The Falkirk FC Thread

[Guest]

8 minutes ago, Dawson Park Boy said:

Exactly correct.

That’s why the directors need to be totally upfront regarding whether they have got the finance in place to see us through or not. If they don’t have it, tell us and we’ll rally round. What bothers me is the delay in having the AGM and the silence.

We would all like to know but I am sure if there was an issue in easing the funds we would have had another plea? That’s my take TBH

[Guest]

Just reading up on the thread. 

I joined the FSS committee recently to try and help the guys grow the membership however it has to be appreciated, that for it’s infancy, 620 members is a good amount to have so we’re on the right tracks. I ran the CI for 2 years and we only had 400 different fans contribute to the cause so credit has to go to all the guys who got the FSS up and running and to this stage. This has created a £7.5k/month income to the club we previously didn’t have so need to acknowledge that too.

Unfortunately it’s not a fast enough growth to help further mitigate our current position but as stated in the article the biggest accelerator tends to be a crisis off the pitch. As BPM pointed out, the irony of this being we need more members to avoid that. 

There is absolutely room for growth but there does have to be some realism and reasonable expectation surrounding that. The FSS will not solely fill the £400k hole. As it said in the newsletter, the common trend amongst all organisations is that the ceiling for membership is around 50% of Season Ticket holders. That’s consistent to FoH, Dundee United ST, Aber DNA etc.

As for what you get in return then as LatapyBairn pointed out, the FSS is more like a Union of fans. You pay to have a voice with the collective shareholding and board representation that comes with it. It’s strength in unity to help protect the club against shysters and question the hierarchy should there be something of concern to the membership. 

Most of the groups mentioned do offer various other things in return. Most of these are simplistic offerings of sentimental value. FoH is the most impressive but even then it was administration that largely  rocketed their numbers. Morton offer much the same as FSS and although they have around 330 more members their average contributions are slightly less than us. Their campaign was borne out of crisis too.

What you have to appreciate is FSS has less resources so that has to be taken in to consideration as well. Additionally you want to make sure that these benefits/services can be maintained and not burden the volunteers who run it with a load of extra administration. Adding benefits costs money too resulting in less going to the club. You also have to service the existing 620 membership, whom are happy to contribute at present. The biggest worry too is that any benefits then make the FSS donations subject to VAT. That would be an instant 20% loss on earnings. 

Ultimately I think fan ownership is working. Not at the rate we’d hope but it’s getting there. The FSS has around 9% shareholding and combined with the Patrons that’s about 34% of the clubs total. 

The FSS will strive to get more and hopefully in future be able to follow in FoH’s foot steps where members continue to subscribe so they can have a say in how the club is run. 

What is worth saying too is that these   schemes are becoming a vital source of income for clubs and the more involved the better competitive advantage it gives us. We have a great fanbase that isn’t quite reflected in the FSS numbers so hopefully more will join in the coming months, not just for the ethos of fan ownership but to help field a better team on the pitch. 

Edited January 19, 2023 by Guest

[Blame Me]

4 hours ago, Back Post Misses said:

Of course Fan ownership is the aim. If it isn’t my monthly subs are a waste of my money 

Perhaps that's one reason there isn't the expected uptake - FSS explicitly say that's off-the-table currently.

[Guest]

12 minutes ago, Blame Me said:

Perhaps that's one reason there isn't the expected uptake - FSS explicitly say that's off-the-table currently.

The club is effectively fan owned at present. The Rawlins are the only real non Falkirk fans with a decent amount of shares in the club and their shareholding has diluted to about 20%.

The FSS is a vehicle for fans to be part of a large shareholder and therefore have a stronger voice within it. 

As stated too, there is currently the option for fans to buy shares in their own names too but as far as I’m aware there doesn’t appear to be many buying. 

Would be good to know why a lot of the fanbase aren’t signing up if it’s for issues other than finance however unfortunately there will always be some that you’ll never be able to convince, no matter what. Some people just want to turn up and watch the football and to be honest I think that’s fair enough. 

[Newbornbairn]

4 hours ago, Back Post Misses said:

It isn’t going to work then. FFS Morton have 1000. How can a St.Mirren and Motherwell make this work and we can’t ? Motherwell have about 3500 members I believe. 
 

All of them playing football at a higher level and to a better standard than us.  Better results and performances on the park might lead to fans digging deeper. 

[Bairn in Exile]

[Bairnardo]

I was at the Stadium and seen Finn Yeats on his way in. 

 

Wee b*****d has a better car than me

[latapythelegend]

1 hour ago, Newbornbairn said:

All of them playing football at a higher level and to a better standard than us.  Better results and performances on the park might lead to fans digging deeper. 

Not to the tune of 2900 more (in Motherwells case). 

Motherwell have used fan ownership to integrate with the local community fully embrace more than we ever will with our current structure.

The one that I don't understand is that we are lagging way behind Morton. 

[FFC 1876]

Morton's has been running since 2019 and Motherwell's first started in 2011 so it's easy to see why they both have more members than us at this point. 

600 odd in the first year is a fantastic number and hopefully with all the positive things going on at the club this season more people buy in. 

[Blame Me]

15 minutes ago, FFC 1876 said:

Morton's has been running since 2019 and Motherwell's first started in 2011 so it's easy to see why they both have more members than us at this point. 

600 odd in the first year is a fantastic number and hopefully with all the positive things going on at the club this season more people buy in. 

 

27 minutes ago, latapythelegend said:

Not to the tune of 2900 more (in Motherwells case). 

Motherwell have used fan ownership to integrate with the local community fully embrace more than we ever will with our current structure.

The one that I don't understand is that we are lagging way behind Morton. 

Beat me too it. My reply

As of September 2022, MCT had 945 members and began in 2019. 

FSS began in 2021? and have 620 by January 2023. In anyone's book that is a hefty uptake if not the desired target of those involved.

Comparing all these other groups membership numbers without context doesn't paint the complete picture and as @Van_damage mentioned some of these other schemes have incentives or are structured slightly differently to the FSS model.

[Jimmy1876]

Does anyone remember the rough number of season tickets sold when we were doing well in the championship? Imagine it's quite different to the number of season tickets sold in the last 2 or 3 years as well. 

If the threshold is 50% of season ticket holders then that will also still be lower just now than it would have been if we were competing for top of the championship.

[Blame Me]

2 minutes ago, Jimmy1876 said:

Does anyone remember the rough number of season tickets sold when we were doing well in the championship? Imagine it's quite different to the number of season tickets sold in the last 2 or 3 years as well. 

If the threshold is 50% of season ticket holders then that will also still be lower just now than it would have been if we were competing for top of the championship.

Having a proper breakdown of the ST numbers would be helpful from an outside perspective but you'd hope the FSS had access to the real numbers to base their target on - which I suspect they do.

[Shodwall cat]

St mirren just posted a massive loss recently and would be struggling I'd think if they weren't linked to that charity and simply fan owned. Motherwell have been going for years and Morton would probably not exist if it wasn't for the fans group.  

I just think  that people simply aren't keen to sign up to direct debits/standing orders in the current climate. Season ticket for the vast majority is a one off payment and thats it. This is a commitment no matter how small the payment is and I get the feeling that kind of scares people these days. Just my opinion but I don't know how we would get round that. 

[Guest]

46 minutes ago, latapythelegend said:

Not to the tune of 2900 more (in Motherwells case). 

Motherwell have used fan ownership to integrate with the local community fully embrace more than we ever will with our current structure.

The one that I don't understand is that we are lagging way behind Morton. 

We may be about 3,000 members short of Motherwell(which includes Junior membership) but we are only about £5.5k short on our monthly contributions. Another 450 members paying an average £12 and we’ll surpass that. 

Our club is structured differently and the Junior Bairns effectively is our Junior membership which Sarah has been diligently running for years and contributing to the club. There could be a gap for the 14-18 year old group though when the kids are too old for Junior Bairns. 

We also have the Foundation as our community arm. Motherwell are great at working with the local community but I wouldn’t necessarily contribute that to the Well Society which is set up very similar to us.  

[Guest]

2 hours ago, Newbornbairn said:

All of them playing football at a higher level and to a better standard than us.  Better results and performances on the park might lead to fans digging deeper. 

All three took on fan ownership on the back of an issue at the club. It has nothing to do with League status imo 

[SouthStander1876]

2 minutes ago, Back Post Misses said:

All three took on fan ownership on the back of an issue at the club. It has nothing to do with League status imo 

So what do you suggest is the reason then?

 

I think if we got promoted, it wouldn't be a surprise if we got to 1,000 a lot quicker.

[Shodwall cat]

12 hours ago, Duncan Freemason said:

Or perhaps some sort of study to better understand where our overheads sit amongst those of our competitors. We have been unable to best several L1 clubs these past few years all of whom operate on half or less of our turnover.

Now the Launderers might not be the perfect example, but other than that which goes unspoken, how is it a club with a core support of 800 (on a good day) outperform us with monotonous regularity. Like us, they occupy an ostensibly council owned facility, but pay rent on a sliding scale depending on what league they are in (in the top flight, it’s peppercorn, in the lower leagues, it’s half of sod all). All this in exchange for providing the good people on their council with a nice hospitality box.

They have a Trust that puts in less than £2k per season…..they have nothing like FSS.

We seem to be stuck with massive overheads. Doubtless there are reasons why.

The big reason livi are ahead of us isn't just finance though it's recruitment it's as simple as that. Whoever handles it is lightyears ahead of what we've been like over the past 4 or 5 years. They sign good players and sell a number on for very decent sums of money which can then be reinvested.  Lyndon dykes for instance they got a fortune in for him and will no doubt get a wad of cash for nouble.  If our recruitment had been half as good we wouldn't be struggling in league one.

[Guest]

14 minutes ago, SouthStander1876 said:

So what do you suggest is the reason then?

 

I think if we got promoted, it wouldn't be a surprise if we got to 1,000 a lot quicker.

Apathy ach someone else will sort, think they paying enough already, can’t afford, don’t believe in it, want my old mates back on the board ……

variety of reasons 

[Bairney The Dinosaur]

17 hours ago, Braes_Bairn said:

Personally I think the FSS model is all wrong, why would I sign up to pay £10 a month when I get nothing in return?

This has been scoffed at a bit and initially I did the same because a collective Falkirk Supporters Society just makes complete sense to me. However, see when I've been trying to convince folk to sign up this exact argument that comes back just about everytime. The idea of of a collective voice, a union and being part of something bigger than ourselves just doesn't appeal to everyone. It's a shame, a bit embarrassing I think, but this is probably one of the biggest barriers for FSS to address - what can we give back?

Not convinced that changing the structure of FSS to allow members to hold the shares in their own name is the right way to go. Anyone can do that as an individual anyway. Seems @Van_damage is suggesting that benefits would subject donations to VAT charges, be interesting to hear a bit more about this. I'm assuming it refers things like free gifts, club shop discount etc. If FSS was to offer membership only events (like the McGlynn Q&A) is this considered a benefit? The FSS prize draw doesn't impact on VAT charges? May be some work around here.

[Guest]

18 minutes ago, Back Post Misses said:

All three took on fan ownership on the back of an issue at the club. It has nothing to do with League status imo 

Performances definitely help. FoH had a lot leave under Levein and then rejoin once things started to improve on the park. The main driver does seem to be an issue at the club though.