According to Tyrone Smith of STV Orion Group have confirmed that they are not renewing the kit sponsorship deal past this season.

I think with the way that the team are playing at the moment and I am sure that the club stature has increased in the last couple of years, maybe we can get a better deal?

Thoughts?

Edited February 27, 201411 yr by ICTRoughi

Harry Gows is the obvious choice.

HIAL.bmp

Good suggestion Alex but this company is owned entirely by the Scottish Government, so there is no chance of them giving over taxpayers money as sponsors.

I am happy as long as we get a decent deal and it isn't a payday lender/pawnshop/bookies.

Agree absolutely with one and two. Could live with the club getting a bob or two from a reputable bookmaker.

I don't know the reasons for Lifescan stopping being our main sponsers but they would seem to me to be an ideal company as Inverness's largest private empolyer and because of the name of their "one touch" product.  Given the style of football we play I really liked it when the boys has "one touch" emblazoned on their shirts. 

I could tolerate a bookies I suppose if it was a good deal.

Definitely NOT a loan shark - e.g. Wonga.  Our club should not associate itself with companies that cause misery to the public.

What about Harris Tweed?  A world-recognised brand...

They could weave the shirts as well. Would be a good deal better quality than Errea.

They could weave the shirts as well. Would be a good deal better quality than Errea.

Harris Tweed shirts? Pretty bloody itchy!  Maybe an idea as a hair shirt pennance after any particularly bad result though.

Tescos...it wouldnt surprise me it were them. 

 

HIAL.bmp

Good suggestion Alex but this company is owned entirely by the Scottish Government, so there is no chance of them giving over taxpayers money as sponsors.

 

The company is owned by the Scottish Parliament but is run as a Private Ltd Company and I believe the taxpayers money that went into saving the company and the airports has been recovered long since. This company operates in the black and is making decent profits. Bearing in mind that advertising generates income I dont think the parliament would object to some of the profits being used for such purposes. Besides advertising budgets are tax deductable so it would mean a little less going to the UK treasury.

I heard somebody suggesting UHI. If they can afford to pay their Principal over £250K a year, a shirt sponsorship would be a snip.

 

 

HIAL.bmp

Good suggestion Alex but this company is owned entirely by the Scottish Government, so there is no chance of them giving over taxpayers money as sponsors.

 

The company is owned by the Scottish Parliament but is run as a Private Ltd Company and I believe the taxpayers money that went into saving the company and the airports has been recovered long since. This company operates in the black and is making decent profits. Bearing in mind that advertising generates income I dont think the parliament would object to some of the profits being used for such purposes. Besides advertising budgets are tax deductable so it would mean a little less going to the UK treasury.

 

 The company gets the majority of its funding from the government as a direct subsidy.  So even though in name it is Ltd company in reality it is an arm of government and therefore would not be allowed to sponsor a football club.

Inverness Tyres - they are feckin loaded.

Inverness never tires would be better

HIAL.bmp

Good suggestion Alex but this company is owned entirely by the Scottish Government, so there is no chance of them giving over taxpayers money as sponsors.

The company is owned by the Scottish Parliament but is run as a Private Ltd Company and I believe the taxpayers money that went into saving the company and the airports has been recovered long since. This company operates in the black and is making decent profits. Bearing in mind that advertising generates income I dont think the parliament would object to some of the profits being used for such purposes. Besides advertising budgets are tax deductable so it would mean a little less going to the UK treasury.

The Scottish Parliament is a legislature. It doesn't "own" anything. IIRC, HIAL is a quango.

 

 

 

HIAL.bmp

Good suggestion Alex but this company is owned entirely by the Scottish Government, so there is no chance of them giving over taxpayers money as sponsors. The company is owned by the Scottish Parliament but is run as a Private Ltd Company and I believe the taxpayers money that went into saving the company and the airports has been recovered long since. This company operates in the black and is making decent profits. Bearing in mind that advertising generates income I dont think the parliament would object to some of the profits being used for such purposes. Besides advertising budgets are tax deductable so it would mean a little less going to the UK treasury.

The Scottish Parliament is a legislature. It doesn't "own" anything. IIRC, HIAL is a quango.

 

Ok. but quangos dont exist in Scotland. If we want to be really pedantic then its owned by the people of Scotland and is run by a Chairman and board of directors who are all selected, for a fixed period, by the government representative of the day. Indeed Mr David Sutherland has had a spell, among many other, prominent local businessmen.

Enough said if Bob the Builder has been involved.

 

 

 

HIAL.bmp

Good suggestion Alex but this company is owned entirely by the Scottish Government, so there is no chance of them giving over taxpayers money as sponsors. The company is owned by the Scottish Parliament but is run as a Private Ltd Company and I believe the taxpayers money that went into saving the company and the airports has been recovered long since. This company operates in the black and is making decent profits. Bearing in mind that advertising generates income I dont think the parliament would object to some of the profits being used for such purposes. Besides advertising budgets are tax deductable so it would mean a little less going to the UK treasury.

The Scottish Parliament is a legislature. It doesn't "own" anything. IIRC, HIAL is a quango.

 

 

HIAL is a publically owned corporation accountable to the Scottish Ministers (and by definition therefore to the Scottish Parliament) and sit in the same way that Scottish Water do. Whilst lumped in with Quangos they are actually slightly different, but lets not split hairs.

 

There is no direct reason why a public corporation cannot sponsor any event or entitiy, however the articles of association or company procedures are likely to place restrictions on what can be sponsored or DLAs may be highly restricted requiring Board or Miniterial approval for certain types of sponsorship. I am aware of at least one public corporation having DLA to CEO and Executive Teams for Sponsorship Activities.

 

In any case I would have thought that there would have to be demonstrated gain to the wider public for this to be acceptable.

I dont really see why HIAL would want to sponsor a football team. Or how they would increase their revenue from it. Will it encourage more charter flights to use the airport.

 

However Diageo have a huge processing plant near Kinloss, have numerous distilleries in the local area and will be creating the largest distillery in Europe near Alness.

 

I would say sponsoring a fresh pure football club from the Highlands strengthens their Global romantic Whisky image to their customers worldwide.

Diageo could be a good shout but the name doesn't really sell whisky in the same way as well known brands would. Just a pity they dont own one of the local brands like Glenmorangie or Tomatin to give a name that is synonomis with the region.

 

 

HIAL.bmp

Good suggestion Alex but this company is owned entirely by the Scottish Government, so there is no chance of them giving over taxpayers money as sponsors.

 

The company is owned by the Scottish Parliament but is run as a Private Ltd Company and I believe the taxpayers money that went into saving the company and the airports has been recovered long since. This company operates in the black and is making decent profits. Bearing in mind that advertising generates income I dont think the parliament would object to some of the profits being used for such purposes. Besides advertising budgets are tax deductable so it would mean a little less going to the UK treasury.

 

 

From hial.co.uk:

 

Highland and Islands Airports Limited (HIAL) is a public corporation wholly owned by the Scottish Ministers. The company operates and manages 11 Airports at Barra, Benbecula, Campbeltown, Dundee, Islay, Inverness, Kirkwall, Stornoway, Sumburgh, Tiree and Wick. HIAL's airports are vital to the social and economic welfare of the areas they serve, but are loss making, and are supported by subsidies from the Scottish Government in accordance with Section 34 of the Civil Aviation Act 1982.

Why cross out Scottish parliament. Is that not where Scottish ministers reside? Not being one who understands the running of business perhaps you can shed light on why, if they are a loss making company, their latest accounts submitted to Company House show:- Cash in Bank - £9,968,000. Liabilities - £5,481,000. Assets - £13,854,000 and Total Worth - £76,978,000. Doesnt seem like loss making to me.

Sometimes paper losses are useful for tax reporting purposes---maybe?

Why cross out Scottish parliament. Is that not where Scottish ministers reside? Not being one who understands the running of business perhaps you can shed light on why, if they are a loss making company, their latest accounts submitted to Company House show:- Cash in Bank - £9,968,000. Liabilities - £5,481,000. Assets - £13,854,000 and Total Worth - £76,978,000. Doesnt seem like loss making to me.

 

Dave Stewart MSP, for example, is part of the parliament, but he's not a minister.

 

The figures you show are about assets and liabilities, not about profit and loss.  The full accounts for the last five years are available at http://www.hial.co.uk/about-us/annual-report-amp-group-financial-statements/