LatapyBairn.

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

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

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.

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.

Is it one out one in regarding Todd? Are we looking to bring another player in before the deadline?

Mutch gave them a goal at the Falkirk stadium so we’ll take that gift in return thank you very much

Looks like you’ve got your wish. Appears it is indeed a 4-3-3 with the midfield and front 3 you’ve suggested.

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.

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.

Always 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.

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.

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.

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.

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?

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.

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.

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?

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.

Club announced the viewing figures on they’re Facebook page

Most home games the club have had between 3 and 4K fans paying for the online stream already this season so I don’t think it’s unrealistic to expect a higher subscription rate in a cup game against premiership opposition.

This!

What does a “virtual ticket” entail? If it’s a live televised game the clubs can’t sell PPV due to the tv contracts.

Agreed, it doesn’t feel like we would have a chance going into this game, in years gone by you always had some sort of hope when playing the old firm. Felt the same before the sevco tie, the gulf between where we were on the park even just a few seasons ago and now is massive.

I’m curious as to what has given you the impression people are celebrating a tie against Celtic because of a 26k windfall. I’ve seen nothing suggesting that’s how anybody has viewed the tie