No sign of this incumbent leaving. 

We remain at full throttle heading down the 'Highway to Hell' with him at the helm. 

😔

2 hours ago, Super Caley Man 94 said:

 it's a carbon copy of the Rangers orange kit anyone who says otherwise needs to go to specsavers. 

Wow - look at the pictures mun!

I might well be wrong on this but is it not the case that ICT (and other teams) have had more orange away kits than Rangers have? I thought Rangers did it for the first and only time in 2002 (the more recent one was 3rd kit, not the official away kit, being pedantic). Personally I really dislike the orange colour, and understand the connotations it can have, but the presumption by so many that we are trying to copy another team is something that anyone outside Scotland would think is just bonkers!

Edited January 23, 20242 yr by Yngwie

Personally I disliked the orange strip as soon as I saw it.  I’m no fan of other teams, including those who may have orange connections, but it just didn’t seem to be a likely colour for an ICT strip.  All the other strips, yes, especially the pink one, but except the full black one (when we paid handsomely to have our names thereon, but it seemed unlucky as far as I recall).  

A Rangers supporting CEO releasing an orange strip on 12th July, and we're all expected to believe it's coincidental?

Pull the other one 😂

All this chat about orange strips but nobody mentions the lost in football history of the orange ball. That needs a come back in winter.

Whether the strip is right or wrong I guess now it's here the proof of the decision is based on sakes, profits and turnover. If its making the club good money then its a success otherwise its another concern fiasco vanity project.

3 hours ago, Super Caley Man 94 said:

Our away kit last season was so popular they've re released this season as a third kit. This kit on the other hand will be on a half price deal soon in a desperate bid to get rid of them all cause no one is buying them 🤷

This one? 

We’ve been linked with looking like Rangers long before Gardiner was here. The home (when not using stripes) was always criticised for this.

Flip sake, this isn't about a strip (bogging orange one) but about much more than that. Hopefully some relevant questions and feedback are put to the 'Board Member' on Saturday 3rd February about Gardiner and his non ethical approach to the ICT fans.

Edited January 23, 20242 yr by Duke of Inverness

13 minutes ago, Duke of Inverness said:

Flip sake, this isn't about a strip (bogging orange one) but about much more than that. Hopefully some relevant questions and feedback are put to the 'Board Member' on Saturday 3rd February about Gardiner and his non ethical approach to the ICT fans.

Totally agree. A side issue given how undervalued a lot of fans feel at moment 

It will all be a big laugh doon the ludge.

How he duped the glaikit teuchters for years.

Edited January 23, 20242 yr by dougiedanger

I wonder if he had any involvement in these: -

 

EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4100446/2021

EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4103632/2020

£16500 in unlawful deductions from wages is a fair skelp and I can't even begin to speculate what it could have been in relation to.

Might explain his apparent lack of effort when he came back on loan?

It’s a different D Mackay. 

Oh well, back to believing he just couldn't be arsed, with no reason for it.

The dictator has a lot riding on the battery project decision and it doesn’t look good . Yet another Flop maybe?  . Seems to be a hell of a lot of these where he is involved in. 

Anyone know what these are about?  My phone isn't letting me download the PDFs from companies house.

A 'charge' is the security a company gives for a loan. For example, a mortgage is a type of charge. You can send us the details of a charge created by the company. We'll then register the charge on the company's public record.

Chairman cash injection.

The documents are Ross Morrison being granted security over the club’s assets (including ICT’s battery farm company) having put money into the club in the form of a loan. Similar to what a bank would do if it lent money to a business.

Is this the first time secured loans have been used? 

2 hours ago, Yngwie said:

The documents are Ross Morrison being granted security over the club’s assets (including ICT’s battery farm company) having put money into the club in the form of a loan. Similar to what a bank would do if it lent money to a business.

 I have little understanding how all this business wheeling and dealing works, but my take on the position is this.

1.  In answer to OCG, I think this is the first time secured loans from Directors have been used to finance the club.  I think there may have been previous bank loans

2.  The fact that secured loans are being made suggests that those providing the loans do not have, or are unwilling simply to give the club the money currently required to keep the club afloat.

3.  In the event of money coming into the club, either from the Battery project or elsewhere, Morrison and Munro would expect their loans to be repaid resulting in the "charge" being discharged.

4.  If Morrison and Munro request the loans to be repaid and the club does not have the money to repay them, then the Battery Company shares become the property of the 2 directors.

5.  ILI have a business model of acquiring land and driving through planning consent for green energy projects and then selling the site on.  I would assume that this is the case here and that there would be an injection of cash relatively quickly if planning permission is granted.  ILI will not have had to purchase the land in this instance and therefore both ILI and the Battery company will profit from the sale of the site.

6.  In the event of the battery project failing, then the shares in the company would become almost worthless.  The club could then repay Morrison and Munro with the shares so that the 2 of them would in effect be writing off their loans.

It does seem to me that this all indicates the club's financial position is pretty precarious, but hopefully someone with a better understanding of these things can prove me wrong.

One thing that will sit uncomfortably with many is that Morrison does, apparently, now have money to put into the club (albeit with strings attached), when so recently he was unable or refused to put money into the concert company.  The concert company was declared bankrupt with the result that local creditors were left out of pocket as a result of the concert company's botched management of the concerts.

 

I think that’s a fair summary except on point 6. Morrison has a charge over ALL of the club’s assets, not just the shares in the battery company. So if those shares are worthless he’d still be owed his money and the likelihood is that the club would have no realistic means to pay him back for the foreseeable future.

2 hours ago, DoofersDad said:

 One thing that will sit uncomfortably with many is that Morrison does, apparently, now have money to put into the club (albeit with strings attached), when so recently he was unable or refused to put money into the concert company.  The concert company was declared bankrupt with the result that local creditors were left out of pocket as a result of the concert company's botched management of the concerts.

If he had spare cash at the time and decided to donate it to bail out the concert company, I suspect that the vast majority of that money would have gone to the multimillionaire artists and not to local businesses. And then he would not have had the money to inject into ICT and keep us afloat.

It's all a big risk and I am sure most fans like myself are hoping that it will work out for our club.

We've been hoping that a lot of money making things work out, but one by one, they all seems to end in disappointment.

Maybe this is an appropriate time to remind folk of what Scot Gardiner said in a lengthy CEO update posted on June 13th.  Referring to the new Green Freeport, Gardiner said "This is a designation which will no doubt be hugely impactful and positive for the club for years to come and we are working with our legal team at WJM and our new auditors A9 Accountancy in Inverness to maximise the opportunities on this front."  Just a few months later, and thoughts of this being a boost to the club's finances seem to be dead in the water with the club Chairman, Ross Morrison,  telling fans at a Supporters Trust meeting that he just couldn't see how the club can get any benefit from this at all.

 

Gardiner also wrote "Infrastructure improvements at the Stadium have been identified and exciting new commercial contracts have been progressed, some to be announced in the coming days including our technical kit partner and main jersey sponsor/partner and subject to legal agreements in the coming weeks, we hope to have important news about the Stadium and its environs."  Despite the Trust's Matchday Experience Survey identifying a wide range of issues with the stadium and its environs, the hoped for important news has still not been delivered.

 I hope to make it to today's game but I won't be able to go to the Trust's meeting before it.  Scott Young, the club's newest Director, should be present at the meeting and should, by now, be rather more up to speed with what is going on at the club.  Perhaps he will be able to tell supporters what it was that was hopefully going to be announced, but which hasn't been.  Is the stadium going to remain an unwelcoming dump or is the club going to act upon some of the constructive and cost effective ideas that fans came up with in their survey responses and which are outlined in the survey report.?

 

 

 

 

So the club have borrowed money and given security against income they don't have yet.

Was there not one of the Glasgow teams, who our CEO used to work for, that did something similar?  Anyone recall how that worked out?