Arabs away March2024

[Charles Bannerman]

11 hours ago, STFU said:

Unsecured loans, so they can shout all they want for the money, if we don't have it they can't get it.

High chance we're facing administration anyway, so they'd get nothing back then either.

I'd rather cut the cancer and take a chance on recovery than continue to let it slowly kill us.

And if you did that - cast aside people who have been bailing out a fundamentally loss making position with their own money for years - who would you expect to take over the running of the club and to cover its ongoing financial shortcomings, knowing that this could happen to them as well? The community doesn’t owe football a living - especially if football chooses to live beyond its means and expects other people to pick up the tab for that.

[STFU]

Our financial position and the future of the club is a situation of the boards making.  Living beyond our means to an extent that they are no longer willing to fund and now trying to hold the city to ransom over planning that will allow them to get that money back.

Crying over fans not turning up in sufficient numbers when they're serving up a **** poor product at an ever increasing price.

All sense of community and belonging stripped from the club, and any who dare protest being shown the door.

If that's the cost of allowing the club to be run the way it is by those currently on the board, I don't want them there.

It might not be so sad if we were seeing even a glimpse of success, but if people such as yourself are happy for the club's soul to be sold in return for a pitiful existence, then have at it.  The longer it continues, the fewer who'll be around to pick up the pieces when needed.

[Charles Bannerman]

2 hours ago, STFU said:

Our financial position and the future of the club is a situation of the boards making.  Living beyond our means to an extent that they are no longer willing to fund and now trying to hold the city to ransom over planning that will allow them to get that money back.

Crying over fans not turning up in sufficient numbers when they're serving up a **** poor product at an ever increasing price.

All sense of community and belonging stripped from the club, and any who dare protest being shown the door.

If that's the cost of allowing the club to be run the way it is by those currently on the board, I don't want them there.

It might not be so sad if we were seeing even a glimpse of success, but if people such as yourself are happy for the club's soul to be sold in return for a pitiful existence, then have at it.  The longer it continues, the fewer who'll be around to pick up the pieces when needed.

I agree with a certain amount of what you say but there are other criticisms that were also made of the previous board and also of boards before that, and indeed are made by football fans throughout the game. The basic truth is that there is no obligation on anyone to put themselves in the firing line and spend their personal funds running a fundamentally non-viable business using a fundamentally non-viable business model - which is common throughout the game. It’s been clear from the start that there isn’t enough demand, neither actual nor (probably) potential, for a product involving around 30 full time front line employees with several more in backup roles, to make that business anything other than regularly loss making. Over time, something in the ballpark of £10 million of other people’s money has gone into keeping this business going and it always runs into the same problem because of its fundamentally loss making nature. Far too often in football there seems to be this expectation that it’s someone else’s responsibility to fund this loss making process and failure then leads to calls for the removal of those who have used their own money to try and their replacement by others prepared to expose themselves to the same routine.

[wilsywilsy]

Thought there was plenty grit and effort on display on Saturday but the quality with the ball was again really poor. On another day the Arabs run out comfortable winners - they wasted a lot of good chances and Ridgers made a few decent saves.

Disappointing to waste another gift goal and not sneak a win. A points a point though and every one of them is important regardless of how they are secured. Still 18 to play for and with Morton and Ayr both struggling to get any rhythm going too, theres still lots of room to escape the play offs yet.

 

Edited March 25 by wilsywilsy

[lizi]

A big Thank You to the Clubs new Supporters Liaison Officer, Scott Young, who chose a very positive way to meet ICT fans in the away end at Dundee.  Before ko he went along the rows of fans, chatting to all and sundry.  I don’t know if everyone knew who he was but I think it was a great gesture and, well done to him.  

Edited March 25 by lizi

[Hearach]

Absolutely Lizi. Makes a pleasant change for a member of the board to be seen interacting with the fans. 

[Robert]

Scott has attended the Fans Meetings organised by the Supporters Trust and it is good he is the new SLO and looks to want to make a positive impact in the role.

[Eagle4Caley]

I enjoyed my first trip up to Dundee and an overnight stop near the Waterfront allowed me to take in V&A Design Museum and Discovery Point before my coach/plane/coach/train/bus replacement service trip back on the Sunday

United's ground is quirky, and there was a good atmosphere in the away end [does chants of 'sack the board' count!] I thought we were competitive given the respective teams league positions. United had the better chances [and twice the number], and we have Ridgers to thank in part for keeping us in the game, but we also created some dangerous moments and I thought we were perhaps on top in the second half before their fluke [?] goal.

Boy do we miss a decent winger though... last year Jay Henderson was impressing, the year before Logan Chalmers added some guile, and the year before Kai Kennedy added energy. Sadly for us Longstaff is injured, and Shaw has [when fit] been playing too deep in my view [presumably as the 'creative' midfielder]. I'd would say Alex Samuel would benefit from someone who put in a cross or two [in addition to Harper/Duffy's forays upfield]

Was a bit surprised to see Pepple paired upfront with Samuel ahead of McKay [was this saving legs, a move to be more physical upfront or a tactical ploy?]. In part it worked because although Pepple doesn't look blessed with a lot a pace, he did occupy the defenders and did well with the cross that set up our goal. And when McKay came on he looked lively. Samuel worked hard all game and he does seem to appreciate the fans as well [he also got warm applause from us when he was subbed], I think he has a key role to play in us staying up.

Ridgers was generally good and  kept us in the game, but I'd say his kicking is average at best, certainly in this game and he was caught way out of his goal from his own kick, although 9 times out of 10 no one would have attempted Moults audacious shot

For me Kerr was the pick of our team and ensured we were competitive in midfield, Anderson next to him was quietly effective and might have scored, and [ignoring the one moment of excessive timewasting which annoyed the Uited fans] I thought Lawal looked good, showing plenty of pace, energy and some skills. Can we keep this midfield together, with Harper overlapping for the remainder of the season?

Given the number of shots that Dundee had, and Ridgers heriocs, you might think our back line was poor, but for me Savage was good as Central CB [a decent signing in my view] and I like Boyes at Left CB, Carragher was decent enough too. A tricky selection headache for big Dunc as Devine is probably best at central CB and Ujdur was by all accounts pretty good when he first joined [we might need all of them on the pitch in a frantic run-in or relegation play-off!]

So a fun filled afternoon, with postives and an enjoyable weekend...at this point of the season a Billy Doods team would suddenly start winning, can we go up a gear? what rabbits can Big Dunc pull out of the hat?  We certainly need to do better at home if we are to stay up, and do better against the mid-table teams. Here's hoping.

[tm4tj]

Can anyone who was at the game shed any light on who was booked when Moult scored. Was it Carragher and Bollan as shown on ICT twitter account or Boyes as shown everywhere else??? Or maybe all three???

[old caley girl]

9 hours ago, tm4tj said:

Can anyone who was at the game shed any light on who was booked when Moult scored. Was it Carragher and Bollan as shown on ICT twitter account or Boyes as shown everywhere else??? Or maybe all three???

Caleycalum assures me it was Carragher. 

[tm4tj]

Our own twitter was adamant it was Carragher and Bollan. BBC has Boyes booked and everyone copied it. 

Cheers OCG. We like to try and get it right on here as it affects the player stats.

[STFU]

On 3/25/2024 at 9:07 AM, Charles Bannerman said:

I agree with a certain amount of what you say but there are other criticisms that were also made of the previous board and also of boards before that, and indeed are made by football fans throughout the game. The basic truth is that there is no obligation on anyone to put themselves in the firing line and spend their personal funds running a fundamentally non-viable business using a fundamentally non-viable business model - which is common throughout the game. It’s been clear from the start that there isn’t enough demand, neither actual nor (probably) potential, for a product involving around 30 full time front line employees with several more in backup roles, to make that business anything other than regularly loss making. Over time, something in the ballpark of £10 million of other people’s money has gone into keeping this business going and it always runs into the same problem because of its fundamentally loss making nature. Far too often in football there seems to be this expectation that it’s someone else’s responsibility to fund this loss making process and failure then leads to calls for the removal of those who have used their own money to try and their replacement by others prepared to expose themselves to the same routine.

You are right that nobody should be under any obligation to put money into a football club and that various people have put in substantial sums over the years.  That Is their choice and until recently those 'investments' have either been written off or converted to shares (to my knowledge).

This is the first time (again to my knowledge) that a Director has put a charge in place to try and ensure they get their money back.  Coincidence that this charge only appeared when the battery scheme looked like it may not happen?

If nobody is willing to put money in to support overspend then we should not be spending more than we make through football operations.

The fact we are failing so miserably in the Championship while maintaining our previous Premiership level of spending is mind boggling and not a sign that those running the club or the team know what they are doing.  Damn right they should face criticism.

[Yngwie]

1 hour ago, STFU said:

The fact we are failing so miserably in the Championship while maintaining our previous Premiership level of spending

That doesn’t sound right.

[Duke of Inverness]

On our 20th anniversary, we were on a 'Motherwell' level in the Premiership, with a Scottish Cup win around the corner.

On our 30th anniversary, we are just about on a 'Morton' type level, heading to League 1.

On our 40th anniversary, if we still exist, we'll be on  a 'Montrose' type level in League 1 or 2, on a 'good' day getting a 4 figure crowd, part time local players with only the main stand being used. Local Derby will be with Elgin City. 

[+snorbens_caleyman]

2 hours ago, Duke of Inverness said:

On our 20th anniversary, we were on a 'Motherwell' level in the Premiership, with a Scottish Cup win around the corner.

On our 30th anniversary, we are just about on a 'Morton' type level, heading to League 1.

On our 40th anniversary, if we still exist, we'll be on  a 'Montrose' type level in League 1 or 2

Far from unusual.  I can look at the lower three divisions in England, and in each I can see teams that were in the top tier in the recent past.

Not saying that it's good, or acceptable - just that it's not unusual. 

[STFU]

21 hours ago, Yngwie said:

That doesn’t sound right.

True, the £835k of losses from the last set of filed accounts might suggest spending has actually increased.

[Yngwie]

No, income has dropped. Prize money and gate receipts massively down since the Premiership days.

Certain running costs have increased with energy being one of them, and Big Dunc won’t be cheap, but look at the current squad and compare it with the one we had even in our relegation season. We are certainly not spending more than we did in the Premiership.

[old caley girl]

2 hours ago, Yngwie said:

No, income has dropped. Prize money and gate receipts massively down since the Premiership days.

Certain running costs have increased with energy being one of them, and Big Dunc won’t be cheap, but look at the current squad and compare it with the one we had even in our relegation season. We are certainly not spending more than we did in the Premiership.

We are very top heavy management wise off park. A few probably on bumper salaries. 

I expect income has dropped too as very few fan activities under the current regime. Hospitality for example is top bracket only with no cheaper offerings 

[Charles Bannerman]

3 hours ago, Yngwie said:

No, income has dropped. Prize money and gate receipts massively down since the Premiership days.

Certain running costs have increased with energy being one of them, and Big Dunc won’t be cheap, but look at the current squad and compare it with the one we had even in our relegation season. We are certainly not spending more than we did in the Premiership.

One of the problems of being a “Small Company” is that the accounts aren’t very detailed. In fact when they eventually materialised last year, I don’t recollect any statement of turnover so we don’t really know, year on year, what’s happening with earnings. We also don’t know what the losses are as a percentage of turnover so we just have to speculate as to what the relative magnitude of that £835K loss was.