BigFish

I think anyone who spends any time on here knows who they are, and yes it is clear that some have been looking forward to this in giddy anticipation. And before anyone suggest fans are turning on each other, I don't believe they are fans, well not of NCFC anyway. That is not to defend the club in the face of what has been a very poor season, littered with mistakes. It is only to call out behaviours from a small number of posters. They know who they are. OTBC

Not really KG, Chicken is right in that a number of trolls have been acheing for this moment

Nothing to prevent the UK (or would it be UR) having direct elections for HoS and nothing to indicate that the elected HoS would have their nose in the trough anymore than the Royal Family has over the centuries either. This could go much further with a Senate replacing the House of Lords, greater devolution and the abolition of titles. Why not throw in a wealth tax as well.

Except it is not really semantics, is it? A rights issue to fund a loss making enterprise without changing the fundamentals of a business makes no sense at all. You could justify it for building infrastructure e.g. a new City Stand or even a completly new stadium, but for underwriting operational expenditure it is clearly not normal business practice. It is just another attempt to find a magic money tree.

This is the key, a prolonged stay in the PL isn't an investment that provides a return, except in the obvious sporting terms and perhaps good will. Higher wages and amortisation eats up all the extra cash from EPL and the club is no bigger, e.g. one bad season from the Chumps.

Eh? No, not really. Yes, selling new shares increases the size of the club in financial terms. But only when that cash is in the bank, the moment you start spending the cash is dilutes the value of the shares. For example, say the share issue values the club at £150 million & we raise £50 million through a rights issue. Then the club is worth £200 million. If we spend that on the team over a few seasons e.g, run at a loss at the end of that period the club is probably worth the equivalent of £150m but the shareholders have lost 25% of value of their shares value and the club doesn't have the money. It works in business because it makes the business bigger if successful, spending on the team doesn't change the fundamentals of the club.

No offense @Branston Pickle because this is true of most fans but this is exactly the kind of fundamentals that mean we will always remain a medium size club.

As @nutty nigel points out we are effectively owned by fans and this is the fundamental behind the self funding model the club follows. Perhaps the OP should have said different fans, although that doesn't really shift the dial on the club's finances. Would still need to break even unless those fans were willing to not only buy the club but also cover any loses that might arise. Would you put your house on the line for City? Running a football club is no fun, and is harder than people make out. Which is why fan consortiums either eventually sell out to financiers or accept bouncing about the lower leagues. Governance might also be an issue, would it be one man one vote or would blocks develop over time taking us back to where we are now with fans arguing amongst themselves. That said if it was that rather than going out of business everyone would take that. But face it the club is well enough run to avoid that or even administration.

Truth be acknowledged we are punching very much at our weight, not above, not below but pretty much as the fundamentals for a club like Norwich would dictate as a statistical average (e.g position 20.5). I agree it would be more exciting if the highs were higher, but just think what this board would be like when the lows were lower. Perspective is difficult when the failures are closer than the successes as well. Our business was bad this close season, out players haven't been good enough & Webber couldn't complain if he had to go on that basis. That we won the Chumps last season is largely forgotten, and certainly the club is better placed than when he joined.

Interesting looking at the names in those tables, of the 13 clubs at the bottom in 2013, 6 played this season in the Chumps, 1 in League 1 and we are getting relegated. Of the 9 on 2016 list , 3 played this year in the Chumps, 1 in League 1 & 2 are getting relegated. Rather dispels the myth that is becoming an established EPL team or that the club is particularly underperforming.

If you are a fan, the answer to this question is always yes. If you are a troll on the other hand..........

If you stopped posters on here posting stupid comments the board would be empty

This ignores the reality of modern football. Since Bosman, there really is no long term. Each close season clubs (if they are fortunate enough) build the best possible squad they can, and outside the big six or seven that tends to include loan players. The Buendia situation shows that even after a successful season that players will move upwards, the Cantwell situation shows the reverse. The only long term players clubs like Norwich have are those good enough to play at our level (top end Chumps/bottom end EPL) but not good enough to step up to even mid-table EPL. And before anyone posts it, this is not a factor of lack of ambition or committment it is the law of the jungle.

Back in the good old days when the capacity was higher and the number of season ticket holders lower this was exactly what happened. That is not even to say it was a bad thing, lots of people play on Saturdays and if there was an evening game would often just casually take it in after work. The result is more unique fans but lower average attendences.

This season only Krul & Pukki really looked the part, so if we define midfield as everyone from our No 1 to our No 9 sunk us then we could all agree.

Let's face it, we are what are called legacy fans and the game is no longer designed to meet our preferences. Not only that, it is unlikely ever to change in our direction. It is now all about content production and it has been headed in this direction since the Premier League came into existance. The fans have largely been complicit in this, happy if it suited their own club, only complaining when it didn't. Norwich fans are as bad as any on that tbf.

Probably tongue in cheek but this is a good point, when he inherits he may have a very different view than his aunt and uncle. Doesn't compensate for the total lack of credible "investors" though

Go on Jimbo, surprise us with any facts/evidence that support your statement. You may well have a wealth of insider information that you haven't shared with us so far but seeing the standards of your inane posting I rather doubt it. Do you know the inner workings of Smith & Jones minds. No. Can you come up with any "interested parties" that have been detered. No. Is there any evidence that S&J act against the best interests of the club. No. So Yes, in fact, it is only opinion and a rather ignorant, misogynistic, bitter and petty opinion at that.

OK, I'll bite and avoid the rather unfunny quips. I guess that if someone was to offer £150m to £200 million the deal would be done (if they actually had the cash, rather than some kind of financial engineering/borrowing exercise). This seems the going rate of clubs of our size. That said I sincerely think no one is interested who meets the criteria.

This made me think of Sam Kroenke at Arsenal. Not least because there is refutation of the "no one will bid unless Delia puts up a for sale sign" brigade. Arsenal are not for sale, but that didn't stop Daniel Ek making a credible bid including fan ownership and a golden share. It was rejected, but the point is that it was known, public and actually happened. Kroenke also froze out Usimov until the later agreed to sell up his 30%. Kroenke's interest in Arsenal wasn't originally welcomed by the Arsenal board but he moved from a technical association, through a small share holding, to a place on the board, built trust, before finally gaining majority control with the purchase of long standing share holdings. The point here is that it is doable with time and determination. But it took Kroenke four years to gain majority control and eleven to complete the entirety of the purchase. There is no evidence that anyone with these attributes is available for City. And the Irony is Arsenal are a self-funding club in anycase.

There is certainly a particularly chippy group that in the the absence of fact resort to personal abuse of Smith & Jones and their motives, often of a mysogynstic nature.

This is only opinion, there is no evidence to support it whatsoever. No "interested party" has emerged, and so no one has been detered. This is the magical thinking of a small subsection of the support who dey the idea that maybe the current regime is the best a mid-sized provincial football club could expect.

So this would be a good place for a Billionaire "Investor" to start to acquire a brridgehead share holding

Worth adding to that that no one needs Delia's approval to begin building a stake in the club from the other 48% of the shareholding

While probably fair criticism that the club doesn't sweat its' assets enough, just imagine the dogs abuse the board would get if it did & we still had a season like this one.