Accounts released

[Icecream Snow 761]

For me the worrying thing is how many of our players on high wages are contracted until the end of 2019.

Wes and Tettey are till the end of this season, but we''ve got Naismith, Jarvis, McGovern, Klose, Pinto, Wildshut and Jerome till 2019. Some of those other clubs will want, but I''m concerned who we''d be stuck with.

[hogesar 9,611]

[quote user="Time to go Delia"]We will be the new Ipswich but even poorer , these owners were always taking us back to league one it was just a case of when . They still talk about promotion back to he prem utterly laughable when the team cannot win a home match even against the likes of Burton .[/quote]

Bl**dy hell, you''re back. How did you feel about our 9 game run? [:)]

[Badger 2,405]

[quote user="lappinitup"][quote user="Time to go Delia"]We will be the new Ipswich but even poorer[/quote]

To do that we''d have to give our stadium and Colney away and then rent them back. Even you aren''t daft enough to believe that will ever happen.....[/quote]It most certainly could happen!I think that it is highly unlikely with our current owners, however. It is one of the main ways that "investors" can regain any money that they have gambled on an "ambitious" push for promotion - there are several examples of this type of thing.Few investors are charities - they want a return for their investment or at least to recover their losses in the long run. It''s why the frequent calls for "investment" are so fatuous.

[Derby Canary 3]

[quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="Derby Canary"]Paint whatever picture you like regarding investment/non investment the real damage was done to this Club by failing to invest in the right/or even any suitably qualified personnel in the Summer window immediately after promotion. This was totally due to a Board that were ''unfit for purpose'' and a Manager whose inexperience (despite promotion) was fully exposed. We got what we deserved with boys trying to do men''s jobs and our Club, as you would expect will suffer the consequences for years to come.[/quote]Let me get this absolutely straight. Neil should have been sacked as soon as he got us promoted? And the board was unfit for purpose for not doing so?[/quote]

You miss the point Purple. It was/and is one thing to get a group promoted to the Prem but another to have the ability/experience and balls to make the investment, to keep them there. Under this board we have demonstrated over and over again that we are found sadly lacking with regard to the latter!

[PurpleCanary 5,553]

[quote user="Derby Canary"][quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="Derby Canary"]Paint whatever picture you like regarding investment/non investment the real damage was done to this Club by failing to invest in the right/or even any suitably qualified personnel in the Summer window immediately after promotion. This was totally due to a Board that were ''unfit for purpose'' and a Manager whose inexperience (despite promotion) was fully exposed. We got what we deserved with boys trying to do men''s jobs and our Club, as you would expect will suffer the consequences for years to come.[/quote]Let me get this absolutely straight. Neil should have been sacked as soon as he got us promoted? And the board was unfit for purpose for not doing so?[/quote]

You miss the point Purple. It was/and is one thing to get a group promoted to the Prem but another to have the ability/experience and balls to make the investment, to keep them there. Under this board we have demonstrated over and over again that we are found sadly lacking with regard to the latter![/quote]So to be clear you wanted Neil sacked the moment he got us promotion? And presumably posted as much as soon as we beat Middlesbrough?

[The Great Mass Debater 1,076]

Thanks Purple

[Derby Canary 3]

[quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="Derby Canary"][quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="Derby Canary"]Paint whatever picture you like regarding investment/non investment the real damage was done to this Club by failing to invest in the right/or even any suitably qualified personnel in the Summer window immediately after promotion. This was totally due to a Board that were ''unfit for purpose'' and a Manager whose inexperience (despite promotion) was fully exposed. We got what we deserved with boys trying to do men''s jobs and our Club, as you would expect will suffer the consequences for years to come.[/quote]Let me get this absolutely straight. Neil should have been sacked as soon as he got us promoted? And the board was unfit for purpose for not doing so?[/quote]

You miss the point Purple. It was/and is one thing to get a group promoted to the Prem but another to have the ability/experience and balls to make the investment, to keep them there. Under this board we have demonstrated over and over again that we are found sadly lacking with regard to the latter![/quote]So to be clear you wanted Neil sacked the moment he got us promotion? And presumably posted as much as soon as we beat Middlesbrough?[/quote]

Lets be totally clear. What I wanted was a board/manager that understood the gulf between class etc etc between the Prem and the Championship and that not immediately investing in suitably equipped players could only have one outcome. What actually happened was lots of ''noise'', not only generated by agents/press was made about targets but next to no investment at that key stage was made. Hard to apportion blame but it quickly became clear that Neil had not got a clue at that level and he should then have gone. It has also been clear for much longer that the board are unfit through lack of football knowledge to run a Club but they are sadly determined to stay!

[PurpleCanary 5,553]

[quote user="Derby Canary"][quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="Derby Canary"][quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="Derby Canary"]Paint whatever picture you like regarding investment/non investment the real damage was done to this Club by failing to invest in the right/or even any suitably qualified personnel in the Summer window immediately after promotion. This was totally due to a Board that were ''unfit for purpose'' and a Manager whose inexperience (despite promotion) was fully exposed. We got what we deserved with boys trying to do men''s jobs and our Club, as you would expect will suffer the consequences for years to come.[/quote]Let me get this absolutely straight. Neil should have been sacked as soon as he got us promoted? And the board was unfit for purpose for not doing so?[/quote]

You miss the point Purple. It was/and is one thing to get a group promoted to the Prem but another to have the ability/experience and balls to make the investment, to keep them there. Under this board we have demonstrated over and over again that we are found sadly lacking with regard to the latter![/quote]So to be clear you wanted Neil sacked the moment he got us promotion? And presumably posted as much as soon as we beat Middlesbrough?[/quote]

Lets be totally clear. What I wanted was a board/manager that understood the gulf between class etc etc between the Prem and the Championship and that not immediately investing in suitably equipped players could only have one outcome. What actually happened was lots of ''noise'', not only generated by agents/press was made about targets but next to no investment at that key stage was made. Hard to apportion blame but it quickly became clear that Neil had not got a clue at that level and he should then have gone. It has also been clear for much longer that the board are unfit through lack of football knowledge to run a Club but they are sadly determined to stay![/quote]So, to be clear you wanted Neil sacked the moment we beat Middlesbrough and posted as much here?

[lappinitup 629]

[quote user="Derby Canary"]the board are unfit through lack of football knowledge to run a Club......[/quote]Twenty one years at the helm and you reckon they know nothing - but you do? [:S]

[nutty nigel 7,506]

Bless him Lapps. Derby thinks he knows better than Bowkett and McNally too. That''s the same Derby who reckoned the team bearing his name would be promoted last season.

I''m just glad he''s well and posting. I had been a tad concerned.....

[Derby Canary 3]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]Bless him Lapps. Derby thinks he knows better than Bowkett and McNally too. That''s the same Derby who reckoned the team bearing his name would be promoted last season.

I''m just glad he''s well and posting. I had been a tad concerned.....[/quote]

Bowkett and McNally probably resigned for the very same reason! As far as Derby are concerned now that they have got the message that Chris Martin is a bad apple, it is sad to say that they look much better equipped than us this year!

[nutty nigel 7,506]

So if they don''t go up this year will you find another excuse over the summer to enable you to go for a hat-trick?

You seem to continually use hindsight to discredit others and yet use hindsight to excuse yourself.

[Year of the tiger 53]

Bowkett & Mcnally did not resign for the reason you state. Stop make suppositions to back your prejudices. Part of the problem that summer was being too ambitious, going for players who felt they were too good for us, at least a couple of whom were playing in the Champions League this week

[Derby Canary 3]

[quote user="Year of the tiger"]Bowkett & Mcnally did not resign for the reason you state. Stop make suppositions to back your prejudices. Part of the problem that summer was being too ambitious, going for players who felt they were too good for us, at least a couple of whom were playing in the Champions League this week[/quote]

............ ''a couple of whom were playing in the Champions League this week''. They clearly were ''too good for us'' then, and not the right players to target in the first place. Or did we target them because we anticipated the outcome? If you know that that was not the reason Messrs McNally/Bowkett resigned would you kindly enlighten me what was?

[hogesar 9,611]

Concentrate on Derby fella.

[Guest]

So discarding the best mark and the lowest as in Olympic Diving, we need to be realistic enough to accept a bit of time in the Championship, if not promoted this season, which to be fair, looks a forlorn hope at present.

It matters not to me, providing Tuesday was a one off and not the shape of things to come, and probably many others, but be prepared of the ever increasing posts from those who know nothing other than success, real or imagined, for our club and will not accept anything less than the Prem.

[Donkey dangler 0]

[quote user="lappinitup"][quote user="Derby Canary"]the board are unfit through lack of football knowledge to run a Club......[/quote]Twenty one years at the helm and you reckon they know nothing - [:S][/quote]

Well they know how to get us into the third tier of football for the first time in fifty years!

[Donkey dangler 0]

So can they find an unknown German striker (who can score regularly in the Championship) going cheap?

Are they going to work another miracle?

Over to Webber & crew........

[Highland Canary 76]

Fundamentally, the financial statements demonstrate that new equity is required for us to remain competitive in the championship. Further, if we avoid relegation this season with no parachute payments, no new equity, and the necessary player disposals that follow next, such a feat will be much more difficult to repeat. We do at least appear to have a mid-table look about us which is all credit to the management team thus far.

[Feedthewolf 4,844]

[quote user="Highland Canary"]Fundamentally, the financial statements demonstrate that new equity is required for us to remain competitive in the championship. Further, if we avoid relegation this season with no parachute payments, no new equity, and the necessary player disposals that follow next, such a feat will be much more difficult to repeat. We do at least appear to have a mid-table look about us which is all credit to the management team thus far.[/quote]"If we avoid relegation"We are one point outside the playoffs.

[lappinitup 629]

[quote user="Donkey dangler"][quote user="lappinitup"][quote user="Derby Canary"]the board are unfit through lack of football knowledge to run a Club......[/quote]Twenty one years at the helm and you reckon they know nothing - [:S][/quote]

Well they know how to get us into the third tier of football for the first time in fifty years![/quote]But they got us promoted to the Prem THREE times Tangy - or did you forget?

[nutty nigel 7,506]

[quote user="Donkey dangler"][quote user="lappinitup"][quote user="Derby Canary"]the board are unfit through lack of football knowledge to run a Club......[/quote]Twenty one years at the helm and you reckon they know nothing - [:S][/quote]

Well they know how to get us into the third tier of football for the first time in fifty years![/quote]

Are you any good at sums Tangie?

If they''ve got us to the top tier three times but got us to the third tier one time what are they best at?

It''s a simple sum but given as it''s you maybe your brother could help solve it. He''s a doctor you know....

[Duncan Edwards 2,216]

Yeah but not a proper one.

[City 2nd 191]

lappinitup wrote the following post at 2017-11-03 1:35 AM:

Donkey dangler wrote:

lappinitup wrote:

Derby Canary wrote:

the board are unfit through lack of football knowledge to run a Club......

Twenty one years at the helm and you reckon they know nothing - Tongue Tied [:S]

Well they know how to get us into the third tier of football for the first time in fifty years!

But they got us promoted to the Prem THREE times Tangy - or did you forget?

How the hell did “they” get us promoted. That was down to the players and football coaching staff, as always, just as the relegations were!

[king canary 7,562]

@city2nd

I''d generally say the buck stops with ownership- they appoint the managers who sign the players.

[City 2nd 191]

king canary wrote the following post at 2017-11-03 12:09 PM:

@city2nd

I''d generally say the buck stops with ownership- they appoint the managers who sign the players.

Wasn’t Paul Lambert and Alex Neil down to the CEO, who recommended them to the owners?

And us it not that players are recommended by the scouting department.

Whose brainchild is it to appoint Farke. Headhunted by Webber!

You can’t simply blame the owners for everything!

I’m not preaching on their behalf, but football is like a roundabout, managers, players and owners come and go, that is the nature of it, the worst thing that ever happened in football was Sky tv, and the absurd amounts of money they introduced into the game. It has made the EPL uncompetitive, and similarly the championship. The same happened in Italian football a few years back, but they saw the light, and it’s improved to where they were at before the days of big money, big players and big owners. Hopefully the same will happen here, because if not, the game will implode. It’s time for the European super league to get rid of the teams running the game, so equality becomes the norm, and finance in football is equally shared, which it isn’t now. Clubs like Norwich, with owners like Norwich, and there are plenty, do not stand a chance of competing against the ever increasing financial rewards of the EPL and the top half dozen sides I’m afraid, and those who say our owners are probably right in wanting to stay in the championship are right, logistically we are too far out on a limb for big investors to come in and take over, let’s face it, what has East Anglia got to offer these large companies and conglomerates who make clubs like Chelsea, Man Utd, Man City, Liverpool etc etc. Absolutely nothing! We are a club who are always going to have to rely on ticket sales and player sales to operate. That being the case, we are, quite simply, going nowhere, and as the debt gets bigger, and it will, the less chance of seeing EPL at Carrow Road soon.

[ROBFLECK 132]

Have to agree with you City 2nd , it''s getting me off the game as a whole. I just watch Norwich City and follow the Championship , but I don''t really give a toss about what happens in the EPL to be honest...

This is not about sport anymore and that has put me off ... Chelsea wasn''t a big club when I started following the game in the mid eighties ! Neither was Manchester City tbh... It''s depressing that Sky and the oil magnates have taken over... Like you say it''s the worst thing that has happened to the sport football

[Yorkshire Canary 118]

The competence or lack of it of the board has been well debated. We are where we are and if we are still in this division come next summer which is probable then the squad churn could be as dramatic as this year. I fear the family silver will be sold and we could be left with a struggling squad

[Buncey 1]

As usual, Purple has excellently covered most of the big points. All I can do is chime in with a few minor ones.

That said, this is, again, a rather boring set of accounts. Very little surprising information and again showing a company with good financial strength (despite us losing our Premier League status).

So onto my few minor minor points:

1. Despite what the "doom-mongers" may say, the accounts show that when it comes to buying and selling players the club is doing a really good job. Overall the total book value of our players declined by only 3m last year, that''s despite us selling Redmond, VOO, Van Wolfswinkel, Olsson, Brady and Canos and spending far less in replacements (Pritchard, Nelson, Yanic and also Canos).

This means that, generally speaking, we sell players for more money than we buy them for. This is very important for us as a club, as over the last two year selling players has accounted for £32m whilst we collectively made only £7m in net profits. Many clubs will be very envious that we are doing so well in the transfer market.

Unfortunately, I''d expect next years'' accounts to perhaps not look so rosy as we released a lot of "deadwood" over the summer for little return. On the other hand, we sold Jacob Murphy for a good deal of money, which from a financial perspective will likely offset that loss.

2. The second place where our good player trading shows up is in impairment - there is none. That means we aren''t "writing off" players as duds. Last year there was an amount for around a 4 million which was likely due to us "cutting our losses" on RVW and writing down Naismith. It remains to be seen if we''ll be writing off any more players this year, but really beyond perhaps Jarvis due to his injury problems or Naismith (if he wasn''t written down enough already), I can''t see any more write-offs to come.

3. Collectively, what 1 & 2 mean is that if things were to go "mega tits-up", we are very likely have at a min. £30m in the bank in readily saleable players (the £30m being what''s in the books for the players). That doesn''t mean we will sell those players, but it makes it much easier for us to borrow money (if we need to) against the value of those players. Furthermore, we are due a net excess £3m in cash for our player trading last season which will also help with our cash position plus and extra £8m in net sales for this season.

4. A minor, but interesting thing is that unlike during the McNally era we didn''t cut down on staff numbers last year. McNasty was almost comically ruthless in cutting staff numbers to the bone whenever we were relegated, but last year the total number of staff actually ticked up. Of course, this means that job losses were in the pipeline once we missed out on promotion - which we have seen over the summer. This is a necessary result of us being a Championship club and not a Premier League club for now.

5. Super minor thing, but the club has provided (i.e. taken an extra hit) on tax liabilities for "certain overseas loan players". As the only overseas loan player was Dijks then it means we might have to pay an extra £0.6m to £3.4m on that deal. The tax boffins have already done lots of number crunching and think that it''ll be around £0.7m, so unless it''s more than that, we won''t have any further losses.

A final thing which isn''t in the accounts, but I was hoping for some clarification on is to do with Steve Stone. In the summer he was made Managing Director and relinquished his financial role at the company. The new FD is Ben Dack. The curious thing is that Steve resigned from the board over the summer (after the year end), so technically speaking, despite "running the company", he doesn''t have to be at board meetings. I was hoping the accounts may have shed a bit more light on how Steve will interact with the board, and perhaps why it was felt necessary for him to no longer be a board member. My instinct is that nothing in practice will change, Steve will still be giving key input into the board. But, as I''ve said in the past, the board are a bit clumsy on their admin/legal matters and would do a good job of being a bit more transparent on them.

[Big Vince 318]

[quote user="lappinitup"][quote user="Donkey dangler"][quote user="lappinitup"][quote user="Derby Canary"]the board are unfit through lack of football knowledge to run a Club......[/quote]Twenty one years at the helm and you reckon they know nothing - [:S][/quote]

Well they know how to get us into the third tier of football for the first time in fifty years![/quote]But they got us promoted to the Prem THREE times Tangy - or did you forget? [/quote]

TWO out of those THREE were entirely the work of McNasty and nothing to do with the SS. It was McNasty who got Lambert and McNasty who got Neil.

The other promotion to the EPL they simply got lucky with one player who galvanised the whole team for one season.