The Falkirk FC Thread

[LatapyBairn.]

1 hour ago, Chinatoon Bairn said:

 

Can understand the want for clarity on it and agree that the FSS/club themselves need to provide that but talk of halting subscriptions before giving both parties sufficient time to do so seems a bit daft. If there are still doubts afterwards then fair enough but until then I'm staying put, after all there has been a tendency at times for things to be blown massively out of proportion on here with FalkirkTV directly funding Dunfermline being the latest that I can think of.

This is very much how I see it and I’ve a feeling a solution to get the supporters society to the 25% + 1 threshold plus allow the club to retain some shares for potential new investors will be found way before the FSS meeting next month, let’s wait and hear what both the committee and the club have to say, like you I’ll certainly not be stopping my monthly debit either as that would only harm the club. On another note I also find the notion from a few on here that somehow the PG are pulling some sort of power play ridiculous. (aside from the fact the PG have no more controlling influence on the club than the FSS does) I know enough of the guys involved to know that couldn’t be further from the truth, I’m sure that will become clear over the coming days as and when information is communicated to fans. 

Edited August 9, 2023 by LatapyBairn.

[Shodwall cat]

Whats the length of appointment for the FSS and patron's group reps? Is it a year or two year post? 

[Guest]

The allotment of the fans bank shares was eventually posted on companies house.

To explain the bits I have circled, it shows the 875,000 shares purchased plus another purchase for 12,500 shares from elsewhere. 

When the share issue was made there was 3,300,265 40p shares made available. 

According to this latest document, which covers up to the end of June, 3,241,107 of those shares have now been allotted. 

That means that there should be 59,158 shares left. 

When all shares are bought then combined with the existing 50p shares the total shares within the club will be 5,255,863. That means to own just over 25% of the club you need 1,314,217 shares.

The FSS currently has 1,279,000 shares which means it only requires 35,217(£14k worth) to get to that magic number. The FSS will have that money in the bank at the moment(unless they’ve since handed it over to the club for nothing). 

If the FSS was to purchase those shares then it would have a 25 +1% shareholding and there would still be around £9.5k worth of shares to purchase. 

If the club sell more than £9.5k worth of shares in the interim then the FSS can’t reach the 25% shareholding it requires without a further share issue. 

I hope the club see sense and I sincerely hope the patrons back the FSS by not buying any more shares at the moment. 

The patrons know the issue so let’s stick together and if the club needs to raise money then discuss having a Crowdfunder instead. 

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, Shodwall cat said:

Whats the length of appointment for the FSS and patron's group reps? Is it a year or two year post? 

2 years. The 2 Patrons reps will be up for re-election in December this year and the FSS rep is up for re-election in July 2024. 

Edited August 9, 2023 by Van_damage

[LatapyBairn.]

9 minutes ago, Shodwall cat said:

Whats the length of appointment for the FSS and patron's group reps? Is it a year or two year post? 

3 years I thought from memory at the time? Might be wrong 

Edited August 9, 2023 by LatapyBairn.

[Zbairn]

4 minutes ago, LatapyBairn. said:

3 years I thought from memory at the time? Might be wrong 

2 years I believe…..in saying that….every five minutes for the FSS rep on the board!

Edited August 9, 2023 by Zbairn

[LatapyBairn.]

15 minutes ago, Zbairn said:

2 years I believe…..in saying that….every five minutes for the FSS rep on the board!

Do we know when the FSS will be putting up a candidate for us to vote on bringing the society back up to two directors reps on the board? Has anybody shown an interest in standing? I haven’t heard or read anything since the last guy resigned, the society still haven’t replaced him. 

Edited August 9, 2023 by LatapyBairn.

[FalkirkBairn2021]

1 hour ago, Stainrod123 said:

Reading through these posts is exactly why I never signed up to the FSS.  The structure of it and the relationship with the patrons group was always going to be an issue in the future.

The issue for me is that the patrons never thought for one minute the FSS would get close to 26%, certainly not as quick as they have, the wording of the agreement of the FSS document is very fluffy which backs that up.  25% + gives the FSS the right to block any move by the board, release of shares, strategic direction, appointment of directors etc.

Reports I have heard first hand is that one of the patrons, possibly two, are driving everything and see the FSS as nothing more than an income source despite having some experienced individuals who volunteer their time to help run the club.  I have no doubt the FSS reps have resigned as they see no point on being on the board whilst they are railroaded by the patrons - I know this is the case with one of them and suspect it with the others despite the party line of ‘not having the time etc’.  That was arguably ok when the FSS had made a small investment but at 25% + the FSS could make things very difficult for the board and have much more influence on the way things are done and the patrons don’t want this.

One way is to release more shares and allow the FSS to purchase new shares, collect their investment but to keep them below the magical 26%, the patrons would be required to pro rata purchase more shares to keep the shareholding balance the same.  They clearly don’t have the appetite to do that.

The keeping of one share for future investment is nothing but a smokescreen. The board know the wording in the FSS now reverts to 'donations' and consideration of what the money is spent on, without any real recourse, they are delighted with this and why wouldn't they be.  Get the cash, protect the patrons influence.

Add in the years of being told this model was ideal, the old MSG was evil etc only to go cap in hand for soft loans off them when things got tight last year I am far from convinced the model we have at present will work.

The guys at board level are obviously fans and you could argue they are doing a decent job in some areas, however, now I think they are now focussing on protecting their own position rather than supporting the fans ownership model which they coveted for years.  I'm not necessarily having a go at the patrons, they put their cash in up front but equally, they have sold this model and need to support it.

Fantastic post

[FalkirkBairn2021]

So John Wright resigned on July 24th. Or at least that's when the story was on the club website.

Presuming Nigel Serafini is still on the board and there's a spot left as an erm opportunity...?

 

[ShaggerG]

2 hours ago, FalkirkBairn2021 said:

Can understand you want to give a good hearing here but I'm not sure what clarity you're expecting?

It's already clear. There's literally no good explanation for this decision. None. Zip. Nada.

All that matters I'd say is 

A) What FSS members want to do now? Ie How many cancel subs v those who don't care and will carry on anyway

B) What the FSS reps on the board have done since this betrayal was mooted

B) How tenable the FSS reps on the board feel their continuing in role is given this Et Tu Brutus behaviour 

I really resent that mate. I signed up and will not cancel (at least not until the two parties are given a chance to clarify things) simply because I do care.

And I knew that your greenie came from Agenda Man without having to look!

[FalkirkBairn2021]

9 minutes ago, ShaggerG said:

I really resent that mate. 

Not sure what part you resent as none of that post was even in reply to you.

I suspect you've misinterpreted what I said. Happy to clarify.

Ah reading it again I think I see the problem. What I meant was that there are FSS contributors who won't care about the shareholding thing. Maybe even a majority. 

So there's every chance that a large number of contributors are fine with this. FSS won't know until they ask. 

I'm not saying either side of that option care more than the other - only that for some it will be a red line and for others they'll shrug as the 25% thing was never why they joined or they accept the reasons for reneging on that.

Hope that helps dude. Sorry if you thought I was suggesting don't care about the club.

Edited August 9, 2023 by FalkirkBairn2021

[ShaggerG]

Just now, FalkirkBairn2021 said:

Not sure what part you resent as none of that post was even in reply to you.

Well, if you can't see the issue there's not much more I can say to you.

[Sarah67]

18 hours ago, latapythelegend said:

If my contribution doesn't go to shares then I'm out. I didn't sign up to a donation scheme and have my own small amount of shares that gets me into the AGM. That will be enough for me.

 

I imagine many others will feel the same.

Yep, 100% agree with this. FSS should be able to not only buy 25% + 1 share but, ideally (subject to further share issues), be allowed to buy as many shares as possible. So that the fans own as much of the club and have as big a say as they can. 
 

Like others, I feel really let down by this and there’s four of us in FSS who would need to consider ongoing involvement. We didn’t sign up to get nothing for our cash and face barriers like this, we did it to get shares to build the fans voice. Instead we’re just left getting no further shares for FSS and meanwhile being asked to pay off a 20 year loan that someone took out on FSS’s behalf. 

[FalkirkBairn2021]

4 minutes ago, ShaggerG said:

Well, if you can't see the issue there's not much more I can say to you.

I've edited what I said. Hope that makes more sense now.

[ilostmyself]

This is pretty depressing reading, always one step forward, 2 steps back with Falkirk.

I've been a huge fan of fan ownership to protect the club and i feel that if what's been written here is true then the club is going against the spirit of FSS and just want a monthly income stream without any strings attached. I was more than happy that once we got to a certain % which can help safeguard the club then my contributions would effectively be donations with the FSS board members influencing how it is spent.

While I've nothing against these schemes and think they're well intentioned, I never signed up to Bairn for Life or Forever Falkirk as I'm not keen on a model that has the club effectively relying on income above and beyond normal football income (tickets, prize money, shirts etc) rather than it being a bonus. With FSS there is some oversight over how the club is run as well as financial support and that is really what attracted me to it. 

For me personally, i don't think i'd continue to contribute on an ongoing basis if the club were actively blocking the FSS having the necessary influence for it to realise it's initial goals.

Edited August 9, 2023 by ilostmyself

[LatapyBairn.]

12 minutes ago, ShaggerG said:

I really resent that mate. I signed up and will not cancel (at least not until the two parties are given a chance to clarify things) simply because I do care.

And I knew that your greenie came from Agenda Man without having to look!

Good post, I won’t cancel either as in the end it’s only going to harm the club. I also always presumed once the FSS reached the 25% +1 my money would indeed become more of a glorified donation, I’m fine with that so long as it’s helping the club and I’m satisfied the money is being used wisely. I don’t think it’s realistic for the club to be continually issuing share’s indefinitely, that would become a bit ridiculous. 

[FalkirkBairn2021]

Maybe the right approach from FSS is to say the goalposts have moved,  they ain't moving back, and investors have to choose if they still stay members (through gritted teeth or happily) or choose to walk away. 

What % would walk? Probably low. 10% maybe. A lot more than that will be disgruntled but still admirably want to support the club financially in this way. Maybe hope for change in the future. 

Interesting times. Some absolutely tremendous posts in the last week too..fascinating reads. 

[FalkirkBairn2021]

1 minute ago, LatapyBairn. said:

Good post, I won’t cancel either as in the end it’s only going to harm the club. I also always presumed once the FSS reached the 25% +1 my money would indeed become more of a glorified donation, I’m fine with that so long as it’s helping the club and I’m satisfied the money is being used wisely. I don’t think it’s realistic for the club to be continually issuing share’s indefinitely, that would become a bit ridiculous. 

Is this wilfully misunderstanding or just trolling?

The whole point of the last 20 pages is that FSS are being blocked from reaching 25% plus 1 

Why you continually ignore that is beyond mysterious. 

[LatapyBairn.]

3 hours ago, FalkirkBairn2021 said:

Is this wilfully misunderstanding or just trolling?

The whole point of the last 20 pages is that FSS are being blocked from reaching 25% plus 1 

Why you continually ignore that is beyond mysterious. 

We have still to hear from the club and also the FSS on the particulars of this, I’d rather wait to hear the detail as I genuinely don’t think the the FSS will be blocked from reaching the 25% + 1 target via one mechanism or another they will get there sooner rather than later IMO. However, regardless of how it all pans out longer term I doubt it would stop me from paying my monthly debit anyway as I realise that would only end up harming the club.  

Edited August 9, 2023 by LatapyBairn.

[Guest]

Just now, LatapyBairn. said:

We have still to hear from the club and also the FSS on the particulars of this, I’d rather wait to hear the detail as I don’t the the FSS will be blocked from reaching the 25% + 1 target via one mechanism or another they’ll get there sooner rather than later but regardless of how it all pans out I doubt it will stop me from paying my monthly debit as I realise that would only harm the club.  

The club have apparently said they’re ok with the FSS trying to retrieve shares from the estates of shareholders who are no longer with us but I find that a bit insulting to the constitution of the FSS to be honest.

It wouldn’t be good enough for me and that process could take a long time with many of these shareholders only having a couple of shares to their name. You then have to trust that the club will sanction the last transfer of shares that will take them over 25+1%. They’ve moved the goal posts already so what’s to say they won’t move them further when that point is near. The wording of the FSS newsletter is that the board are understanding of their aim to get over 25%. That’s a little ambiguous to me. 

What is there to lose by not just selling the shares to FSS just now and put an end to this debacle?