The Falkirk FC Thread

[Bairney Rubble]

2 minutes ago, Skyline Drifter said:

Ah, some detail here. Is this fact or conjecture? It suggests the repayment terms are £17,500 per annum rather than actually 20% of income as the original post suggested.

No fact. I am just a fan with a brain. The deal stated 20 year repayment period. If, like your mortgage, you want to pay it back quicker then why not. I presume the 20% is based on current income to FSS.

[NavyBlueArmy1876]

A couple of people have asked what happens if FSS folds or membership drops and income/ money in their bank eventually reaches 0.

I assume in that scenario any outstanding money is simply written off as per the terms of the loan. Which is obviously a risk that relies on the good people of FFC holding up our end of the bargain 

Edited May 31, 2023 by NavyBlueArmy1876

[bairn88]

4 minutes ago, Skyline Drifter said:

That does rather seem to be the implication. Which is a wholly remarkable use of public funding. I guess the follow up question would be what happens to the shares if the FSS actually folded? Although I guess that's unlikely. What's more likely is they exist but run out of cash and can't repay the debt by the target date. In which case does it lapse altogether or get extended until it is repaid?

If it's written off after 20 years then there is a clear incentive for fans to divert their cash to other initiatives meantime surely?

Exactly. It seems to rely on the good will of fans of a certain club. 

I don't think they'll have trouble with us, but given they extend to roll the scheme out...not entirely sure they've thought this through...

[Jimmy1876]

2 minutes ago, Skyline Drifter said:

That does rather seem to be the implication. Which is a wholly remarkable use of public funding. I guess the follow up question would be what happens to the shares if the FSS actually folded? Although I guess that's unlikely. What's more likely is they exist but run out of cash and can't repay the debt by the target date. In which case does it lapse altogether or get extended until it is repaid?

If it's written off after 20 years then there is a clear incentive for fans to divert their cash to other initiatives meantime surely?

The whole point of FSS is to have a voice in the way the club is run, the money facilitates that and continues to facilitate that. If you are suggesting people divert their cash to try and skip out on a loan (which is a pretty out there thing to suggest for more than one reason) then you are also requiring all members have decided they no longer support the fundamental purpose of FSS, are happy for the shares to then be resold and for anyone to buy them. I highly doubt all 700 members do not believe in fan ownership and are happy for anyone to come in and buy the club and give up on that fundamental strategy.

[bridge of allan bairn]

This looks like good news.

Can someone with a better grip on the club's finances please sum up where we are now please with regards to what will be left for this year's playing budget? Taking into account the following and anything I've missed...

£350k govt loan

Scottish cup money

Fss money

Season ticket and sponsorship etc

£400k hole at start of each season

New pitch allowing for grants etc

New floodlights again allowing for grants

I'm hoping if there is a significant surplus now it isn't all given to the manager over the summer for players and we use it all up trying to get out of this league. Hopefully some is held back incase we do go up to strengthen next season or for January if we need a new manager and to strengthen to get up. I'd give mcglynn a healthy and fair summer budget but hold a decent chunk back if we are in a position to do so. 

Edited May 31, 2023 by bridge of allan bairn

[FK1Bairn]

Is this what was left of the 'missing' £600k? 

As a Falkirk fan, this seems a great deal. Almost too good to be true. 

As a Falkirk Council taxpayer, I do agree there are other facilities in the area this money could have been invested in.

[Jimmy1876]

1 minute ago, NavyBlueArmy1876 said:

A couple of people have asked what happens if FSS folds or membership drops and income/ money in their bank eventually reaches 0.

I assume in that scenario any outstanding money is simply written off as per the terms of the loan

I think to be honest it sounds almost like a donation from the government to try and support fan ownership and gives fans organisations a chance to run their clubs in the hope that does something positive for the community. The terms are so good it's almost like they are saying if they get money back then great, if not then they tried something to support communities and it didn't work. 

[HopeStreetWalker]

4 minutes ago, Shodwall cat said:

. Main thing is the money isn't being used to pay off private individuals it's going straight to the club.

What irks me is the money being spent to upgrade the floodlighting.

The club don't own the floodlights so yet again the Council will be pissing themselves laughing that their multi-million pound asset is being maintained and upgraded to the highest level ensuring it's capitol value that they can use as security for a loan and there is diddly squat the club could do about it. The council could come to an arrangement with a private equity company to take over the facility and the first thing we would know about it was then was all over.

Therefore the bare minimum should be spent on care and maintenance and soldier on with the current lighting releasing funds for the playing squad. 

[MazzyStar]

The SNP obviously want to hold onto Falkirk West at the next election.  

[bairn88]

2 minutes ago, HopeStreetWalker said:

What irks me is the money being spent to upgrade the floodlighting.

The club don't own the floodlights so yet again the Council will be pissing themselves laughing that their multi-million pound asset is being maintained and upgraded to the highest level ensuring it's capitol value that they can use as security for a loan and there is diddly squat the club could do about it. The council could come to an arrangement with a private equity company to take over the facility and the first thing we would know about it was then was all over.

Therefore the bare minimum should be spent on care and maintenance and soldier on with the current lighting releasing funds for the playing squad. 

 

[falkirkzombie]

3 minutes ago, HopeStreetWalker said:

What irks me is the money being spent to upgrade the floodlighting.

The club don't own the floodlights so yet again the Council will be pissing themselves laughing that their multi-million pound asset is being maintained and upgraded to the highest level ensuring it's capitol value that they can use as security for a loan and there is diddly squat the club could do about it. The council could come to an arrangement with a private equity company to take over the facility and the first thing we would know about it was then was all over.

Therefore the bare minimum should be spent on care and maintenance and soldier on with the current lighting releasing funds for the playing squad. 

today's 1/50 NAP landed

Edited May 31, 2023 by falkirkzombie

[NavyBlueArmy1876]

3 minutes ago, bridge of allan bairn said:

This looks like good news.

Can someone with a better grip on the club's finances please sum up where we are now please with regards to what will be left for this year's playing budget? Taking into account the following and anything I've missed...

£350k govt loan

Scottish cup money

£400k hole at start of each season

New pitch allowing for grants etc

New floodlights again allowing for grants

I'm hoping if there is a significant surplus now it isn't all given to the manager over the summer for players and we use it all up trying to get out of this league. Hopefully some is held back incase we do go up to strengthen next season or for January if we need a new manager and to strengthen to get up. I'd give mcglynn a healthy and fair summer budget but hold a decent chunk back if we are in a position to do so. 

 

Scottish cup money has filled that 400k hole this season with a small profit. As you say the pitch and floodlights will be covered by this, though mainly via the grant money

 

1 minute ago, FK1Bairn said:

Is this what was left of the 'missing' £600k? 

As a Falkirk fan, this seems a great deal. Almost too good to be true. 

As a Falkirk Council taxpayer, I do agree there are other facilities in the area this money could have been invested in.

 

My understanding is the £600k has been filled by increased income from sponsorship, hospitality etc

That money was over and above our usual £400k loss, hence losing around £1.1m last season. Imagine we will be back to around £400k each season going forward. Which will now be filled by this loan/ continuing to increase FSS membership  

[grumpyoldman]

41 minutes ago, RC_Bairn said:

You don't have to agree with it.  Them's the facts.  The FSS has two board seats and will still have two board seats when it pumps in the 350k.  If you think that's having 'more of an influence' then I agree there is little point in discussing further.

If it comes to a card vote at an AGM for example having 26% of shares is a far bigger influence than having 10% of the shares

[MulsonFFC]

5 minutes ago, HopeStreetWalker said:

What irks me is the money being spent to upgrade the floodlighting.

The club don't own the floodlights so yet again the Council will be pissing themselves laughing that their multi-million pound asset is being maintained and upgraded to the highest level ensuring it's capitol value that they can use as security for a loan and there is diddly squat the club could do about it. The council could come to an arrangement with a private equity company to take over the facility and the first thing we would know about it was then was all over.

Therefore the bare minimum should be spent on care and maintenance and soldier on with the current lighting releasing funds for the playing squad. 

Absolute Wooooooosh!!

[Hughsie]

3 minutes ago, bairn88 said:

 

I’ve got that idiot on ignore but I’m glad you quoted him here. That has to be seen to be believed.

[Skyline Drifter]

22 minutes ago, Bairney Rubble said:

No fact. I am just a fan with a brain. The deal stated 20 year repayment period. If, like your mortgage, you want to pay it back quicker then why not. I presume the 20% is based on current income to FSS.

Well because some loans allow early or accelerate repayment and some do not. There are literally hundreds of mortgage products that don't allow early repayment without penalties. I paid my mortgage back in 12 years because I went out of my way to select one that allowed over-payment and early redemption. Most don't.

Whilst that is largely related to the investment return on interest which won't be relevant here, you can't just assume that it necessarily is allowing flexible repayment.

Edited May 31, 2023 by Skyline Drifter

[Bairnardo]

Going to run a time saving trial in the coming weeks. 

The objective us simple. Spend less time analysing whether or not something Falkirk FC do is good for the Club. 

 

The methodology is simple. 

1. Hear of news coming out of Falkirk FC pertaining to the operations, football or otherwise of said club.

2. Scan P&B to see if posters like "RC Bairn" are dripping like a fucked fridge over it. 

3. Upon confirmation of said mewling, celebrate good news. 

Edited May 31, 2023 by Bairnardo

[Skyline Drifter]

11 minutes ago, Jimmy1876 said:

The whole point of FSS is to have a voice in the way the club is run, the money facilitates that and continues to facilitate that. If you are suggesting people divert their cash to try and skip out on a loan (which is a pretty out there thing to suggest for more than one reason) then you are also requiring all members have decided they no longer support the fundamental purpose of FSS, are happy for the shares to then be resold and for anyone to buy them. I highly doubt all 700 members do not believe in fan ownership and are happy for anyone to come in and buy the club and give up on that fundamental strategy.

I know what the point of FSS is. But the fan ownership is already achieved. You have a loan, you've bought the shares. I think you're missing the point of the question here. It's not a massive reach that a football club in 5 years, or 10 years, or 15 years, suddenly has some other major funding shortfall and launches some other major fundraiser for it which fans pile into and stop their FSS standing orders because "that will just be written off anyway". It's absolutely nothing to do with not supporting an ownership model.

[Hughsie]

Just now, Skyline Drifter said:

I know what the point of FSS is. But the fan ownership is already achieved. You have a loan, you've bought the shares. I think you're missing the point of the question here. It's not a massive reach that a football club in 5 years, or 10 years, or 15 years, suddenly has some other major funding shortfall and launches some other major fundraiser for it which fans pile into and stop their FSS standing orders because "that will just be written off anyway". It's absolutely nothing to do with not supporting an ownership model.

My view of this whole thing is that the Scottish Government aren’t actually that bothered if they don’t see all the money back. 

[Skyline Drifter]

2 minutes ago, Hughsie said:

My view of this whole thing is that the Scottish Government aren’t actually that bothered if they don’t see all the money back. 

I suspect you're right. In the scheme of things £350k is peanuts to them and the publicity is probably worth more than that, at least for this first one.

If they get repayment then all the better. If they quietly end up writing it off in 20 years because there's no means of enforcing payment that will be a very trivial problem for another government who, if anyone even notices, will simply blame mistakes made by a past regime.