LatapyBairn.

Very harsh to drop MCCann the way he’s played in the games so far, he’s been excellent. Mackie has also been very good at center back.

They did, sorry I maybe didn’t word that very well. The SG money was divided up based on what league you were in, not league position. Your correct, championship clubs got 500k each, think our division the clubs got 110k.

The premier league clubs received interest free loans of up to 3 million. The rest of the clubs were awarded grants based on league position from the Scottish government. The Anderson money was a flat grant across all 42 clubs, think it was 70k or something

I’m sure the extra 500k they received the likes of ourselves and Patrick didn’t helped produce “what is done on the pitch” as you put it . Most of the time money does tend to influence how good or bad the product on the park is unfortunately.

40p a share is the price that the Rawlins bought in at, the share issue was set up around those same terms as part of the “three legged stool” idea.

There are still unsold shares available for this at minimum purchase of £400, I don’t think the club can actively advertise the sale of shares (something to do with company law) but they most definitely welcome any fan wanting to invest. If you are interested email the club and get in touch with Gordon Wright who I think deals with that side of things. Although for what it’s worth I do think the FSS is a better mechanism as it allows a large block of shares to be controlled by the fans giving us a real influence, where as individuals with tiny shareholdings really cant have a proper influence other than being able to attend the AGM and ask questions.

I think it’s a bit of both, when/if the FSS reaches its target of 26% looking forward longer term I presume the money raised will still be re-invested in the club in some other way than the purchase of shares. Not to bankroll the full club operation as such but certainly to provide an extra income stream that would give us a competitive advantage, ideally with the members being canvased on how money raised each year should be spent.

Think that target is 26% with the patrons group taking another 26% giving the club majority fan ownership. The Rawlins , SA and MR make up the bulk of the remaining shareholding I presume

Are both the FSS representative positions being voted on or just the one Nigel Serafini holds with it being the temporary appointment after Gordon white stepped down?

10% apparently but it doesn’t sound like he’s going to be moving for a particularly large fee if anything at all. Reports are the club is trying to offload him after falling out the team under a new manager.

I did, can’t recall them exactly now but as the dual membership thing was never an issue for me I’d probably never have picked up on it. As long as everything was disclosed before the vote then what is the problem? Don’t get what the fuss is about to be honest. Starting to seem like a solitary poster on here is for some reason trying to create an issue where there isn’t one.

No single group does have an overall majority, each set of directors are there to represent the respective fans groups(they are not in opposition to each other!) and are elected by the members of said groups. If fans have an issue with dual membership there are upcoming elections where they can vote for change. Like I’ve said I don’t have a problem with directors being members of both groups but for some reason you seem to so I’d suggest you vote to elect an alternative candidate if one puts themselves forward, if a majority of fans feel the same way as you they can use there vote for change.

That’s a fair enough point, although I don’t have any particular issue with a potential director being a member of both groups a few obviously do. Perhaps in the upcoming elections candidates should be told to lay all that out in they’re pre- election spiel to let fans have a fully informed vote. It is however a very minor issue, teething issues like this will be ironed out I’m sure as they new model progresses.

All 4 directors from the respective groups are also democratically elected by the fans/members of each group, if for some reason you have an issue with the governance of the club join one of the groups and vote for a different candidate in the upcoming FSS elections. I personally have no issue with directors being members (and paying into) both groups, it gives us added investment and a broader talent pool to choose from, the club is now more democratic and fan inclusive than its ever been in my opinion but if you don’t like something then stand for election yourselves or even just raise the issue and use your vote for a change of director(s). Really don’t get the state you seem to be in over this, the new structure will have a few teething problems no doubt but the outline of it is absolutely bang on how a club of our size should operate and I’m sure will eventually get the club back to where it should be both on and off the pitch.

Agree with most of this however I really can’t see us having 5 new players here in time for the Montrose game, possibly before the end of the transfer window but even at that it’s a push as I reckon we’d need to move at least one/possibly two out the door first. If we get the right players in I’m content to wait rather than jump at another Jamie Wilson type signing but the obvious risk is we may not have the squad ready in time ti start the season.

As long as we are challenging to win the division and go into the playoffs with a bit of momentum giving us a chance of promotion most fans will take that. Being 30 points off top stop and finishing 5/6th again is absolutely unacceptable however

Then join the FSS if you haven’t already and vote for another set of directors when the elections come along if you have an issue with the status quo. The governance of the club is the most democratic and fan inclusive it has ever been, I’ve no issue with a patron putting money into the FSS or vise versa then standing for election, at the end of the day it’s the members/fans who elect these directors and we need the largest possible pool of cash, skill set and talent to draw upon, putting up barriers to that is beyond crazy in my opinion, anybody prepared to join one of these groups and stand for election putting cash into the club, giving up time and energy for no reward deserves a thank you. You do seem to be creating issues that don’t excist here and I can understand why some posters are suggesting some kind of agenda.

What recourses? By all accounts the playing budget is actually larger than it was last season and will most likely be if not the largest pretty close to the largest in the division. it’s just unfortunate the previous regime has hamstrung the club with so many poor players on long term contracts tying a lot of that cash up, I trust McGlynn to eventualy move a few on and get a few in but it won’t happen overnight and we simply can’t rush in and sign any old shite again this season with the remaining budget we do have available, it will most likely be into August before McGlynn finalises his squad.

https://www.falkirkfc.co.uk/2022/06/30/bairns-to-elect-fans-director/

Agree with this, at the time in the position we were in taking a gamble on a player of Griffiths quality made sense to me and plenty of others on here seemed to agree at that time. Can understand why Rennie wanted him, in hindsight it didn’t pay off but that’s the nature of football. The wages he received (roughly 24k) over what was only a 4 month contract would have made very little difference to our budget in the grand scheme of things. Banging on about it is pointless , It’s a non issue for me.

Expecting ST sales to be at our championship levels is surely a bit unrealistic when we are currently a mid table league one side. We had 2700 season ticket holders the season we went down, getting any where near that is remarkable IMO. Particularly considering the dross of the last 3 seasons and the country being in the middle of a cost of living crisis.

Unfortunately we are stuck with they’re legacy, it’s crucial we can somehow move at least a couple out to get a couple extra in. McGlynn has been left with some job on his hands not only to source good enough players but trying to shuffle that squad to free up wages, the mess Holt has left us in lumbered with terrible players on three year deals can’t be magicked away unfortunately. Having said all that we are told that even without any departures we can still expect another couple of players plus a couple of loans, if all those singings are bang on and can go straight into the first 11 we definitely have a chance. McGlynn now has no margin for error tho, every player brought in will need to hit the mark.

The seats in the main stand have been in place and in use for 20 years! I’m guessing it’s pretty standard procedure in most stadiums one or two might need replaced from time to time!

For no definitive reason I’ve a similar suspicion, they obviously punched above there weight a bit last season and were excellent at times. It’ll be harder to do the same again after losing a manager and they’re best player. The fans expectations will be raised now as well which also brings an added pressure to deal with, particularly for a rookie management team. I can see it being a tricky season for them.

On his interview at the time I don’t think the manager classes Oliver as an out and out striker, unless we have no other options his position will probably be one of the front three behind a striker in McGlynns preferred 4-2-3-1. Certainly his goals to game ratio would suggest he’s not an out and out number 9.