RC_Bairn

Agreed - it's a shifting of the goalposts. We were told to join FSS which would in turn increase the shareholding in the club. It looks like the FSS has now reached the upper ceiling of it's shareholding and any further money coming into FSS will either be a donation to the club or used to service the SG loan. Disappointing is an understatement. Anyone know if the Patrons are imposing similar limits on themselves??

Better watch yourself. @LatapyBairn. will be along in a moment to tell us that everything is fine

Read the last supporters update. It says the only reason we are full time this season is the cup run and FSS money. If there's no cup run, external investment, promotion or a tangible increase in FSS membership this season then we won''t be full time next season. Then there will need to be some hard choices made about whether the funding for the 'academy' continues as it is.

That's some logic you've got there. It's fine to slag off Lewis and Stuart who volunteered their time and effort to the club, but don't dare slag off SD.

Not that I'm aware of. They were directed at the previous board I believe?

Aye, I'm the arsehole. Jog on.

Still salty about it I see. My point remains the same - if you're going to make personal comments about people (as SD does on a regular basis) then you better be prepared to take them too. As my auld granny used to say "Don't dish it out if you can't take it."

If you're going to be referring to people as 'cretins' then you better have a pretty squeeky clean back story in my view. Don't dish it out if you can't take it

You don't have to agree with it. Them's the facts. The FSS has two board seats and will still have two board seats when it pumps in the 350k. If you think that's having 'more of an influence' then I agree there is little point in discussing further.

Bold statement from a man with your past

You've hardly been a shining beacon of positivity over the years

1. But the point is that the FSS's voice is not any stronger. The FSS has two board seats just now, and will still have two board seats after it puts this money in. So actually you're not getting any more influence. I think its a harder sell to say to fans now - join FSS and 80% of your money will go to FFC and 20% will go to repaying a loan we took from the Government. 2. It's more the fact the nature of the organisation has changed without consultation with members. We were never told that a % of our payments would be used to service a loan. 3. Appreciate the clarification from Robocop. I hadn't seen his post until after I posted

Heaven forbid people are allowed to ask legitimate questions

I was typing before it was posted. And the above doesn't answer all of my questions.

Must admit to having a bit of trepidation when I read the Sun story last night but wanted to wait for the further detail before commenting. Just seen the FSS statement and still worried. Looks like we are making short-term financial promises based on future income (Remember Craig Whyte anyone?). Hopefully the FSS outriders on this forum can put me at ease. 1. Does this news now make the FSS an even harder sell to the ordinary punter? Before you could claim that every penny went into the club. Now the marketing line has to be 'Join FSS and help us pay back the Government'. 2. As an FSS member myself, bit worried this has not been done in consultation with members. Seems like a bit of mission creep to me. I joined the FSS on the basis that my money would be drip fed into the club and not to pay back a loan. If I had known that FSS was suddenly going to be taking out loans I might have thought twice. 3. Would be good to have a bit of clarity on what the loan is secured against? 20 years seems a long time and there's no guarantee that FSS will exist in that time. So what happens if FSS defaults? Also a worrying lack of clarity about who calls the shots at FSS. Lots of different names mentioned on the committee but who is actually in charge? A bit like the Club where no one seems willing to step up and take the responsibility.

Based on what? The handful of times you saw him play against us? I know you feel the need to defend everything that goes on at FFC these days but that's just daft.

So you must have supported the two year deal for Hetherington given he was PT?

Dishing out two year deals when there's a real possibility that we'll be hybrid or part time in 24/25 is mad. Holt rightly got criticised for handing out 2 and 3 year deals but now we're just repeating the same mistakes. I'm all for the manager getting freedom to sign the players but should he really be tieing the club's hands for future seasons when there's doubt over our full-time status and whether he'll still be in a job in 24/25.

So given this season's budget was higher than last season, does that mean the club massively overspent this season too?

The club is owned by SOME fans. It's not a democracy when you have to pay £10k to have a say in removing one of the patron directors. Always a laugh telling others not to buy season tickets when you don't have one yourself.

Funny how much you've changed your tune. Haven't you been the guy advocating a season ticket boycott every year for the past 5-6 seasons?? Amazing what having some pals on the board will do.

You seem a well balanced individual

The problem with initiatives such as FSS and Falkirk Forever is that the promises made to spend the money on X or Y are meaningless. As soon as the money hits the club bank account then Directors are duty bound to spend it on what they deem are in the best interests of the business. And with no transparency around what the football budget is - how would anyone ever know that the money has gone there?

It's basically a replacement for B4L - but this time directly under the control of the club

There's no doubt we have improved on last season. But the real question is have we improved enough to justify the significant extra budget that JM has used and arguably wasted? He's signed a string of goalkeepers, each one worse than the last. Finn Yeats who despite a promising start has fallen away badly. Lawal and two strikers (Burrell and Allan) who the manager clearly doesn't rate - the latter even costing us a fee. I'd probably suggest he has a 50% success rate in his recruitment which is simply not good enough. Let's also take this semi-final issue off the table. It's being used to paper over so many cracks. I would wager than in the history of the Scottish Cup no team has had an easier route to the semi-final, and indeed the final if we make it. So lets no kid ourselves on that reaching the Scottish Cup semi-final is some massive achievement. It's not.