Can you imagine

[splendidrush 700]

1 hour ago, Cliff the Canary said:

This statement shows the apathy! If you can’t change it don’t talk about it!

where would the world be today if people just gave up at the first obstacle?

clearly there’s no place for people of my ‘ilk’ on this fan forum! I’ll jog on now, wouldn’t want to be thought provoking, shudder the thought 

By your 'ilk' you mean that you think putting the finances of the Club at risk, like we did the last time we were in the Premiership, when we bought Naismith, is a good idea.

By 'thought provoking' you mean dragging up something that has been discussed a thousand times before, usually after we've lost a game, though rarely to the best Club side in the World. 

If you changed the word 'apathy' to 'reality' you may be closer to the truth, as it's undeniable that we will never compete with Liverpool or Chelsea financially.

Sorry for the long post but you asked for more than a 'one sentence pun' the others were probably wise not to rise to your bait, as I'm sure that's what you're looking for but as I'm not on here that often nowadays I'll play the game and maybe come back in a week or so for your response. 

[Cliff the Canary 63]

14 minutes ago, splendidrush said:

By your 'ilk' you mean that you think putting the finances of the Club at risk, like we did the last time we were in the Premiership, when we bought Naismith, is a good idea.

By 'thought provoking' you mean dragging up something that has been discussed a thousand times before, usually after we've lost a game, though rarely to the best Club side in the World. 

If you changed the word 'apathy' to 'reality' you may be closer to the truth, as it's undeniable that we will never compete with Liverpool or Chelsea financially.

Sorry for the long post but you asked for more than a 'one sentence pun' the others were probably wise not to rise to your bait, as I'm sure that's what you're looking for but as I'm not on here that often nowadays I'll play the game and maybe come back in a week or so for your response. 

Thanks for your response, I appreciate constructive dialogue.

Im not trying to provoke or rise people to my bait! I also post infrequently, but occasionally I feel compelled.

under the current ownership I wouldn’t suggest putting the clubs finances at risk as there is no cash reserves to support any speculative spending!  e.g. my point is the current ownership cannot and are unable to take the club financially forward, whilst at the same time unwilling to relinquish power. The self sustaining model is the only model that maintains their power.

Again I’m accused of singing from the same chord after defeat, well if no one stands up against the apathetic majority, Delia’s reign will carry on! How lucky for her the majority is apathetic 

Edited February 15, 2020 by Cliff the Canary

[splendidrush 700]

2 minutes ago, Cliff the Canary said:

 

under the current ownership I wouldn’t suggest putting the clubs finances at risk as there is no cash reserves to support any speculative spending!  e.g. my point is the current ownership cannot and are unable to take the club financially forward, whilst at the same time unwilling to relinquish power. The self sustaining model is the only model that maintains their power.

 

Good points, well made and thanks for the courteous response. 

If 'there is no cash reserves to support any speculative spending' why are you advocating spending 20-30 million, that we haven't got on players who may, or may not make a difference?

I've not heard that the 'current owners are unwilling to relinquish power' I'm sure that if you were to stump up enough money they would consider it. 

[Nono 19]

You mean invest like villa did? 

Remind us how many points that 150 million had gained? 

Tool. 

[Cliff the Canary 63]

11 minutes ago, splendidrush said:

Good points, well made and thanks for the courteous response. 

If 'there is no cash reserves to support any speculative spending' why are you advocating spending 20-30 million, that we haven't got on players who may, or may not make a difference?

I've not heard that the 'current owners are unwilling to relinquish power' I'm sure that if you were to stump up enough money they would consider it. 

 

12 minutes ago, splendidrush said:

Good points, well made and thanks for the courteous response. 

If 'there is no cash reserves to support any speculative spending' why are you advocating spending 20-30 million, that we haven't got on players who may, or may not make a difference?

I've not heard that the 'current owners are unwilling to relinquish power' I'm sure that if you were to stump up enough money they would consider it. 

As a Norwich fan, as you are, if we had the means to buyout Norwich with millions to invest we would! Obviously that is fantasy.

 I work in a UK crown dependency where alot of high net worth individuals choose to keep their money due to favourable tax regime. We regularly see sales pitches for EPL clubs, that are being aggressively marketed. Investment doesn’t walk to the doors of Carrow Road, you have to market the club in the right circles.

 I have no inside knowledge, but the recent interviews with Delia and MWJ in the newspaper and on sky were pretty clear they weren’t interested in selling the club or even listening to offers. 
 

my point on spending £30m this season is that there are adequate cash reserve’s in EPL money and player assets to mitigate that risk. Even in the event of relegation (which is likely) there should be enough to cover such expenses. The issue with Naismith and Jarvis was handing out such long contracts to very average players! But again most clubs do this but have ownership that can take the financial hit!

 I love NCFC and appreciate everything DS & MJW have done, but every dog has its day and maybe that day is done?

[hogesar 9,618]

Unfortunately it's sort of become some hindsight proven fact that had we spent money in the summer we would have stayed up. 

However if our scouting had led us to signing Amadou permanently for 10 mill instead of a loan and Fahrmann for 10 mill - I'm not sure we would be any better of.

I'm also not sure why a similar thread has to be created after every loss and then not mentioned after a positive result. Its either a permanent issue in which case one thread regularly commented on will suffice, or it's the up and down emotions mixed with short termism which unfortunately epitomizes football fans in general. 

[Badger 2,405]

11 hours ago, Cliff the Canary said:

well if no one stands up against the apathetic majority

What you describe as the "apathetic majority" care about the club just as much, if not more than you do!

To denigrate their support as "apathy" because they (arguably) have a better understanding of financial reality betrays a lack of understanding about the complexity of the issue.

With regards your original point it is not in the least bit difficult to imagine the impact of spending 20-30 million.

1. We had an option to buy Amadou for £10 million, rather than loan him.

2. Farhmann was reputedly worth £8 to 10 million 

3. I very much doubt that we would have got Roberts at the start of the season for less than 10 million and probably significantly more. 

So there's your £30 million - so how much higher would we have been if we had bought them rather than loaned them?

[Midlands Yellow 3,934]

7 minutes ago, Badger said:

What you describe as the "apathetic majority" care about the club just as much, if not more than you do!

To denigrate their support as "apathy" because they (arguably) have a better understanding of financial reality betrays a lack of understanding about the complexity of the issue.

With regards your original point it is not in the least bit difficult to imagine the impact of spending 20-30 million.

1. We had an option to buy Amadou for £10 million, rather than loan him.

2. Farhmann was reputedly worth £8 to 10 million 

3. I very much doubt that we would have got Roberts at the start of the season for less than 10 million and probably significantly more. 

So there's your £30 million - so how much higher would we have been if we had bought them rather than loaned them?

Those 3 players would never have been signed in a million years for £30M. They were low risk loan signings who were not getting any minutes at their respective clubs. 

[wcorkcanary 4,329]

15 hours ago, Cliff the Canary said:

! What part of my post is pathetic

All of it, so pathetic I'll only quote the bit asking the question. This has been discussed to death, dug up, reburied and dug up again several times. ITS BORING.  So boring in fact that most people that were asking that question have given up because the answer doesn't change. In fact I feel foolish for even bothering to answer you. I apogise to myself and others for responding. I hope you enjoy your fourteenth birthday , in a year or twos time.

[Badger 2,405]

1 hour ago, Midlands Yellow said:

Those 3 players would never have been signed in a million years for £30M. They were low risk loan signings who were not getting any minutes at their respective clubs. 

Therein lies the issue - of course they were not "getting minutes" as you put it - why would a player "getting minutes" in a top league - Serie A, la Liga, Premier league sign a permanent contract with a newly promoted club?

You've left with hoping they "make the jump." So we could have had Wesley Moraes (Villa) for a reported 22 million and 3 million pa contract for 5 years (15 million). He may prove good value in the long run, equally, he might not.

So far the 25 million outlay for this season has produced 5 goals in 21 games! Would that have been a season changer for us? Just imagine.

Or perhaps you'd prefer Joelinton at Newcastle. He was believed to have signed for a fee in the region of £40 million. So far he has produced on goal from 25 starts - that could have been a real season changer!

Big spending does not guarantee success - it does however, guarantee that there is less money available for the future. 

[Midlands Yellow 3,934]

14 minutes ago, Badger said:

Therein lies the issue - of course they were not "getting minutes" as you put it - why would a player "getting minutes" in a top league - Serie A, la Liga, Premier league sign a permanent contract with a newly promoted club?

You've left with hoping they "make the jump." So we could have had Wesley Moraes (Villa) for a reported 22 million and 3 million pa contract for 5 years (15 million). He may prove good value in the long run, equally, he might not.

So far the 25 million outlay for this season has produced 5 goals in 21 games! Would that have been a season changer for us? Just imagine.

Or perhaps you'd prefer Joelinton at Newcastle. He was believed to have signed for a fee in the region of £40 million. So far he has produced on goal from 25 starts - that could have been a real season changer!

Big spending does not guarantee success - it does however, guarantee that there is less money available for the future. 

You know what I meant. If the criteria to obtain the 3 mentioned players had been permanent deals only we would not have signed any of them. No one advocated going on a crazy spending spree last summer but our dealings were underwhelming to say the least.

[Badger 2,405]

58 minutes ago, Midlands Yellow said:

You know what I meant. If the criteria to obtain the 3 mentioned players had been permanent deals only we would not have signed any of them. No one advocated going on a crazy spending spree last summer but our dealings were underwhelming to say the least.

I'm afraid I don't know what you mean. You don't advocate going on a "crazy spending spree" but you don't want players that are not "getting minutes." Therefore, you presumably mean that you want players that are doing very well and first team regulars? Top league players "getting minutes" will not sign for a newly promoted club - frankly, I doubt Amadou and Fahrmann would ahve signed on permanent deals if we had tried.

Well you are not going to get "first team regulars" from top leagues. You are going to have to pay large sums for "players with promise" from lower leagues - like Villa did with Wesley Moraes and Newcastle with Joelinton. In the long run, these signings might work out - but many don't.

Big spending does not guarantee success - it does however, guarantee that there is less money available for the future. In essence you want to mortgage our future on a punt - no thank you. 

 

[Surfer 1,547]

The fact is our best players this year have been Puuki, Cantwell, Aarons, Krul. And we spent how much on those four?