The Falkirk FC Thread

[LatapyBairn.]

7 minutes ago, Back Post Misses said:

Can’t see it being that big TBH. Turnover heading to min £2m we won’t be spending over £1.2m on the player budget 

Maybe I’ve picked it up wrong, I’m pretty sure the figure was 65% but can’t honestly say I completely took everything in. Maybe someone else who was there will clarify. 

Edited February 26, 2023 by LatapyBairn.

[Guest]

6 minutes ago, LatapyBairn. said:

Maybe I’ve picked it up wrong, I’m pretty sure the figure was 65% but can’t honestly say I completely took everything in. Maybe someone else who was there will clarify. 

Of course it depends what they put in that budget 

[Bainsfordbairn]

46 minutes ago, Springfield said:

Do we have any credible information on what % to turnover for players salaries ?

The 65% reported by others ties in with my recollection of the AGM. I think it was stated that was a general target for all clubs and would be ours going forwards. 

As BPM alluded to, it depends on what's included in that budget. My assumption is the that players salaries are not a standalone figure. The 65% football budget will likely include things like physio, match analysis, scouts, hotels, team bus, meals and even pre-season tours if we ever have one again. 

[Springfield]

Need to study the AGM papers. If the quoted ratios aren’t to far off, and the suggested player’s percentage isn’t far away, there’s considerable cash flowing out the club. 

[Guest]

19 minutes ago, Springfield said:

Need to study the AGM papers. If the quoted ratios aren’t to far off, and the suggested player’s percentage isn’t far away, there’s considerable cash flowing out the club. 

Little point looking at last years numbers TBH. That is nothing like the picture now. 

[Shabba]

Did the discussion around ticket prices go into detail? Our ticket prices may not have risen for a while but current adult prices are already high for League One. On the other hand, kids getting in for free is brilliant 

Edited February 26, 2023 by Shabba

[Guest Brockvillenomore]

40 minutes ago, Springfield said:

Need to study the AGM papers. If the quoted ratios aren’t to far off, and the suggested player’s percentage isn’t far away, there’s considerable cash flowing out the club. 

The club spends every penny it earns and then, this year an additional £400k. So £1.9m revenue, plus the loss = £2.3m cash out the door.  

[RC55 FFC]

It’s much criticised over the last few years but good to see the website & mobile version has been updated fully. Far better. 

[Reggie Perrin]

41 minutes ago, Shabba said:

Did the discussion around ticket prices go into detail? Our ticket prices may not have risen for a while but current adult prices are already high for League One. On the other hand, kids getting in for free is brilliant 

Remember that we are being hit with double digit inflation for the first time in decades.

Will require a £2 increase just to stand still.

[Springfield]

27 minutes ago, Reggie Perrin said:

Remember that we are being hit with double digit inflation for the first time in decades.

Will require a £2 increase just to stand still.

I,ll take a pitch that the STs price increase will be in line with inflation, and some marginal discount for early bird renewal’s. 

[Springfield]

If your a Dundee Utd fan, look forward to seeing you next season. 

[Bainsfordbairn]

7 hours ago, Duncan Freemason said:

That one group or the other might have differing views on how certain things can be achieved is a perfectly normal piece of business I would have thought.

That's a fair point, though I think it's irrelevant as I'll explain in a minute. 

To back up your theory, lets take a scenario:- prices need to rise. The patrons have no objections because they probably have more disposable income available so the increases won't affect them. Whereas the FSS members may be more affected as the increase in the price of a season ticket could be harder for some of their members to find. 

So under the circumstances, it's reasonable to assume the two groups could have differing views. 

However, it's irrelevant because policy is not decided by the groups. It's decided by their BOD appointees who make decisions on their own. They don't poll their members to test the water, as doing so would be a breach of confidentiality. You can't exactly ask six hundred plus FSS members whether we should approach John McGlynn to become the next manager. Or even two dozen patrons. One of them would be guaranteed to leak. 

The opinions of the two group members don't matter. What's important is that their appointees can work together, which so far appears to be happening. I'm not sure why people try to turn that into a conflict scenario. 

[Bigbrbairn]

A real good plan would be to bring in a season ticket plus option. Instead of paying the perhaps £240 in a one go an option of paying £30 a month with £10 of it going to FSS membership might draw in a few. People already FSS member could pay the standard £20 but could agree to take the plus scheme and increase their involement.

[bothkennarbairn]

4 hours ago, Bigbrbairn said:

A real good plan would be to bring in a season ticket plus option. Instead of paying the perhaps £240 in a one go an option of paying £30 a month with £10 of it going to FSS membership might draw in a few. People already FSS member could pay the standard £20 but could agree to take the plus scheme and increase their involement.

Thats a really good idea.

[Springfield]

Clubs normally rely on a big uptake with STs so that they can maximise playing budgets as quickly as possible. But a monthly scheme in conjunction/parallel could entice more subscriptions.

[Guest]

5 hours ago, Bigbrbairn said:

A real good plan would be to bring in a season ticket plus option. Instead of paying the perhaps £240 in a one go an option of paying £30 a month with £10 of it going to FSS membership might draw in a few. People already FSS member could pay the standard £20 but could agree to take the plus scheme and increase their involement.

Is that not in principle what the membership scheme is? 

[FFC 1876]

14 hours ago, Donathan said:

Every time we play Airdrie the lad Gabby McGill impresses me. We should sign him.

He always gets right stuck in, wins headers and causes an absolute nuisance of himself but he doesn't really have any end product. Still only 22 right enough.

Quite happily take Frizzell or Smith off their hands this summer though.

Edited February 27, 2023 by FFC 1876

[Shodwall cat]

8 hours ago, Bainsfordbairn said:

That's a fair point, though I think it's irrelevant as I'll explain in a minute. 

To back up your theory, lets take a scenario:- prices need to rise. The patrons have no objections because they probably have more disposable income available so the increases won't affect them. Whereas the FSS members may be more affected as the increase in the price of a season ticket could be harder for some of their members to find. 

So under the circumstances, it's reasonable to assume the two groups could have differing views. 

However, it's irrelevant because policy is not decided by the groups. It's decided by their BOD appointees who make decisions on their own. They don't poll their members to test the water, as doing so would be a breach of confidentiality. You can't exactly ask six hundred plus FSS members whether we should approach John McGlynn to become the next manager. Or even two dozen patrons. One of them would be guaranteed to leak. 

The opinions of the two group members don't matter. What's important is that their appointees can work together, which so far appears to be happening. I'm not sure why people try to turn that into a conflict scenario. 

They are there to represent the interests of the fss though and ensure decisions are made that would be favoured by their membership otherwise there is absolutely no point in groups having members on the bod.

Edited February 27, 2023 by Shodwall cat

[Shodwall cat]

1 hour ago, FFC 1876 said:

He always gets right stuck in, wins headers and causes an absolute nuisance of himself but he doesn't really have any end product. Still only 22 right enough.

Quite happily take Frizzell or Smith off their hands this summer though.

Frizzell is a cracking wee player. Always liked him at Killie and was very surprised when he left and only ended up playing part time for dumbarton.Can never understand why he's stuck at Airdrie playing in front of a few hundred folk every other week and getting paid a pittance. He could be playing at a far higher level . He's not one of their part time players I don't think or then I could see why he's hanging about down here.

 

Edited February 27, 2023 by Shodwall cat

[Guest Brockvillenomore]

8 hours ago, Bainsfordbairn said:

That's a fair point, though I think it's irrelevant as I'll explain in a minute. 

To back up your theory, lets take a scenario:- prices need to rise. The patrons have no objections because they probably have more disposable income available so the increases won't affect them. Whereas the FSS members may be more affected as the increase in the price of a season ticket could be harder for some of their members to find. 

So under the circumstances, it's reasonable to assume the two groups could have differing views. 

However, it's irrelevant because policy is not decided by the groups. It's decided by their BOD appointees who make decisions on their own. They don't poll their members to test the water, as doing so would be a breach of confidentiality. You can't exactly ask six hundred plus FSS members whether we should approach John McGlynn to become the next manager. Or even two dozen patrons. One of them would be guaranteed to leak. 

The opinions of the two group members don't matter. What's important is that their appointees can work together, which so far appears to be happening. I'm not sure why people try to turn that into a conflict scenario. 

Exactly. Why does there need to be even the idea of any conflict? I expect there will be differences but they can be resolved by working together we all want the same thing, surely.