What is it you realistically want, expect, and demand from your club

[Midlands Yellow 3,946]

3 minutes ago, hogesar said:

As opposed to just not experiencing promotion at all - like a lot of similar clubs are size with wealthy owners are dealing with.

I’m not interested in any other clubs. We just waste opportunities to try and build to the next level every time. It’s very sad this team is about to be broken up but not for the happy clappers it would seem. 

 

[Half Ar5ed Hipster 82]

4 minutes ago, Midlands Yellow said:

I’m not interested in any other clubs. We just waste opportunities to try and build to the next level every time. It’s very sad this team is about to be broken up but not for the happy clappers it would seem. 

 

How do you know that? It's pure conjecture on your part to assume most of the players you like will leave. I think they'll be sales sure, but you dont know who's next in line will be as good, or better, than their predecessor.

[Midlands Yellow 3,946]

1 minute ago, Half Ar5ed Hipster said:

How do you know that? It's pure conjecture on your part to assume most of the players you like will leave. I think they'll be sales sure, but you dont know who's next in line will be as good, or better, than their predecessor.

Most of the players worth serious money (you know which ones ) will be gone in 6 months. Tell me which ones you think will stay. 

[nutty nigel 7,513]

Perhaps Todwell will finally get that loooon...

[Half Ar5ed Hipster 82]

Hmm.. it depends on a number of things; clubs who want to buy, players who want to leave, the price being right, a successor post sale..

And again, my point hinges on the fact that who we sell isn't immediately backed up by a player who is as good or better. We don't know that.

Buendia hasnt set the Prem on fire. Godfrey has been thrown in at a deep end, a bridge too far? Pukki is at the sharp end of an age wedge and suits a particular brand of football (ours). Aarons is a good, I'd happily let him go when we consider Byram has had better games so far. Cantwell is a damn fine player but do we have a replacement more suited to the Champ (should we go down) to help us up again as I seem to recall him struggling in that division last season...

There's a lot of sentimentality thrown about individuals but it's the team as a whole that got us up last season, a team yellow (no pun) to the ways of the Premier League. That naivety has cost us so far, it also means we dont they'll be clamouring of other clubs wanting to buy those players who failed to galvanise a Norwich city to survival that we all know is capable of much more than it currently exudes.

Edited January 15, 2020 by Half Ar5ed Hipster
Championship is NOT the Premier League, duh!

[Midlands Yellow 3,946]

8 minutes ago, Half Ar5ed Hipster said:

Hmm.. it depends on a number of things; clubs who want to buy, players who want to leave, the price being right, a successor post sale..

And again, my point hinges on the fact that who we sell isn't immediately backed up by a player who is as good or better. We don't know that.

Buendia hasnt set the Prem on fire. Godfrey has been thrown in at a deep end, a bridge too far? Pukki is at the sharp end of an age wedge and suits a particular brand of football (ours). Aarons is a good, I'd happily let him go when we consider Byram has had better games so far. Cantwell is a damn fine player but do we have a replacement more suited to the Champ (should we go down) to help us up again as I seem to recall him struggling in that division last season...

There's a lot of sentimentality thrown about individuals but it's the team as a whole that got us up last season, a team yellow (no pun) to the ways of the Premier League. That naivety has cost us so far, it also means we dont they'll be clamouring of other clubs wanting to buy those players who failed to galvanise a Norwich city to survival that we all know is capable of much more than it currently exudes.

Here’s my prophecy. Sales of over £100M coming in with the announcement of the new stand being made to appease some people. Could still be competitive in the Championship next season with some decent replacements brought in. 

[ROBFLECK 132]

17 hours ago, nutty nigel said:

So we're on the same page here. You'd like our present successful owners to be richer. My apologies buddy, I thought you wanted someone unknown with more money.

Preferably not somebody unknown...like you say , but that seems to be increasingly difficult doesn't it?

[Jim Smith 2,314]

16 hours ago, GMF said:

To add clarity to your response, and Jim’s queries, the last time that the Club allocated any new shares at £100 each was back in 2014.

Taking a couple of steps back however, to circa 2009, when the Club had just been relegated to League One and was struggling with debts of circa £23m, mainly the Aviva bond, the Board proposed an AGM resolution, passed by shareholders in 2010, enabling the Board to allocate up to 1,000,000 ordinary shares without further notice to shareholders. The resolution lasted five years and was renewed again in 2015.

In theory therefore, the Board could more than double the existing share capital of the Club, with the investor acquiring an approximate 2/3rds majority and a significant cash injection.

Obviously, any potential buyer, if they existed, would have to satisfy whatever conditions the existing majority shareholders would want to impose.

Would anyone taking up those shares be subject to the City Code for takeovers GMF? They would obviously be acquiring a share in excess of 50% of the ordinary share capital of they took them all. 

[GMF 736]

1 hour ago, Jim Smith said:

Would anyone taking up those shares be subject to the City Code for takeovers GMF? They would obviously be acquiring a share in excess of 50% of the ordinary share capital of they took them all. 

Jim, I don’t know - that’s a question for a corporate law expert. At a guess, I’d assume so. 

[nutty nigel 7,513]

1 hour ago, ROBFLECK said:

Preferably not somebody unknown...like you say , but that seems to be increasingly difficult doesn't it?

Well, if you're happy with the club we have but wish the owners had more money then the simplest way would be to invest in that. If you are not happy with it then gamble. But be aware you then don't improve what we have, you have something the new owner wants. And you don't get to choose what that is.

[BigFish 1,986]

2 hours ago, Jim Smith said:

Would anyone taking up those shares be subject to the City Code for takeovers GMF? They would obviously be acquiring a share in excess of 50% of the ordinary share capital of they took them all. 

Knock yourself out Jim - A Guide to Takeovers in the United Kingdom.

Interesting with Brexit bubbling along that the City Code is an EU Directive, although actionable under UK Law. I am not an expert but clearly the City Code would apply, but the question is instead how. The threshold of compulsory purchase of 100% of the club is 90% while it is 70% that would require any offer to be extended to all shareholders, so in this case it doesn't make much difference. However, if someone had the spare £100 million required to purchase the million shares there are a number of minority shareholder rights (they could prevent the owner taking the company private for example, prevent special resolutions, block takeovers, compel offers to all shareholders) that would restrict the new owners ability to operate so it would make sense for them to take the lot.

You are now talking about the club being valued at around £160m which is comparable to other clubs sold so the chances of finding someone who fits the bill for a new owner looks virtually nil.

[GenerationA47 750]

On 15/01/2020 at 09:59, Thirsty Lizard said:

If you're so ashamed of our club best you go off and support someone else eh? To be honest it sounds as if you already do! 

Yep - you called it, Thirsty. There’s an almighty stench of covert bin from every single thread and post of this new poster

[PurpleCanary 5,554]

On 16/01/2020 at 12:55, BigFish said:

Knock yourself out Jim - A Guide to Takeovers in the United Kingdom.

Interesting with Brexit bubbling along that the City Code is an EU Directive, although actionable under UK Law. I am not an expert but clearly the City Code would apply, but the question is instead how. The threshold of compulsory purchase of 100% of the club is 90% while it is 70% that would require any offer to be extended to all shareholders, so in this case it doesn't make much difference. However, if someone had the spare £100 million required to purchase the million shares there are a number of minority shareholder rights (they could prevent the owner taking the company private for example, prevent special resolutions, block takeovers, compel offers to all shareholders) that would restrict the new owners ability to operate so it would make sense for them to take the lot.

You are now talking about the club being valued at around £160m which is comparable to other clubs sold so the chances of finding someone who fits the bill for a new owner looks virtually nil.

BF, 30 per cent rather than 70 per cent, I think, unless that has been changed recently.