The Falkirk FC Thread

[Jimmy1876]

48 minutes ago, CapitalDiamond said:

2 of you have mentioned Airdrie when responding to my OP when this was intended to stay away from the tribal nonsense which went before.

OK if the previous board burned through £800k cash reserves then that is criminal. Why did no one at Falkirk look at the likes of Montrose or ourselves last year and see what could be done even under a “cut cut cut” approach. 
 

With your attendances that should have been (and should still be) easy to do on a bigger scale (e.g. by appointing Ian Murray 2 years ago).

If you are all comfortable that all is fine even if you don’t go up this year then who am I to comment?

Would also just add to that, the board saying the FSS uptake was not enough was in the context of the fact there are three options going forward - FSS gain enough of a following that any loss could be covered by that income. FSS don't gain enough following and more investment has to be found instead, potentially in sale of the club and giving up fan ownership. Or we slash the playing budget next season to be within our means. Out of those FSS getting the bigger following is most desirable and that's why it's being pushed for. 

[Guest]

31 minutes ago, PedroMoutinho said:

One point I do agree with is the closeness of the FSS to the Patrons/board. In my view a fans’ organisation is there to represent and advocate for the interests of the supporters. Those will not always align with the board/patrons. 

There have clearly been some issues in the relationship- I.e. the FSS rep stepping down and now the board’s statements at the AGM. The FSS were perhaps right not to go out all guns blazing publicly on these but in not convinced they would be willing to challenge a more serious issue sufficiently.

The other point I think will need to be looked at is the reluctance for political reasons to launch some sort of share save scheme to allow fans to hold shares in their names.

There is clearly a concern that these individuals may not always vote as the FSS leadership would like them to, but at some point getting money in the door will need to take priority in my opinion.

The Board is the FSS and the Patrons FFS. These people are elected by the members. It is these organisations that are running the place. Why would groups want to fight with themselves. I despair 

[PedroMoutinho]

4 minutes ago, Back Post Misses said:

The Board is the FSS and the Patrons FFS. These people are elected by the members. It is these organisations that are running the place. Why would groups want to fight with themselves. I despair 

Not advocating them fighting each other. However, patently the interests of people who’ve ponied up £10k minimum will not always be the same as people contributing a tenner a month.

In my view, the FSS should be vocal in standing up for the interests of the wider support base when needed.

You can see for example they’re unhappy about comments at the AGM from some patrons. The FSS needs to be able to criticise the board/patrons when necessary. 

[Guest]

9 minutes ago, PedroMoutinho said:

Not advocating them fighting each other. However, patently the interests of people who’ve ponied up £10k minimum will not always be the same as people contributing a tenner a month.

In my view, the FSS should be vocal in standing up for the interests of the wider support base when needed.

You can see for example they’re unhappy about comments at the AGM from some patrons. The FSS needs to be able to criticise the board/patrons when necessary. 

You are advocating division at a time when we should be pulling together. I am both a Patron and FSS member and don’t feel any superior to any fan who is either a FSS member, non shareholder, season ticket holder or PATG. I also don’t think the Board are working on behalf of my interest and more than my two sons who are not Patrons. As far as I see they are working on behalf of the best interests of the CLUB. 
I just want the club to punch at its weight, be run properly and be there for my kids and grand kids when they come along. The Board are all FSS members. Who do you think they are working on behalf of? 

Edited February 26, 2023 by Back Post Misses

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, PedroMoutinho said:

Not advocating them fighting each other. However, patently the interests of people who’ve ponied up £10k minimum will not always be the same as people contributing a tenner a month.

In my view, the FSS should be vocal in standing up for the interests of the wider support base when needed.

You can see for example they’re unhappy about comments at the AGM from some patrons. The FSS needs to be able to criticise the board/patrons when necessary. 

What comments were they out of interest? 

[LatapyBairn.]

7 minutes ago, PedroMoutinho said:

Not advocating them fighting each other. However, patently the interests of people who’ve ponied up £10k minimum will not always be the same as people contributing a tenner a month.

In my view, the FSS should be vocal in standing up for the interests of the wider support base when needed.

You can see for example they’re unhappy about comments at the AGM from some patrons. The FSS needs to be able to criticise the board/patrons when necessary. 

If the FSS were to criticise the board they’d be criticising themselves as they are the board! Your sounding borderline ludicrous , at time when everyone is on the same page and the club is moving in a positive direction why on earth would any fan try to manufacture some form of divide?

[Guest Brockvillenomore]

13 minutes ago, PedroMoutinho said:

Not advocating them fighting each other. However, patently the interests of people who’ve ponied up £10k minimum will not always be the same as people contributing a tenner a month.

In my view, the FSS should be vocal in standing up for the interests of the wider support base when needed.

You can see for example they’re unhappy about comments at the AGM from some patrons. The FSS needs to be able to criticise the board/patrons when necessary. 

Directors, when registered at companies house, have legal responsibilities. 

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/being-a-company-director

This is how democracy works. If you’re not happy, vote them off. There is no wider anything, their role is to safeguard the company. 

[PedroMoutinho]

14 minutes ago, Back Post Misses said:

What comments were they out of interest? 

I understand there were comparisons made to how many members other fans groups have without the context that many of these members pay lower contributions than FSS.

Another example would be the decisions to launch a competing fundraising scheme and increase ticket prices- I can’t see either of these helping to boost FSS numbers, so did the FSS support these?

In my view the FSS should not just be there to support the patrons at all times- there should be challenge when necessary.

Edited February 26, 2023 by PedroMoutinho

[PedroMoutinho]

17 minutes ago, LatapyBairn. said:

If the FSS were to criticise the board they’d be criticising themselves as they are the board! Your sounding borderline ludicrous , at time when everyone is on the same page and the club is moving in a positive direction why on earth would any fan try to manufacture some form of divide?

So in your view it was wrong for previous fans groups to criticise previous boards when fans had representation on those boards for large spells?

[Guest]

23 minutes ago, PedroMoutinho said:

I understand there were comparisons made to how many members other fans groups have without the context that many of these members pay lower contributions than FSS.

Another example would be the decisions to launch a competing fundraising scheme and increase ticket prices- I can’t see either of these helping to boost FSS numbers, so did the FSS support these?

In my view the FSS should not just be there to support the patrons at all times- there should be challenge when necessary.

The club needs finance to fill the hole we all know about. There are more than 1800 people who are ST holders who have not joined FSS. Why? Various reasons we all speculate about. So how does the club try to tap into that group of fans? You can’t blame the Board for trying to look at all options surely? 

You last paragraph is utter shite. FSS have as much say in this club as Patrons and as all the Board are FSS members i just can’t see WTF you are talking about. 

If you are insinuating the Patron group has influence over policy at the club I can tell you 100% not one decision made by the club since December 2021 have I or any other non Board members who are Patrons had input into, and nor do I want any. If I think the Patron reps are doing a poor job I will then vote the reps off. 

Edited February 26, 2023 by Back Post Misses

[Guest]

6 minutes ago, PedroMoutinho said:

So in your view it was wrong for previous fans groups to criticise previous boards when fans had representation on those boards for large spells?

We are in a completely different space now. The comparisons of the past are irrelevant as the structure the club now has totally changed 

Edited February 26, 2023 by Back Post Misses

[Guest Brockvillenomore]

12 minutes ago, PedroMoutinho said:

I understand there were comparisons made to how many members other fans groups have without the context that many of these members pay lower contributions than FSS.

Another example would be the decisions to launch a competing fundraising scheme and increase ticket prices- I can’t see either of these helping to boost FSS numbers, so did the FSS support these?

In my view the FSS should not just be there to support the patrons at all times- there should be challenge when necessary.

Presumably you noticed (if you were there) that the comparison with other clubs schemes and the two new initiatives (Forever Falkirk and Season Tickets) were presented by both FSS directors? 
 

Common sense dictates that the more people who get involved and work together the best interests of club and fans will be aligned as owners. 

[LatapyBairn.]

21 minutes ago, PedroMoutinho said:

So in your view it was wrong for previous fans groups to criticise previous boards when fans had representation on those boards for large spells?

A token fan rep on a board is completely different from the actual fan ownership structure we have now! Jesus wept!  We must now be one of the most democratically run clubs in the country FFS! If the BOD needs criticism the fans and members can now literally vote them out if we don’t think the 4 board members are performing their role correctly, thankfully up to this point the guys we all elected on our behalf have got far more right than wrong and the set up seems to be working. I see no reason to change anything at this point. 

Edited February 26, 2023 by LatapyBairn.

[Guest Brockvillenomore]

14 minutes ago, LatapyBairn. said:

A token fan rep on a board is completely different from the actual fan ownership structure we have now! Jesus wept!  We must now be one of the most democratically run clubs in the country FFS!

Didn’t at least one fan rep resign because he was sidelined and excluded from all the major decisions? 

[Bairney The Dinosaur]

Not wanting to get involved in the above which just seems to be a back and forth nonsense, but what I will say is there has got to be an end to the creeping narrative that FSS is failing.

Sole focus seems to be on how much money FSS is bringing in. I understand why, the 'black hole' in the budget brings stresses and FSS was seen as a potential fix, but ultimately filling a gap in the budget is not why we want fan ownership.

I am on my knees begging that by the end of the season we are looking at promotion and a cup semi. For the obvious reason first, but also I think it just gives the club and FSS that breathing space to allow a gradual build to the ownership model which secures our future.

 

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, Bairney The Dinosaur said:

Not wanting to get involved in the above which just seems to be a back and forth nonsense, but what I will say is there has got to be an end to the creeping narrative that FSS is failing.

Sole focus seems to be on how much money FSS is bringing in. I understand why, the 'black hole' in the budget brings stresses and FSS was seen as a potential fix, but ultimately filling a gap in the budget is not why we want fan ownership.

I am on my knees begging that by the end of the season we are looking at promotion and a cup semi. For the obvious reason first, but also I think it just gives the club and FSS that breathing space to allow a gradual build to the ownership model which secures our future.

 

I have not seen anywhere that the FSS is failing. My view is that it is a bit of a victim of circumstances. To be bringing in 100k per season from nothing is a great effort. Unfortunately it is not enough in the current situation. The club therefore has to look at other options. I agree beating Ayr buys everyone time 

[Guest Brockvillenomore]

10 minutes ago, Back Post Misses said:

I have not seen anywhere that the FSS is failing. My view is that it is a bit of a victim of circumstances. To be bringing in 100k per season from nothing is a great effort. Unfortunately it is not enough in the current situation. The club therefore has to look at other options. I agree beating Ayr buys everyone time 

I agree. There is no narrative about the FSS failing. Nor was there a suggestion at the AGM. There was a realism that to match the management teams ambition and support them additional funding was needed to get out of league one and mount a decent challenge in the championship. 

After losing what looks like £1.6M in two years time is running out to make fan ownership work. In my opinion. 
 

Edited February 26, 2023 by Brockvillenomore

[PedroMoutinho]

56 minutes ago, Back Post Misses said:

The club needs finance to fill the hole we all know about. There are more than 1800 people who are ST holders who have not joined FSS. Why? Various reasons we all speculate about. So how does the club try to tap into that group of fans? You can’t blame the Board for trying to look at all options surely? 

You last paragraph is utter shite. FSS have as much say in this club as Patrons and as all the Board are FSS members i just can’t see WTF you are talking about. 

If you are insinuating the Patron group has influence over policy at the club I can tell you 100% not one decision made by the club since December 2021 have I or any other non Board members who are Patrons had input into, and nor do I want any. If I think the Patron reps are doing a poor job I will then vote the reps off. 

I don’t disagree but launching a competing scheme and whacking up ticket prices seems a strange way of increasing FSS numbers. The latter has the potential to decrease membership depending on the scale of the increases.

In my view you need to look at how to make the FSS more attractive rather than directing more of people’s money elsewhere. The price draws are a great initiative- we should be looking to build on these. The political objections to a share save scheme also need to go imo.

[LatapyBairn.]

19 minutes ago, PedroMoutinho said:

I don’t disagree but launching a competing scheme and whacking up ticket prices seems a strange way of increasing FSS numbers. The latter has the potential to decrease membership depending on the scale of the increases.

In my view you need to look at how to make the FSS more attractive rather than directing more of people’s money elsewhere. The price draws are a great initiative- we should be looking to build on these. The political objections to a share save scheme also need to go imo.

In my opinion (and I’m sure others) the FSS becomes less attractive to me as a fan if it isn’t unionised, the whole point is strength in numbers and we vote as a block on a decision taken democratically by all members. If a fan wants to go buy individual shares in they’re own name nothing is stopping them from doing so, in fact I asked this question and the club actually already offers a “share save” scheme of sorts if somebody wanted to buy some shares but pay them up over an agreed period of time they can do so. 

Edited February 26, 2023 by LatapyBairn.

[Guest]

13 minutes ago, PedroMoutinho said:

I don’t disagree but launching a competing scheme and whacking up ticket prices seems a strange way of increasing FSS numbers. The latter has the potential to decrease membership depending on the scale of the increases.

In my view you need to look at how to make the FSS more attractive rather than directing more of people’s money elsewhere. The price draws are a great initiative- we should be looking to build on these. The political objections to a share save scheme also need to go imo.

I think you are right in terms of making the FSS more attractive but that is the guys who run its role supportered by the club, not the other way round