CaleyD

Great chat and insight from Bryan Jackson. The only thing he said that I think we need to be cautious with was around clubs situations coming out of admin. He mentioned that clubs generally find it easier as most of the costs had been cut by the administrator etc. I'm not sure that is the case with us as Alan Savage has been bankrolling things. There's no doubt some costs have been cut, but he's recently said that a further £1.8 million is needed to get to the end of next season.

Calm down The article credits the podcast and one of their journalists is a a member of the podcast panel.

The first mention of admin came from Ross Morrison when he said that if we didn't move training and operations to Kelty then we faced administration. It was that threat that spurred the fans meeting where Alan Mackenzie then outlined the risks if such a thing. On the rest of your response to STFU, I don't think anyone is in any doubt as to the circumstances that resulted in the meeting last August. The point STFU is making, and I've also touched on it previously, is WHY did the agreements from that meeting not materialise? I don't have any current inside knowledge, but I still hear things, as I'm sure others do. Piecing together the whispers it would seem that a lack of transparency/information (intentional or otherwise) around certain things at the time of that initial meeting, which then came to the attention of some afterwards, meant that they felt there was risk that any new investor/owner may be motivated by the value of the land for non football development. Being in administration and open to having to accept the highest bid meant that if the car parks lease was also held by the club, it increased that risk....which it would. There was then very public criticism of some of those involved, and from there it went south and turned into a battle of the personalities. There is zero doubt that the financial position that was left behind when Ross Morrison stepped down put us at risk, and I make no defence of that, but I do believe had it not become a (one sided) public spat, then issues could have been worked through and administration avoided. Alan Savage is now meeting the cost of that, and hopefully the slated parties feel he's paid his dues and they will now sort the club out and put it on a new, firmer, financial footing.

That will be taken from the newest Wyness Shuffle podcast where they spoke to Bryan Jackson. Well worth a listen.

This happened in August last year. My take on it from the info available is that agreement was reached to write off debts/exchange them for shares. What then seems to have happened is that disagreement arose over the car parks, people were getting slated in the press etc. and the whole thing quickly fell apart. In that regard we seem to be right back where we were then, but 15 points worse off and facing a huge invoice from BDO. Hopefully the outcome is different this time!

Need to keep in mind that the administrator is there to get the best possible outcome for the creditors, which effectively "on the side" of everyone due money. This means they have to be cautious about how they deal with writing off debts, and why their statement made it very clear they were asking people to fulfil previous intimated intentions to do so. In relation to the car parks, they are not part of the club, so not part of what they are dealing with. Whilst it may improve the value of the club, they aren't going to get involved in any of those talks directly. That would be akin to a scenario where you're selling your house but the buyers want the neighbours garden, so the estate agent starts putting pressure on them to just hand it over so they can get a deal done. As uncomfortable/upsetting as it is, the club have no legal claim on the carparks beyond any existing lease with Ross Morrison and David Cameron. In short, it's not within the administrators duty, and would possibly breach their obligations, to have hosted or attended this kind of meeting.

Just putting it out there.... What if someone connected to the energy industry was trying to do a deal with HIE to free up the site of the stadium so it could realise it's full development potential? What if a third party controlled part of that land and needed some persuasion to hand it over on the cheap? What if HIE had some sway on land elsewhere upon which a stadium could be sited....say a smaller, more efficient stadium that could be "swapped" for the current one? If such a person existed, how might they go about making the above happen?

From what's been said, I don't think the security has passed scrutiny. AS said that the person holding £1.5M would walk away with the largest share of any CVA. If the security was solid, then they'd likely walk away with all of any CVA. I also can't get my head around why it's going to need £1.8 million of investment to get through next season? That would suggest our financial position would be worse than it was under Morrison and Gardiner! The stadium shift to UHI campus is not a new idea. That was being talked about nearly 10 years ago.

Even if such a clause did exist, the question remains....to what ends? They pull the lease, and then what? Restrictions on use of the land prevent it being developed/used for other means, they'd effectively be cutting off their own income. It should also be noted that Cameron and Morrison will be paying rent to the Common Good Fund. If they transfer the lease to the club then we have to pay that instead, so it doesn't wipe out the need to pay rent. The current setup may be messier than needs be, but it's not a financial obstacle in the whole scheme of things.

Administrator will continue to run the club so long as there's money there to do so and some hope that creditors will see some of what they are owed returned to them. AS has said he will do that until the end of the season so, unless someone else steps in, that's pretty much the deadline before they'd pull the plug and start liquidating.

BDO are the club at the moment.

It would, yes....as would any sub lease the club has on the car parks. Here's a question to ponder. What's the monetary value in the car parks to those who currently hold the lease? Especially when the land use is tied to the stadium...i.e. primarily for the provision of parking to support stadium operations. Then ask yourself why those who control the car parks would want to jeopardise the main income they get from it...no club, no sub lease, no income. I have no doubt that Alan Savage is doing what he thinks is the right thing, just the same as David Cameron, Ross Morrison and anyone else involved in any way think they are doing the right thing. The problem is, they don't all agree on what that right thing is, and we're all left trying to work it out based on very limited information and understanding of the politics at play.

No monetary value, but they certainly aren't worthless when it comes to control...and as we are witnessing...making the decision on who else may or may not hold that control going forward.

Common Good Fund owns the land, what's being talked about with car parks and stadium is who holds the lease/s. Should the club liquidate, it would for the Common Good Fund to negotiate/agree a lease with whomever was running a "new" club setup. I don't personally believe the car park situation is any real issue. The club already has a sub tenancy on it, and I understand the terms of that are very favourable and allow the club to use them as they please (within relevant planning rules/restrictions etc.). A prime example of that is the gym building that was put there! Everyone has become focused on it because that's all that's been talked about for the last 6 months. I'm not suggesting for a moment that liquidation should be taken lightly or that it wouldn't be without challenges, but it would provide the least complicated foundations to build from again.

I had that thought briefly, but the shareholding was always going to be bigger hurdle involving a few more people.