shefcanary

Perhaps its time to take that 2nd degree, or even a masters? 😉

An angle I've never seen before. Is that the ball underneath the Wednesday player who may have just bulldozed City's keeper into the net? Over the line? Clear foul? Goal or not goal? VAR?

Look, I am not selling my shares to anyone! Unless I have no choice, okay!

Untied have just confirmed today they've bought the remaining land on their Bramall Lane stadium footprint from their former owner (who was playing hardball after losing in court to the current owner), they earlier this month bought a large site for their new training campus at the edge of the City from HSBC, and are currently spending a few million revamping the hotel in the corner of their stadium. It seems their owner is prioritising assets over team building, so yes, they are skint in that regards. A real test for them next season given that over half the current squad see their contracts ending at the end of this season! Not sure any are worthy of our attention especially if we go up.

Not all of us, mea culpa! Wagner asked if he'd have voted for McLean for PotS: "Yes, but I was a little bit surprised that so many supporters chose him. Normally the players who score goals and are in the spotlight win these awards. This only shows how smart our supporters are, and he fully deserves this award."

@MC_NCFC conveyed higher up the thread how Attanasio and his backers had an interest in Sara's contract. Some of us fear it may be bordering on third party ownership but they seem initially to have found a way around the rules governing this. In theory if repeated it should allow Norwich to attract more players of Sara's quality to the club even with a limited budget.

I've heard on the local grapevine up here that Sheffield United's goalkeeping coach has said they have already enquired after Johanson for next season, but have dropped their pursuit because they can't afford him! 😳💰

Just cut out the silly mistakes Kenny! Just one bottle of 20/20 Mad Dog on the City Hall balcony in May! 😉

And I know you know that the important word here is technically - but not in reality. I was FD at a company that had positive net assets until we had to incorporate the bloody FRS17 Defined Benefit Pension liability turning it into mass liabilities - it was not really a true liability but the projected cost of providing pensions over the rest of the pensioners lives (I could argue all day that this made accounts meaningless for years and wasted so much time trying to explain it to lay board members - I'll not even try on here). The company was always cash flow positive and financially sound. Grrrr .... Have any companies failed because the FRS17 Pension liability alone stopped them trading? In short, no! Until Sky funding (or whatever broadcast company succeeds them) and other foreign broadcasters decides Football is not the major subscription draw in the world, cash will be swimming around the football world negating any true concerns over financially managing clubs prudently. The trick is ensuring non-EPL teams get access to more of it! Next season we will be just like any other club, more's the shame, but there we go. Norfolk FB Holdings will hopefully become a bit more transparent in time and we will understand a little more about their plans, like more detail on Sara's true contract ownership which was to me a bombshell dropped last night!

The net liabilities in last year's accounts when you boil it down was effectively created by the loan from Attanasio / Norfolk FBH. In practical terms was this a true liability? Add back the £33m (or so) loaned and the accounts look completely different again. The squad was probably worth £50m (on a cash basis of 50 or so players, not an accounting basis, as excellently put by GMF above), the latest value of the land at Carrow Road given its prime location (and wary of course of potential flooding issues) you could probably add another £20m minimum (also not in the accounts). I've got to assets of about £80m without trying! Sure there are liabilities as well, but if operations have been managed well in the current season, not anywhere near as great as last financial year-end. If, hypothetically, a Norfolk born entrepreneur made an offer to buy the club that met the approval of both sets of majority shareholders, what would be their offer price to achieve this? That is the valuation of the club that really matters, which would then determine a share price (but only in this hypothetical situation - I'm trying not to excite Essex too much, but looking at this from a Corporate Financiers point of view). I hear what Chicken says, the price should be only what someone is prepared to pay. But in my hypothetical situation you have a Burnley type sale - is the club worth more than the £90m paid for them? I'd say yet again yes, the potential for Norwich as the prime club in a geographical area spanning nearly a quarter of England is much greater than for Burnley who are destined to live in the shadow of the Mancunians and Scousers. I agree all that is hypothetical and one only for the Corporate Financiers of this world, those trying to do deals etc. But that is why I brought up the £70-£80 share sales, because it is the only evidence of a market place at the moment. But even those prices are about half what the hypothetical friendly investor would have to pay to the existing majority shareholders now to gain complete control in corporate financial terms. Meanwhile Attanasio seems to be on a "promise" eventually he can obtain 81% holding by only investing c. £50m (based on his investment and loans so far) which is around £50 per share (I'm looking here from his perspective, not an accounting one). He's definitely getting control of the club on the cheap from my perspective. Especially comparing it to the Burnley sale. That's my main point really. Even Chicken cannot deny that? My other point is that the key from here is what checks and balances Smith & Jones build in to any disposal agreement that allows them to sell their shares to Attanasio. This is where things may drag on for another 10 years or so ..... 😉

I recognise that Canaries Trust don't set the price, I said they advertise the price that someone is asking for. I'm going to go over old ground once again here, but here is my view. For share valuation, that is ultimately determined in a non-stock exchange managed environment by what someone wants to pay for outright control of the club, its corporate value. All we can do is compare what other clubs have been valued at in such "takeovers" or even prospective "takeovers" which indeed picks up on your "small number of shares versus controlling interests versus complete control". I don't think you can argue on the evidence from say Burnley (an equivalent yo-yo EPL / Champs club) of a sale price of £90m, perhaps a bit more aegument by the Princes' asking price for Sheffield United (again a similar yo-yo club) of £150m. To date Attanasio has bought a stake of 40.4% for c. £8m, inputting a value on the club of only c.£20m, that is definitely alt of kilter with the values placed on similar clubs. Is the value of a potential EPL club based in Norwich really only worth a fifth of one based in Burnley? If you take Attanasio's other investment (okay loans, but will he ever see them repaid?) that "enabled" the acquisition of his 40% stake (the £10m pref shares and the letter of credit of £28m), it totals £46m. That grossed up equates to £115m which I'd argue is more like the true value of the club. That takes the share price to c. £140 per share. But I accept Attanasio seems destined to achieve ultimate control of the club for very much less than £115m. Will he ever buy out the minority interests to test a wider market? Maybe, maybe not. And people dealing in small groups of shares at the moment don't seem persuaded to hang out for anything higher than £80. This one is a very different football club takeover than any other. One for the pedants to review for years to come!

The model is interesting but Purps is right to question how close it is to breaching 3rd party rules! It does perhaps answer a question behind of Weaver's departure; dealing with this model is going to be burdensome and require new skills.

If we get promoted, then the next transfer window will be busier than any of us thought and might increase the profile of players we can sign!! 😃

I see Long being sold, Reyes as No.2, Barden loaned/ No. 3 (if Gunn stays). Unless we get promoted, when can see a more experienced No.2 being brought in.

Wow, I didn't know that! Puts a slightly different view on things, we are in fact being used as a testing ground then? Can I ask where you have gained this knowledge?

I think the OP was channelling knowledge that Attanasio's clearance from the EFL was being announced today, in that dream! Pre-Cog! I'm not alluding to Attanasio being Trump-lite BTW!

That £33m debt package (or letter of credit) also included the £5m for the share allotment, so now it has been reduced in theory to £28m, although until we see the next financial statements whether the full letter of credit is still being utilised I don't know. We have discussed earlier in this thread that the existing majority shareholders were keen that this transaction was based on the same figure as the majority of other shares were originally paid for, which was £25 (from the public issue of shares in early 2000's that lead to the current corporate structure of the club), rather than a true market value (the Canaries Trust are advertising asking prices of £70-80 per share as evidence of this). And yes, given Smith & Jones public statement that they are not seen to benefit from their disposal of their shares (i.e. sold at or above £25 per share), the most likely way to effect the transfer of their shareholding to Attanasio is for him to buy their shares at that £25 per share (total c. £11m) and by some legal means / slight of hand, write-off (rather than converting) Norfolk's loans in part but non-monetary consideration, for those shares. However that is very complicated to achieve, will involve tax implications for all parties and may yet require further reviews by EPL if Norwich are in it at that stage. I'm sceptical it could ever achieve the complete write-off of the loans however so if it happens there will be a fudge as always.

Yes, on votes that result in a major change in the corporate structure (shares & loans etc.) of the club. Attanasio can vote against Smith & Jones on business as usual stuff at Board meetings however, although to win any vote if he doesn't take advantage of the right to appoint his own additional director, in theory he would not win a vote on anything he alone wanted to effect. As others have said earlier on this thread and as Paddy has said many times, with his money now bankrolling the club, would Smith & Jones now risk antagonising him and thus risk withdrawal of his loans? So as of today Attanasio is now formally effectively running things. You could argue now that Smith & Jones are merely marking his territory / protecting their own investment / providing checks and balances on behalf of the supporters of the club?

January 26th 2026!

24th April 2024 then. I am surprised that it wasn't a May date, but there again perhaps the club's potential involvement in the play-offs and potential promotion gave the EFL a kick up the jacksy to complete their work before the club didn't fall out from under their jurisdiction for a twelve months! So, given where we currently are in terms of the play-offs, I don't think we will hear much from Attanasio until our season has formally ended; he wouldn't want to upset the way the run in is being managed at this stage. However I'm sure he has already sorted out hotels for May 26th should they be needed. After the Spring bank holiday we should see plenty of announcements - if we're lucky even from the City Hall balcony!

If Wagner is in charge next season I can't see this happening because Brereton-Diaz can't defend for toffee, which is what Wagner demands of his forwards - witness the match on Saturday where he just allowed the opposition player to waltz past him in the penalty box. Comical. As for Maupay - no, he is one mardy **** and genuinely seems to **** off the rest of the side around him at times. His only redeeming feature is his ability to score 1 in 4. But surely we would need a 1 in 3'er at least?

It's because until you get a chance to watch back in a replay it is difficult to lip read what is said, but the action of "waving an imaginary yellow card" is visible immediately. However, if the ref was miked up on the other hand as in rugby. Also, the restriction of discussion with the ref whilst the game is in play was supposed to be restricted to the captain only. They did enforce this at the beginning of the season, but it seems to have been forgotten by everyone as we hit the crunch part of the season.

I actually had a swap IIRC! Lost many years ago! Soz.

So, the EFL have already determined WBA will finish 5th, like the FA had pre-determined an all Manchester Cup Final. 🤪🤣

Hmm, the news on the date of the playoff final implies the EFL already believe they are going to finish 5th! A bit like the FA deciding it was going to be an all Manchester Cup final! #modernfootballisrubbish