Just read this on the official site, fantastic news!!

Offer of cash help for club

Statement from ICTFC:

In response to local speculation, ICTFC can confirm the club has received an offer of a six figure investment in the club.

This has come from a small group of Inverness exiles who have supported Caley Thistle from afar and who have now indicated a willingness to become more involved.

Club chairman George Fraser said: "We feel it is only fair to confirm that this offer has been received. The board is encouraged by the fact that, in this challenging financial climate, there are people willing to invest in, and support, the club.

"There are a number of issues which require to be agreed by both parties but hopefully these can be concluded in the next 10 to 14 days.

"Operating an SPL club has never been so financially demanding and the proposed investment would be of great value to assist Caley Thistle going forward."

"The proposed investment was stimulated by, and is connected to, the previous statement by former chairman David Sutherland offering to transfer his majority shareholding to potential new investors."

Mr Fraser added:"In fairness to all parties, the club will be making no further comment on the present investment offer until all matters are concluded."

Linky

Where's the money going to come from to build this new stadium?

Hello - listen to me for once :irritated:

Lots of feckin good comments on the latter part of this thread - this is not all about having loyalty to and faith in ICT - of course voluntary work could save some money - where does all of that stop - get community service involved or get inmates from Porterfield to do some time on the decorating and hand out menial tasks to the community patients of New Craig.

Charles has got it spot feckin bang on:

1) Increase income / Reduce expenditure.

2) Accept a long term existence outwith the SPL.

Scary but as simple as that

Hoping that one off windfalls will continue to come along indefinitely to keep the wolf from the door isn't a realistic strategy and there aren't really any assets left to sell off.

Are you not feckin listening to me

Lets just hope that the Texans storm the new age Longman Alamo and get control back from Davy Crockett Sutherland.

Your tongue in cheek smileys are misplaced.

Bucket collection CD? If that doesnt work then we can fill it with sand and bury our heads in it.

Its been suggested that a six figure investment is being viewed as a sticking plaster on a big problem, It wasnt me that decided to raise this issue but seeing as it has been raised by others why not look at a long term solution.

Reduce overheads and increase turnover,

We currently have an on site bar which opens 19 afternoons a year and even then the staff struggle to cope during a 15 minute rush,or perhaps fans would have a second drink instead of looking at the queue and thinking maybe not.

Catering equipment and kitchens used 19 afternoons a year only for hospitality.

A club shop which although is right next to the A9 isnt accessible to pedestrians, no one just pops in because they were walking by during the week.

We also pay an unknown figure to someone for renting TCS worth ?2,000,000+,for only 19 cash generating home fixture and a couple of cup games.

If its in the right location a club shop would be easily accessible to passing trade.

An open all year ICT bar(depending on alcohol license cost),restaurant/ burger bar in a prime location,which also provides food for hospitality.

So whether the council want to absorb some of the cost of a new stadium and find other uses when ICT arent playing.

The stadium is council owned and is rented to ICT for match days only.

Or is actually owned outright by ICT shareholders due to major investment and extra uses are found for the stadium to make the stadium pay for itself, including units built into the stands for club shop/burger bar to generate income and also units for lease to generate income in a prime location for Barbers,Cr?che,Shop etc. The stadium has to be in the right location for this to work.

If we could find ways to make the ICT brand generate money with out a ball being kicked I would invest in the club myself.At the minute its more of a donation than an investment.

More money could be spent on player budgets which hopefully brings success, which brings in more fans, which generates more cash and if the stadium is paying for itself then it takes a lot of pressure off those involved at ICT.

IMO the TCS was sited in the best location at the time of build, fast forward 20 years and to start again, right next to the Uni would be the perfect location, There are big changes earmarked for Stratton and Ashton farms with the A96 veering left at Milton of Culloden, running behind Tesco retail park and joining up with the A9 at Inshes, too far east and its handy for Smithton Culloden and Balloch but unfair for Inverness so Inshes would be ideal.

This train of thought is merely a suggestion thats all, a few posters keep raising the issue of shortfalls in the books and am merely looking at a long term viable and in my mind a healthy solution. Apologies for repeating myself.

Just a short answer for now as I'm heading out the door to a meeting.

Looking at long term solutions is fine (and vital), but we have to ensure we can make it far enough to see long term plans come to fruition.

I'm not for one minute suggesting that bucket collections etc are the answer, they were just examples of the poor fan involvement that exists, but which I do think is essential to both the clubs short and long term survival and growth.

If you can't generate enough interest to get the small things done, how on earth do you stir enough interest to get the big things done?

FWIW, I'm actually an advocate of a Stadium move...I just don't think that moving the stadium will guarantee larger crowds. If you have a good product (and I mean more than just the football) then people will come. A bad shop in a badp location, is still a bad shop if you move it onto the high street...worse in fact if you end up paying more in rent and rates.

If the club is struggling to balance the books just now what chance have they got of raising the tens of millions required for a new stadium. I think, if the country gets out of recession and the local plan for the Longman area goes ahead the stadium is in the perfect location where it is.

IHE you woke Scarlet up with your totally brilliant suggestion about Porterfield inhabitabnts being useful tools at Tulloch C S.

Shoot! didn't know the place was still functional. Huh!

What expanse of your generally comatose mind ran such a superb idea through to it's logical conclusion.

Gosh ..there is truth in the rumour, after all, that out of the mouths of babes and sucklings come forth words of wisdom.

Have agreat day the morn, Itchy.

I already looked at the prison/community service thing and it's a no go. They only assist charities and community projects and doing work at/on TCS doesn't qualify.

http://www.volunteerscotland.org.uk/Opportunity/List/iv27uy?radius=5

Ops doesnt apply to us, charirty yes us no.

Edited September 10, 201114 yr by 12th Man

Charles has got it spot feckin bang on:

1) Increase income / Reduce expenditure.

2) Accept a long term existence outwith the SPL.

Scary but as simple as that

Hoping that one off windfalls will continue to come along indefinitely to keep the wolf from the door isn't a realistic strategy and there aren't really any assets left to sell off.

IHE agreeing with Mr Bannerman .... you know you just have to take notice of that !!! FWIW, I also agree with them and will settle for option 1

As for moving stadium ? unless someone wants to buy out our lease and pay all costs associated with moving us elsewhere then I dont see it. The lease is the only real asset we have in terms of the stadium. We dont own the building (removed to stadium trust when debt was made invisible), we dont own the land (always been the councils) and we would not make a fortune by selling anything.

Laying aside that hurdle for a second and assuming we could afford to move, I am kind of in two minds about the stadium ... lots of good memories (and history) there, and a lingering chance of the "leisure village" complex that would see the value of our location rocket send me off in the NO MOVE direction, but the chance to perhaps have a 4 sided compact stadium elsewhere in the town with facilities, amenities and infrastructure included from the start send me in the other direction (YES, lets move) although I have no idea where such a location could be found.

As I dont think moving is going to be anything more than a pub or forum talking point for many years to come then happy to be in that undecided position and able to listen to and absorb both sets of ideas.

Inverness population circa 60,000 ICT average gate 3,500

Aberdeen population circ 240,000 Dons average gate 10,500

I'm sure the above figures are not particularly accurate BUT they aren't far off. What it shows is that we punch above our weight in terms of average gates. When you look at last Saturday; we had 4,100. County had 2,000 a combined total of over 6,000 for the area. That's a very large average attendance for any team outwith the top 3 or 4 in the SPL.

A new stadium wouldn't alter these figures in my opinion. If we had one team representing the North based in Inverness we may have had a chance. However being a massive Caledonian FC follower for over 50 years I would have hated that to happen.

Inverness population circa 60,000 ICT average gate 3,500

Aberdeen population circ 240,000 Dons average gate 10,500

I'm sure the above figures are not particularly accurate BUT they aren't far off. What it shows is that we punch above our weight in terms of average gates. When you look at last Saturday; we had 4,100. County had 2,000 a combined total of over 6,000 for the area. That's a very large average attendance for any team outwith the top 3 or 4 in the SPL.

A new stadium wouldn't alter these figures in my opinion. If we had one team representing the North based in Inverness we may have had a chance. However being a massive Caledonian FC follower for over 50 years I would have hated that to happen.

Attendance levels and percentages based on local or regional populations are all smoke and mirrors as far as I am concerned .... bottom line - whether punching above our weight or not - is that a 3500 average crowd (accurate or not - and I agree its probably not far off) is not enough to sustain an SPL team on an ongoing basis just like similar figures are not enough to sustain other 'small' teams.

For me, there are two key areas ...... IHE and others got it right earlier in the thread when talking of increasing income and reducing expenditure ... those are the two, unless of course we get someone obscenely rich who runs ICT from their petty cash ... but would that still be ICT !!!

Reduce Expenditure ... I think the club are trying here. Relegation saw swingeing cuts at the club and although staffing and other expenditures have increased again, I dont think they are anywhere near the pre-relegation levels. Some costs are inevitable - having an U19 team for example is mandatory in SPL I think - but if we can keep a lid on the costs we are able to manage then that will help. I think we are better than some here. Many at the club dont take a wage - directors for example - and the club has, over the last two or three years embraced the idea of allowing volunteers to help without being suspicious of ulterior motives .....

Increase Income ... This is the biggie for me, and the one where we can perhaps encourage club and fans alike to contribute to the ideas. As far as I am concerned, there are two parts to increasing income, one is at SPL/SFL/SFA level by making the game more attractive to the paying customer and the other is at a local level.

At a central level, the governing bodies have to find a way to maximise club incomes. More sponsors, more money is one route but the SPL isnt exactly top tier for most global advertisers. However, Friday night football, and reducing the league to 10 and other ludicrous ideas is not the way to do it. Why not ask the fans what they want? Standing Areas? better treatment from stewards, better quality of refereeing? all affect the enjoyment and all affect the desire to go to games from those who may not be classed as 'diehards' and it is by encouraging the 'part-time' supporters to come along more regularly that you will increase attendances and income.

At a local level, it is finding ways to get things done more cost effectively, and trying to grow and develop other revenue streams outside of a matchday .... aggressively market the conferencing and functions facilities ... I think Gringo Jr mentioned something about having the Kingsmills free for parties and stuff ... maybe adjust that a little ... not free, but the more people you have at a function, the less it costs ... Upstairs at the Hayloft did that decades ago ... if you got 100 people in, and they took a load of cash at the bar, your function was free, if not you paid for room rental and the rental of the disco. Also, if we could get them built then pods at the corners of the stadium for offices or something so there was regular rental income ... more concerts, etc ... I am sure there are hundreds of good ideas that dont cost a lot (excluding the pod idea) and might each bring in a few hundred or a few thousand quid over a year .... and it all helps !

I doubt that there is now much scope to reduce expenditure. Most of the potential to reduce expenditure will be in players' wages and if wages are not at a pragmatic level players good enough to keep us in the SPL will not sign.

We need to increase income. Of course, one off investment would be good but what is needed is a steady increase in revenue and a few good ideas have already been suggested. For me one of the key things must be to try to get more folk into the ground and I wonder if the club would benefit from reducing entrance fees, programme costs etc. I am lucky enough to be able to afford these prices without worrying about it but it doesn't stop me from thinking the prices are a bit steep and I am sure the price will put others off. Reducing prices, particularly for the youngsters, will encourage more to attend - more attending will improve the atmosphere - a better atmosphere will provide a better match day experience and perhaps also help the performance on the pitch.

Folk may argue that if you cut the admission by 25% you are unlikely to see a 25% increase in numbers but it is not as simple as that. If paying less to get in you are more likely to buy a programme, more likely to buy a 50:50 ticket and more likely to buy refreshments. You end up spending much the same or maybe even more but just feel you have got better value. Coupled with a good marketing campaign there would be a real opportunity to boost the fan base (vital for the long term future) as well as increasing overall revenue.

The other thing that I don't think has been mentioned is revenue from transfers. It seems that most players are being signed on short term contracts of 2 years at most. Apart from a worry that this strategy relies on making "finds" every year and hard negotiations with them the following year to keep them at the club, this strategy gives us no income from transfers. Contracts of 3 or 4 years carry the risk that injury or failure to fulfil potential will mean we end up paying for donkeys but there must be a happy medium where players like Rooney keen to develop their careers can be sold on whilst still in contract. There must be players who would welcome 2 year contracts rather than 1 and probably local lads who would happily sign for a 3 or 4 year contract at fairly low wages in order to have a real opportunity to develop and put them in the spotlight. If they blossom then they will want to move on to higher wages and can be sold. If they don't then most would probably still be useful squad players and the few that really disappoint aren't going to cost that much in any case or could be given free transfers to get them off the wage bill. There are real risks with longer term contracts for high wage players but low risk and opportunity for considerable returns with unproven young players of the sort we are signing. We have a good youth system and a knack of finding good young players from down South but we don't make any money out of them. Indeed, they end up costing us as those who impress and we want to keep cost a lot more when their contract is renewed.

The last part is a bit chicken and egg. I asked a footballer about contracts etc. The majority of players, unless they;re of a very high standard, dont want long contracts. They sign short contracts on lower wages knowing they can get a boost to their earnings with more frequent signing on fee's.

The one way to make money out of players is to bring them through the youth system and then sell them on. Hibs showed it could be done, however, those players that come through, and are good enough to cash in on, are few and far between. We have brought a few through our ranks but in all seriousness are they good enough to make the big time and earn us money or are they just good enough to play in the SPL. A league of plummeting standards.

Outwith what monies come from the league coffers the club has to increase its income. The main part of this comes from advertising and season ticket sales. These are the two areas where increasing revenue doesn't incur an increase in costs. Sadly we are in a time of deep recession and people just dont have the spare cash.

Many good ideas have been put forward but these all need to be weighed up against cost. Conferencing and other uses of the facilities all require staff. That adds to wages and liability costs. There's also initial outlay to provide IT equipment and to make the operation attractive. Will the profit margin be enough to cover the costs?

We're in a global climate at the moment where money is in short supply and somewhere along the way what is spent on leisure has to be cut back. Football clubs are suffering. Sport in general is suffering. The strong will pull through it and survive for many more years. Others will fold. Lets hope we are the strong. Or that a sugar daddy with millions to burn comes along.

Whilst I agree with most of what Scotty says I still maintain that population has a major part to play. It is a fact that Celtic probably attract more people into their stadium each week than live in and around Inverness. That shows how few folk live up here compared to the Central belt. There is a definite saturation point, believe it or not, not everyone enjoys football. The few of us who do attend every game come hell or high water have only limited amounts of disposable cash.

Some great ideas though in Scotty's and the following posts.

Whilst I agree with most of what Scotty says I still maintain that population has a major part to play. It is a fact that Celtic probably attract more people into their stadium each week than live in and around Inverness. That shows how few folk live up here compared to the Central belt. There is a definite saturation point, believe it or not, not everyone enjoys football. The few of us who do attend every game come hell or high water have only limited amounts of disposable cash.

Some great ideas though in Scotty's and the following posts.

I'm not convinced that there's a completely rigid correlation between population density around a football ground and attendances although the sprasity of population in the Highlands does make it that bit more difficult.

However I must pick up on the reference to the number of people that Celtic (and Rangers) attract to their stadium. I think there are three factors here.

1) Yes, the OF are based in by far the largest conurbation in Scotland where there may well be of the order of 10 times as many people within 50 miles of their grounds as there are with 50 miles of the Caledonian Stadium. This is bound to have a significant effect on their crowds.

2) Both Rangers and Celtic, whether they like it or not, have become focal points for the political and religious divide which has been imported across the Irish Sea. This further enhances support for these clubs.

3) Largely because of 1) and 2) above, both Rangers and Celtic have acquired a critical mass which draws in other fans from across Scotland. With them comes their money. Not only does this further strengthen the OF's financial clout, it leaves every other team in Scotland disproportionately under supported and under resourced.

As a result you have two very large clubs (who are still abysmal is Europe and one of which at least still lives beyond its means) and a number of others who typically attract between (ballpark figures) 3,000 and 12,000 to home games with the lower end of that range being the more common.

Rangers and Celtic must find a way to lower their expectations or go.

Preferably South.

If they are not prepared to assist the other clubs to a greater financial degree then what happens to them if the lower clubs in the SPL go out of business? Are they resigned to eventually playing what , effectively, will be minnows? And win 10-0 every week?

If the SFA, or whatever Scottish Football body is responsible for ensuring that clubs in Scotland do survive (what are you saying? None!?), are not prepared to come down hard on these two big clubs and ensure that overall gates are doled out on a more equitable basis to all the SPL clubs then what?

Right now the situation seems to be going from bad to worse and most clubs will not be in the SPL shortly unless their fairy-godfather stays or comes along with a barrowload of cash to allow them to survive. At least that's MHO. The clubs have to bite the bullet, IMHO, and do the obvious--reduce prices in an attampt to get the clients back as has been siad above.

found this update on the proposed investment.

blinky

Have to say ?250k aint exactly a lot of money from a group of businessmen that hope to get some form of control at ICT. That kind of sum will maybe help us break even, not what i had imagined nor thought it would take this long to organise a piddly sum.

I believe the deal involves a bit more than just the cash injection.

Don't know enough to form an opinion on whether I think it's the right/wrong way forward for ICT...but we're not exactly spoiled for choice and I stand by my thoughts that with nothing other than "a love for ICT" left to invest in, then motives can't be anything other than doing what's best for the club.

yeah i knda agree C100. While any investment is welcome, i cant really see it changing things on the park where it matters at the moment!

Great oaks from little acorns grow chums.

Great oaks from little acorns grow chums.

You mean the same sum that we just got as an investment from the board recently, em what did we get with that another little acorn?

every little helps .......

As mentioned earlier, anyone putting money into ICT is not doing it to make a profit or to 'asset strip' the club. We dont make a profit and we have little or no assets ... for me, that leaves the motive for investing in the club - by anyone - as being 'philanthropic' and likely based on being a supporter of the team.

?250k may not be a lot in football terms, but for most of us its a few years salary so it is not insignificant !!! We all wax lyrical from time to time about how we would put money into the club if we won the lottery or Euromillions etc, well it seems that this group have a few quid and are putting their money where our mouths are !

I know nothing about the who or why involved in this consortium but between our current board and our major shareholder I am pretty certain they would turn down any offer that gave them a bad vibe ...... like the porn guy a few years ago for example ! I await the full details with cautious optimism

found this update on the proposed investment.

blinky

This story, and a bit more, actually broke first as long ago as Friday of last week on the BBC local news after I spoke to the Muirfield Mills consortium's Inverness based representative Richard Smith. Among the details Richard remains unable to discuss are the precise value and the timescale of this proposed investment which I am not convinced are totally fixed yet.

I've done a review of the situation in my "Sportsview" column in this week's Highland News, published tonight (Wed).

Edited October 5, 201114 yr by Charles Bannerman

Butcher gets a new contract and this takes off is no coincidence. The bait is ?250 K bid by a wee consortium who are asking for some basic assurances - but the "bite" will lead to a struggle to land the intended target.

Which is?