LatapyBairn.

The difference in prize and gate money alone as outlined by JS between 3rd in our league or 3rd in the championship is surely the obvious solution toward solving the problem! Potentially near 400k of a difference, let get out of this fucking league!

Did the former MSG members provide all the soft loan offerings last year? I was told the majority came from members of the patrons group?

Think we all new this year was win or broke, barring another unexpected cash windfall in this year if we don’t go up next seasons playing budget is going to be vastly reduced which could could easily see us fester in this league for an extended period. Good that he clarified this years position however with Mcglynn already working on a slightly reduced budget at least the cash in the bank will see us through the season. The hand to mouth way the club has been operating really does prevent us from properly investing any cash windfalls we do get, any extra money coming in inevitably just plugs a hole or repays a soft loan, very frustrating rut to be in.

You’ve lost me, I’ve absolutely no idea what’s happening behind the scenes on the FSS committee, certainly not heard or read anything to suggest there is an issue. Are you telling us there is some kind of unrest or is it just idle speculation? As far as I’m aware it’s a happy ship. A lot of good people have came and went since the birth of the supporters society (some I know personally)and although I can’t speak for Pablo Roberson in each of they’re cases eventually it’s ended up a lack of available time to commit in what essentially becomes an unpaid job that was the issue.

Neilson was excellent for us, not sure why anybody could see differently to be honest. Would have taken him back in a second, could play right back or center back and was equally effective as both at a very young age still performing in a poor team.

I agree but I don’t think having a handful of part time players would be that difficult to incorporate. I’m guessing it’s hard to entice a top part time player into full time football who already has a decent paying job. It may well actually be a gross wage cut unless we as a club pay way over the odds. There’s definitely a place for a hybrid set up where it could work to our benefit if the training regimes could somehow be figured out.

Last I asked the intention was to repay the soft loans in full when it became clear the club was out of the woods and no longer needed them thanks to the cup run and Scottish Government money.

Not being dismiss, obviously isn’t as clear to some as I first thought. I now think the question should be asked to knock it on the head and move on. Normal procedure would obviously be the financials coming out in full at the AGM but if it puts any remaining uncertainty to bed Jamie probably should just give a bit of a heads up before then in the interests of transparency. I’m sure he will if asked.

Yes, ask him to confirm that. Thought it was pretty clear already but obviously not to some. The club has also never ever budgeted to presume progress beyond any of the initial rounds of cup competitions.

Perhaps you should askJamie to confirm that the club is fully funded for the season and they won’t be out with the begging bowl come Christmas time again. There seems to be a couple of posters on here questioning that.

Think that’s probably more a question for the manager, Jamie may be able to answer if there is still any form of budget remaining to bring in a player in or if we’d need to move players on first however.

Depends who the manager is, an Ian McCall type who is out of work would not cost a penny. Two different years and football seasons with completely different sets of circumstances, budgets and starting bases which are incomparable for multiple reasons. Think you’re adding 2+2 together and getting 5 here, the club setting commercial targets means nothing when budgets are based on the previous years income. My advice is maybe stop thinking about this, if you want to scrutinise the club finances shareholders will probably receive papers around November / December time, I’m sure you’ll then see the club is not in any immediate trouble or in danger of of running out of money. At the moment having looked at all the available information I am more than content the club has a solid and conservatively put together plan going through this current year which does not involving having to meet any excessive or overly ambitions targets as you keep suggesting. Perhaps you should quiz the BOD at the upcoming AGM or I’m pretty certain if you wanted to fire over an email you’d get a response as in full as could be allowed legally.

We wouldn’t actually have to pay Mcglynn off I suppose, his contract runs out in 9 months time. Putting him on gardening leave would suffice and I still don’t get where your are correlating the playing budget being linked to any stretched commercial targets? At no point have I heard or read anything stating that, having ambitious commercial targets is a good thing it does not mean the playing budget is directly linked to meeting those targets. We are running with a slightly smaller playing budget this year as well, I think we only have 20 or so senior players supplemented by the apprentices. We had to carry (and pay) a number of senior players last year the manager hadn’t signed with a squad of about 25 in total (14 of whom were already under contract) so efforts were made to allow him more flexibility in the transfer market, that’s not the case this season.

Think that was the case, it was not just a gamble based on FSS numbers although I think that was a big chunk of it. Existing patrons investing more and new patrons being attracted didn’t materialise to the levels hoped for either and McGlynn wasn’t able to move on some of the dead wood through pre season as the club had expected. Having asked a few of the directors these questions at various fan events they are as open as they legally can be and accept last season was a calculated gamble but felt had they not invested in the playing budget we’d never have been able to grow the commercial side of things to the levels we now have, fans may also have fell away if we hadn’t made signings pre season and put a competitive team on the park. This years budget seems much more conservatively planned, , there are no calculated gambles. The appetite to be mid season trying to raise funds again isn’t there and the plan seemed to be whatever cash reserves, season ticket figures and FSS numbers we had by the end of June was going to be how we outlined our playing budget. I’ve no reason to believe that has changed.

If not for the cup run I’m told yes, we would have been relying partially on those soft loans from shareholders.

We have most probably the largest playing budget in the division, how the manager decides to spend it is up to him. I have no idea if he’s spent it all or still has money for a right back, left back or any other position but it’s quite clear to me exactly what that statement you quoted is saying and nowhere does it say we have budgeted to run at an actual in the red unfunded loss (as was the case in the previous year) regardless of whether or not I have any further information. The club accounts will be published soon enough for shareholders to read although for the life of me I’ve no idea why the panic (certainly in the short to medium term)over finances given the statement you quote and the information already available in the public domain. Next season as we know there may well be the need for a degree concern however there are a million if’s, buts and maybes before it’s possible for anybody to budget for that until we see both our exact end of year position for the current season and also which league we will be in.

Absolutely nothing in that statement says the club have set a budget this season predicting to run at a loss! No idea why some seem desperate to make that leap! Pretty certain you’ll find when the accounts are published we ran a decent profit in the last financial year due to both the cup run, 3 new patrons, the 10 year season ticket thing and exceeding all our commercial targets ect ect which would have left us with a cash balance starting this season before a ticket, strip or advertising board was even sold. Something the new BOD did not have the luxury of the season beginning before. That statement is quite obviously emphasising the longer term need to grow our income through all the means mentioned as we may not every season be in a position where we have that small cash reserve sitting there as could easily have been the case this year if it wasn’t for the cup run and success of the commercial departments ect. The club are absolutely correct to look forward beyond the next 12 months and emphasise the need for continued growth across all income streams which is clearly what they are doing here and laying out potential effects to the business model if we are unable achieve a more steady stream of continued income longer term that isn’t as erratic as cup runs or player sales.

Yes. Correct.

There is no shortfall, loss or “mid season financial crisis” predicted, at no point has the club indicated that so not sure where you are getting your information! They have spoke about potentially running an operational deficit not an unfunded loss. The two are completely different, one is fully funded one is not.

His form at the time of the extension was excellent, he was arguably our best player at that point and the stats will back that up. His form then off a cliff at the season end along with the rest of the squad, there was obviously something more to that combined collapse than the form of a single player which I hope has been looked into and learned from this season. Can totally understand why Mcglynn wanted to keep him.

The last major cash investment was actually from the patrons group which came after the Rawlings bought into the club(around 300k or so) Then there was also the Scottish government loan as well.

Not 100% sure about the new deal but when it was INEOS they paid for every single under 12’s ticket taken up. Just presumed the new sponsorship was the same.

The club still get paid for the under 12’s tickets so not sure what difference it makes.

I think they mean it’s ironic for a fan of QOTS to be trying to point out Falkirk are not a “premier” club. Although I’m not sure why somebody would equate the name of a hospitality suite within the stadium to how anybody views the club in a general sense anyway. It’s only a name, there are multiple lounges in the stadium and they all have different names.

Agreed but unless we move a few players out the door I think a young right back on loan is probably going to be our lot. If Partick hadn’t scored that last minute goal against cove the league cup money may have allowed us to do more and Alegeria would have provided excellent competition with MacAver. Really hope he doesn’t end up playing against us now!