"The ICT Thread - From the Premiership to the Seaside"

[parsforlife]

2 hours ago, strichener said:

After the Rangers debacle, it matters not a jot.  The club and the company are two distinct entities within the rules so the club and their operating company can easily be split with the club being moved into a new operating entity.  We don't have to like it but that is the reality.

Now that it has been done once and is codified, I would expect any company operating a club would take this approach if there was no way to avoid liquidation.  A pre-pack is the cleanest way of doing this.

If there's no way of avoiding liquidation I agree,  but I think anyone would prefer a CVA and preserved continuity and at least not having the 'new club' stick used to beat them with.

Also new company= loss of spfl share which would be more dangerous now with the pyramid up and running. ICT are far less capable of bullying everyone out the water that no one moaned about not being able to apply to the SFL at the time.  I think if cally newco'd then you'd have at least 3 or 4 putting their case across to get the place instead. They'd probably win a HL vote tho.

[invergowrie arab]

5 minutes ago, parsforlife said:

If there's no way of avoiding liquidation I agree,  but I think anyone would prefer a CVA and preserved continuity and at least not having the 'new club' stick used to beat them with.

Also new company= loss of spfl share which would be more dangerous now with the pyramid up and running. ICT are far less capable of bullying everyone out the water that no one moaned about not being able to apply to the SFL at the time.  I think if cally newco'd then you'd have at least 3 or 4 putting their case across to get the place instead. They'd probably win a HL vote tho.

They might not be licensed for the HFL as a Newco

[forkboy]

37 minutes ago, invergowrie arab said:

They might not be licensed for the HFL as a Newco

While I don't think it would come to this, it would be quite funny if ICT have to apply to the North Caledonian League at the same time another new club is added: someone has decided to resurrect the Inverness Thistle name and they are meant to join for 2025

[the philosopher]

8 hours ago, The Black Flag said:

what happened here?

This was back in middle of August.

I never saw a follow up to this article that was going around media at the time on the Directors at the club had agreed to convert or write off loans???

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/articles/clyw88kx84xo

I take it no such thing ever happened

I smell shite

[HeWhoWalksBehindTheRows]

9 hours ago, Doormin said:

Again - I haven't read the opic or much of background stuff - but you're right it is mental. At the beginning was it not said that Ferguson was being paid entirely from an outside investor?

The only thing i can think of with Puma is hes refysed to go (say) 60/40 split with Puma on all items sold and has instead invested heavily in the fans of Inverness wanting to buy replica William of Orange strips. Which wouldn't surprise me, having had him at Dens.

Those strips were going for a tenner last home game.

[RiG]

10 hours ago, Savage Henry said:

It makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.  
 

Nor does paying Duncan Ferguson more than most top flight managers when you know the club can’t afford it.  
 

I think the entire board is not just complicit, but incompetent.  
 

edit: I see that oddball Charles Bannerman is saying he expects liquidation. 

Barley Chatterman Where is @SandyCromarty?

10 hours ago, Doormin said:

Again - I haven't read the opic or much of background stuff - but you're right it is mental. At the beginning was it not said that Ferguson was being paid entirely from an outside investor?

The only thing i can think of with Puma is hes refysed to go (say) 60/40 split with Puma on all items sold and has instead invested heavily in the fans of Inverness wanting to buy replica William of Orange strips. Which wouldn't surprise me, having had him at Dens.

 

9 hours ago, Savage Henry said:

I was told he was being paid by a director.  Which if true, would mean him working for free would be meaningless unless that money was being redirected into the club by said director.  I can only assume that it was actually the club that was paying him all along, but the board was under the impression that they weren’t.  
 

As I say, complicity and incompetence are hand in hand here.  But it also stinks to high heaven of money laundering. 

Didn't Morrison on TWS say that he was in fact being paid by the club? I think everyone just assumed that, because of the bonkers sums being talked about, it must be getting paid / subsidised by some outside source. It was incredible to find out that wasn't true. When you hear that we paid "Big Dunc" that insane sum many would argue we deserve everything we get...

[Savage Henry]

43 minutes ago, RiG said:

Barley Chatterman Where is @SandyCromarty?

 

Didn't Morrison on TWS say that he was in fact being paid by the club? I think everyone just assumed that, because of the bonkers sums being talked about, it must be getting paid / subsidised by some outside source. It was incredible to find out that wasn't true. When you hear that we paid "Big Dunc" that insane sum many would argue we deserve everything we get...

Yeah.  Morrison did say that.  Gardiner said he wasn’t.  I know which story of events I tend to believe.   I suspect what has happened is Gardiner told the board that someone else was paying for it and they all took him at face value. Otherwise they’d never have agreed to the deal and his Rangers North project would collapse on its arse.  

Edited 40 minutes ago by Savage Henry