The Falkirk FC Thread

[ShaggerG]

3 hours ago, Shodwall cat said:

That wasn't the last board though was it . That was SA and Ritchie etc who had nothing to do with the inchyra debacle.The last board didn't invest any huge amounts of money like they have over the years. 

I desperately wanted the old board to succeed (and the one before that, and the one before that...), however, in some ways I think they were a victim of the failure that went before because they were the tip of the iceberg of failure, if that makes any sense? We'd reached the end of our tether at the point that they departed and it was obvious that something radical was required following Houstie's demise and the catalouge of nonsense that followed with Hartley, McKinnon etc, etc.

We now seem to have hit on a winning formula, both at board level and on the park, so surely we can now forget about what's gone on before and all get behind our efforts to improve things?

[Hartleys18/19Army]

3 hours ago, FalkirkBairn2021 said:

To be fair I haven't really seen that other than about long term issues that aren't related to what's happening on the park. Apart from an obvious troll or two who should just be roundly ignored.

It's a little bit sobering that even if we continue our great form and get promoted- we face the same financial pressures we have today next season. When we really should be investing again in a better standard of player.

I love fan ownership..I think it's great. I'm just not sure we are well placed to make it work without Ann Budge or Gordon Scott type to write cheques additionally whilst we aren't in the Premiership.

That feels like the only model likely to be successful imo. We don't need a multi millionaire but we would ideally have a Martin Ritchie type character willing to meet the majority of the shortfall in the lower leagues. 

I totally understand why that's a shit deal for them as its essentially burning tenners KLF style every year.

 

This was the point I made previously. Several of the guys behind the fans ownership who really pushed for it are wealthy guys, certainly more money than your average punter but none are that next level  what is really required at a club. 

Edited October 18, 2023 by Hartleys18/19Army

[HopeStreetWalker]

1 hour ago, StuartA said:

The £400k thing is both a choice and a necessity.  The choice is to maintain full time football rather than radically cut the playing budget, probably in half.  The necessity is that, if we did cut the budget in such a way, we'd likely enter a spiral.  The best p/t players get as much or more than our f/t players, so there isn't really a silver lining in that direction. 

The figure itself is borne out of the operating loss we've suffered on average each year for the past decade/15 years, so there's evidence behind it, with player sales and cup runs historically plugging the gap.  As is obvious, being in L1 puts direct pressure on budgets because of the woeful prize money and poor away crowds, and indirectly because we're less likely to sell players (esp w/o an Academy) or have these cup runs.  The crippler is stadium overheads, which is approaching mid six figures irrespective of which division we're in, but there's little we can do about that and blame games aren't appropriate here.

I get that the constant ask for fans to fund the gap is grating on some folk.  But I think the club has to do it and I'm not clear that playing around with the tone would help much.  They have to be up-front and tell fans the situation as it is, otherwise what's the point of having fan-elected directors?

I think I struggle with the idea that fan ownership is a "choice" inasmuch as we can decide that it didn't work so we'll just go and find that sugar daddy.  The balanced ownership model allows for someone like that, and no-one is champing at the bit to throw cash at us.  An outright sale brings a similar challenge, not least because any new owner would still have to work with fans as significant shareholders, unless everyone agrees to sell-up.

We're on a bit of a wing-and-a-prayer, but still in a hugely better position than a year ago.  So much hinges on getting promoted this season.  If we don't, and another few hundred £k doesn't materialise through a cup run, sale, or windfall, then it is the radical scenario, as we can't really go into debt.

I don't really have an answer, other than to say that now isn't the time to get fatigued by the club's situation.  Of course, it's up to everyone - rich or poor - how they spend their cash and no-one can criticise those who choose not to.  But it's equally true that choosing not to contribute *if you can afford to* means that the club is less able to thrive at this crucial juncture.  That might not be palatable and sound "blamey" but it's no less true.  (And the upside of doing it via FSS rather than other ventures is the absence of VAT, which is significant).

Possible one-off cash injection into the club would be to sell the assets we hold in the stadium to the council and be shot of it once and for all. After all previous threads made it clear the council will never sell their share to FFC, so fine let them own the white elephant lock stock and barrel with FFC having no involvement or responsibility for it's upkeep. Let the council update the floodlights, repair the roof, replace the seating, playing surface etc.

Rent the place for games possibly training maybe some office space and that's it. Bound to be a reduction in running costs per season not having to factor into the yearly budget these oncosts with the bonus of funds we desperately need this season.

Club

[Blame Me]

21 minutes ago, Hartleys18/19Army said:

This was the point I made previously. Several of the guys behind the fans ownership who really pushed for it are wealthy guys, certainly more money than your average punter but none are that next level  what is really required at a club

... with our overheads.

I don't doubt that our model of fan ownership would work but when the bucket you're trying to fill has a massive, stadium sized hole in it then it's an uphill task as @StuartA points out.

As the club said at the outset they've cut-costs, increased turnover and matchday pricing whilst the fans continue to back the players in numbers - as we've always done - so apart from slashing the playing budget these fixed costs are killing us. However, the BoD seem content with the arrangement as they alluded to in one of the podcasts so HSW solution appears to be a non-starter.

Can only assume and perhaps someone can confirm that the Shire contribute via rental costs for the use of the stadium although I'd think their impact would be negligible.

[Springfield]

28 minutes ago, HopeStreetWalker said:

The crippler is stadium overheads, which is approaching mid six figures irrespective of which division we're in, but there's little we can do about that and blame games aren't appropriate here.

Maybe my memory playing up but didn’t the two members of the BOD on an earlier podcast say something along the lines when asked about the stadium costs being a good deal. Apologies if misinterpreted.

[RC55 FFC]

8 minutes ago, Springfield said:

Maybe my memory playing up but didn’t the two members of the BOD on an earlier podcast say something along the lines when asked about the stadium costs being a good deal. Apologies if misinterpreted.

I think the “good deal” comment was in relation to our question on the podcast about an increase of utilities/rates like we are all seeing. Because the club is in a shared council facility it seems gas/electricity is one bonus so in the words of Still Game “We are kings of leckie & can burn the full 3 bars, we’re not caring”

[Springfield]

4 minutes ago, RC55 FFC said:

I think the “good deal” comment was in relation to our question on the podcast about an increase of utilities/rates like we are all seeing. Because the club is in a shared council facility it seems gas/electricity is one bonus so in the words of Still Game “We are kings of leckie & can burn the full 3 bars, we’re not caring”

Thanks 

[Bainsfordbairn]

16 minutes ago, Springfield said:

Maybe my memory playing up but didn’t the two members of the BOD on an earlier podcast say something along the lines when asked about the stadium costs being a good deal. Apologies if misinterpreted.

They did. They quoted facts and figures which will be available to anyone who listens to the podcast again. I can't remember what they were and can't be bothered checking, but my abiding memory of that podcast was the BOD members reaction when he was asked the question. He was surprised how good the deal was, which suggested that he, like most of us, assumed we were getting screwed. Evidently that's not the case. 

The stadium size for me is about right. It holds around 8,000 and we have a normal home support of around half that. For big games it can rise to 5K+ and if the opposition are decent we're not far off a sellout. 

[Reggie Perrin]

1 hour ago, HopeStreetWalker said:

Possible one-off cash injection into the club would be to sell the assets we hold in the stadium to the council and be shot of it once and for all. After all previous threads made it clear the council will never sell their share to FFC, so fine let them own the white elephant lock stock and barrel with FFC having no involvement or responsibility for it's upkeep. Let the council update the floodlights, repair the roof, replace the seating, playing surface etc.

Rent the place for games possibly training maybe some office space and that's it. Bound to be a reduction in running costs per season not having to factor into the yearly budget these oncosts with the bonus of funds we desperately need this season.

Club

The Council barely have enough money to empty our bins yet you expect them to magic up the money to buy a football stadium!!!

Truly bizarre post.

[Reggie Perrin]

4 hours ago, Zbairn said:

I may be wrong but I’m not totally convinced on that

BPM assures me that he has not posted since he left P&B and is definitely not Mr Grimsdale (or any other remarkably similar contributor).

[Shodwall cat]

2 hours ago, ShaggerG said:

I desperately wanted the old board to succeed (and the one before that, and the one before that...), however, in some ways I think they were a victim of the failure that went before because they were the tip of the iceberg of failure, if that makes any sense? We'd reached the end of our tether at the point that they departed and it was obvious that something radical was required following Houstie's demise and the catalouge of nonsense that followed with Hartley, McKinnon etc, etc.

We now seem to have hit on a winning formula, both at board level and on the park, so surely we can now forget about what's gone on before and all get behind our efforts to improve things?

Get it right on the park and you've got a far better chance of getting it right off the park . All I've ever wanted was a decent manager appointed who could persuade decent players to sign for the club. The former board gave miller and McCracken contract extensions and then appointed both sheeting and Holt.  All dreadful appointments that cost the club god knows how much money.  M and m and Holt's recruitment were absolutely honking and that's more money down the drain. How anyone could appoint two guys that looked so far out of their depth that night at the inchyra is completely beyond me.  I've never heard a manager tell people I wish I was better in all my life, never mind holts were you good in your first job pish.  A complete disaster which saw all our cash reserves we'd built up pissed down the drain to come mid table in league one. Inexcusable I'm afraid in my book.

[MrDust]

12 hours ago, Springfield said:

Think it’s a given that the players contracted beyond 2024, should we fail to secure promotion, will have clauses to leave. 

If it goes tits up and we go part time, I fully expect a hybrid set up

A lot can happen, I shudder to think of our budget this season without our cup run.

We could get a cup run this season that could top last years, tho I hope it benefits our championship season

11 hours ago, Grangemouth Bairn said:

I don’t post on here as much now - reading the last few pages make me glad of that and I can see how good, Falkirk guys like BPM have stopped posting. Top of the league, unbeaten and playing great football and still we have people moaning.

 

I also don't post much on here, I did prefer when it was all about the football.

As for BPM, I applauded his various finger pointing at the previous board in many fans meetings and I know he bleeds navy blue.

I probably agreed with the majority of what he posted pre him hanging up the gloves here but I think we seen similar on here with folk who were friends with the last board posting here. I think most folk will back who you know blindly at times no matter the business. 

A thick skin is required, for everyone 

 

19 minutes ago, Shodwall cat said:

Get it right on the park and you've got a far better chance of getting it right off the park . All I've ever wanted was a decent manager appointed who could persuade decent players to sign for the club. The former board gave miller and McCracken contract extensions and then appointed both sheeting and Holt.  All dreadful appointments that cost the club god knows how much money.  M and m and Holt's recruitment were absolutely honking and that's more money down the drain. How anyone could appoint two guys that looked so far out of their depth that night at the inchyra is completely beyond me.  I've never heard a manager tell people I wish I was better in all my life, never mind holts were you good in your first job pish.  A complete disaster which saw all our cash reserves we'd built up pissed down the drain to come mid table in league one. Inexcusable I'm afraid in my book.

I'm guessing our home support has increased most years albeit we are in league one and failing horribly.

I still believe M&M would've taken us up the COVID season, probably helped with McKinnon's recruitment, although following season they did well till a point, they needed help and Holt was not the man, Alex Smith around the place would've been ideal or similar. 

Managers of their ilk need time to grow, yogi could've been dumped after year one and no one would've complained 

[Bula Bairn]

2 hours ago, Bainsfordbairn said:

They did. They quoted facts and figures which will be available to anyone who listens to the podcast again. I can't remember what they were and can't be bothered checking, but my abiding memory of that podcast was the BOD members reaction when he was asked the question. He was surprised how good the deal was, which suggested that he, like most of us, assumed we were getting screwed. Evidently that's not the case. 

The stadium size for me is about right. It holds around 8,000 and we have a normal home support of around half that. For big games it can rise to 5K+ and if the opposition are decent we're not far off a sellout. 

See link from 1 hour 44 min; said we're paying premier costs, which is a problem in League 1 and the Championship but we have a contract...

Would be good to get an update on the council talks KG references from last year as the stadium deal is a crippler, as StuartA says.   

 

[Hampden Roar]

Yet again the 3rd stool via FSS being asked to bring in more money and the other 2 don’t stump up their share, despite being the decision makers.

[Zbairn]

7 minutes ago, Hampden Roar said:

Yet again the 3rd stool via FSS being asked to bring in more money and the other 2 don’t stump up their share, despite being the decision makers.

I think you will find one leg of the stool stumped up a good few thousands to buy up the remaining shares. The other leg of the stool stumped up significant cash as a soft loan to help us get through the season financially unscathed.

You can always become a decision maker by nominating yourself (assuming you are a member of the FSS)

Edited October 18, 2023 by Zbairn

[ebobsboy]

15 hours ago, FFC 1876 said:

Especially important given the club have highlighted the fact they need to start working on current players contract situations. Fair few out of contract next summer that I would hope we can keep. 

Goalkeeper
1. Sam Long - Still contracted to Lincoln to 2025
31. Nicky Hogarth - June 2024
27. Owen Hayward (A)

Defender
2. Tom Lang - June 2025
6. Coll Donaldson - June 2024
26. Sean Mackie - June 2024
22. Brad Mckay - June 2024(thank f**k)
3. Leon Mccann - June 2024
20. Layton Bisland - Out of contract with Dundee United
33. Logan Sinclair (A)

Midfielder
8. Brad Spencer - June 2025
5. Liam Henderson - June 2024
4. Stephen McGinn - June 2024
14. Finn Yeats - June 2024
21. Ola Lawal - June 2024
10. Aidan Nesbitt - June 2025
18. Gary Oliver - June 2024
7. Callumn Morrison - June 2024
29. Calvin Miller - June 2025
11. Alfredo Agyeman - June 2025
23. Ethan Ross - Out of contract with Raith
30. Scott Honeyman (A)
32. Rhys Walker (A)

Striker
9. Jordan Allan - June 2025
17. Ross MacIver - June 2025

Let go Hogarth he's not had a sniff and tbh didn't come here to sit on the bench, . Mackie, McGinn, Oliver, Mckay can all go for one reason or another. McCann I'd try and keep but I just don't think McGlynn favours him if he had a better left back which to all intents and purposes Mackie was meant to be. I'd try and keep Henderson,Yeats, Donaldson. Lawal is a conundrum, and I'd be trying to get Morrison on at least another year if I was McGlynn because on current form it won't have gone unnoticed. 

[Bairn in Exile]

25 minutes ago, ebobsboy said:

Let go Hogarth he's not had a sniff and tbh didn't come here to sit on the bench, . Mackie, McGinn, Oliver, Mckay can all go for one reason or another. McCann I'd try and keep but I just don't think McGlynn favours him if he had a better left back which to all intents and purposes Mackie was meant to be. I'd try and keep Henderson,Yeats, Donaldson. Lawal is a conundrum, and I'd be trying to get Morrison on at least another year if I was McGlynn because on current form it won't have gone unnoticed. 

I think that word you are looking for is palindrome. 

[muppetshow]

overheads? any other club in our league have 3 people on the commercial team? (just an example) i fucking doubt it. u cant run a club like a gravy train council is run, no matter what league u are in, especially in the current climate. talking of councils, do falkirk council make money out of us? are do we benefit from them? (doubtful) clubs simply dont run at a 400k deficit p.a. in this tinpot league without something being very wrong...... especially when they have been here for years

[Chinatoon Bairn]

8 hours ago, muppetshow said:

overheads? any other club in our league have 3 people on the commercial team?

This the same one that posted record breaking numbers last year?

[FFC 1876]

9 hours ago, ebobsboy said:

Let go Hogarth he's not had a sniff and tbh didn't come here to sit on the bench, . Mackie, McGinn, Oliver, Mckay can all go for one reason or another. McCann I'd try and keep but I just don't think McGlynn favours him if he had a better left back which to all intents and purposes Mackie was meant to be. I'd try and keep Henderson,Yeats, Donaldson. Lawal is a conundrum, and I'd be trying to get Morrison on at least another year if I was McGlynn because on current form it won't have gone unnoticed. 

If Hogarth doesn't force his way into the starting line up he'll probably want away but if not I'd be trying to keep him. I'd also be trying to extend Donaldson, Henderson, Yeats and Lawal.

Will most likely be Morrison's last season, been talk of him leaving near enough every transfer window I doubt we'll keep a hold of him when he's free to go in the summer. Likewise I'd love to see Mccann stay but given Gary Holt negotiated his 3 year deal he could be on a fair whack so McGlynn may fancy using that money elsewhere.

I wouldn't be trying to extend Mackie, McGinn or Oliver as the first two have been rooked with injuries and there's better quality out there than Oliver. As already mentioned thank f**k it'll be the last of Brad Mckay.