Leaderboard

Unlike the Courier to jump the gun but I guess they need those clicks.

Simplistically you can argue that is the case. It nevertheless dismisses any responsibility of duty of care or due diligence by the council to consider the effects of one of its sub tenants (ICTFC) folding and going into liquidation. Whilst ICTP may still provide the rent, their remains the issue of the stadium upkeep and security costs which will have to picked up by the council (they own the stadium). Another concern were this to happen is the likelihood of any development of the area would be deferred some years I expect. This stance also goes against THC common good fund principles Ie ‘Common Good Funds are made up of assets including buildings, land …. , are ‘held by the Council principally for the benefit of the local community’. If what it appears from an earlier posting it maybe a moot point, insofar it appears their will be a statement by BDO mid Jan. Hopefully their is some positive signs of an agreement or a road map to achieve that between RM/main stakeholders and the long suffering retail suppliers. bc ps - I hasten to add THC would like to avoid anything to do with ICTFC right now giving the complete pigs-ear they made of dealing with the battery farm.

I’ll bet Mrs Gringo is thoroughly enjoying it though

Not if you’re a farmer with some land to pass on.

I don’t think the Bught is even a starter here, and for one or two reasons, Cherly. Back in 1993, INE commissioned a study which eventually led to the choice of the current stadium site, but the Bught never even figured. Agreed, the West Link has appeared since then which might appear to improve access to close to the Bught, but in terms of immediate access, the area is already a traffic nightmare, made worse by everyone trying to pile out on to Glenurquhart Road because you can no longer drive north along the riverside because of that £2.5M cycleway that nobody uses. The other big problem with the Bught is that the land is all already committed to other purposes and - to be blunt - people aren’t going to be prepared to be dislodged simply to accommodate a football club that’s failed to run itself properly. The Bught Stadium itself would be a complete no-no since it is currently undergoing a multi-million pound upgrade as a national centre for shinty. You mentioned sharing with the rugby club or the athletics track. Both of these are HighLife Highland facilities so any football club would simply be tenants and there would probably difficulties with advertising signage. But, more fundamentally, the rugby club doesn’t even have a stand while, although the running track has a small one, spectator areas are quite limited. Also, there is no running water at the track past the sports centre which is the only location of toilets and, with field event areas on the infield, the Queens Park isn’t actually big enough to accommodate a football pitch. And then there’s the issue that Highland RFC and Inverness Harriers both have their own fixture lists which they wouldn’t be prepared or indeed able to have disrupted, and the same goes for both clubs’ weekly training sessions which would clash with midweek football fixtures. What the 1993 report showed was that Inverness wasn’t, even then, well provided with potential sites for a football stadium so - apart from possible greenfield areas outwith the city boundary - I don’t see that having become any better over the last 30 years of development.

What about the site of the 3G pitch at the UHI Campus that the national bodies said there was no funding for? This is a large area adjacent to the railway line and a footbridge (with future rail halt potential). There is access from both the retail park and the Campus with a future link planned near to it between Smithton and Inshes. A stadium here with a 3G pitch or even a full plastic one could serve the wider community, student population and the football club. The Council (Common Good Fund) might even contribute from the proceeds of the sale of the land at the current stadium.

I have now managed to establish the route by which Cameron and Morrison acquired control of the ICT Property Company and hence of the lease of the car parks and of the so called Bermuda Triangle at the far end of the North car parks. This was purchased from a body that was effectively Tullochs, which also tells us that about 8ish years ago, when the stadium was given back to the club by Tullochs, they retained the car park lease under Propco whose two directors, before Cameron and Morrison took over in August 2023, according to Companies House, were George Fraser, former Chairman of Tullochs and a Cesidio de Ciacca who appears to have been a minor Propco shareholder. This means that, contrary to what many, including myself, had thought, the club gained nothing from the acquisition so the transaction was not apparently made as a bail-out. So why, then, did Cameron and Morrison acquire this intangible but potentially valuable asset if it wasn’t to keep the club afloat? In Cameron’s case, it’s especially mysterious since the gentleman is 82 years old and there are other gestures he could have made that might have helped the club more. As for Morrison, five months after he acquired his share of that lease, he also made a loan of £1.65 million to the club, but with the security of the Stadium plus the land on which it stands and right out to the pavement. As previously mentioned, this security (Charge) may, in the opinion of the administrator, be subject to challenge, but as things stand, Cameron and Morrison - who resigned as club directors respectively in July and May 2024 - potentially have complete control over the stadium and all that surrounds it. It was also made pretty clear at the administrator’s press conference on December 23rd that Cameron and Morrison - respectively based in Aviemore and Broughty Ferry - have been attempting to play hardball over the car park lease, leading us to ask whether they are looking for pretty big bucks for it? It is therefore very clear that these two former directors pose the biggest obstacle that the administrator has to clear as he tries to ensure that this club survives and moves forward. As a post script, it was my firm understanding back in 1994 that the Common Good Fund granted the original lease specifically for the purpose of taking Scottish League football to Inverness so any attempted change of use might rank alongside the query over Morrison’s loan in terms of what is going for the club here.