What is the "five year plan"?

[TeemuVanBasten 3,327]

Two posters in the past two weeks have mentioned us being ahead of the "five year plan". 

For example:

4 hours ago, SwindonCanary said:

The aim of the club is to become self sufficient, by getting us in the Premiership Farke's helped with it a great deal, it's another few years of the money coming in. The club set out a five year plan but Farke  is well ahead of that. there's no way that he will lose his job.

But I've googled and can't find anything about this plan from Stuart Webber.

I've searched this forum for the exact phrase "five year plan" and sorted by date, but the only thing which comes up is talk about David McNally's revised five year plan in 2014 (obviously expired now). 

So if anybody can help I've got a few questions:

1). Does this five year plan actually exist or was it invented this month, because nobody seems to have ever talked about it on here.

2). If it does exist, what exactly is this five year plan?

3). When was this five year plan revealed? 

4) If it started at the beginning of 2017/2018 then next season we'll be in the fourth year of that plan, but if relegated to the Championship we can't possibly be 'ahead' of the plan in that scenario unless the five year plan was promotion in the fourth season?

Promotion in the fourth season doesn't sound particularly ambitious or like something that would come out of Webber's mouth. 

Thanks. 

 

Edited January 23, 2020 by TeemuVanBasten

[Duncan Edwards 2,216]

No. It’s all rubbish. Invented by the sycophant deliaites. Truth is we’re sleepwalking to relegation, beating Bournemouth just papered over the cracks, fire sale in the summer, nothing coming through from the academy, no investment from the board, club not for sale while all around us obtain significant cash injections leaving us behind, Farke back to Germany, Webber gone the season after, academy downgraded, relegation to league one, administration, points deduction, wound up, playing Wroxham. 
 

Appears to be the five year plan. On here, anyway. 

[Aggy 747]

I’d guess it was probably said at an AGM or something, so unlikely to be findable on google.

This is the best I can find: 

“Creating financial stability was the second part of the presentation, involving planning over a period of three to five years, ensuring the club owns all of its assets, efficiencies and maximising revenue to allow the playing squad to be enhanced.”
 

From https://www.pinkun.com/norwich-city/how-norwich-city-2019-agm-unfolded-1-6400332

[king canary 7,559]

35 minutes ago, TeemuVanBasten said:

Two posters in the past two weeks have mentioned us being ahead of the "five year plan". 

For example:

But I've googled and can't find anything about this plan from Stuart Webber.

I've searched this forum for the exact phrase "five year plan" and sorted by date, but the only thing which comes up is talk about David McNally's revised five year plan in 2014 (obviously expired now). 

So if anybody can help I've got a few questions:

1). Does this five year plan actually exist or was it invented this month, because nobody seems to have ever talked about it on here.

2). If it does exist, what exactly is this five year plan?

3). When was this five year plan revealed? 

4) If it started at the beginning of 2017/2018 then next season we'll be in the fourth year of that plan, but if relegated to the Championship we can't possibly be 'ahead' of the plan in that scenario unless the five year plan was promotion in the fourth season?

 Promotion in the fourth season doesn't sound particularly ambitious or like something that would come out of Webber's mouth. 

Thanks. 

 

1) I do think people are getting this apparent five year plan confused with the one McNally laid out.

2) I think most of these sorts of plans have a relegation baked into them- ie season 3 go up, season 4 go down, season 5 go back up and then stay up. So by going up in season two instead of season three we'd be ahead of the plan. 

[ricardo 7,328]

5 minutes ago, king canary said:

1) I do think people are getting this apparent five year plan confused with the one McNally laid out.

2) I think most of these sorts of plans have a relegation baked into them- ie season 3 go up, season 4 go down, season 5 go back up and then stay up. So by going up in season two instead of season three we'd be ahead of the plan. 

We can't go up in season three because we are already up.

Lets hope season four doesn't go to plan.😉

[PurpleCanary 5,553]

1 hour ago, TeemuVanBasten said:

Two posters in the past two weeks have mentioned us being ahead of the "five year plan". 

For example:

But I've googled and can't find anything about this plan from Stuart Webber.

I've searched this forum for the exact phrase "five year plan" and sorted by date, but the only thing which comes up is talk about David McNally's revised five year plan in 2014 (obviously expired now). 

So if anybody can help I've got a few questions:

1). Does this five year plan actually exist or was it invented this month, because nobody seems to have ever talked about it on here.

2). If it does exist, what exactly is this five year plan?

3). When was this five year plan revealed? 

4) If it started at the beginning of 2017/2018 then next season we'll be in the fourth year of that plan, but if relegated to the Championship we can't possibly be 'ahead' of the plan in that scenario unless the five year plan was promotion in the fourth season?

Promotion in the fourth season doesn't sound particularly ambitious or like something that would come out of Webber's mouth. 

Thanks. 

 

Someone asked the same question a few weeks back and I gave an answer based on what I understood it to be, but I can't offhand find the post, for what it was worth.

[TeemuVanBasten 3,327]

50 minutes ago, Aggy said:

I’d guess it was probably said at an AGM or something, so unlikely to be findable on google.

This is the best I can find: 

“Creating financial stability was the second part of the presentation, involving planning over a period of three to five years, ensuring the club owns all of its assets, efficiencies and maximising revenue to allow the playing squad to be enhanced.”
 

From https://www.pinkun.com/norwich-city/how-norwich-city-2019-agm-unfolded-1-6400332

 

So it was primarily about sorting out the finances then, which is achieved by getting promoted and being very conservative with spending.

Well I just hope that if we're back in the Premier League in year 5 that this season enables us to spend a bit of money in the summer window following promotion in season 4. 

"if" of course! 

Edited January 23, 2020 by TeemuVanBasten

[TeemuVanBasten 3,327]

10 minutes ago, PurpleCanary said:

Someone asked the same question a few weeks back and I gave an answer based on what I understood it to be, but I can't offhand find the post, for what it was worth.

The search engine may be rubbish. 

[Cantiaci Canary 556]

It's quite simple really ... be a nailed on top 26 club without a billionaire owner.

 

Playing attractive football with young and hungry home grown players.

Not ever being rocked by having a talented coach or top player poached by a bigger fish.

Not worrying about financial ruin.

Either scrapping to survive in the Prem or being a genuine contender to win promotion.

 

Sounds ambitious, sensible and exciting to me.

[The Real Buh 3,423]

The Mission statement, aim and overriding objective of a club in our financial situation is and always has been the same.

 

stay afloat

 

its harder than a lot of people think

[TeemuVanBasten 3,327]

4 minutes ago, Cantiaci Canary said:

It's quite simple really ... be a nailed on top 26 club without a billionaire owner.

There's no such thing as being a "nailed on top 26 club", not when Stoke are 41st when owned by the 19th richest person in the UK. 

[Faded Jaded Semi Plastic SOB 1,017]

The five year plan is for us to be established in the top 26 teams in England whilst only spending 72p, acouple of coke can rings and a pocket of fluff on transfers each season....... 

[Faded Jaded Semi Plastic SOB 1,017]

15 minutes ago, TeemuVanBasten said:

There's no such thing as being a "nailed on top 26 club", not when Stoke are 41st when owned by the 19th richest person in the UK. 

I think the aim is to be in the Top 26 of teams in England at the end of each season, rather than with 18 games to go.........

[Chumino 57]

1 hour ago, TeemuVanBasten said:

Two posters in the past two weeks have mentioned us being ahead of the "five year plan". 

For example:

But I've googled and can't find anything about this plan from Stuart Webber.

I've searched this forum for the exact phrase "five year plan" and sorted by date, but the only thing which comes up is talk about David McNally's revised five year plan in 2014 (obviously expired now). 

So if anybody can help I've got a few questions:

1). Does this five year plan actually exist or was it invented this month, because nobody seems to have ever talked about it on here.

2). If it does exist, what exactly is this five year plan?

3). When was this five year plan revealed? 

4) If it started at the beginning of 2017/2018 then next season we'll be in the fourth year of that plan, but if relegated to the Championship we can't possibly be 'ahead' of the plan in that scenario unless the five year plan was promotion in the fourth season?

Promotion in the fourth season doesn't sound particularly ambitious or like something that would come out of Webber's mouth. 

Thanks. 

 

It's simply Delias pension plan, not to be confused with Premiership football. 

[PurpleCanary 5,553]

27 minutes ago, TeemuVanBasten said:

The search engine may be rubbish. 

Possibly. Cantiaci has summed it up pretty well. A quick summary of what I posted before would be: self-sustainability; young talent; two steps forward, one step back.

[Cantiaci Canary 556]

36 minutes ago, TeemuVanBasten said:

There's no such thing as being a "nailed on top 26 club", not when Stoke are 41st when owned by the 19th richest person in the UK. 

Exactly!

Stoke City have the money but not the planning.

By having a long term plan that we HONOUR (rather than flush away when we're still drunk after promotion) we hope to more than make up for our humble finances.

We'll have a clear focus, style, approach, philosophy and direction.

Clever recruitment will give us round pegs in round holes.

Players will be sold on our terms with funds reinvested in attracting and rearing the next best things - with a clear pathway for them to game time.

The future is brighter with a plan than without one but with loadsa dosh to throw around.

It's also quite a fascinating experiment to watch unfold ... and it has already added a trophy to our cabinet and wiped out our debts - not bad eh?!

[norfolkngood 1,086]

It Will be interesting how this Works out this Summer 

i understand the club Did not have the money at the start of the season for Transfers  due to PL money being paid in Instalments and were losing money 

But As we have not spent much This season looks like there will be a good Profit at the end 

Add to that Any of our Valuable Players leave would add to that Profit 

The club will have a choice to spend that Profit Or get a very big tax bill 

[Branston Pickle 3,632]

I don’t quite get the ‘staged payment’ thing re the tv money - obviously it is staged, but so are transfers and there is/was a minimum guaranteed amount that everyone knows we’d be getting.
We took the bridging loan due to the cash flow, and used part of it to repay the bond money, something that was not completely necessary, which took £5m out of it.

[Aggy 747]

1 hour ago, TeemuVanBasten said:

There's no such thing as being a "nailed on top 26 club", not when Stoke are 41st when owned by the 19th richest person in the UK. 

 

 

1 hour ago, TeemuVanBasten said:

 

So it was primarily about sorting out the finances then, which is achieved by getting promoted and being very conservative with spending.

Well I just hope that if we're back in the Premier League in year 5 that this season enables us to spend a bit of money in the summer window following promotion in season 4. 

"if" of course! 

My understanding (admittedly predominantly from what I’ve read on here in the past and then pieced together) has always been that the aim is predominantly financial security/self sustainability - being a “top 26” club is to an extent both cause and effect of being a self sustaining club. 
 

I don’t think anyone’s saying we are a ‘nailed on’ top 26 club, but that is the aim. We are already (now) a top 26 club - our best chance of remaining in the top 26 is not spending crazy wages and fees on players who cripple us when we come down (as happened a few years ago). Twist that around, and if we finish in the top 26 it’s easier to be self sustaining. 
 

If a club run by the 19th richest person in the Uk is in 41st then that suggests to me that relying on a big bucks owner isn’t a guarantee of success.

[Iwans Big Toe 312]

3 hours ago, TeemuVanBasten said:

Two posters in the past two weeks have mentioned us being ahead of the "five year plan". 

For example:

But I've googled and can't find anything about this plan from Stuart Webber.

I've searched this forum for the exact phrase "five year plan" and sorted by date, but the only thing which comes up is talk about David McNally's revised five year plan in 2014 (obviously expired now). 

So if anybody can help I've got a few questions:

1). Does this five year plan actually exist or was it invented this month, because nobody seems to have ever talked about it on here.

2). If it does exist, what exactly is this five year plan?

3). When was this five year plan revealed? 

4) If it started at the beginning of 2017/2018 then next season we'll be in the fourth year of that plan, but if relegated to the Championship we can't possibly be 'ahead' of the plan in that scenario unless the five year plan was promotion in the fourth season?

Promotion in the fourth season doesn't sound particularly ambitious or like something that would come out of Webber's mouth. 

Thanks. 

 

It does exist.

 

Unfortunately it changes every two years.

 

 

 

[wcorkcanary 4,329]

1 hour ago, Cantiaci Canary said:

Exactly!

Stoke City have the money but not the planning.

By having a long term plan that we HONOUR (rather than flush away when we're still drunk after promotion) we hope to more than make up for our humble finances.

We'll have a clear focus, style, approach, philosophy and direction.

Clever recruitment will give us round pegs in round holes.

Players will be sold on our terms with funds reinvested in attracting and rearing the next best things - with a clear pathway for them to game time.

The future is brighter with a plan than without one but with loadsa dosh to throw around.

It's also quite a fascinating experiment to watch unfold ... and it has already added a trophy to our cabinet and wiped out our debts - not bad eh?!

Kaboom!! Sometimes  someone posts exactly what I was about to. 

[TeemuVanBasten 3,327]

3 hours ago, Faded Jaded Semi Plastic SOB said:

I think the aim is to be in the Top 26 of teams in England at the end of each season, rather than with 18 games to go.........

I think Stoke might struggle a little to close the gap between 21st and 6th. 

[TeemuVanBasten 3,327]

2 hours ago, Cantiaci Canary said:

Exactly!

Stoke City have the money but not the planning.

By having a long term plan that we HONOUR (rather than flush away when we're still drunk after promotion) we hope to more than make up for our humble finances.

We'll have a clear focus, style, approach, philosophy and direction.

Clever recruitment will give us round pegs in round holes.

Players will be sold on our terms with funds reinvested in attracting and rearing the next best things - with a clear pathway for them to game time.

The future is brighter with a plan than without one but with loadsa dosh to throw around.

It's also quite a fascinating experiment to watch unfold ... and it has already added a trophy to our cabinet and wiped out our debts - not bad eh?!

I hope you are right mate, we definitely need a good summer window with more Zimmermann's/Pukki's and fewer Heise's/Frankie's if we are to be competitive next season. 

[Kenny Foggo 1,116]

Wow.. rather than reach for the stars.. its stay afloat..  good job our London Olympic committee did not follow this conservative scared outlook... My opinion not fact x

[Kenny Foggo 1,116]

Ps Top 26 .. come on NO ONE ever thinks this is credible... 

[sgncfc 1,221]

I was speaking to a Stoke fan the other night as it happens. He was talking about the way we have approached the PL with a touch of envy - "at least you play exciting football and have a proper club", he said, "we didn't even try."

He said that their owners didn't spend in the January of their PL relegation season when they should have done and now the FFP rules mean that even with the UK's 19th richest man in charge, he can't spend very much of it when turnover plummets like theirs has - hence why so many rich owners of Championship clubs find themselves unable to get out of the Championship.

Having a rich owner......wonder what Sunderland fans think about that. Or even Ipswich - I believe their owner is quite wealthy.

Top 26 is fine by me; PL or playoffs every year. What's not to like?

[daly 499]

The only consistent thing about us is we’re always permanently broke

[Surfer 1,547]

3 hours ago, Kenny Foggo said:

Wow.. rather than reach for the stars.. its stay afloat..  good job our London Olympic committee did not follow this conservative scared outlook... My opinion not fact x

I think the London Olympic stadium debacle is the perfect rebuttal to your intended point KF. 
They destroyed a perfectly good UK athletics infrastructure to build a white elephant that had to be massively subsidized to gift it to a bunch of grifters who in turn have all but destroyed their community club to become the “tenant” of a soulless bowl who’s only advantage is it lets them make money at everyone else’s expense. 

[hogesar 9,609]

3 hours ago, Surfer said:

I think the London Olympic stadium debacle is the perfect rebuttal to your intended point KF. 
They destroyed a perfectly good UK athletics infrastructure to build a white elephant that had to be massively subsidized to gift it to a bunch of grifters who in turn have all but destroyed their community club to become the “tenant” of a soulless bowl who’s only advantage is it lets them make money at everyone else’s expense. 

Smashed it

[lake district canary 4,530]

6 hours ago, daly said:

The only consistent thing about us is we’re always permanently broke

That is so wide of the mark. Even as we speak, if we sell four or five players we can amass well over £100 million and adding the money we make this season from being in the PL and adding parachute payments to that if we get relegated, could give us £200m plus in finance to develop the club and develop the squad further . None of that money would be needed to go into paying off debts like it did in the past, because we have no debt. 

It is really quite an exciting position to be in - a club able to build its squad and its finances organically, with a clear playing policy and a style of football that at its best is wonderful to watch. 

I can't really understand why there are still some who can't take this on board.