DoofersDad

Thanks RiG. Having looked up ICT Battery Storage Ltd at Companies House, I see the Directors of the company are Ross Morrison and David Cameron. It is a company limited by share holding. There is just 1 share allocated which is owned by the football club. But this doesn't explain where the money is coming from. It will not be the club that is paying for all the capital cost of the development. Presumably that is where ILI come in and they clearly will need a return on their investment.

We are being told that if this development goes ahead, it will secure the long term financial stability of the club. Frankly, I haven't a clue how this will generate the amount of money which would achieve that. I get that the land is owned by one of the Directors of the Club (or one of his companies), but can anyone explain how much money this is projected to generate for the club and what exactly it is for? There must be more to it than a bit of rent for site.

I see our CEO has been quoted in the "Courier" as referring to the development as a "Battery Farm". I trust he is aware it is for a Battery Energy Storage Facility and not a Battery Farm with Big Sheds full of hens. That really would be putting all our eggs in one basket.

I've started another topic specifically on the battery project now that the Chairman has posted a statement on the Club's website. What is important in relation to his attendance at the ST meeting last Saturday is that apart from talking about the battery project, he said he was really struggling to see how there was any way the Club could benefit from being located in the free port zone. That being the case, it would seem that the only prospect of the club getting more money in, over and above what the footballing side of things generates and continuing bailing out by the directors, is the battery project.

https://ictfc.com/club-statement-17/ Hers's a statement by the chairman on the recommendation to refuse the planning application. It includes a link to a video he has made with a message to the Councillors. Clearly whether it goes ahead or not will have a significant bearing on the viability of the club.

It's a tick box exercise to pretend we have an SLO. Gordon doesn't remotely perform the recognised functions of the role. With Robbo's departure, presumably the CEO will have even less time to address the concerns of fans. But this gives the club a real opportunity as there is the potential to reallocate some of Robbo's salary to a dedicated SLO. Even if on a part time basis with some volunteer support, there is so much an SLO could do in liaising with the fans and addressing some of the many issues identified by the Supporters Trust's Matchday Experience survey. Not only were a lot of issues identified, but respondents made a lot of very constructive suggestions too. All it requires is a bit of vision and a bit of common sense on behalf of the club. OK. So it's not going to happen.

Was Devine's during or after the match?

Maybe you're both right

He'll be after the Rangers job now that Beale has gone

Report on today's meeting in the Courier https://www.inverness-courier.co.uk/sport/fans-feel-disconnected-with-caley-thistle-as-they-express-327463/

Disappointing to lose that. Good effort and more solid at the back with Ujdur and Boyes looking like they could be a real asset to the club. We actually created quite a lot of chances, but it was in this area that the lack of confidence showed. Shooting was either tame or off target, and at times players took an extra touch and the chance was gone. Having said that, credit must go to Dundee Utd for a lot of good defensive work in closing us down quickly and snuffing out our opportunities. They have only conceded 2 goals in their 6 games and if they continue in that vein, they will win the title at a canter. Good to see both Doran and Samuels looking energised following Dodd's departure. With the right manager in place, I see no reason why the current squad can't get into the promotion play-offs.

This is why the matchday experience survey is so important. It gave a voice to the generally silent majority and gives the lie to the narrative that only a small minority are unhappy. It was open to anyone to complete and over 300 people took the trouble to offer their views. It is important to note that the demographic make up of the respondents was remarkably similar to a major survey the EFL conducted a year or two back, and therefore, it is reasonable to compare our results with the those in the EFL survey where very similar questions were asked. Some will argue that people who perceive a problem are more likely to respond to surveys. That may well be true to some extent, but the point here is that fans of other clubs in a major survey have expressed satisfaction with aspects of the matchday experience whereas a comparable sample of fans from our club are expressing dissatisfaction. The survey therefore provides robust evidence that a significant proportion of the ICT fan base are unhappy about several aspects of the matchday experience. To suggest it is only small minority of "clickbait proponents" is demonstrably untrue.

It's very interesting to read what the CEO said to the Courier. There was no suggestion that Robbo and Charlie are not interested in the post on a permanent basis, it was simply that they wouldn't be considered. Gardiner is quoted as saying "They are 100 per cent interim. They both have very important jobs, so they know that's what they are going to do." It would appear, therefore, that even if one of them wanted the job and was a better candidate than any outsider applying, they would not be considered because they are currently doing a job at the club which is, apparently, more important than being 1st team coach! That really is the most crass statement I've heard for a long time.

If that's the plan, then why not simply announce his appointment to the end of the season? Given they have advertised the post, subsequently appointing Robbo till the end of the season would hardly be a ring endorsement of their faith in him, especially as it would also mean they were unable to recruit anybody better.

I've no idea if the Club have someone in mind, but their statement did include an email address for applications. If you think you could do better than Dodds, the address is footballdept@ictfc. Let's hope they look at that account more than the slo@ictfc one or we will be without a manager for the rest of the season.

In the Club statement announcing Dodds' sacking, the Club stated "We have great plans for the club as we head towards our 30th year." Would the Chairman kindly tell us what these plans are?

I got the impression at the Club's AGM that Gardiner had wanted Dodds gone in the middle of last season, but that the late upturn in form and the cup run saved him. Now the club have sacked him just 5 league games into his new 2 year contract extension! Obviously the results so far have not been good, but to sack a guy just 5 league games after extending his contract is a pretty drastic and expensive change of mind. So just what has happened? It would have been good to be a fly on the wall for the discussions which led to the decision. There are some mitigating factors. Firstly, the later finish to last season with the Cup Final undoubtedly had a knock on effect in terms both of contract uncertainties and in getting players back to match fitness after a much needed end of season break. Secondly, whilst results have been poor, performance wise we are not far off it. Much has been said about our defensive howlers, but yet we have not lost a league match by more than one goal. At the other end, we are averaging more shots and more shots on target per game than our opponents manage. Then on Saturday against Raith, the general performance appears to have improved with there being a consensus that we were the better side. It hardly seems to justify such a radical change of mind, and yet less than 24 hours later, Dodds is shown the door. This must be about more than a few poor early season results. It seems to me that defenders are making mistakes and strikers are not finding the net because they are low on confidence. And they are low on confidence because they are worried about being publicly criticised by the manager. Too often, Dodds has made criticism of players in his statements, and whilst not naming them, it has been crystal clear who he has been referring too. It seems to me that Dodds has lost the dressing room and that will be why he is going. Having said, that, he will not have lost the dressing room just in the first few weeks of this season and we all know of his fallings out with players previously. It just makes it all the more bizarre that the club should award Dodds with a new contract only to sack him 5 leagues games later. Sacking Dodds was the right decision, but the timing of it illustrates how dysfunctional the management within the club has become.

But not a surprise.

I don't speak for the Trust, but what I can tell you is that the Trust exists to represent the wider fan base. Proof of that is the Matchday Experience survey which involved a lot of work to get and report on the views of all fans who could be bothered to complete the survey. It was not restricted to members only. The survey results will be useful to the Trust Board in pointing out to the club what the views of the wider fan base are on the issues raised in the survey. But in terms of the credibility of the Board representing the supporters as a whole is concerned, that can only come from those on the Board having the backing of the supporters. As I have said before, Trust Board members are elected by the Trust Members. If people don't join the Trust, then the Club will say the Trust isn't representative of supporters as a whole and will remain disinclined to engage. Now, I absolutely get that you may think the Trust Board is not doing enough or you don't like what they are doing, but you aren't going to change that by bleating from the sidelines. The Trust Board, unlike the Club Board, is a democratically elected body. If you don't like what the current Board members are doing then you have the power to do something about it by joining the Trust and either voting for someone who has views more aligned to your own, or standing for election yourself and see if your views are supported by the membership. Whatever your views of the current Trust Board may be, the fact remains that the current Board members are keeping the Trust functioning. They are keeping the supporters voting stake in the club alive and maintaining some level of communication with the club. They are also the only supporters of this club who, at the moment, appear to be willing to do that on behalf of others. As for this Forum, it is completely separate from the Trust. It exists for exactly for the reason you suggest and therefore you are both an insider and very welcome on here. You would also be free to give your opinion as a member of the Trust. Indeed, your membership of the Trust would make it more, rather than less likely that the changes you would like to see would be taken up by the Trust. You said in an earlier post that radical change is needed. So, what are you going to do about it? The Trust is the mechanism through which supporters can obtain influence and change within the club, but it will only achieve that if far more supporters join the Trust and shape its future. As long as supporters stay outside of the Trust and moan about the Trust and the Club from the sidelines, then they are part of problem. Change happens when some people do something and when others support them in their efforts.

Today marks the 30th Anniversary of the historic votes which led to the merger and the creation of ICT. The intervening years have brought a great deal of success with the club having won the Scottish Cup, had several years in the premiership, and played in Europe. There have been some hugely memorable days during that period and we can look back with a lot of pride. Against that history it is very sad, 30 years on, to see where the club is now. We are struggling in a lower division, getting beaten by part time sides, haemorrhaging support, and have a Board of Directors and senior management that seem to care little for the supporters and their concerns. It therefore seems like an appropriate time for people to make their views known to the club. The current decline on and off the pitch needs to be turned around, and soon. As STFU says, the Supporters Trust is best placed to represent the fans. Hopefully an open meeting will be the opportunity for people who are concerned about the state of the club to come forward and offer some constructive help to the Trust. The Trust Board is democratically elected by its members and all supporters are welcome to join. The Trust Board is, therefore, what the supporters make it to be. If the supporters want the Trust to be more effective, then the supporters have it in their power to make it so.

The problem with this is that you need a mass walk in first.

One thing the Trust exhibits which the Club does not is a democratically elected Board. If you and other fans are unhappy with the current Trust Board, you and they are free to join the Trust, put yourselves up for election and/or vote for others who would also like to see a change. By voting with your feet, you are, in effect, voting for a continuation of the very thing you are complaining about. The fact is, that the 6 current members of the Trust Board are the only supporters of this Club who currently demonstrate the willingness to take on the responsibility and accountability that being on the Trust Board entails. They have also ensured that the Supporters Trust together with the 10% voting right in the Club on behalf of supporters continues to exist. But the future direction and success of the Trust is not going to be dictated by the current Board members, it will be dictated by the views and the numbers of those fans who join the Trust and express their views through it. If some fans don't want to be part of a collective voice, that's up to them. The Trust Board is also more accessible than the Club. They have a desk in the Sports Bar and members of the Trust Board are present there before most home matches and are available for anybody who wants to have a chat. In addition if you email the Trust, you are likely to get a response – unlike sending an email to the Clubs SLO address. If you feel that a change campaign is the best way forward, then the best way for that to be successful must be for it to be done through the Supporters Trust. If enough people want a change campaign, there will be enough people to make that the strategy of the Trust. As I said above, the Trust is a democratic supporters body and as such, any campaign will be far more successful as part of the Trust strategy than as a separate group working against the wishes of the recognised democratic supporters body. Having a campaign quite separate from the wishes of the Trust would be playing into the hands of certain people in the Club who are quite happy to encourage a divide and rule situation. As supporters, we need to be as united as possible in order to engage constructively with the club in addressing the concerns of supporters. The Matchday survey could be a changing point in the Club's attitude. It was encouraging that in the P&J article, the Club was quoted as saying that the 300 or so fans who completed the survey should be seen as a reasonable cross-section. We need to build on this. If the club is sincere in this view, then they will take the results of the survey more seriously. This is why it is so important for more people to join the Trust so that Trust membership is at a level of at least the number who completed the survey. Clearly, the more members the Trust has, the more representative it becomes and the harder it will be for the club to ignore. The survey therefore represents the best opportunity fans have had for many a year to get the Club to engage constructively in addressing fans' concerns. To be successful, it really is important that Trust membership increases significantly and that a good few more folk show a willingness to get actively involved in supporting the expressed views of the fans. Of course, the club might just decide to ignore the Trust and the fans they represent, but it makes sense to give them every opportunity to engage. If they choose not to, then it may well be that the kind of active protest campaign that Big Cherly advocates would begin to find more favour and could become the Trusts strategy too. Either way success is far more likely if campaigns are the strategy of a recognised supporters body and led by democratically elected fans representatives.

This thread certainly makes for grim reading, but it provides good examples of the attitude the Club has towards the fans which the Supporters Trust survey illustrated in a more structured and representative way. I can understand and respect people voting with their feet, especially when money is tight, but I don't think that will make the Club management change their ways. Less revenue will simply be used as an excuse not to address some of the issues highlighted in the Matchday Experience Survey. What we need is a stronger fans' voice. It is interesting that in the P&J's article on the Survey Report, the Club is quoted as acknowledging that the 300 or so fans who completed the survey should be seen as a reasonable cross section. It follows that the club must acknowledge the shortcomings identified in the survey report are a reflection of the views of the support as a whole and therefore need to be addressed. The P&J also quoted the Club saying "if we could have a strong and relevant supporters group going forward, it would be very helpful". As fans, we need to hold the Club to these statements. If fans can get behind the Supporters Trust then that would seem to be the best way to get a constructive dialogue between the Club and the supporters and to get these issues addressed. If the Trust had the backing of a large proportion of the fan base, then I am sure the club would not get away with cancelling the sponsors' night or failing to follow up on season-ticket renewals, for example. In the longer term, what we need is fans' representation on the Club Board. The Supporters Trust is the obvious channel for that, but it would need the Trust to be significantly stronger than it is now for that to ever happen. The bottom line here is that the stronger the Supporters Trust is, the better the communication with the club will be. The Trust is trying to get the concerns of funds addressed. If fans don't get behind the Trust and join it, it will simply give the Club an excuse not to address the very issues that fans are complaining about.

No Gilmore either.

I am no longer on the Supporters Trust Board and so can't speak on their behalf, but I am the immediate past Chair and therefore can give some informed comment on the interactions between the Trust and the Club, and how it tries to represent the wider fan base. It is true that the Trust could be more active on this forum, but it does take note of issues that are raised here and takes some of these to the Club. However, the problem is that when these issues are brought up, the stock response is that the Club is not going to make changes just because a handful of people on social media are having a moan about something. When the Trust responds that as the representative fans body, and having spoken with others, they believe this to be a wider concern, the club dismisses the claim of the the Trust to be representative due to the level of its membership. This is a major reason why the Trust carried out the Supporters Matchday Survey earlier in the year. This survey asked fans about a wide range of issues associated with the matchday experience and, as a result, the report will provide views of a large and generally representative number of fans. Where the survey reveals a general unhappiness regarding a specific topic it will therefore not be possible to dismiss it as the views of a small minority of folk who like to moan. The survey has involved a lot of work and should mark a significant milestone in developing the collaborative working between the Club and its supporters through the Trust. My understanding is that the Trust Board will be meeting Club representatives next week regarding the survey report and that the report will be issued more widely soon after. Hopefully, the report will pave the way for some detailed interactions on a range of issues and that this will provide opportunities for a wide range of people to get involved. It is true that the Trust is nothing like as representative as it should be or as the Trust Board would like it to be. And it needs to be more representative if the Trust is to effectively engage with the club in exploring the issued raised by the survey. The Trust has regularly reached out to the wider fan base to get more involved, but if people don't want to join or help in the aims of the Trust, the Board can't force them to! Hopefully the survey report will convince many more people of the value of having a strong and representative Supporters Trust to be the link between the fans and the Club. This is why it is so exasperating for Trust Board members to read people criticising the Trust and giving excuses as to why they don't join. Every time someone does that it makes it easier for the Club to say the Trust is not representative. It also makes it harder for the Trust to do the very things people are criticising them for not doing. If you think the Trust should be doing more, join it and help them do it!