Let's get something straight.

[lake district canary 4,530]

Delia and MJW have poured a large part of their wealth into our football club and own shares in it.   Any assets they may have, should they pass on, as would go to their nearest kin - which, as they have no kids, looks likes being Tom Smith.  This is normal function of any family situation where assets are involved.  If either or both DS or MJW became too infirm to do their daily duties at the club - again, it would fall to a family member to act for them.  So they have been absolutely correct in getting Tom in on the board so he learns about the workings of the club, gaining experience, so if the worst happens, their assets are being looked after.  This is all absolutely correct and as it should be.  Now I know some people just want them to sell up, but having invested their time and money over so many years - they have the right to protect their assets and not be forced to sell something they care so much about.   We can argue about investors and such like, but historically, over many years, there have been few, if any, wealthy enough people with the right attributes to do it.  Cullum (the only one I am aware of) was a case in point. His plan was not up to it, as it has been explained many times on here. So let''s cut the cr*p. DS and MJW have every right on every level to take steps to protect their assets as time goes on, just as any couple who are getting on in years would.  It is sensible behaviour for people who have put a huge amount of their wealth into something they care about.  They have also said that a Trust would be put in place to ensure no unscruplous investor can get hold of the club - ie no-one can make a quick buck out of seling the club, unless a board of trustees agreed it was the best thing for the club. It might not be your wish for the club, but there are many worse situations our club could be in - and could have been in - had it not been for our majority shareholders seeing us through some traumatic financial situations, most of which were a legacy of what Chase left behind. You might not want to see it, but it is the truth.

[Baldyboy 0]

The Smith/Wynn-Jones mouthpiece spouting shite again. What a surprise!

Are you nephew Tom by any chance?

[Rogue Baboon 0]

Oh do shut up. So fans should just put up and shut up?

Football is a massive business. Its no longer a part time hobby. It requires huge finances to run. We seem to be going against every club in the country, and it’s showing on the pitch.

As for Tom, what does he bring?

Experience? Nope.

Wealth? Nope.

Privilege? Lots of it.

[Mello Yello 2,273]

Can Tom cook?......

[Baldyboy 0]

LDC, you say things could be worse but they could also be a hell of a lot better, especially if our inept board hadn’t, as Webber said, pissed it against the wall!

[Hoola Han Solo 448]

Lakey, you truly are a pompous, objectionable twit. Fans that spend copious amounts of time and money are allowed to give their opinion on the club’s owners, whether good or bad. I for one get cheesed off with someone who rarely goes to matches lecturing those that do. F uck off 👍🏻

[Lessingham Canary 99]

This is a wind up...........

[Sussexyellow 55]

LDC - whilst technically you are correct, a football club is not your usual chattel to be passed on. It comes with tens of thousands of stakeholders, supporters who have a vested interest in the club. Supporters who have also invested emotion, time and money into the club. Supporters without which the club as we know it would not exist.

You overlook such stakeholders at your peril.

[king canary 7,558]

Oh for fucks sake.

This is dumbest post I think I''ve ever read.

[Herman 9,691]

 [:D]

[lake district canary 4,530]

[quote user="Rogue Baboon"]Oh do shut up. So fans should just put up and shut up?

Football is a massive business. Its no longer a part time hobby. It requires huge finances to run. We seem to be going against every club in the country, and it’s showing on the pitch.

As for Tom, what does he bring?

Experience? Nope.

Wealth? Nope.

Privilege? Lots of it.[/quote]I will not shut up. The op is the truth. you might not like it, but it is. Also, we are not going against every every other club in the country, there are several who are trying to do it our way - and with the sporting director/head coach situation, we are pioneering that too.  And what Tom has to offer is irrelevant - he is the natural heir of the assets that belong to DS/MJW - and if he becomes tha majority shareholder in due course, the board will have a footballing set-up under a sporting dorector that makes the board''s decisions less about football and more about just those in charge of the day to day finances and future development, leaving the football to those that know about it.

[norfolkngood 1,086]

am i right thinking all the money they poured in has been paid back ? so in effect they bought the club got their investment back /money back plus the club has risen in value

now handing into to someone with little wealth of his own

[king canary 7,558]

How smug and self regarding must you be to refer to what is very clearly your opinion as the objective truth?

[Mello Yello 2,273]

At least a large majority of support (including myself) can be happy in the thought that we as individuals, have probably contributed more financially to NCFC than the future anointed/appointed benefactor has - or ever will........

[Sussexyellow 55]

I have no problem with them leaving everything to Tom. Which could be a load of cash.

I do have a big problem if leaving the club to Tom has become their ambition as opposed to taking decisions in the best interest of NCFC. A bid for the club may not come along but if one did I would hope they would want them to evaluate it in a full and proper way, taking into account the views of stakeholders and that our current model of ownership is not sustainable if we have any ambition to play in the premiership and possibly even remain in the championship.

[Sussexyellow 55]

Should be - I would want them to evaluate....

[Crafty Canary 495]

I will not shut up. The op is the truth. you might not like it, but it is.

If you are nasty to me I will scream and scream until I am sick.

Wha a plonker!

[lake district canary 4,530]

[quote user="king canary"]How smug and self regarding must you be to refer to what is very clearly your opinion as the objective truth?[/quote]It''s the truth. In the last few days there has been so much disrespect and insults on

here hurled at our majority shareholders, with new threads eeking out

inacurate and spurious nonsense every day.  Families, as they get older look to see what will happen to their estate when they go. In this case there are no siblings, so it is a natural thing to wish to pass on assets to nearest family.  It''s no wind up, as someone said, it''s stating facts as simply as possible.  People might not want to see it - they want to rant and rave. Fine, but very rarely does someone state things as they are and I believe I have done that.

[king canary 7,558]

Agree with all of that Sussex. You can''t preach how important the club is to the fans then treat is like a piece of nice furniture you pass down the family tree.

[Rogue Baboon 0]

So Delia has every right to act in her best interests, even if those best interests are not the same as the best interests of the club?

[king canary 7,558]

@ldc

Yes, it''s the truth that as owners they allowed to plan to do what they wish with the club. As fans we''re also entitled to disagree with those plans, especially if they aren''t actually in the best interests of the club.

[Mello Yello 2,273]

The minute NepoTominism was appointed to the board, the warning signs were there......

[Capt. Pants 4,194]

[quote user="king canary"]Agree with all of that Sussex. You can''t preach how important the club is to the fans then treat is like a piece of nice furniture you pass down the family tree.[/quote]Delia''s dolls house I think is the term. To become Tom''s toy fort in due course.

[lake district canary 4,530]

[quote user="king canary"]@ldc

Yes, it''s the truth that as owners they allowed to plan to do what they wish with the club. As fans we''re also entitled to disagree with those plans, especially if they aren''t actually in the best interests of the club.[/quote]

I agree. What I find so unpalatable is the abuse and dis-respect at the owners from a few posters who have been complaining bitterly about the owners for years and years.  Never any credit to them, always looking for something to knock them about, never a good word. It''s rather sad really.   The argument about what is best for the club is a different one from my op. There is a discussion to be had there, of course.  But then, if you hold the view that the best way forwards for the club is to live within it''s means rather than sell out just for money, particularly as any possible investor would quite likely have no affiliation to the club, then what the majority shareholders propose, with the added protection of a Trust to be set up, is quite reasonable.  But make no mistake, it is their assets, their many years of committment and emotional connection to the club, their money - so making plans to pass on to a close family member is entirely their perogative to have.  You might disagree with that, but there is nothing wrong with their stance.

[Faded Jaded Semi Plastic SOB 1,017]

"To my nephew Tom I leave Norwich City FC".......really?!........

[JF 694]

I’m sorry but I’m not buying that. Whilst undoubtedly the club and fans are very clearly important to Smith and Jones I’m afraid that with their plan for Tom they are putting sentiment towards their own family way above the interests of the football club and it’s fans. Football is now a multi billion pound business and a plaything for the rich. Tom brings literally nothing to the table and he never will. The club does not belong to this family, it was here long before them and hopefully will be long after. They are merely the current custodians of it and it’s naive and almost arrogant of them to believe that no one else could be better for the club. If they had the clubs real interests at heart and not being blinded by sentiment towards Tom they would be actively finding someone worthy of taking the club over and hopefully further. But they are not

[Sussexyellow 55]

But are we living within our means. Not my reading of our financial situation I am afraid.

A calculated gamble (and I would describe it as a gamble rather than a risk) was taken in the January 2016 window signings to stay in the Premiership. I understand why and in fairness there was little or no criticism from the support at the time including myself.

But we must now live with the consequences. Whilst a small profit is forecast for 17/18 it is hard to see how the books will be balanced in 18/19 without a lot of unpalatable sales.

[king canary 7,558]

I agree that some of the abuse they get is unfair. But right now I sense to mood is turning against them and a lot of the criticism I''ve seen for them has been entirely valid.

In an ideal world yes we''d live within our means. But the reality of Championship football is that it''s extremely difficult to do so. Even Ipswich, who we''ve laughed at for their lack of spending power, have an owner that covers a £6m loss every season they don''t sell a player and everyone''s favourite example Huddersfield didn''t live within their means last season.

I am yet to see a convincing argument for why it is in the club''s best interest to hand control over to a man with no discernable business acumen and money to invest. All people seem to do is shout ''BUT BUT PORTSMOUTH!!''

[JF 694]

I am yet to see a convincing argument for why it is in the club''s best interest to hand control over to a man with no discernable business acumen and money to invest. All people seem to do is shout ''BUT BUT PORTSMOUTH!!''

We don’t need to be taken over to end up like Portsmouth though. Before the Lambert miracle, when I’m League1 we were in serious trouble with genuine consideration being made to sell the stadium to survive.

[Samwam27 519]

Let''s not forget also, that for all they''ve put into the club, they''ve been part of an inept Board that has got a strong track record of making bad decisions, which they make the managers the scapegoats for, they they remain untouched.

Sacking Hughton with 5 games to go was a terrible decision (look what he''s done before and after us). Handing it to someone who had no managerial experience, then appointing him full time. Then going the extreme opposite and not removing AN when it looked for all we were heading for relegation.

Appointing Moxey and wasting a chunk of the clubs coppers in the process! And it doesn''t look rosey under the Farke/Webber partnership, but I''m willing (only just) to give this beyond Jan, and hope that we can clear some deadwood and bring in some fresh players.

So for all they''ve done, they''ve done a hell of a lot to undo things aswell. Lets get that straight