First time poster guys - just seeing what's already out there in terms of the fans putting additional resources into the club . Having read through the forum a lot of people would be willing to buy season tickets and merchandise which is great . Unfortunately that's not going to be enough to keep the vultures at bay so just seeing if there are any fans initiatives already on the go which would put additional cash into the club . Much like what Hearts done in there time of need and Rangers with there fund . Just trying to think of a way to help .

25 minutes ago, ymip said:

Savage has gone through these boardroom chancers and supposed captains of Highland industry like a dose of the salts. He could clearly see through Gardiner from day one any it's fair to say that any man who loathes Gardiner with the unbridled venom he spits out in the media is frankly a prince among men. I wish our former CEO the very best of luck in his efforts to extort a further £70k out of the club and his next role in the football industry. 

He appears to have sociopathic tendencies so he will want his day in court just to feed his ego. A decision that will no doubt bite him in his ass and further expose him as the loser that he is. His days in football are very much numbered. I would say AS is very much looking forward to butting heads with Gardiner.

10 hours ago, Charles Bannerman said:

AS hasn’t exactly been backward at coming forward with criticism of Gardiner. I actually wonder how devastated or otherwise AS would be if the allegedly litigious SG felt minded to raise a defamation action

I'd be very surprised if SG did that. 

Was it AS who first used the word "forensic"?  That word has a specific meaning. 

SG and the rest of the Board will be keeping their heads down until AS gives the "all clear".  Or maybe he won't, just to keep them in order

AS: "I will deal with the £70,000 Scot Gardiner thinks he is owed"

 

 

3 hours ago, ClickbaitProponent said:

From the standpoint of the battery farm, I am wondering how the said Councillors are feeling given that they almost cost local people their jobs. I hope the people of Inverness remember it during election time. Those clowns have truly shot themselves in the foot. I would love to see them lose their seats. I for one will be reminding people. 

It does make you wonder if Gardiner had not been involved if the battery farm would have gone through smoothly? 

 

Looking at it from a different viewpoint, could the councillors you refer to have stopped people already with money lining their own pockets even more? 

The way this has all played out, I would be very surprised if the supposed guardians of our club had any intention of using the proceeds to clear any of the clubs debts and use it as the rescue package they claimed it would be. It was only a matter of time before the club ended up on it's knees regardless of the many fishy deals these chancers tried to implement.

Perhaps we should applaud these councillors for bringing forward what inevitably was going to happen anyway and bringing everything out in the fore unwittingly. I'm not saying they knew or had this foresight but regardless whether it be this deal or not, there would have had to have been one last final failed venture and this was it, the council just happened to be rapped up into it and are too easy to blame. 

It wouldn't have been them causing people to lose their jobs, it would have been our boards fault.

It was one failed deal too many that these guardians had used the clubs name to try and fill their own accounts until they finally realised the club couldn't be used as a credit negotiator anymore. They were exposing the club to all the liabilities and not themselves, just remember that.

It's happened so many times over, in the past at various clubs and will happen again. 

 

9 minutes ago, MrCaleyjag said:

Looking at it from a different viewpoint, could the councillors you refer to have stopped people already with money lining their own pockets even more? 

The way this has all played out, I would be very surprised if the supposed guardians of our club had any intention of using the proceeds to clear any of the clubs debts and use it as the rescue package they claimed it would be. It was only a matter of time before the club ended up on it's knees regardless of the many fishy deals these chancers tried to implement.

Perhaps we should applaud these councillors for bringing forward what inevitably was going to happen anyway and bringing everything out in the fore unwittingly. I'm not saying they knew or had this foresight but regardless whether it be this deal or not, there would have had to have been one last final failed venture and this was it, the council just happened to be rapped up into it and are too easy to blame. 

It wouldn't have been them causing people to lose their jobs, it would have been our boards fault.

It was one failed deal too many that these guardians had used the clubs name to try and fill their own accounts until they finally realised the club couldn't be used as a credit negotiator anymore. They were exposing the club to all the liabilities and not themselves, just remember that.

It's happened so many times over, in the past at various clubs and will happen again. 

 

I watched the full council hearing on the link. Yes our application was far from perfect but they were clueless

7 hours ago, ClickbaitProponent said:

He appears to have sociopathic tendencies so he will want his day in court just to feed his ego. A decision that will no doubt bite him in his ass and further expose him as the loser that he is. His days in football are very much numbered. I would say AS is very much looking forward to butting heads with Gardiner.

Yes CbP, tend to agree but I would prefer AS would not go down this ‘road’. I would prefer a settlement was reached and we paid SG to disappear quickly (he will reappear somewhere else {England} i’m sure). 
My reasons are:

# SG will want to keep his name in the limelight (Kahwana like), so his name and image of a ‘hard and demanding businessman’ in the sport world is ‘out there’. There are enough like minded individuals out there that care only about siphoning money out of clubs (Glazers spring to mind), that admire these attributes. It wouldn’t surprise me any if some future connection or venture with good old Ketan appears. 

# I would like AS to give his full attention to making ICTFC an attractive and sound investment for an appropriate and long term group or individual. (Anders Povlsen my ideal type). Wasting energy over a long drawn out legal battle in Court dilutes AS’s time on this matter. It also serves SG purpose above.

# The costs for fighting any legal case submitted by SG will only go one way, and that’s up!! I can imagine the fun lawyers would have insisting each of the over 7,000 unopened emails are debated over in the minuscule detail to defend some abstract and completely irrelevant clause of corporate law. Cut our losses now and ‘heave’ SG. Give him the 70K to ‘get rid’!

# Any legal case will inevitably drag the members of the Board into the quagmire. ‘I said this to XX, and he agreed’. No ‘I only said this’, and thought it was clear what I meant ….’ It’s just a mess waiting to hear the starting gun. God knows there are a pile (if not all) of the KK Board backers I’d gladly dump now, but I just can’t face more of these people pleading insanity!! 

# Lastly and more importantly for me, it’s time to close the door on the past 5-7 years of incompetence and self-interest, and move onto a new and hopefully brighter chapter of the club’s future.

Let’s pay SG his 30 silver coins to see the back of him for good. Can’t think of a better way of insulting SG than starting with a victory on Saturday. 
 

 

 

Edited August 29, 20241 yr by big cherly

13 hours ago, Charles Bannerman said:

One other thought … AS hasn’t exactly been backward at coming forward with criticism of Gardiner. I actually wonder how devastated or otherwise AS would be if the allegedly litigious SG felt minded to raise a defamation action…. which of course would mean that five years of goings on at Caley Thistle would emerge in detail in a very public forum indeed.

As i said yesterday, I think he would relish butting heads with our former CEO. The quote that he would "deal with the £70K that he thinks he is due" is almost like drawing battle lines. I would however suggest that AS likely has a few rabbits that he can pull out of the forensic audit hat, so to speak. 

 

13 hours ago, IBM said:

I doubt if Scott Gardiner would have the B***s to try that.

Oh, I don't know... 

 

4 hours ago, ClickbaitProponent said:

If I was Gardiner, who reported £588k losses (the reality being £1.7m), I would avoid attempting to sue people or even trying to screw £70k out of the club, because I suspect the forensics have revealed some issues that may warrant further official scrutiny. If Gardiner has any naus he will slope off quietly, keep his head down, and try to save what is left of his career ...

You would think so wouldn't you. 7000 unread emails, existing technology that is working well replaced with something that doesn't (pixellot), strips ordered in an exponentially higher quantity than needed from Puma. Reported losses exponentially higher than stated, submission of accounts delayed, delayed AGMs etc. Does all of this (and more) pass the sniff test? Does anyone (else) benefit from any of the outwardly strange looking deals? I am sure AS has and will continue to look into these kinds of anomalies that go back to 2019. If I were our former CEO, I would be more worried about AS/ICT suing him than the other way around.  

 

However, I am with Big Cherly on this one. Get some agreement, close this sorry 5-year chapter quickly, and move on. We can move upwards, and our former CEO can look for employment with 78 Ventures or another club that is looking for his particular skillset. 

 

 

 

22 minutes ago, big cherly said:

Yes CbP, tend to agree but I would prefer AS would not go down this ‘road’. I would prefer a settlement was reached and we paid SG to disappear quickly (he will reappear somewhere else {England} i’m sure). 
My reasons are:

# SG will want to keep his name in the limelight (Kahwana like), so his name and image of a ‘hard and demanding businessman’ in the sport works is ‘out there’. There are enough like minded individuals out there that care only about siphoning money out of clubs (Glazers spring to mind), that admire these attributes. It wouldn’t surprise me any if some future connection or venture with good old Ketan appears. 

# I would like AS to give his full attention to making ICTFC an attractive and sound investment for an appropriate and long term group or individual. (Anders Povlsen my ideal type). Wasting energy over a long drawn out legal battle in Court dilutes AS’s time on this matter. It also serves SG purpose above.

# The costs for fighting any legal case submitted by SG will only go one way, and that’s up!! I can imagine the fun lawyers would have insisting each of the over 7,000 unopened emails are debated over in the minuscule detail to defend some abstract and completely irrelevant clause of corporate law. Cut our losses now and ‘heave’ SG. Give him the 70K to ‘get rid’!

# Any legal case will inevitably drag the members of the Board into the quagmire. ‘I said this to XX, and he agreed’. No ‘I only said this’, and thought it was clear what I meant ….’ It’s just a mess waiting to hear the starting gun. God knows there are a pile (if not all) of the KK Board backers I’d gladly dump now, but I just can’t face more of these people pleading insanity!! 

# Lastly and more importantly for me, it’s time to close the door on the past 5-7 years of incompetence and self-interest, and move onto a new and hopefully brighter chapter of the club’s future.

Let’s pay SG his 30 silver coins to see the back of him for good. Can’t think of a better way of insulting SG than starting with a victory on Saturday. 
 

 

 

All good in an ideal world but not so good if his £70k pushes us over the edge or leads to zero credit ratings via a CCJ against the club - the kind of thing expected of Gardiner. He will want reprisals one way or another.

16 minutes ago, Scotty said:

As i said yesterday, I think he would relish butting heads with our former CEO. The quote that he would "deal with the £70K that he thinks he is due" is almost like drawing battle lines. I would however suggest that AS likely has a few rabbits that he can pull out of the forensic audit hat, so to speak. 

 

Oh, I don't know... 

 

You would think so wouldn't you. 7000 unread emails, existing technology that is working well replaced with something that doesn't (pixellot), strips ordered in an exponentially higher quantity than needed from Puma. Reported losses exponentially higher than stated, submission of accounts delayed, delayed AGMs etc. Does all of this (and more) pass the sniff test? Does anyone (else) benefit from any of the outwardly strange looking deals? I am sure AS has and will continue to look into these kinds of anomalies that go back to 2019. If I were our former CEO, I would be more worried about AS/ICT suing him than the other way around.  

 

However, I am with Big Cherly on this one. Get some agreement, close this sorry 5-year chapter quickly, and move on. We can move upwards, and our former CEO can look for employment with 78 Ventures or another club that is looking for his particular skillset. 

 

 

 

I hear McD's are recruiting. I am pretty sure that is about the only chance SG has now.

1 hour ago, ClickbaitProponent said:

All good in an ideal world but not so good if his £70k pushes us over the edge or leads to zero credit ratings via a CCJ against the club - the kind of thing expected of Gardiner. He will want reprisals one way or another.

Sounds like his £70K will not push us over the edge. AS has already asked for £150K to cover the other loanees asking for repayment and stated he would deal with this £70K personally ... then by the end of the day yesterday he indicated everything was in place. That would suggest he has either paid it already or most likely will now negotiate (through lawyers no doubt) an acceptable walk-away fee. Hopefully he has a few things he can highlight from his forensic audit to make walking away with a lower figure attractive. 

On a more positive note - we just got a loan player from Ross County so I assume this means we did pay our debts to them and any other club we owed money to for players. 

 

Edited August 29, 20241 yr by Scotty
fixing typos and grammar

I think AS has been very clever in how he has handled the SG situation. He’s made it clear he, not the club, is fronting it. He’s made it clear how badly he feels SG was performing and the poor decisions he was making. Making things like 7000 unread e-mails public highlights that there were deficiencies in his running of the club.

It’s all been done to make it clear to SG that AS will meet fire with fire, funding it himself, and that there will only be one winner, which will not be SG.

Surely, despite his well discussed ego issues, not even SG is foolish enough to take that fight on. If he is, AS will take him to the cleaners.

And why should AS pay SG some or all of the £70k when he knows it would be much better used taking the club forward?

Good on him!

Edited August 29, 20241 yr by Robert

18 minutes ago, Robert said:

I think AS has been very clever in how he has handled the SG situation. He’s made it clear he, not the club, is fronting it. He’s made it clear how badly he feels SG was performing and the poor decisions he was making. Making things like 7000 unread e-mails public highlights that there were deficiencies in his running of the club.

It’s all been done to make it clear to SG that AS will meet fire with fire, funding it himself, and that there will only be one winner, which will not be SG.

Surely, despite his well discussed ego issues, not even SG is foolish enough to take that fight on. If he is, AS will take him to the cleaners.

And why should AS pay SG some or all of the £70k when he knows it would be much better used taking the club forward?

Good on him!

For the reasons I provided. It’s simply a poor investment of time, energy and money (even if it is AS’s). 
Better to move on and concentrate on improving the club professionally (both on and off the park). 
I know DF was/is SG’s ‘man’, and there are valid reasons to question his managerial capabilities. He knows he is under the focus of our new interim CEO and if performance and or results are not at an acceptable level, then I am sure we will have change.  

39 minutes ago, big cherly said:

For the reasons I provided. It’s simply a poor investment of time, energy and money (even if it is AS’s). 
Better to move on and concentrate on improving the club professionally (both on and off the park). 
I know DF was/is SG’s ‘man’, and there are valid reasons to question his managerial capabilities. He knows he is under the focus of our new interim CEO and if performance and or results are not at an acceptable level, then I am sure we will have change.  

I get your logic but can’t help feeling that if AS was not taking the approach he is, SG would be much more likely to take the matter to court.

A bit like defending from the front to prevent the attack taking place at all.

I, like many others, am enjoying it all 😂😂

Edited August 29, 20241 yr by Robert

We need to remember that Savage is only a consultant at this point and everything still needs signed off by the board and that includes how they deal with Gardiner.

It sits a little uneasy with me that Savage is looking for total control of the club via a mandate from shareholders as opposed to through own shareholding.

As much as I appreciate what Savage is doing and have no reason to distrust him I'm not sure total control sitting with one person is a wise move regardless of who that person is.

There has been talk in the past of Savage waiting for admin to get control on the cheap and it feels like he's doing that now but without the official admin bit.

It may be happening for all the right reasons and the alternative is/was a lot worse. It just has a wee hint of being power trippy.

49 minutes ago, big cherly said:

For the reasons I provided. It’s simply a poor investment of time, energy and money (even if it is AS’s). 
Better to move on and concentrate on improving the club professionally (both on and off the park). 
I know DF was/is SG’s ‘man’, and there are valid reasons to question his managerial capabilities. He knows he is under the focus of our new interim CEO and if performance and or results are not at an acceptable level, then I am sure we will have change.  

I agree DF is now under more scrutiny now than he has been before, What makes you sure we will have change? Change costs money & AS is shelling out a lot at the moment. What needs to happen ( not happen), to make the change you expect?

32 minutes ago, STFU said:

There has been talk in the past of Savage waiting for admin to get control on the cheap and it feels like he's doing that now but without the official admin bit.

It may be happening for all the right reasons and the alternative is/was a lot worse. It just has a wee hint of being power trippy.

I think that has more to do with power struggle frustrations during his stint as chairman as opposed to anything nefarious. He pretty much said that in one of the articles recently. 

Given what he has done in a couple of weeks in ridding us of Makwana & Gardiner and bringing both visibility and scrutiny to the eyepopping higher debt than our former CEO or board have previously announced, then I can totally understand his request for a mandate. Provided that mandate is reviewable, he continues to be open with us, and as noted, keeps the light on as he has said he will do, then I am ok with it.

Bottom line personally is that I would rather give him the keys for 3 years than to some random wannabee internet influencer, and giving him full power for three years is two less than we gave it to our former CEO for, with, I suspect, far more governance in place and hopefully less unread emails.   

If I were to add a caveat, then perhaps it would be to say that any sale of the club to a third party has to go to an AGM/EGM for ratification. I don't think that is unreasonable as we don't want another 'fait accompli' with another Makwana but I also don't think that would happen given AS's ties to the local community, to local football, to youth development and to Caley Thistle. 

 

 

Will AS keep the current board in place given most (but not all), were present during the disastrous SG era and either turned a blind eye or did not do their job in holding SG and others in check. Surely the accountant  knew the Club was spending money it didn’t have and buying things it couldn’t afford? This includes bringing in loan players etc. I hope these people are scrutinised by AS and those he has brought in to conduct his forensic audit. 

Potential new investor lying at anchor infront of the stadium this morning 😂 'Elysian' Super yacht with owner John W Henry on board. Had a look at Aberdeen last week, Lossiemouth yesterday and Inverness today.

Liverpool owner?

2 minutes ago, STFU said:

Liverpool owner?

Yes 👌 

https://www.northern-scot.co.uk/news/premier-league-club-owner-makes-surprise-moray-visit-on-90-359799/

5 minutes ago, STFU said:

Liverpool owner?

That would surely be the end of Big Dunc, then.

We'd get Steven Gerrard instead 

 

Maybe Ketan has an office on board this one?

I am sure the Boston Red Sox fans will be happy to know they are now an American Football team according to this article! 

Alan Savage being interviewed on Radio Scotland Sportsound this afternoon, likely some time betweeen 2pm and 3pm. Should be an interesting listen.