Jump to content

The Falkirk FC Thread


Recommended Posts

Can't be the only one thinking that this is being massively blown out of proportion here.. FSS have acquired a controlling stake in the club and at the moment have the most say in how it is run? Any subscriptions from this point onwards will go towards whatever the FSS see fit, whether that be repayment of the government loan or investment into the infrastructure of the club.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Chinatoon Bairn said:

Can't be the only one thinking that this is being massively blown out of proportion here.. FSS have acquired a controlling stake in the club and at the moment have the most say in how it is run? Any subscriptions from this point onwards will go towards whatever the FSS see fit, whether that be repayment of the government loan or investment into the infrastructure of the club.

Not if the FSS committee have agreed that all money is handed over to the club, with the club agreeing only to "allow the FSS to make suggestions" on how it was spent. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Chinatoon Bairn said:

Can't be the only one thinking that this is being massively blown out of proportion here.. FSS have acquired a controlling stake in the club and at the moment have the most say in how it is run? Any subscriptions from this point onwards will go towards whatever the FSS see fit, whether that be repayment of the government loan or investment into the infrastructure of the club.

This is more or less how I’ve been seeing it to be honest. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Bairnardo said:

Not if the FSS committee have agreed that all money is handed over to the club, with the club agreeing only to "allow the FSS to make suggestions" on how it was spent. 

 

But the FSS are the club essentially, with the largest shareholding and two directors on a board of 5 people. Surely the elected directors make decisions on how that money is spent on behalf of the FSS? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, FFC 1876 said:

Having listened to the last Falkirk FC podcast with Jamie Swinney it really does seem like what we've got just now is going to be our lot. If MacIver or Spencer get injured McGlynn's one way of playing is completely fucked, which is very worrying.

He also said we've decided to only take part in the reserve cup this year and not the reserve league so some of our youngsters will go out on loan again this season.

 

Goalkeeper
Nicky Hogarth
Sam Long - On loan from Lincoln City
Owen Hayward (A)

Defender
Tom Lang
Coll Donaldson
Liam Henderson
Sean Mackie
Brad Mckay
Leon Mccann
Logan Sinclair (A)

Midfielder
Brad Spencer
Stephen McGinn
Finn Yeats
Ola Lawal
Aidan Nesbitt
Gary Oliver
Callumn Morrison
Calvin Miller
Alfredo Agyeman
Pearse Carroll (A)
Scott Honeyman (A)
Rhys Walker (A)

Striker
Jordan Allan
Ross MacIver

It certainly sounded like we'd be bringing in 1 more player absolute tops, only on loan and only the right quality of player for the right price. You've got to imagine that would be a right back which does leave us short in multiple areas. 

We budgeted for 2,300 STs and have sold over 2,500. I don't have a problem not increasing the playing budget to reflect that if it allows us to decrease the £400k deficit by say £40k. 

Dunfermline ran with a small squad last year so it absolutely can work with a bit of luck. Though all three midfielders getting booked on Saturday wasn't a great start. Hopefully the new pitch will cut down on the number of injuries we pick up 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Chinatoon Bairn said:

Can't be the only one thinking that this is being massively blown out of proportion here.. FSS have acquired a controlling stake in the club and at the moment have the most say in how it is run? Any subscriptions from this point onwards will go towards whatever the FSS see fit, whether that be repayment of the government loan or investment into the infrastructure of the club.

I hope that's the case. But the reality is the controlling stake, the important stake is the 25%+1 which FSS has been blocked from acquiring. The day to day running of the club I have no qualms with and think the board are doing a great job. But FSS and fan ownership need the 25% to be able to safeguard the future of the club (a phrase used by FSS) and I simply cannot understand the logic of blocking that from happening. All I can think is this is an attempt to prevent FSS having that power and that greatly concerns me. 

And in the simplest terms, this is what FSS was sold on. I think it's pretty reasonable for people who believed the aim was to own a key shareholding for specific purpose to be upset when that is now being blocked. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Chinatoon Bairn said:

Can't be the only one thinking that this is being massively blown out of proportion here.. FSS have acquired a controlling stake in the club and at the moment have the most say in how it is run? Any subscriptions from this point onwards will go towards whatever the FSS see fit, whether that be repayment of the government loan or investment into the infrastructure of the club.

Is the point here not that the club's board are - allegedly - preventing FSS's shareholding getting over the 25% threshold, which means you could in practice be ignored eternally and don't have a veto on any decisions/special resolutions requiring a 75% vote of shareholders?

Obviously in reality there's very little chance of this happening when there's another fan group also holding shares, but in the most drastic scenario there's theoretically nothing to stop a shyster coming along, buying up the shares of other groups and then having a 75%+ stake which would allow them to ram through all manner of decisions about your club regardless of any objections from FSS. It might not be likely, but guarding against that sort of scenario is exactly why fan groups getting a 25% stake in clubs is important.

From another angle we had some uproar, although the resolution did pass, when we had a proposal for MCT (who own around 90% of Morton) to sell off shares in 5% blocks as a means of attracting investment, because fans were concerned our influence would be diluted too much by ever falling below 75% and risking one private individual or group being able to buy up 25%+ themselves. Obviously fan groups should eventually get to a place where they're no longer concerned about adding more shares and the money becomes a donation, and circumstances will differ from club to club on whether that level at any given time is 25%, 50% or 75%, but having that cut off anywhere below 25% seems wild to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can anyone from FSS also confirm this has no impact on the terms of the government loan? When it was announced it was about supporting clubs having a controlling stake in their clubs as well as for building infrastructure in a community focussed club.  FSS has now been blocked from that controlling stake so does that have any impact on the loan? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Chinatoon Bairn said:

Can't be the only one thinking that this is being massively blown out of proportion here.. FSS have acquired a controlling stake in the club and at the moment have the most say in how it is run? Any subscriptions from this point onwards will go towards whatever the FSS see fit, whether that be repayment of the government loan or investment into the infrastructure of the club.

FSS don’t have a controlling stake in the club.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, grahamstonbairn said:

That does not mean they control the club.

Did I say it did? It surely does mean the supporters society have considerable influence being the largest shareholder however, bigger than that of any other shareholder even if not a controlling influence. 

Edited by LatapyBairn.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As an FSS member and ordinary punter I find this all very dodgy. Any money from contributions should be withheld until this has been resolved.

Was never very comfortable with this whole scenario once we got the government loan. I contributed to attain shares. To be stopped short off what we need is quite frankly scandalous.

Pretty miffed by this whole thing. If it is not sorted out soon I will be leaving the FSS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Jimmy1876 said:

Can anyone from FSS also confirm this has no impact on the terms of the government loan? When it was announced it was about supporting clubs having a controlling stake in their clubs as well as for building infrastructure in a community focussed club.  FSS has now been blocked from that controlling stake so does that have any impact on the loan? 

No - no effect at all.. It is an unsecured loan and the only stipulation is that the Govt is to be updated on any changes to the governance of FSS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...