Jimmy1876 Posted October 2 Share Posted October 2 8 minutes ago, Rugster said: I think the same rules apply about signing someone even if the club folds, I don't think we can sign anyone that wasn't a free agent at the end of the window can we? We signed Ryan Shanley before Christmas after he was released from Edinburgh City during their financial issues did we not? Would be very harsh of the SFA to not allow footballers employment as a result of something completely outside their control. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rugster Posted October 2 Share Posted October 2 7 minutes ago, 18BAIRN76 said: If the rules allowed it, I’d absolutely take him as a short-term signing. He’s got on a bit but he’s still a very intelligent player. Edit to add: might be talking shite, but vaguely seem to recall special dispensation behind given to players to sign for other teams who had lost their job due to admin etc. Would need someone a lot more knowledgeable than me to confirm though. When it happened with Edinburgh City we signed Shanley in December but he couldn't be registered until 1st January. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rugster Posted October 2 Share Posted October 2 3 minutes ago, Jimmy1876 said: We signed Ryan Shanley before Christmas after he was released from Edinburgh City during their financial issues did we not? Would be very harsh of the SFA to not allow footballers employment as a result of something completely outside their control. Yes but he couldn't play until January https://www.falkirkfc.co.uk/2023/12/18/ryan-shanley-signs/ 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RC55 FFC Posted October 2 Share Posted October 2 21 minutes ago, HoBNob said: How far in advance do you tend to put tickets on sale, and will you have standard pricing for the Dunfermline game or are there different grades? (ala Raith Rovers) Cheers. Home tickets are available now for the full season but away tickets are usually on sale a couple of weeks beforehand (and advertised by the away side). No tiered pricing no. Will be £21 for an adult in the away stand. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimmy1876 Posted October 2 Share Posted October 2 7 minutes ago, Rugster said: Yes but he couldn't play until January https://www.falkirkfc.co.uk/2023/12/18/ryan-shanley-signs/ I see, didn't remember that. Definitely seems unfair given its entirely outwith their control. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rugster Posted October 2 Share Posted October 2 2 minutes ago, Jimmy1876 said: I see, didn't remember that. Definitely seems unfair given its entirely outwith their control. Agree 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
18BAIRN76 Posted October 2 Share Posted October 2 7 minutes ago, Rugster said: When it happened with Edinburgh City we signed Shanley in December but he couldn't be registered until 1st January. Fair point aye, don’t think Edinburgh actually ‘officially’ went into administration though? They got points deducted for not paying wages on time, but think they released basically their entire squad to avoid it. https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/dundee-sign-released-dunfermline-athletic-1795303.amp Think it’s a different case when you’re officially made redundant rather than just released going by examples in that article. We’ll see what happens but yeah, he’s probably the only ICT player I’d be looking at but I doubt we’d be the only ones. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BPM Posted October 2 Share Posted October 2 10 hours ago, Blame Me said: This. As mentioned by JS, all income streams outperforming previous targets, Championship revenues and the club in relative good place on the pitch fans might ask why topping up the budget is needed. I would agree the emphasis on the budget has run its course. Interested why you think it has run its course?a All the commercial increases will be required due to increased costs that the Championship brings. The extra that FSS brings in absolutely makes a difference to McGlynn’s budget every year 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Latapy is god Posted October 2 Share Posted October 2 1 hour ago, PedroMoutinho said: Personally I think it’s clearer than ever that some sort of external investment will be needed to become the third leg of the stool and make up that deficit. There are not going to be many better circumstances to encourage people to sign up than last season and still the vast majority of supporters have chosen not to do so. Unfortunately, I don’t see FSS membership getting near the 2500-3000 figure mentioned. Everyone will have their own reasons, but I suspect a good number will simply believe that they are already contributing enough through STs, hospitality, merchandise etc and don’t feel like contributing more for no tangible benefit to them. We have a really good number of FSS members (especially when the average donation is considered). There are things that can be done around the edges to get some more- I think some way of allowing people to purchase their own shares over time so they get something tangible should be looked at. As mentioned, in my view FSS independence from the board and Patrons is another factor. Ultimately though, I do feel external investment will be important if we are to get the club to where it can and should be across all areas. I’m sure the board are not closed to that, but compromise on the ‘ideal’ ownership model may be needed. 100%. We've been told a lot of frogs heads would be getting kissed for quite time now though. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blame Me Posted October 2 Share Posted October 2 59 minutes ago, BPM said: Interested why you think it has run its course?a All the commercial increases will be required due to increased costs that the Championship brings. The extra that FSS brings in absolutely makes a difference to McGlynn’s budget every year I don't think most fans see it that way. As discussed at length previously, non-FSS members perhaps see what they contribute via the traditional methods as supporting the football budget. Ally that with our above average and loyal support, I question whether that generates a perception that the club should be able to sustain a decent budget without additional input from the FSS and especially now we're back in the Championship. Again, my view only, but the FSS don't talk up the other work that the provided funding is helping with as far as I know. Unfortunately money spent on players doesn't always translate to success on-it and can be temporary. Demonstrating some of the non-playing successes that will last the club in the longer-term could help. I don't think it's an either/or strategy but, again, for me the messaging has become one-sided. @BPM that's just my opinion. Others may disagree. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silvio Tattiescone Posted October 2 Share Posted October 2 2 hours ago, PedroMoutinho said: I think some way of allowing people to purchase their own shares over time so they get something tangible should be looked at. I've enquired about this but its not possible right now. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bainsfordbairn Posted October 2 Share Posted October 2 (edited) 21 minutes ago, Blame Me said: Ally that with our above average and loyal support, I question whether that generates a perception that the club should be able to sustain a decent budget without additional input from the FSS and especially now we're back in the Championship. I think that such a perception would likely only be held by people who're fully aware of the finances. And not paying attention to club communications. As far as we've been told, the club have always had this 400K deficit while in the championship. That evidently dates back to the time we were relegated from the premier league in 2009/10. In the past the deficit has been filled by soft loans from (presumably) the BOD or MSG, cup runs or player sales from the academy. Two out of three of those avenues are now closed. The FSS are now the major shareholder and don't have the funds that wealthier directors previously did. Our academy isn't advanced enough yet to be selling players down to England for either big money or future transfer fees. That leaves cup runs, and if you budget for one and go out in the first round you're up shit creek without a paddle. So the FSS will always be the main funding avenue unless we find trustworthy external investment to be the third leg of the stool. Our abandon the current ownership model, which doesn't seem to have worked out well for Dunfermline. Edited October 2 by Bainsfordbairn grammar 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PedroMoutinho Posted October 2 Share Posted October 2 (edited) 10 minutes ago, Bainsfordbairn said: I think that such a perception would likely only be held by people who're fully aware of the finances. And not paying attention to club communications. As far as we've been told, the club have always had this 400K deficit while in the championship. That evidently dates back to the time we were relegated from the premier league in 2009/10. In the past the deficit has been filled by soft loans from (presumably) the BOD or MSG, cup runs or player sales from the academy. Two out of three of those avenues are now closed. The FSS are now the major shareholder and don't have the funds that wealthier directors previously did. Our academy isn't advanced enough yet to be selling players down to England for either big money or future transfer fees. That leaves cup runs, and if you budget for one and go out in the first round you're up shit creek without a paddle. So the FSS will always be the main funding avenue unless we find trustworthy external investment to be the third leg of the stool. Our abandon the current ownership model, which doesn't seem to have worked out well for Dunfermline. Player sales don’t have to come from the academy. In my view we now have a number of players who are or could become sellable assets (largely thanks to good recruitment from McGlynn), and none of them have been near our academy. Edited October 2 by PedroMoutinho 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bainsfordbairn Posted October 2 Share Posted October 2 1 minute ago, PedroMoutinho said: Player sales don’t have to come from the academy. In my view we now have a number of players who are or could become sellable assets, and none of them have been near our academy. True, but the academy produced consistent and ongoing sales. I think the only sales we made from signing "experienced" pros were Lyle Taylor, Kallum Higginbotham & Will Vaulks. All of whom were recruited in a short timeframe by one manager. Who was forced into such gambles because he had no money. We haven't had enough sustained success from that route to afford the luxury of thinking that we don't need to keep pushing to increase the size of FSS. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disco Duck Posted October 2 Share Posted October 2 2 hours ago, PedroMoutinho said: Personally I think it’s clearer than ever that some sort of external investment will be needed to become the third leg of the stool and make up that deficit. There are not going to be many better circumstances to encourage people to sign up than last season and still the vast majority of supporters have chosen not to do so. Unfortunately, I don’t see FSS membership getting near the 2500-3000 figure mentioned. Everyone will have their own reasons, but I suspect a good number will simply believe that they are already contributing enough through STs, hospitality, merchandise etc and don’t feel like contributing more for no tangible benefit to them. We have a really good number of FSS members (especially when the average donation is considered). There are things that can be done around the edges to get some more- I think some way of allowing people to purchase their own shares over time so they get something tangible should be looked at. As mentioned, in my view FSS independence from the board and Patrons is another factor. Ultimately though, I do feel external investment will be important if we are to get the club to where it can and should be across all areas. I’m sure the board are not closed to that, but compromise on the ‘ideal’ ownership model may be needed. For me that comes down to whether we are happy being consistently a Championship team with a (good) Championship budget, with occasional forays elsewhere; or aim to be a Premier team with the required investments and commensurate risks from outside parties. id rather the former. Maybe that’s lacking in ambition, but Scottish football is littered with examples of clubs that have grown ambitiously and then failed spectacularly. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HopeStreetWalker Posted October 2 Share Posted October 2 13 minutes ago, Disco Duck said: For me that comes down to whether we are happy being consistently a Championship team with a (good) Championship budget, with occasional forays elsewhere; or aim to be a Premier team with the required investments and commensurate risks from outside parties. id rather the former. Maybe that’s lacking in ambition, but Scottish football is littered with examples of clubs that have grown ambitiously and then failed spectacularly. The club have to go canny regarding expenditure. The £400k shortfall year after year being met by supporter's goodwill is not a sustainable or reliable income stream. The punter supporter is going to be hit in the pocket for any disposable income in the upcoming UK Budget and personal, family and dependents finances rightly come first. Can you imagine the hit to the pocket if its 20p on litre of fuel geez its frighting. People are going to hold off making any new or further contributions to the club until they know where they stand. Would rather be a middling championship team at the end of the season and still in business and build on it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Springfield Posted October 2 Share Posted October 2 I’m genuinely shocked (maybe too strong) that we didn’t see a decent uplift in FSS membership. The opportunity to get these numbers increased couldn’t have been better timed. Invincible season, Sales of STs at the highest for years, very close to sell out home games and a huge following away from home. We add ten new members in September. Don’t understand why there wasn’t a decent uplift. Could argue that people can’t afford it which I respect. However the club have just confirmed that the away supporters numbers for our last five games are just shy of 8000 most likely increasing the away clubs finances by around £140-160K. Considering that three were our league games, would suggest that people can generate that bit extra. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stainrod Posted October 2 Share Posted October 2 1 hour ago, PedroMoutinho said: Player sales don’t have to come from the academy. In my view we now have a number of players who are or could become sellable assets (largely thanks to good recruitment from McGlynn), and none of them have been near our academy. All decent young prospects go to the clubs with an elite academy . We are u likely to uncover a championship level player from the guys we have in our set up. Unless we get lucky. The alternative model of picking up good young prospects deemed not good enough for the premiership seems more viable and the work done by McGlynn in securing Adam’s ,Hogarth , Yeats and possibly hendo may actually see us getting some cash . I love the concept of us honing our own young players through our youth set up but it seems like everything else in Scottish football the premier teams have drawn up rules that favour them scooping up all the young talent now to protect their business model ! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PedroMoutinho Posted October 2 Share Posted October 2 1 hour ago, Disco Duck said: For me that comes down to whether we are happy being consistently a Championship team with a (good) Championship budget, with occasional forays elsewhere; or aim to be a Premier team with the required investments and commensurate risks from outside parties. id rather the former. Maybe that’s lacking in ambition, but Scottish football is littered with examples of clubs that have grown ambitiously and then failed spectacularly. Personally I’d far rather be an established premier league club (even if they requires external investment) and I don’t think there’s any reason we shouldn’t be. There’s a long list of clubs smaller than ours which have achieved that. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grumpyoldman Posted October 2 Share Posted October 2 4 hours ago, Rugster said: Yes but he couldn't play until January https://www.falkirkfc.co.uk/2023/12/18/ryan-shanley-signs/ Is that Jan 2025 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.