Yngwie

The thing about us this season is that we lose when I expect us to win and win when I expect us to lose. So on that basis I am expecting us to win because I expect us to lose. Or does that mean we will lose because, oh forget it!

20 minutes ago, snorbens_caleyman said:

Even there we see that Uncle Roy is keeping them going to the tune of more than £500K a year.  I suspect that when he pulls out - he's 71 now, so who knows what his plans are - then if there are no similar sugar daddies for either club, then a merger/takeover will follow soon after.

I was wondering how long it would be til someone suggested the M word!

I’d be open to a merger but my terms would be ICT’s name, colours, stadium and history, merging with Roy’s money.

Nah, we’ve definitely had more than our fair of injuries in the last few seasons. 

We’ve signed midfielder Samson Laval on loan. He’s a 5’8”, 19yo Nigerian who Livi signed in the summer but has only played 24 minutes for them.

Bad to worse, unbelievable. 

If you are saying we should live within our means then you are effectively saying we should have gone part time years ago after getting relegated and we would likely have been relegated again by now. Can you confirm that if we had, you’d be applauding the board for their financial prudence?! 

Instead, they tried to get us back to the top flight by maintaining a very competitive (expensive) squad and our impressive youth set up, and got close to promotion a couple of times. In doing so the club racked up huge losses every season and some generous individuals dug deep into their own pockets to keep us going.

They have said for years this business model doesn’t work and needs supplemented by non-football income so they pursued concerts and, very innovatively, the battery farm.

It’s easy to criticise, especially when we are in such a poor position both financially and in the league, and mistakes have been made, but what specifically should have been done different that would make a 7 figure difference to us now?

Should’ve slashed the wage bill, giving up on Premiership aspirations? Go part time, and end up as a League 1 side?

Should’ve shut down the youth set up?

Should not have loaned us their own money to keep us going?

Should not have sought non-football income sources?

Those are the only realistic options I can think of. Rather than criticise all the time I just try putting myself in their position and wonder what in terms of the business model I would have done differently over the years. It’s not easy.

2 hours ago, Charles Bannerman said:

Around 4pm today, which should have been deadline day for the club’s accounts, a notification appeared on Companies House that IT and C’s accounting period had been shortened by a day to May 30th 2023. This apparently entitles a company to an extension of their deadline for publishing accounts by three months, and is apparently an established device for achieving this.

It’s a smart move by the club under the circumstances, but obviously it isn’t at all good that we have these circumstances.

24 minutes ago, caley1 said:

He’s holding on hoping the Battery project goes through and even if it did , Majority of that money will be sucked up pretty quickly lining his pockets . 

Can you back that up with anything?

20 minutes ago, caley1 said:

 SG you’re not worth a minimum wage to this club . Never seen such a hated board director which in itself says it all . 

He’s not a board director. He is just an employee and is answerable to the board.

2 minutes ago, tm4tj said:

Who are the absolute cretins within our support that forced Billy Mckay to post this on X

"Not big on social media, obviously gutted I’ve cost the boys 3 points tonight hold my hands up! 
And listen I’m happy to take abuse or criticism at me no problem had it plenty of times in my career. 
But to shout my son then abuse me to him I don’t think is acceptable.

Wow, just wow.

44 minutes ago, FrontRow said:

We are in a real dog fight with a bunch of loanees who will be leaving in April.

I’m hoping they’ll be here until May when the league season ends!

0-0 FT. Rather disappointing. But when you consider how poor we are at home and this time we had so many players missing, was a draw the best we could hope for? I thought we still had enough quality on the pitch to be able to win. And we might have won if we had converted the penalty. Is that no goals in 8 matches for Billy now?

Start 6-2-2 and if we need goals later on bring the entire bench on and then it’s 2-2-6!

I would say we were denied a pretty clear penalty for handball when it was 0-0, and in saying that I am not saying officials are out to get us nor am I trying to deflect from the team’s deficiencies, I’m just telling it like it is, as are others. Is that allowed?!

47 minutes ago, STFU said:

Do some people really think that we are the only team on the receiving end of inept officiating and that we find ourselves where we are as a result?

Don’t think anybody has said that, have they?

Is this why Dougal wants an affiliation with FC Augsburg? 

Some posters are living in the present not the past!

Today was the day that I finally gave up on us getting to the promotion play-offs.
At the end of November I was confident we could do it. End of January after the win at Raith I was hopeful. That hope has been fading through February, and now I finally accept it’s all about staying up. Offer me 8th place and I’ll take it.

Anyone else still clinging on to hope?

51 minutes ago, DoofersDad said:

A further factor, which I had previously missed, is the Notice of Termination of Ian MacDonald as Company Secretary and which was submitted to Companies House the day before the Registration of Charge documents were submitted.  There has been nothing submitted to say a replacement has been appointed.  Ian joined the Board of Directors way back in 1997 and was on the Board till 2004 when he took on the role of Company Secretary.  Maybe I have missed something, but there appears to have been no statement from the club about him giving up his role after over 25 years service to the club.  Surely, notice of this low key departure being submitted to Companies House on the day before the Registration of Charge documents were submitted is no coincidence.

His actual date of departure as stated on the form was 10 months ago so it wouldn’t be related to the charge. No replacement needed as companies no longer need to have a company secretary.  The club still should have filed the form promptly at the time though. 

Bad result for us, and useless match officials.

How many councillors are there? We know that at least 20 put their names to this new vote, and you have to imagine that they are all unhappy with the initial outcome.

Who was on the Panel, the chairman of our planning applications committee?

1 hour ago, STFU said:

If the question is 'Could the club have been reasonably expected to have done more?', then for me the answer yes.

I was highlighting the fact that there was an option for the club to have the decision makers look over their submission ahead of time.  This would have allowed them to deal with some of the concerns/objections raised in a more timely fashion and might have even avoided the situation that has now arisen.

From my following of what's happened, nobody with the planning dept has objected to anything (it's not their place to do so).  What they have done is highlighted areas where the proposal does not meet planning requirements.

You'll also get no argument from me that the last planning meeting was a shambles.  Having realised that only 5 of the planning committee were eligible to vote the chair should have not allowed it and immediately referred it to full council for a decision.  By allowing it and then asking for it to be referred, especially given how he voted, the chair has opened himself and his peers up to accusations of foul play.

People keep saying that all concerns and objections were met, but that is also not the case.  The loss of protected green land was not satisfactorily addressed, which is why it was still recommended for rejection.  There were also still a number of conditions to be attached to address remaining concerns on other aspects and it's not certain all of these can/will be met.  Even of it is accepted at full council, there's no guarantee the club gets a pay day.  Conveniently they will have created enough of a shitstorm to then blame it on delays and everyone else messing them around.  As I said at the start of this post, they refused an option which could easily have expedited things.

It wouldn’t. The fact that the site is on green land means that the planning department's advice would have been that the project is incapable of meeting their requirements for recommending approval - unless you know of a way to build a battery farm without taking up any space!

I’m pretty sure the club knew all along that this would be the biggest challenge and the only way to overcome it would be to stress the wider benefits to the community and to the environment that would result from it going ahead, which is what they did.

28 minutes ago, STFU said:

At the original meeting it was pointed out that the club had refused to take up the offer of pre-submission advice from the planning dept.

What’s your point? ILE and their experts oversaw the application and have been through this process many times. And what do you think the planning department’s pre-submission advice would have been, given that they are totally against it happening?

The club did very well to overcome the hurdles that were put in front of them and to convince enough voters to get it through a quorate vote.