Jump to content

Recommended Posts

42 minutes ago, dylanisabaddog said:

Can we all have a say on what you put in your will? 

Perhaps you could actually address the question I raised?  In legal terms she is entirely free to do what the hell she likes with the club but that fly's totally in the face of public comments she has made.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why have the owners decided to leave their shares to their nephew? Because they have no children and believe he is the best person to take on the club whilst keeping the shares in the family. That is their legal right and presumably why they brought him onto the board to prepare him for his inheritance.

Time will tell how good a decision that is.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Crafty Canary said:

Why have the owners decided to leave their shares to their nephew? Because they have no children and believe he is the best person to take on the club whilst keeping the shares in the family. That is their legal right and presumably why they brought him onto the board to prepare him for his inheritance.

Time will tell how good a decision that is.

You just made that up Crafty..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Crafty Canary said:

Why have the owners decided to leave their shares to their nephew? Because they have no children and believe he is the best person to take on the club whilst keeping the shares in the family. That is their legal right and presumably why they brought him onto the board to prepare him for his inheritance.

Time will tell how good a decision that is.

Amen. It is truly mind boggling how fans lose sight of the boundary of ownership and begin to believe that it’s actually ‘their’ club and the owners must explain their decisions to everyone’s satisfaction.

Share this post


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

Why have the owners decided to leave their shares to their nephew? Because they have no children and believe he is the best person to take on the club whilst keeping the shares in the family. That is their legal right and presumably why they brought him onto the board to prepare him for his inheritance.

Time will tell how good a decision that is.

They have bequeathed them to Tom because they are sick to death of my begging letters.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, CANARYKING said:

£17 million up front then £6 million a year just to survive, I hope the pension contributions can afford this.

If the pension contribution plan is true - I haven’t done my homework- then to me, that verges on criminal. To place the future financial well being of people and their families on an investment in ITFC is ludicrous. There is no way in hell that that investment is going to offer an ROI that warrants the risk. There are far stronger options available to investors than a flailing and failed football club.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, keelansgrandad said:

They have bequeathed them to Tom because they are sick to death of my begging letters.

Really old joke. Couple have won big on the football pools (ask your grandparents) with photos in the papers, and a worried friend asks:

'But what about the begging letters?'

'Oh  no problem. We'll keep sending them.'

Share this post


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

Thanks, nutty, I hadn't seen that before, although I have seen similar statements coinfirming that the nephew plan is certainly not set in stone. I was intrigued by this:

When talking about her lowest point of the years that have followed, Smith appeared to be referring to the controversy which surrounded wealthy businessman Peter Cullum in 2008, who told a national newspaper he wanted to pump £20million into the club – which never materialised.

'I've never thought it wasn't worth it, never thought that,' Smith continued. 'But we did once, where we tried to get somebody to bring money into the football club because we were desperate, really desperate, and it didn't work out at all. And I think that was my lowest moment, it was just awful, but we've never ever had enough of it and wanted to walk away.'

It probably is Cullumgate, although I wonder if it might be the Turners. That would roughly fit the description as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Graham Paddons Beard said:

Binners are winning again . Poor darlings won’t know what to think. Do they still hate Lambert? Do they want Americans ? And Cook? Or Mucus? 
 

Turned the corner, Prem champs and FA cup winners within 5 seasons.

Paul becomes king of Scotland.👍

Share this post


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

Thanks, nutty, I hadn't seen that before, although I have seen similar statements coinfirming that the nephew plan is certainly not set in stone. I was intrigued by this:

When talking about her lowest point of the years that have followed, Smith appeared to be referring to the controversy which surrounded wealthy businessman Peter Cullum in 2008, who told a national newspaper he wanted to pump £20million into the club – which never materialised.

'I've never thought it wasn't worth it, never thought that,' Smith continued. 'But we did once, where we tried to get somebody to bring money into the football club because we were desperate, really desperate, and it didn't work out at all. And I think that was my lowest moment, it was just awful, but we've never ever had enough of it and wanted to walk away.'

It probably is Cullumgate, although I wonder if it might be the Turners. That would roughly fit the description as well.

It's on an ACN podcast so can be listened to....

https://www.alongcomenorwich.com/articles/acn-podcast-delia-and-mwj/

 

Share this post


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

Thanks, nutty, I hadn't seen that before, although I have seen similar statements coinfirming that the nephew plan is certainly not set in stone. I was intrigued by this:

When talking about her lowest point of the years that have followed, Smith appeared to be referring to the controversy which surrounded wealthy businessman Peter Cullum in 2008, who told a national newspaper he wanted to pump £20million into the club – which never materialised.

'I've never thought it wasn't worth it, never thought that,' Smith continued. 'But we did once, where we tried to get somebody to bring money into the football club because we were desperate, really desperate, and it didn't work out at all. And I think that was my lowest moment, it was just awful, but we've never ever had enough of it and wanted to walk away.'

It probably is Cullumgate, although I wonder if it might be the Turners. That would roughly fit the description as well.

Sounds more likely to be The Turners to me. For it to be 'really awful' suggests they got embroiled into a bad situation. With Cullum, nothing much really ever happened.

With The Turners there were clearly disagreements and NCFC ended up having to pay off their investment, which I'm sure was a big problem at that time. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Midlands Yellow said:

There is hope after all then and they might sell. 

That has always been there, if you had paid attention to certain posters here...🤓

 

35 minutes ago, Beefy is a legend said:

Sounds more likely to be The Turners to me. For it to be 'really awful' suggests they got embroiled into a bad situation. With Cullum, nothing much really ever happened.

With The Turners there were clearly disagreements and NCFC ended up having to pay off their investment, which I'm sure was a big problem at that time. 

Why Is partly why I wondered that. And as I understand it, Cullum came to them unbidden, having been given the idea by the MP for Norwich South, whose name escapes me as I type but will arrive in my mind eventually, whereas the Turners seem to have been invited and did indeed put in a couple of million, which plainly was needed at the time and probably the reason for them being offered  directorships.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Midlands Yellow said:

There is hope after all then and they might sell. 

It's not news is it. The interview was summer 2019 and I've linked it lots since then. 

Share this post


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

That has always been there, if you had paid attention to certain posters here...🤓

 

Why Is partly why I wondered that. And as I understand it, Cullum came to them unbidden, having been given the idea by the MP for Norwich South, whose name escapes me as I type but will arrive in my mind eventually, whereas the Turners seem to have been invited and did indeed put in a couple of million, which plainly was needed at the time and probably the reason for them being offered  directorships.

The MP for Norwich South who I think you're referring to was Dr. Ian Gibson, but I don't think he was involved in this in any way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Thirsty Lizard said:

The MP for Norwich South who I think you're referring to was Dr. Ian Gibson, but I don't think he was involved in this in any way.

It came to me eventually. It was Charles Clarke, who was MP for Norwich South at the time, and Home Secretary for a while, who is said to have taken Cullum to lunch, or dinner, in order to propel him into trying to take over the club. Gibson was MP for Norwich North.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Beefy is a legend said:

Sounds more likely to be The Turners to me. For it to be 'really awful' suggests they got embroiled into a bad situation. With Cullum, nothing much really ever happened.

With The Turners there were clearly disagreements and NCFC ended up having to pay off their investment, which I'm sure was a big problem at that time. 

When you say that nothing much really happened with Cullum, that's not actually true. It went quite a way down the due diligence route before falling apart.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, CirclePoint said:

If the pension contribution plan is true - I haven’t done my homework- then to me, that verges on criminal. To place the future financial well being of people and their families on an investment in ITFC is ludicrous. There is no way in hell that that investment is going to offer an ROI that warrants the risk. There are far stronger options available to investors than a flailing and failed football club.

 

Apparently the pension fund is one step removed and is simply lending money to the consortium so it's little more than a loan. That would suggest that the consortium members have offered some form of security. 

There are rules in the UK concerning the investment of pension funds and you would think the same exists in America. 

Whatever the circumstances, I share your view. I wouldn't want part of my pension fund lent to someone to buy Norwich City let alone Ipswich Town.

I'll be amazed if the deal goes through. 

Share this post


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

It came to me eventually. It was Charles Clarke, who was MP for Norwich South at the time, and Home Secretary for a while, who is said to have taken Cullum to lunch, or dinner, in order to propel him into trying to take over the club. Gibson was MP for Norwich North.

Yes, you're quite right. 

Share this post


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

Yes, you're quite right. 

This is from that time, from the sadly departed Cam, who had his sources:

It wasn''t actually Cullum''s idea to approach Norwich City - it was not a Damascan moment.  The idea that he should invest in the club came from Charles Clarke MP who spent an hour and a half at a dinner they attended persuading him that he was the right man to make an approach. Whether this was a "freelance" idea from Mr Clarke - acting just as a concerned fan, perhaps - or whether he was a "broker" for someone else we do not know and are unlikely to know as Mr Clarke steadfastly refuses to discuss his role in this.  But we do know that is how the whole thing started.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am a happy clapper, clap enthusiastically during act of worship. Many of us were brought up on the terraces of the River end , so we learnt early to rise about the wretched whimperer. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Couldn't resist quoting this utterly deluded TWTD poster (itfcjoe):

"If you are in the Championship and can play young players you will make a fortune - any upwardly mobile Championship clubs sell youngsters for 8 figures at a time.

Someone like Todd Cantwell would have been behind Nydam, Dozzell, Downes for their respective age groups......if we can go up this year and play young English players regularly we'll be fine"

So Nydam, Dozzel, and Downes must each be worth £25m+, makes you wonder why the squad isn't valued at £200m rather than the £17m the're being bought for. Must be be some mistake!!!

 

Share this post


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

Couldn't resist quoting this utterly deluded TWTD poster (itfcjoe):

"If you are in the Championship and can play young players you will make a fortune - any upwardly mobile Championship clubs sell youngsters for 8 figures at a time.

Someone like Todd Cantwell would have been behind Nydam, Dozzell, Downes for their respective age groups......if we can go up this year and play young English players regularly we'll be fine"

So Nydam, Dozzel, and Downes must each be worth £25m+, makes you wonder why the squad isn't valued at £200m rather than the £17m the're being bought for. Must be be some mistake!!!

 

I think they're talking about the England U19/U20 setups where Downes and Dozzell picked up several caps, and Todd Cantwell wasn't involved.

They're ignoring how good our setup is and how hard Todd has worked though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Icecream Snow said:

I think they're talking about the England U19/U20 setups where Downes and Dozzell picked up several caps, and Todd Cantwell wasn't involved.

They're ignoring how good our setup is and how hard Todd has worked though.

If you read the thread I think you'll find he's talking about generating funds from the sale of players developed through their cat 2 youth set up. Some on the thread are already taliking about generating £100m. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, shefcanary said:

Curious, the plot thickens.  Mutual consent and just after a win against a promotion rival.  

Screenshot_20210228-212343_Twitter.jpg

“It has, however, become clear after holding discussions over the last few days that there are significant differences of opinion as to the order of immediate priorities and we agreed it was best for us to part company. I would like to wish both Paul and Stuart the best in the future.”

 

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...