STFU

Brechin will be delighted with that draw.

1 hour ago, Yngwie said:

I was surprised to see mention of cost control issues when it seemed apparent that lack of ticket sales was the root cause of the concert company’s financial problems?

Given the level of losses, they'd have needed almost twice as many ticket sales to just break even.  As the stadium would not have held those numbers, then it could be argued that the root cause was the costs.  Low ticket sales just compounded the issue.

1 hour ago, RiG said:

"...lack of controls by the production company..."

Forgive my ignorance here but is ICTCC Ltd the production company?

If it is then that's lamentable management of the finances for these shows and if it isn't it doesn't sound like they were keeping a particularly close watch on what was going on / didn't have appropriate "safeguards" in place to limit any financial issues becoming their concern when they should really have been borne by the production company.

Another fine mess...

They 100% were the production company.  There would be no need for them to exist otherwise.

I was quite excited by the opening 10 mins or so of the game when we had a handful of decent attacking opportunities, but then the bottom fell out of everything.  Samuels started using his pace to run into walls and I'd said to the couple sitting next to me that he was going to get himself injured moments before he went down the first time.

By mid way through the first half it was obvious something was wrong, not just with the tactics, but with the team.  They were niggling at each other, uncommitted in the challenge and generally looked like they would rather be sunning themselves at the beach than playing football.

Even more frustrating was that Morton were awful.  I lost count of the number of times they passed directly to one of our players or played a ball into space where they didn't have anyone making a move, but we did nothing to capitalise on that.

Dodds plays the cheery chappy card a lot, but sometimes players need a reality rocket.  The whole pamper and cuddle players and you'll get the best out of them doesn't wash with me, and the expectation that fans shouldn't show their discontent is all part of how soft society is getting on everything.  When nobody is making themselves accountable, then discipline and hard work go out the window.  FWiW, I think this is a culture that is feeding down from the very top at ICTFC.

Strap in, because the club have boxed themselves in on all sides and it's going to be a long hard season on and off the park.

It's all very confusing because it's the same people representing the concert company as are representing the club.

The ICT Concert Company ARE the production company and what they are saying is that the Directors didn't put enough controls in place to stop those running things going over budget (the same directors who help control the club budget!).  As is my understanding, those running things being Scot Gardiner, the same Scot Gardiner who is CEO of ICTFC, and his sidekick John Brown.  Yes, "that" John Brown, and even he was using a club email address.

Feels like Keith Haggart might be the person getting thrown to the wolves here whilst the ICTFC Chairman and Concert Company Director, Ross Morrison remains in hiding and Scot Gardiner runs around kicking up as much ****, dust and confusion as he can so that people can't really see what's going on to cover his ass.

They can spin all the "separate company" BS they like, but as far as those owed money will be concerned, they are one and the same.

We're only seeing the tip of this and it could turn out to be the biggest shitfest the club has ever been subjected to.

Draws are effectively worthless to anyone other than managers who rely on them to hold onto their jobs when not clocking up wins and they choose to highlight that they only have a small number of losses.

I take it we're not shouting for this thread to be removed or hidden any more?

20 minutes ago, Hearach said:

WE SAID BUS FOR PARTICK LEAVING STADIUM AT 3PM

Thank you 

Can you shout a bit louder as I don't think they heard you at the back!

A bit of a risk for any club given that he has multiple medical conditions.

The squad may have been depleted, but I don't think anyone who started on Saturday deserves to lose their spot to those who might be coming back from injury.  Aside from the fact they all played well, our injury list is very worrying for so early in the season and it'd be best not to risk rushing players back onto the park when not necessary.

We created a lot of good quality chances at the weekend and it could have been more than 4.  Even though we were under a bit of pressure at the start of the second half we limited Cove's chances and the only proper threat other than their goal came from one of our own players 

Take the Inverness from Inverness Thistle FC and combine it with the Caledonian from Caledonian FC.

Apparently the club's constitution still says that no more than the 25% of the main playing colours should be red & black and it's about time the club were forced to stick to their own rules!

*this is not a serious post*

18 hours ago, Robert said:

I joined the Trust last year but am not on the Board, so other than bolstering the membership I’ve not had the opportunity to make a positive contribution, largely due to other commitments.

However, and just a thought, with your clear passion for the club, if you are going to Saturday’s game, why not go along to the Caley Club or the Sports Bar before the game and discuss your thoughts and concerns with Board members.

Why not join up and look to join the Board at the next opportunity, allowing you to influence the direction of the Trust and the relationship with the club?

Work commitments mean that I am usually one of the last in to the ground on a matchday so, even if I were inclined towards attending, it wouldn't be an option.*  I'm quite happy discussing my thoughts and concerns on this open forum.

I've no interest in joining boards or committees, but I am happy to support any events or initiatives if they appeal to me and/or provide added value for supporters.  If only we had some idea as to what these were?!

*FWiW, I stopped spending money in the Caley Club when it was sold into an ex Directors hands and the club stopped getting any benefit from the income it produces.

15 hours ago, Fraz said:

I've no idea about STFU or anyone else and everyone is entitled to their opinions regarding the club or The Trust but I do agree it's very easy to go online be it here, P&B, Twitter, Facebook etc and complain. It's much more difficult to give up some time and come up with constructive and realistic solutions to the issues.

The Club don't seem to want to make it easy either much of the time as they appear to have a select group of folk they listen to. They shouldn't be picking and choosing whose views are worthy and whose aren't. Hopefully that's changing. 

For the record I am a born and bred Invernessian

I keep seeing this idea that people should join the board to bring forward their ideas and solutions.  I'm guessing that's why the current board members joined.  Where are their constructive ideas and realistic solutions?  Put them out there and at least give the fans something to get behind...or not!  Right now it feels like I'm being asked to buy cinema tickets where we don't know what the movie is.  We'll try and decide what the movie is after we get 1200 people to turn up, but if they don't show up then there's no movie and no refund.

I agree with your point about the club choosing who they want to listen too, and it's generally people who tell them what they want to hear.  I'm not holding my breath on that changing any time soon.

9 hours ago, highlandexile said:

At the end of the day with around a 12% shareholding the trust should have a much stronger voice within the club.

The only one concern that I do have is that the current football club directors and CEO have a better understanding of what a trust can do and how it can benefit the football club and not expect the trust to be a cash cow for the football clubs running costs.

You are correct, the trust should have a much stronger voice within the club, unfortunately the trust fail to recognise that and think they need members to realise it.  Having a representative voice and having a strong voice are not the same thing.  Maybe if they used the latter to build the former then they might get on a bit better.  Or they can keep repeating what the trust has always done and getting where the trust has always got....nowhere.

I too share your concerns that the club only view the trust as a cash cow.  Coincidence that after huge losses from the concerts that they suddenly want a strong, active supporters trust?

5 hours ago, DoofersDad said:

Many thanks to those of you who have responded positively to the Club's recent statement and have joined the Trust.  It is a positive start for the rejuvenated Trust and a growing membership will increasingly help the Trust Board to make the fans' voice heard.  The Trust Board met last night and we will be putting out a newsletter to members old and new sometime next week to update them on progress following the events of a very busy and important weak for the Trust.

For those who remain sceptical about the Club's support for the Trust, the need for a major increase in Trust membership and the reasons why they should join, I would make the following points:-

• The club is supporting the Trust by putting the statement out and saying publicly that an active Trust is good for the club.  Issuing such a statement is in sharp contrast to pulling the plug on the Fans Focus Group without explanation and is a reflection of work gone on behind the scenes.  The statement is a recognition from the Club Board both that working with the Trust will be useful to the club and that the current Trust Board consists of people the Club can work constructively with.
• Short, medium and long term goals are detailed on the Trust's website and they are what we are asking the supporters to buy into.  
• The detail of what projects the Trust will get involved with in the future will be influenced by what the Club wants to do and what our members want the club to do. It is not an excuse to say we need more members in order to be more representative and to do the work.  It is a harsh reality.  Why should the Club choose to engage with a group who might be seen as an unrepresentative clique pushing their own personal agenda?  It is absolutely vital that the Trust Board is seen to be as representative as possible and accountable to the members who voted for them.  
• It is also vital that more members get actively involved because the level of input required to make meaningful progress on our goals and to successfully engage in joint projects with the club is far more than the small number of current volunteers can possibly achieve. 

The open meeting at the Caley Club at 12.00 this coming Saturday is an opportunity to meet the Trust Board members and to raise issues that may be of concern to you.  There is also the opportunity to come and raise issues with us and to discuss how you can get involved at the Trust's desk in the Sports Bar prior to home games.  Together we can make the fans' voice heard.  You can join us on this journey here.

See my point above about the strong voice vs representative voice.  Pandering to the clubs view that they are both the same thing and you can't be at the table unless you have a representative voice is a crock of smelly stuff.

I see from the website that a long term goal is a fans rep on the club board.  Given the information provided by CaleyD, you could have that by the end of this year.  Why not pursue it now?  It is absolutely an excuse to say that you can't reach this goal without more members.  Can we stop this mindset that a place on the board is the clubs gift to give?  It's not, and it's not even within their power to stop it happening.

The club board are the biggest clique of them all.  Not a single one of them voted in and they are trying to dictate to a sizeable voting rights/shareholder who they will allow into the boys club?

As, like the club, you seem to only be interested in speaking to/thanking people for positive contributions which fit with your thinking, I shall make this my last post on the matter.

Other than a generic, cliché riddled statement (which commits them to nothing) what are the club actually doing to support the trust's efforts to increase member numbers?

There's talk of getting involved in projects and improving the matchday experience that we've been hearing since the club came into being, but what does that actually involve?

It's easy to do nothing and keep kicking it down the road on the back of the excuse that there's not enough members to give a representative view on what should be done, or to support what you want to do....but I for one haven't got a clue what you are actually asking fans to back.

Give us something with some substance that we can buy into.

You may not have as many members as you like, but there's nothing to stop you polling non members.  If the club wanted to support you then they could actively work with you on doing that.

Aside from coming up with more ways to extract the fans hard earned cash to funnel it in to the club to pay for the basics that should be covered by our matchday/season ticket, what can we expect?

On 8/3/2022 at 2:05 PM, CaleyD said:

This is not intended as an opinion on what the trust should or should not do.  I post this purely for information and because Peter has stated that he stands willing to be corrected.

This snippet is from the clubs articles of association.

As at the last return, there are 4,902,379 ordinary shares issued.

Supporters Trust have 13,658 shares, of which 108 have enhanced rights....leaving 13,550 "ordinary" rights.

The enhanced shares are, in todays terms, equal to 490,237 shares....and we then add the 13,550....total 503,787

As per the company articles 900,003 of the ordinary shares carry no voting right, so issued shares with voting powers total 4,002,376 and this gives the trust a voting right of approx 12.6% in real terms

This is the second largest single entity voting right which exists within the club right now and far surpasses the total voting right of all current directors combined.  The largest shareholding/voting right sits with the ICT Trust (a different entity to the supporters trust).

The company articles state no need for club directors to stand down and/or be reelected by rotation.  They have the power to appoint new directors and are, at present, entirely self appointed with no elected members on the board.

A shareholder resolution can be raised by giving sufficient notice ahead of any general meeting for the election of a board member.  The Supporters Trust could do that now if they so desired.

The current board do not hold anything like sufficient shares between them to stop that resolution and would need support from others to do so...if they so wished.

Thank you for clearing that up.

Maybe you should rejoin the supporters trust board so they have someone who understands these things to keep them right?

Also, I am not from Inverness, or Scotland, or even the UK 

Flip it on it's head.  Maybe if the trust used it's voting right to secure a representative on the board, then such a statement of intent might encourage the fans to back the organisation.

If I'm understanding you, then shareholding/voting right plays no part in who is on the club board and it's by invitation only?  That doesn't seem right!  Who is in control of these invites and what gives them that control?  What guarantee do the trust have that they will get what they desire if they have a larger membership if there is no mechanism other than invitation?

I notice that my shareholding question was swerved.

Are you able to provide a list of who the largest shareholders are and where the supporters trust sit in that list?

Can you explain why club board members (and groups) with lower (some have none) shareholdings have a voice, but the supporters trust does not?

Thank you.

We thought about it, but it equated to about £33 for a curry and a pint and most of our group weren't willing to pay that.

4 hours ago, tm4tj said:

Could the camera operator be any more zoomed out?

Have said it already this season, but if we're serious about challenging for the league then we need to be the team dictating the play and not allowing the opposition to dictate.  Especially at home.

Hoping Belladrum was the reason we had a poor sub 2000 crowd for our first league match of the season.

We'll all know in time .

The concert company had the clubs name on it, was backed by club directors and fronted by the club CEO.  It used club resources for the planning, marketing and promotion of the concerts, sold tickets via the clubs ticketing system and had our commercial & sporting directors running around the city selling tickets and hospitality in the clubs name.  Nothing in any of the promotion gave mention that the football club was a separate, sole beneficiary.  It wouldn't have been seen as a requirement because everything was done to create the perception that people were dealing with the club.  The only organisation ever mentioned as separate beneficiaries on posters etc were the Highland Hospice as the charity partner.

You can't set up an external company to run up debts by taking on the burden of costs while another benefits from the income.  If the decision is taken to liquidate the concert company without settling debts then the club are so intrinsically linked that they could rightly be pursued for it, IMO.

1 minute ago, DWH said:

I'll stick my neck out and wager STFU is talking one load of horse manure.................

I'll take that wager.

Just now, caleyboy said:

If a new company was set up for "concerts" it's unlikely to show on football club accounts

New companies also have to publish accounts, so losses will show there.