LatapyBairn.
-
Posts
1,415 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by LatapyBairn.
-
-
12 minutes ago, Peter LaFleur said:
Thanks for the factual update. That’s really gutting to read. Were the BoD open to the fans involvement for managerial selection at all? Were the fans group suggesting any names?
They were prepared to allow two members of the group to sit on the BOD however the removal of certain other board members and involvement in selecting of a new manager received a very polite “NO but can we still have your money”
1 -
2 minutes ago, bairn88 said:
Why do we only ever hear of these rather shocking and damning things days or weeks after they happen, on Pie and B from second hand accounts?
Why don’t the fans group who’s money seems to have been flat out rejected come together and release an official statement? That isn’t a criticism of them, just a “why doesn’t it happen?” query.
For me these allegations are something our whole support should be aware of. Instead it’s confined to the 5% of the support who read Pie and B. If we want real change more people must know.
I think it’s a case of people not wanting to burn bridges in case of potential future investment, a lot of what was discussed was confidential. There may also be legal issues however I do agree a brief carefully worded statement wouldn’t be a bad idea.
2 -
2 minutes ago, Bairnardo said:6 minutes ago, LatapyBairn. said:Not just a rumour, all true. The group were investing as a block and had an agreement to take (26%) however walked away after most of they’re requests including the restructuring of the current BOD and having some form of involment in the process of selecting the new manager we’re stonewalled. The club seem to want investment but don’t want the fans investing to have any say on how the investment is spent. The one slight bonus is both SA and MR were happy to dilute and donate there shareholding massively to allow the investment to happen, it’s not them that were the issue.
Have to forgive my ignorance of business here.... Whats stopping them from donating/selling their holdings to the fnas group and the fans group then forcing their way to a position of influence accordingly?
A transfer of shares needs BOD approval
0 -
3 hours ago, Zbairn said:
While we are on the rumour mill...... heard another belter !
The BoD and Rawlin's rejected an offer from some local businessmen to take a £600k stake in the club. Apparently the sticking point was that certain members of the Board didn't want to lose their blazers and Rawlins supported that.
Not just a rumour, all true. The group were investing as a block and had an agreement to take (26%) however walked away after most of they’re requests including the restructuring of the current BOD and having some form of involment in the process of selecting the new manager were stonewalled. The club seem to want investment but don’t want the fans investing to have any say on how that investment is then spent and managed. The one slight bonus is both SA and MR were happy to dilute and donate they’re own shareholding massively to allow the investment to happen, it’s not them that were the issue.
5 -
10 hours ago, Bairney The Dinosaur said:12 hours ago, LatapyBairn. said:I’m hearing the guys raising the funds for the Crunchie initiative to re-name the south stand have been struggling to deal with the BOD in getting things moving now the the bulk of the funds have been raised, the club are being very obstructive and are now demanding the funds raised are to be handed over to the club directly and they will directly deal with putting up the signage and arranging an opening game against Hibs themselves. All sounds far to familiar! ....we want your money but don’t dare ask for a say in how we spend/waste it!.....BtB had the exact same issues with the previous board after getting the cash in place for the fans takeover at the time which unfortunately never came to fruition after the club reneged. I’m actually starting to worry that despite new faces in the board room and a new owner in reality nothing has changed. Same people involved behind the scenes treating the fans with utter disregard. This should have been a PR gift for the club, money is fully raised by the fans and all they asked for in return was to have fan involvement in the actual design and look of the new signage to be placed above the bar entrance, on the front of the south stand and also something in the south stand bar with Crunchies name on it. Unbelievably one board member demanded if they wanted to use space in the south stand bar the initiative would have to pay for the advertising space!!! Absolutely unbelievable
I heard KK has been a right dick about the whole thing from the start.
Heard the same thing, don’t think KK likes any ideas or suggestions unless he’s come up with them himself. Very career driven guy who likes taking credit
1 -
I’m hearing the guys raising the funds for the Crunchie initiative to re-name the south stand have been struggling to deal with the BOD in getting things moving now the the bulk of the funds have been raised, the club are being very obstructive and are now demanding the funds raised are to be handed over to the club directly and they will directly deal with putting up the signage and arranging an opening game against Hibs themselves. All sounds far to familiar! ....we want your money but don’t dare ask for a say in how we spend/waste it!.....BtB had the exact same issues with the previous board after getting the cash in place for the fans takeover at the time which unfortunately never came to fruition after the club reneged. I’m actually starting to worry that despite new faces in the board room and a new owner in reality nothing has changed. Same people involved behind the scenes treating the fans with utter disregard. This should have been a PR gift for the club, money is fully raised by the fans and all they asked for in return was to have fan involvement in the actual design and look of the new signage to be placed above the bar entrance, on the front of the south stand and also something in the south stand bar with Crunchies name on it. Unbelievably one board member demanded if they wanted to use space in the south stand bar the initiative would have to pay for the advertising space!!! Absolutely unbelievable
11 -
42 minutes ago, Back Post Misses said:
Add the these two, the other ex-MSG and Rawlins it is over 60% of the club, pretty similar to the former MSG. If you think those two are not still having a say then you are either naive or don’t know how the place has operated for 20 years.
Both SA and MR have always said they would only sell to Falkirk fans - bingo - lies.
I am like you however and want Rawlins to start influencing things that we can actually see. He needs to get over from the States as soon as he can and start engaging with a wider audience who won’t just tell him what he wants to hear or blow smoke up his arse in return for power.Agree with most of what your saying but for SA and MR to form what your effectively saying would be an MSG mark 2 they’d need Rawlins on board, he’s not going to blindly go along with the wishes of that pair, at the end of the day Mr Rawlings now owns the bulk of our club, is his own man and the buck stops with him. I don’t know the guy personally but I find it very hard to believe he’s intending allowing others already at the club to over rule him looking at the level of investment he’s put up and also the guys previous track record in football he obviously intends on implementing upward change. I can’t believe he is going to be the type that’s influenced by two grumpy old men whispering in his ear. The buck now stops with him, especially if he takes up the additional 19% shareholding. I do have confidence going forward however I admit I am now starting to get a little impatient at the lack of obvious change behind the scenes or engagement with the fans. I’d like Rawlins to be a little more visible even if for nothing more than a PR point of view at this point.
0 -
49 minutes ago, Stainrod said:
The still effectively have control. They have taken a back seat and appointed a few accountants to run the club for now but they believe they have a significant investment to recover before they agree to move on . Trouble is nobody else agrees the club is worth hee haw and selling their shares to the punters will prove a difficult gig to pull off . I have genuine sympathy for their position and if / when we improve as a team then the pressure will be off. Most fans just want to watch a competitive team with a few stars and some attacking play so unless we do a partick or livi and manage to get a numpty lottery winner to bankroll us then we had better get used to relative mediocrity.
If your referring to SA and MR they have had 3 significant cash offers for they’re shareholding, all in the region of 30p per share so could have chosen to walk at any time but instead are still hanging about. One from the BtB patrons group , one from Kenny Rodgers and one from Alan Gows consortium. Also I’m not so not convinced they “control” the club in any meaningful way, neither have a seat on the board and even they’re combined shareholding is now less than the 27% of the club Rawlings now owns as our largest shareholder. If anybody has a “control” over the club it should be him. I’d like to see him starting to be a bit more hands on now. He surely hasn’t invested 350k (with more to come, I’m told he has an option to buy a further 19%) into a club just to let the status quo rumble on, the guy must have his own plans.
0 -
Is it one out one in regarding Todd? Are we looking to bring another player in before the deadline?
0 -
Mutch gave them a goal at the Falkirk stadium so we’ll take that gift in return thank you very much
0 -
6 hours ago, JulioBairn said:
4-3-3. There’s about 5 permutations that could happen at the back but I’d like to see a midfield 3 of Gomis, Alston and Telfer with Fotheringham and Morrison either side of Keena up front.
Looks like you’ve got your wish. Appears it is indeed a 4-3-3 with the midfield and front 3 you’ve suggested.
0 -
6 hours ago, Duncan Freemason said:
So, the ex MSG shares........if someone pays £400, who gets the £400? I don’t understand who at this point in time, really owns the shares and gets the money.
Money will go to the club, they bought the outgoing MSG shares at 30p and are selling at 40p via the share issue. It’s a move in the right direction, will give the fans a bigger shareholding should they invest and will also raise capital for the club at the same time. However it’s highly disappointing the club have stone walled the proposal for larger investment via what was the former patrons group from the previous BtB scheme, I’d heard the group had raised circa 400k and were prepared to buy in in exchange for a seat on the board and a meaningful % shareholding but the club (Gary Deans) isn’t keen on a group having such a large block vote and would prefer the shares were sold/distributed in smaller numbers around the wider group of fans. I completely agree with some of the above posters, SA and MR have run they’re course now and should perhaps consider selling or diluting they’re shareholding. People should remember the current board were effectively put in place by the previous MSG, as much as GD has been relatively impressive and speaks very well he’s still the voice of SA and MR. Hopefully now Rawlins has his feet under the table as our new major shareholder things will shake up over the next 18 months or so and larger fresh investment from the fans may be possible.
0 -
31 minutes ago, HopeStreetWalker said:
Council own the 4 story office complex.
FFC own the rest.
Whole facility run by the Community Stadium Company where Council & FFC are shareholders, it has never made a profit.
Not a better time financially to buy out the council but the surrounding land would have to be in the deal as well. However is there a market for that type of office space ?
FFC would once again own their stadium outright. Therefore you have a asset to secure borrowing if required.
Stadium design was flawed from the start. Should have been 4 smaller stands with fewer rows of seats at a steeper angle the fans would have be closer to the action and have a better atmosphere.
Soulless barn of a place.
Sandy Alexander owns the south stand , he would have to agree to sell that part of the stadium as well. Not just the council, there are 3 parties involved in ownership of the stadium. SA, the club and the council.
0 -
1 hour ago, Back Post Misses said:
We pay more renting that stand than Livingston pay WLC for their whole stadium. Great deal thatAlways though it was excessive, certainly no gift or favour from a fan. It’s 100% been seen as long term investment opportunity for SA personally, nothing more nothing less. Dunfermline also pay the consortium that bought in during administration less in rent for the whole stadium than we do for that one stand.
2 -
6 hours ago, roman_bairn said:
Do you ACTUALLY know that we are still paying rent at the moment? I believe it’s frozen....No, I don’t know, that’s the reason I asked the question in the first place! Various other posters then suggested we are indeed still paying rent. It’s a pretty relevant question considering the stand isn’t being used at present. Do you know that we are NOT still paying rent? It’s a fair assumption to presume the rent situation is exactly the same as it was pre covid without the club or SA having communicated otherwise.
0 -
1 hour ago, Reggie Perrin said:
Should we demolish it then rebuild at a later date when we need it again?
No but a season with out rent while the stand is effectively mothballed would have been a nice gesture, 80k for a stand we can’t and don’t use is a waste of money. It would be easier to swallow if the money was going toward paying off an asset we would eventually own. Renting especially in the current circumstances makes no sense.
2 -
7 hours ago, Proudtobeabairn said:
I'm always surprised there are folk who don't expect SA to get get something back for his up front investment here. Suspect £80k a year is far less than we'd be paying for a bank loan.
Depends on the terms of a the loan/mortgage but regardless of that if we were repaying a loan at least it would have a final payment where we would eventually own the thing. At the moment it’s 80k a year rent down the toilet for a stand we can’t and don’t use. Would have been a nice gestures from super fan to maybe give the club he supports few months rent holiday during covid times where the stand has no use.
2 -
10 minutes ago, Back Post Misses said:
0 -
10 minutes ago, badgerthewitness said:
Are we still paying rent for the South Stand?
Brilliant question actually! I wonder if SA is still paying himself 80k a year in rent for a stand we don’t and can’t use. Wish I had asked this at the AGM now, by rights that’s one saving the club should be making. Is anybody in a position to shed any light on this?
1 -
4 hours ago, Bairnardo said:
See if we have to wait until August to start a third season in League 1, having not had a proper crack at getting out of it, and still have to jump through hoops to attend a match, if we can even attend at all, I think I will be done with it.
Beyond pissed off and realising that being at the games is pretty much the be all and end all of being a fan. Anyone else think similar?Feeling exactly the same, the the inequality and borderline corruption shown by our footballing authorities combined with the attitude shown by some of our member clubs really tests your faith in the game. If it happens I think I’m done with Scottish football, I’m out.
4 -
Light at the end off the tunnel now, this combined with the pending share issue and fan investment could be a massive turning point for the club.
0 -
12 minutes ago, Back Post Misses said:
The thing that no one outside Falkirk probably know is we are about to receive a large investment from an ex-Stoke and Orlando City Director who has already stated he will be investing more than his initial 400k.
So Falkirk are, you are correct, a poor league 1 side at the moment, but with a new long term investor who has, I believe a new long term plan for the club. That may or may not be of interest to someone like Wright but if you don’t ask you will never know.
That investment will be signed off this Thursday at a club EGM.Regarding the EGM I presume the club have sufficient shareholder numbers and vote isn’t in question to ratify it? .....As in the minor shareholders won’t be required to vote in numbers again this time for it to be passed?
0 -
5 minutes ago, Mr. Alli said:
I've just had a quick scan back as far as the start of November. Can't see a single mention of the viewing figures in any match update, 5050's or reviews. I never read all the comments so it might have been in there.
Are you meaning STs sold, rather than individual match streams bought?
I presumed the figures would have included season tickets sold as well as the PPV in the same way match attendances were calculated as a combined ST sales and PATG.
0 -
2 minutes ago, Mr. Alli said:
Terrific. Can you share where you get this info from?
Club announced the viewing figures on they’re Facebook page
1
The Falkirk FC Thread
in Scottish Championship General Chatter
Posted · Edited by LatapyBairn.
Regarding the recent collapse of the proposed investment from a consortium of fans SA and MR were both happy to dilute and donate they’re shareholding to allow the group to take a 26% holding therefore matching the share of the club the Rawlins own.They were happy to step aside for the right investor(s) and are not the problem, they weren’t involved in any negations other than allowing they’re large joint shareholding to be used for the sale, things broke down because the BOD headed up by the Rawlins wouldn’t bend with regards to a few of the red lines the group had regarding the running of the club, structure of the board and the process of appointing a new manager.