DEB (never forgotten)

http://readnorwich.com/2016/01/04/norwich-interested-west-brom-outcast/

Translated article in French paper this morning; Norwich tries a bundle for Mandanda and Nkoulou Besides playing together at Olympique de Marseille goalkeeper Steve Mandanda and defender Nicolas Nkoulou the center also have another important common point. Clearly, the French and Cameroon will be free of any contract in June 2016. Referring to L''Equipe, we learn that the leaders of Norwich would consider arriving in a few days to secure the services of the keeper and defender are both experienced. The departure of these elements significantly weaken the strength of Marseille for the second part of the season.

http://www.fcinter1908.it/ultim-ora/sky-ranocchia-vuole-rimanere-in-serie-a-il-bologna-insiste-e-pare-che-le-parti-171899 SKY - RANOCCHIA WANTS TO STAY IN SERIE A. BOLOGNA INSISTS AND IT SEEMS THAT THE PARTIES ... 01.01.2016 19:30 Andrea Della Sala Twitter: @ dellas8427 article read 107 times Source: Sky Sports The future of Ranocchia seems away from Inter. The defender is looking for a new team to find the continuity that Inter are not getting. Norwich follows him but he wants to stay in Italy and Bologna is quite interested. As reported by Sky Sports seems that Inter and Bologna are closer to what the arrangements for payment of the engagement to the player. Denied, however the interest of Roma to Inter defender.

http://www.fcinter1908.it/copertina/ranocchia-toglie-la-multa-all-inter-ritorno-di-fiamma-per-santon-e-in-entrata-171701 The Norwich is serious - The English club - mired in relegation - Inter would present the final offer for Andrea Ranocchia. The dish arrived 11 million euro that would come into the coffers if the Nerazzurri club - that would borrow player - could be saved: loan repurchase obligations in the event of salvation. OFFER - Inter have not remained indifferent to the British proposal, to the point of putting stalled the transfer of frogs to Bologna. The "swag" allow - also - the Nerazzurri to fix the budget and avoid paying the second "installment" of the fine imposed by UEFA. Thohir, to be precise, has until June 30 to be within the -30 million agreed . The ball goes to the player who will have to decide whether to accept the British proposal, listen to the Spanish and - ultimately - to assess that coming from Bologna (loan).  TESORETTO - if it were to materialize the operation Ranocchia - Norwich the Nerazzurri would cash in a cash to invest.

https://icsolointerpv.wordpress.com/2015/12/30/ranocchia-norwich-linter-lo-cede-11-milioni-per-il-difensore-leggi-la-notizia-completa-qui-httpift-tt-1ysvrrm-alessandro-basta/

Seems as though City are the only club prepared to pay 11m euros in advance of a deadline by which Inter would satisfy ''fair play'' requirements.

Going from the Inter defence for the forthcoming January transfer market. Departing is Ranocchia: according to Corriere dello Sport, the English club Norwich made ​​an offer of 11 million Euros with the formula of an initial loan with redemption obligation in the event of final agreement. The decision goes to the player, in the background remain open tracks that lead to Seville and Bologna, as well interest from Santon.

http://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/sport/football/transfer-news/newcastle-united-transfers-magpies-join-10613894 Looks like he will end up in the north east.

http://www.express.co.uk/sport/football/626587/Sunderland-cold-Norwich-bid-French-striker  

Yes

http://www.meisstudio.com/carrow-road/  

Definitely true (unfortunately) - and is potentially damaging our ability to capitalise on the next generation of support, support that could be forever lost to that grubby little club should they become more successful. I live and work in North Suffolk - my kids play local football and I am aware of many families that attend matches at PR due to ticket availability, despite being impartial with their support - they just want to go several times a season to see professional football. This really is a largely unrecognised problem. We must give very careful consideration to implementing much needed capacity increase at the earliest opportunity. Given our very mediocre net spend throughout the summer transfer window, if we were to survive in the PL this season (& enjoy the benefit of a substantial increase in turnover from next season onwards), expansion is a no-brainer I would think.

It is also important to note that after promotion to the premier league in 2011, we cleared well over £20m of net debt at the same time as making significant squad investment, at a time when turnover was significantly less than it will be now. McNally commented after publication of the 2013 accounts as follows: "There was £19.7m of player investment in the last financial year, up from £10.4m, and increase in spending made possible by successfully retaining our Premier League status, and the £49.03m received for television rights, a figure which will rise to somewhere between £62m and £64m for this season".

Ten months ago the club released financial statements for the year to 30th June 2014, and gave commentary as to the (then) financial position. Key points of note: - Revenue up to £95.5m (£78.7m in 2013) - Profit after tax of £6.7m (£0.5m in 2013) - External debt was reduced to zero (£0.2m at June 2013) - Operating activities generated £24.9m cash which was used to invest in the playing squad. Key actions taken in the business within the last 12 months include: - Financial position remains strong despite relegation due to no debt and relegation clauses in all player contracts. - Continued strategy of investing spare cash in to football in each transfer window. The Club’s main objective for the current season is to return to the Premier League at the first opportunity. City Chairman Alan Bowkett commented: “I find myself in the uncomfortable position of being disappointed that the club has reported an above forecast profit for last year. "This surplus is due to our failure to remain in The Premier League and as a consequence bonus payments due for success have not been paid. “The good news is that this surplus has enabled us to construct one of the strongest squads in the Championship and our overall performance to date has been encouraging. “Due to our strong balance sheet we are able to totally focus on planning our return to The Premier League. We believe we have the human and financial resources to achieve" From subsequent information released through local media we can establish that non budgeted income (from the play-off''s) further strengthened the club''s financial position, and player trading throughout the year to 30th June 2015 was undertaken at a net surplus. It is also worth noting that our club was effectively debt free by June 2013. The forthcoming release of the 2015 accounts should provide us with more clarification of the club''s financial state, healthy or not!

[quote user="Dead Canary"]The point is DEB that you can''t compare net spend on players until the end of January. Your quoted number includes players signed in that window and you need a full season because finances, both TV money in and transfers out, are accounted for over a year not just the August window. Also until last seasons accounts are released we don''t know how much we have had to potentially pay back this season and thus the effect on our playing budget. Until these two factors are sorted your question has no answers and come the end of the January window may no longer be pertinent.[/quote] Excellent points put most eloquently! In retrospect, my figures included the likes of Howson, but I still conclude (on balance) that we must have significant balance of transfer budget available for January - and I fail to understand why we didn''t take advantage of increasing funds further, by the £7m on offer for Grabban. On field performance between now and the January window is of critical importance, as will be our success (or otherwise) in what is a very difficult time in trading players. Why we would go forward with such weaknesses in the area''s of central defence & up front is truly baffling.

[quote user="Dead Canary"]Something you aren''t taking into consideration DEB is whether we made a loss last season as the accounts are yet to be produced. It is well known that the club arranged a £6m overdraft facility just in case, would have also had to pay out significant bonuses upon promotion, maybe a pay off for Adams and a payment for hiring Alex Neil. We could have made a loss last season and be paying that back, something we won''t know until the accounts are released. Also can I add our wages now will probably be higher than in the seasons Lambert was here due to us maintaining a large proportion of the squad that we went down with. These players will now be back on the wages they were last time we were in the premier league plus we have a number of additional signings who were already established premier league players and will have wages to match. Transfer spend isn''t everything when it comes to the budget and the wage factor shouldn''t be discounted when we look at the clubs spending.[/quote] Indeed, I suspect that we may have incurred a loss last season, despite the £15m parachute money and play-off related income streams. We were informed that squad salaries were reduced significantly, in accordance with contract clauses, but it remains likely that costs may have exceeded income. However, that is no explanation for the significant differential in net squad investment in comparison to this time 4 years ago, when the club were handicapped by £27m of net debt, with an associated commitment for repayment.

[quote user="westcoastcanary"][quote user="norfolkbroadslim"]Westcoastcanary, IF that is the situation, then we are never going to progress. We will be the eternal West Brom of old. Little old Norwich forever x[/quote] The basis on which the club operates has been clearly stated several times. In simple terms, everything has to be funded from the income the club generates; nobody is putting private money in, and nobody is siphoning money out. If we want to keep increasing the amount available to spend on the team, we must either reduce spending elsewhere and/or keep growing the club income. This can be done, but it takes time, clever management and everyone pulling in the same direction. It doesn''t help to have impatient fans who appear to think there''s far more money to spend than there is. If you want to shortcut the process of slow, step-by-step improvement, you need to come up with an acceptable way of funding expenditure far in excess of club income. There are plenty of examples of club''s ruined by pursuing such strategies.[/quote] Perfectly logical, reasoned common sense - but the point is that back in 2011/12 we entered the premier league with approx £27m of net debt. We were successful in eradicating this over our 3 seasons of premier league membership prior to relegation. At the same time, we regulary invested more heavily in the transfer market than in the one just ended. The transfer window ending 31/8/11 (when entering the premier league under Lambert) saw us invest a total of £14.05m (net): IN: Pilkington £2.0M Vaughan £2.5m Morison £2.5m Bennett (E) £1.5m Bennett (R) £3.2m Howson £2.0M Ayala £0.8m OUT: McDonald £0.45m   The window just ended saw us invest (circa) £3.5m net. A significant reduction in respective net investment in the squad, at a time when we have no commitment to debt repayment. Clearly, we appear less ambitious or less willing to back our manager this time round.

http://www.edp24.co.uk/sport/norwich-city/bradley_johnson_thanks_norwich_city_fans_and_says_i_ll_never_forget_you_1_4219635

http://www.edp24.co.uk/sport/norwich-city/bradley_johnson_thanks_norwich_city_fans_and_says_i_ll_never_forget_you_1_4219635  

Does the club not do PR anymore? Cut-backs?

''City had indicated they would be prepared to accept an improved £7million offer for the player. However, it is believed the Norfolk outfit blocked the move and refused to sign the relevant paperwork before informing Cherries of their decision five minutes before the deadline''. http://www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/sport/13639445.AFC_Bournemouth__Grabban_deal_falls_through_at_11th_hour/  

Not very much lying at the very bottom of the barrel is there?!What have we become?!

http://m.bournemouthecho.co.uk/sport/13639445.AFC_Bournemouth__Grabban_deal_falls_through_at_11th_hour/  

http://m.bournemouthecho.co.uk/sport/13639445.AFC_Bournemouth__Grabban_deal_falls_through_at_11th_hour/ Surely it was imperative that we got Grabban out of the squad? - but with £7m on offer why would we agree to sell but then refuse to sign off paperwork and conclude an excellent bit of business? Some of our decision making during this crucial transfer window has been (to put it politely) very questionable!

[quote user="Branston Pickle"]I hope so, and hope/expect the players and true fans to have a bit more stomach for it than some of the keyboard muppets on here. All is not doom and gloom, defence apart we have a better squad than we had at the start of the transfer window - obviously we hoped it would be improved still, but it wasn''t to be.[/quote]   You hope/expext the true fans to have the stomach for what is sure to be an incredibly hard fight at such a critical moment in the history of our club, with the riches and rewards of continued premiership membership going forward from this season - but the magnitude of difficulty has been exagerated significantly, both as a result of our club''s failure to show ambition over the period through to yesterday and it''s mismanagement of players and club finance. Some ''muppets'' appear unwilling or unable to process the implications/importance of our transfer window failings in their closed minds. If we were to somehow replenish moral and confidence within the squad and go on to avoid relegation, it will go down as a truly remarkable achievement.