Jump to content

The Falkirk FC Thread


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Kircer bairn said:

On a side note how good to see that the investment in the franchise football models at Livvie & Queens Park is eventually finding its true level with both propping up their respective divisions 😏

This is an important point and relevant to us.  It's often taken that the choice FFC has is between what we do now and a Sugar Daddy.  It isn't because there isn't a Sugar Daddy out there, or at least one who'd fit our bill, not being a crook/charlatan/fantasist etc.  But it also shows the vulnerability of that model.  If those clubs are so highly-subsidised that they couldn't tolerate any exposure in the real world, without Sugar Daddy or projected success, then it's a flawed model, a'la Gretna.

Our model is still vulnerable as we've so little cushion/fallback until we have another couple of good seasons and a windfall or two.  And we've been on a continual albeit gradual upturn since J McG came in so hard to say what would happen if we did implode.  But it's at least a bit more predictable and, I'd suggest, sustainable as it relies on broader shoulders (nearly ?900 FSS members, dozens of medium/larger shareholders, hundreds of sponsors, thousands of fans) even if it is a slog.  The *right* investor would still be welcomed, but worth considering the risk of relying too heavily on one individual.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Reggie Perrin said:

Not sure about this fixation with moving players on.

We don’t have a bloated squad and will certainly require cover for injuries and suspensions as the season progresses.

The only ones I would be looking to shift are McKay who is so far out of the picture as to be invisible and Long who should be sent back to his parent club and replaced by an experienced keeper.

Suppose it's a balance, if you've got folk like McKay or Lawal who aren't likely to be getting much game time and you can get their wages away or at least reduced while getting people in who are more likely to contribute then great.

I do agree that we shouldn't be making the squad any smaller so only let go if we'll be able to replace with better quality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Moonball said:

You do a great job, especially considering it's a one-man effort on the production side. We're much the same on the rare occasions we stream (thanks to macros and Stream Decks and suchlike!) and have to dial the quality back to 1080p for live streaming, which impacts on highlights.

4K is lovely, but even having upgraded to a decent laptop and started doing a bit of editing at the ground, I'm stuck with 'superfast' internet instead of fibre at home which practically kills any chance of getting 4K highlights up for midnight. I'm in two minds whether to switch back to 1080p but wanted to give 4K a good go first!

Thank you.

We've had a leased line* at the club that makes me think 4k uploads for midnight might be possible in the near future... *Although the thing that really hurts my soul we got an internet 'upgrade' last month that's turned 66mbps upload into 16mbps upload. Do get a ridiculous 200mbps download - I need to ask if there's something wrong that upload is so low.

Streaming in 4k would need a new capture card, probably a newer laptop and a new configuration on AWS, I've just not looked at it in years because what I've got works and I've forgotten how to set it up...😂

That's forgetting I'm shooting on a Sony a6400 in 1080p50 (it does 4k 30 but frames > resolution) which I think is a bit of a limiting factor just now. An a6700 is a great step up and already have the compatible lens... or I'll really go all in for a FX3 and a £2k full frame power zoom lens. At that point I'll be content with what I have I think😂
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, LeodhasXD said:

Thank you.

We've had a leased line* at the club that makes me think 4k uploads for midnight might be possible in the near future... *Although the thing that really hurts my soul we got an internet 'upgrade' last month that's turned 66mbps upload into 16mbps upload. Do get a ridiculous 200mbps download - I need to ask if there's something wrong that upload is so low.

Streaming in 4k would need a new capture card, probably a newer laptop and a new configuration on AWS, I've just not looked at it in years because what I've got works and I've forgotten how to set it up...😂

That's forgetting I'm shooting on a Sony a6400 in 1080p50 (it does 4k 30 but frames > resolution) which I think is a bit of a limiting factor just now. An a6700 is a great step up and already have the compatible lens... or I'll really go all in for a FX3 and a £2k full frame power zoom lens. At that point I'll be content with what I have I think😂
 

 

200.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, StuartA said:

This is an important point and relevant to us.  It's often taken that the choice FFC has is between what we do now and a Sugar Daddy.  It isn't because there isn't a Sugar Daddy out there, or at least one who'd fit our bill, not being a crook/charlatan/fantasist etc.  But it also shows the vulnerability of that model.  If those clubs are so highly-subsidised that they couldn't tolerate any exposure in the real world, without Sugar Daddy or projected success, then it's a flawed model, a'la Gretna.

Our model is still vulnerable as we've so little cushion/fallback until we have another couple of good seasons and a windfall or two.  And we've been on a continual albeit gradual upturn since J McG came in so hard to say what would happen if we did implode.  But it's at least a bit more predictable and, I'd suggest, sustainable as it relies on broader shoulders (nearly ?900 FSS members, dozens of medium/larger shareholders, hundreds of sponsors, thousands of fans) even if it is a slog.  The *right* investor would still be welcomed, but worth considering the risk of relying too heavily on one individual.

https://norwichcity.myfootballwriter.com/2020/02/11/mega-rich-owners-come-with-no-guarantees-of-success-plenty-of-examples-of-failure/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Hisingdoon said:

When was the last time we had this many games without a loss because it’s been a while since we’ve had a record as long as we have it the now

also side point only us, PSV and Bayer leverkussen are unbeaten in Europe

It’s actually quite incredible, does feel like the run has went under the radar a bit. It’s made even more impressive when you take into account Hamilton have been consistently breathing down our necks, there’s been some really impressive individual performances and results in the big games against the better sides both in the league and cup in amongst that as well.  

Edited by LatapyBairn.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, StuartA said:

This is an important point and relevant to us.  It's often taken that the choice FFC has is between what we do now and a Sugar Daddy.  It isn't because there isn't a Sugar Daddy out there, or at least one who'd fit our bill, not being a crook/charlatan/fantasist etc.  But it also shows the vulnerability of that model.  If those clubs are so highly-subsidised that they couldn't tolerate any exposure in the real world, without Sugar Daddy or projected success, then it's a flawed model, a'la Gretna.

Our model is still vulnerable as we've so little cushion/fallback until we have another couple of good seasons and a windfall or two.  And we've been on a continual albeit gradual upturn since J McG came in so hard to say what would happen if we did implode.  But it's at least a bit more predictable and, I'd suggest, sustainable as it relies on broader shoulders (nearly ?900 FSS members, dozens of medium/larger shareholders, hundreds of sponsors, thousands of fans) even if it is a slog.  The *right* investor would still be welcomed, but worth considering the risk of relying too heavily on one individual.

Same goes for Ross County and Roy MacGregor. The sponsorship he brings in with his MacGregor Supplies leverage goes when he does.

 

 

 

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...
×
×
  • Create New...