What to expect under Delia/Michael/Nephew Tom's ownership

[nutty nigel 7,535]

[quote user="JF"]It’s not commonly known that Tony Bloom made the vast majority of his fortune gambling, he’s been described as the worlds most successful gambler. Anyone know what he was betting on?[/quote]

The Weazel? Poker?

He just blinked....

[nutty nigel 7,535]

[quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="JF"]It’s not commonly known that Tony Bloom made the vast majority of his fortune gambling, he’s been described as the worlds most successful gambler. Anyone know what he was betting on?[/quote]

The Weazel? Poker?

He just blinked....

[/quote]

No!

Maybe The Lizard?

[JF 694]

One horse racing! No seriously he made his hundreds of millions gambling football on the Asian markets. Could do with him on you pups selections

[nutty nigel 7,535]

http://uk.businessinsider.com/inside-story-star-lizard-tony-bloom-2016-

No JF. We need you to stick around the whole season on Rays Funds. But Rays funds isn''t about gambling. We wouldn''t have passed ten grand for just a tenner a season if it was. If you start on Weds you''ll only be 2 weeks behind.

[JF 694]

I’ll try my best to remember 👍🏻

[lake district canary 4,531]

[quote user="Dicky"]So, 2 games in, 1 point (could easily have been no points) against fairly easy opposition.[/quote]

I had to laugh out loud at that.  WBA fairly easy opposition?   Did you actually bother to look a their team sheet?  They will be a force to be reckoned with by anyone this season, should have beaten Forest and will no doubt be top six or very near all season.  Make no mistake, we have a tough task this season, but belittling other teams in this league is sheer delusion.  Every team will be a challenge, every team can beat any other team and the sooner people wake up and smell the coffee in this respect the better.

[nutty nigel 7,535]

[quote user="JF"]I’ll try my best to remember 👍🏻[/quote]

Top man. We need ya[Y]

[Alex Moss 2,165]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]http://uk.businessinsider.com/inside-story-star-lizard-tony-bloom-2016-

No JF. We need you to stick around the whole season on Rays Funds. But Rays funds isn''t about gambling. We wouldn''t have passed ten grand for just a tenner a season if it was. If you start on Weds you''ll only be 2 weeks behind.

[/quote]

The weird thing is that I wouldn’t have known whom that bloke was in a month of Sunday’s, but the lizards on the other hand are South America’s Basiliscus plumifrons and Australia’s Pogona vitticeps. Still know nothing of the bloke in the middle though!

[Woodman 92]

While I agree with you Lakey that WBA will be up there this season, they were very much there for the taking on Saturday.

We caused them a lot of problems defensively - a missed penalty and a goalkeeping mistake certainly cost us our first 3 points of the season.

Equally though, if we continue to play the way we did in the first half, we will score a lot more goals this season. Combine that with cutting out defensive mistakes and who knows where we''ll end up!

[lake district canary 4,531]

[quote user="Woodman"]While I agree with you Lakey that WBA will be up there this season, they were very much there for the taking on Saturday.

We caused them a lot of problems defensively - a missed penalty and a goalkeeping mistake certainly cost us our first 3 points of the season.

Equally though, if we continue to play the way we did in the first half, we will score a lot more goals this season. Combine that with cutting out defensive mistakes and who knows where we''ll end up![/quote]

I predicted a 4-3 to us beforehand as I thought we would really be up for it and was pretty sure WBA were not going to sit back with the players they have.  Just a shame it went the other way!   Looking at how effective Rhodes/Pukki and Hernandez are I agree we should score more goals and that should make it very interesting as the season progresses.  

[nutty nigel 7,535]

[quote user="Alex "][quote user="nutty nigel"]http://uk.businessinsider.com/inside-story-star-lizard-tony-bloom-2016-

No JF. We need you to stick around the whole season on Rays Funds. But Rays funds isn''t about gambling. We wouldn''t have passed ten grand for just a tenner a season if it was. If you start on Weds you''ll only be 2 weeks behind.

[/quote]

The weird thing is that I wouldn’t have known whom that bloke was in a month of Sunday’s, but the lizards on the other hand are South America’s Basiliscus plumifrons and Australia’s Pogona vitticeps. Still know nothing of the bloke in the middle though![/quote]

You are our Lizard expert Alex. Herpetologist? 

[Alex Moss 2,165]

[quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="Alex "][quote user="nutty nigel"]http://uk.businessinsider.com/inside-story-star-lizard-tony-bloom-2016-

No JF. We need you to stick around the whole season on Rays Funds. But Rays funds isn''t about gambling. We wouldn''t have passed ten grand for just a tenner a season if it was. If you start on Weds you''ll only be 2 weeks behind.

[/quote]

The weird thing is that I wouldn’t have known whom that bloke was in a month of Sunday’s, but the lizards on the other hand are South America’s Basiliscus plumifrons and Australia’s Pogona vitticeps. Still know nothing of the bloke in the middle though![/quote]

You are our Lizard expert Alex. Herpetologist? 

[/quote]

Herpetologist is indeed the correct term for someone whom studies Reptiles and Amphibians professionally, Eddie 👍

[JF 694]

Another article on him here https://www.honestbettingreviews.com/tony-bloom/

Anyone can invest in his syndicate as long as you’ve a minimum of £2 million to put in!!

[Parma Ham's gone mouldy 2,220]

Purple,

To pull some strands together:

Perhaps the voting majority of the Board agreed with Bowkett that ‘tidying up’ the outstanding debt was ‘good housekeeping’. Perhaps there was also a further motive behind such fiscal cleanliness.

Perhaps Delia and Michael - in order to forestall - said ‘we’ll we don’t want it, but if we are swimming in cash one day we’ll revisit it’.

Perhaps Bowkett and others recognised upon promotion and being debt free that that was the likeliest time for a high-profile sale .

(nb: a debt free club is actually quite expensive if full value shares, plus player investment funds are a pre-requisite - changing majority shareholding puts nothing into “the club” after all - meaning it would likely need to be shining brightly at the top table to attract a Magpie Patron. The alternative scenario of investment is for the Club to be doing very poorly and for the shares to have no meaningful value, though this would also mean the self-funding model had failed financially and/or in Sporting terms).

Delia and Michael might easily have then ‘voted against’ the repayment of their own monies being returned, as they might have disagreed that then was the time to sell or might not have wished to consider such an option.

‘Tidying up the books’ or accounting ‘good housekeeping’ does not appear to be an overriding objective for many football clubs, so it is reasonable to opine that a man as intelligent as Bowkett - and a Club as relatively un-wealthy as Norwich - had multiple strategic objectives with the return of the relatively small repayment sums, particularly as the PR interpretation could easily cast Delia and Michael in a slightly unfavourable light (which would have been clear to all). Being debt-free is newsworthy in football circles and a twinkly come-and-get-me news item in the business pages.

Perhaps the. the Club is not the Oligarchic plaything that many appear to envisage. Perhaps Delia and Michael even accede to things that are not always in their direct interest from time to time , but do so for the good of the Club.

Perhaps even - and this is pure speculation - the public presentation of a credible(ish) succession plan was to show that other avenues exist, that they don’t ‘need’ the money. A position any sensible seller would wish to present.

Parma

[PurpleCanary 5,562]

[quote user="Parma Hams gone mouldy"]Purple,

To pull some strands together:

Perhaps the voting majority of the Board agreed with Bowkett that ‘tidying up’ the outstanding debt was ‘good housekeeping’. Perhaps there was also a further motive behind such fiscal cleanliness.

Perhaps Delia and Michael - in order to forestall - said ‘we’ll we don’t want it, but if we are swimming in cash one day we’ll revisit it’.

Perhaps Bowkett and others recognised upon promotion and being debt free that that was the likeliest time for a high-profile sale .

(nb: a debt free club is actually quite expensive if full value shares, plus player investment funds are a pre-requisite - changing majority shareholding puts nothing into “the club” after all - meaning it would likely need to be shining brightly at the top table to attract a Magpie Patron. The alternative scenario of investment is for the Club to be doing very poorly and for the shares to have no meaningful value, though this would also mean the self-funding model had failed financially and/or in Sporting terms).

Delia and Michael might easily have then ‘voted against’ the repayment of their own monies being returned, as they might have disagreed that then was the time to sell or might not have wished to consider such an option.

‘Tidying up the books’ or accounting ‘good housekeeping’ does not appear to be an overriding objective for many football clubs, so it is reasonable to opine that a man as intelligent as Bowkett - and a Club as relatively un-wealthy as Norwich - had multiple strategic objectives with the return of the relatively small repayment sums, particularly as the PR interpretation could easily cast Delia and Michael in a slightly unfavourable light (which would have been clear to all). Being debt-free is newsworthy in football circles and a twinkly come-and-get-me news item in the business pages.

Perhaps the. the Club is not the Oligarchic plaything that many appear to envisage. Perhaps Delia and Michael even accede to things that are not always in their direct interest from time to time , but do so for the good of the Club.

Perhaps even - and this is pure speculation - the public presentation of a credible(ish) succession plan was to show that other avenues exist, that they don’t ‘need’ the money. A position any sensible seller would wish to present.

Parma[/quote]

Parma, snowed under with self-imposed research at the moment! But, yes, clubs/businesses often do things for more than one reason, and the main reason might not be the obvious one. And in this case I think you are right to highlight Bowkett''s role.

[Dr Greenthumb 749]

[quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="Dr Greenthumb"][quote user="nutty nigel"]What insults Dicky?

You told us Billy Brighton, sorry can''t remember his name or be bothered to check back, told you that we wouldn''t ever sniff the prem again under our current ownership. I think he may live to regret those words.

BTW I''m not angry enough to crush a grape but I might drop Billy an email. Footballs a funny old game and it tends to kick the gobby ones in the teeth. This time next season they could easily be below us.[/quote]

If you seriously believe these owners will get the club back to the Premiership, then more fool you. I will bet anyone that this club won’t see premiership football again under these terrible owners and the rubbish management they have in[/quote]

I heard all this in 2009. We did get promoted to the prem twice after that but nobody made good such pledges. How much are you gonna pledge Doc?

BTW are you a real doctor? Because we''ve got a wannabe doctor posting on here[;)]

[/quote]

It’s a cypress hill reference thanks.

I love your optimism, but it’s not 2009 anymore, heck, football has moved on from when we last got promoted. We were the big spenders then. Won’t happen again!

[norfolkngood 1,087]

Tom might be more ruthless than his Auntie you never know i know he has no wealth to speak of but he might be a totally different owner

[daly 501]

Yes he might sell up and move to The Bahamas and sip Pina Colada''s all day unlike Mr Delia Smith who stated he would not sell to Indians, American or Chinese and especially anyone who wears the Letter Box gear.

[Dicky 0]

[quote user="norfolkngood"]Tom might be more ruthless than his Auntie you never know i know he has no wealth to speak of but he might be a totally different owner[/quote]

Might be. Might not. So we are potentially in the hands of someone with no real wealth and potentially no real idea.

It''s our football club we are talking about here, but unfortunately most fans seem to just accept the situation and as each month goes by, we fall further and further away from where I for one want my club to be.

On another note - heard Farke described yesterday as a fake-fake Klopp.... Not sure it was meant as a compliment.

[king canary 7,606]

Tom should be under the same scrutiny as any potential new owner would be- yet being related to our current owners and shaking hands at fans forums seems to be enough for a fair few.

[PurpleCanary 5,562]

[quote user="king canary"]Tom should be under the same scrutiny as any potential new owner would be- yet being related to our current owners and shaking hands at fans forums seems to be enough for a fair few.[/quote]

I have never seen anyone here suggest otherwise. If anything some posters have already made a negative assessment just by assuming he is not qualified precisely because he is related.

[nutty nigel 7,535]

Yes the only judgement call I''ve seen is a negative one has been based on nepotism and shaking hands with fans and nothing to do with scrutiny if or when he is majority shareholder.

[Dicky 0]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]Yes the only judgement call I''ve seen is a negative one has been based on nepotism and shaking hands with fans and nothing to do with scrutiny if or when he is majority shareholder.[/quote]

But he is not under any scrutiny as I see it? He inherits the shares and therefore the controlling interest in the club? Or am I missing something?

Does anyone on here actually believe that he is the man to take our club forward btw? Genuine question.

[Indy 3,300]

It doesn’t really matter what we believe, he’ll eventually inherit the club control, but the club will still be run by part time Balls, Webber, Stone & Farke and his coaching staff.

I don’t think much will change, their will be a set structure and an ongoing plane of self sufficient finances. So yes Tom can take the club forward, the questions will come should gates fall, we don’t bring through any decent players to sell on and debt rises, but that’s only one scenario.

I couldn’t care who runs the club, I’ve enjoyed my last six visits and last Saturday was a decent game. Long may Farke push on and deliver on the pitch.

[daly 501]

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

[daly 501]

Doubt if it will be run by Balls too busy appearing on TV and serving breakfast to all the immigrants that he and Pixie categorically stated that they would be happy to put up in one of their residences

[GMF 744]

Indy just about nails it with his assessment - what happens on the pitch will probably determine the future, unless someone, somewhere comes in with a cheeky bid.

[king canary 7,606]

There are a fair few on here who will happily dig through details of pretty much every other owner in the division yet apply no scrutiny to our owner in waiting.

[lake district canary 4,531]

[quote user="Dicky"]Does anyone on here actually believe that he is the man to take our club forward btw? Genuine question.[/quote]

It is what it is - he is in line to take over at some stage - we''ve been told that - so the question is not "is he the man to take the forwards", but "how will he take the club forwards?"

The answer is clear, the policy of self financing will continue, with bringing on youngsters and selling them on at some stage to help balance the books.  Pretty much what we''ve been doing since I started supporting the club in the late sixties with the difference that we are now looking at keeping debt free, whereas up until now and apart from a couple of premier league seasons, having debt has been endemic in the way NCFC has had to operate. 

So why people are still bellyaching about lack of money or better people to be in charge, I don''t know.  Yes, you can point to mistakes made, but also - if people are honest with themselves - you can point to high points of success too.  Financally we will be secure as long as we''re successful in the policy we are pursuing.  That policy relies on our club being seen by other clubs and players as a good club to come to to develop your footballing career, so we get the quality loans in if we need them, or good quality young players in from wherever.  So we keep up the quality by being a good footballing club - something that Webber is overseeing and it is to the board''s credit that they have given up a certain amount of control to footballing people - in other words they are doing what a board of directors ought to do, giving the running of the business up to professionals in their field,  Stone - the business - and Webber - the football. 

I have no issue with who has control of the club as long as they are running it in the best way they can - and the present board, doing what they have done in setting up a progressive style management system, do appear to be on the right track. Also, finance from outside has not been ruled out - if the right person comes along - and that of course is the issue.

So the answer is a yes from me. If it isn''t broke, no need to try and fix it.

[Indy 3,300]

That’s the sox million dollar question Lakey......is it broke? Or not?

We’re moving to cut costs and run on a very small budget, the gates are slowly falling and the slow death of the championship is having an effect.

So you can blame the current state of football and carry on or you accept financial risk by out or new investment/ owner. Both are ways forward for our club but you can’t say it’s not broke?