Jimmy1876

Might have been a penalty but tired of watching Alegria waste good scoring opportunities in favour of trying to get a penalty which has not once worked this season. If he had held some strength he might have got his head on that and scored. Better chance of that than penalties at this rate and he is wasting them. His hold up play is better than Burrels though.

I would agree that at the time it seemed that way but for me coming down to league 1 the first year there has a lot more going for us than being down here 4 seasons watching a steady decline in third tier football. The relegated championship team is always the favourite to go back up the first year as well. Where the last 4 years for me have been like watching a slow death. And there is a much bigger rebuild needed now that there was then (although not saying it was good then either) which is why I say simply looking at points is a touch oversimplistic. It's still relevant for sure and it's not good enough, but I think time is the answer rather than calling for yet another managers job. Also who is the alternative? Right now there is absolutely no one to me that sounds a better shout than McGlynn. If teams that had better seasons than us last season are struggling to find good managers then how do we expect anyone to want to work here after firing the one manager who had a remote chance of turning things around while he was here and was showing improvements?

It doesn't look great but for me the difference is that McGlynn is having to build up from one of the worst seasons we have had after years of mismanagement, so for me comparing like for like points/win rate etc is too oversimplistic. Especially with 14 of the squad already signed so it's difficult to build from scratch exactly what you want. Also comparing the league tables this season and last, points may not be that different or far off but look at the goal difference. Shows already what kind of improvement there is. I will give him a bit more time for that reason and think it's far too early to be against him just yet. Saying that lawal coming on that late in the game is shocking, he had one bad game and Oliver scores against Wick and that is deemed enough to take Lawal's spot? Also Morrison needed off far earlier but bringing McGuffie on as a replacement is just nowhere near an improvement. Desperately hoping for some movement in January with players out as well as in.

I get that this is a common and completely understandable opinion but this is my main reason for feeling so strongly about fan ownership. Because the fans get to vote for two places on the board and can rightly vote people in or out when necessary which has a big impact. Likewise fan ownership gives a steady, reliable income to the club that can be used for the playing budget. If we don't get the numbers then we don't get those things. In the right numbers fan ownership could contribute to the solution to both of those things.

The target was £250,000 raised by FSS from October over around 8 months. With an average of £12 per month membership which it was at the time that would need a total of 2604 members.

What's disappointing about what you've just said is that I actually agree with you that the board should be criticised when required and jumping on people or trying to shut people up by saying you're just an ex board supporter is not okay. But here you are doing the exact same when actually all I've said is that I don't understand people complaining about the lack of clarity when they have been open since the summer about the situation. But the situation is rightly concerning and if there is criticism due it will come, at the moment I'm happy with the information and direction we have been told we are heading.

Please don't put words in my mouth.... I don't think I once for a second blamed fans for anything? To recap, the board made a push for fan ownership thinking it would cover the costs - factual. The uptake has been less than anticipated, and I am disappointed with that, because I have hope for fan ownership and worry if the uptake is not high enough it will not be continued. But likewise completely understand the other support that has been provided and even made reference to the increased gates etc. Also you've spent quite some time saying you aren't against the board and condemning people for suggesting you are an ex-board supporter but when someone disagrees with you you immediately jump to "board supporter". Bit hypocritical no? I was also pretty clear about how disappointed I was with the board on their statement about it being unfair only 10% of fans were supporting etc for exactly this reason. Fans support in every way they can and in this climate anything is excellent. Doesn't change my disappointment at the numbers for FSS which I thought and hoped would be higher especially when the board have been clear about the finances.

I have to say I'm really not understanding the "come clean now" rhetoric from some of our own fans?? I understand other clubs saying that who have not been following but not sure what was not clear back in July from the meet the board night about "we have a 400k operating loss which we need fan ownership to cover or we will have to look elsewhere". And then again in September, and October, and November? The concerning thing to me is not the lack of clarity but about the fact we had no cash reserves in the bank this season (which was made clear at the meet the board night) because of ridiculous over spending from the last board. Yes giving McGlynn extra budget is definitely a gamble, but as far as we know, the bigger gates and hospitality uptake etc is covering that so it seems it's maybe a gamble that is paying itself off. Although it would have been ideal if that wasn't needed we equally need to get out this league as soon as possible so I also feel it's worth that gamble. On top of that the board have made an attempt for fan ownership to cover costs, and get a steady income from people who can be relied on (us as fans) and our fans have been completely apathetic about it. 620 members is okay but I'd have thought the emergence of the financial situation would have encouraged more and honestly I'm disappointed that it hasn't. And finally as for the AGM being delayed, again not sure what is not clear from their most recent statement that they need the finances to be confirmed before they have the AGM. And it's the same with the auditors so I don't get why people are acting as if it's such a surprise and the board have some how mislead people. It's been laid out for everyone to see for months now, to the detriment of us here who have to listen to other clubs rejoicing over it

I mean if you can't see the benefit of £125k cash injection in a financial emergency for the cost of losing a meagre £7500 per year in a multimillion £ budget then I would maybe leave the finances to other people. You have also said they have adjusted cashflow as if that is some kind of insult and not the literal goal of the initiative???

Didn't someone say days ago that 14 of these 10 year tickets had already been requested? So there must be an appetite. I get that it's a cost of living crisis but these kind of tickets are obviously not meant for those that are most affected by it, and are more for the people who can spend £5k with or without a cost of living crisis. So I don't really see the issue. I guess the only downside could be it highlights the desperation as other clubs only offered these immediately before administration.... But the club has been very clear about the financial difficulties for months so it's not new information and just brings extra money we wouldn't otherwise get.

25 tickets sold at £5k = £125k. £400k - £125k = £275k left to fill. Don't need an accounting degree for that.

I understand that actually, but as I mentioned, I think the board have been questioned and have been quite clear the situation is bad but they have x y and z plan they hope will solve the various issues. If they were outright lying surely they would just say everything is fine and nothing to worry about? That's why I am inclined to trust what has been said thus far anyway, I hope I'm not proven wrong.

To be fair I think people are asking questions? I think the board has been consistently pretty clear about all of the above. They had a meet the board session over the summer where these finances were laid out in PowerPoints. They have statements discussing the financial issues and a podcast which was only just a month ago. They have now written an additional statement which updates even more on the podcast. So I think the questions are all pretty much being answered and they have been clear about the situation for months now and are showing progress at every step. Unless, as you say they are outright lying I wouldn't say there is cause for concern in terms of information not being available. My main concerns are mainly in performance staying good so that we do remain on track for that 600k revenue increase (which they said we are to exceed in the most recent supporters update) and that the 400k is covered. But from what Latapy Bairn has said these various initiatives are on track to cover that 400k... So currently all my concerns/worries are being addressed with more clarity still to come via AGM so I don't feel the need to go breaking doors down demanding more answers just yet.

Do you know if the various pay offs for Sheerin, Rennie and Holt were included in the spending budget for last year, or was this an additional cost unrelated to spending budgets?

Great to hear that the 600k increase in revenue is on track and potentially to be exceeded, that's one less thing to worry about (for now). Wonder what sort of investment they will be looking at to cover the shortfall then, soft loans from shareholders or outside investment?

Last update was some uptake in numbers of the supporters society but not nearly enough to reach the target. Although good numbers for the first year and without a background of administration. Don't know about the patrons group (the other fans group) but in total I think the two fans groups own around 30% of shares? I don't know if the patrons have bought more or not but seems likely some other form of investment will be needed to cover the shortfall.

Yeah. My point in mentioning the 600k was to address the fact that McGlynns increased budget was covered by a planned increased revenue. And that the higher gate sales and sponsorship are going in to the increased revenue target, not eating away at the 400k operating loss. So only really investment from the patrons, FSS or externally can cover the 400k.

Yeah for the operating loss. But this operating loss was based on a budget that included a planned income which was 600k higher in revenue than what was made last season. As in last year our income was 1.2million, spending was 2.2million. this year the planned income is 1.8 million (600k more than last year) with a spending budget of 2.2 million. Meaning we need to increase revenue by 600k on last year (which was on target at date of podcast) and additionally cover the operating loss of 400k. That's what I wrote immediately after the podcast so please correct if that is wrong.

I think this was planned to be covered by the increased revenue. There was supposed to be a target of 600k increase in income from last year which they said was on target and this included covering the increased team budget. The 400k operating loss was then supposed to be covered by other investment on top of that.

Would be good to get a financial update. When the podcast came out my main concerns were the revenue gap which was needing about 600k increased on last year if costs remained the same. Is this still on target as it was mid October? And would also be good to know if there is any new investment to cover the operating loss gap from patron's or external sources. I guess it will all come out in time with the AGM but to me the podcast was pretty clear about how serious the situation was

Said before the game I'd have rather had Mackie come in if it was Donaldson that was out and stand by that. But actually should have been a replacement for Henderson. Williamson is a mile off match fit for me and should never have had a start as his first game back too. MacKay also didn't have a great game. Neither did Burrel. Good effort to come back though and the goals were well taken, Lawal deserves man of the match for that and at least a point.

Are you suggesting Coll Donaldson is the one that's been ill? If this is the case I think I'd rather Mackie come in, can't imagine Williamson will be on to start for his first game back either

Yeah that makes sense, as I said I wasn't sure it would balance out as I don't know what the extras are. But it's definitely a good cash injection and definitely needed just now. Limiting it is a good idea for that reason though because fans who can pay the £5000 are likely fans who would be getting season tickets/hospitality usually.

Completely missed the point here of helping out fans at one of the most financially taxing times of year, in a cost of living crisis. But if you are concerned about finances there are also some financial benefits to marketing strategies like this. Maybe attracting some fans who don't usually go to games but show up because it's cheap, get into the game and maybe end up going more often. Also attracting a larger gate with more people maybe likely to buy a hat or a scarf while they are there. As for selling 10 years worth of season tickets at once? Maybe an initial cash injection but you are then missing out on 10 years of income from fans who would have likely bought season tickets anyway, not sure that actually balances out very well.

There is a Morrison one too which is interesting... Progressive dribbles and passes are quite low for the league which seems to add up with him losing the ball and possession a lot in midfield, although could also be down to the fact he plays wide and often gets the ball just so he can put a ball in the box. Lots of dribbles, few of them are successful. What is surprising is his accuracy, 89% shots on target!! And 84% accurate crosses!!