Charles Bannerman

It has been announced that ex-Provost Allan Sellar died yesterday at the age of 93. Clearly , as Provost for 12 years from 1980-92, Allan's overall contribution to public life was considerable but on this forum, I think it's important to acknowledge what he did for Inverness Caledonian Thistle, especially in the early days. He had been succeeded as Provost by Bill Fraser by the time the ICT formation process even started, but he was hugely supportive of the campaign to have an Inverness team playing in the SFL. This was so much so that he was chosen by the club to kick the first ceremonial ball at the official opening of the Caledonian Stadium in 1996 (a wonderful lob towards the goal at the North end which even Barry Wilson - I think - had some difficulty taming!) A few years later, in 2001, he became one of the founding trustees of the Inverness Caledonian Thistle Charitable Trust which saw the club out of its extreme financial difficulties at that time.

I don't think the comparison with Gretna is completely accurate for one or two reasons. Firstly, I would give Roy MacGregor credit for a lot more savvy than Brooks Mileson and, although I agree that if Roy's assistance were suddenly to disappear, County would be in serious trouble. On the other hand Gretna was a total house of cards which rapidly expanded from nothing at the instigation of a guy who was clearly completely bizarre, surviving on 60 a day, chips and Lucozade, but who, for some reason, managed to con the media wholesale into believing in him. I also think that Ross County have a lot more fundamental substance as a football club than Gretna ever had. If Stuart Kettlewell does get the job, then this would create an interesting parallel with the Rangers situation. The thought of Yogi is an interesting one, given that this would then become a combination of a manager who has a track record for wheedling money out of chairmen for less than convincing signings and a chairman renowned for his capacity to sustain twice yearly signing bonanzas. One other option may be what County did in 2011 on the departure of Willie McStay - the interim appointment of a well paid safe pair of hands (in that instance Jimmy Calderwood) to achieve safety before making a permanent appointment for the next season (in that instance Derek Adams). It's currently about three weeks later in the season than the corresponding time in 2011.

Absolutely! That is actually what should have been done instead of the procedure adopted earlier this week. An EGM is priority number one and indeed what I find most astonishing about this whole unfortunate saga has been the apparent long term reluctance by those apparent self-appointees to engage directly with the body itself - ie the membership. It looks to me as if CJT has been allowed to go through a period of total inactivity and then, without any recourse whatsoever to the membership, a "board" has declared itself to have been appointed by itself. Presumably one of the agenda items on any requisition for a meeting would need to read something along the lines of: "To hold such votes among members as are necessary to appoint a board, by confirmation in whole or in part of the body which self-declared on 27th February 2018, or by other constitutional means determined by the membership at the meeting."

Ok, so now we know who the six individuals are, we can move on to the next questions: In what appears (correct me if I am wrong) to be the absence for some time of a fully concluded AGM or General Meeting of any kind, what was the process by which the six board members were appointed? Which of them hold board positions and offices still active since the last properly concluded and transacted General Meeting of the Society? Which of them have been coopted, and what are the Board's powers of cooption under the Society's Constitution/ Articles of Association? By which, if any, other means have any of them been appointed to the Board or to their offices? How much input has the Society's membership had into the formation of this board? Hence, to what extent have the Board's actions carried a mandate from the membership? And indeed, has the Society's membership even been properly defined?

So let me get this straight - what we now have is an anonymous claim that a (so far - BUMP!) anonymous group of six people has apparently, and in the absence for some time of a General Meeting of the Society, appointed itself to run the said society (if it still legally exists) and hence control 10% of the voting rights (one of the biggest single allocations) of a company with a turnover of several million pounds per annum. Presumably applications for the remaining four positions should be lodged with the Society's secretary - Mr D Trotter, Nelson Mandela House, Peckham, or the Chairperson Mr A Daley, c/o The Winchester Club, East London.

I think it's quite important to supporters to know who the six board members are?

I can't really say that the titles and details of lesser central belt Scottish football grounds, especially in this Toni Macaroni era, looms especially large on my list of priorities.

Is Dumbarton's ground still on the site formerly known as "Boghead"?

I don't want to drag this thread off course but feel compelled to observe that if there had been an iota of justice in the world, every asset held by the previous Rangers company, long since defunct, would have been sold to ensure that a galaxy of businesses, large and small, were compensated for the millions they were owed. I'm sure Asda would have been interested in converting Ibrox into a supermarket, suitably liveried in Asda colours. That is all.... now back to ICT.

I am not an accountant, but Page 8 of the most recent accounts to last May appears to come closest to giving an indication. It states net current liabilities of 147,190 and net assets of 166,918. The club is, of course, several months' trading and also significant donations of capital on from that situation, but I find it difficult to see how a "debt" as such could have accumulated since then, given the lack of assets to secure it against. Difficulties in cash flow may be another matter, though.

I would imagine not a lot. When you have no significant assets as security and lack the means to service a debt in any case, that tends to be the situation. "Gentlemanly" loans may have been made by well disposed individuals but I think much of the inter-season shortfall may have been met by the £450K discussed earlier. What cash flow is like may or may not be another issue.

Most likely a case of he who pays the piper calls the tune. I didn't include bank interest because I regarded the debt at having, in effect, been written off by Tullochs at the start. Also, one of the sources of the figure of £6M is Tullochs themselves, so that may well be part of this number. How Tullochs disposed of ICT's debt has never been entirely clear, but it may indeed be worth including an interest factor - which will simply push the subsidy involved ever Northwards.

Caleyboy, there has always been a considerable degree of smoke and mirrors since the debt was removed over the precise mechanics of that removal but yes, it was nominally to the Trust that the debt was transferred. However, in effect it appears to have been reconciled with the Bank of Scotland in some shape or form by Tullochs. I have to say that it was only when Tullochs' offer to donate the stadium fabric back to the club emerged in December 2016 that I began to see more clearly the full extent of the overlap between Tullochs and the Trust. The way I see it is that the ICT Charitable Trust was set up as a tax efficient means of allowing Tullochs to remove the debt. Conspiracy theorists may at the one extreme suggest that the Trust was simply a vehicle for cynical asset stripping, and at the other that it allowed benefactors to retain a degree of anonymity. However, in the former case, a couple of observations need to be made. Firstly, almost 20 years on, the only contentious issue is long term use of the car parks by the club, and indeed a number of reassurances have been offered in that respect. And secondly, if there is an asset stripping conspiracy agenda then, as Trustees, public figures such as ex-Provost Allan Sellar and David Stewart MSP must have been complicit in it - along with the members of the Muirfield Mills consortium who now control the Trust, along with the 730,000 shares donated to it by Tullochs. It's also worth observing that when the Inverness Caledonian Thistle Charitable Trust was set up, the legal conditions - as a quid pro quo for the tax concessions - included the requirement that all local sporting organisations should be among its potential beneficiaries. However I am not aware of anyone other than Inverness Caledonian Thistle FC having benefited at all from its activities. To me, it's quite clear that the club, as a company, became debt free because that debt, of around £2.6M, was taken away by some unspecified arrangement between Tullochs and the main creditor the Bank of Scotland. In return, ownership of the stadium and its lease was transferred to the Trust rather than to Tullochs as discussed above. In terms of "dues", in order to work out what Tullochs have put in, you need to add up the £2.6M removed debt, £0.73M in cash in return for shares subsequently donated back to the Trust, the provision of the North and South stands, innumerable other, smaller "drip feed" contributions such as the provision of staff and, most recently, the write off of £300,000 of outstanding rent.... all of that also alongside the donation back of the stadium fabric. This has been estimated as having a gross value of around £6 million. As for rent paid in return, the only concrete figure we have is the current £205,000 pa. We don't know how much this was from the start of the 7500 capacity era and how it may ultimately have increased to that figure, nor do we know what it was for the pre-North and South stand period. However, I don't think that something in the ballpark of a net £3.5M, after deduction of rent paid, is an unreasonable estimate of what Tullochs have given to the club since around 2000. I find it difficult to reconcile that figure with the notion that "we have more than paid our dues". (As an aside, I have always been a bit bemused by the view that the club should have been allowed to exist rent free in premises which it was obliged to give up because it vastly outspent its earning capacity.) I also find it difficult to see what, by way of keeping the club in existence, the alternatives back in the early 2000s would have been to the arrangements described above. On the other hand if a "free lunch" extending to £3.5 with the only down side the title to the car parks over which significant assurances have been given is considered a bad deal......

Sorry to appear awkward but, while the existence of the 450,000 shares is in the public domain, I have to consider the information I have about their ownership as having been given to me in confidence. However it shouldn't be to difficult to work this out by comparing last year's Annual Return of share ownership with this year's, which should be due in the pretty near future.

It really is quite astonishing that this CJT situation has been allowed to get to the state that it has now reached. The ONLY evidence for CJT's existence is subliminal assertions, unsupported by any evidence I have seen, that there is a "board". So if this board does exist, why is it doing nothing, why has it been doing nothing for months if not years, and why does it continue to conceal itself behind a wall of stubborn silence? Why, at one of the club's most critical and fragile periods in almost 20 years, is this alleged board, which claims to represent the supporters, not lifting a finger to assist the club through these very difficult times? The concern of ever more ICT supporters that I speak to is that the sole priority of this alleged board is to sit on top of the 10% voting rights which are the club's literal birthright and which are a legacy to all supporters. What is needed is a publicly active and working supporters' organisation guided by an equally active and working board - not some kind of a mirage whose existence or otherwise could by now very comfortably become the subject of an examination question for a degree in Philosophy..... or a dramatic farce.

CJT's 10% voting rights are actually only slightly less than those attached to the 450,000 shares, although these shares have been tken up by more than a single party.

I'm going to indulge in a bit of mutual back scratching here and also commend the above by DD! Football's wage structure and expectations make it very difficult indeed for a large number of clubs to balance their earnings and their expenditure. In the case of the two Highland clubs, the ICT situation is as already described. Twelve years in the Premiership, ending in a very precarious financial situation, have only been achieved as a result of being propped up by a ballpark £6.5 million of other people's money - mainly Tullochs'. In the case of Ross County, the actual numbers are a lot less accessible but it's very clear that their twice yearly signing spree and a lot more have depended critically on subsidy by Roy MacGregor and very probably others. I would be a bit surprised if the total over the years is any less than the approximate figure quoted for ICT. The bottom line is that the Inner Moray Firth isn't capable of sustaining two upper tier SPFL clubs with both (or maybe even just one of them) standing on their own two feet. However, although I believe that the Inverness/ Easter Ross population conglomerate is becoming less polarised due to incomers, there is no way that this two club arrangement is going to change. Indeed I'm sure the SFL didn't envisage the progress made by BOTH the neighbouring clubs they elected in 1994 to the extent that they both need the current level of rnourishment from limited local sources. That progress and growth has created an unsustainable and very precarious situation whereby a twitch on the ICT tightrope or the withdrawal of Roy MacGregor could precipitate a collapse which would see much of what has been achieved flushed unceremoniously down Johndo's aquifer.

An excellent illustration, IHE. The tightrope is there as described, and the safety net corresponds to Tullochs who, once you subtract rent paid for the stadium until now, have been club benefactors to the tune of around £3.5M net of that. Had that safety net not been rushed into place in the early noughties, the club would very probably have disappeared into that whirlpool long since.

The shareholders' agreement to the issue of up to around 1 million extra shares was obtained at the EGM at the end of July. It was indicated at that time that a significant number of them were spoken for and the allotment of the 450,000 was recorded by Companies House a few days ago.

It's not really rocket science, and the analogy I used yesterday is still probably the best inasmuch as a tightrope walker survives until there's even a modest disruption - and the effect of that is then catastrophic. Under Charlie Christie in 2006-7, I'm led to believe that there was a very strict, board-imposed wage limit of £650pw. Combined with crowds a bit higher than latterly in the Premiership because this was still a relative novelty, and probably higher TV money as well, the club just about muddled along in the lower half of the table. When you get to the Terry Butcher era, well Terry's assertiveness seems to have managed to wheedle a bit more out of the board for wages, but on the other hand he at least partly justified that by making good signings, reaching the Top Six, and gaining the corresponding performance payout. But by now we are into the realms of having to depend on windfalls like high performance payments, transfer fees etc, and when these aren't quite enough, the Social Club also needs to be sold. Then enter Yogi who flatters to deceive - to a large extent thanks to the team TB put together. But TB's signings begin to move on, so Yogi needs to take in his own, and there are two problems here - most of them were duds and, worse still, even further over the odds seems to have been paid for them. Latterly the Ryan Christie money, for instance, and anything else available, simply disappears into the black hole Yogi has persuaded the Board to extend in order to recruit the said duds. The club is still, however, hanging on in the Premiership, but by now only by paying way over the odds for players way under the required standard. At this point, the whole thing has become an car crash waiting to happen.... and that car crash is the appointment of Richie Foran. Saddled with a bunch of poor players, lacking the managerial skills to address the situation and allowed by the Board to continue in the job, there's only one place Foran and his team are going - out the door and down a league respectively. By now crowds are also declining so what we have is a relegated club which has allowed all its crown jewels to be blown on an expensive, relegated side. Meanwhile income streams are even lower than before - hence a £422K loss. When you have to put round the begging bowl for £450,000 simply to remain solvent, as has just happened, the current situation is more or less inevitable. As for the Faustian bit, everything was thrown into the black hole in exchange for the last few years of life in the Premiership. The tightrope walker has now fallen from the wire, on which he had for some time enjoyed a charmed life in any case. It would be very wrong to assume that ICT's default position is the SPFL Premiership, where it remained for years courtesy of chickens which have now come home to roost.

I'm not sure about that, Caleyboy. When Tulloch got involved first in 2000, there was a debt of around £2.6M, creating an imminent danger of collapse. Now, any debts will be small but earnings are a major issue. I also know that 450,000 new shares were allotted just the other week in exchange for money donated to keep things going post-relegation. I agree that the fabric of the stadium isn't worth a great deal given its limited use potential. And I remain unsure what the term "investment" means in football. I can't think of many situations where it means anything other than "charitable donation to remove debt and/or to allow expenditure to exceed earnings."

One thing I never seem to hear from the anti-Tulloch squad is what the alternative strategy would have been for disposing of £2.6M of probably fatal debt, producing working capital to build a team to gain promotion to the SPL and providing stands to allow SPL football to be played in Inverness? There seems to be an alarming presumption among some football supporters that it's somebody else's responsibility to owe clubs a living when their expenditure runs away ahead of their capacity to earn income.

Net of rent paid, I would place the value of Tulloch's assistance to ICT at a ballpark £3.5 million - and that's before you allow for the gifting back of the stadium fabric and £730,000 of shares. Then you have to add in millions more given as free gifts, most of it in large £50K+ slices from wealthy individuals over the last couple of decades. But of course, Uncle Roy's millions are still source of contempt and ridicule.......

It has been a problem for years - indeed ever since it was installed. But just look at the shape and symmetry of the problem areas and you relly do have to wonder if this is the latest difficulty this particular source of pitch disruption has caused.

Over these 24 years, the club has - probably in two separate phases, 1995-2000 and around 2013-1017 - spent money that it didn't in any realistic sense have in order to pay players more than the club could afford - and more than they were worth in real market terms. Following the first period, it was obliged to accept massive assistance from Tullochs, which I would struggle to call The Devil but which still, reasonably, accepted ownership of the stadium in exchange for warding off the Administrator or the Receiver with big bucks. During the second phase, the Devil was in the detail of the windfalls that the board depended upon to finance - or indeed fail to finance - well over the top payments to a procession of duds brought in by John Hughes and then Richie Foran. The brutal fact is that Inverness Caledonian Thistle has fallen short by something like £6-7 million over the last 20-odd years to generate earnings to finance what it has paid out to function as it has as a football club. Until recently, thanks to Tullochs (I don't expect many green dots for that, but this is the truth) and a few other five and six figure benefactors, the club has lived a charmed life. However Auld Nick has now changed what he breathes out from Chanel Number 5 to Sulphur Dioxide. The age of Reality has now dawned.