Battery Project - Chairman's Statement

[dougal]

Afraid many of the lemmings have a very short memory when it comes to the Council. 
 

Correct me if I’m wrong but did the local authority not gift us 900k from the Inverness Common Good fund to push the merger through this was deemed ok but now the council are the bad guys because they are rightly hesitant in making any rash decisions regarding this battery debacle. 
 

Some posters on here need to think before they post. 
 

Dougal

[Yngwie]

Some posters are living in the present not the past!

[+Fraz]

5 hours ago, dougal said:

Afraid many of the lemmings have a very short memory when it comes to the Council. 
 

Correct me if I’m wrong but did the local authority not gift us 900k from the Inverness Common Good fund to push the merger through this was deemed ok but now the council are the bad guys because they are rightly hesitant in making any rash decisions regarding this battery debacle. 
 

Some posters on here need to think before they post. 
 

Dougal

Almost like people may have a different opinion regarding two totally different situations 30 years apart. Weird eh?

[dougal]

58 minutes ago, Fraz said:

Almost like people may have a different opinion regarding two totally different situations 30 years apart. Weird eh?

ICT and sevco’s close friendship must suit you nicely give you a chance to air your old Union Jack  

Dougal

[Charles Bannerman]

10 hours ago, dougal said:

Afraid many of the lemmings have a very short memory when it comes to the Council. 
 

Correct me if I’m wrong but did the local authority not gift us 900k from the Inverness Common Good fund to push the merger through this was deemed ok but now the council are the bad guys because they are rightly hesitant in making any rash decisions regarding this battery debacle. 
 

Some posters on here need to think before they post. 
 

Dougal

Some posters on here here need to get their facts right… so I’m correcting you because you are very wrong!

In 1995/96 - by which time the merger had been done and dusted several months previously - Inverness District Council voted to award the club £900,000 from the council budget towards the approach road to the stadium - a road which has now paid for itself many times over by opening up the entire Harbour area. However the Council - note the Council - got itself into the most terrible mess because a group of councillors and officials tried to stop payment, hence putting the entire stadium project in danger. With time running out before IDC went out of existence in favour of Highland Council on 1st April 1996, it looked as if the grant couldn’t physically be paid, making court action apparently unavoidable, until HC CEO Arthur McCourt managed to have the money paid from the Inverness Common Good Fund.

The reality here is that Inverness District Council were most definitely the “bad guys” back then when they almost secured the demise of the club because a stadium was an SFL membership condition, and when a solution was eventually found, the spin off for the entire city was enormous.

Best to check what really happened when you are intent on stirring

Edited February 25 by Charles Bannerman

[+Fraz]

3 hours ago, dougal said:

ICT and sevco’s close friendship must suit you nicely give you a chance to air your old Union Jack  

Dougal

What are you on about?

You're entertaining and quite good at getting the bites. I'll give you that

[dougal]

On 2/25/2024 at 8:27 PM, Charles Bannerman said:

Some posters on here here need to get their facts right… so I’m correcting you because you are very wrong!

 

Pot kettle black springs to mind if I was to correct you about your so called facts over the following years I’d be able to write and publish my own book .

My point still stands  that it’s outrageous a cash strapped council would throw 900k at ICT especially when it came out of the Inverness common good fund. 

Anyway I thought you left this forum after you threw all your toys out of the pram in inconsolable tears and a highly entertaining tantrum from memory. 
Not a man that keeps his word then eh?

Again correct me if I’m wrong 

Dougal
 

 

 

 

 

 

[Satan]

21 minutes ago, dougal said:

 

My point still stands  that it’s outrageous a cash strapped council would throw 900k at ICT especially when it came out of the Inverness common good fund. 

Again correct me if I’m wrong 

Dougal

The fact that the council may or may not have been 'cash strapped' back then is irrelevant when the money came from the common good fund - its not council money - they are just administrators for the fund.

[STFU]

The land the stadium sits on belongs to the common good fund.  That means the road monetised the use of the land and I'm sure they'll have received that back, and maybe more, for the rent we've paid over the last 30 years.

[Charles Bannerman]

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.

[+DoofersDad]

7 minutes 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.

Are you sure?  There's nothing on the club's website to say they've done this!  

[STFU]

Big red flag....

https://equitablelaw.com/the-red-flag-of-companies-shortening-their-accounting-period-by-one-day/

[Robert]

Presumably done in the hope that planning gets approved so they can get the accounts signed off by the Auditors.

It surely confirms how perilous our financial position is, and that the Auditors are unwilling to sign the accounts off as they stand and without confirmation that the Battery Park income will be forthcoming.

The future of the club is clearly now squarely in the hands of the 74 Highland Councillors entitled to be at the full Council Meeting.

Increasingly worrying times. 

Edited February 29 by Robert

[Scotty]

31 minutes ago, STFU said:

Big red flag....

https://equitablelaw.com/the-red-flag-of-companies-shortening-their-accounting-period-by-one-day/

 

from the link: "Such action can reveal a disorganised set of managers – who can’t produce their accounting information in a timely fashion – but it’s also used by companies to hide financial difficulties with their businesses."

[Charles Bannerman]

46 minutes ago, DoofersDad said:

Are you sure?  There's nothing on the club's website to say they've done this!  

 

[CELTIC1CALEY3]

It certainly looks like the Club as a Company is in a high risk situation should the Council on 14th March, 2024 reverse its South Planning Committee's decision. 

[STFU]

It is not the council who have put the club in this situation, it is one entirely of their own making.

The club should never have put itself in a position where they are relying on some grand scheme to pay the bills and spending money they don't have to feed their egos.

The worst thing is that Scot Gardiner has history on this front, and we were well warned.

[Robert]

4 minutes ago, STFU said:

It is not the council who have put the club in this situation, it is one entirely of their own making.

I don’t think anyone will disagree with that at all, but the reality is that we now find our future squarely in the hands of the Councillors at the forthcoming meeting. 

[STFU]

14 minutes ago, Robert said:

I don’t think anyone will disagree with that at all, but the reality is that we now find our future squarely in the hands of the Councillors at the forthcoming meeting. 

Not a comfortable position to be in!

Personally, I think the locating of the battery storage is wrong and I'm angry that we're in a position where my thoughts on that will be seen (by some) as my somehow wishing bad on the club. 

All I want is the charlatans gone and for us to get back to being a club with at least some moral fibre.

It's not right that a wrong (in my view) has to be done to secure any kind of future for ICTFC.  It's not right that Councillors have to make a decision knowing it could be catastrophic for ICTFC.  It's not right that this whole sorry affair is driving division among fans.

[Yngwie]

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.

[STFU]

14 minutes ago, Yngwie said:

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

The smart move would have been not putting the club in this position to begin with, no?

[Yngwie]

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.

[bdu98196]

23 minutes ago, Yngwie said:

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

 

Exactly this. I'm not going to repost my comments over the last few days but its clear so many fans are failing to see the financial reason for loans and turn over of players or acknowledge where a club with a gate of 2k max sits in the Scottish football hierarchy.

Stars aligned once achieving unfathomable success but the chances of that again is slim so we may yet need to go further back both on and off park to build again.

[Charles Bannerman]

53 minutes ago, Yngwie said:

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.

I have tried for years to be optimistic as I can about the financial future and, while several factors have been operating, I think there is one huge and probably unavoidable fundamental - the Inner Moray Firth plus some hinterland is an insufficient base for two “sizeable” football clubs. It was fine at the start in the Third Division with an added novelty factor, but as Caley Thistle and Ross County both grew and moved up the leagues, that progress was only made possible by £5M from Tullochs and some very good club and football management in the case of ICT and repeated subsidy of Ross County by Roy MacGregor. In County’s case, their latest loss of £579K has been announced today and that has been written off, as it tends to be annually, by their “holding company”. And even that level of ongoing subsidy is JUST keeping the club in the Premiership.

In the case of ICT, the factors I mentioned there worked through the system some years ago and since about 2018 the club has been substantially loss making and dependent on ad hoc emergency handouts as it now clings to second tier status. There have also been other factors and members of the business community tell me that Inverness Caledonian Thistle is not flavour of the month in many quarters - especially since the collapse of the Concert Company where the club netted a large stadium rent before the company went bankrupt, leaving local traders out of pocket.

The bottom line (personal view) is that the local area is unable to sustain these two clubs ant current levels and, should Roy MacGregor’s support of County end, the deficit would be even greater. However, in a football environment there is NO way out of a situation where two companies are fundamentally loss making in the same marketplace, unless one shrinks massively.

It would appear that the battery farm might well be another short term fix, and a big one, but here there is a dilemma. Much as we would love to see this latest income source realised, the Councillors who will be making the decision are obliged to do so solely on the merits/demerits, practicability, safety, environmental implications etc. That the football club has a substantial financial interest cannot be a consideration in a completely isolated planning situation.

Edited February 29 by Charles Bannerman

[johnnykipper]

Why does the battery farm affect accounts that ended in May 2023 (9 months ago)?