The Falkirk FC Thread

[HopeStreetWalker]

1 hour ago, Van_damage said:

As much as we need a right back, if we are still running at a £400k loss then I’d rather that be covered before we put any more money to the transfer budget. Could be very bleak should we not find a way to cover that going forward so till then think a loan will have to do. 

If FFC have budgeted a £400k short fall then hell mend us, the fanbase digging deep as well intended as it is not's sustainable.

Sooner or later a yearly begging bowl ain't going to be filled.

[Guest]

10 minutes ago, HopeStreetWalker said:

If FFC have budgeted a £400k short fall then hell mend us, the fanbase digging deep as well intended as it is not's sustainable.

Sooner or later a yearly begging bowl ain't going to be filled.

Just going by the statement. Not sure whether it was referring to this season or the upcoming set of accounts(to 31st May 23) but it did say the FSS money and cup run will fill it but I presume that is combined with the commercial team reaching their stretched targets. Also believe we have soft loans to pay back.

In any case I’d throw some caution to the wind before spending much more. More signing up to the FSS will help relieve that pressure as will a last surge in season ticket sales. 

Edited August 1, 2023 by Van_damage

[gav-ffc]

2 hours ago, Big chungus said:

Hopefully it’s means some funds can be released for a right back. 

We were told we would need to beat last seasons tickets sales including the 3/4 and 1/2 ones which we have. We may regret it if we don’t.

[Guest]

11 minutes ago, gav-ffc said:

We were told we would need to beat last seasons tickets sales including the 3/4 and 1/2 ones which we have. We may regret it if we don’t.

Hard one to weigh up. Need a right back but there should have been more than enough money to bring one in.

I’d be tempted more to let him have to cope with how he’s spent it and hope we can get a free loan in as if we don’t get off to a good start in the first couple of quarters then we might also need money in reserve to pay off McGlynn’s contract. 

Is a bit of a catch 22 but most important thing is keeping the club afloat. 

[Proudtobeabairn]

It's an impressive total but actual figure (when you take out the free under 12s) would be interesting. That's the number we need to grow. 

[gav-ffc]

7 minutes ago, Van_damage said:

Hard one to weigh up. Need a right back but there should have been more than enough money to bring one in.

I’d be tempted more to let him have to cope with how he’s spent it and hope we can get a free loan in as if we don’t get off to a good start in the first couple of quarters then we might also need money in reserve to pay off McGlynn’s contract. 

Is a bit of a catch 22 but most important thing is keeping the club afloat. 

Can only hope we can get a Max Johnstone type loan rather than a Ryan Sinnamon type. A couple hundred quid a a week on a loan shouldn’t be an issue after exceeding season ticket numbers up, FSS money up front and great commercial numbers.

[ebobsboy]

If Falkirk daft is to be believed we were in for Tumilty but he chose Hamilton so at least we were trying for a right back. Whether or not the budget had been spent by then is a different story. 

[Bairney The Dinosaur]

15 minutes ago, Proudtobeabairn said:

It's an impressive total but actual figure (when you take out the free under 12s) would be interesting. That's the number we need to grow. 

I seem to remember U18s estimated to be around 1/5th of total sales. Purely assuming that the breakdown of ages will be roughly the same I think an educated guess of 330ish U12s seems fair. Wouldn't think it would be more than that.

[Blame Me]

54 minutes ago, Proudtobeabairn said:

It's an impressive total but actual figure (when you take out the free under 12s) would be interesting. That's the number we need to grow. 

Do you mean in terms of the paying adults as the U12's are only "free" to the purchaser. The cost is covered by the Y.E.S. partnership for those as I understand.

[Kevin James Left Knee]

2 hours ago, Forever_Blue_ said:

Anyone heard from FSS lately? Haven't had an email from them since Mid-June. 

A newsletter was written then had to be delayed as some info was out of date. Expect one later this week.

[Guest]

9 minutes ago, Blame Me said:

Do you mean in terms of the paying adults as the U12's are only "free" to the purchaser. The cost is covered by the Y.E.S. partnership for those as I understand.

Never quite understood that. Do they pay per U12 ticket taken up or is it just a sponsorship amount that offsets some of the reduced income giving away free U12s?

[LatapyBairn.]

1 hour ago, Proudtobeabairn said:

It's an impressive total but actual figure (when you take out the free under 12s) would be interesting. That's the number we need to grow. 

The club still get paid for the under 12’s tickets so not sure what difference it makes. 

[LatapyBairn.]

3 minutes ago, Van_damage said:

Never quite understood that. Do they pay per U12 ticket taken up or is it just a sponsorship amount that offsets some of the reduced income giving away free U12s?

Not 100% sure about the new deal but when it was INEOS they paid for every single under 12’s ticket taken up. Just presumed the new sponsorship was the same. 

Edited August 1, 2023 by LatapyBairn.

[Monkey Tennis]

2 hours ago, Skyline Drifter said:

Yes, I appreciate that some clubs prefer to secure funds up front for a variety of reasons, those clubs usually also offer larger discounts to get it though. So what you gain on one side with a certainty of income, you lose on the other hand. With the advent of 3G pitches, Saturday postponements are rarer, though granted bad weather days (or a rugby international) still hit attendances. we've never been a club particularly fixated on season ticket sales, We don't offer major discounts for them. Our season tickets are pitched at two free games in effect (18 games for the price of 16). Not sure what Falkirk are offering these days. If I recall Raith Rovers, another club who place a lot of focus on season ticket sales, with running total updates, offer much bigger discounts for season payments.

Nobody's making any interest on a business current account and I doubt many football clubs are allowed to run overdrafts these days by banks so the actual cash advance in bank terms makes no odds. Back in the days when clubs were allowed overdrafts it probably had that advantage.

I suppose the main point is the "certainty of income" you refer to.

It's not necessarily that it arrives in one block which, as you say with regard to interest rates, is not that significant.  It's more that it definitely arrives at all.   

 

I've said before that other than as a conscious display of loyalty, there's little real point in buying  a season ticket at our level, from a fan's viewpoint.

I'll go to virtually all the home games, but personally, I'd rather not have that custom taken for granted in advance.  My support is absolute in the long term. However, it's not unconditional at all times.

[Springfield]

 

1 hour ago, gav-ffc said:

We were told we would need to beat last seasons tickets sales including the 3/4 and 1/2 ones which we have. We may regret it if we don’t.

Surprised we got anywhere near the number of tickets sold, a credit to all those, not only supporting the club with early STs but over 700 contributors to the FSS. Many more as patrons and sponsors.
Let’s face it the BOD have made clear no more near misses, it’s promotion or a complete change of business model. The budget clearly gone barely a week into July. God knows where we would have been without the cup money last season, albeit the SNP loan of late helps with the finances. I might be completely wrong but if the board think that they’ll get the minus 400K shortfall made up with FSS subscribers, they need to give themselves a shake. Maybe just maybe if we were top six in the SPL we could get anywhere near these numbers. The club need to address the existing business model and for me the only way going forward is obviously promotion, and consider external investment. We’re told that the club has operated with this deficit for a decade+ so five or so change of BODs and we are still head in the sand. 

[FFC 1876]

Blaine Rowe doesn't seem to have found a club yet, bring him home.

[ShaggerG]

1 hour ago, Springfield said:

 

Surprised we got anywhere near the number of tickets sold, a credit to all those, not only supporting the club with early STs but over 700 contributors to the FSS. Many more as patrons and sponsors.
Let’s face it the BOD have made clear no more near misses, it’s promotion or a complete change of business model. The budget clearly gone barely a week into July. God knows where we would have been without the cup money last season, albeit the SNP loan of late helps with the finances. I might be completely wrong but if the board think that they’ll get the minus 400K shortfall made up with FSS subscribers, they need to give themselves a shake. Maybe just maybe if we were top six in the SPL we could get anywhere near these numbers. The club need to address the existing business model and for me the only way going forward is obviously promotion, and consider external investment. We’re told that the club has operated with this deficit for a decade+ so five or so change of BODs and we are still head in the sand. 

You're going to have to explain to me what you mean by 'head in the sand'? I presume you're talking about the BOD, yet I can't see how they have their heads in the sand when it's them that are telling us what's going on and trying to make some inroads into dealing with it.

[Bairney The Dinosaur]

1 hour ago, Springfield said:

I might be completely wrong but if the board think that they’ll get the minus 400K shortfall made up with FSS subscribers, they need to give themselves a shake.

A few weeks back at the Fan Engagement Day Kenny Jamieson did a presentation and a good chunk of it was related to the 400k shortfall. Previously just about everything the board has said regarding the shortfall has been around the number of FSS subscribers needed to fill it, but it was a bit different this time. He started talking about FSS and the subscriptions increasing, however instead of just focusing on this being used to plug the gap, he seemed to suggest that if FSS began to significantly increase he expected other shareholders (I took it to mean PG and old MSG) would consider investing more too. Therefore we would see all 3 'legs of the stool' providing continual investment.

Seemed to me a much more realistic and desirable way to operate.

[Springfield]

22 minutes ago, ShaggerG said:

You're going to have to explain to me what you mean by 'head in the sand'? I presume you're talking about the BOD, yet I can't see how they have their heads in the sand when it's them that are telling us what's going on and trying to make some inroads into dealing with it.

Five or so BODs have been at the helm with this pre season deficit for a decade and beyond as quoted by one of the current BOD guys. You would think that some inroads would have been achieved by now. So far it doesn’t make good reading. The last major cash investment was the Rawlings who’ve disappeared off the side of a cliff,  and the goodwill of the patron group. I sincerely hope that the current BOD are successful, but I don’t think without major external investment we will be a pt/hybrid model very soon. There’s not a chance in hell the FSS are going to get near this deficit, but let’s thank every single fan that’s now contributing to around £80K a year. 

[HopeStreetWalker]

3 hours ago, Van_damage said:

Just going by the statement. Not sure whether it was referring to this season or the upcoming set of accounts(to 31st May 23) but it did say the FSS money and cup run will fill it but I presume that is combined with the commercial team reaching their stretched targets. Also believe we have soft loans to pay back.

In any case I’d throw some caution to the wind before spending much more. More signing up to the FSS will help relieve that pressure as will a last surge in season ticket sales. 

Get your point it's future seasons i'm on about.

The club has been very lucky with a fanbase that has dug deep in financial challenging times over the last few seasons.

Factoring in a begging bowl if things go wrong to save the club just ain't sustainable and that's my point.

Would rather set a budget that's achievable and if there is a surplus mid-season take it from there. If that means a smaller squad, hybrid so be it.

At least we would have a club to support.

In the mid 70's when we nearly went bust and went part-time it was miserable I don't want that again.