Carlisle United's Nigel Clibbens: "The club has been for sale since 2015"

"I was on the radio and I was asked things like, did the [overseas investor] deal go away because the shareholders wanted cash out?" he says. "Groundless. They are damaging accusations. Not true."

Clibbens says United's directors are "ambitious", eager to get out of League Two and supportive of Keith Curle. These broad points, he says, must be put across firmer to those who still doubt whether the Blues are being steered in the right way.

United must also state their intentions clearer on the longer term. Their owners, we are told, are set on a "succession plan" that will bring fresh blood and money into the club.

The recent loan arrangement with Edinburgh Woollen Mill is said to be a move this way, but so far it lacks detail. What supporters would like to know, fully, is what "succession" will look like.

Clibbens, firstly, says the process of succession is already under way in terms of how United is run. A reorganisation has moved the main shareholders to the strategic holding company board, with management personnel on the 1921 operational board.

There has so far been no such shift in ownership, though. "That remains a key priority," chief executive Clibbens says.

If so, why do the owners not declare openly that United is for sale? "I think it's pretty clear that the 'for sale' sign has been hanging from the club going right back to 2015,"Clibbens says. "In every interview I do I reiterate that the two issues of new investment and succession go hand in hand, and remain to be solved."

Perhaps some see the word "investment" and don't assume those owners are open to outright takeover? "I look at it the other way. Some people might want to invest but not take over. If you say we're only open to takeovers, it rules a lot of people out, who may want to move in more gradually." Clibbens says this was the case at his former club Huddersfield, where greetings card magnate Dean Hoyle built up his stake over time.

"The clear message is the individual shareholders want to see a succession," Clibbens adds. "They appreciate the club needs it."

On what particular terms, though? "It's good we've got to this point," Clibbens says. "Nobody's out to make one penny of profit or get one penny of cash back. That deals with loans. They're all entirely focused on what the deal means for the club, not for them personally."

So owners who paid a nominal sum for their shares in 2008 do not desire a penny's return? "The individual shareholders are not looking to recoup the amounts they paid. In all the deals we've discussed, those issues go away, because all that means is less money for the club."

Clibbens says the ideal solution would be people with the wherewithal to provide both an initial boost and long-term security, whilst engaging fans and understanding United's "community" status. He also says new investment will inevitably lead to current shareholdings being diluted.

Asked whether this should include the Carlisle United Official Supporters' Club, with 25.4 per cent that supposedly guards against reckless ownership, the chief executive says: "For CUOSC to dilute, it has to be presented with a plan for the club, because it has to look after the interests of the club.

"It would be wrong for any shareholder just to roll over. They have a duty to look after those shares. At the same time, they want to see the club develop." A dilution "under duress" would be no good for anyone, he adds.

Clibbens demurs when asked if he has seen a clear, written-down mission statement at Brunton Park since arriving last summer. He does, though, claim the directors have a "clear view" of what they want to achieve, and talks about what he feels are the club's strengths and aims, such as a productive academy and well-regarded community work. "There's lots to be proud of here," he says. "We've got to take our fans with us."

The club's accounts for 2015/16 are due this week, before Friday's filing deadline, and - unlike last year - to be followed by an AGM. Why have the club gone to the wire with this? "The club had the flood in that period and the accounting [paper] records were washed away. We have backups but the hard copies of everything [went].

"There has been a process of reconstructing. That's taken a long time." United are "working" to hit Friday's deadline, adds Clibbens.

The post-flood period is naturally key. Clibbens praises construction firms Story and Esh for their rebuilding work and support at the stadium. Did the club, though, receive all it expected from its insurers? "As anyone who's been affected by the flood will know, it's always a negotiation. Have we got what we expected? Probably not. We might have hoped for a little more. But that's insurance for you."

This does not, Clibbens stresses, mean United carried out more work than it could afford. "Part of the deal with the insurers was as long as the bill didn't exceed a certain amount, we could spend it on what we wanted, if it made the club more flood-resistant and we only repaired damage. We've treated it as one big pot."

The Edinburgh Woollen Mill loan, with Brunton Park as security, is not connected to a post-flood shortfall, he says. "The accounts are going to show the value of the assets that we've reinstated has gone up by £1.6m," he adds.

Clibbens, though, admits cash is tight. Can United afford its current wage bill? "There's no issue with paying wages. We're up to date with all our wages and tax obligations."

A further question posed by some critical fans concerns income from the transfers of Charlie Wyke, Brad Potts and Kyle Dempsey plus two big cup ties last season. Where has the money gone?

"The really, really simple answer," Clibbens says, "is that all the cash has been spent on the team. Including the Wyke money. That was all committed before he was sold."

There are two remaining instalments due from Bradford for Wyke, he says. "The cash is committed on existing contracts before Charlie went, essentially." January arrivals included Wyke's short-term replacement Jamie Proctor, understood to be one of the club's costlier loan acquisitions.

Can United maintain such outlays if crowds stay at their current level? "Generally the crowds are still up. They are at a level that means we comply with the wage cap and that we will meet our budgets. Are they at a level that's sustainable in the long run? No. This is where we have to be honest with everybody.

"If you look at the accounts, this club has run at significant deficits on an ongoing basis for a long time. It has relied on Andrew Jenkins to make up the shortfall, or cup runs and player sales. This takes us full circle to why we need to improve the viability of the club."

Do those deficits, seen regularly under this nine-year regime, mean the club has been poorly run?

"I wouldn't say so. Not from what I've seen. The challenge is to get as many decisions as right as possible, [and] you have to run your business as efficiently and effectively as possible.

"I challenge anybody to find any member of staff here that's not working their fingers to the bone for the cause. They go the extra mile. To tar them with a brush that they work in an organisation that's been badly managed I think is disrespectful."

How about badly led, though? The journey from brink of Championship in 2008 to scrambling in League Two today suggests a decline. This was another question asked by protesting fans at the recent Luton home game.

Clibbens' response? "I think there was a lot of repair work to be done after previous regimes. I think Mr Story [Fred, owner from 2004-8], from what I understand, played his part, but the directors had a number of issues to deal with, like the Story loan and the charge [on Brunton Park] that has recently gone away.

"It's not an easy one for me to answer. Andrew has invested a huge amount of money and continues to support the club. John [Nixon] has provided more or less full-time time and management free of charge over a number of years, to try and make the club better.

"They recognise there's a clamour for more progress than they've been able to deliver. It's not for the want of trying. The realities are, at this level, that it's not a straight path."

The unrest Clibbens first heard at Notts County last season has plainly not gone away, though. "Nobody in the club thought it had," Clibbens says, adding that investment, and succession, may have to be delivered in order for the staunchest critics to be finally won over.

"Nobody is clinging on," he says. "There's a recognition there needs to be improvement and succession. The club is trying to make that happen."

*Tomorrow: Clibbens on owner criticism, the January transfer window and Keith Curle