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

[The Black Flag]

6 minutes ago, Stephen Malkmus said:

That's clearly not the situation here. The issue is that they don't want to put more money in.

Maybe they didn't want to take any more risks.

A football club isn't entitled to a directors personal or business funds, its entirely up to the discretion of that director. There originally needed to be some form of compensation as throwing money at a football club is high risk especially if said directors are or should be aware that the club was not able at the time to run from day to day on the regular income from football matches and sponsorship etc.

A loan is a debt, it doesn't automatically become free money to piss up a wall. The directors and ex directors should also be looking towards Scott Gardiner to pay back the money owed. Incredible that there will never any personal financial consequences for Scott Gardiner for what he did.

[oneteaminglasgow]

26 minutes ago, Chippyminton said:

Whatever the historical reason, the loss of any club under any circumstances isn't good for the game IMO, and I for one really hope this gets resolved.

Im not having this, Rangers dying was a f**king sensational laugh.

Edit: I also enjoyed Gretna going bust. 

Edited October 10 by oneteaminglasgow

[Chippyminton]

58 minutes ago, oneteaminglasgow said:

Rangers dying was a f**king sensational laugh.

Not for the tens of thousands of supporters who'd followed their club for decades it wasn't. You've also conveniently forgotten about your club's turmoil at the arse-end of the Jacqui Low era, so we'll agree to disagree.

Edited October 10 by Chippyminton

[ICTChris]

The money was put in by directors because they thought they had a shot at getting it back, from the concert company, the battery farm, the park-and-ride, the property deals.  None of these things came through though.  

Building alternative revenue streams is clearly a sensible thing for any football club to do and I would imagine most clubs in Scotland look at these and make it a priority to build them.  The issue with us is that we were chasing losses by implementing these increasingly risky schemes, they weren't put in place by competent people and the club itself was left to wither while the board focused on the side projects.

Putting concerts on at the stadium has made the club money in the past but it was never going to be a consistent thing - the concerts that made a profit were Elton John and then Rod Stewart.  We tried to replicate this with Duran Duran and Placido Domingo - they just aren't as big, they aren't going to attract an audience to a stadium in Inverness.  The battery farm might still come through but it's hugely risky - there was a clear possibility of it being rejected, high risk, high reward.  I don't know the ins and outs of the park and ride but I can make a semi-educated guess that we pushed for too much money and they told us to ram it.  Given the personality of the people involved, they would not have wanted to maybe soften their position - we wanted over £1m, apparently, maybe the Hydro firm wanted to pay less and we didn't (couldn't?) accomodate that.

[Lanky Highlander]

44 minutes ago, Chippyminton said:

Whatever the historical reason, the loss of any club under any circumstances isn't good for the game IMO

Agreed.

* Apart from Rangers. That was magnificent. 

[Girth]

30 minutes ago, oneteaminglasgow said:

Im not having this, Rangers dying was a f**king sensational laugh.

Edit: I also enjoyed Gretna going bust. 

[The Black Flag]

Back when the club was growing in the late 90's and 00's there was talk of alternative revenues to the club and how the club could reach further. During the 'Pele' era we knew that our ceiling had been reached as a top 2 tier club.

Could have been on here or CTO but there was a bit admiration for St. Johnstone and how they managed to reach the levels they could in the top flight (with the odd blip and trough). we saw ourselves as that was an achievable standard and level to aim at. I didn't see anything wrong with us achieving this ambition, still don't. we proved during the 00's in the top flight it was sustainable while everyone else around us was financially falling on their arse.

[19QOS19]

1 hour ago, Chippyminton said:

Not for the tens of thousands of supporters who'd followed their club for decades it wasn't. 

That's what made it so funny tbf. 

[ICTChris]

41 minutes ago, The Black Flag said:

Back when the club was growing in the late 90's and 00's there was talk of alternative revenues to the club and how the club could reach further. During the 'Pele' era we knew that our ceiling had been reached as a top 2 tier club.

Could have been on here or CTO but there was a bit admiration for St. Johnstone and how they managed to reach the levels they could in the top flight (with the odd blip and trough). we saw ourselves as that was an achievable standard and level to aim at. I didn't see anything wrong with us achieving this ambition, still don't. we proved during the 00's in the top flight it was sustainable while everyone else around us was financially falling on their arse.

We had significant financial problems in that era as well - the club incurred costs far higher than expected when building the stadium.  The original shareholders called in David Sutherland in the late 1990s, he took over as chairman and put in place the Trust to make the club sustainable and deal with the debt.  He also agreed the long term lease on the stadium.  Then in 2002 Tullochs (Sutherland's firm) basically took over the club, investing £500,000 in new shares to become the biggest shareholder.  A few of the old guard (Dougie MacGilvary and John Fraser) opposed this, not wanting to lose control but they couldn't defeat it - there was really no-one able to provide investment like that at that time.  We used that money very wisely, recruited players and management very well and were promoted to the top flight after only ten years in the league.

Significantly, we also had people involved with the club who were shrewd, who built bridges and were able to work with other clubs and the authorities.  The obvious example here is in 2004 we were promoted but were initially denied entry into the top flight because we didn't have a 10,000 seat stadium.  We offered to share with Aberdeen but this was rejected.  Thanks to careful lobbying and negotiation, David Sutherland and the board managed to win a second vote and get us into the top flight, as well as relaxing the seating rules.  You now only need 6,000 covered seats.

Compare that to the reign of Morrison and Gardiner, constant fulminating, seething statements and picking fights with all and sundry to achieve absolutley nothing.  The classic example is the Covid season - we were picking fights with the entirity of Scottish football, clubs and governing bodies.  Now, maybe there's a case that the season could have gone on but our board was completely unable to read the room and try and maximise our position.  That regime/board also burned a lot of brdiges with businesses in the city and with supporters.  It doesn't take much to keep people onside but it was too much for Gardiner and Morrison, in many cases.  I happen to know that one journalist arranged to go up and speak to them for a piece when they were in the area only for one of the chairman or the CEO to say that "the central Belt media all hate us".  What can you do with that?  "Free publicity?  F*ck off!"

[Connor Macleod]

1 hour ago, Chippyminton said:

Not for the tens of thousands of supporters who'd followed their club for decades it wasn't. You've also conveniently forgotten about your club's turmoil at the arse-end of the Jacqui Low era, so we'll agree to disagree.

Yeah any ounce of sympathy i had for them is gone i am afraid. After their latest antics with the open meeting, mocking us & grave dancing all cause of the vote 12 years ago even though they voted against us in 2004. The actual decent Rangers fans can get shot down with the crows for all i care. The majority of them should be supporting their local team anyway.

Edited October 10 by Connor Macleod

[welshbairn]

1 hour ago, ICTChris said:

The money was put in by directors because they thought they had a shot at getting it back, from the concert company, the battery farm, the park-and-ride, the property deals.  None of these things came through though.  

Building alternative revenue streams is clearly a sensible thing for any football club to do and I would imagine most clubs in Scotland look at these and make it a priority to build them.  The issue with us is that we were chasing losses by implementing these increasingly risky schemes, they weren't put in place by competent people and the club itself was left to wither while the board focused on the side projects.

Putting concerts on at the stadium has made the club money in the past but it was never going to be a consistent thing - the concerts that made a profit were Elton John and then Rod Stewart.  We tried to replicate this with Duran Duran and Placido Domingo - they just aren't as big, they aren't going to attract an audience to a stadium in Inverness.  The battery farm might still come through but it's hugely risky - there was a clear possibility of it being rejected, high risk, high reward.  I don't know the ins and outs of the park and ride but I can make a semi-educated guess that we pushed for too much money and they told us to ram it.  Given the personality of the people involved, they would not have wanted to maybe soften their position - we wanted over £1m, apparently, maybe the Hydro firm wanted to pay less and we didn't (couldn't?) accomodate that.

I think the concert problem wasn't so much the acts but thinking they could do the whole showbiz impresario thing on their own instead of leaving it to the pros for a smaller but risk free take. How hard can it be? The battery farm and park and ride schemes were all about over promising influence over the Council, it's revealing that the Norwegians pulled out of the extortionate car park hire as soon as they lost the battery farm planning deal. 

[Skyline Drifter]

2 hours ago, The Black Flag said:

A loan is a debt, it doesn't automatically become free money to piss up a wall. The directors and ex directors should also be looking towards Scott Gardiner to pay back the money owed. Incredible that there will never any personal financial consequences for Scott Gardiner for what he did.

Incompetency isn't a crime. Unless Scott Gardiner is criminally complicit in something (and nobody has so far suggested seriously that he is) then he's got no reason to pay anything back. Ultimately the business owners have to pay the cost of leaving someone in charge who wasn't competent to be left in charge if indeed that's what happened.

Edited October 10 by Skyline Drifter

[realmadrid]

1 hour ago, The Black Flag said:

Back when the club was growing in the late 90's and 00's there was talk of alternative revenues to the club and how the club could reach further. During the 'Pele' era we knew that our ceiling had been reached as a top 2 tier club.

Could have been on here or CTO but there was a bit admiration for St. Johnstone and how they managed to reach the levels they could in the top flight (with the odd blip and trough). we saw ourselves as that was an achievable standard and level to aim at. I didn't see anything wrong with us achieving this ambition, still don't. we proved during the 00's in the top flight it was sustainable while everyone else around us was financially falling on their arse.

The big issue as i see it is the stadium, for a new build its shocking.  As you have pointed out Saints gain about 20% of our income at Premiership level from events at the stadium , mainly funeral teas. Nothing high tech or spectacular but it makes a lot of money. Gardiner and crew seem to have chased all sorts of odd ball get rich quick schemes.

Going back to the stadium the Main stand faces into the sun, there are large areas of seat with no cover and due to the boxes what little cover there is , is far too high. The stand also does not seem to have many rooms that can be used outwith club events. I know the pipeline messes things up on the other side but if the main stand had been put on that side with the pitch then closer to the water and club offices and function suites behind the goals a lot more revenue could have been raised and you would have a functional stadium , possibly with facilities behind the goal and a small covered terrace on the road side.

Inverness should have at worst a championship team but due to mismanagement at a lot of levels that seems a long way off just now.   

[Alert Mongoose]

34 minutes ago, Skyline Drifter said:

Unless Scott Gardiner is criminally complicit in something (and nobody has so far suggested seriously that he is)

I think there have been murmurings around the Puma deal but no idea if it is being investigated or if anything untoward did happen.

[Sergeant Wilson]

3 hours ago, Chippyminton said:

To be fair, any supporter of any club on the edge of such a potentially fatal precipice would do exactly the same. I don't blame any Caley fan for being hopeful, optimistic - or even desperate for a positive outcome. And as for those gloating and roasting over the club's misfortune - they're not looking at the bigger picture. Whatever the historical reason, the loss of any club under any circumstances isn't good for the game IMO, and I for one really hope this gets resolved.

Here's me when Rangers went tits up.

[The Black Flag]

37 minutes ago, Skyline Drifter said:

Incompetency isn't a crime. Unless Scott Gardiner is criminally complicit in something (and nobody has so far suggested seriously that he is) then he's got no reason to pay anything back. Ultimately the business owners have to pay the cost of leaving someone in charge who wasn't competent to be left in charge if indeed that's what happened.

For someone with so much experience of running a football club that's quite a pattern of achievement he's left behind at nearly every club he's been at.

This is like getting hold of someone's credit card and pin number then going on a shopping spree over 5 years.

Of course its all down to incompetence and he can't be held in accountability and take responsibility for his actions, it was the carelessness of the credit card account holder, their fault entirely.

 

[Silvio Tattiescone]

Quote

"If we get a 15-point deduction, we are not going to be able to stay in the division unless we probably win every game and every other teams loses every game.

Not sure big Dunc understands how football leagues work. 

[Sir Tarmo]

9 minutes ago, Silvio Tattiescone said:

Not sure big Dunc understands how football leagues work. 

You would be absolutely correct

[Sortmeout]

2 hours ago, Chippyminton said:

Not for the tens of thousands of supporters who'd followed their club for decades 

f**k them.

[The Black Flag]

10 minutes ago, Silvio Tattiescone said:

Not sure big Dunc understands how football leagues work. 

we could draw every game 0-0 and hope Dumbarton lose 80% of their games, then play Elgin City in the playoffs. we will subdue them with our by the book what the no fun coaching academy taught us tactics with a 0-0 over two legs and a win on penalties. worked against Hamilton. what could go wrong?