Stadium Naming Rights

[Kingsmills]

As we all know the board voted four years ago to change the name of the stadium from the Caledonian Stadium to the Tulloch Caledonian Stadium a name very quickly and widely adopted by local and national media affording the Tulloch Group invaluable publicity.

In my opinion that gesture was merited given the contribution that particular construction group had made to the remarkable construction of the North and South Stands allowing SPL football to come to Inverness.

Surely, however, in a strictly commercial sense they have had their money's worth of adverising over the last four years.

The stadium name has an ongoing commercial value even in the current economic climate and the club could certainly do with maximising all sources of revenue.

Is it not now time for the rights to be either renegotiated with Tulloch or offered to any other interested party ?

[CaleyD]

As they've owned the Stadium since 2002 I'm guessing there's no "negotiation" to be had and they can call it what the like.

[IMMORTAL HOWDEN ENDER]

Feck me Ironside - I have changed my mind about getting you to defend me - How long does it take to smell the feckin coffee in rural Aberdeenshire. :thumb04: :018:

[reefinweedallday]

Has to be said this has been a very astute bit of business by Mr Sutherland,getting the stadium and the land for next to **** all

[Kingsmills]

Sorry IHE I'm even slower today than normal. Maybe smelling and then even drinking the coffee will help the sobering up process !

[CaleyMad]

yee,

main stand - tulloch

north stand - ***

south stand - ***

west stand (lol, whats the point of it. No one goes in it) - ***

get advertising going on for the ***, it will boost the clubs financial figures, and if someone quotes me saying tulloch owns the whole staduim then why not name the stands? famous chairmans that have recently passed away. Jock McDonald (i think) should get the main stand or north stand

[Alex MacLeod]

Is the North stand not already named the Kevin Bissett stand?

[Guest birdog]

I think it's just the family section which is named the "Kevin Bisset Enclosure" I amprobably wrong though.

[Scotty]

I don't have a problem with the Tulloch name being on the stadium as without his or his company's intervention at various points in our history we would be toast ! I do however tend to agree that naming rights should be for a timed period and if he wants it to remain as the TCS that it should form part of an ongoing sponsorship deal.

Its kind of strange or interesting to see how DFS has turned from a saviour into this "Big Bad Wolf" character to many fans over the last year or two .... Maybe I am naive, too trusting, or overly optimistic, but I have always thought that his decisions relating to ICT have - for the most part - been quite symbiotic and benefitted both parties rather than one or the other.

There is no question in my mind that he is extremely astute but I just cannot make that leap to the opinion that he is working against ICT for some reason. I think he has made some errors of judgement in the last year - {allegedly} not being able to work with AS for one, calling out DJS and the supporters trust for another, and persevering with Brewster when everyone else could see it was not working just to cap it all off but the good he has done for the club (a lot of which has been unseen and unpublicised over the years) still trumps the bad as far as I am concerned.

Tulloch have certainly gained things over the years for their cash infusions. They pretty much have a controlling interest in the club, they have - one way or another - what amounts to ownership of the stadium lease, they have had a lot of good publicity based on the stadium name, and not least the kudos and potential business boost that comes from the remarkable achievement of building the two stands in such a short time.

the club have gained too ... Without DFS, our main creditor - the bank - may have foreclosed on us years ago (he was the main reason they let the debt continue for a while), he put a policy of fiscal responsibility in place that tied in with the "road to premier league" football and achieved both, he pumped money in when we needed it, and he mobilised his company's resources to bring SPL football to Inverness by early 2005.

In short - it was a win/win for everyone at the time and my only fear back then was knowledge of what the local plan held for the Longman Bay area and how ICT would fit into this.

If and when the land surrounding the stadium rockets in value because the "leisure village" that has been touted in the local plans for a few years comes to fruition, Tulloch will certainly be poised to make a killing, but that could also benefit the club hugely too. The area would open up to business, to tourism, to activity of all sorts on a daily rather than fortnightly basis and the stadium would be at the hub of that. If the club develop the stadium area sensibly by building services and amenities that can be used not only by fans on matchdays, but by the leisure village customers on other days, we could be poised to share in the wealth that any development might bring. I would far rather Tulloch were in there helping to shape any new development as they have a history with ICT ... could you see any other builder doing that when one of their main competitors has had a long history with the club ? I don't think so.

Ultimately, I still believe the ICT/Tulloch/DFS relationship to be good for the club but as I only have the interests of one of those three at heart, then I will continue to watch with interest. I will support the other two when I believe they are working with the club and voice my concerns if and when I believe they are not.

[Scotty]

Is the North stand not already named the Kevin Bissett stand?

I think it's just the family section which is named the "Kevin Bisset Enclosure" I amprobably wrong though.

I don't say this very often, but I believe Birdog is right

Personally, I believe the stadium should be subject to naming rights but the stands themselves should be named in honour of people associated with the success of the club such as Jock MacDonald, Norman Miller etc.

[Glen Mhor]

Aye, you're right about Norman Miller Scotty - all too soon forgotten but a truly major figure in the merger. We owe him a lot.

Incidentally, where's the Thistle gone in the stadium name ? I was always a Caley fan but they too deserve recognition.

[Alex MacLeod]

Aye, you're right about Norman Miller Scotty - all too soon forgotten but a truly major figure in the merger. We owe him a lot.

Incidentally, where's the Thistle gone in the stadium name ? I was always a Caley fan but they too deserve recognition.

There was never a thistle in the name. I dont even think calling it Caledonian Stadium had anything to do with that club but more with Caledon that ancient name for these lands and the fact we sit pretty much at that end of the Caledonian Canal.

I wholeheartedly support all Scotty say's with reference to David Sutherland. Without him this club would not exist. Nor do I have issue with the Tulloch name but do agree that there could be money to be made by re-naming. Now if we could just get someone to build a hotel on the west of the stadium, incorporating a stand.

I believe birdog to be right regards the Kevin Bissett enclosure which leaves the club with the opportunity to name both North and South Stands, the Jock MacDonald Stand and the Norman Miller Stand. Think I'll put a question to that effect to boardroom banter.

[Charles Bannerman]

Aye, you're right about Norman Miller Scotty - all too soon forgotten but a truly major figure in the merger. We owe him a lot.

Incidentally, where's the Thistle gone in the stadium name ? I was always a Caley fan but they too deserve recognition.

There was never a thistle in the name. I dont even think calling it Caledonian Stadium had anything to do with that club but more with Caledon that ancient name for these lands and the fact we sit pretty much at that end of the Caledonian Canal.

The title "Caledonian Stadium" is a legacy of the torrid time the merger went through late 1993 and early 1994 when it came within a hairsbreadth of extinction and with it Inverness's prospects of Scottish League football. There were protracted negotiations, which also involved INE and on which the future of the club depended, and these came up with the vital agreement that the club would be called Caledonian Thistle and the stadium would be called the Caledonian Stadium. There was never any "Thistle" part of the stadium name but the deal as a whole was designed to reflect the fact that Caley were the bigger partners.

There were eventually other features as well such as the notorious inaugural "predominantly blue" strip but what finally came out in the wash, especially after the black and red was added to the strip in 1995, probably reflected quite fairly the unequal nature of the merger. I often think the Jaggies got a bit of a bonus out of it though since "their" bit of the stadium was named the Kingsmills Suite. As it's turned out this is one of the most heavily used and therefore best known parts of the Caledonian Stadium.

Edited March 17, 2009 by Charles Bannerman

[MissICT]

They should name the North Stand cause all the other ground have names for their stands!

[Renegade]

Correct me if I'm wrong but was the ground not originally called or going to be called "Longman Stadium"?

[Charles Bannerman]

Correct me if I'm wrong but was the ground not originally called or going to be called "Longman Stadium"?

That was the original request from Inverness District Council when they granted the 99 year lease of the site but it was only a request and the term "Caledonian Stadium" was needed instead as a means of appeasing the Caley side at a time when the whole merger plan looked likely to hit the buffers.

[PullMyFinger]

I often think the Jaggies got a bit of a bonus out of it though since "their" bit of the stadium was named the Kingsmills Suite. As it's turned out this is one of the most heavily used and therefore best known parts of the Caledonian Stadium.

Is that the fat cats?

[Charles Bannerman]

I often think the Jaggies got a bit of a bonus out of it though since "their" bit of the stadium was named the Kingsmills Suite. As it's turned out this is one of the most heavily used and therefore best known parts of the Caledonian Stadium.

Is that the fat cats?

You mean the people who subsidise the price of your ticket?

Edited March 18, 2009 by Charles Bannerman

[PullMyFinger]

You mean the people who subsidise the price of your ticket?

No Charles, I think it is I who subsidise the price of their pies. :thumb04:

[Georgeios]

I'd have thought it goes with out saying, They built the place, and kept us alive. As for the name of the place what about the other grounds around with the "people who supplyed the money to build the place's Names"

Reebok, McCain, Emmerits, O2 etc... at the end of the day would the club have what we have with out Tullochs....?

[PullMyFinger]

I'd have thought it goes with out saying, They built the place, and kept us alive. As for the name of the place what about the other grounds around with the "people who supplyed the money to build the place's Names"

Reebok, McCain, Emmerits, O2 etc... at the end of the day would the club have what we have with out Tullochs....?

The difference is that the naming of those stadia is timebound under a contract but Tulloch Caledonian Stadium is completely owned by Tullochs in one guise or another. Personally I have no issue with that as Tullochs have never failed to support ICT when they needed it. It would only become an issue if ICT outgrew Tullochs and DS, but I am sure that if that were to happen Mr Sutherland would be amenable to rebranding the stadium.

[Guest Muir-Jaggie]

I remeber when the 2 stands were built they had thoses 2 BIG! TULLOCH signs on them. Why did they come down???

[Caley Stan]

The difference is that the naming of those stadia is timebound under a contract but Tulloch Caledonian Stadium is completely owned by Tullochs in one guise or another. Personally I have no issue with that as Tullochs have never failed to support ICT when they needed it. It would only become an issue if ICT outgrew Tullochs and DS, but I am sure that if that were to happen Mr Sutherland would be amenable to rebranding the stadium.

So is it widely accepted now that Tulloch own the stadium?

Weren't we told that it was transferred to a charitable trust?

[PullMyFinger]

I remeber when the 2 stands were built they had thoses 2 BIG! TULLOCH signs on them. Why did they come down???

During construction the contractors are permitted to erect signs which are subject to planning regulations later.....I think, but I could be talking pants though.

[Charles Bannerman]

The difference is that the naming of those stadia is timebound under a contract but Tulloch Caledonian Stadium is completely owned by Tullochs in one guise or another. Personally I have no issue with that as Tullochs have never failed to support ICT when they needed it. It would only become an issue if ICT outgrew Tullochs and DS, but I am sure that if that were to happen Mr Sutherland would be amenable to rebranding the stadium.

So is it widely accepted now that Tulloch own the stadium?

Weren't we told that it was transferred to a charitable trust?

Let's go back to 2000 when ICT was ?2M in debt and in significant danger of administration or worse. A lot of measures were put in place over the next couple of years, including the ICT Charitable Trust which bought the Stadium and took over the balance of the lease from Highland Council, thus effectively wiping out the potentially fatal debt. The setting up of the Trust was a long and complicated affair, with strict criteria to qualify for charitable status (which included the legal requirement, as a quid pro quo, to assist ALL sport and not just football although I'm not aware of too much of that having happened.)

The Trustees were, and as far as I am aware still are, David Sutherland, David Stewart MP and now MSP and ex Provost Allan Sellar. There had always been some uncertainty as to how ?2M of debt was simply "spirited away" but it has become clear that the Bank of Scotland, with which David Sutherland has strong ties, played the central role in taking up this debt, with Tullochs guaranteeing it in some shape or form.

As a result, Tullochs play a very influential role in the basic stadium ownership and, to face reality, they were the only game in town when ICT was a complete basket case and would probably have gone to the wall without them.

The second component of the Tullochs involvement was the ?500,000 or thereby of equity they took up in around 2002 which made a huge difference to ongoing club funding, probably at the same time making it financially feasible to win the First Division and to go into the SPL (and carry the Pittodrie costs for 6 months). In return for this, Tullochs got the right for 5 years to nominate 3 of the 6 directors, including the Chairman, and since he also had a casting vote, this was effectively control of the board. This arrangement expired in 2007 but David Sutherland, although not a director, is still very infuential. It should perhaps also be emphasised that Tullochs have never allowed their shareholding to exceed around 42% and have never sought to have a controlling interest.

Part 3 relates to the North and South stands which were built at great speed by Tullochs in the winter of 2004-05. What is more important than the fact that they built the stands is that they also played an instrumental part in funding them, in association with Highland Council. The quid pro quo for that was that the premises should be called the Tulloch Caledonian Stadium.

So Tullochs' contribution can be summarised under three headings - avoidance of bankruptcy, funding on the eve of SPL membership, provision of facilities to bring SPL football to Inverness.

These are the financial facts although I have noticed that interpretation of them on this board has tended to depend on the phase of the cycle of popularity that David Sutherland is deemed to be on at any particular time.

Edited March 18, 2009 by Charles Bannerman