The Falkirk FC Thread

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, LatapyBairn. said:

They turned out to be false prophets. 

100%

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, Forever_Blue_ said:

I wonder if they are just laying low until the storm passes? Would they resurface if we did manage to secure promotion? I can't remember if they were part of the problem, or just really unlucky we were a complete sh1tshow on and off the park when they bought into us? 

Definitely part of the problem.  

[LatapyBairn.]

18 minutes ago, Van_damage said:

It’s not untrue and if a moot point then why don’t we have the shares back security as part of the agreement? 

 

You seem to be going around in circles, the FSS and the club released various statements explaining why now the shares are all sold no more would be issued. A position they all seem to agree upon and a position that has been the case from the outset which has ultimately benefited the club (the reason I presume we all pay in our £10 a month in the first place) No idea why you continue to get your nickers in a twist over this when it appears the vast majority seem quite content with the final outcome, are happy we now have a balanced fan owned structure and a mechanism to crowd fund with a democratic path to elect the people we want running the club. The boxes have now been ticked in that regard and IMO it’s now time to start enjoying what’s been built, the beginnings of a new academy with young players already showing promise and what is starting out to look like an exciting first team on the park. Most in the broader fan base do seem to appreciate that despite a minority on this particular forum continually trying to dissect everything. 

Edited September 12, 2023 by LatapyBairn.

[Bainsfordbairn]

1 minute ago, Van_damage said:

why don’t we have the shares back security as part of the agreement? 

 

I think that's been answered under the "Transfer Of Funds to FFC" section in the members update of 9th September. 

"The FSS will raise this with the FFC board to discuss if this is permitted by the related financial regulations and if the proposal is workable. There will be further communication on this as discussions progress."

Why don't we wait and see the outcome rather than worrying about "what ifs" that might never happen? 

[Guest]

11 minutes ago, Bainsfordbairn said:

I think that's been answered under the "Transfer Of Funds to FFC" section in the members update of 9th September. 

"The FSS will raise this with the FFC board to discuss if this is permitted by the related financial regulations and if the proposal is workable. There will be further communication on this as discussions progress."

Why don't we wait and see the outcome rather than worrying about "what ifs" that might never happen? 

Believe that was already asked by @Kevin James Left Knee though hence questioning why it hadn’t already been agreed.

Maybe more people understanding it and seeing its importance will help bring it about. 

Bear in mind the Rawlins also have an option to gain 45% with the club to issue shares of 50p each for them to do so. Granted this would cost them a lot of money but what would happen if this was taken up? 

Edited September 12, 2023 by Van_damage

[gav-ffc]

52 minutes ago, Van_damage said:

Believe that was already asked by @Kevin James Left Knee though hence questioning why it hadn’t already been agreed.

Maybe more people understanding it and seeing its importance will help bring it about. 

Bear in mind the Rawlins also have an option to gain 45% with the club to issue shares of 50p each for them to do so. Granted this would cost them a lot of money but what would happen if this was taken up? 

That offer has expired. 

[LatapyBairn.]

59 minutes ago, Van_damage said:

Believe that was already asked by @Kevin James Left Knee though hence questioning why it hadn’t already been agreed.

Maybe more people understanding it and seeing its importance will help bring it about. 

Bear in mind the Rawlins also have an option to gain 45% with the club to issue shares of 50p each for them to do so. Granted this would cost them a lot of money but what would happen if this was taken up? 

The Rawlins no longer have that option , any new share issue would require a special resolution with a 75% vote needed to pass. 

Edited September 12, 2023 by LatapyBairn.

[Guest]

42 minutes ago, gav-ffc said:

That offer has expired. 

I had been told this but there’s no mention of any time limit on the resolution document?

They were given an option to maintain their 26% by accruing 500,000 of the available shares. That expired and those shares were eventually bought by the Patrons and FSS. but seen nothing concrete about the 45% option having expired. 

Edited September 12, 2023 by Van_damage

[Guest]

47 minutes ago, LatapyBairn. said:

The Rawlins no longer have that option , any new share issue would require a special resolution with a 75% vote needed to pass. 

Is if not an ordinary resolution of only 50% required to issue new shares?

[Reggie Perrin]

Anyone want to talk about football?

[Forever_Blue_]

4 minutes ago, Van_damage said:

Is if not an ordinary resolution of only 50% required to issue new shares?

Correct. FSS and PG currently have approx 46.6% of shares between them - going by the joint statement issued by FFC and FSS yesterday. With at least another 9.6% of small shareholders who could chip in to veto any new share issue (all hypothetical of course). 

[LatapyBairn.]

9 minutes ago, Van_damage said:

Is if not an ordinary resolution of only 50% required to issue new shares?

75% going on the threshold needed previously to issue shares that allowed the Rawlins, PG and FSS to invest. 

[Guest]

1 minute ago, LatapyBairn. said:

75% going on the threshold needed previously to issue shares that allowed the Rawlins, PG and FSS to invest. 

Not sure that’s correct. I thought 25% had the right to block any share issues but if you look above the issuing of shares to the Rawlins was an ordinary resolution.  
 

The special resolution was buying back and selling some of the previous MSG shares. 

[Forever_Blue_]

10 minutes ago, Reggie Perrin said:

Anyone want to talk about football?

Agreed. Can't wait for Saturday and hopefully another dominant performance and 3 points. 

[Ranaldo Bairn]

12 minutes ago, Reggie Perrin said:

Anyone want to talk about football?

In seriousness, a separate thread about the financial and share discussions might be a good idea.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Ranaldo Bairn said:

In seriousness, a separate thread about the financial and share discussions might be a good idea.

Not a bad shout to be fair. I can just bore myself then!  

[ShaggerG]

26 minutes ago, Reggie Perrin said:

Anyone want to talk about football?

Nah, this is fuckin riveting!

[Proudtobeabairn]

I'm not particularly riveted by the FSS debate but suspect these pages wouldn't be moving otherwise.  Football side going well for a change and not that much to discuss until Saturday. 

[Barr]

The board and Jamie have said that if there’s anything not covered in the club communications/interviews/podcasts that people want to know then send it in to them. May be worth doing if people still have unanswered questions.

[RC_Bairn]

3 hours ago, Blame Me said:

 

Being honest, I do find it utterly bizarre that the FSS found itself in this position in the first place.

As I write I am still seeing members asking JS online if the FSS is now FF/BfL in all but name!

I paraphrase as I can't remember where I read that events had overtook the FSS and they achieved the main aim much quicker than expected, which is true, yet that shouldn't have stopped the committee from canvassing their members and understanding the demonstrably diverse views within and clarifying whether the agreement met those aims before it was agreed.

Sadly, votes on legends and quizzes isn't engaging the membership - That's a pat on the head.

To have no formulation of what happens next suggests there was - and still is - too much focus on bailing out the club and the messaging and perception is that rather than the being the fans voice it's the fans pocket.

I'd really like to hear some concrete views emanating from the FSS yet appreciating they won't all be enacted but certainly tangible outcomes. That there is no discernible difference between the FF and FSS to the layman should concern the committee.

Agreed.  It's also very interesting to note that many of the 'founding fathers' of the FSS have now gone to ground.  Would be keen to hear their take on things as recent statements seem to point the finger at those individuals for misreading the relationship between FSS and the club.