Webber attracted by our BOARD!

[Mr Angry 1,545]

According to Companies House, Moxey is still a director. A change was filed on 080217, changing his role from CE to Company Director, effective from 020217-the date of his resignation as CE.

[OldRobert 38]

[quote user="Hoola Han Solo"]A non-3''xecutive director is an advisory/consultant type role. They will not take part in any of the board''s decision making, hence the giant clue of NON-executive in the title.[/quote]If part of their role is to facilitate strategic decisions by the

executive directors, how can that fail to be part of the decision making process, or am I being thick here, which is perfectly possible?

[lappinitup 629]

[quote user="OldRobert"][quote user="Hoola Han Solo"]A non-3''xecutive director is an advisory/consultant type role. They will not take part in any of the board''s decision making, hence the giant clue of NON-executive in the title.[/quote]If part of their role is to facilitate strategic decisions by the

executive directors, how can that fail to be part of the decision making process, or am I being thick here, which is perfectly possible?[/quote]Obviously they''ve failed to submit Form 288b again. [:S]Where''s Tangy when you need him? [:^)]

[Mr Angry 1,545]

No Lapps, this is clearly deliberate, they''ve completed Form CH01, Change of Particulars for Director.

[Van wink 2,994]

OldRobert wrote the following post at 16/04/2017 1:52 PM:

Hoola Han Solo wrote:

A non-3''xecutive director is an advisory/consultant type role. They will not take part in any of the board''s decision making, hence the giant clue of NON-executive in the title.

If part of their role is to facilitate strategic decisions by the executive directors, how can that fail to be part of the decision making process, or am I being thick here, which is perfectly possible?

They bring some external expertise Robert, have a role as you said as critical friend, asking the questions others might miss, but in this case no real authority.

[OldRobert 38]

[quote user="Van wink"]OldRobert wrote the following post at 16/04/2017 1:52 PM:

Hoola Han Solo wrote:

A non-3''xecutive director is an advisory/consultant type role. They will not take part in any of the board''s decision making, hence the giant clue of NON-executive in the title.

If part of their role is to facilitate strategic decisions by the executive directors, how can that fail to be part of the decision making process, or am I being thick here, which is perfectly possible?

They bring some external expertise Robert, have a role as you said as critical friend, asking the questions others might miss, but in this case no real authority.[/quote][Y]

[PurpleCanary 5,554]

[quote user="OldRobert"][quote user="Hoola Han Solo"]A non-3''xecutive director is an advisory/consultant type role. They will not take part in any of the board''s decision making, hence the giant clue of NON-executive in the title.[/quote]If part of their role is to facilitate strategic decisions by the

executive directors, how can that fail to be part of the decision making process, or am I being thick here, which is perfectly possible?[/quote]There is a confusion here. That type of non-executive director is usually someone who is not only not employed by the company but has no direct connection with it, apart from the directorship. Their role is to provide an independent view specifically as outsiders.This kind of arrangement normally exists in large companies where there are enough senior executives (chairman, chief executive, chief finance officer etc etc etc) to form a working board of decision-making directors.It is different with Norwich City, where traditionally we have only had one executive director - the CEO. And the others are non-executive, but they are directly connected with the club, either as owners or fans and as such are an intrinsic part of the decsion-making process. Indeed since the non-execs always outnumber the one exec....---This unbiased and agenda-free post comes to you from the PurpleCanary "Football finance made impenetrable" Helpline.

[OldRobert 38]

[quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="OldRobert"][quote user="Hoola Han Solo"]A non-3''xecutive director is an advisory/consultant type role. They will not take part in any of the board''s decision making, hence the giant clue of NON-executive in the title.[/quote]If part of their role is to facilitate strategic decisions by the

executive directors, how can that fail to be part of the decision making process, or am I being thick here, which is perfectly possible?[/quote]There is a confusion here. That type of non-executive director is usually someone who is not only not employed by the company but has no direct connection with it, apart from the directorship. Their role is to provide an independent view specifically as outsiders.This kind of arrangement normally exists in large companies where there are enough senior executives (chairman, chief executive, chief finance officer etc etc etc) to form a working board of decision-making directors.It is different with Norwich City, where traditionally we have only had one executive director - the CEO. And the others are non-executive, but they are directly connected with the club, either as owners or fans and as such are an intrinsic part of the decsion-making process. Indeed since the non-execs always outnumber the one exec....---This unbiased and agenda-free post comes to you from the PurpleCanary "Football finance made impenetrable" Helpline.[/quote]Thank you for your response Purple ("Football finance made impenetrable" Helpline.).  So therefore, I was right in that Moxey, although fired from his post at NCFC, still has a part in the decision making process at NCFC?  And if I have that right, and indeed his former post of CEO has subsequently been abolished, what was the point of sacking him?  Rhetorical question.

[Parma Ham's gone mouldy 2,219]

You typically contribute expertise to others who ultimately have the responsibility to take or enact any decision.

The non-Executive contributes expertise, contacts and an external critical eye over the business direction, operations, capabilities, weaknesses, wider market, competition, possible cross-pollination opportunities with other businesses and sectors, may even offer back-channel communication with competitors, buyers, sellers or investors.

Payments are ad-hoc or as a retainer and no employment liabilities are typically incurred by the client. In this way additional skills are accessed for relatively limited cost and investment.

In this way both thoughts are correct. It is technically a role that doesn''t take the decision per se, but may conversely have an influence over the decision taken. Having such roles in multiple Companies and across multiple sectors allows for excellent opportunities to share ideas, identify opportunities and merge positive elements from different sources. Any large Company or institution - including Norwich City - has a tendency to the insular after a period of time.

Parma

[PurpleCanary 5,554]

[quote user="OldRobert"][quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="OldRobert"][quote user="Hoola Han Solo"]A non-3''xecutive director is an advisory/consultant type role. They will not take part in any of the board''s decision making, hence the giant clue of NON-executive in the title.[/quote]If part of their role is to facilitate strategic decisions by the

executive directors, how can that fail to be part of the decision making process, or am I being thick here, which is perfectly possible?[/quote]There is a confusion here. That type of non-executive director is usually someone who is not only not employed by the company but has no direct connection with it, apart from the directorship. Their role is to provide an independent view specifically as outsiders.This kind of arrangement normally exists in large companies where there are enough senior executives (chairman, chief executive, chief finance officer etc etc etc) to form a working board of decision-making directors.It is different with Norwich City, where traditionally we have only had one executive director - the CEO. And the others are non-executive, but they are directly connected with the club, either as owners or fans and as such are an intrinsic part of the decsion-making process. Indeed since the non-execs always outnumber the one exec....---This unbiased and agenda-free post comes to you from the PurpleCanary "Football finance made impenetrable" Helpline.[/quote]Thank you for your response Purple ("Football finance made impenetrable" Helpline.).  So therefore, I was right in that Moxey, although fired from his post at NCFC, still has a part in the decision making process at NCFC?  And if I have that right, and indeed his former post of CEO has subsequently been abolished, what was the point of sacking him?  Rhetorical question.[/quote]No. I would be amazed if that were the case, given the manner of/background to his departure. He may still technically be a director but I would be prepared to wager a substantial amount of money that he takes absolutely no part in decision-making.

[Van wink 2,994]

"In this way both thoughts are correct. It is technically a role that doesn''t take the decision per se, but may conversely have an influence over the decision taken. Having such roles in multiple Companies and across multiple sectors allows for excellent opportunities to share ideas, identify opportunities and merge positive elements from different sources. Any large Company or institution - including Norwich City - has a tendency to the insular after a period of time."

👍

Maybe one day we will get a definitive view, we''re all speculating ATM. As Parma says a non exec directorship can take many forms, my suspicion is that this is an arrangement put in place more for the benefit of Moxey than NCFC, but that''s purely my assumption.

[OldRobert 38]

[quote] user="Parma Ham''s gone mouldy"]You typically contribute expertise to others who ultimately have the responsibility to take or enact any decision.

The non-Executive contributes expertise, contacts and an external critical eye over the business direction, operations, capabilities, weaknesses, wider market, competition, possible cross-pollination opportunities with other businesses and sectors, may even offer back-channel communication with competitors, buyers, sellers or investors.

Payments are ad-hoc or as a retainer and no employment liabilities are typically incurred by the client. In this way additional skills are accessed for relatively limited cost and investment.

In this way both thoughts are correct. It is technically a role that doesn''t take the decision per se, but may conversely have an influence over the decision taken. Having such roles in multiple Companies and across multiple sectors allows for excellent opportunities to share ideas, identify opportunities and merge positive elements from different sources. Any large Company or institution - including Norwich City - has a tendency to the insular after a period of time.

Parma [/quote]Is Moxey that much of an asset to NCFC, that we should retain him as an NED?  If he is, I ask again why did we fire him and not just shuffle him sideways or is that, as I suspect, exactly what we have done?

[A Load of Squit 5,128]

I may have missed this an earlier post but could this be a legal issue. If Moxey''s pay off for his contract termination isn''t a lump sum and is phased ove a number of payments and months does he need to be given a non-exec position?

[OldRobert 38]

[quote user="PurpleCanary"]No. I would be amazed if that were the case, given the manner of/background to his departure. He may still technically be a director but I would be prepared to wager a substantial amount of money that he takes absolutely no part in decision-making.[/quote]My thoughts entirely.  But you can hardly give someone a position then deny them the duties, functions whatever of that position.  If you don''t want them to carry out those functions surely you don''t give them the position in the first place.  NEDs can attend board meetings, vote, are sent agendas, why was he ''kept on?  As you say Purple there was a ''manner of his departure'', yet it would appear he''s stll here..................

[PurpleCanary 5,554]

[quote user="OldRobert"][quote] user="Parma Ham''s gone mouldy"]You typically contribute expertise to others who ultimately have the responsibility to take or enact any decision.

The non-Executive contributes expertise, contacts and an external critical eye over the business direction, operations, capabilities, weaknesses, wider market, competition, possible cross-pollination opportunities with other businesses and sectors, may even offer back-channel communication with competitors, buyers, sellers or investors.

Payments are ad-hoc or as a retainer and no employment liabilities are typically incurred by the client. In this way additional skills are accessed for relatively limited cost and investment.

In this way both thoughts are correct. It is technically a role that doesn''t take the decision per se, but may conversely have an influence over the decision taken. Having such roles in multiple Companies and across multiple sectors allows for excellent opportunities to share ideas, identify opportunities and merge positive elements from different sources. Any large Company or institution - including Norwich City - has a tendency to the insular after a period of time.

Parma [/quote]Is Moxey that much of an asset to NCFC, that we should retain him as an NED?  If he is, I ask again why did we fire him and not just shuffle him sideways or is that, as I suspect, exactly what we have done?[/quote]No again. This is almost certainly purely a case of the club not getting round to doing the paperwork to remove Moxey as a director. I would be surprised - to put it mildly - if he has set foot in Carrow Road since he was sacked as CEO, let alone done any work. He was only paid because he was CEO, so he won''t now be getting a salary. To all intent and purposes he no longer has any connection with the club.

[OldRobert 38]

[quote user="PurpleCanary"]No again. This is almost certainly purely a case of the club not getting round to doing the paperwork to remove Moxey as a director. I would be surprised - to put it mildly - if he has set foot in Carrow Road since he was sacked as CEO, let alone done any work. He was only paid because he was CEO, so he won''t now be getting a salary. To all intent and purposes he no longer has any connection with the club.[/quote]I wonder if the club are aware that if you are right, and they haven''t done their paperwork, the press have picked up on the fact that Moxey is only sitting on the FL board because he is a NED of NCFC?

[Lessingham Canary 99]

@Purple

No again. This is almost certainly purely a case of the club not getting round to doing the paperwork to remove Moxey as a director. I would be surprised - to put it mildly - if he has set foot in Carrow Road since he was sacked as CEO, let alone done any work. He was only paid because he was CEO, so he won''t now be getting a salary. To all intent and purposes he no longer has any connection with the club.

Very much doubt that, cost the club nothing to retain him for a period as a Non exec, would have been done as a gesture on his exit, purely until he finds another job. No more no less than that imo.

[PurpleCanary 5,554]

[quote user="Lessingham Canary"]@Purple

No again. This is almost certainly purely a case of the club not getting round to doing the paperwork to remove Moxey as a director. I would be surprised - to put it mildly - if he has set foot in Carrow Road since he was sacked as CEO, let alone done any work. He was only paid because he was CEO, so he won''t now be getting a salary. To all intent and purposes he no longer has any connection with the club.

 Very much doubt that, cost the club nothing to retain him for a period as a Non exec, would have been done as a gesture on his exit, purely until he finds another job. No more no less than that imo.[/quote]One of is right and one of us is wrong. If it turns out he does still step inside Carrow Road and work for the club then I will happily acknowlege my error. Given everything, I doubt there was much desire to make a gesture of goodwill to him. It would certainly have nothing to do with tiding him over until he finds another job, since being a non-executive director of NCFC is not a job. It is possible he asked our board to be allowed to keep this nominal status for a while (and to be clear he hasn''t just been made a director - he always was one) so he could carry on as a director of the Football League, but apart from that I would still be amazed if he has any practical connection with the club.

[Van wink 2,994]

"It is possible he asked our board to be allowed to keep this nominal status for a while (and to be clear he hasn''t just been made a director - he always was one) so he could carry on as a director of the Football League, but apart from that I would still be amazed if he has any practical connection with the club."

Would be very surprised if it is any more than a convenient arrangement agreed by the club to assist him with his FL role. Nothing wrong with that in my view.

[Lessingham Canary 99]

Purple wrote;

One of is right and one of us is wrong. If it turns out he does still step inside Carrow Road and work for the club then I will happily acknowlege my error. Given everything, I doubt there was much desire to make a gesture of goodwill to him. It would certainly have nothing to do with tiding him over until he finds another job, since being a non-executive director of NCFC is not a job.

It is possible he asked our board to be allowed to keep this nominal status for a while (and to be clear he hasn''t just been made a director - he always was one) so he could carry on as a director of the Football League, but apart from that I would still be amazed if he has any practical connection with the club.

Thats not what i was saying Purple, he won''t step inside Carrow Rd, the board will have granted him a period of time to hold the title "non exec director" so he can carry on at the EFL, as soon as he gets a proper job it will be taken away!

[Van wink 2,994]

👍

[PurpleCanary 5,554]

[quote user="Lessingham Canary"]Purple wrote;

One of is right and one of us is wrong. If it turns out he does still step inside Carrow Road and work for the club then I will happily acknowlege my error. Given everything, I doubt there was much desire to make a gesture of goodwill to him. It would certainly have nothing to do with tiding him over until he finds another job, since being a non-executive director of NCFC is not a job.

It is possible he asked our board to be allowed to keep this nominal status for a while (and to be clear he hasn''t just been made a director - he always was one) so he could carry on as a director of the Football League, but apart from that I would still be amazed if he has any practical connection with the club.

Thats not what i was saying Purple, he won''t step inside Carrow Rd, the board will have granted him a period of time to hold the title "non exec director" so he can carry on at the EFL, as soon as he gets a proper job it will be taken away![/quote]No. Your reply said - "Very much doubt that" - which had to be a blanket assertion that you were disagreeing with everything I was saying in my post, which included my belief that he was not now to be seen anywhere near Carrow Road and to all intents and purposes he now had nothing to do with the running of the football club. I was also correcting your false idea that somehow being a Norwich City non-executive director is a job of any kind, proper or not, when it is not.

[hogesar 9,618]

If this helps and I''m not sure it does, he moved out of where he was living in Norwich approx 4 weeks ago.

[Mello Yello 2,279]

Maybe those ''investigative reporters'' at Archant can delve into the background of this supposed Moxey ''non story'' and clear all doubt?......

[Van wink 2,994]

So they delve?

[Mello Yello 2,279]

Well if delve means have a butchers and see if Mr Moxey is still part of the decision making process at the club.....Or to ask or query any other questions that have since been raised on this post discussion, then yes, delve. I''m sure the curious amongst us would like to know.....either way?

[Van wink 2,994]

Yes indeed.

👍

[Big Vince 318]

So the boy Webber finds dimwits attractive?

It still staggers me that after 20 years on the board, Delia, Wynnie and Foulger feel it necessary to hire someone to tell them how to run the club. Surely those 3 should know everything there is to know about the workings of a professional football club after all this time? What have they been doing all this time to wind up with so little knowledge? Why can''t they run the club without Webber? Could you ever imagine Mr Chase being as clueless as this?

Big Vince smells a rat.

The boy Webber could only have been hired for one reason - and that is to be another human shield if it all goes wrong (again) for Delia and Wynnie.

But they really are playing in the chance last saloon this time. Supporters will surely not be taken for fools again if this one goes wrong. The finger of blame can point in only one direction.

[Nuff Said 5,089]

Bit early to be p*ssed isn''t it Vince?

[Van wink 2,994]

Match preparation