Jump to content

Recommended Posts

11 minutes ago, yellow_belly said:

Just read about the Summit Foundation.

But what is Mr 90% holding in his hand?

 

88B8662D-31E3-4A84-BE32-5E17225BEB80.jpeg

Looks like a big 🔔 end. Just an observation.  

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Mengo said:

Looks like a big 🔔 end. Just an observation.  

Are you referring to Mr 90% or the penis in his hand?

Share this post


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

Are you referring to Mr 90% or the penis in his hand?

I'll leave that for others to judge🤣🙃. Getting back to the Summit foundation.  Personally 🔊 speaking its not very original. There is also one already in place with exactly the same name🤔.

Screenshot_20220427-083556_Chrome.jpg

Edited by Mengo

Share this post


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

Posters can draw their own conclusions to what is set before them. I did add that Zoe is a CSF trustee but I doubt that's a reason why he didn't choose the CSF. To get a definitive answer he'd have to be asked the question.

Indeed . I asked you the question precisely because you might know / have asked / could ask. 

There may indeed - quite properly - be an entirely valid answer. 

Parma 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Mengo said:

Looks like a big 🔔 end. Just an observation.  

They spelt wa*ker wrong 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TIL 1010 said:

Maybe he knew that when he climbed back down from the summit of Everest he would no longer have any connection with Norwich City .

 

shefcanary     447

shefcanary

I have worked in the charity sector for many years.  At Board level, there is always a raised eyebrow and some strong questioning (as you would expect with strong corporate governance) when a senior executive is known to be doing a charitable event / activity that does not benefit their own charity, especially if that charity does not have the values of the employer.  It is an unwritten rule that senior executives (who set the example for junior employees and supporters of the charity) should apply themselves in all their activities first to the charity that employs them, subject to a truly unarguable personal position that warrants such support.

Now the Club is not the charity here, but it has supported the CSF which publicly is seen as the charitable arm of the club (I know that is not the case legally but we are talking perceptions here).  It does strike me that the outcomes the CSF is seeking are similar if not the same as the Summit Foundation that has, as I understand it, not yet been properly and fully set up! If the Board were on the case I believe at worst they would have seen this as a missed opportunity, but most of them  should be absolutely fuming under their breath!

I therefore think again this is another example of a lack of corporate governance within the Club, with its values not being clearly lived by either the Board or the executives.  When Webber asked for the leave to pursue his mountainous goal, the Board should have made it a pre-condition that this met with the values of the club.  This would have lead all to the conclusion, fine, go ahead Stu but please do it in a way that the club can get some reflected glory if only through the support it would bring for the CSF.   

But the lack of clear governance has lead to an even bigger row and is quite rightly seeing questions raised by some of our more worldly contributors on this page which should be reflected more widely amongst supporters of both the club and the CSF.   

 

———————————

One possible answer from @TIL 1010 and good Corporate process analysis from @shefcanary

…both of which make the question of ‘why not the CSF?’ entirely legitimate.
 

That @nutty nigel also wonders the same, does rather reiterate that this is a valid pan-forum question, not a loaded point-scoring polemic-creator. I have no interest in that. 

Webber chose-felt-decided not to use the CSF. That’s his prerogative. It is a little elliptical though isn’t it? Why is a fair - and from a Norwich fan’s perspective - rather pertinent question. 

The questions posed are not semantically ‘Socratic’ because any post hoc  ‘justification’ for not using the CSF might be created and made to sound plausible now by anyone with half a brain. The mens rea may never be known. The actus reus is that he didn’t. I did not need to be Socratic about that fact. 

Parma

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


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

Indeed . I asked you the question precisely because you might know / have asked / could ask. 

There may indeed - quite properly - be an entirely valid answer. 

Parma 

So has / is anyone ( @nutty nigel? ) going to ask Stuart/ Zoe the question? 

 

Share this post


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

But what is Mr 90% holding in his hand?

It looks like he's been massaging his ego too much and judging by it's colour he should probably get some cream for it. 🤣

Apples

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're all missing the point, charity is a failure of government, why isn't Stuart raising a peoples army to bring down the government so that people never need to go hungry again.

It's a valid question and one that should concern the majority of supporters.

Maybe all those people are leaving to form an underground army.

It's what the socialists anarchist owners of the club want.

 

 

  • Haha 1
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, A Load of Squit said:

You're all missing the point, charity is a failure of government, why isn't Stuart raising a peoples army to bring down the government so that people never need to go hungry again.

It's a valid question and one that should concern the majority of supporters.

Maybe all those people are leaving to form an underground army.

It's what the socialists anarchist owners of the club want.

 

 

Because he wants to go climbing and Zoe thought that adding a charity element would soften the message. Mr 90% didn’t want to raise money for a charity… he wanted to go climbing (whilst being paid his salary).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Zoe is also trustee for yorkshire young achievers, perhaps Stu can go back up Everest for then, then the CSF, and if he's still standing he can go a fourth time to fund a League One CDM for us..?

Share this post


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

It's funny you should mention administration Doc. I think steering us through the difficult years where similar clubs were going into administration is something our owners deserve huge credit for. Not forgetting that we were closest we've been to administration when Martin Armstrong went to them for investment.

I get they're not rich enough for you. But it is what it is.

 

They aren’t. But how many times can you dice with administration before it gets you? Will we have a James Maddison sale and a Buendia bargain to get us up next time? 
 

They aren’t, that’s modern day football. I would love a loaded Norwich city fan in charge of the club, we all would! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Google Bot said:

Zoe is also trustee for yorkshire young achievers, perhaps Stu can go back up Everest for then, then the CSF, and if he's still standing he can go a fourth time to fund a League One CDM for us..?

A bungee rope would help........

Share this post


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

They aren’t. But how many times can you dice with administration before it gets you? Will we have a James Maddison sale and a Buendia bargain to get us up next time? 
 

They aren’t, that’s modern day football. I would love a loaded Norwich city fan in charge of the club, we all would! 

We haven't been in administration. I know that disappoints a few on here (not you Doc) but it hasn't happened. That is something the owners deserve credit for and is one of the real achievements of their tenure.

I don't think we'll ever agree about the owners. I see value in people others see value in people's money. I seem to be in the minority on here. It's practically a clash of world views so there's no right or wrong.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

They aren’t. But how many times can you dice with administration before it gets you? Will we have a James Maddison sale and a Buendia bargain to get us up next time? 
 

They aren’t, that’s modern day football. I would love a loaded Norwich city fan in charge of the club, we all would! 

Once in our case, and there’s a strong case to be made that the risk was over-exaggerated by incoming management to make their achievements look more impressive, as I suspect Webber did with his comments about the contracts of Naismith and the rest.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

So has / is anyone ( @nutty nigel? ) going to ask Stuart/ Zoe the question? 

 

Maybe the OSP could ask on behelf of what appear to be a number of fans who are interested as after all they were elected to represent their views ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, nutty nigel said:

We haven't been in administration. I know that disappoints a few on here (not you Doc) but it hasn't happened. That is something the owners deserve credit for and is one of the real achievements of their tenure.

I don't think we'll ever agree about the owners. I see value in people others see value in people's money. I seem to be in the minority on here. It's practically a clash of world views so there's no right or wrong.

No fan wants Norwich City to go - or to have gone - into administration, but to praise that not happening as a 'real achievement' by the owners is probably the most bizarre view I've ever read on this forum. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


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

I'll leave that for others to judge🤣🙃. Getting back to the Summit foundation.  Personally 🔊 speaking its not very original. There is also one already in place with exactly the same name🤔.

Screenshot_20220427-083556_Chrome.jpg

I mean FFS.

This is the kind of due dilligence NCFC is renowned for.

  • Haha 2

Share this post


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

No fan wants Norwich City to go - or to have gone - into administration, but to praise that not happening as a 'real achievement' by the owners is probably the most bizarre view I've ever read on this forum. 

No, the most bizarre things have been posted by you. My favourite being Delia tried to buy Ipswich.

 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


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

No, the most bizarre things have been posted by you. My favourite being Delia tried to buy Ipswich.

 

And against some pretty stiff competition over the years...😎

  • Haha 1

Share this post


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

I'm not sure that is the case to be honest. The CSF is legally a separate entity from the Club and whilst the club does help it (provides players for events and some funding etc plus I think maybe office space) and has trustee representatives it doesn;t contribute to it massively in a financial sense and there are different people running the charity.

If anything, you might argue that the club likes to present itself as a model "fan funded community club" but does not always act accordingly in terms of things like ticket prices, away membership schemes, fan representation on the board etc. There is a good article on this on the ACN site this week. 

Indeed. That is because they appear to think that all community activity is directed through the CSF and none applies to the Football Club. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

1 hour ago, TIL 1010 said:

Maybe the OSP could ask on behelf of what appear to be a number of fans who are interested as after all they were elected to represent their views ?

Hmm yeah @Feedthewolf has been quiet on here lately. Will the club address the childish way an employee and ambassador of the club reacted to fans outside the ground?

Share this post


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

No, the most bizarre things have been posted by you. My favourite being Delia tried to buy Ipswich.

 

I’m still keeping an open mind on that one, but some Ipswich fans swear she tried to invest - not ‘buy’. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, komakino said:

I’m still keeping an open mind on that one, but some Ipswich fans swear she tried to invest - not ‘buy’. 

Yep, they claim a lot of things. Some even repeat them on here...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i doubt Webber did his Charity much good last week , the interview and arguing with fans outside the main entrance 

i am not so sure so many of our fans will be willing to Donate or sponsor him now 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, WD40 said:

 

Hmm yeah @Feedthewolf has been quiet on here lately. Will the club address the childish way an employee and ambassador of the club reacted to fans outside the ground?

Wolfie has been busy with contract conundrums lately. 🤔👍Screenshot_20220427-135247_Chrome.thumb.jpg.dbbece7869032ccd6c52586d213c8c96.jpg

Share this post


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

Wolfie has been busy with contract conundrums lately. 🤔👍

Fair! Pretty quiet on Webber and Ward related goings on. 

Share this post


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

Just read about the Summit Foundation.

But what is Mr 90% holding in his hand?

 

88B8662D-31E3-4A84-BE32-5E17225BEB80.jpeg

Why did he choose a picture where he’s holding one of these though?

80E6409E-056D-459D-96FC-07D7F52A6C71.jpeg

Share this post


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

No fan wants Norwich City to go - or to have gone - into administration, but to praise that not happening as a 'real achievement' by the owners is probably the most bizarre view I've ever read on this forum. 

Given the finances the owners have and the big leagues we are playing in, I can understand why we celebrate Delia keeping us debt free. 
We need to push on though and it isn’t happening under this ownership.

I don’t think Nigel’s is a bizarre view in that aspect, but we need to strive for more. We cannot be happy with this Groundhog Day  promotion/relegation scenario.
 

Every time we are in the prem, it’s just expected we are going down. There needs to be a break in that (not championship obscurity). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Getting relegated is a self fulfilling philosophy. The majority shareholders don't want to stay up, so we inevitably do not. The few contacts I have connected to the club seem to think that is the case too, though I might add, that is just their opinion. We need owners that embrace the EPL - not carping about how immoral it is - and get on with doing the very best they can to keep us there. 

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...