Heard news story this morning that David Sutherland is keen to sell his shares in ICT, Charlie Bannermans story also tells us that there is a third party very interested in taking the 25% shareholding that DFS owns.

Sutherland says that any party that takes on the shares must put the football team first.

Wonder who the third party is, A Savage? wonder why Sutherland is selling up - cash?

Also coming into the frame is that Tulloch still own the two end stands do they not? would the buyer have to pay for them.

I hear this lads keen to invest in a football club.......

Potential investor

I hear this lads keen to invest in a football club.......

Potential investor

Er, no. Just no.

I hear this lads keen to invest in a football club.......

Potential investor

They're not quite so gullible in this part of the world, H/Dee....

BBC News report

For all that he is crticised, we have done well under the effective control of David Sutherland. I'd be interested to see who was looking at buying us, hopefully we can avoid the useless, vain, egotistical idiots that abound in football club ownership.

Be nice if he walks away and says keep the money for the shares,put it in to next years transfer kitty along with another say million,it's not like he would miss 1 he is a very very rich man after all!!

Be nice if he walks away and says keep the money for the shares,put it in to next years transfer kitty along with another say million,it's not like he would miss 1 he is a very very rich man after all!!

Would be very nice indeed.However,the Tulloch shares are only worth what someone will pay for them. Let's not forget that the Club is making a financial loss and has no real assets other than the players.

For all that he is crticised, we have done well under the effective control of David Sutherland.

Indeed. There have been mistakes along the way, but has any Scottish club been better run than ICT over the last 10 years?

For all that he is crticised, we have done well under the effective control of David Sutherland.

Indeed. There have been mistakes along the way, but has any Scottish club been better run than ICT over the last 10 years?

Probably not.

I was told a few weeks back that DFS was looking to sell on some of his land bank.

Not sure if this is related in terms of attempting to free up some capital?

I am assuming that its still ?1 per share, I heard that a soap star from ITV 2 is interested, must admit though, " THE ONLY WAY IS ICT" sounds good to me.

Indeed. There have been mistakes along the way, but has any Scottish club been better run than ICT over the last 10 years?

The running of the club is shrouded in such secrecy that few people would really know. It is a concern that we don't own our ground or have our own training facilities. Off the top of my head, Hibs and St. Mirren are two clubs who have managed to achieve those things without going into serious debt.

Hibs have stability that is the envy of many, and get a lot of things right, particularly the production line of talent that puts much bigger clubs to shame. But despite the money, players and facilities at their disposal, they seem to have achieved so little for a club of their size.

St Mirren are a different case altogether. Massively in debt, the sale of Love St for a supermarket development was their get out of jail free card (and oh what their fans would give for one of those.)

Owning a stadium would be the icing on the cake, but having secure long term access to one is what really matters and we seem to have that sorted.

Hibs are a strange one. On the face of it, a well-run club with little to no debt, plus an enviable infrastructure. But football doesn't begin and end with debt management. There have been times when a small investment, or keeping a player or two, could have made the club more successful. I don't mean throwing money at the problem but there were certainly times when, if Hibs had invested in a couple of players - probably less than ?500k - then they may well have been competing for, at the very least, third slot and a decent chance of more silverware. Whether that would have resulted in more cash long-term is difficult to say but surely being the best your club can be without running it into the ground is the whole point of professional football?

For me, Hibs have been too cautious. It's a fine line but strike when the iron's hot. Consolidate when it's not. Despite a bewildering array of talent, there's been precious little for the Hibs fans to have been proud about in post-war football.

Interview with David Sutherland on BBC Scotland sportsound days he is giving away shares for free (potentially) for a substantial investment!

The future is bright.

Edited December 29, 201015 yr by gdm

Hibs have stability that is the envy of many, and get a lot of things right, particularly the production line of talent that puts much bigger clubs to shame. But despite the money, players and facilities at their disposal, they seem to have achieved so little for a club of their size.

St Mirren are a different case altogether. Massively in debt, the sale of Love St for a supermarket development was their get out of jail free card (and oh what their fans would give for one of those.)

Owning a stadium would be the icing on the cake, but having secure long term access to one is what really matters and we seem to have that sorted.

Very good - Have a green one on me!

Very interesting, if slightly puke inducing, interview with 'Sir David' on Sportsound. He is willing to give away his shares to someone who will make a substantial investment in the club and he's sounding well chuffed about it.

Very interesting, if slightly puke inducing, interview with 'Sir David' on Sportsound. He is willing to give away his shares to someone who will make a substantial investment in the club and he's sounding well chuffed about it.

What do think he's got in mind?

What do think he's got in mind?

I've no idea. He may well have the best of intentions. I'm a cynic who hates the rich so i'm instinctively suspicious. It does sound good on the face of it though.

An email from a club source stated the following:

In relation to the present press speculation re our major shareholder David Sutherland selling his shares in the Club, Chairman George Fraser said

"All clubs are always interested in new investment and we are no different. Presently we are delighted with the existing support we currently receive from our major sharehoder David Sutherland together with all our corporate sponsors including our main sponsors the Orion Group. David would obviously wish to discuss any change of shareholding with the Board at the appropriate time but other than the fact that he has stated he is open to others investing in the Club that is as far as any discussions have gone at present"

It must be someone he knows - you'd hardly give a shareholding away to someone you weren't sure about. My money is on Orion/Savage.

Dougie Mcgilvray

It must be someone he knows - you'd hardly give a shareholding away to someone you weren't sure about. My money is on Orion/Savage.

I could be wrong here but I suspect Sutherland and Savage aren't on each others Xmas card list.

I imagine this is not a new thought in DFS's mind. However, it may alert certain people/start the ball rolling. Why not be proactive? People tend to come when they feel wanted. Urs Schwarzenbach, of Ben Alder Estate, Inverness-shire has over ?800 million apparently. Also owns a polo team. Interest in owning sporting teams...

Seriously though, I do think that Inverness may have an advantage over other clubs in attracting a potential backer. The club is debt free by and large, a major stumbling block for others, its location in the millionaire's playground (hunting estate territory, owners of tetra pak and above and Mr Trump) and the "free" price tag...

Not seen anything about this so dont know whats going on but I would suspect that DS may be suggesting that if a major investor was to come in he'd be willing to give up some or all of his shareholding to make any investment more attractive. Nobody will come in with loads of cash if they dont have a say in the club so it makes sense for DS to reduce his shareholding. What isn't clear is what shareholding he's talking about. His personal stake or that of Tulloch. IIRC the total of the two amounts to something like 47%.

If DS is giving up some of his stake to make way for investment then he has to be commended. If he is selling then I'd be inclined to think that either he or his company or both are finding book balancing difficult at this time.

Isn't this an ideal opportunity for us fans to club together and take control? We all think we could run things better....