DoofersDad

This. Whilst we all know Gardiner was the person with the ideas and the recommendations which would have destroyed the club had he stayed, it was the Board which made the decisions. Without the Board meekly agreeing to Gardiner's recommendations, none of them could have been acted upon. The Board operate on the standard system of collective accountability, so that whilst individuals may not agree with every decision the Board makes, they are expected to support all decisions publicly. I think everyone can understand and accept that Boards have to operate on that basis and therefore will accept that not every Director has been supportive of every poor decision the Board has made. Some Directors might be unhappy about several decisions and be very uncomfortable about being associated with those decisions. The question then is, at what point do they stand up and say they can no longer support the decisions the Board is taking and resign? An argument against resigning is that their involvement on the Board has been to successfully argue against certain recommendations and also to have submitted positive ideas which have been taken forward. They might argue that their resignation would result in a lot more bad decisions being made and therefore staying on will help to limit the damage. But we have gone way beyond that now. The Board has made decision after decision that has been hugely damaging to the club and they supported a CEO who has been almost universally disliked and who treated people in a totally unacceptable manner. He should have been dismissed within months of his arrival and the case for his dismissal grew stronger with every month that passed. I simply fail to see why any of the Board (with the possible exception of the more recently appointed Scott Young) can justify remaining on the Board after their complicity in all that has happened in recent years. If any of them think they are fit to be a Director of our football club, I challenge them to come to a public meeting of supporters and to justify their support of all the decisions which have done so much financial and reputational damage to the club. I challenge them to do the same at a shareholders meeting and to put their status as a Director to the vote. If they are not prepared to do that, they should resign forthwith.

A day later and the BBC are picking up on this saying the SPFL are looking into the complaints. The Scottish Professional Football League is looking into complaints about monies owed to Dundee and Ross County by Inverness Caledonian Thistle. The unpaid fees concern the loans of 28-year-old Cammy Kerr and Alex Samuel. Forward Samuel is back with County while defender Kerr left Premiership rivals Dundee to join Queen's Park in the Championship. Both players joined Caley Thistle in January and left at the end of last season when the club was relegated to Scottish League 1. County confirmed to BBC Scotland that their Highland neighbours owe them £20,000 for the Samuel loan. Caley Thistle have been trying to attract a new majority shareholder to avoid administration and last month agreed a deal with Seventy7 Ventures. This story was updated a couple of hours ago, but apparently their well paid journalists have not picked up on the latest speculation.

Well, those who have fallen for his proposals hook, line and sinker must be looking at them with a bit of dubaiity now.

This is precisely why we need those responsible for the recent shameful behaviour and gross incompetence to have absolutely no role in running the club in the future. I don't think the Makwana deal will become a reality and therefore if the club is to avoid slipping into administration there will need to be prompt action from those who genuinely care about the club. People who have not necessarily seen eye to eye in the past need to put their differences aside and work together to save the club. If they can do that, they will need the help of the wider club community to try and restore the trust and goodwill of those the club has so recklessly wronged in the recent past.

What is clear is that we were sh*te. If those were the highlights I dread to think what the rest was like.

Far from it. Morrison said that the change of ownership was to protect the Battery Company from potential administration of the Club. He said that in the event of a successful appeal and subsequent sale to a company to develop and operate the BESS, the club would then invoice the Battery Company for the proceeds (presumably less the sum paid by Morrison, Munro and Cameron to buy the company). If the appeal is successful, the BESS should still provide a major one off capital boost for the club in due course. Hopefully lessons will be learnt and whoever is running the club will not spend the money before it is received - or not, as the case may be.

It sounds like the kind of meeting which should have taken place a few weeks ago, but would be a very positive development if true. The bigger shareholders will be the people who are much better placed that most of us to assess whether the Makwana deal is good for the club or not. They are also the people who will be more familiar with the ins and outs of company law and procedure and will be in a better position to hold the club to account in all of this. Fingers crossed for some positive news coming from this if what Charles has heard is true.

HT. 1-0 FT. 2-1 ICT. Brooks Annan. Goss Crowd 481

I think it pretty certain that the Supporters Trust will have made the views of supporters very clear to Makwana. But let's get real here. If Gardiner stays, there will still be a significant fanbase. It is a small minority of fans who are currently boycotting games and withholding money. Attendances this season are clearly down a fair bit and some of that will be due to fans boycotting, but some will also be down to a drop off of enthusiasm following relegation. The reality is that most fans who want Gardiner gone will still come and support the team. It is of course true, that as long as Gardiner is in post, the club is losing out on a not insignificant sum of money, Makwana has said then when the deal is finalised, he wants to sit down and talk to everyone at the club and look into the whites of their eyes as part of an audit. If he is being thorough, that will include the Board of the Supporters Trust and perhaps reaching out to former staff and local business. If he does that, he will realise (if he doesn't already) that Gardiner is almost universally disliked and distrusted, and has alienated a huge number of people in the wider club community. He will also hear of numerous examples of bad decision making and poor treatment of people. He will learn that whatever positive attributes Gardiner may have do not compensate for the negatives. There is huge potential for development of the club within its staff, fanbase, local businesses and the wider community. That potential will not be realised if the club is fronted by a CEO who nobody trusts or wants to engage with. Gardiner is a millstone round the neck of the club. Makwana needs to realise that the club will not prosper whilst Gardiner remains at the club

Absolutely. Not rushing into anything, but instead making a careful assessment of these things and of the staff employed is good management if you are simply moving into a new management job. If that assessment shows that the enterprise is a lost cause, then you are free to look for a job elsewhere. It is different if you come to the enterprise as a result of making a major investment in order to become the owner - if the enterprise is a lost cause, then you lose your money. Makwana should not be investing his (or somebody else's) money in the club unless he has already done as thorough an assessment as possible of why the club is in financial crisis and of the potential for future improvement. As a general rule, you will not want to risk your investment by retaining for a day longer than necessary, those responsible for the enterprise being in financial crisis in the first place.

I'd prefer administration to being asset stripped. I'm all for giving folk the benefit of the doubt, but giving Makwana a controlling interest in the club feels a bit like giving your house keys to a stranger who knocks on your door and offers to look after your house whilst you are away on holiday.

It could be argued that he was lucky Covid reduced the sale of tickets. There was a total lack of communication between those running the concerts and those delivering them. It was only after tickets were sold that the Concert Company and the Club realised the size of the stage that would be used. As a result, people who were sat in the 2 most westerly sections in both the North and South stands had to be allocated new seats because otherwise they would have seen nothing of the performers. I believe folk affected were only informed of this when they arrived at the stadium. As it was, folk in the middle of the 2 stands only got a partial view of the stage and numerous people wrote to complain and seek a refund because of the restricted view. (They got no reply). In addition, such was the height of the stage that those in premium seats at the front also had a very restricted view. Many moved back to cheaper seats to get a better view. What would have happened had the concerts been sold out doesn't bear thinking about.

People are sceptical because nobody, least of all Makwana himself, have come up with any information which suggests he is remotely capable of funding this deal or running a football club. He seems to be basically a one man band. The latest accounts filed with Companies House record Seventy7 Ventures as having an average of just 1 employee - presumably himself. His longer established business of Enterprise Lab Ltd is listed as having 2 employees with him, as the sole director presumably being one of them. So, he probably has someone who gives a bit of admin support and that is his business empire! His businesses all seem to be related to business consultancy, a subject on which he appears to have minimal experience or qualification to provide advice on. On an admittedly brief Google search, I could find no record of him having been in a senior management role in a company. His consultancy work seemed to focus on making videos or participating in conferences in ofter obscure places such as Albania. It would appear that having made a presentation at a conference, he then claims to have provided consultancy services to all the companies that had a member of staff attend. I don't doubt that he has a fair bit of knowledge around business management theory and, in particular, related to change management, but it comes across as more of a hobby than something he has a record of successful delivery in. Has he actually worked with companies on detailed projects of change management and documented how he produced positive change? If he has, I didn't find any evidence of it. If anybody has found any evidence that there is any substance behind the change management buzzwords, please share.

That's a very helpful post, but we don't know that the larger shareholders are just walking on by. If I had a sizeable shareholding I don't think I would be too keen to see my voting stake effectively wiped out by the club engineering control of the club through a majority shareholding for someone who has no connection with Inverness and who nobody has heard of before. Significant shareholders may well have been privately challenging what has been going on but are not wanting to do so in the glare of the press. Remember too that the club had previously said that there were a number of prospective investors. This was why they gave Makwana a deadline to provide more details about his offer. It wouldn't surprise me at all if there was some significant activity behind the scenes trying to secure a more local and believable solution to the club's current financial plight. As for us small shareholders who know next to nothing about company law and do not have significant funds at our disposal, there is precious little we can do other than express our concerns and hope for the best.

Look on the bright side - you've only got 8 people ahead of you.

Maybe they were delivered to Kelty?

The club Board and CEO will have had access to far more detail than has been released publicly. One would assume they would not have agreed a deal unless there was clear evidence that everything stacked up. They would have to utterly incompetent to to hand majority control of the club to some unknown individual unless they had this evidence. Ah! I see the problem!

HT. 0-0 FT. 1-0 ICT. Brooks Opp. Gray Crowd. 1476

More from the Courier interview, One of the big questions that people have asked is how the deal will benefit the club: What will the new investors bring to the table? The answer on the face of it is a hugely ambitious plan to redevelop the land around Caledonian Stadium. Taking as a cue the Tottenham Hotspur Stadium - among others - the ground and the area around it will be brought under total club control for the first time, allowing for a major redevelopment that could impact more than just the club. Looking at the economic context of the green freeport as well as burgeoning tourism in the region, Seven7 Ventures’ Ketan Makwana wants to create “a hotbed for events, activities, entertainment and leisure”. That will be “not just for the people of Inverness to enjoy but also for people who come and visit and give people a reason to come and visit Inverness” so as to “bring people into the environment and let people fall in love with football”. Attractive as that ambition is, one thing lays behind it according to Mr Makwana: “The club, as I have said, is paramount - it is the first thing. “But the irony of this is that the club is actually situated in the centre of land that sits around it and for the last 18 years that land has been separated from the club. “Well, we are about to make history because we are going to put that land back under the club’s ownership and that is the first line of rehabilitation to stabilisation and what goes on that land will have a financial impact and reward to the club that can be reinvested back in. “The other side is our background is in entertainment, leisure and sport. We have a phenomenal amount of expertise in building these types of eco-systems. “So if you look at a lot of the football clubs in the UK right now some of the bigger clubs are now transitioning to have leisure and entertainment attached to sports - it is becoming a common theme. “The reason they are doing that is because it creates a multi-purpose use of the space which also allows for tourism: sports tourism and leisure tourism. “So what we are trying to do is build the area around the stadium to become a hotbed for events, activities, entertainment and leisure, not just for the people of Inverness to enjoy but also for people who come and visit and give people a reason to come and visit Inverness. “Bring people into the environment and let people fall in love with football - that is the way we want to build this, it allows us to produce multiple revenue streams that then allows us to reinvest that into the club, reinvigorate it and be able to put the right amount of money into the right place. “Furthermore, it future proofs the club so if one line of income happens to fall or fail you have still got another three or four, which allows the businesses to continue while we remedy the one that has failed.” It sounds great on the surface, but this rather attractive vision begs so many questions. There is nothing that anyone has found out about Makwana and his companies that suggests he is remotely capable of financing and delivering on such a vision. What land is he talking about? How can he be sure he can acquire the surrounding land? Exactly what developments is he planning? How do his plans fit in with the requirements of the green freeport zone if, as he implies, some of the development would be on freeport zone land around the stadium? And where is the money coming from? This vision will cost vastly more than any assets we know of which he may have liquidated. He may, of course, be acting as a front man for someone who wishes to remain anonymous at this point. It could also be so much BS. I don't think there is much any of us can do just now but wait and watch with our fingers crossed.

It is interesting that Makwana said: “I have got a very good relationship with the internal team at Inverness, we have formed almost a unity of trust and transparency". He needs to appraise himself of their track record and remember that it is their incompetence that has got the club into the mess that it is currently in.

And me. We need more people signing up to stop Robert winning it again. Scot Gardiner has absolutely no input into the Prediction League so there is no need to boycott it!

I guess that if the club went into administration, that would also represent a capital loss. But in any case, I don't imagine any shareholder in the club expects to ever get any money back on the shares, so I don't see why they would give shares away to an unknown outside investor. If they were going to give their shares away to create a capital loss, why not just give them to someone associated with the club who clearly has the best interest of the club at heart. To save the club seems a more plausible reason. However, if that was the reason, then surely any significant shareholder with a long term involvement and attachment to the club would need to have been given cast iron assurances that the plans for the club guaranteed the longer term security of the club. At the moment, we have heard nothing that gives us any confidence that is the case. There is, of course, a 3rd possible reason. Rather than having "given away" their shares, they could have "given up" their shares in exchange for something else. In other words. they could have sold out for profit or for some stake in an associated development. This, of course, is purely speculation. We just don't know what is going on. What we do know is that this is all extremely worrying.

It's all part of the exciting new innovative model for running a football club. It's called Fan Free Soccer - or FFS for short.

On the pitch we would be no worse off if Dodds were still here but, off the pitch we would be in a better position (or less bad might be more accurate). Dodds was paid off and Ferguson was appointed on the basis of loans. The club assumed they were going to receive money which never materialised.

7 of those 13 companies were dissolved. 4 of those 7 companies never had any accounts submitted prior to them being dissolved. Makwana resigned from one company in October 22 which remains technically active but appears to be simply existing. Makwana is involved in 5 active companies as follows:- Seventy7 Ventures Ltd. This deals in "management consultancy activities other than financial management". Makwani is the sole director and only employee. Latest accounts show net liabilities of £15,898. On 28th June this year, a charge was filed against the company by a Jersey based company. If Seventy7 Ventures cannot repay the unspecified loan, the Jersey firm has the claim on all aspects of an unspecified project. I can't see anything other than ICT being "the project". Cryptolytx Ltd. This is involved in "other publishing activities" and "new agency activities". He is the sole director and there are no employees. Net liabilities are £19,935. ! am for change C.I.C. (whatever that means). The nature of the business is described as "other social work activities without accommodation not elsewhere classified". There are 2 other directors. It was founded in July 2022. No accounts have been submitted and they are overdue. A notice was published just 5 days ago that "unless cause is shown to the contrary, the company will be struck off the register and dissolved not less than 2 months after the date shown." ELI APP Ltd. Involved in "Other information technology service activities", Makwana is the sole director and only employee. Net liabilities are £86,945. An active proposal to strike off is currently suspended due to an objection. Enterprise Lab Ltd. This company apparently provides "educational support services". Makwana is the sole director and one of 2 employees. The company has net liabilities of £50,634. There is absolutely nothing in all of this that would give me the confidence to give Makwana £10 towards running an ice cream van, let alone taking control of our football club. There are red flags everywhere. It would be good if the club would explain to its shareholders, season ticket holders and supporters in general, what it is about Mr Makwana that gives them the confidence that he can both finance a majority stake holding in the club and then finance and manage the long term development of the club.