Charles Bannerman

What a welcome breath of fresh air and an admirable reality check from Chris there! The only nit I would pick is that to become a teacher in Scotland, you MUST have a relevant degree (and also the necessary teacher training). You don't just walk into the jobs in question and people certainly don't create them for you. Perhaps it should also be remembered that many people, especially among the majority who aren't interested in football, regard professional footballers as grossly overpaid as it is - even before you consider their microscopically short working week. There are people in other sports performing at higher levels than many professional footballers and often training more frequently - whilst still holding down the day jobs they need to have because their sport isn't subsidised by rich people. The bottom line is Chris's bottom line - the world doesn't owe football and footballers a living.

I can't say I'm all that interested in the wedding of two people I don't know, have never met and who don't know me either. On the other hand, that nice young couple who saved hard to buy the house up the road and who greet me with a smile and a hello every time they see me - that's different.

Straight from the horse's mouth - Robbo doesn't read CTO.

IHE... if you did become a director or something like that, they would have to fight me off in my unbridled desire to join you. I am sure, between us, we could swing a vote to have the price of Vodka in the Sports Bar reduced to 47p a nip - the cheapest now allowed by law. My Gambian friend Abdoulli does magic and would give the club free access to a spell which would shift the course of the aquifer. (I'm still trying to remember that glorious wind-up of several years ago.)

Or IHE on the wind up? It was several years ago now, but remember the time he had everybody going for ages with what can only be called a masterpiece of deception?

As long as it is accepted that if there is a legitimate view (which in my case there is) that a series of posts is designed to undermine the current board, then that needs to be highlighted. So also does the coincidence in time of a sudden and dramatic U-turn in the viewpoint of the poster concerned and that poster ceasing to fulfil a role he previously held within the club. Indeed, I think it is essential that ICT supporters - and equally importantly, any potential investors - should understand the context in which a number of hostile and misleading posts have been made. For instance, at a time when efforts continue to finalise the stadium transfer deal in order to attract money into the club, another thread which began simply as an unsupported rumour about an unspecified announcement was, by a single post, diverted into extremely unhelpful speculation about the club going into Administration.

You don't seem to have mentioned their inherited obligation to deal with the £422,000 loss for the year to last May, run up by the "previous regime", and with the £1.2M reduction in revenue for 2017-18, which was a consequence of the relegation achieved under the "previous regime" by a manager given a very long contract by the "previous regime", which also sanctioned the profligate wage structures implemented by the managers the "previous regime" appointed. I trust that everyone is clear that the "lion's share" of the £450,000 bail out - some £250,000 - was provided by David Sutherland. I believe that - against hugely adverse circumstances - a pretty good job has pretty consistently been done by successive administrations to achieve what has been since 1994. This has been made all the more difficult because the consequences of any error made have been hugely magnified by the highly marginal circumstances which have constrained successive boards. I would therefore prefer to concentrate on the way ahead rather than create recriminations. However, if you are as intent as it appears on constantly attacking the current board - who, we note, no longer avail themselves of your services at the club - then it regrettably becomes necessary to achieve balance and realism. That must be done even if it involves my reluctantly highlighting the less glorious moments of the "previous regime" - whose Cheerleader In Chief and Proclaimer Of Infallibility you were for some time. At a time when the club and the team are showing signs of recovery after a traumatic summer of 2017, I find your attempts to sow unhelpful division and dissent extremely unfortunate and to the detriment of the club - especially since these are arguably motivated by the personal agenda of a former club functionary. I note that you now appear also to be installing yourself as Cheerleader In Chief for CJT. There is maybe something of an irony there, given that in another thread CJT's objectives are quoted - by you - as including: ".... to be the vehicle through which a healthy, balanced and constructive relationship between the Club and its supporters and the communities it serves is encouraged and developed."

You did understand it correctly Robert. The news broke after my own stuff went out earlier in the day. At time of writing, the SRU have rescheduled the game for this Saturday (May 5) and Dave Carson the Highland coach has asked for confirmation of whether or not St Boswells will fulfil it no later than Wednesday. If they don't do so and their results are all scrapped, Highland go up as champions after the necessary points adjustments. If they do play, then the scenario is as described at the top of this thread - subject also to St Boswells also fulfilling the fixture they defaulted on earlier at Newton Stewart. St Boswells have got considerable "form" over a period of years when it comes to defaulting on fixtures and fielding ineligible players and Dave is (rightly, in my view) also saying that if they don't meet these last two fixtures, they should be chucked out of rugby completely for a year. There really is no excuse for this. Dave makes the point that this isn't 2nd or 3rd XV stuff - it's National League rugby and clubs aspiring to this top club level should be expected to fulfil certain standards. Highland, who want to progress by playing here and not by default, spent a lot of money in preparations for yesterday's game which would have attracted a big crowd, and all they got for their trouble was a few beers and an afternoon of touch rugby.

Since I was in the front row of the critics of the earlier inactivity on this, I now have to say that I am very pleased that this progress has been made. I do note that a change - and I think a change for the better - seems to have been made to the wording of Resolution 2 compared with the original requisition. Just to avoid any future hiccups, I trust that the whole process of calling this meeting remains within the scope of the Articles of Association.

Strange coincidence that both these food products happen to be brown....

Given the speed of your transition from Cheerleader In Chief to Instigator Of Dissent, I would find it very difficult indeed to keep up with you!

But, just as you insinuated the Administration Rumour on to the Announcement thread ("hypotherically", of course), you thought you would just insert this snidey wee negative, also with its "save my own backside" qualification, on to this one......

I don't think the importance of providing background and context to comments on here which have of late suddenly transformed from abject sycophancy to outright hostility (and therefore in a sense become ad homines in themselves) can be overestimated. Given their potentially destabilising effect upon the club, the background to such comments urgently needs to be understood. As for poor Ferben, Mods - PLEASE don't ban him! Just as, according to Margaret Thatcher, "every Prime Minister needs a Willie", similarly "Every Forum Needs A Ferben", simply to remind other users of the coherence and articulacy of their own contributions. So please don't deprive this Forum of its Willie!!

What a superb and hugely appropriate analogy, as we continue to wait for this claimed statement, Scarlet!? "To be, or not to be? That is the question."?

So when is this alleged "announcement" actually going to come? In fact, what's the most likely next announcement? At this time of year, might it not be about 2018-19 season tickets which must surely be due to go on sale within the next two weeks? Maybe the board will even get Gordy Fyfe's uncle to do the official launch? Inevitably, this thread's extremely vague, open ended, unsubstantiated OP was going to kick off speculation, and one form in which this quickly emerged was through "The A-word". So let's look at just how that sinister notion was inserted into this thread. The first to use "The A-word" was Fraz - but only in one of a number of scenarios which were clearly humorous and satirical to the extent that 11 other posts followed in which this idea was not pursued. And THEN we get the first serious and completely unprompted reference to "The A-word"...."Hypothetically speaking" of course - aye, right. And it comes from that one-time Arch Happy Clapper and Cheerleader In Chief for the former board, CALEY D, who not only makes serious reference to the concept but also tells us "it would come as absolutely no surprise" to him. Well of course it wouldn't, given that those he went to such pains for so long to present as The Infallible Ones have vacated the boardroom, to be succeeded by people with whom he no longer has any working relationship. Speculation... destabilising speculation... about Administration is hence the creation of CALEYD and we now await whether this has any more substance than what the rumour machine told us about it some months ago. Donald... it's time you came clean about the nature of your agenda. Some years ago you waged a relentless campaign on here against the administration of the time. Then, by means which remain unclear, you suddenly not only took up the said Arch Happy Clapper and Chief Cheerleader roles, you also waged an equally relentless campaign telling us how absolutely wonderful the whole thing had suddenly become. This also created a conflict of interest, making it impossible to tell whether CaleyD was speaking or whether this was the official view of the club. And now, after you made more departures and comebacks than Frank Sinatra, you seem to have had a second holiday to Damascus, which appears to have prompted the dissolution of your relationship with the current board. And with that, you have reverted to your earlier status of "Caley Thistle BAD". (This may be pure coincidence, of course???) I therefore think it's time you explained to us the agenda motivating the tone and content of many of your comments - on this forum at least.

Robert....what I was saying was "will either finish first or second" is a bit premature since there is still a permutation which would exclude that.

All I can do is to reiterate that this now lengthy thread - on the strength of an unsupported, speculative post, with no substantiation whatsoever - began with a claim that an unspecified announcement was allegedly imminent. Very quickly indeed, this has been extrapolated to equally unsubstantiated speculation that this announcement will be about administration. Now is this a new administration....or the same one that rumour said this was imminent two or three months ago? Please note that I am NOT saying that administration, or indeed any of the other speculated subjects of this alleged announcement, is NOT going to happen. (And I will quote that last sentence in the event of any future "I told you so".) All I am saying is that what we have heard makes none of the speculated outcomes more or less likely since it is not accompanied by any evidence. For instance, a guy in the gym changing rooms has been telling me with total confidence that Dougie McGilvray is on the point of taking the club over. The trouble is that the guy has been telling me this regularly for the last three years or so. If Dougie ever were to do so, then I'm sure my informant will remind me that I heard it from him first..... in a manner similar to some newspapers when a managerial appointment is confirmed - conveniently ignoring the other 19 names they sprayed about that were 100% wrong. This present rumour may - or may not - follow a similar pattern. On the performance of the current board, I suppose it's inevitable that CaleyD should find so many deficiencies in it, especially compared with the previous one ....... of whose complete infallibility he spent so long advising the world.

This is pretty standard form. The Edinburgh local media, who obviously have extensive contacts within Hearts, have clearly got a whiff of something down there - as happens everywhere, including here where you frequently see moves reported in our local media before the club concerned, which is constrained by contractual procedures, announces it. More often than not, these stories are correct, but sometimes they come unstuck - in which case, as with the numerous complete red herrings you see when managerial vacancies occur, nothing more is ever heard of it.

And IF there's not going to be an announcement, what then? An announcement that there's not going to be an announcement..... setting an interesting precedent in response to future red herrings?

That would be a very sensible idea, given that even the existence of an announcement is simply speculation while on top of that (with varying degrees of seriousness) further speculation about what it's meant to be about has ranged from administration to the colour of the strip to cut price pies. On the other hand, some of the spin-off discussion about fundamental viability has been quite interesting!

Caleyboy has clearly been addressing the same question as I have - and with the same dilemma over "want" as opposed to "deserve". Does the Inverness public "want" a full time football club? Well, given that maybe half of them won't even be interested in football and many of those who are will follow teams from outwith Inverness, the number of people in Inverness who actively want full time club - possibly from the level of following the score on Saturday nights or even Monday mornings upwards - probably isn't that big a slice of the population. In other words, to be brutally realistic, most people in Inverness couldn't give a toss about Caley Thistle - and that also reflects what I've seen on the streets over the years trying to assemble ICT voxpops. It's actually quite difficult to find enough people interested enough to comment. So does the Inverness public "deserve" a full time football club? Well to deserve one, you have to want one first and then you need to behave in a way which morally justifies your desire. But given that most people aren't interested, then the question doesn't actually arise. I used to think that Inverness actually didn't deserve a full time football club because of the lack of support for a body which publicised the city, brought some trade into it and, for instance, provided a road to open up the harbour etc. However I've changed my view on that over the years, in that the founding fathers of the club put it there to promote football in Inverness, not to create collateral benefit - however much they used that to gain brownie points in the early years. So, in conclusion, a relatively small number of people in inverness want a full time football club but, while the concept of deserving one becomes redundant, you do have to wonder if there are enough of them to make this a sustainable, viable option?

That's a very well argued post, much of which I would agree with, but maybe in my earlier one I should have been clearer about what exactly I meant about Ross County. One of the central doubts I now have is whether the inner Moray Firth has the capacity to sustain two major football clubs, even when one is nourished substantially and long term by a benefactor. There wasn't much of a problem back in the 90s in D3 but I think that at the level of more recent years, something was bound to give. But as it happens, a second thing may be about to give in the next few weeks. So it's not a matter of measuring success as being "better" than County, it's now a case of "this place ain't big enough for the two of us" and irrespective of any desire to avoid comparisons, the reality is that to some extent, both clubs are competing for the same, scarce local resources.

Whereas you yourself retain a spirit of benevolence towards all involved in the governance of the club over the years?

I'm not so sure about that, Fraz. Over the years, there have been regular derogatory remarks about the recent donor of £250,000 who is still the man dismissed as "the builder", and also much cynicism about his former business concern whose £6M has, over the years, variously staved off financial collapse, bankrolled progress to the SPL and provided the wherewithal to comply with its requirements. Now the flak is turning to the MM-controlled board, MM having donated over £0.5M, including £150,000 over the last year as part of the summer bailout. If the club is looking for "investment" - a useful euphemism for donations - then it really is going to have to hope that prospective "investors" don't scrutinise CTO or listen too much to "the word on the street", since they will be presented with plenty of reasons to place their money in places which will give them much less grief. It's understandable that people are disappointed about relegation and now also that the playoffs suddenly look so much more unlikely. However a lot of the focus seems to be on trying to criticise what has been got wrong rather than highlighting the great amount which has been got right over the years. It's my belief that it was a minor miracle that ICT reached the SPL in ten years and a major one that it stayed in it for 12 of the next 13. This is because I believe that what we have is a product which is fundamentally loss-making in its market environment. In other words, especially with a heavily subsidised competitor 15 miles up the road and with increasing competition from other activities, not enough people are prepared to part with around £20 to sit outside in the cold watching an hour and a half of entertainment of quality which is no more predictable than in the rest of football - and that's before you even consider the added difficulties of being 150 miles detached from other sectors of the market. This is the intractable situation that successive board have wrestled with - and largely done a good job of staving off for as long as possible. Edinburgh and especially Dundee have had difficulties sustaining two top flight football clubs in recent years. Glasgow could well be losing one of its three and Aberdeen has at times sailed perilously close to the wind with its one. So where does this leave the two clubs so close together in the sparsely populated inner Moray Firth, on the extreme periphery of national football? (One very possible answer to that question now being "playing Highland Derbies in the Championship") As we approach the 25th anniversary of the election of Caley Thistle and Ross County to the SFL, I have been benefitting greatly from hindsight to the extent that I am now wondering if it was all that good an idea after all that both local clubs got into the league; and also - although I still believe that it was the "least bad" solution in the mid-90s - whether the siting of the Caledonian Stadium has now for some years been a significant liability?

Fair point. I can certainly think of one previous board member who donated £250,000 to keep the club afloat several months ago - and that despite the abuse he got from some off the back of the £6M he previously arranged for his former company to subsidise the club by over a period of years. What must be said of the board which was in place on relegation is that, despite acknowledged mistakes, they did their honest best to keep the club in the Premiership despite its fundamental lack of capacity to earn enough to do so. But it's strange how credit so seldom seems to be given for that.