The Falkirk FC Thread

[Springfield]

2 hours ago, Mon_Eh_Bairns2018 said:

I believe sandy still owns a large share in the club, but is a very passive investor and lets the others run the club. Not sure about Martin though

Same 

[Bigbrbairn]

Who is the interested investor? Ties to club or outside money?

[Bigbrbairn]

Hearing that the potential new investor made his money from real estate in USA and is opening a coffee business.  Sounds good!!

 

 I will get my coat

[gav-ffc]

6 hours ago, LatapyBairn. said:

How much of the club do SA and MR still own? Can’t be much more than 10% between them? 

Sandy has 454320 shares and Ritchie has 191804.

[LatapyBairn.]

26 minutes ago, gav-ffc said:

Sandy has 454320 shares and Ritchie has 191804.

So less than 10% between them? 

[grumpyoldman]

6 hours ago, LatapyBairn. said:

So less than 10% between them? 

There’s also. over 100000 shares held a company owned by MR, there’s also Moffat and McIntyre who are still shareholders, between the four of them they hold more than 1.2 million shares not a kick in the arse of 24% of the company

Edited November 11, 2023 by grumpyoldman

[LatapyBairn.]

6 hours ago, grumpyoldman said:

There’s also. over 100000 shares held a company owned by MR, there’s also Moffat and McIntyre who are still shareholders, between the four of them they hold more than 1.2 million shares not a kick in the arse of 24% of the company

Even between the 4 of them I’m surprised it’s as much as that, didn’t realise Moffat and McIntyre still had as many shares. 

[Zbairn]

6 hours ago, grumpyoldman said:

There’s also. over 100000 shares held a company owned by MR, there’s also Moffat and McIntyre who are still shareholders, between the four of them they hold more than 1.2 million shares not a kick in the arse of 24% of the company

Any new investment (£ into the club) would require a new share issue, thus diluting further the old MSG's % shareholding, as well as that of the Patrons and FSS. 

I would like to think that any new investment in the club would, at the minimum, need to have the support of all 3 "legs of the stool" before any changes to the current ratios of % shareholding.

Potentially it means that the FSS monthly cash reverts to buying shares, allowing it to retain the current level of,  rather than just being a "donation" to the club as it is now.  The Patrons would also have to stump up, if they want to retain their %. 

 

[LatapyBairn.]

2 hours ago, Zbairn said:

Any new investment (£ into the club) would require a new share issue, thus diluting further the old MSG's % shareholding, as well as that of the Patrons and FSS. 

I would like to think that any new investment in the club would, at the minimum, need to have the support of all 3 "legs of the stool" before any changes to the current ratios of % shareholding.

Potentially it means that the FSS monthly cash reverts to buying shares, allowing it to retain the current level of,  rather than just being a "donation" to the club as it is now.  The Patrons would also have to stump up, if they want to retain their %. 

 

It’s all complete and utter speculation but in theory if the club were to sanction it the shares still held by the former MSG could all be sold directly to any new investor without the need for a share issue, the only caveat being the money would not go to the club but to the guys holding the shares so your then relying on they’re good will, they may or may not gift the proceeds to the club. The previous share issue to allow the Rawlins investment required a vote with a 75% threshold so if that were the case here all three legs would indeed need to approve that and vote for it, hypothetically I presume the situation would be the same here unless there are differences I’m not aware of?  Apart from anything else I’m not sure why any new investor would be interested in buying a 20% shareholding, surely any outside money would want enough to allow a level of control? Unless of course this imaginary investor is a philanthropic Falkirk fan with only the clubs interests at heart.  

Edited November 11, 2023 by LatapyBairn.

[Mr Grimsdale]

This has all the hallmarks of amateur hour stuff with news breaking on P&B. 
 

[Roboccop]

I’m on my phone at moment so can’t write screeds but this scenario is exactly why FSS needs to be more independent of the club just now than it is and MUST get something in return for all new money  invested from its membership. The interest free loan against future shares if there’s an issue is essential and not a proposal that the FSS committee has kicked into the long grass to avoid upsetting the Board. 

[LatapyBairn.]

8 minutes ago, Roboccop said:

I’m on my phone at moment so can’t write screeds but this scenario is exactly why FSS needs to be more independent of the club just now than it is and MUST get something in return for all new money  invested from its membership. The interest free loan against future shares if there’s an issue is essential and not a proposal that the FSS committee has kicked into the long grass to avoid upsetting the Board. 

This isn’t a legitimate concern, If this hypothetical share issue were to happen it’s already been stated and is also in the contract between the FSS and the club that shares would be ring fenced specifically for the FSS allowing the society to regain its 25% shareholding. 

Edited November 11, 2023 by LatapyBairn.

[Roboccop]

6 minutes ago, LatapyBairn. said:

This isn’t a legitimate concern, If there is ever this hypothetical share issue it’s already been stated and is also in the contract between the FSS and the club that shares would be ring fenced specifically for the FSS allowing the society to regain its 25% shareholding. 

Any current money is going to the club with no strings attached where if it was a loan then shares could be allocated to it if there’s a share issue. The “ deal” you are alluding to is unofficial and would require further fundraising. And I am reasonable sure it’s not in the contract between the club and FSS ( which I was part responsible for negotiating). 

[LatapyBairn.]

34 minutes ago, Roboccop said:

Any current money is going to the club with no strings attached where if it was a loan then shares could be allocated to it if there’s a share issue. The “ deal” you are alluding to is unofficial and would require further fundraising. And I am reasonable sure it’s not in the contract between the club and FSS ( which I was part responsible for negotiating). 

I’ll have to take your word on this but it contradicts what I was told from a committee member when I asked the question. I was told the agreement between the club and the FSS is indeed official and binding therefore should a share issue ever happen there would be a ring fenced amount of shares specifically and only for the FSS to allow the society to regain its shareholding. If that is the case I am perfectly content with the situation. The FSS are now the clubs largest shareholder, we have as much if not more influence than any other group or individual shareholder. Some people really need to get away from this narrative that the club and the FSS are somehow at odds with each other when in fact they are one and the same (and currently doing an extremely good job running the club) now we are a fan owned club, there is no us and them and I find that mentality completely counter productive and irritating to be honest.  

Edited November 11, 2023 by LatapyBairn.

[Roboccop]

12 minutes ago, LatapyBairn. said:

I’ll have to take your word on this but it contradicts what I was told from a committee member when I asked the question. I was told the agreement between the club and the FSS is indeed official and binding therefore should a share issue ever happen there would be a ring fenced amount of shares specifically and only for the FSS to allow the society to regain its shareholding. If that is the case I am perfectly content with the situation. The FSS are now the clubs largest shareholder, we have as much if not more influence than any other group or individual shareholder. 

Sorry you are misinformed. The deal says the club will get all money from Fss ( but crucially doesn’t say in what form) and in return they will get 2 directors and be regarded as the official supporters representative ( sadly FSS current leadership has forgotten that bit and does whatever the club wants). That’s it. Nothing about keeping the share holding to 25% ( which it still hasn’t reached - last time I checked companies house still had the holding below 25 - perhaps I need to check again but at best it wil be 24%. 
 

Be wary. 

Edited November 11, 2023 by Roboccop

[LatapyBairn.]

18 minutes ago, Roboccop said:

Sorry you are misinformed. The deal says the club will get all money from Fss ( but crucially doesn’t say in what form) and in return they will get 2 directors and be regarded as the official supporters representative ( sadly FSS current leadership has forgotten that bit and does whatever the club wants). That’s it. Nothing about keeping the share holding to 25% ( which it still hasn’t reached - last time I checked companies house still had the holding below 25 - perhaps I need to check again but at best it wil be 24%. 
 

Be wary. 

Well I won’t call you a liar but it does contradict the information I was given, I’m also sure I read a quote from the club confining it. The shareholding is actually 24.3% making us the clubs largest shareholder apparently, with 25.1% made up via proxy. The O.6% currently being made up by proxy I’m told could actually be handed over to the FSS officially in the next few months as well by a fan looking to donate leaving the society no need for small the proxy to make up that number. 

Edited November 11, 2023 by LatapyBairn.

[knee jerk reaction]

No been on here for a while so catching up. The FSS may not have the official 25 odd% to block anything horrifically bad for the club but when taking into account loads of small investors (fans) who have a few shares like myself but want to keep them for sentimental reasons then there's absolutely no way anyone could do get a sufficient number of votes to do something harmful to the club.

[Roboccop]

9 minutes ago, LatapyBairn. said:

Well I won’t call you a liar but it does contradict the information I was given, I’m also sure I read a quote from the club confining it. The shareholding is actually 24.3% making us the clubs largest shareholder apparently, with 25.1% made up via proxy. The O.6% currently being made up by proxy I’m told could actually be handed over to the FSS officially in the next few months as well by a fan looking to donate leaving the society no need for small the proxy to make up that number. 

I’ve actually read it and discussed it with the Board so I think I know a bit more about this. Looking back we ( FSS) agreed it without thinking about all the implications and I regret that. 

[Zbairn]

46 minutes ago, LatapyBairn. said:

Well I won’t call you a liar but it does contradict the information I was given, I’m also sure I read a quote from the club confining it. The shareholding is actually 24.3% making us the clubs largest shareholder apparently, with 25.1% made up via proxy. The O.6% currently being made up by proxy I’m told could actually be handed over to the FSS officially in the next few months as well by a fan looking to donate leaving the society no need for small the proxy to make up that number. 

24.3% + 0.6% = 24.9% .......still not the 25%+1 

That was always the main part of the many previous discussions. 

[LatapyBairn.]

44 minutes ago, Zbairn said:

24.3% + 0.6% = 24.9% .......still not the 25%+1 

That was always the main part of the many previous discussions. 

Sorry, that’s just a typo, 0.8% it should have read. Which does = 25.1%. I’ll edit the original post accordingly.

Edited November 11, 2023 by LatapyBairn.