Fraz Posted Tuesday at 15:10 Share Posted Tuesday at 15:10 28 minutes ago, Sergeant Wilson said: They did with Airdrie. What's the logic behind that I wonder? Are they expecting ST holders to buy tickets a second time to go to games? Can't see that working. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergeant Wilson Posted Tuesday at 15:18 Share Posted Tuesday at 15:18 (edited) 7 minutes ago, Fraz said: What's the logic behind that I wonder? Are they expecting ST holders to buy tickets a second time to go to games? Can't see that working. In a word, Aye. ETA, You also become a creditor. Edited Tuesday at 15:19 by Sergeant Wilson 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Staggie52 Posted Tuesday at 15:18 Share Posted Tuesday at 15:18 3 minutes ago, Fraz said: What's the logic behind that I wonder? Are they expecting ST holders to buy tickets a second time to go to games? Can't see that working. The logic is that the money from season tickets is general income for the club, it’s not reserved. The role of the administrator is primarily to keep the club running. Letting people in for no additional income does not help keep the business running. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledLichtie Posted Tuesday at 15:27 Share Posted Tuesday at 15:27 16 minutes ago, Fraz said: What's the logic behind that I wonder? Are they expecting ST holders to buy tickets a second time to go to games? Can't see that working. It seems a lot like the way gift vouchers are no longer valid once a shop goes into administration. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DA Baracus Posted Tuesday at 15:40 Share Posted Tuesday at 15:40 26 minutes ago, Staggie52 said: My understanding is that season tickets are cancelled, holders then become creditors and join the queue for whatever money is available. This has never happened with any administration (except for one apparently). Why would it happen here? Why would they make season ticket holders become creditors? What does cancelling season tickets actually do/achieve? Seems ridiculous and a good way to lose more fans and potentially have more folk vote against any sortvof CVA. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
invergowrie arab Posted Tuesday at 15:42 Share Posted Tuesday at 15:42 18 minutes ago, Staggie52 said: The logic is that the money from season tickets is general income for the club, it’s not reserved. The role of the administrator is primarily to keep the club running. Letting people in for no additional income does not help keep the business running. The administrator doesn't have the right to unilaterally vary any contract. Cancelling STs would be a breach of contract and would require a court to judge what compensation would be due to ST holders. This why, other than Airdrie apparently, this has never happened. Letting people in for no additonal income is what the club are legally obliged to do. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fraz Posted Tuesday at 15:42 Share Posted Tuesday at 15:42 (edited) 16 minutes ago, ExiledLichtie said: It seems a lot like the way gift vouchers are no longer valid once a shop goes into administration. I see what you're saying but unlike a voucher which would be redeemed for a physical product usually which the company would then lose, ST holders tend to go to games and spend more money on food, at the bar or on merch. Maybe they'd save on stewards as there would barely be anyone there. Edited Tuesday at 15:43 by Fraz 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Staggie52 Posted Tuesday at 16:06 Share Posted Tuesday at 16:06 Cancelling season tickets is up to the administrator. There is no difference in law between the season ticket holder and the voucher holder. It’s clear that that not honouring the voucher is financially beneficial to the administrator, not so much with the season ticket holder, but in Airdrie’s case they decided it was appropriate, it’s a wait and see for Caley season ticket holders. Hopefully they’ll be alright. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cosmic Joe Posted Tuesday at 16:07 Share Posted Tuesday at 16:07 1 hour ago, forkboy said: Thistle's ground is houses, Caledonian's is a dead retail park. Is sharing with the Clach an option? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DA Baracus Posted Tuesday at 16:15 Share Posted Tuesday at 16:15 7 minutes ago, Staggie52 said: Cancelling season tickets is up to the administrator. There is no difference in law between the season ticket holder and the voucher holder. It’s clear that that not honouring the voucher is financially beneficial to the administrator, not so much with the season ticket holder, but in Airdrie’s case they decided it was appropriate, it’s a wait and see for Caley season ticket holders. Hopefully they’ll be alright. Pretty sure you're making things up now. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Staggie52 Posted Tuesday at 16:16 Share Posted Tuesday at 16:16 Just now, DA Baracus said: Pretty sure you're making things up now. Pretty sure I’m not. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted Tuesday at 16:32 Share Posted Tuesday at 16:32 1 hour ago, Sergeant Wilson said: They did with Airdrie. Airdrie were liquidated though weren't they? The aim here is to keep the club operating as a going concern, it would be odd if they suddenly cancelled season tickets. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergeant Wilson Posted Tuesday at 16:38 Share Posted Tuesday at 16:38 (edited) 6 minutes ago, welshbairn said: Airdrie were liquidated though weren't they? The aim here is to keep the club operating as a going concern, it would be odd if they suddenly cancelled season tickets. This was before the coup de grace, while in provisional liquidation, which might explain why KPMG could do it, as opposed to administration. Edited Tuesday at 16:38 by Sergeant Wilson 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DiegoDiego Posted Tuesday at 17:01 Share Posted Tuesday at 17:01 2 hours ago, Stephen Malkmus said: there are much more things to do on a Saturday now (including other televised fixtures) Last season was an all-time high for lower-league attendances in Scotland (outwith the early seasons of Sevco), and attendances overall are higher than they were when ICTFC were formed. More things to do on a Saturday may negatively affect attendances, but despite that and perennial complaints about ticket prices, there seem to be enough forces counteracting that for most clubs. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skyline Drifter Posted Tuesday at 17:04 Share Posted Tuesday at 17:04 (edited) 2 hours ago, PB1994 said: Why would they cancel the season tickets? They've never done that before as I am aware. The Administrator also wouldn't automatically get rid of all of our senior players. We are still paying the wages and I imagine we would continue to do so. They would be at the club until January where offers would be considered for all players. 59 minutes ago, Staggie52 said: Cancelling season tickets is up to the administrator. There is no difference in law between the season ticket holder and the voucher holder. It’s clear that that not honouring the voucher is financially beneficial to the administrator, not so much with the season ticket holder, but in Airdrie’s case they decided it was appropriate, it’s a wait and see for Caley season ticket holders. Hopefully they’ll be alright. 51 minutes ago, DA Baracus said: Pretty sure you're making things up now. He's not making it up. Whether it might happen is another question but fundamentally a season ticket is a future contract for provision of service to a customer exactly the same as a gift voucher for a beautician or the same as a gift voucher for product at a shop. If they breach the contract and don't honour it then the holder becomes an ordinary creditor, just like a voucher holder. The administrator's job is to draw a line in the sand on existing liabilities and assets and establish if there's actually a business moving forward that could be profitable to sell as a going concern to a new owner (which in this case there clearly is) or if need be to sell the constituent assets to raise monies to pay the creditors and himself in which case it would head towards liquidation instead. It's perfectly possible that one might decide the best way forward is to make everyone a creditor and run games moving forward on a cash basis. Much will depend on whether they think that supporters will effectively pay twice for the same game or would be disenfranchised to the extent they won't pay to get in anyway. Much might also depend on whether there might be additional income raised from those season ticket holders at food kiosks, etc. Since Savage has made it clear he intends to see them out of administration and presumably can afford it, I'd imagine he'd be keen to ensure the administrator doesn't cancel them but ultimately it's not his decision. That said, as he said himself in that meeting, ICT are no cascading headlong out of control into admin. His funding of the last month or so has enabled them to move towards administration in control of things and presumably with a pretty accurate handle on what's owing and what future income sources are. It's likely that an administration can be gone through with less pain than normal. On the other comment, as the aim will be to cut costs as quickly as possible as long as you can fulfill upcoming fixtures, it's highly likely that the administrator will indeed get rid of the majority of high earners, on and off the pitch. You'd imagine Duncan Ferguson would be first out the door and I'm presuming guys like Billy McKay and Danny Devine will be amongst the highest earners and also likely redundancies along with whatever other senior well paid players there are. Any players with a potential resale value won't be binned though. Again though, it may be that a deal can be struck in some way with Savage to minimise the impact on players if he wants to keep them. Edited Tuesday at 17:10 by Skyline Drifter 8 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SirJimmyofNic Posted Tuesday at 17:20 Share Posted Tuesday at 17:20 Has Morrison got the charge on the football club or on the stadium or on both ??? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted Tuesday at 17:21 Share Posted Tuesday at 17:21 13 minutes ago, Skyline Drifter said: You'd imagine Duncan Ferguson would be first out the door What about the SFA rules about honouring football contracts? Would it not risk ICT losing their license if Big Dunc wasn't paid off in full? I don't know how it works. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Tarmo Posted Tuesday at 17:23 Share Posted Tuesday at 17:23 I’m not sure Danny Devine is even that high an earner. Did he not effectively offer himself to the club for peanuts when he re-joined so that he could live with his partner who was from Aviemore? I’d be less surprised if some carthorse that ‘Big Dunc’ has signed was on the most. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Central Belt Caley Posted Tuesday at 17:46 Share Posted Tuesday at 17:46 18 minutes ago, Sir Tarmo said: I’m not sure Danny Devine is even that high an earner. Did he not effectively offer himself to the club for peanuts when he re-joined so that he could live with his partner who was from Aviemore? I’d be less surprised if some carthorse that ‘Big Dunc’ has signed was on the most. Pretty much aye, think it was Robbo who said he was looking to get back to the area when he signed him. Billy will be our highest earner imo then probably someone like Savage or Longstaff next after that. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skyline Drifter Posted Tuesday at 17:59 Share Posted Tuesday at 17:59 35 minutes ago, welshbairn said: What about the SFA rules about honouring football contracts? Would it not risk ICT losing their license if Big Dunc wasn't paid off in full? I don't know how it works. They are required to honour them in full (unsure if that includes managers does it? If it does then the rules have changed since Chisholm and Dodds were unsecured creditors with Dundee) but they can still make them redundant and add them to creditors to be dealt with down the line. 33 minutes ago, Sir Tarmo said: I’m not sure Danny Devine is even that high an earner. Did he not effectively offer himself to the club for peanuts when he re-joined so that he could live with his partner who was from Aviemore? I’d be less surprised if some carthorse that ‘Big Dunc’ has signed was on the most. Fair enough. I took it as read McKay would be biggest and Devine was the next highest profile name to me. If he's not actually on a bigger wage then he may well escape the first cull. 0 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.