately it’s where we find ourselves at the moment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Harry Kinnear said:

I know and agree totally, but unfortunately it’s where we find ourselves at the moment.

Someone at the Bonnyrigg game hit the nail on the head by pointing out a few years back we were playing at Hampden now it seems like playing in someone's back garden

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, grahamstonbairn said:

Just got my AGM papers by email. Highlights;

FFC made a loss of £1.2m in the year to 31st May 2022.

Although losses are forecast to reduce this year, the current business model is seen as unsustainable.

Options for the club will be outlined to shareholders at the AGM on 23rd February.

 

 

 

 

 

 

The numbers are horrible but this model has been ingrained now for 12 years. Cup runs, player sales and to a lesser extent concerts have papered over the cracks.

If fan ownership is to succeed many more than 635 fans need to sign up to FSS.

Failure to increase that significantly will mean the Board have no option but to seek external investment IMO. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, grahamstonbairn said:

Just got my AGM papers by email. Highlights;

FFC made a loss of £1.2m in the year to 31st May 2022.

Although losses are forecast to reduce this year, the current business model is seen as unsustainable.

Options for the club will be outlined to shareholders at the AGM on 23rd February.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Last year seems to have been even worse than some of the reports leaked at the time suggested, luckily the club had both cash reserves and a significant investment mid season from the patrons group otherwise we wouldn’t have seen the season out. The other part I noted was the projected 400k operating loss predicted in this year has been covered via 145k of soft loans plus further external investment, is that 265k the board have been able to raise from within the patrons group/FSS or has there been another contributing share purchase? It’s another pretty sizeable amount particularly if it came from the patrons group when you put it on top of the near 300k those same fans put in last year.  The general take seems to be for fan ownership to work properly the numbers paying into the FSS need to increase significantly in line with other fan owned clubs our size who run similar models, I’m expecting another big push from the FSS in conjunction with the club this summer to attract people, perhaps the FSS could work with the club and offer a membership package in conjunction with season tickets? 

Edited by LatapyBairn.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, LatapyBairn. said:

Last year seems to have been even worse than some of the reports leaked at the time suggested, luckily the club had both cash reserves and a significant investment mid season from the patrons group otherwise we wouldn’t have seen the season out. The other part I noted was the projected 400k operating loss predicted in this year has been covered via 145k of soft loans plus further external investment, is that 265k the board have been able to raise from within the patrons group/FSS or has there been another contributing share purchase? It’s another pretty sizeable amount when you put it on top of the near 300k the fans put in last year. 

I believe that the FSS cash contributes to the 400k 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Back Post Misses said:

I believe that the FSS cash contributes to the 400k 

That situation is not sustainable and should be a one-off.

Scrambling around mid-season to get cash to keep trading indicates the boards financial projections were way out.

The economic outlook is grim for everybody with declining disposable income and sadly going to the football is one of the things that people have to give up if it means food on the table. 

Next year's budget must be cautious and more realistic the future of the club depends on it. Then if there is a surplus of funds mid-season then the manager can wheel and deal. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, HopeStreetWalker said:

That situation is not sustainable and should be a one-off.

Scrambling around mid-season to get cash to keep trading indicates the boards financial projections were way out.

The economic outlook is grim for everybody with declining disposable income and sadly going to the football is one of the things that people have to give up if it means food on the table. 

Next year's budget must be cautious and more realistic the future of the club depends on it. Then if there is a surplus of funds mid-season then the manager can wheel and deal. 

The club made an operating loss of 1.2 million in the previous year! I actually think getting that down to 400k in the space of 6 months while still being able to fund a decent side on the park is quite good going. Hopefully that improvement continues and they have ideas and strategy to continue to grow our income, simply cutting the playing budget is to simplistic and will actually only make the problem worse, if there is a lack of product on the park it drives turnover down, discourages sponsorship, hospitality and crowd numbers inevitably drop. We need to be creative and find a way to close the funding gap that isn’t simply cut cut cut. If we are not competitive on the park the whole business model collapses. 

Edited by LatapyBairn.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, HopeStreetWalker said:

That situation is not sustainable and should be a one-off.

Scrambling around mid-season to get cash to keep trading indicates the boards financial projections were way out.

The economic outlook is grim for everybody with declining disposable income and sadly going to the football is one of the things that people have to give up if it means food on the table. 

Next year's budget must be cautious and more realistic the future of the club depends on it. Then if there is a surplus of funds mid-season then the manager can wheel and deal. 

we have budgeted this way every season since we went down. As stated before the hole has been filled before with Transfer fees, Cup runs and concerts. 

The FSS cash comes in every month, every season.


ATM FSS contributes c95k/year. So if you take where we are now and we have the same budget then the “hole” is 300k. Therefore if you could get to 1800 fans the “hole” would only be 100k. 
The fans either want fan ownership or not. The numbers are the reality of the situation. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, LatapyBairn. said:

The club made an operating loss of 1.2 million in the previous year, I actually think getting that down to 400k in the space of 6 months while still being able to fund a decent side on the park is quite good going. Hopefully that improvement continues and they have ideas and strategy to continue to grow our income, simply cutting the playing budget is to simplistic and will actually only make the problem worse, if there is a lack of product on the park it drives turnover down, discourages sponsorship, hospitality and crowd numbers. We need to be creative and find a way to close the funding gap that isn’t simply cut cut cut. If we are not competitive on the park the whole business model collapses. 

100% this 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Ecosse83
1 hour ago, HopeStreetWalker said:

That situation is not sustainable and should be a one-off.

Scrambling around mid-season to get cash to keep trading indicates the boards financial projections were way out.

The economic outlook is grim for everybody with declining disposable income and sadly going to the football is one of the things that people have to give up if it means food on the table. 

Next year's budget must be cautious and more realistic the future of the club depends on it. Then if there is a surplus of funds mid-season then the manager can wheel and deal. 

I’d stop watching the scaremongering BBC if I was you! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Kevin James Left Knee said:

My personal view:

Let's be realistic. From a standing start we have 630 people paying into FSS at least £10 a month.

THAT IS PRETTY AMAZING and it is NOT a failure. 

To expect 1200 or more to join up within 18 months is to my mind not realistic. With the exception of Hearts, none of the other fan organisations are doing better than 50% of their season ticket holders giving additional donations.

Fans want fan ownership but let's not see a success story be re-scripted as failure or lack of desire.

The important thing is long term steady growth and keeping those already paying in on board. To try to accelerate membership growth beyond what is actually feasible will damage the project.

There are issues with fan ownership - that we see now in these accounts - mainly when money injection is needed the fans can't raise enough quickly enough but this is a known issue (I organised a one day seminar on The Future of Scottish Football back in 1999 for the John Wheatley centre and this was identified then as the biggest problem with fan ownership). It does not mean that fan ownership cannot happen especially if you want a fan ownership that is not a majority of shareholders but a significant proportion.

Football is a stupid industry - it is a "sugar daddy" industry because it has relied on investment from individuals who do not usually seek to regain their investment. But it should not be like that. The whole of football needs to be rebalanced but because there are always people willing to bail out clubs far bigger than ours then the model keeps being dominant. If other clubs had to live within their means then all of football would have to create sane budgets and stop the ever increasing wage and transfer bills.

FSS is a huge success story even when compared with other such organisations and I am fed being told it is under performing. 

I've seen people claim that our number of members is embarrassing and I really don't get it at all. Over 600 people when it's just starting up is incredible, especially considering where we currently are. I'm signing up after work :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, SouthStander1876 said:

I've seen people claim that our number of members is embarrassing and I really don't get it at all. Over 600 people when it's just starting up is incredible, especially considering where we currently are. I'm signing up after work :)

It is incredible and we really need more to appreciate that. It can definitely grow but you can’t just do that by constantly telling fans they must sign up to support the fans ownership model.

The truth is that not every fan signed up for fan ownership so we just need to encourage people the benefits of being part of a collective group of fans and the good that can come of it with security, funding and having a say. Without a mass crisis at hands then it a slow burner but it’s heading in the right direction. 

If you are comparing it to other clubs then you have to accept the reality that other clubs aren’t earning that much more. Going by the rule of thumb the ceiling for the FSS is probably another £3-4K/month. That would take us above Morton and very close to Motherwell and Dunfermline. It is only another £50k per year though so won’t cover the budget hole.

We just need to appreciate those who have joined and encourage others to do the same but not simply because they have to. 

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, SouthStander1876 said:

I've seen people claim that our number of members is embarrassing and I really don't get it at all. Over 600 people when it's just starting up is incredible, especially considering where we currently are. I'm signing up after work :)

Good man/woman/boy/girl/both/either/horse/cat/etc, etc...

Get your pals telt as well!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, Kevin James Left Knee said:

My personal view:

Let's be realistic. From a standing start we have 630 people paying into FSS at least £10 a month.

THAT IS PRETTY AMAZING and it is NOT a failure. 

To expect 1200 or more to join up within 18 months is to my mind not realistic. With the exception of Hearts, none of the other fan organisations are doing better than 50% of their season ticket holders giving additional donations.

Fans want fan ownership but let's not see a success story be re-scripted as failure or lack of desire.

The important thing is long term steady growth and keeping those already paying in on board. To try to accelerate membership growth beyond what is actually feasible will damage the project.

There are issues with fan ownership - that we see now in these accounts - mainly when money injection is needed the fans can't raise enough quickly enough but this is a known issue (I organised a one day seminar on The Future of Scottish Football back in 1999 for the John Wheatley centre and this was identified then as the biggest problem with fan ownership). It does not mean that fan ownership cannot happen especially if you want a fan ownership that is not a majority of shareholders but a significant proportion.

Football is a stupid industry - it is a "sugar daddy" industry because it has relied on investment from individuals who do not usually seek to regain their investment. But it should not be like that. The whole of football needs to be rebalanced but because there are always people willing to bail out clubs far bigger than ours then the model keeps being dominant. If other clubs had to live within their means then all of football would have to create sane budgets and stop the ever increasing wage and transfer bills.

FSS is a huge success story even when compared with other such organisations and I am fed being told it is under performing. 

I 100% agree with you that adding another 1200 is almost impossible BUT if they want proper fan ownership that is the number we have to get to IMO as quickly as possible or outside investment will be required.

I am not in anyway taking away the efforts of FSS so far merely pointing out the reality of where we are and what, in my opinion, needs to happen. 

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...