Battery Project - Chairman's Statement

[Satan]

Where is all this salt coming from?

[wilsywilsy]

1 hour ago, Yngwie said:

You’ve made quite a few interesting and informative contributions on this subject, which I appreciate and I’m sure others do too. I’m curious though - is it the case that you didn't want this application to succeed?

Ach, I'm obviously not against the idea of the club pursuing revenue opportunities, and I'm not fully against this planning application...... although I do think it is flawed based on the public data. Trying to apply some critical thought to the details as I see them and be objective instead of only seeing $$ and debt free Champions League like the other cheer leaders.

Edited February 8 by wilsywilsy

[wilsywilsy]

29 minutes ago, Satan said:

Where is all this salt coming from?

Not the new batteries - they will be leaking lithium into the water ways.

[+roarer]

3 hours ago, wilsywilsy said:

Not the new batteries - they will be leaking lithium into the water ways.

Well at least the waterways might be positive!!!

[CELTIC1CALEY3]

https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/SC732789 Two Directors - Chairman and David Cameron.

[STFU]

22 hours ago, Yngwie said:

This would seem to be one of the biggest days in our history in terms of off the field activities.
 

After all the negativity, criticism and derision on this thread, I think there should be some recognition of the achievement of the club and its partners to have firstly conceived this remarkable high benefit, low risk deal, and then to push it through and overcome the considerable planning permission challenges.

Morrison and Gardner have played an absolute blinder here, haven’t they?

 

Have they?

Until we know how much is involved here and the level of debt that needs serviced, then we really don't know what they've done.

If you blow £10000 on scratch cards and win £10000, is that playing an absolute blinder or just getting lucky?

These guys put us in the position we were in and have taken a serious risk with the clubs existence. The decision in the clubs favour scraped through on the margin of 1 vote.  Not sure that counts as low risk.

Even if there is a net financial benefit, are these really the right people to be leading the club and in control of the money?

[Yngwie]

Well the cash inflow to the club is over £1m and the amount they risked on the planning application, don’t know but I would guess to be in the tens of thousands and at worst still a small proportion of the cash gain. That is a low risk, high reward project, and I don’t see how it realistically risked the club’s existence.

Criticise them all you want on other matters, it’s justified, but on this particular one surely even you can put your grievances aside and acknowledge that it’s a rather miraculous rabbit out of a hat!

[STFU]

Did the hat look like this one?

[Jack Waddington]

Aaaand there goes half our earnings from the Battery Farm, on building an up to scratch set of stands and/or the ensuing lawsuit...

https://twitter.com/rjs334/status/1756382836758552749?t=83osJPtsZptCdy-fsLAt0A&s=19

Edited February 10 by Jack Waddington

[RednBlackComeback]

9 minutes ago, Jack Waddington said:

Aaaand there goes half our earnings from the Battery Farm, on building an up to scratch set of stands and/or the ensuing lawsuit...

https://twitter.com/rjs334/status/1756382836758552749?t=83osJPtsZptCdy-fsLAt0A&s=19

Looks like a hole in the south stand floor . . . . . Digby Brown will be looking into it ! 

[forresjags]

Oh f*** what next, things are really not good for us right now.

These temporary stands must be well past their sell by date by now.

[STFU]

17 minutes ago, forresjags said:

Oh f*** what next, things are really not good for us right now.

These temporary stands must be well past their sell by date by now.

It's the wooden panel flooring which failed.  This should be easy and relatively inexpensive to replace, as well as regularly checked under normal maintenance.  That has no baring on the structural integrity of the stands.

What's happened there is down to neglect on the club's part.

Edited February 10 by STFU

[forresjags]

Hopefully that's true , but just have a nagging feeling it might not be that straightforward. 

It's Scottish football after all.

[Row S]

3 hours ago, forresjags said:

Oh f*** what next, things are really not good for us right now.

These temporary stands must be well past their sell by date by now.

What has been forgotten is that when granted planning permission in 2004 it was only for a temporary period of 3 years. The club was supposed to have applied for more permanent stands, renew the permission or dismantle the stands before the 3 years was up. The agents told the club that when the permission was granted then again early in 2007. Not even the Council bothered to chase that one up. Technically, they are in breach of planning legislation.

Edited February 11 by Row S

[STFU]

I'm assuming the club would be able to cite the 4 year and 10 year rule for unlawful development to prevent any action against them in relation to planning at this time?

That still doesn't excuse having a stand (or stands) that are unsafe, and I imagine there are safety certificates required.

Again, our CEO has history here.  Only this time he seems to have overlooked new flooring instead of new seats.

Hopefully this is just a very isolated issue and we don't end up with both North and South stands being closed pending full inspection and repairs, and the cost that comes with that.

[Jack Waddington]

51 minutes ago, STFU said:

Hopefully this is just a very isolated issue.

It's happened before on a far smaller scale (just a random hole here and there) and the panels have just been swapped out, but with just shy of 20 odd years with two fans to a seat for quite a lot of our games, it's a surprise its taken so long to happen.

The stand itself is highly likely to be structurally sound for a decent while yet, just the flooring needs swapped out for something that can hack the weight and has a longer lifespan.

Just need to wait on word from the club on whats happening, either through an (unlikely) statement or being brought up at the next fan meeting.

[Satan]

Oh oh.

[Stephen Malkmus]

The chairman of the south planning committee is an absolute pillock. He wasn't concerned about being a representative from Fort William, rather than Inverness, when he cast the deciding vote to replace the Ironworks with a hotel.

[CaleyCanary]

WTF! Councillors never cease to amaze me…

[Jack Waddington]

Aaaaand there goes the appeal to the Scottish Government...

Cheers, Highland Council, for shooting us in the face at point blank after giving us a lifeline. Competent as per...

 

Full article: https://www.inverness-courier.co.uk/news/breaking-highland-council-u-turn-on-its-own-caley-thistle-b-342166/

[STFU]

If the original decision had gone the other way, then the club wouldn't have accepted the 'democratic process' and would absolutely be appealing it, as would have been their right.

The full council can recall any decision by the planning committee or any other committee so are exercising their right.

[STFU]

13 minutes ago, Stephen Malkmus said:

The chairman of the south planning committee is an absolute pillock. He wasn't concerned about being a representative from Fort William, rather than Inverness, when he cast the deciding vote to replace the Ironworks with a hotel.

The council did not make any decision to close the Ironworks, that was the property owner.  Going by some accounts, the operator was quite happy to get out of the lease as it wasn't making money.

Sucks that it's gone, but blame lies elsewhere.

[caley1]

Only 5 councillors voted . Why would u abstain from a vote of great importance?
something smells so bad about all this .  
Another great SG flop maybe which we are getting so used to it shouldn’t surprise us .  

[Satan]

12 minutes ago, STFU said:

If the original decision had gone the other way, then the club wouldn't have accepted the 'democratic process' and would absolutely be appealing it, as would have been their right.

The full council can recall any decision by the planning committee or any other committee so are exercising their right.

If it had gone the other way,  would the chair and his vice who voted against it have raised the issue as being barely quorate. Which is irrelevant anyway, it either is or it isn't, no barely about it.

They've clearly been upset and after some 'advice' on how to get their results have rustled up some signatures.

[Stephen Malkmus]

17 minutes ago, STFU said:

The council did not make any decision to close the Ironworks, that was the property owner.  Going by some accounts, the operator was quite happy to get out of the lease as it wasn't making money.

Sucks that it's gone, but blame lies elsewhere.

The hotel development needed planning permission, and this was decided by the south planning committee. If permission had been refused, there would likely still be a cultural use at the site.

That is beside the point anyway - the Chair of the commitee is claiming that the battery decision isn't valid because not enough Councillors from Inverness voted on it. Yet he represents Fort William, and has been happy to vote in favour of the hotel development at the Ironworks and against the battery farm last week.

I hope the club embarrass the Council over this, it's a shambles.