DoofersDad

I am sure we could field a team of local lads next season, but I can't see we could field a team of local lads who would be good enough to stay in league one. They would certainly play for the shirt though. Frankly, if that was the scenario being offered by a new regime, I would bite your hand off to have that just now. The club would then have a couple of years to mend relationships with the fans, local businesses and the wider community. That would form a solid foundation for strengthening the team and moving forward in a sustainable and responsible way.

Why would anybody buy a season ticket just now? We have no idea if there will even be a team to watch next season, and the likelihood is that the money would basically go straight into the administrator's pockets as their fee for winding the club up? What the Board and insolvency advisors need to know is that there is a willingness from the fans to buy season tickets and spend money if administration can be avoided with new management at the helm. The Supporters Trust's recent survey demonstrated there is a significant sum available. I, and no doubt many others, will be happy to put more money into the club than the sum I indicated in the survey. Fans are more than willing to dig deep to support our club, but first, it is vital that the club is under new and far more competent management.

Let's make the probably rather rash assumption that we will actually have a team next season. The dreadful way the club is treating our players means there will hardly be any Inverness based players left. That means we will need to recruit more from elsewhere. But that will be a problem because the Board told us that was too expensive due to accommodation costs! But don't worry, folks. I think I know someone who might have a solution

I think Gardiner has had aspirations for ICT to be like The Rangers. So he is currently tying up some loose ends that will put us into liquidation.

Just when you think those in charge of the club couldn't be any more awful and incompetent, lo and behold, they prove us wrong. What a disgusting way to treat a long serving, core member of the team who, despite all the chaos around the club, actually wants to stay here. Let's face it, if there's one player we are going to need next season, it is a good keeper. And Mark is a very good keeper.

Exactly. To my mind it was never an either/or issue. Whilst the club maybe presented it as such, the widely ridiculed Kelty option was presented as a done deal. There was absolutely no argument presented as to why it would save the sums stated or why it would produce a more competitive team. In reality, it was more likely to project us towards administration than staying put would. The value of the scheme to the Board seems to be that administration can now be blamed on the fans for rejecting the latest brilliant plan for keeping the club solvent.

At that point, it was probably reasonable to be optimistic about the future. The big (and possibly, fatal) mistakes were firstly, a lack of attention to detail in the application and contracting processes and secondly, to assume the anticipated funds would materialise and to commit the money before we actually had it. Of course, there is always risk associated with business investment, but the Board were relying on income which was dependent on decisions taken by others over whom they had no say. In such circumstances, it is particularly important to ensure all paperwork is watertight. Clearly, it wasn't. With the financial position of the club as it was and the now apparent unwillingness of the directors to pump more money into the club, they should simply have kept things ticking over till the anticipated windfalls arrived. Instead, they sacked a manager just 6 games after having given him a new contract and replaced him with a big name ex-player with a very poor managerial record. In doing this they had to commit huge sums of money in paying off Dodds and those we went with him, whilst committing even larger sums to pay Fergusson and his team. Those who displayed this incompetence and recklessness need to be the first to dip deep into their pockets to help dig the club out of the mess for which they are responsible.

It gets grimmer by the day. On 29th Feb, the club filed a change of accounting reference date, so that the end of year accounts were to end on 30th May rather than the 31st. I seem to recall that someone (Yngwie?) explained that this was a common accounting device which allowed the due date for the current accounts to be submitted to be extended by a month. It sounds as if that would be done in the event of knowing there was a problem with the accounts. None of the few communications from the Board have made any reference to there being any problem with the accounts nor have they enlightened latterly why the accounts have not been filed at Companies House. In his Wyness Shuffle interview, Morrison said that it would be easy to provide any potential investor with relevant due diligence information. Bennett was saying that Gardiner had been tasked with seeking new investment from local firms. Surely, if anything, he should be tasked with getting the accounts sorted. If Gardiner is the one chasing potential investors, it seems unlikely that anyone is going to test Morrison's claim regarding due diligence. Gardiner would probably have more success going to Celtic Park to recruit for an Orange march than getting local businesses to invest whilst he is still on the payroll. It is beginning to look increasingly unlikely that we will have the pleasure of welcoming the mighty Annan Athletic back to Inverness this season.

This is at the heart of the problem. It is all very well for the club to say we all need to pull together, but what exactly are we supposed to be pulling together on? Given the club's recent record of catastrophic decision making, are we simply expected to dip deeper into our pockets to finance more bad decisions taken without any consultation? In his recent Wyness Shuffle interview, Morrison stated that the 2022/3 cup run windfall of around £800k was used to pay off creditors. He also said that the club currently owe £300k to creditors. In other words, the club effectively has at least £500k less debt than it had at the start of the season. So what's the problem? Well, the problem is that they have made decisions based on money they were assuming would materialise but which hasn't. And it hasn't materialised because they mismanaged the BESS application and signed contracts which were not sufficiently robust. Communication on these issues has been poor and consultation non-existent. In the meantime, cash flow was managed because directors were putting money into the club on a loan basis in anticipation of forthcoming windfalls. Now there is no imminent windfall and the directors don't feel able to put more money into the club. The answer? Fans and new "investors" to put money into the club as part of the pulling togetherness! But hold on a minute! Morrison and Munro have both lodged charges against the club in order to protect their loans. In effect, this means that we, the long suffering fans, are expected to dip into our pockets and fork out money which can then be paid back to the very people who got the club into the mess in the first place! I am more than willing to spend as much on the club in League 1 as I did when we were in the Premiership - and more, but I don't want my money being used to pay back directors' loans. I want my money to help pay the wages of the players and the hard working staff at the stadium. I want my money to help with some of the stadium improvements required to address the issues raised in the Supporters Trust's matchday experience survey. If the club want us to "pull together" then I am more than willing to do so. But first, those who got us into this crisis have to take the lead and accept their accountability. Morrison and Munro should withdraw the charges they hold against the club and all directors who have bankrolled the club with loans should publicly declare that they are writing off those loans. Not only would that demonstrate accountability on their behalf, it would open the door to major investors who will not want to have a significant amount of their money swallowed up by repaying those who are responsible for the mess.

Indeed. But the problem is, that if there are people being chucked oot the door, you need to have some folk willing to come in the door.

What sort of "buyers" are we talking about here? One of the reasons for opposing the Kelty move was to preserve the essence of the club being embedded into the community. People felt passionately about this. What we need to be wary of it someone buying the club as a personal plaything only to dump it a few years down the line. We need to be looking for a happy compromise here. It is certainly encouraging that there seem to be potential investors out there.

Well, the last club book was Ian Broadfoot's brilliant book to celebrate ICT's first 25 years - "Milestones and Memories". Given that everything has gone tits up since then, it could, perhaps be called "Millstones and Mammaries"? (With apologies for any offence this rather non PC suggestion may cause. Sorry, I couldn't resist! )

Keeping the club afloat is exactly what the fans and the Supporters Trust is trying to do. It wasn't a case of administration or Kelty, it was a case of which of the 2 alternatives was less damaging for the club. Whilst the Kelty deal was presented as a way of avoiding administration, the club didn't provide a shred of evidence to demonstrate that it would. Fans presented plenty of reasons why it wouldn't. Kelty was Gardiner's plan and it is he who threw the **** at the fan (and the fans!). The fans are trying to help clean up the mess. The club desperately needs more money and Gardiner has alienated so many of the very people who just might provide it. They are not wanting to pump money into the club if it is simply going to be thrown at the latest ill thought through, harebrained scheme which ends up damaging rather than benefitting the club. The fans and the Supporters Trust are not fighting a battle of who's in what position, they are simply urging the club to make sure the biggest barrier to future investment in the club is removed as soon as possible. Gardiner has never wanted fan engagement. From the beginning, the Board were duped into thinking that with his background at much bigger clubs, Gardiner would have the ideas and experience to make us an established premiership club. They meekly went along with his ideas, including ignoring the Supporters Trust. The Board are culpable here, but the fans are being pragmatic enough not to be calling for the entire Board to go. Moving forward must include having a democratically elected representative from the Supporters Trust on the Board. Had we had a fans' representative on the Board when Gardiner was appointed, we wouldn't be in this mess now.

Gardiner should have been sacked long ago. The Board have created a problem for themselves by trusting Gardiner and allowing him to have far too much control in the running of the club. Gardiner's management style is of the control freak variety. He has never wanted anything done without his say so. There are things which should have been delegated but which he would keep to himself. As a result, I suspect there genuinely are a lot of things which realistically, only he can do. For instance, we are due a club AGM and this had previously been administered by the Company Secretary. We haven't had a Company Secretary since April last year and I would imagine that it has been the CEO who has taken on the Company Secretary roles. There may be nobody else in the building that would know what to do, where to find the relevant files etc. On the other hand, the Board also know there are people who do not trust Gardiner and who will not put a penny into the club until he is finally out of the door. They will be aware that of all the loose ends to be tied up, he is the biggest. I would assume he has at least 3 months notice to work, but if the club is to move forward quickly in a meaningful way, he needs to be away before then. The Board therefore need to identify what "loose ends" there are which Gardiner needs to action and give him a clear timescale to get them sorted. They need to identify who will now carry out his former management roles. They then need to identify what information he has which needs passed to others to allow the club to function, and make sure it is passed to the relevant people. That should not take more than 4 weeks at the most. After that, he should be away on gardening leave for the rest of his notice period. Of course, if Gardiner was even a remotely competent manager, none of this would be necessary because he would have trained his staff properly and kept relevant staff appropriately appraised of issues. This should be routine practice in order that other staff can seamlessly take over the reins in the event of unforeseen absence. There should have been no reason for him to stay in the building beyond the day he resigned.

No company secretary since April last year, Scotty.

Those who were protesting after the Hamilton match wanted Gardiner out. That was before his farcical plan to move training to Kelty hit the fan. Many, and perhaps the majority of fans, won't be buying a season ticket if it goes towards paying his wages. I can see another Supporters Trust survey on this one?

Obviously it is good news that the Kelty move is off. Other than that, it is a pathetic statement. My take is that there will be negotiations going on about a number of separate issues and that there is little more detail they can really say just now. They should, however, have officially apologised and noted Ross Morrison's departure. They should have thanked him for his contribution to the club. They are, after all, collectively responsible for supporting the decisions which have resulted in Morrison's resignation. Whilst the Kelty move may be off, that does not mean there aren't some contractual obligations linked to that absurd deal. Kelty may be demanding payment whilst the club will be arguing that the deal is null and void because Kelty failed inform to Fife Council. There will be negotiations around the failure of the car parking contract. This might well involve our main sponsors, ILI, who the club might perceive to be at fault for not including that contract as an integral part of the Red John sale. The club will not be wanting to lose its main sponsor too. There will be negotiations around the CEO's position. His position is surely not tenable any longer, but he will not give up without trying to squeeze as much out of the club as he can. Other issues need urgent attention, such as ensuring the 2022/3 accounts are submitted to Companies House and ensuring the planning application appeal is submitted. Then there are the discussions with potential investors. Potential investors will be wanting clarity on all of these issues even if they are not all fully resolved. They will certainly be wanting Gardiner out of the door.

Ross Morrison has been speaking recently as though the appeal is in. Maybe he has been assured that it is when the reality is that it isn't! That wouldn't surprise me. Perhaps the Supporters Trust could seek confirmation through the SLO? It would be catastrophic if we missed out on income from this as a result of yet another administrative failure.

It's good from their position certainly, but whatever the outcome, the club gets £250k at least into the coffers. The directors who have bought the Battery Company might have chosen not to put any more money into the club had the club not sold the company. The club might potentially lose out on some of the bigger profit, but at least it has had a significant cash injection at a time when it is most needed.

I think there is a lot more to it than simply allowing a cash injection into the club. If the 3 of them could afford the £250k to buy the Battery company, they could simply have put the money directly into the club instead. That way, the club would still have the battery company and any potential benefits it might subsequently bring. These benefits could be significant if the planning appeal is successful and a buyer can be found to build and operate the storage system. The company could also have been sold to a 3rd party prior to the result of the planning appeal. However, the club is at risk of administration. Taking the Battery company out of the club therefore means that if we do go into administration, the administrators cannot sell off the company at a knock down price in order to raise funds to pay creditors. Should we go into administration and then the planning appeal is successful, any resulting profits would be protected. The proceeds would, of course, now come to the directors and not the club. Morrison stated that if the appeal was successful and a buyer was found, then the club would simply invoice the company for payment. I doubt the directors have any legal obligation to hand over any of the proceeds to the club. They could, theoretically, pocket all the profit and still claim back from the club the money they have loaned. I don't for a moment think that they would do anything as dishonourable as that. What the directors do have every right to do though, is to use the profits to pay back the loans they have made to the club, handing over any remaining balance. They may claim back all or some of the loans, or, depending on their personal circumstances and those surrounding the club, they may simply write off their loans and pass all of any profits directly to the club. So, in summary, I don't think the sale was to give the club a cash injection, it was to protect potential Battery company profits from the administrator. That seems to me to be a sensible move. It does, however, demonstrate that the 3 directors and others at the club must have felt the club was at serious risk of administration even before they could blame the risk on the fans' threatened boycott. It also begs the question of whether the appeal has actually been submitted and, if not, who has the responsibility for submitting it before the deadline.

He has resigned from the Board. I have no idea how that would affect his creditor status.

Thanks. I missed that! So why wait until last night for an emergency Board meeting? Makes the lack of any statement from the club even more inexcusable.

I note from Companies House that Morrison has resigned as a Director as well as Chairman. This has clearly been posted promptly and electronically. That rules out any chance of the accounts having been lost in the post.

The Board must surely understand that the club has no future without the fans and that the fans feel betrayed. They must recognise that the failures which Achfary so eloquently summarises in his latest post, lie with the Board collectively and not just with the Chairman, and that therefore they have to take responsibility for resolving the crisis they created. They must surely understand that there is a need to reach out to the fan base if solutions are to be found. The first step would be to issue some brief communication to let people know that somebody is still in the building. I am sure we all appreciate that to reverse the Kelty deal and to relieve any employee of their duties may involve difficult negotiations and legal advice and that therefore they may be severely limited on what they can say. But there is no good reason to say nothing. Why can they not put a simple holding statement out? This might simply:- Officially confirm that Ross Morrison has stood down as Chairman. Confirm whether Morrison remains on the Board or not. Confirm who is interim Chairman. Clarify the position regarding the overdue 2022/23 accounts. Acknowledge the strong feelings and concern amongst the fan base and that fan engagement will be important moving forward. State that discussions are taking place around the Kelty plan and the positions of certain employees, but that detail clearly has to kept confidential at this stage. Confirm that the Board are committed to resolving issues so that we will be able to field a competitive team at Annan on July 13th. Agree to provide regular updates. Do they not understand that the longer the silence goes on, the angrier and more disillusioned the fans become?

Yes, an interesting read. Nice to hear some common sense from a former Chairman. Someone who would like to see the club become a football club again.