Delia as Campaign Leader

[A Load of Squit 5,128]

20 minutes ago, essex canary said:

In  2002 NCFC were well under subscribed, in 2018 effectively well oversubscribed. The name of the trading game is to get it right. If we miss the mark by that much in the transfer market it goes some way to explaining how we could do better.

So you are proposing that we instigate a bond scheme to finance the transfer market and we should set a very ambitious target.

 

[wcorkcanary 4,329]

43 minutes ago, A Load of Squit said:

So you are proposing that we instigate a bond scheme to finance the transfer market and we should set a very ambitious target.

 

I think he is . Ethics Canary wants to invest in players for our Club.  Nice man. Is he Chinese?....I can think of one person who would welcome that with open arms. 

[Hucks6 169]

Heaven forbid if TOM got involved otbc

[Badger 2,405]

1 hour ago, A Load of Squit said:

So you are proposing that we instigate a bond scheme to finance the transfer market and we should set a very ambitious target.

That's a good idea! All of those on the board that want to buy a player could launch a bond to buy the player for the club on the understanding that they would get the profits after wages/ agents fees etc had been deducted.

We are often told that players are "worth a punt" well people would have the chance to do this with their own money, rather than risking the club's!

[essex canary 491]

4 minutes ago, Badger said:

That's a good idea! All of those on the board that want to buy a player could launch a bond to buy the player for the club

 

In the case of 2 board members in particular I would rather see them put up their own money as there has been precious little of it up to now.

[Badger 2,405]

Just now, essex canary said:

In the case of 2 board members in particular I would rather see them put up their own money as there has been precious little of it up to now.

I meant the Pink 'un message board! they could invest their own money rather than investing someone elses

[nutty nigel 7,509]

2 hours ago, essex canary said:

In  2002 NCFC were well under subscribed, in 2018 effectively well oversubscribed. The name of the trading game is to get it right. If we miss the mark by that much in the transfer market it goes some way to explaining how we could do better.

The bond was an unsecured investment. Many "accountant types" suggested we'd lose our money. Why didn't you invest? Was it the risk? "Accountant Types" are often wrong btw...

[A Load of Squit 5,128]

34 minutes ago, essex canary said:

In the case of 2 board members in particular I would rather see them put up their own money as there has been precious little of it up to now.

Why have you proposed a bond scheme when you want 2 members of the NCFC board to put their own money in?

 

[essex canary 491]

3 hours ago, A Load of Squit said:

Why have you proposed a bond scheme when you want 2 members of the NCFC board to put their own money in?

 

I didn't propose a bond scheme. That was a fork in the road taken by somebody else.

What I communicated was that when it came to fan finance the Board had undershot substantially in one instance and overshot substantially in another.

As such how do I know they would get it right in any market pricing situation?

[A Load of Squit 5,128]

36 minutes ago, essex canary said:

I didn't propose a bond scheme. That was a fork in the road taken by somebody else.

What I communicated was that when it came to fan finance the Board had undershot substantially in one instance and overshot substantially in another.

As such how do I know they would get it right in any market pricing situation?

Wouldn't the 16 year gap between the undershot (bad) and the overshot (good) indicate that they got it right and they would get it right again.

 

[essex canary 491]

11 minutes ago, A Load of Squit said:

Wouldn't the 16 year gap between the undershot (bad) and the overshot (good) indicate that they got it right and they would get it right again.

 

Basically No.

If say the basic rate was 5% full stop and the promotion bonus 10% rather than 25% they may still have raised the £5 million they wanted albeit that it may have taken say 8 weeks rather than 3 and it would have saved £1 million  of shareholders or club reinvestment money.

If they had say put £1 million aside for each of 5 years which is quite reasonable given their average annual budget they would have saved the other £1 million in addition.

[Rock The Boat 1,325]

On 07/05/2020 at 13:45, keelansgrandad said:

I think Delia is the perfect spokesperson.

She is respected greatly in the non football world. Funny that many of our own fans disrespect her. And she is respected among football itself. Forget Karen Brady and her slightly seedy club. Ours is the First Lady.

She has a very soft and pleasant speaking voice (forget ManC) and I am sure she wouldn't say anything she didn't believe unlike some of the snake like CEO's of clubs. It is a bit unfortunate it won't be a proper meeting as I guess they only get invited to speak on the platform they use. 

 

She's not very bright. I was listening to an interview she gave during a street demo she was involved in and she had difficulty in constructing a coherent argument. Lots of heart, not so much brain. 

[Duncan Edwards 2,219]

3 hours ago, Rock The Boat said:

She's not very bright. I was listening to an interview she gave during a street demo she was involved in and she had difficulty in constructing a coherent argument. Lots of heart, not so much brain. 

Although if she was to start a thread trying to roast someone, I reckon she’d nail it.*

 

*Insert Any cooking related term. Grill/fry/burn (that’s for you Mother) 

[A Load of Squit 5,128]

10 hours ago, essex canary said:

Basically No.

If say the basic rate was 5% full stop and the promotion bonus 10% rather than 25% they may still have raised the £5 million they wanted albeit that it may have taken say 8 weeks rather than 3 and it would have saved £1 million  of shareholders or club reinvestment money.

If they had say put £1 million aside for each of 5 years which is quite reasonable given their average annual budget they would have saved the other £1 million in addition.

Basically Yes.

The bond sheme raised the money required and the investors got their bonus, the club is happy and the investors are happy, that's a success.

All you have done is thrown some hypothetical figures together and produced another method of acheiving the same result, the main difference is that the clubs version is a proven success and yours is not.