Jump to content
A Load of Squit

Safe, sensible hands guiding the club

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, king canary said:

In my view the opposite is also true. Those who refuse to accept any criticism of the club or its owners are continuing down that path in the current situation. 

Fair, although (and happy to be proven wrong) I've not seen anyone start multiple threads about how much of an excellent decisions furloughing was, nor have I seen anyone who is delighted about what Webber is doing flounce off the forum publically just to return a week later to uhh...make the exact same points again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, keelansgrandad said:

It's also no coincidence that the strong majority of people who are protesting these decisions have either been Anti-Delia or Anti-Webber (or both) but simply had little to cling onto. 

Not quite sure that is fair Hoggy. I think there is a great deal of love and respect for what Delia is and has done. For me, I think she is what a football owner should be. Believe me there are a lot out there who are jealous of our owner. She has also given the club a great deal of exposure that doesn't do any harm. She has been the consistency throughout our success.
I am unconvinced about Webber, or any CEO or Sporting Director. It isn't personal. He may well be a great person. The position he holds may be deemed necessary but I don't see him as anything different to a player or coach. If a better offer comes along, naturally, he will take and be pictured holding a scarf of that club above his head.
Delia isn't going to try and buy a different club. She is here for the duration. I can't imagine what it would be like to have a cold fish but obligatorily wealthy owner.

Sorry Keelan, it's not fair on you agreed. I did say majority mind. You're an exception. Theres a couple others. But theres some posters who we only see during bad results etc return specifically to kick into the club.

It might be why theres some on here who are perhaps overly defensive of the club. To make up for those.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Uncle Fred said:

 my preferred option is to sell to a stinking rich Chinese owner who has already survived corona virus 

You do realise that scampi on the Gunn Club menu will be replaced by bat ?

  • Haha 1

Share this post


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

Fair, although (and happy to be proven wrong) I've not seen anyone start multiple threads about how much of an excellent decisions furloughing was, nor have I seen anyone who is delighted about what Webber is doing flounce off the forum publically just to return a week later to uhh...make the exact same points again.

Are you claiming that Webber is in charge of Ward and Kensell then and can over rule decisions? And they aren't making important decisions like this as a trio? 

If so, what's the point in that leadership model? 

As you seem to be making this just about Webber, when actually I suggested we need an experienced heavyweight in that mix. 

I was under the impression that Ward, Webber and Kensell ran the club having had that job delegated to them by the board. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TeemuVanBasten said:

What if I was one of those guys? I'm not, but hasn't coronavirus taught people anything about not looking down at people for the job that they do? If I were one of those guys I'd be risking my health going out to work everyday as a keyworker for your benefit, bank branches are still open! 

You are one of those guys that looks down at supermarket checkout staff then? And minimum wage care workers? And street cleaners? And bin men? That comment reflects far worse on you than it does me. I've got nothing but respect for all these people out there putting themselves in harms way to keep society functioning, having to get on public transport and worry about what they may be taking home to their families at the end of their shifts. 

I've worked in factories, worked minimum wage retail, now doing pretty well for myself but never have I considered myself superior to somebody because of the job that they do. Everybody who works does so to pay the bills and feed their families. Truly appalled, shame on you. 

At no point did I state that I looked down on anybody......you made that up. So bog off and carry on being a self righteous, humourless prig. You are the worst kind of populist ,self congratulating, virtue signalling boor, this board was a much more pleasant place when you flounced off. Now, I have insulted someone,  you, so you can at last be justifiably pompous and unpleasant, I shall ignore you , as your attention seeking is incredibly childish. 

Oh and well played Badgero for having the stamina to be able to eventually get this numpty to concede.....even if he displayed  even more extremely bitter sentiment in that concession. A bad sport and a sad sad poster.

This conversation ends here ,bye. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
5 minutes ago, wcorkcanary said:

At no point did I state that I looked down on anybody......you made that up. So bog off and carry on being a self righteous, humourless prig. You are the worst kind of populist ,self congratulating, virtue signalling boor, this board was a much more pleasant place when you flounced off. Now, I have insulted someone,  you, so you can at last be justifiably pompous and unpleasant, I shall ignore you , as your attention seeking is incredibly childish. 

Oh and well played Badgero for having the stamina to be able to eventually get this numpty to concede.....even if he displayed  even more extremely bitter sentiment in that concession. A bad sport and a sad sad poster.

This conversation ends here ,bye. 

Thank God for that. 

Edited by TeemuVanBasten

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Badger said:

Let us see live up to the principles that you think others should follow. Set up a just giving page "TeemuVanBasten's voluntary fund for the govt." You and others that support you can go to the website and donate using their message board names, so that we can see that they have the courage of their convictions and not merely full of hot air. I have provided a link for you to help.

https://www.justgiving.com/start-fundraising

20 hours ago, TeemuVanBasten said:

Its cringeworthy seeing you put so much effort into defending these millionaires who think donating less than 0.3 percent of their annual salary to the NHS cuts the mustard.

This is quite useful as a guide as to how much you should contribute. As a graduate economist  in a STEM subject with Economics modules*  working for a bank (as you have told us before) a contribution in the region of a couple of hundred would be equivalent of the contribution that you think is inadequate for others. Obviously if you think that they should give say, 10%, you should give thousands. Or are you just generous with other peoples' money?

Personally, I don't believe charitable donations to fund the healthcare system of a country that has one of the largest economies in the world - I believe that the NHS should be funded properly at all times and not have to rely on charitable donations.

Right so let's get back to the point, you do not claim to be an Economics graduate but a STEM graduate (who studied Economics modules), I don't think that this should affect your wage level negatively. 

I referred to your occupation as it gave some (very limited) guidance as to your income. I don't think my original assertion that 0.3% of your income is broadly in the range of a couple of hundred pounds. Are you going to be as generous as the players and donate this to the Just Giving. Set up a just giving page "TeemuVanBasten's voluntary fund for the govt.: you and others that support you can go to the website and donate using their message board names, so that we can see that they have the courage of their convictions and not merely full of hot air. I have provided a link for you to help.

https://www.justgiving.com/start-fundraising

Obviously if you think that they should give say, 10%, you should give thousands. Or are you just generous with other peoples' money?

Please provide a link to the evidence TVB.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Badger said:

Right so let's get back to the point, you do not claim to be an Economics graduate but a STEM graduate (who studied Economics modules), I don't think that this should affect your wage level negatively. 

I referred to your occupation as it gave some (very limited) guidance as to your income. I don't think my original assertion that 0.3% of your income is broadly in the range of a couple of hundred pounds. Are you going to be as generous as the players and donate this to the Just Giving. Set up a just giving page "TeemuVanBasten's voluntary fund for the govt.: you and others that support you can go to the website and donate using their message board names, so that we can see that they have the courage of their convictions and not merely full of hot air. I have provided a link for you to help.

https://www.justgiving.com/start-fundraising

Obviously if you think that they should give say, 10%, you should give thousands. Or are you just generous with other peoples' money?

Please provide a link to the evidence TVB.

A couple of hundred pounds is a little bit more than 0.3% of my guaranteed income I'm afraid. 

£150 for 0.3%. 

The problem with your idea of setting up a JustGiving page Badger is that I've already got pretty close to that 0.3%, having donated to Captain Tom Moore, an animal sanctuary which has no income but animals to feed, and a hospice which relied every year on marathon fundraising. I certainly expect to exceed it by the end of lockdown. 

But to make the comparison a fair one, it is highly likely that my on target bonus of 10% for the year, which is entirely discretionary, won't happen this year for the first time ever. We've already been warned that this is likely to be the case. This is due to my employer having profits impacted by coronavirus. 

As things stand my personal financial sacrifice, granted involuntary (although I'm not complaining), is greater than any that have been confirmed to effect the players or executives at the football club.

The executives at my employer have taken pay cuts and given up bonuses for this year, and it is for that reason that I won't complain about losing my bonus too. 

Edited by TeemuVanBasten

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The point every one is missing is yet again we are close to financial meltdown under the stowmarket 2, I have lost track of how many times under their ownership this has happened.

if we do long term try to be self financing  we need more financially astute owners 

we can’t keep stumbling from one financial disaster to the next 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, TeemuVanBasten said:

A couple of hundred pounds is a little bit more than 0.3% of my guaranteed income I'm afraid. 

£150 for 0.3%. 

The problem with your idea of setting up a JustGiving page Badger is that I've already got pretty close to that 0.3%, having donated to Captain Tom Moore, an animal sanctuary which has no income but animals to feed, and a hospice which relied every year on marathon fundraising. I certainly expect to exceed it by the end of lockdown. 

But to make the comparison a fair one, it is highly likely that my on target bonus of 10% for the year, which is entirely discretionary, won't happen this year for the first time ever. We've already been warned that this is likely to be the case. This is due to my employer having profits impacted by coronavirus. 

As things stand my personal financial sacrifice, granted involuntary (although I'm not complaining), is greater than any that have been confirmed to effect the players or executives at the football club.

The executives at my employer have taken pay cuts and given up bonuses for this year, and it is for that reason that I won't complain about losing my bonus too. 

In essence TVB, your position seems little different to that of the players. You have made a small voluntary donation of a similar magnitude of the players reported donations. On top of this, you have been deprived of your bonus on an involuntary basis.

As things stand, players will be losing bonuses too - squad fees, appearance fees, performance fees (goals; clean sheets; assists etc). Like you they will be doing this on an involuntary basis. I don't see any difference in your positions except that the players may have made additional donations privately that we do not know about and the same way as I didn't know about yours or you about mine.

The difference is that you want the players to make an additional surrender of wages, in which is likely to be the best year financially of their entire lives for many of them, which could contribute to their families welfare for the future. When you look at a lot of our players, they are essentially "journeymen:" we know that Zimmermann nearly gave up football two or three years ago to become a teacher. Most of them are unlikely to go on to have long premiership careers where they go on to earn multi-million pounds every year - we are not like Arsenal, Man City or even West Ham.

I am not pleading poverty on their behalf at all, but suggesting that to sacrifice voluntarily a large proportion of their salary in what is likely to be their best ever years financially is a big ask and one that there is little evidence that any on this message board would make themselves.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think donating is a matter of people giving what they can afford Badger. And the people who give when they cannot afford it is even more of a gesture.

I am always sceptical of the reasons people have to tell us what and how they have donated. And some people, like Nutty, do things because it is in their nature to help others and not their wallet or Facebook account. They are givers not takers.

So when I see that players have made donations, I think good, well done but don't expect a medal because you have just given money. However I know our players are very active in the Community and give up their free time for others and that is what I admire more.

I hated Jimmy Saville before the scandal broke because he used his Charity work to promote himself.

Share this post


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

I think donating is a matter of people giving what they can afford Badger. And the people who give when they cannot afford it is even more of a gesture.

I am always sceptical of the reasons people have to tell us what and how they have donated.

I tend to agree KG. However, sometimes someone with a "famous name" can help push a cause and get more people involved. I can imagine for the "sincere ones" it might be a little bit of a dilemma - they might not want to be involved so publicly, but equally they know the value of their name.

On the other hand, there are others, who pretty obviously do it for their own purposes. It's not always easy to tell though, so I tend to err on the side of caution with individuals, whilst agreeing with your general point.

Share this post


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

The focus should not just be on the players. They got us to where we are and to be honest by prem standards are not that highly paid so although I do think they should be taking cuts or deferrals so also should the other highly paid staff at the club. Also amongst that interview is the express statement that “the owners are no longer putting any money into the club” which I think is the first time that’s actually been said outright although we all know they haven’t done so for a long time.

if the club does start asking people to forego refunds then it will be interesting to see if the owners actually put in some money themselves to keep their main asset (which they have made clear they will hand to their nephew whether the fans like it or not) afloat or just rely on the fans to fund everything as has become the norm. 

 

Stuart Webber said on Saturday that the club do not have a cashflow issue, hence why they have not considered asking players to defer salary. And presumably why he is not deferring or reducing any of his.

This is, of course, a direct contradiction of Ben Kensall's statement when he defended the club furloughing 200 staff, when he said they had to furlough because they didn't have enough cash.

Obviously if the club has to offer refunds to season ticket holders eventually it is up to the individuals whether they accept it or not, but as the club don't seem to know their a**e from their elbow in terms of their cash position I'd take that as a bad sign.

Of course, it might be that they don't now have a cashflow problem because they have furloughed - so the taxpayer is now paying all the high earner salaries. Happy with that everyone?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, sgncfc said:

Of course, it might be that they don't now have a cashflow problem because they have furloughed - so the taxpayer is now paying all the high earner salaries. Happy with that everyone?

The furlough scheme pays wages of up to £2,600 max per month, so this won't apply.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, sgncfc said:

Stuart Webber said on Saturday that the club do not have a cashflow issue, hence why they have not considered asking players to defer salary. And presumably why he is not deferring or reducing any of his.

This is, of course, a direct contradiction of Ben Kensall's statement when he defended the club furloughing 200 staff, when he said they had to furlough because they didn't have enough cash.

Obviously if the club has to offer refunds to season ticket holders eventually it is up to the individuals whether they accept it or not, but as the club don't seem to know their a**e from their elbow in terms of their cash position I'd take that as a bad sign.

Of course, it might be that they don't now have a cashflow problem because they have furloughed - so the taxpayer is now paying all the high earner salaries. Happy with that everyone?

Stuart was speaking specifically about wage deferalls.

Will the conversation at some point turn towards deferrals? More than likely, yes, because if you look at the landscape of where things are going in the world, of course.

“But what we felt was important was that, fortunately we’re not in a major rush from a cashflow point of view, so we have got a little bit of time to really assess the situation, to really communicate properly - and I’ve got to say that the players and the staff have been an absolute credit to the club during this period.”

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, A Load of Squit said:

Stuart was speaking specifically about wage deferalls.

Will the conversation at some point turn towards deferrals? More than likely, yes, because if you look at the landscape of where things are going in the world, of course.

“But what we felt was important was that, fortunately we’re not in a major rush from a cashflow point of view, so we have got a little bit of time to really assess the situation, to really communicate properly - and I’ve got to say that the players and the staff have been an absolute credit to the club during this period.”

 

 

Of course he was - that's the biggest outlay. My point is that they still have the cash to pay the players and the execs (and as they are "not in a major rush" presumably they have enough for a few months) but they apparently don't have the cash to pay the non-football staff for March and April. Its complete nonsense.

I'd like the press in general to ask better questions, but in particular I'd like the EDP to ask Stuart Webber why, if they are sitting on so much cash, they have decided to furlough and also why Ben Kensall's statement (reported widely) contained so much incorrect information eg we have already spent £125m.

They can't both be right!

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Uncle Fred said:

The point every one is missing is yet again we are close to financial meltdown under the stowmarket 2, I have lost track of how many times under their ownership this has happened.

if we do long term try to be self financing  we need more financially astute owners 

we can’t keep stumbling from one financial disaster to the next 

I see Ren agrees, now all you need is Stimpy.......oh and the Two Stupid Dogs. Might be over your head that one, Jobbo. Kids Cartoons a bit intellectual for ya.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, sgncfc said:

Of course he was - that's the biggest outlay. My point is that they still have the cash to pay the players and the execs (and as they are "not in a major rush" presumably they have enough for a few months) but they apparently don't have the cash to pay the non-football staff for March and April.

 

That's the definition of managing cash flow.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the cash flow has little to do with paying the players but is just their way of saying we aren't doing anything until the next EPL meeting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, Badger said:

In essence TVB, your position seems little different to that of the players. You have made a small voluntary donation of a similar magnitude of the players reported donations. On top of this, you have been deprived of your bonus on an involuntary basis.

As things stand, players will be losing bonuses too - squad fees, appearance fees, performance fees (goals; clean sheets; assists etc). Like you they will be doing this on an involuntary basis. I don't see any difference in your positions except that the players may have made additional donations privately that we do not know about and the same way as I didn't know about yours or you about mine.

The difference is that you want the players to make an additional surrender of wages, in which is likely to be the best year financially of their entire lives for many of them, which could contribute to their families welfare for the future. When you look at a lot of our players, they are essentially "journeymen:" we know that Zimmermann nearly gave up football two or three years ago to become a teacher. Most of them are unlikely to go on to have long premiership careers where they go on to earn multi-million pounds every year - we are not like Arsenal, Man City or even West Ham.

I am not pleading poverty on their behalf at all, but suggesting that to sacrifice voluntarily a large proportion of their salary in what is likely to be their best ever years financially is a big ask and one that there is little evidence that any on this message board would make themselves.

I think its suffice to say that I'd be loathe to take a voluntary pay cut at my current job, a large bank, even if I felt that my job was at threat. Although if the banks were at risk of collapsing all of our jobs would be at threat. 

But I think there is a good chance that I'd have done so with at least one of my previous employers, an SME, if they could convince me, with data, that doing so was essential to their survival and to protect a substantial proportion of jobs (including mine). 

On the provision that this was a sweeping/universal pay cut with all employees earning above a certain threshold (living wage perhaps) taking the same hit, which I guess wouldn't be achievable unless it was a unionised industry with collective bargaining. 

And that's where I think the idea of players making their minds up on an individual basis is highly flawed, because you get a situation where Moritz Leitner says "Why should I take a 12% pay cut if Marco Stiepermann isn't", etc. Or, indeed, "why should I donate 5% to the NHS if he isn't", etc. 

And football is unionised isn't it. 

And football clubs have one crucial difference to most other businesses, in that it is essentially a huge part of the local community and it goes way beyond a mere pursuit of profit (at least, it should be that way).

ps. I do like the way that we are managing to converse with each other a bit more respectfully by the way, lets both keep that up.

Edited by TeemuVanBasten

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, sgncfc said:

Of course he was - that's the biggest outlay. My point is that they still have the cash to pay the players and the execs (and as they are "not in a major rush" presumably they have enough for a few months) but they apparently don't have the cash to pay the non-football staff for March and April. Its complete nonsense.

I'd like the press in general to ask better questions, but in particular I'd like the EDP to ask Stuart Webber why, if they are sitting on so much cash, they have decided to furlough and also why Ben Kensall's statement (reported widely) contained so much incorrect information eg we have already spent £125m.

They can't both be right!

I actually reflected over a cuppa earlier and wonder whether the club is waiting for a few other clubs to make a move with requesting pay cuts to set the precedent and, to apply public pressure to our own players. 

But, the flaw in that is that this would be far more believable if the executive team had made the first move and shown themselves keen to make a personal sacrifice. Players won't if the execs don't. 

It is possible that some of us are jumping the gun a little bit with criticism and should wait and see how it plays out, although it is equally possible that some are being way too defensive of the club and players when the situation could deteriorate rapidly.

I guess its a case of waiting to see how this plays out now. Another consideration is perhaps uncertainty over whether there will be a Sky clawback and the extent/level of that clawback. Clubs could be too quick to move to request a pay cut or deferral of x amount, agree it with the PFA or with club captains, but then have to go back and ask for more as they'd be requesting a figure based on an underestimated financial impact. Likewise, players may want to see if the financial impact has been overstated and don't want to commit to a sacrifice until they are certain it is necessary to protect the wider industry. 

Or in short, people on both sides of the debate have set their stall out too early on this forum as the situation is still a developing one with too much uncertainty. 

Edited by TeemuVanBasten

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TeemuVanBasten said:

It is possible that some of us are jumping the gun a little bit with criticism and should wait and see how it plays out, although it is equally possible that some are being way too defensive of the club and players when the situation could deteriorate rapidly.

Isn't that pretty much what some were trying to tell you before your 'little absence'.? It s ok though TvB, you were so busy telling us stuff, how could you be expected to listen. Better late than never, I suppose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
31 minutes ago, wcorkcanary said:

Isn't that pretty much what some were trying to tell you before your 'little absence'.? It s ok though TvB, you were so busy telling us stuff, how could you be expected to listen. Better late than never, I suppose.

Perhaps you should read the section of my post that you quoted a little more carefully. 

There are plenty of people that have stated that they believe the players shouldn't take a pay cut under any circumstances, which is a ludicrous position to take considering the potential catastrophe unfolding in the industry. 

Let's see if this is a minor ripple or if some big clubs will actually be brought down by this. If the latter then players will look somewhat silly not foregoing a proportion of one seasons wages then having the next three years of their contract written off when their employer goes bankrupt, only to find that the 'new' market doesn't support wages anywhere near that level. 

I'm admitting that my judgement could turn out to be rash and that the club could be holding some cards close to its chest, although I consider it unlikely, but I can assure you that there are plenty of people who will look very silly if clubs are pulled under by an inability to cover player wages in the short term - not least the players themselves and the PFA. 

Edited by TeemuVanBasten

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, TeemuVanBasten said:

Perhaps you should read the section of my post that you quoted a little more carefully. 

Which bit? All looked reasonable and balanced to me. Which is why I had to check that it was in fact you that posted. 

Always best not to have too much of a hair trigger. Helps with ones dignity😉

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, TeemuVanBasten said:

Or in short, people on both sides of the debate have set their stall out too early on this forum as the situation is still a developing one with too much uncertainty. 

My point wcorkcanary, is that when you say this:

"Isn't that pretty much what some were trying to tell you" 

There is some validity in that, I'll concede. 

But the same applies in the other direction, some of those critical of my position or "trying to tell me" have also taken a very strong stance on this issue in the opposite direction which is equally unwise and fallible. Can't be bothered to create a list or to check if you are on it. 

I think we should all wait and see how this plays out now, situation developing. 

Edited by TeemuVanBasten

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
17 minutes ago, TeemuVanBasten said:

 

I think we should all wait and see how this plays out now, situation developing.

Which is pretty much word for word what I said to you a couple of weeks ago when this debate started. I have never ,and never will be entrenched in my views on such matters until all of the salient points are truly established. You, however were happy to use words like , disgrace, shame, indefensible.....all pretty inflammatory words. Which is exactly why so many refuted your outrage. Now you've decided that we should wait and see. There is no need to try to make this seem any wiser than it was a couple of weeks back. I am reasonably sure that you will understand that little detail.

Did you decide not to take your season ticket then? Or have you decided to reserve judgement on that too? Lets hope no one took you too seriously in the ticket office either.

Edited by wcorkcanary

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, TeemuVanBasten said:

I do like the way that we are managing to converse with each other a bit more respectfully by the way, lets both keep that up.

Agreed 👍

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, wcorkcanary said:

Which is pretty much word for word what I said to you a couple of weeks ago when this debate started. I have never ,and never will be entrenched in my views on such matters until all of the salient points are truly established.

Let us be clear here wcorkcanary, what I have conceded on this thread is that it may have been a little rash of me to jump to conclusions at the moment about player wages, because both party's (club and players) aren't going to want to leave themselves unnecessarily short changed, the players by agreeing to a greater reduction than ultimately necessary, or the club by asking for a contribution which later proves insufficient due to current uncertainty over the Sky settlement for this season. 

I concede that, happily. 

However, I've actually talked a lot more about executive pay rather than footballer pay (not recently, but in totality since the beginning of furlough). 

Every FTSE 100 company that has revealed that they have furloughed employees have also seen executives take a voluntary pay cut. That's according to The Guardian in an article where it is, rightfully, pointed out that the executives of any other business that has furloughed staff (but have yet to reveal that) will also be under great pressure from the general public and shareholders to explain any decision to not reduce executive pay. 

I remain uncomfortable with the fact that Norwich City FC is, at this moment in time, a business that has taken furlough money but has not seen executive pay cuts. The Guardian are unable to identify, at this stage, any FTSE 100 company which has taken a similar position. And this is why I often state that I think we need an Alan Bowkett in the mix, because the club is poor on the communication side (on non-playing matters) and needs better governance, more of an emphasis on corporate social responsibility, and frankly may need some help with PR. 

A lot of the justification from people on this forum has said stuff like "I bet CEO's aren't taking pay cuts", but as things stand it appears that when taking taxpayers money for furlough.... they actually are!

Does that make you comfortable? Because I don't think there is much "wait and see" with that one, the possible justification for delays in player contribution that I floated above, particularly with the involvement of a strong union and likelihood of collective bargaining, simply does not apply here.

Edited by TeemuVanBasten

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, A Load of Squit said:

That's the definition of managing cash flow.

 

Only if you're an incompetent buffoon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, keelansgrandad said:

I think donating is a matter of people giving what they can afford Badger. And the people who give when they cannot afford it is even more of a gesture.

I am always sceptical of the reasons people have to tell us what and how they have donated. And some people, like Nutty, do things because it is in their nature to help others and not their wallet or Facebook account. They are givers not takers.

So when I see that players have made donations, I think good, well done but don't expect a medal because you have just given money. However I know our players are very active in the Community and give up their free time for others and that is what I admire more.

I hated Jimmy Saville before the scandal broke because he used his Charity work to promote himself.

Much of the money for Rays Funds is given anonymously by posters on this messageboard and the only connection to me is that I administer it and tell the board we have it. No credit for this should go to me.

 

 

 

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

×
×
  • Create New...