essex canary

It is hard to believe that following the sale of Emi Buendia we actually show net spend of £1.13 million this year. Note that the published accounts give the actual audited figures based on complete financial years rather than close season which presumably this list reflects.

Can he sign for us then?

I absolutely agree on the tier point bearing in mind that the average casual ticket has been upped from £30 to £44. Also whilst £20 rebate is reasonable for a standard £500 season ticket, it isn't for an £840 lounge ticket. As was discussed at the Supporters Panel the end point of decision is also relevant, 2 days notice is radically different to 2 hours. If the former, people may hold onto the tickets in the hope of getting a higher price from their mates thereby creating a risk of empty seats if they then fail. This is the kind of detail the Club should share with their Consultative Groups before announcing it in order to get the feedback and fine tune the policy before announcing it.

I suspect it maybe because he doesn't see why 2 people paying the same fee should get a different level of service. I have some sympathy with that. My logic is that as a member who would otherwise qualify, typically attending two thirds of away games in the recent past I don't see why I should pay to frank my loyalty. Perhaps both reasons explain why away fees at other clubs are only charged to those who attend all or nearly all away matches with the tickets being automatically sent to them. All of this ought to have been subject to supporter consultation review prior to the start of the season bearing in mind that there are 15 matches of experience behind us.

How do you know the 750 elite is intact? The wife and I qualify but will refuse to pay the fee because we don't believe in having to validate loyalty. At least that gives you more opportunity.

On the subject of the £10 charge, we can vote with our feet but given what NCFC claim to be we should be able to vote with our hands.

Too right it is as is raising £500,000 from casual supporters or £200,000 from away fans. They tend to sell players for £30 million rather than £3 million. Any Club with any recent Premier League history is in a very favourable and privileged position relative to other Clubs regardless of the wealth of the owners. Stop moaning at or extracting from the fans and get on with it.

Sounds like a good opportunity for Ben. Chris Sutton notes in the last chapter of his book how Scottish Football has been moving in the right direction in terms of spectator interest. St. Johnstone winning both domestic cups was a great story. It will need it's Covid recovery plans without the TV monster we have in England. Raising casual attendance prices by 50 per cent won't be an option. Best wishes to Ben.

Given that the Club has been so successful in expanding its commercial income, why could it not tap into some of those sources for Capital development such as ground expansion? This is the kind of evolution rather than revolution strategy we could have.

Thanks. More clarity would be welcome. It is of course early days, just frustrating that the Club finds itself needing to recreate something that was working fine up to about 12 years ago but I appreciate that it is challenging for new volunteers though I agree with Jim Smith and Greavsy on the desired direction of travel. Another interesting dimension we had 17 years ago was 6 fan roadshows in different location's with Board member representation. These offered direct input opportunities for fans and of course took some pressure off the Consultation Group.

Hmm. The facts are that if you want to watch your local football team in Cambridge on a casual basis the price is £22 whereas in Norwich it has now jumped to an average £44. Is the ability to pay for the individual any different? As other correspondents have pointed out it is Robin Hood logic in reverse with very marginal increases in players wages being the outcome. Your assertion was that other Clubs don't consult on pricing. Maybe you are correct amongst the commercial behemoths of the Premier League but then there are fan owned community clubs. The 64,000 dollar question is what is NCFC trying to be?

I would rather judge us against ourselves 2004 vintage. The Annual Report for that year states: 'The Supporters Consultative Group is designed to enable supporters from different interest groups to discuss matters with the Board and senior management covering a diverse range of issues including pricing, catering, site development, away travel and ticketing."

The reason for that being that fans conducted the '20 is plenty' campaign on the grounds that with their huge TV contracts Premier League clubs do not need to charge more to the travelling away fan, 20 became 30. Last time round our club decided they didn't want to charge home fans more than away fans for the same product. Many other clubs took a different view and continued to charge more, At least the change restores a comparative advantage for season ticket holders at the moment though maybe there will be a substantial hike for that next season? Whatever the rights and wrongs the most stunning thing is again the lack of prior consultation with fans on a significant face change of policy. A 30% hike equals £3million which will still not revolutionise the budget and may price out some would be loyal fans. Demand and Supply it is but does it satisfy community inclusiveness especially bearing in mind that some would be attendees don't have the option of a season ticket and the average match cost associated with it.

In Delia's interview 2 months ago she mentioned how much stronger the administration was then compared to the past. When it comes to marketing they have never had better than Andy Cullen.

Because I am an NCFC fan, perhaps even an SJW fan up to a point but not as much as some. Family club needs to equal far more than 2 families.

One thing we must salute NCFC for was the refund or carry forward for season ticket holders. Many other clubs simply didn't, some of the smaller clubs couldn't afford it. Given the charges that some levied for ifollow it may have been an idea to have retained the odd million pound though arguable given the quality. We should also salute the 2019 promotion celebration. Everyone was included and a great chance for City Centre businesses to make some money. Of course it has been difficult this time round but a dinner for 600 people at Carrow Road costing £45 per head. How does this serve young people or other businesses? If this really is the way why not free with the first invites being sent to Fan of the Season contestants. This event will raise around £27,000, perhaps around 3 days wages for one of top paid footballers or less than the Directors Preference Share Dividends. The away ticket scheme charge. 8,000 members last time round probably less this time. Now £25 per head. Maximum Revenue £200,000. Lack of goodwill for one of the most travelled sets of supporters. Scrap it! How about a season ticket discount for individual minority shareholders. £1 per share minimum £10. Maximum cost £200,000 probably less. What Covid should have taught us, if we needed teaching, is that self funding whilst admirable and essential cannot be pursued to the nth degree. Ditto for bk8. Ditch the petty penny pinching and promote generosity and goodwill.

The fact that the PL package only gave a Club like Cambridge United two thirds or so of its gate money is a disgrace and typical of PL greed.

Over the last six years the total dividends were £200k and the total donations were £98k. We simply don't know whether the latter are from the Directors or other sources. In the previous 5 years the dividends were paid on time. Where does your Intellect take you on this one?

Hi GMF. I doubt whether the Directors are in the habit of donating those dividends back to the Club. If they did so I suspect that they would declare that position in the Related Parties Note as they have done at times for waiving other forms of interest. I am not totally expert on the latter but in looking at guidance it would appear that Related Parties declarations are not required to be made for items which could be deemed as regular remuneration including Dividends. Of course any such reward would be modest relative to that charged by other Clubs. Transparency?

FYI I came into this on behalf of a young inheritor of 1,000 shares who had never signed any agreement with the Club and simply didn't understand why she doesn't get any benefits relative to people who don't own shares whilst the Club simply wasnt proactive in explaining. If it had been my offspring they may well have been on ebay advertising the shares with the advantage of a Club Membership. It could end up costing the Club far more than making the seat inheritable ever would. Whatever the background the Club ought to drive its business practices into the 21st century.

OK. I guess the original prospectus did state that one of the risks was that company control was in the hands of the majority shareholders so need to take that on board though there was another comment about 'encouragement to retain shares' which of itself doesn't imply time limitations though the specifics may have done. Just more confusing communication like the Articles of Association which use the terms 'member' and 'membership' in reference to 2 different categories. Still I guess that my time in Essex has taught me that Norfolk is different. Interesting to note Purples comment about golf club membership. I am sure most golf clubs wouldn't dream of placing non members on their management committee yet placing non permanent shareholders on the Board of a football club seems OK. I think it is an industry that has a long way to go including NCFC.

I am an Accountant so I am able to interpret the Accounts. Taking the 2020 Annual Report the detail of the ownership of these shares is shown on pages 5 and 40. The figure for the Interst paid of which the directors claim more than 50% is shown in the middle of page 29. The figure on page 26 for donations coming in is much smaller. There are no comments concerning preference share dividends or repaying same in Related Party declarations on pages 42 and 43. Given the maths it is a complete mystery where greater than 50% of the £63,000 declared in the middle of page 29 has gone.

I look upon it as a dividend in kind which I didn't get during the pandemic. Let's switch the argument to all the small investors who bought 4 shares for £100 each. I think there is around 5,000 of you so that was £500,000 for the Club. The only potential benefit is the free home membership yet GMF indicates that almost nobody is claiming which means free money for the Club. Since you bought those shares the 3 main board directors have expanded their preference share holdings by £600,000 thereby earning an extra £27,000 interest each year. Do you still think it is the Club you are helping?

First 2 paragraphs fine. If you invest in shares you normally get dividends. I consider the seat to be my Dividend. If you calculate it at the (should be lower) Preference Share rate of 4.5% that works out at £1,500 over 15 months, effective loss on account of the pandemic. Word file on last posting failed. Further attempt below. NORWICH CITY SUPPORTERS PANEL PAPER v1.docx