Striker rumour (guess where he's from ...)

[Mike 2]

[quote user="sonyc"]Oh, and thanks for indicating I''m a moron Mike. Then you may say you didn''t? It''s standard fare on this forum ....people being very personal. And a good reason for me not to post very much. Like others, you just get abuse. It''s a scourge of modern life. People who appear to have a different view are seen as a threat. I find this sad. We all want a similar thing yet cannot accept difference in ideas.[/quote]

My posts were not xenophobic in the slightest, I said anyone who found them so was a moron, you have since stated it was not aimed at me, I have since said fair enough.... and breathe....

[Mike 2]

[quote user="Rich T The Biscuit"]The business plan is a logical business plan for running a business but not a great plan for fans, that’s working within the means of the company. At the end of the day the football club is a company and like all companies you don’t want to be trading with massive loses.

Therefore any money from Maddison will go towards that plan and it’s a valid question, what would they have done had Maddison not been the star of the show, I guess the answer to that won’t he known but would certainly have been centred around offloading anything you can get money for; which would have been limited.[/quote]

Therefore if you are in a business where the successful companies all have very rich backers, it makes sense to make yourself competitive by pursuing those avenues or at least actively opening yourself up to offers? Otherwise would you not see that business enter into a slow decline?

Oh well, doubt we as fans will ever agree but would love Archant to do a proper fan poll but being so close to the owners, I doubt that would ever happen.

[TCCANARY 263]

[quote user="Mike "]Therefore if you are in a business where the successful companies all have very rich backers, it makes sense to make yourself competitive by pursuing those avenues or at least actively opening yourself up to offers? Otherwise would you not see that business enter into a slow decline?

Oh well, doubt we as fans will ever agree but would love Archant to do a proper fan poll but being so close to the owners, I doubt that would ever happen.[/quote]

What''s a ''proper fan poll''?

Is it a poll of proper fans? Or is it a poll of fans done properly?

[nutty nigel 7,531]

Couldn''t we have a referendum, like Brexit? That would be fun....

[PurpleCanary 5,557]

[quote user="Mike "][quote user="Rich T The Biscuit"]The business plan is a logical business plan for running a business but not a great plan for fans, that’s working within the means of the company. At the end of the day the football club is a company and like all companies you don’t want to be trading with massive loses.

Therefore any money from Maddison will go towards that plan and it’s a valid question, what would they have done had Maddison not been the star of the show, I guess the answer to that won’t he known but would certainly have been centred around offloading anything you can get money for; which would have been limited.[/quote]

Therefore if you are in a business where the successful companies all have very rich backers, it makes sense to make yourself competitive by pursuing those avenues or at least actively opening yourself up to offers? Otherwise would you not see that business enter into a slow decline?

Oh well, doubt we as fans will ever agree but would love Archant to do a proper fan poll but being so close to the owners, I doubt that would ever happen.[/quote]

Archant and the club are not close. That aside​, the problem, since there is not a specific investor/offer to vote on, would be framing the question or questions. A basic "Do you think the club should seek outside investment?" would be essentially meaningless under the circumstances.There would have to be one long question covering all the possibilities* that would also be meaningless as a guide, or a whole raft of questions, and in the latter case I can pretty much guarantee the "answer" would be as clear as something less clear than mud.*Do you want Norwich City to be taken over by an outside investor if they:Have connections with Norfolk/do not have connections with Norfolk, are British/are foreign, intend to run the club on a self-sustaining basis/intend to rack up large debts to themselves that will need to be paid off by any future owner, intend to abide scrupulously by financial fair play rules/intend to break FFP rules, intend to allow the election by the fans of at least one supporter-director/intend not to have such a supporter-director, intend to preserve the heritage of the club, and in particular ownership and preservation of Carrow Road and the club colours/intend to move the ground to a greenfield site and make the club colours dependent on their marketing value.

[BobLoz3 492]

[quote user="PurpleCanary"]

[quote user="Mike "][quote user="Rich T The Biscuit"]The business plan is a logical business plan for running a business but not a great plan for fans, that’s working within the means of the company. At the end of the day the football club is a company and like all companies you don’t want to be trading with massive loses.

Therefore any money from Maddison will go towards that plan and it’s a valid question, what would they have done had Maddison not been the star of the show, I guess the answer to that won’t he known but would certainly have been centred around offloading anything you can get money for; which would have been limited.[/quote]

Therefore if you are in a business where the successful companies all have very rich backers, it makes sense to make yourself competitive by pursuing those avenues or at least actively opening yourself up to offers? Otherwise would you not see that business enter into a slow decline?

Oh well, doubt we as fans will ever agree but would love Archant to do a proper fan poll but being so close to the owners, I doubt that would ever happen.[/quote]

Archant and the club are not close. That aside​, the problem, since there is not a specific investor/offer to vote on, would be framing the question or questions. A basic "Do you think the club should seek outside investment?" would be essentially meaningless under the circumstances.There would have to be one long question covering all the possibilities* that would also be meaningless as a guide, or a whole raft of questions, and in the latter case I can pretty much guarantee the "answer" would be as clear as something less clear than mud.*Do you want Norwich City to be taken over by an outside investor if they:Have connections with Norfolk/do not have connections with Norfolk, are British/are foreign, intend to run the club on a self-sustaining basis/intend to rack up large debts to themselves that will need to be paid off by any future owner, intend to abide scrupulously by financial fair play rules/intend to break FFP rules, intend to allow the election by the fans of at least one supporter-director/intend not to have such a supporter-director, intend to preserve the heritage of the club, and in particular ownership and preservation of Carrow Road and the club colours/intend to move the ground to a greenfield site and make the club colours dependent on their marketing value.

[/quote]Relationships may have been tarnished between them but I can tell you that one of the NCFC board members used to work at Archant and, therefore, they probably are quite close. Not necessarily with the ''owners'' but definitely in a broader sense.

[PurpleCanary 5,557]

[quote user="BobLoz3"]Relationships may have been tarnished between them but I can tell you that one of the NCFC board members used to work at Archant and, therefore, they probably are quite close. Not necessarily with the ''owners'' but definitely in a broader sense.

[/quote]

Stephan Phillips left Archant in 2011. If there was a director who determined the relationship between the club and Archant, with the latter very much feeling it had to watch what it published, it was McNally. And as it happened  just before McNally''s departure there was a bit of a new broom at Archant who decided they should be less circumspect - cowed might be the better word  - in their coverage. Archant would not now be afraid to publish the kind of poll Mike wants. The problem would be what to ask  that would make sense.

[Icecream Snow 761]

[quote user="PurpleCanary"]

Stephan Phillips left Archant in 2011. If there was a director who determined the relationship between the club and Archant, with the latter very much feeling it had to watch what it published, it was McNally. And as it happened  just before McNally''s departure there was a bit of a new broom at Archant who decided they should be less circumspect - cowed might be the better word  - in their coverage. Archant would not now be afraid to publish the kind of poll Mike wants. The problem would be what to ask  that would make sense.

[/quote]

To be fair to Archant, McNally had a nasty habit of punishing anyone who annoyed him, even if they were just trying to do their job. From memory, he took great offence at an innocuous Pinkun story linking us with Exeter''s Ryan Hartley (which was probably just something his agent had invented).

Which was trivial compared to the aftermath of Dion Dublin talking about the Craig Mackail-Smith signing (with Peterboro reneging on an agreed deal), with McNally refusing to deal with whichever TV station Dublin was working for for months. Or when McNally sent the police round to the address of some kid who''d found the new kit photos on the website.

[Bill 1,788]

"Therefore if you are in a business where the successful companies all have very rich backers,"

not correct, but this is

a business where the very rich backers don''t all have successful companies

[Mike 2]

[quote user="Bigears"]

"Therefore if you are in a business where the successful companies all have very rich backers,"

not correct, but this is

a business where the very rich backers don''t all have successful companies

[/quote]

Name the club in the playoffs in our division, where the owners do not financial contribute? Not saying it automatically means you are a success but facts state its almost impossible without it.

If our current board had made a good job of say.. recruitment or maybe the ininfrastructure or even the 1st team performance, I would be happy. They have not

[Bill 1,788]

[quote user="Mike "][quote user="Bigears"]

"Therefore if you are in a business where the successful companies all have very rich backers,"

not correct, but this is

a business where the very rich backers don''t all have successful companies

[/quote]

Name the club in the playoffs in our division, where the owners do not financial contribute? Not saying it automatically means you are a success but facts state its almost impossible without it.

If our current board had made a good job of say.. recruitment or maybe the ininfrastructure or even the 1st team performance, I would be happy. They have not[/quote]

then how could our first team performance be made a good job as you claim it is impossible without this money

I suspect you just want to have a whine about the club and this is an easy method

[nutty nigel 7,531]

Nevermind a poll the supporters gave a massive thumbs up to the current model with the Canaries bond selling out in a matter of days.

[PurpleCanary 5,557]

[quote user="Icecream Snow"][quote user="PurpleCanary"]

Stephan Phillips left Archant in 2011. If there was a director who determined the relationship between the club and Archant, with the latter very much feeling it had to watch what it published, it was McNally. And as it happened  just before McNally''s departure there was a bit of a new broom at Archant who decided they should be less circumspect - cowed might be the better word  - in their coverage. Archant would not now be afraid to publish the kind of poll Mike wants. The problem would be what to ask  that would make sense.

[/quote]

To be fair to Archant, McNally had a nasty habit of punishing anyone who annoyed him, even if they were just trying to do their job. From memory, he took great offence at an innocuous Pinkun story linking us with Exeter''s Ryan Hartley (which was probably just something his agent had invented).

Which was trivial compared to the aftermath of Dion Dublin talking about the Craig Mackail-Smith signing (with Peterboro reneging on an agreed deal), with McNally refusing to deal with whichever TV station Dublin was working for for months. Or when McNally sent the police round to the address of some kid who''d found the new kit photos on the website.

[/quote]

It was Look East, and anyone who understood how the BBC operated knew it would not back down. As to shopping the nerd, to be fair to McNally he did apologise for that very quickly. There was also a story about a US financial middleman touting Norwich City as a good investment which provoked some anger. And I believe a small Norwich brewery also got it in the neck, for using Norwich City or The Canaries or some such as a brand name. Interesting times. Water inder the bridge.