Dawson Park Boy Posted March 12, 2022 Share Posted March 12, 2022 11 minutes ago, Ecosse83 said: Really not allowed to question anything at all now are we? That’s not what he said. I suppose in retrospect, it should have been made clear that one of the candidates was a patron but, hey, hardly a hanging offence. What pleases me is the number of people willing to put their money where their mouths are and also, more importantly, to offer their time and skills to take the club forward. Augurs well for the future. Lets not create unnecessary division. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 12, 2022 Share Posted March 12, 2022 37 minutes ago, Ecosse83 said: Really not allowed to question anything at all now are we? Lost me. I simply said that if someone is not happy with the ways things are being run get involved either in the FSS committee or stand for the Board. Really not sure what is wrong with that 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 12, 2022 Share Posted March 12, 2022 1 hour ago, Proudtobeabairn said: Remember the days when everyone was up in arms because the Rawlins were having a say despite only investing "the price of a new build in Larbert"? Now we have a board who each have invested the cost of a new patio in that new build garden (or less in any non patron FSS case). Of course it doesn't matter how deep your pockets are to have the capability to run the club well. Some early mistakes made (including the almost catastrophic one) but the new guys deserve time to prove whether they're capable or not. The FSS appointments are temporary. I voted but not knowing either it was 50/50 really. If I'd known one was a patron I'd probably have voted for the other for nothing other than balance. They were up in arms because they welded themselves to a group of people who have played a huge part in putting us where we are today. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bairn in Exile Posted March 12, 2022 Share Posted March 12, 2022 1 minute ago, Back Post Misses said: They were up in arms because they welded themselves to a group of people who have played a huge part in putting us where we are today. Not true. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 12, 2022 Share Posted March 12, 2022 1 minute ago, Bairn in Exile said: Not true. What isn’t true? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bairn in Exile Posted March 12, 2022 Share Posted March 12, 2022 Just now, Back Post Misses said: What isn’t true? What you said. People found it strange that the Rawlins' were able to wield so much power for such a small cash investment, not because of their ties to Gary Deans. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 12, 2022 Share Posted March 12, 2022 1 minute ago, Bairn in Exile said: What you said. People found it strange that the Rawlins' were able to wield so much power for such a small cash investment, not because of their ties to Gary Deans. It wasn’t a small cash injection. It was the biggest new purchase of shares since 1998. They had so much power because the MSG members still around washed their hands of the responsibility. I think their investment would have been good for the club had they seen through Deans and Co quicker. It took about 6 days in the UK for the penny to drop with them what others had told them for months. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bairn in Exile Posted March 12, 2022 Share Posted March 12, 2022 5 minutes ago, Back Post Misses said: It wasn’t a small cash injection. It was the biggest new purchase of shares since 1998. They had so much power because the MSG members still around washed their hands of the responsibility. I think their investment would have been good for the club had they seen through Deans and Co quicker. It took about 6 days in the UK for the penny to drop with them what others had told them for months. it was about GBP200K, right? Hardly a massive injection of cash. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 12, 2022 Share Posted March 12, 2022 (edited) 1 minute ago, Bairn in Exile said: it was about GBP200K, right? Hardly a massive injection of cash. No it was 350k, even it was only 200k then it would still have been the largest share purchase in a long time. Edited March 12, 2022 by Back Post Misses 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bairn in Exile Posted March 12, 2022 Share Posted March 12, 2022 Just now, Back Post Misses said: No it was 350k Still not a lot. -5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LatapyBairn. Posted March 12, 2022 Share Posted March 12, 2022 (edited) 28 minutes ago, Bairn in Exile said: What you said. People found it strange that the Rawlins' were able to wield so much power for such a small cash investment, not because of their ties to Gary Deans. I never had any issue with the Rawlins, 2 BOD seats and a 26% shareholding seemed fair considering the level of investment and they’re skill set, hopefully they can still play some part in moving the club forward be it further investment or otherwise. I did however have issue with Deans and his band stubbornly and arrogantly clinging onto the remaining BOD positions and in turn blocking further fan led investment ultimately damaging the club, all this while having failed miserably while in situ on the BOD themselves! Edited March 12, 2022 by LatapyBairn. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 12, 2022 Share Posted March 12, 2022 Thing is, be they Patrons Directors or FSS Directors, they are all Directors and ultimately have to act in the best interests of the club. Equally, does a Patron have to declare themselves to be an FSS member? You cannot deny a Patron a role as Director because they are an FSS member just as you cannot deny a FSS member a role as Director because they are also an Patron. That is just daft. You want the best people putting themselves forward. An FSS Director cannot really work solely for FSS members just as Patron Directors aren’t there to solely represent the views of the Patrons. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reggie Perrin Posted March 12, 2022 Share Posted March 12, 2022 46 minutes ago, Bairn in Exile said: Still not a lot. You seem to be confusing us with Manchester United. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridge of allan bairn Posted March 12, 2022 Share Posted March 12, 2022 3 hours ago, HopeStreetWalker said: FFC own the seats but not the grandstand they sit on. FFC own the pitch but not ground it sits on. The grandstand and the ground are council property and that is what FFC pays the council for every year call it a lease or rent whatever its all the same with the same outcome. FFC sends them a nice fat cheque every year. Have you ever seen a more contrived, complicated shared ownership farce in your life. The club were stitched up like a kipper by the council and they know it. The long term aim should be to buy outright the stadium and surrounding land and become the sole owner. Then sort out all the wrong in the design like roofs that keep the weather out. Until that is done the fans should look on it with no more affinity and affection than a rented premises. Again totally agree re the stadium one of the worst deals I've ever seen put together and we had Gary Holt as DOF. owning pitches that sit on land we don't own and seats on buildings we don't own is ridiculous. I'd almost rather start again with 1 stand on land that we own outright. donated by a generous falkirk fan? it's at the heart of everything that's wrong with the club, we need to be in control of our own destiny and potential revenue streams. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tea and Busquets Posted March 12, 2022 Share Posted March 12, 2022 McKay is back . Rotten team. Not much we could do but it’s line up lottery again. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 12, 2022 Share Posted March 12, 2022 7 minutes ago, Tea and Busquets said: McKay is back . Rotten team. Not much we could do but it’s line up lottery again. No no no. It’s a stable and consistent starting eleven. Same number of vowels and consonants as last week. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Russ Posted March 12, 2022 Share Posted March 12, 2022 McKay back in and back to a 3 [emoji23]. The sooner that loser is fucked off back to America the better. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grangemouth Bairn Posted March 12, 2022 Share Posted March 12, 2022 I can’t understand this line up at all. There is zero consistency in his team selections. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 12, 2022 Share Posted March 12, 2022 7 minutes ago, Russ said: McKay back in and back to a 3 . The sooner that loser is fucked off back to America the better. Back 4 by the look to me 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigbri Bairn Posted March 12, 2022 Share Posted March 12, 2022 Back 4 by the look to me Wonder if Mills will play defensive midfield? Did in bounce game. Worth a shot as that's where we are crap ( Miller Hetherington etc) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.