The Falkirk FC Thread

[Guest]

1 hour ago, scottsdad said:

For all clubs, the train coming down the track is the state of the economy, specifically inflation. 

Fans will spend a bit less on luxuries like going to matches as they need to cut back. And the money going out will jump. Money for everything from bovril to floodlights. And of course players will want wages to rise with inflation too. 

This, I think, is where the 7% comes from. An extra 7% next year keeps is where we were last year, just about. 

Clubs in precarious financial positions will be the first to suffer. Reading the statement, we might well be in that boat. The fact is we have for years overspent relative to our position. Each time gambling that this will be the year we go up, and over and over again we have failed. That is unsustainable. 

Looks like the board realise this. The problem is identified. Not sure a solution is. 

Bear in mind ST prices went up by 11-21%, depending on the ticket so we have also applied inflation to our own sales. 

[Roboccop]

5 hours ago, PedroMoutinho said:

FSS has done incredibly well to get upwards of 700 people paying at least a tenner a month extra in the current economic climate.

3000+ was never a realistic target (through absolutely no fault of those involved) and should never have been assumed.

3000 was never assumed. 2500 is a pipe dream and I wish that figure would stop being trotted out. Only Hearts can get proportions of their support as high as that donating regularly and their Dan base is on average much higher income levels ( because it’s in an economic capital). Personally I think that update was badly written and has only panicked people. 

[Bairn in Exile]

Somebody will need to help me with the actual numbers here but in the last few months we have had income from the fan bank (£350k?) cup run prize money and attendances (£400k?) and league prize money (£100k?) so around £850k. This cash will not only help to keep the wolves away from the door but added to season ticket sales should have given McGlynn a good sized budget for signing new players yet we appear to be 3 players light in the squad, yes?

This is my take on things: the board has told McGlynn that he is in the last chance saloon and has given him the first quarter to have us clear at the top of the league but if we are down in 4^th or 5^th place then he is out the door. Should that situation arise they will need to pay off the last year of his and Smith’s contracts, say £100k? so they have had to hold this sum back from his playing budget hence us being 3 players light.

I know that there is time to get players in on loan but we aren't going to be signing anybody new on a contract.

[Harry Kinnear]

3 hours ago, Bairn in Exile said:

Somebody will need to help me with the actual numbers here but in the last few months we have had income from the fan bank (£350k?) cup run prize money and attendances (£400k?) and league prize money (£100k?) so around £850k. This cash will not only help to keep the wolves away from the door but added to season ticket sales should have given McGlynn a good sized budget for signing new players yet we appear to be 3 players light in the squad, yes?

This is my take on things: the board has told McGlynn that he is in the last chance saloon and has given him the first quarter to have us clear at the top of the league but if we are down in 4^th or 5^th place then he is out the door. Should that situation arise they will need to pay off the last year of his and Smith’s contracts, say £100k? so they have had to hold this sum back from his playing budget hence us being 3 players light.

I know that there is time to get players in on loan but we aren't going to be signing anybody new on a contract.

Surely if they had money in reserve in the bank it would be better to let McGlynn bring in a RB than to keep it to pay him and Smith off. I’m more thinking he has his budget and has spent it and is taking a gamble on Yeats and McKay being adequate cover for RB or is hoping for a loan signing, big risk I know.

Edited July 18, 2023 by Harry Kinnear

[PedroMoutinho]

9 hours ago, Blame Me said:

As much as the announcement is startling I don't think one contract to Aidan Nesbitt is the problem here as much as you wish it were. 

 

Not just about Nesbitt- we also have Allan on a 2.5 year deal and Oliver and McGinn were seemingly pretty much guaranteed extensions.

[Bairnardo]

1 minute ago, PedroMoutinho said:

Not just about Nesbitt- we also have Allan on a 2.5 year deal and Oliver and McGinn were seemingly pretty much guaranteed extensions.

And who was complaining about the signing of McGinn this time last season?

[PedroMoutinho]

9 minutes ago, Bairnardo said:

And who was complaining about the signing of McGinn this time last season?

It is always a risk signing a player of that age on a pretty much guaranteed 2 year deal.

[Blame Me]

21 minutes ago, PedroMoutinho said:

It is always a risk signing a player ...

FTFY

[LatapyBairn.]

Some people seem a bit confused between running an operating deficit and running at a loss. Noticed a few posts about the club running at a loss which isn’t what I took from that statement , we are projecting an operational deficit but the money from the cup run and SG fan bank (last years accounts when published will probably also show a profit/cash balance) has allowed the club budget for that while also upgrading the pitch/floodlights. It’s not ideal long term which is why they are obviously still pushing the FSS investment but it is different from spending money the club doesn’t have, the cash to cover this year’s deficit is already in the bank ,the concern for me is going forward after that if we can’t increase investment we will indeed have to cut our cloth accordingly which will directly effect the playing budget and the quality we see on the pitch.  

Edited July 18, 2023 by LatapyBairn.

[Bairnardo]

22 minutes ago, PedroMoutinho said:

It is always a risk signing a player of that age on a pretty much guaranteed 2 year deal.

Firstly, Blame Me is correct. With every signing there is risk. Look at Watson for example. 

Secondly, using McGinn in hindsight as an example is not for me. No one was complaining about that signing. Not one person. It was lauded by us and by fans of other clubs as an excellent one in fact. 

[Bairney The Dinosaur]

It's not really been touched on much by the board, other than a brief mention of 'soft loans' last seasons, but I wonder hope much scope there is for continual investment from the Patrons Group. One of the benefits of the '3 legged stool' is having these slightly more flush fans active in the club, but we haven't really heard much from them since that initial investment. 

I expect they have been providing in some way and keeping it behind closed doors, but I'd quite like to find out what they've been doing.

[Blame Me]

7 minutes ago, LatapyBairn. said:

... we will indeed have to cut our cloth accordingly which will directly effect the playing budget and the quality we see on the pitch

I don't necessarily think this is a reason to continue with the budget as it has been. 

It hasn't given us a real competitive advantage at any point and is now the millstone around the clubs neck. 

We pushed the boat out on LG and he was no better than Matt Wright.

[Hughsie]

52 minutes ago, LatapyBairn. said:

the concern for me is going forward after that if we can’t increase investment we will indeed have to cut our cloth accordingly which will directly effect the playing budget and the quality we see on the pitch.  

So be it, then. The club has been wasting money (fans, investors, patrons) for over 10 years now with the product getting continuously worse.

It can’t continue and if we fail to get promoted again this year then we’ll need to start operating as the League One club we are.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, LatapyBairn. said:

Some people seem a bit confused between running an operating deficit and running at a loss. Noticed a few posts about the club running at a loss which isn’t what I took from that statement , we are projecting an operational deficit but the money from the cup run and SG fan bank (last years accounts when published will probably also show a profit/cash balance) has allowed the club budget for that while also upgrading the pitch/floodlights. It’s not ideal long term which is why they are obviously still pushing the FSS investment but it is different from spending money the club doesn’t have, the cash to cover this year’s deficit is already in the bank ,the concern for me is going forward after that if we can’t increase investment we will indeed have to cut our cloth accordingly which will directly effect the playing budget and the quality we see on the pitch.  

I understand the difference but am disappointed that the FSS money has effectively went on maintaining a budget that is unsustainable. 

Kenny said on the FD podcast that they couldn’t just cut from a £1m loss to break even from 2 seasons ago so openly explained why they went with a £400k loss. The message I received was that’s not how they planned to proceed and made a strong point about not going ahead covering operating losses with cup runs etc however that’s effectively  what’s happened this season. 

If we don’t go up too then could have a lot of the budget tied up in a few players and if we run a break even budget then we will be at the same point as when Sheerin left with not much more money to bring in other good players. 

Just seems like too much of a risk given what they now know as the likely ceiling for FSS membership and the fact FF has been a failure. 

We had money there to bank but by the sounds of it, it appears it’s all getting spent on one last shot at getting out this league. 

Edited July 18, 2023 by Van_damage

[HopeStreetWalker]

38 minutes ago, Hughsie said:

So be it, then. The club has been wasting money (fans, investors, patrons) for over 10 years now with the product getting continuously worse.

It can’t continue and if we fail to get promoted again this year then we’ll need to start operating as the League One club we are.

Club Board Statement.

'At present, net donations via FSS and the Forever Falkirk Fund are a little over £80,000, meaning we’ll still have an operating loss of around £320,000. Our ability to cover this loss (and thereby remain full-time this season) is only made possible by last season’s cup run and the FSS investment. Neither of such incomes can be guaranteed every season, so we are still operating with an unsustainable business model'

That loss is unsustainable and the economic pressures on the public means fans donations as generous as they are cannot be banked on.

Next season promoted or not the club should be looking at a full time / part time hybrid business model. Also renegotiate any financial commitments the club has - and yes that does include the stadium. If need be let the council buy the clubs share of the infrastructure and be shot of it which gives us a cash injection and rent on a yearly basis depending on our income leaving the council to fund seating, pitch, floodlights and the best of luck to them.

[Gollum]

Out of all the payment providers we could choose for Falkirk TV 

[Hughsie]

15 minutes ago, Gollum said:

Out of all the payment providers we could choose for Falkirk TV 

It’s a Fife based provider.

Does anyone have the actual story regarding the link to Pars TV and whether any of the subscription money goes there? I think it’s obvious that the guys running it are Pars fans but presumably this company is completely separate from DAFC.

There are some of the usual ramblings on the Facebook page suggesting otherwise.

Edited July 18, 2023 by Hughsie

[Guest]

I have registered, and have tended to shell out for it on top of ST & FSS, but a 20% price hike from the new provider means that I will now be giving it a miss.

Edited July 18, 2023 by Duncan Freemason

[Cologne]

23 minutes ago, Hughsie said:

It’s a Fife based provider.

Does anyone have the actual story regarding the link to Pars TV and whether any of the subscription money goes there? I think it’s obvious that the guys running it are Pars fans but presumably this company is completely separate from DAFC.

There are some of the usual ramblings on the Facebook page suggesting otherwise.

Am sure those ramblings are being fed by Tony Smith. Guess he's bitter at losing the work. 

 

Makes you wonder how much of a dick he's been for the club to ditch him in favour of fifers. 

[Believe The Hype]

Do we know the reasons for the Change and are there any benefits?