Jump to content
Note to existing users - password reset is required Read more... ×
TeemuVanBasten

Delia is 78, MWJ's is 78

Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, PurpleCanary said:

I agree. I have no idea whether him as the successor is a good idea. But it very much also cuts the other way. There is no way of knowing that it will be a bad idea.

There are any number of questions I would need to have the answer to in order to have an opinion either way. One certainly would be how much will he have learnt about running a football club by the time he takes over. Another would be whether there is an experienced director (Foulger?) still there. They are just for starters. But I would need to know just as much about any alternative successor.

That is totally fair view.

I do agree with TVB though that quite a few seem happy to wave him through without question while being entirely skeptical of any other change of ownership. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, TeemuVanBasten said:
23 minutes ago, Dr Greenthumb said:

Tom Smith is fine, good grief. I want to live in your happy world 

I find it a bit weird that people back somebody that we know so little about, who has no track record in business, no wealth that we know of, and we have heard so little from... Just because he shares a surname and a little bit of DNA with our current owner. 

Purple has just answered that and he is right, there is no need to assume he isn't fit for the role.  So why the need to dismiss the idea?  He is on the board at the club and will have been learning and getting experience, so there are positives to it. 

There is some kind of vague idea that everything can be solved by the present owners selling up, that somehow we can be turned into a better and/or more successful club probably because a new owner might have lots of money. Yes, it could happen, but then we would be are in the same boat as so many other clubs trying to be successful with lots of money and not succeeding and we would probably still get this angst that somehow things are not right. 

The club is transformed from even two years ago - and we had seen a pretty successful for a few years before that too! 

If it ain't broke, no need to fix it.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can see it now......"NCFC, sponsored by SAGA"......  

....."Gonna now soak me dentures in steradent.....as tonight I'm off out on the pull".....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, king canary said:

That is totally fair view.

I do agree with TVB though that quite a few seem happy to wave him through without question while being entirely skeptical of any other change of ownership. 

All prospective new owners should be subject to the same level of scrutiny by fans, I don't see why a few on here think Tom Smith gets a free pass. 

But I'm guessing we'll see some sort of phased hand over of shares to Tom, where the family retains control... Equal thirds of that majority stake perhaps. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, lake district canary said:

Purple has just answered that and he is right, there is no need to assume he isn't fit for the role.  So why the need to dismiss the idea?  He is on the board at the club and will have been learning and getting experience, so there are positives to it. 

There is some kind of vague idea that everything can be solved by the present owners selling up, that somehow we can be turned into a better and/or more successful club probably because a new owner might have lots of money. Yes, it could happen, but then we would be are in the same boat as so many other clubs trying to be successful with lots of money and not succeeding and we would probably still get this angst that somehow things are not right. 

The club is transformed from even two years ago - and we had seen a pretty successful for a few years before that too! 

If it ain't broke, no need to fix it.

 

I think the point is Lakey that the current arrangement will break, because it doesn't have an infinite lifespan. 

Yes we could suffer prolonged mediocrity with a wealthy owner and we could suffer the same with a skint one. 

But I'd argue we have a better chance of success with one who at least has the ability to use personal cash to bridge us when necessary or underwrite us in times of crisis. 

If we run out of cash under Tom it's borrow from private markets or sell something, and I'd hope that is never the ground. 

Edited by TeemuVanBasten

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Financially stable apparently, by which means we need to sell one or more assets each season to continue.  The result therefore when we fail to produce any stars that can be sold we will be financially unsecure.  We cannot rely on finding gems season after season and is a dangerous model to follow.  It is then we can truly gauge the efficacy of the reign of Saint Delia and her reign at the court of Carrow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Both 78, yes, so what?

I would say the real question here is, who looks better for it?

And I would suggest that the answer is...

Delia.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, lake district canary said:

Purple has just answered that and he is right, there is no need to assume he isn't fit for the role.  So why the need to dismiss the idea?  He is on the board at the club and will have been learning and getting experience, so there are positives to it. 

There is some kind of vague idea that everything can be solved by the present owners selling up, that somehow we can be turned into a better and/or more successful club probably because a new owner might have lots of money. Yes, it could happen, but then we would be are in the same boat as so many other clubs trying to be successful with lots of money and not succeeding and we would probably still get this angst that somehow things are not right. 

The club is transformed from even two years ago - and we had seen a pretty successful for a few years before that too! 

If it ain't broke, no need to fix it.

 

Different owner, different ideas. So it will be getting “fixed” either way. 
 

I would generally have to question my loyalty to the football club if it was getting handed down like a present. If it’s a case of the experience of AGMs and board meetings, then give the club to Webber. At least he has football knowledge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, BroadstairsR said:

She does look good for her age  .... perhaps she's had some help.

 

Apparently booze doesn't accelerate the ageing process as quickly as ciggies do......

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've mentioned this on another thread but since this seems to be the active one what would people's attitude be if a takeover by Qatar Sports Investments (who are rumoured to be buying Leeds) was a genuine possibility?

Would people want Delia and Michael to pursue that or would people not want that sort of owner for our club?

Just genuinely interested in how people would feel. We all view things differently so there's no right or wrong answer here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Dr Greenthumb said:

Different owner, different ideas. So it will be getting “fixed” either way. 
 

I would generally have to question my loyalty to the football club if it was getting handed down like a present. If it’s a case of the experience of AGMs and board meetings, then give the club to Webber. At least he has football knowledge.

From when Tom was first mentioned I assume the plan is by the time it's handed over Tom will have had what, 10 years maybe? I presume in that 10 years he'll have shadowed and worked with a multitude of people in and around football (Webber included) and I guess the aim is he'll have a good grounding into what owning a football club entails.

Which to be fair would be significantly more experience than a lot of the foreign buyers who are "first time" club purchasers. Whether that additional experience of being able to watch the running of a football club for a century is better than someone coming in with a 100 million quid, remains to be seen of course.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, hogesar said:

From when Tom was first mentioned I assume the plan is by the time it's handed over Tom will have had what, 10 years maybe? I presume in that 10 years he'll have shadowed and worked with a multitude of people in and around football (Webber included) and I guess the aim is he'll have a good grounding into what owning a football club entails.

Which to be fair would be significantly more experience than a lot of the foreign buyers who are "first time" club purchasers. Whether that additional experience of being able to watch the running of a football club for a century is better than someone coming in with a 100 million quid, remains to be seen of course.

You can do something for a long time and not be good at it. Also, let’s face it, he would never have even been involved in the football club if he wasn’t related to Delia. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Dr Greenthumb said:

Different owner, different ideas. So it will be getting “fixed” either way. 
 

I would generally have to question my loyalty to the football club if it was getting handed down like a present. If it’s a case of the experience of AGMs and board meetings, then give the club to Webber. At least he has football knowledge.

Perhaps the solution is for the club to pay for Webber to own it, out of future revenues. 

Tom Smith will get £50m over the course of 25 years as an alternative to the equity, but we can repay early if we want. 

The problem is Webber has just said he doesn't plan to stick around, so has he ruled himself out? 

Edited by TeemuVanBasten

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Dr Greenthumb said:

You can do something for a long time and not be good at it. 

Jez Moxey and Neil Doomcaster spring to mind. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Dr Greenthumb said:

You can do something for a long time and not be good at it. Also, let’s face it, he would never have even been involved in the football club if he wasn’t related to Delia. 

Of course. We won't really know that without being in the boardroom or working within the club. I guess we would have to go by the thoughts of Delia, Michael, and possibly the 'footballing board', so currently Webber etc - who it might be in 10 years time or whatever is anyone's guess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, The Bristol Nest said:

It's quite an unnecessary point that you make. It has an unpleasant tone to it.

Op btw.

I'm glad other posters felt capable of having a sensible discussion about the subject.

And I'm not sure what you consider to be unpleasant about retirement, I personally make a lot of sacrifices to ensure that I'll get one at a reasonable age! 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 19/11/2019 at 09:13, king canary said:

That is totally fair view.

I do agree with TVB though that quite a few seem happy to wave him through without question while being entirely skeptical of any other change of ownership. 

The ones who are happy to do that are most probably Labour voters, no doubt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, norfolkbroadslim said:

The ones who are happy to do that are most probably Labour voters, no doubt.

This is a football forum page, the politics one is in the other header

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 19/11/2019 at 14:12, TeemuVanBasten said:

I'm glad other posters felt capable of having a sensible discussion about the subject.

And I'm not sure what you consider to be unpleasant about retirement, I personally make a lot of sacrifices to ensure that I'll get one at a reasonable age! 

TVB, some interesting comments, both from you and others.

To be honest, I don’t think your implied presumption, their stepping down as directors (rather than retirement) would necessarily mean that they’d also sell up.

Previous comments also imply that they’re far more likely to pass on their shares, almost certainly to Tom, rather than just sell up. 
 

As majority shareholders, that’s their entitlement, just as it is with every other shareholder for that matter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, GMF said:

TVB, some interesting comments, both from you and others.

To be honest, I don’t think your implied presumption, their stepping down as directors (rather than retirement) would necessarily mean that they’d also sell up.

Previous comments also imply that they’re far more likely to pass on their shares, almost certainly to Tom, rather than just sell up. 
 

As majority shareholders, that’s their entitlement, just as it is with every other shareholder for that matter.

I think you're Missing   T v B s point, GMF. He thinks that Delia should do what he wants with her shares/ money/ power . Maybe they could swap ideas and she could tell him what to do with his house/ car/ job/ career.  I'm sure he'd be as receptive  to her demands as she would be to his. It's a tough world when you're so right but no one takes any notice.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 19/11/2019 at 09:14, lake district canary said:

Purple has just answered that and he is right, there is no need to assume he isn't fit for the role.  So why the need to dismiss the idea?  He is on the board at the club and will have been learning and getting experience, so there are positives to it. 

There is some kind of vague idea that everything can be solved by the present owners selling up, that somehow we can be turned into a better and/or more successful club probably because a new owner might have lots of money. Yes, it could happen, but then we would be are in the same boat as so many other clubs trying to be successful with lots of money and not succeeding and we would probably still get this angst that somehow things are not right. 

The club is transformed from even two years ago - and we had seen a pretty successful for a few years before that too! 

If it ain't broke, no need to fix it.

 

I think you touch on a pertinent point (in my eyes). The majority of clubs owned by rich owners are all trying to do things the same way, I don't want to support a homogenised soccer franchise, I like the way we try and do things a different way and if it doesn't work, so be it, I will still support the club.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, wcorkcanary said:

I think you're Missing   T v B s point, GMF. He thinks that Delia should do what he wants with her shares/ money/ power . Maybe they could swap ideas and she could tell him what to do with his house/ car/ job/ career.  I'm sure he'd be as receptive  to her demands as she would be to his. It's a tough world when you're so right but no one takes any notice.

This is bordering on stalking now, you are legitimately obsessed with me.

How do I do that magic block thing?

Edited by TeemuVanBasten

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, TeemuVanBasten said:

This is bordering on stalking now, you are legitimately obsessed with me.

How do I do that magic block thing?

Nah Chap, smell bullshoite, call bullshoite,  that's all. Dont flatter yourself,  you're really not that important , any news on the Webber  quote ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 19/11/2019 at 09:14, lake district canary said:

Purple has just answered that and he is right, there is no need to assume he isn't fit for the role.  So why the need to dismiss the idea?  He is on the board at the club and will have been learning and getting experience, so there are positives to it. 

There is some kind of vague idea that everything can be solved by the present owners selling up, that somehow we can be turned into a better and/or more successful club probably because a new owner might have lots of money. Yes, it could happen, but then we would be are in the same boat as so many other clubs trying to be successful with lots of money and not succeeding and we would probably still get this angst that somehow things are not right. 

The club is transformed from even two years ago - and we had seen a pretty successful for a few years before that too! 

If it ain't broke, no need to fix it.

 

I think we need to know what Tom would bring to the club as well as the other alternatives and from that you would, as in all walks of life, chose your favourite to achieve the most success. I have no assumptions he can not do the job as well as no assumptions he can. It's a great base we have and it  would be nice to push on like other well run clubs (Leicester, Wolves, Burnley etc).

Ultimately the owner will decide regardless of what we wish or think.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Kenny Foggo said:

I think we need to know what Tom would bring to the club as well as the other alternatives and from that you would, as in all walks of life, chose your favourite to achieve the most success. I have no assumptions he can not do the job as well as no assumptions he can. It's a great base we have and it  would be nice to push on like other well run clubs (Leicester, Wolves, Burnley, Norwich etc).

Ultimately the owner will decide regardless of what we wish or think.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 18/11/2019 at 13:48, lake district canary said:

....this time with ageism attached to it.

 

 

Lakey, normally I agree with 80% of what you say, however I can’t agree with this comment.
 

Simply stating that someone is old, which in today’s world, 78 is considered ‘old’ with regards the succession plan of NCFC, does not qualify as ageism.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, CirclePoint said:

Lakey, normally I agree with 80% of what you say, however I can’t agree with this comment.
 

Simply stating that someone is old, which in today’s world, 78 is considered ‘old’ with regards the succession plan of NCFC, does not qualify as ageism.

I don't think age has anything to do with it.  78 is just a number and if you have the energy and desire to continue achieving things as you get older, then other people speculating about you retiring or selling up is just irrelevant. There are numerous people in their 80's and 90's still active in their chosen field, so if you have it within you, then it doesn't matter if you are 25 or 95. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, lake district canary said:

I don't think age has anything to do with it.  78 is just a number and if you have the energy and desire to continue achieving things as you get older, then other people speculating about you retiring or selling up is just irrelevant. There are numerous people in their 80's and 90's still active in their chosen field, so if you have it within you, then it doesn't matter if you are 25 or 95. 

 

It would be ageism if TVB had said Delia and MWJ's age meant they weren't competent to run the club.

To point out their age and the importance of succession planning isn't ageism. The average live expectancy for a man is 79 and for women it is 82. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×