Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
vlad666

Buendia “come and get me”

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, GenerationA47 said:

...

To acknowledge  the risks of the current approach is fine & sensible. To dwell on them, though - without regard to the yet  greater uncertainties and risks of the alternatives, including your above examples - is a bit unfair. 

Kind of what I was thinking as I read Parma’s long post. Yes, things *could* not go as well in the future, but as a team hugely out-performing any benchmark rivals, a little bit of credit for where we are and the potential we still have wouldn’t go amiss. Instead we seem to have a group of doom mongers standing around looking at the sky wondering if we can cope the next time there’s a tornado, when they should be enjoying the party.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Nuff Said said:

Kind of what I was thinking as I read Parma’s long post. Yes, things *could* not go as well in the future, but as a team hugely out-performing any benchmark rivals, a little bit of credit for where we are and the potential we still have wouldn’t go amiss. Instead we seem to have a group of doom mongers standing around looking at the sky wondering if we can cope the next time there’s a tornado, when they should be enjoying the party.

Last season didn't feel like much of a party to me.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

That is the sound of a cat being put in the middle of several pigeons...

Or of several much-cherished foxes being shot...

I know you young people are meant to have short attention spans,😫 but has no-one read right to the bottom of Parma's post?!🤓

Edited by PurpleCanary
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, PurpleCanary said:

I know you young people are meant to have short attention spans,😫 but has no-one read right to the bottom of Parma's post?!🤓

I did. Needs a bit more meat on the bones before discussion imo (young people speak for 'in my opinion')

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Using Parma's analogy of poker is fairly indicative of our position.

Poker is a game that can be won just from a position of strength. The ability to force your opponent(s) into a position they do not want to be in.

You may have the finest poker brain but if you do not have the chips, you play from a position of weakness. Your adversary an go all in and force you to throw away the winning hand.

Our seat at last years table was unforeseen and unintentional. So by the time we had checked in the back of the sofa and raided the piggy bank, we had enough money for a few blinds and one bluff.

We got away with a couple of winning hands early doors. But then they just looked in our eyes and realised we couldn't play more than one round of bidding and then had to fold.

And when we resumed after a break, we got soundly beaten by those happy to call our bluffs, players with very few chips themselves.

To be fair, D&M do not look like poker players but would rather have a hand or two of Newmarket.

But they do know that should they get to the table again, they will need to back up their efforts with a few more chips, even if it means gambling rather than counting cards.

And many of our supporters visit the bookies themselves, dreaming of the big win. While many are happy with 8 from 10 on the pools.

And very strange that so many clubs advertise gambling on their strips.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, king canary said:

I did. Needs a bit more meat on the bones before discussion imo (young people speak for 'in my opinion')

Okay daddy-o. I guess I can dig that vibe. You must be one real cool hepcat...

Share this post


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

Okay daddy-o. I guess I can dig that vibe. You must be one real cool hepcat...

728104730_tenor(4).gif.ffc54b06bd2c253d775515e9969f4780.gif

Obviously if Parma is correct it is an interesting development though...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Brentford comparison is valid - we are now doing what they have been doing for some years. The difference is that they have never made it to the PL whereas we did, so we should have a lot more resource now to accelerate the plan - hence Placheta/Sorenson/Mumba/Sinani/Sitti/Dowell, all of whom "could" go on to be players worth several million. Adding players with potential like those to a productive academy every year means the plan gathers pace.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Norwich R Us said:

Why the Hoolahan admission? Emi hasn't come anywhere near to achieving what he did in the yellow shirt.  Let's not go OTT here he's had one great season so far, as did many others.

Yes I agree regarding Hoolahan.

I was only thinking of the flair type players and whilst EB has only been with us two seasons, he is definitely in that bracket. Those type of players are rare.

Whilst EB has a long way to go to match others we have had in terms of longevity, it is not beyond the realms of possibility that if he stays he could replicate some of those performers with his undoubted skill set.

 

 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

I know you young people are meant to have short attention spans,😫 but has no-one read right to the bottom of Parma's post?!🤓

The club being "for sale" is different to the concept that there is a stinking rich potential owner with acceptable moral fortitude gagging to buy it. A local consortium raising £100m? Not a cat in hells chance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, king canary said:

728104730_tenor(4).gif.ffc54b06bd2c253d775515e9969f4780.gif

Obviously if Parma is correct it is an interesting development though...

To summarise, if Parma is correct then not only is the Nephew Plan far from set in stone, it is more like the plan if nothing better materialises. And to emphasise that, there has actually been an attempt quite recently to sell the club. How far that got is certainly a question. As it happens I have been saying that about the Nephew Plan ever since it was announced, and that S&J would be willing to sell if the offer was right, but that was based on a general assessment rather than on inside knowledge.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@PurpleCanary

That the club was financially ‘cleaned up’ - Delia and Michael receiving all outstanding loans for example - is not recent news as we both know. 

The search for new investment also has a reasonably long date on it now. 

Promotion, influx of new funds and Coronavirus certainly change the landscape, though - truthfully - Championship news is far from the Premier headlines once the top tier gets underway. Being comfortable at this level carries its own cultural risks. Is this enough for us as Individual fans, local Companies, minor or major investors?

The future of the Club, its direction and long term trajectory is at the heart of running a competitive football business and will be so far past the current waves. 

It is not unreasonable to lament our competitiveness at the top level as Hardhouse has done. Our performance was a long way from competitive.

This was after a wonderful, unexpected and spectacular performance in the Championship-winning year. We fell a long way short and even good, progressive growth would be hard-pushed to amortise the differential next time. 

We haven’t got the money to compete. @keelansgrandad ran with the Poker metaphor and characterised it well. Self-sustainability is a noble aim. To suggest, hint or promote strict self-sustainability as a top level success strategy is a considerable stretch however. 

Many may despise the distortion of the beautiful game, though this is where we are, the world we are in. The business we have chosen if we are owners or stakeholders. 

The success of the bond was interesting. 

The French have a cute ‘breathing’ Mortgage model whereby anyone can join up with the mortgage and the ownership of the property is fluid. It ‘moves’ with your relative investment, your share can be ‘traded’ up or down with others, adjusting through good times and bad. New partners can be injected at any time. There is no cap on numbers. 

I like it as a model.

Parma 

Edited by Parma Ham's gone mouldy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Parma Ham's gone mouldy said:

I think that’s a reasonable assessment @GenerationA47 . There are however other ways. 

Economists have predicted 9 of the last 5 recessions, though operating within football without the funds to make any errors, to operate - in effect - without (owner) overdraft or bailout possibility (even to sign a Huckerby or update a training ground) is highly unlikely to be sustainable alongside any measure of sporting success over an extended period. 

A free striker from Finland and a second-tier Spanish outcast catalysed a wonderful and unexpected promotion, which will keep the wagons rolling for a year or two more, though these unlikely jackpots are very difficult to keep spinning. Goals (and assists) are precious, rare and ephemeral fig leaves for all sorts of fragilities. 

We are not too far from ‘Huddersfield o’clock’ for Webber, who will strike out when his own hot iron risks cooling too much. A dynamic window of young, thrusting maybes and a relative revolution of change follows a steely-cold taking o’ the money. All fine, though deliberately ‘noisy’ as methodologies go. Plenty of ‘here I am’ at all times. Understandable. Transient. 

When he leaves he’ll let slip the story of the Maddison sale. How close Norwich were (again) to an extremely dramatic fire sale of decent players that would have been released as the petrol couldn’t have been paid for the Ferraris (Klose et al). In context it was overblown poker to play Maddison in the last month. Nearly all in football would have had him out with a Knock. His injury had many (including Webber) absolutely ****ting themselves. Playing hard with other people’s money that wasn’t there. 

Another miracle occurred of seismic proportions and the wonderful, attractive, unexpected (anywhere) promotion. People quickly forget how exceptional it all was. The Premier season cruelly reminded. 

 This cycle has repeated and has actually sustained further and more often than it had any right to. I do not lament that of course,  though as an analyst, I think reversion to the (financial) mean is now likely. 

The model, corporate structure and recent appointments have smoothed the separation of the two elements of Football and Finance  (previously  ‘we let our Managers manage’ with all its ‘them-and-us’ fiefdom and short-term self-interest risks) which for so long - and often so poisonously - had been clumsily and ignorantly separate.

Webber leaving (Farke moving upwards might be cute as an aside) may well catalyse a return to familiar failings. I find it hard to believe Webber will appoint his own superior successor to undermine his own cherished and well-polished legacy. A contacts book is a good thing to move with and Academy conveyor belts take very deep, long-term quality throughout, not top-down instruction.

The current espoused model is right, though it is auxiliary, not primary as a route to success. 

Our assets are now well-promoted and advanced, though in terms of effectiveness it is Buendia and Pukki’s marvels that need to be re-created. Others are merely good adornments, excepting Godfrey who is a paint job away from a Ferrari. The market is now full of sellers. 

The point being it is game-changers that are pragmatic weapons, that really affect games and add points. Assists and goals are hard to grow. Even Norwich with their limited resources break their own model for strikers. 

What the future of Norwich could or should look like? What it will need to look like to be reasonably competitive over the medium term. 

I happen to believe that Delia and Michael would sell. Or rather would even step aside should an appropriate alternative be seen to be viable. 

Hitherto events have kept the need to sell at bay somewhat, though additional funds have been sought. The ‘offer’ - I suppose because those offering were not considered the right sort - has needed to include the purchase of majority shareholding plus a Company-changing sum for investment/ transfers/ stuff. Needless to say this is quickly unattractive to buyers, who typically want something more distressed, with higher impact for their buck. 

I do not preclude Delia and Michael stepping aside for a good local consortium however - and indeed believe they would welcome an involvement in it. A socio model looks quite suited to Norwich, its supporter base, locality and wide number of potential investors with some money, though not many with a lot of money: A first-among-equals voting rights system according to investment has its flaws, though this kind of model would appear to suit the existing parameters. Putting the deal together is where it’s at.

The hand-me-down inheritance model espoused (Tom) is somewhat discounted. This is in my view to indicate that there is some plan, so as not to appear distressed in an outright sale. It is the plan until another plan arrives. A sale was very actively sought reasonably recently. Events dear boys, events. 

Parma 

Best post I've read on here about this Parma👏

What would you say is the financial mean?

And what would be any expected mean under a 'rich owner' model. (That is discounting the extremes like Leicester and ipswich.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, king canary said:

I do think people downplay the risks involved in our model too- we're reliant on either getting to the Premier League or a steady conveyor belt of large scale player sales, neither of which you can actually rely on. A couple of fallow years in those respects could put us in a tough position.

This is precisely my point.We’re terrified to allow somebody to find us players we have to pay larger sums of money for fear they will turn out to be another wolfswinkle or Naismith yet we trust people to find young prospects that will be good enough to become future saleable assets.  Are they the same people who spunked our money on the likes of Fharmann, Duda and Amadou.
 

Yet again I seriously question the credible existence of the “plan/project”. We’re being guided by people who will either retire or jump ship if things go bristols skywards. 
 

The plan is like god. You like the plan you crack on with it but don’t expect anybody with intelligence to believe in it. 
 

As a club we are the dinosaurs that disprove the existence. Yet millions deny the evidence! LDC and his buddies will be claiming the worlds flat soon!

 


 

 

 

Edited by Hardhouse44

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, king canary said:

Last season didn't feel like much of a party to me.

Understood, although I would make the point that there is a recognised psychological effect where we are more heavily influenced by the end of an experience than how we perceive the overall event, so the dire results post restart colour your perception of the season. See what Daniel Kahneman says in Thinking Fast and Slow about the difference between our experiencing and remembering selves. 
 

Tl;dr - it wasn’t all bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Hardhouse44 said:

This is precisely my point.We’re terrified to allow somebody to find us players we have to pay larger sums of money for fear they will turn out to be another wolfswinkle or Naismith yet we trust people to find young prospects that will be good enough to become future saleable assets.  Are they the same people who spunked our money on the likes of Fharmann, Duda and Amadou.
 

Yet again I seriously question the credible existence of the “plan/project”. We’re being guided by people who will either retire or jump ship if things go bristols skywards. 
 

The plan is like god. You like the plan you crack on with it but don’t expect anybody with intelligence to believe in it. 
 

As a club we are the dinosaurs that disprove the existence. Yet millions deny the evidence! LDC and his buddies will be claiming the worlds flat soon!

 


 

 

 

But the evidence is that our plan works! What other comparable club has performed close to what we have achieved recently? 
 

Since I seem to be citing other people’s writing:

We are not Everton nor were meant to be

Are a Derby/Forest/Brighton/Palace/Wednesday/Stoke/Charlton/Portsmouth, one that will do

To spend a few seasons in the Premier League, a cup run or two

(with huge apologies to T.S. Eliot)

Edited by Nuff Said

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, nutty nigel said:

Best post I've read on here about this Parma👏

What would you say is the financial mean?

And what would be any expected mean under a 'rich owner' model. (That is discounting the extremes like Leicester and ipswich.)

 

1 hour ago, Parma Ham's gone mouldy said:

@PurpleCanary

That the club was financially ‘cleaned up’ - Delia and Michael receiving all outstanding loans for example - is not recent news as we both know. 

The search for new investment also has a reasonably long date on it now. 

Promotion, influx of new funds and Coronavirus certainly change the landscape, though - truthfully - Championship news is far from the Premier headlines once the top tier gets underway. Being comfortable at this level carries its own cultural risks. Is this enough for us as Individual fans, local Companies, minor or major investors?

The future of the Club, its direction and long term trajectory is at the heart of running a competitive football business and will be so far past the current waves. 

It is not unreasonable to lament our competitiveness at the top level as Hardhouse has done. Our performance was a long way from competitive.

This was after a wonderful, unexpected and spectacular performance in the Championship-winning year. We fell a long way short and even good, progressive growth would be hard-pushed to amortise the differential next time. 

We haven’t got the money to compete. @keelansgrandad ran with the Poker metaphor and characterised it well. Self-sustainability is a noble aim. To suggest, hint or promote strict self-sustainability as a top level success strategy is a considerable stretch however. 

Many may despise the distortion of the beautiful game, though this is where we are, the world we are in. The business we have chosen if we are owners or stakeholders. 

The success of the bond was interesting. 

The French have a cute ‘breathing’ Mortgage model whereby anyone can join up with the mortgage and the ownership of the property is fluid. It ‘moves’ with your relative investment, your share can be ‘traded’ up or down with others, adjusting through good times and bad. New partners can be injected at any time. There is no cap on numbers. 

I like it as a model.

Parma 

@nutty nigel

I think Norwich - as a Football Club, as a Company, as a culture beyond those things, as a area - lends itself to a hybrid fan-SME-Investor model based broadly on the example I gave above. 

This neither discounts what is good about the current programme, nor excludes the current owners, nor requires any individual or corporate entity to make exceptionally high investment necessarily. 

It allows for ‘investor calls’ at key strategic points and even retrenchment where necessary. Its transparency encourages pragmatism, whilst offering (unlimited) scope for ambition. It removes the need for - and risk of - Oligarchic despotism as a Faustian trade-off for billions. 

It is a progression from what we see today, rather than ‘a Bowkett moment’. Not that he was wrong in his analysis of course....

Parma 

Edited by Parma Ham's gone mouldy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Despite Covid, relegation etc. We are in a much better place right across the club than when SW came in. The plan is working, patience Hh44, patience.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Nuff Said said:

As a club we are the dinosaurs that disprove the existence.

Curious. The trend for the future of the world is towards self-sustainability in nearly every area you can think of, so in that way we are the most progressive of clubs. The time of big money in football will come to an end and in it's place will be an ethic of clubs living within their means. So we are at the forefront of that. Hardly Jurassic Park, is it..........

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Hardhouse44 said:

This is precisely my point.We’re terrified to allow somebody to find us players we have to pay larger sums of money for fear they will turn out to be another wolfswinkle or Naismith yet we trust people to find young prospects that will be good enough to become future saleable assets.  Are they the same people who spunked our money on the likes of Fharmann, Duda and Amadou.
 

Yet again I seriously question the credible existence of the “plan/project”. We’re being guided by people who will either retire or jump ship if things go bristols skywards. 
 

The plan is like god. You like the plan you crack on with it but don’t expect anybody with intelligence to believe in it. 
 

As a club we are the dinosaurs that disprove the existence. Yet millions deny the evidence! LDC and his buddies will be claiming the worlds flat soon!

 


 

 

 

Compare the sums spunked.

And we've just cleared the entire purchase sum for all our latest crop with the sale of one player.

And i'll bet there's at least one £15m player amongst our latest influx.

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry NS. That is a mystery.

1 hour ago, Hardhouse44 said:

As a club we are the dinosaurs that disprove the existence.

Curious. The trend for the future of the world is towards self-sustainability in nearly every area you can think of, so in that way we are the most progressive of clubs. The time of big money in football will come to an end and in it's place will be an ethic of clubs living within their means. So we are at the forefront of that. Hardly Jurassic Park, is it..........

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@nutty nigel

The real question is whether and when our financial mean position is below our sporting level mean to an unacceptable degree. Either now or in the future. 

The Championship-winning season is either an outlier or it isn’t, depending on your analysis. 

One could argue - I would suggest with difficulty - that our Premier league season was also an outlier and that we can do much better than that with our current model. 

Success can be an artistic concept,  a matter of opinion and judgment to some degree, though not completely. FTSE 100 Companies have a share price, investors have varying dividends, Companies make profits or losses. 

Football is not only about the top tier emotionally, spiritually...though the de-facto financial gains, funding opportunities, exposure and sporting success spin-offs generated by the Premier League utterly dwarfs anything else, almost to the point of unsustainability. Including in our wider business community. 

Our sustainable model de-facto (currently) trades Company survival for top level uncompetitiveness as a necessity. Its limited resources mitigate against the bludgeoning poker played by our opponents. 

For context, our owner wealth was 23rd out of 24 owners in the Championship in the year that Burton were in the league with us. In the same year there were 6 third division clubs with more owner resource wealth than us. We are talking extremes here. 

We have already done brilliantly. 

There is so much goodness, decency and honesty in our football Club, with huge credit to Delia and Michael for everything they have done and will no doubt also do in the future. 

I like the way we are doing different currently. It may simply be time - before too long - to take some of the principles and to modernise and expand the Corporate structure to facilitate broader investment.

To create a socio model that engages far wider participation, allows flexibility, provides transparency and clarity of purpose with the Community at its core. 

It would require a shift from demanding a buyout of all shares plus a significant sum for purchases and structural Company improvements.

As Delia and Michael have themselves noted, simply buying out the shares changes nothing for the Club itself. 

Additional access to ongoing funding does however. 
 

Parma 

Edited by Parma Ham's gone mouldy
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Parma Ham's gone mouldy said:

@nutty nigel

The real question is whether and when our financial mean position is below our sporting level mean to an unacceptable degree. Either now or in the future. 

The Championship-winning season is either an outlier or it isn’t, depending on your analysis. 

One could argue - I would suggest with difficulty - that our Premier league season was also an outlier and that we can do much better than that with our current model. 

Success can be an artistic concept,  a matter of opinion and judgment to some degree, though not completely. FTSE 100 Companies have a share price, investors have varying dividends, Companies make profits or losses. 

Football is not only about the top tier emotionally, spiritually...though the de-facto financial gains, funding opportunities, exposure and sporting success spin-offs generated by the Premier League utterly dwarfs anything else, almost to the point of unsustainability. Including in our wider business community. 

Our sustainable model de-facto (currently) trades Company survival for top level uncompetitiveness as a necessity. Its limited resources mitigate against the bludgeoning poker played by our opponents. 

For context, our owner wealth was 23rd out of 24 owners in the Championship in the year that Burton were in the league with us. In the same year there were 6 third division clubs with more owner resource wealth than us. We are talking extremes here. 

We have already done brilliantly. 

There is so much goodness, decency and honesty in our football Club, with huge credit to Delia and Michael for everything they have done and will no doubt also do in the future. 

I like the way we are doing different currently. It may simply be time - before too long - to take some of the principles and to modernise and expand the Corporate structure to facilitate broader investment.

To create a socio model that engages far wider participation, allows flexibility, provides transparency and clarity of purpose with the Community at its core. 

It would require a shift from demanding a buyout of all shares plus a significant sum for purchases and structural Company improvements.

As Delia and Michael have themselves noted, simply buying out the shares changes nothing for the Club itself. 

Additional access to ongoing funding does however. 
 

Parma 

And that's why I support Norwich City Football Club.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Parma Ham's gone mouldy said:

@PurpleCanary

That the club was financially ‘cleaned up’ - Delia and Michael receiving all outstanding loans for example - is not recent news as we both know. 

The search for new investment also has a reasonably long date on it now. 

Promotion, influx of new funds and Coronavirus certainly change the landscape, though - truthfully - Championship news is far from the Premier headlines once the top tier gets underway. Being comfortable at this level carries its own cultural risks. Is this enough for us as Individual fans, local Companies, minor or major investors?

The future of the Club, its direction and long term trajectory is at the heart of running a competitive football business and will be so far past the current waves. 

It is not unreasonable to lament our competitiveness at the top level as Hardhouse has done. Our performance was a long way from competitive.

This was after a wonderful, unexpected and spectacular performance in the Championship-winning year. We fell a long way short and even good, progressive growth would be hard-pushed to amortise the differential next time. 

We haven’t got the money to compete. @keelansgrandad ran with the Poker metaphor and characterised it well. Self-sustainability is a noble aim. To suggest, hint or promote strict self-sustainability as a top level success strategy is a considerable stretch however. 

Many may despise the distortion of the beautiful game, though this is where we are, the world we are in. The business we have chosen if we are owners or stakeholders. 

The success of the bond was interesting. 

The French have a cute ‘breathing’ Mortgage model whereby anyone can join up with the mortgage and the ownership of the property is fluid. It ‘moves’ with your relative investment, your share can be ‘traded’ up or down with others, adjusting through good times and bad. New partners can be injected at any time. There is no cap on numbers. 

I like it as a model.

Parma 

 

Parma, it would all be so much simpler if this was a company on some dreary industrial estate that made widgets, with sales being the only criterion. Norwich City is not unique as a club, but it is one of those that is part of the fabric and the culture, in all senses, of a whole county, and that complicates the equation.


Against crude economics there have to be balanced questions of community interest, morality, politics, and even aesthetics, in terms of the kind of football played. Impossible to put a price on that tradition or spirit or ethos, but I know some prices would be too high if it meant they disappeared.

There was a RoyaL Navy commander in world war two who justified  bold action in a dangerous situation in the expected way of the senior service by saying it took three years to build a ship but three hundred to rebuild a tradition.

I too like the idea of some community involvement in any change of ownership, although those wanting billions of new money would then almost certainly be disappointed. Truthfully, I doubt there is a perfect solution out there. The argument will always come down to where the balance is struck between filthy lucre and purist tradition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Parma Ham's gone mouldy said:

It would require a shift from demanding a buyout of all shares plus a significant sum for purchases and structural Company improvements.

As Delia and Michael have themselves noted, simply buying out the shares changes nothing for the Club itself. 

Additional access to ongoing funding does however. 
 

Parma 

@PurpleCanary We monitor events with interest.

Parma

Edited by Parma Ham's gone mouldy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, nutty nigel said:

Best post I've read on here about this Parma👏

What would you say is the financial mean?

And what would be any expected mean under a 'rich owner' model. (That is discounting the extremes like Leicester and ipswich.)

Can you actually post on here without pointing out how much you love Delia?

 

Impressive!

Edited by Dr Greenthumb

Share this post


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

Can you actually post on here without pointing out how much you love Delia?

 

Impressive!

I didn't mention Delia and rarely do yet you appear besotted with the woman.

Were you caught behaving inappropriately with your mum's copy of Delia's cook book?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Parma Ham's gone mouldy said:

@nutty nigel

The real question is whether and when our financial mean position is below our sporting level mean to an unacceptable degree. Either now or in the future. 

The Championship-winning season is either an outlier or it isn’t, depending on your analysis. 

One could argue - I would suggest with difficulty - that our Premier league season was also an outlier and that we can do much better than that with our current model. 

Success can be an artistic concept,  a matter of opinion and judgment to some degree, though not completely. FTSE 100 Companies have a share price, investors have varying dividends, Companies make profits or losses. 

Football is not only about the top tier emotionally, spiritually...though the de-facto financial gains, funding opportunities, exposure and sporting success spin-offs generated by the Premier League utterly dwarfs anything else, almost to the point of unsustainability. Including in our wider business community. 

Our sustainable model de-facto (currently) trades Company survival for top level uncompetitiveness as a necessity. Its limited resources mitigate against the bludgeoning poker played by our opponents. 

For context, our owner wealth was 23rd out of 24 owners in the Championship in the year that Burton were in the league with us. In the same year there were 6 third division clubs with more owner resource wealth than us. We are talking extremes here. 

We have already done brilliantly. 

There is so much goodness, decency and honesty in our football Club, with huge credit to Delia and Michael for everything they have done and will no doubt also do in the future. 

I like the way we are doing different currently. It may simply be time - before too long - to take some of the principles and to modernise and expand the Corporate structure to facilitate broader investment.

To create a socio model that engages far wider participation, allows flexibility, provides transparency and clarity of purpose with the Community at its core. 

It would require a shift from demanding a buyout of all shares plus a significant sum for purchases and structural Company improvements.

As Delia and Michael have themselves noted, simply buying out the shares changes nothing for the Club itself. 

Additional access to ongoing funding does however. 
 

Parma 

There being a financial level and a sporting level is something I've never thought about.

Mostly it seems beliefs are governed by financial level which can be worked out by a league table of of clubs owner's wealth. I believe that puts us yo-yoing between champs and league one.

If that's our mean then obviously we've absolutely smashed it for ten years but I guess we're expected to sink there sooner rather than later.

But what is our sporting mean? Is that what we actually achieve? Or something else?

Share this post


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

There being a financial level and a sporting level is something I've never thought about.

Mostly it seems beliefs are governed by financial level which can be worked out by a league table of of clubs owner's wealth. I believe that puts us yo-yoing between champs and league one.

If that's our mean then obviously we've absolutely smashed it for ten years but I guess we're expected to sink there sooner rather than later.

But what is our sporting mean? Is that what we actually achieve? Or something else?

I don't think they can be divorced any longer DoubleN. You and I might wish to but it keeps coming back as a reason for what some call failure.

We were upset at relegation but we always make allowances and compromise between achievement and expectation. And clearly we are one of the better clubs at the balance.

But too many will accept nothing but EPL membership.  A membership that I expect a dozen other clubs and supporters feel they should have.

And so many expect their club to have a wealthy owner who will pump so much of his own money into to provide the success they crave and in so many cases, demand.

Our catering business can make delicious pasties. They have been mentioned far and wide and are better than any shop bought ones. And they are better because of the way they are produced. And that system of production means the amount we can make is limited.

So we could expand and buy in preprepared ingredients and employ more people. But the standard will only be as good as shop bought. So ours won't be special anymore.

And that dilemma faces NCFC. We are those homemade pasties at the moment. But so much of our customer base known as supporters wants us to change the recipe and ingredients and borrow money to buy a bigger oven. Forgetting they used to enjoy the homemade ones.

 

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
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...