Leaderboard

From the AGM it was generally agreed that Tulloch had provided in the region of £6,500,000 of "value" to the club over the years (not including any interest). I've not done the exact sums, but it was surmised that they had received approx £2,000,000 in rental income over the years....there's also been £300k of rent arrears written off and no rental for the past 12 months. That gives a net position of about £5,000,000 that Tullochs "paid" for the stadium & leases since 2001. The gift that has just been provided means the club will save 76 years worth of rent at £205,000 plus they asset has been valued at £2,300,000....total £17,880,000. Club will have £30k rent to pay per year (£15k to Common Good Fund & £15k for Car Parks)....over 76 years (and on the assumption we may have the car parks that long or need to pay for an alternative at similar rate if they are developed) that's a £2,280,000......the net "gift" value comes out at £15,600,000....on top of the £5,000,000 net investment by Tullochs from the last paragraph. Whichever way you want to cut it....that's £20,000,000 to the good for ICTFC....and I fail to see how anyone can continue to paint Tulloch as the bad guys. Some of you have been around this forum long enough to know that I did a lot of digging and questioning over the whole stadium ownership/lease deals for a number of years because I wanted to ensure that the debt would never come back to haunt the club. You may also recall that I made a statement (it may still be on this forum somewhere) that whilst I could not share information that I had been shown in confidence, I was happy to stick my neck out and state that the club's interests were being looked after and that the debt would not come back to haunt us. So this is as huge for me personally as it is for the club because a lot of people have questioned my credibility over the years as a result of that. Finally (for now at least...lol)....the work to bring the stadium ownership back to the club was started a long time ago and the offer was made public 12 months ago....so whilst the current board may have been the ones to finally sign off on it, credit has to be given to the previous Chairman and Board as they are actually the ones that made it even remotely likely or possible.

Absolutely not 25 years Scotty. It's more like half of that since, as I recollect, the "Tulloch" tag appeared after the January 2005 upgrade to 6000 seats. I'm not sure about the originally agreed duration of this deal, but the 2001 deal for control of the board through "Tulloch" directors including the chair was originally for 5 years but in practice extended to 10 or maybe more. For instance DFS took over the chair in 2000, passed it for a time to Ken Mackie who then passed it back to DFS who held it until 2006. Then "non Tulloch" Alan Savage held it for less than two years 2006-08 before Tullochs' George Fraser had it until 2011. Apart from AS, these are "Tulloch" chairmen from 2000-2011, and thereafter you could debate whether Kenny (2011-17) was a "Tulloch" chairman or not. In the case of the Tulloch-ICT association to date, I see the rough "balance sheet" for 2000- early 2018 (but this won't quite be exhaustive) as roughly reading:- THE CLUB HAS RECEIVED - around £2.5M of debt removed, £730,000 in working share capital, a stadium upgraded by two new stands to SPL standards, the gift of everything within the stadium perimeter, the gift back (to the Trust in 2011) of 730,000 shares, the benefit of some very good chairmanship (for instance Ken Mackie was hugely influential in negotiating SPL status during that fraught summer of 2004),absolution over the years from part of the stadium rent and other odds and ends such as the random Tulloch employees who kept appearing to fill gaps at busy times. TULLOCHS HAVE RECEIVED - control, since 2011, of Propco which owns the stadium and holds the lease, control of the Board for approaching 10 years (approx.), naming rights for the stadium for around 13 years, 730,000 shares (until given back in 2011), rent for the stadium and site, a lot of goodwill and positive publicity in the earlier years of the association and........ a whole lot of grief from people who either don't understand or decline to acknowledge that Tullochs have not only put a lot more into the club than they have taken out and that, were it not for their involvement, there is every likelihood that the club would have died in 2001.

With the announcement at the AGM that the current board intend to recommend to shareholders that the club is restructured into a Community Interest Company, then there's no time to lose in sorting out CJT. With the intimation given about capping any individual/groups voting right to 10%, this would mean that the Supporters Trust's influence would be immediately diluted with the shares they hold in addition to the 10% voting right becoming worthless. It is also an intimation which appears to stand in contrast to the accompanying line that this is a move intended to put the club back in the hands of the fans. We absolutely need to be organised as a group so we can ensure there's suitable representation at the table when these discussions begin.

MJ.... have you ever considered the alternative to the Tulloch involvement? What would you propose should have been done instead, if the Tulloch deal really was that awful? It strikes me that you are complaining about your free lunch, to which the alternative was starvation, because someone has asked you to wash the plates.

Correct, it is written into the club's memorandum and articles.....but any restructuring would mean a new rule-set. Even if those new rules maintained the 10% voting right, it would still render the additional shares held be the trust as worthless as they would/could not be added to increase that voting right. I don't want to be getting ahead of things here as no detail was given at the AGM, just the loose idea....however, as CJT are the only existing fans group with a shareholding/voting right then (on the face of it) we'd either need to set up a new fans group any time we wanted to increase the fans say or, any cap would have to exclude CJT....otherwise you're not putting the club back to the fans, you're capping their influence at 10%....which is worse than the current position. It's all these questions, and many more that will no doubt arise, which make it vital that CJT is suitably represented from the outset.

Inverness Caledonian Thistle has received the good news that Tulloch Homes have agreed to return the lease of the stadium and North and South stands to the ownership of the club and at the same time have allowed access to the adjacent car parks for the foreseeable future. http://ictfc.com/news/club-news/2082-significant-milestone-for-ictfc-as-tulloch-agrees-transfer-of-stadium-lease

Every time someone starts a thread about us re-signing a former player, a kitten dies.

Dougie needs to be given credit for stating at last night's AGM that his family holding of around half a million shares would never be used as anything more than a single hand up at a meeting. In other words he would not want to exert his pro-rata entitlement in a poll vote.

Don't think all the credit for this should go to the McGillivrays or Alan Savage as think the Chairman deserves some credit on this. Still think Messrs Savage and McGillivray need to provide more details on what involvement they want in the club. Never a good idea for a club to have a few powerful shareholders who can dictate what happens to the club.

While its a positive bit of news, lets not forget that the stadium has been called the Tulloch Caledonian Stadium for 25 years - that's pretty good advertising especially in an age when other clubs are selling the stadium naming rights. Being associated at a level when the club ascended into the Premiership (including regular mentions on TV), National Cup finals and a trip into Europe - its not been bad exposure overall for Tulloch.

It wasn't a classic by any means but after coming over with the game in doubt of being on i was well pleased it was. As already said by others we are really lacking up front and i really hope we can get a decent striker in January . . . . Where that striker would come from is the big question. Thought we looked quite solid at the back and midfield was ok you could tell Vigurs absence was felt. It was good to see us play some nice passing football again too. Its been a while since i seen us pass the ball about like that in the flesh instead of the hoof ball we played under Foran. I took part in the Hospitality for the first time and i couldn't say a bad thing about it. It was nothing short of fantastic and i enjoyed every moment of it. I'll certainly be doing it again in future. A great win for us to pick up and it's always good to come all the way and see us get a win. That topped off another brilliant trip over and i can't wait to get another game booked!

It does seem that Tullochs have extracted some money from the club in return for what they have given it, but nevertheless this latest statement sounds more positive than we could reasonably have hoped for. I have to be the first to admit that I am clueless about business wheeling and dealing but this does sound as though this offers the stability required to allow for new investment and for taking the club forward once again.

To digress further, just how snobbish and superior is that.

Access for 3 years minimum then What? Tulloch apply for planning permission. It's also nice to note that they are keeping control of the car parks and still charging us 15k a year for the privilege. Plus the 3.6 million they helped us out with they have made back about 2.5 million in rent from us so not exactly the heroes everyone is making them out to be.