Delia out

[lake district canary 4,531]

23 minutes ago, Jim Smith said:

He's not disrespecting it. He's saying he's more reluctant to give them abuse because they are older. By your logic, however, presumably they are fair game?

To a degree they are fair game. They are the virtual owners at the end of a very bad season where they allowed an SD to sack a head coach at a ridiculous point of the season with no like minded coach up to take his place. They appointed Webber after all. The biggest problem they have is not the fans, or protests, it is how to manage the board when it has both Zoe Ward on there and with Webber at the club - and not wanting to upset them to the point they both leave, which would leave a huge gap at the club. 

So yes, they are fair game.  I don't want them to leave as I believe the stability they have given the club has helped us ride all the storms of finances ups and downs as well as ups and downs on the pitch - and will do so again. They've always come up trumps with the people they've brought in.

Right now they appear to be sticking with Webber because they have no choice - no replacement in mind - and if that is the case, then all is good for next season - we carry on, Webber getting in what we need, to get Smith his team to get us promoted again.  After all he's done it twice now - needs to do it again.

For the future, who knows, but what we need now is stability, calmness and getting ready for next season. If fans want to try and ruin that, then it would be a shame and counter productive. 

[king canary 7,609]

28 minutes ago, lake district canary said:

Yes. Describing someone as a pensioner, while may be accurate in one sense, in another sense is derogartory......it all depends on the context it is being used.  The fact that DS and MJW are pensioners is irrelevant to them being owners/custodians of a football club. 

 

OK but it is you that have decided it is derogatory. It wasn't supposed to be as most other people seem to have grasped. There is nothing in my post that suggests their age has any bearing on my view of their competency. 

What I'm (quite clearly) saying is their age affects how I feel about efforts to remove them. Fundamentally I feel more squeamish protesting and chanting against a couple of people in their 80's than I would in their 40's/50's. 

[Inch High aka Inchy.. 405]

2 hours ago, Wings of a Sparrow said:

What a load of nonsense.

 

Is it though? Two 80yr olds running a football club the size of Norwich like a little hobby.

[Jim Smith 2,320]

53 minutes ago, lake district canary said:

Yes. Describing someone as a pensioner, while may be accurate in one sense, in another sense is derogartory......it all depends on the context it is being used.  The fact that DS and MJW are pensioners is irrelevant to them being owners/custodians of a football club. 

 

I'm not sure their age is irrelevant. People respond differently to aging. Some retain their drive. Others lose it somewhat and just want a relaxed, easy life. In the case of Delia and Michael i think they clearly very much enjoy something that has become their lives (and certainly a focal point of their social lives) over the last 25 years and probably can't imagine giving it up and I think that does come into their decision making in a way that it might not were they 20 years younger. But also when someone has been doing something for a very long time you can become a bit institutionalised and benefit from a fresh pair of eyes or a fresh way of thinking. 

Speaking personally, as much as i'd love a "billionaire" new owner I want to see some new, dynamic thinking at the club and also as others have said some new blood at CEO/chairman level to put some checks on Webber and Ward because it really does concern me how they seem to have free reign and I am far from convinced that either is doing a good job, yet their grip seems to have tightened rather than been loosened in the last year. 

[TIL 1010 4,748]

5 hours ago, PurpleCanary said:

For now the promise is more important than the mechanics of how, but two possibilities occur to me. One is a vote by all shareholders, all season ticket holders and all employees. The other would be for the fans to subcontract the decision to a group of four or five respected supporters, one of whom would be a financial expert able to assess the viability of the offer.

Should not be a problem finding a financial expert to assess the viability of any offer as this forum is littered with them who have an extensive knowledge gleaned from their microscopic analysis of numerous clubs quoted on here virtually on a daily basis. 😜

[Big Vince 318]

5 hours ago, king canary said:

Largely this is where I sit and it is a problem.

I believe that fundamentally the only way for the fans to try and push a change of ownership is to make life uncomfortable for the current majority shareholders. That means protests outside the ground, chants aimed specifically at the owners in the ground and generally creating an atmosphere that makes them think 'this isn't something I enjoy any more.' However I don't really want to be involved in hounding out a couple of pensioners who I believe do have the best interests of the club at heart and largely haven't done anything wrong other than not have more money. So I guess I'm a bit of a hypocrite- I want change but I'm too squeamish to do the dirty work that is needed to make it happen. I don't think I'm alone in this.

In an ideal world  a change happens before anything gets ugly because the owners decide their time has run its course. That doesn't feel very likely though.

Haven't done anything wrong? They employed the Blarneymeister, Bob the Grocer, Doomcaster, Moxey, Roeder, Gunn, Adams, Peter Grant, Joe Ferrari, etc and apart from Huckerby and maybe Ashton, have never invested in EPL players when it was required to do so.

[TIL 1010 4,748]

5 hours ago, Feedthewolf said:

We don't only engage with fans on here, Diane... we actually talk to them in real life, too 🙂

I can't deny that the first year of the panel has been very challenging. Our role and remit keeps changing, where we sit in relation to other fan groups is still far from clear, and our contacts at the club keep changing too (although having Zoe as a board member at our meetings has been a big step in the right direction).

I tend to be more reactive on here in terms of my OSP role; replying to people's comments/concerns rather than going out of my way to try and ask opinion on behalf of the panel (I did that at the start, and it was a bit of a nightmare to be honest). If any NCFC fan wants to speak to me (or any other panel member) as part of the role, I'd be open to it through whatever medium; I'm just not very active on social media, which is where a lot of the chat happens.

How about the OSP hold an open meeting with fans one evening as i am sure the club would provide you with a room  ?  A great opportuntiy to put faces to names and a wonderful opportunity to find out how much interest there is in the OSP  within the fanbase.

You never know who might turn up, even @Greavsy

[Feedthewolf 4,846]

3 minutes ago, TIL 1010 said:

How about the OSP hold an open meeting with fans one evening as i am sure the club would provide you with a room  ?  A great opportuntiy to put faces to names and a wonderful opportunity to find out how much interest there is in the OSP  within the fanbase.

You never know who might turn up, even @Greavsy

That's a nice idea, Tilly. I'll put it to the rest of the panel and see what they think, and if they're up for it then it'd be a good one to put to the new Head of Supporter Engagement when they start next month. 

[TIL 1010 4,748]

4 hours ago, shefcanary said:

I'll repost something I have posted elsewhere, as just as relevant to this thread:

Can I just point out here that the potential for Smith & Jones selling their shares in the club in the next 12 months, even if they wanted to, would be a miracle of fantastic proportions to actually take place and even if that miracle took place, it would take a long time.  With their 51% holding, Smith & Jones have effectively created a community owned club (I know it doesn't feel like it, but it is a 50 +1 model except it is in their favour, not the fans).  Any sale of their shares would first have to be offered to the other 3,000 plus shareholders at the same price offered to Smith & Jones; as I have said before this is an expensive transaction because of all the legal and financial due diligence that would be done in a semi-public manner. 

In addition, to attract a potential investor, there has to be a good reason for investing.  As others have noted, the finances of the club are in reasonably good state, so nothing to be gained as would be in a distressed sale - any investor would have to buy top dollar.  So that leaves the only potential being a rich fan of the club.

From what I can gather (and forgive me I am a Canary exile so not close to local personalities at the club) there is no obvious billionaire who has a pile of free cash and is a fan of the club.  So this leads to it having to be a consortium of some kind.  This again would take some time to build and would need good leadership and probably a very high media profile. I have suggested in the past someone like Jake Humphries would be the sort of person who could achieve this, as he would not scare Smith & Jones off whilst he negotiated all this.  Indeed Smith & Jones would need to be part of the consortia probably to make it effective, it may sound counter-intuitive but I think if they retained some involvement it might accelerate things.  

So whilst it may seem easy to just say the resolution of the current problems is for Smith & Jones to sell up, it ain't as easy as that! 

From my perspective, by all means sow the seeds of a new consortia, but much more importantly Smith & jones need to be persuaded to re-vamp corporate governance at the club and appoint an "independent" Chair and a strong CEO.  That will kick start the clear out of: the current malaise at the club; the daft commercial mistakes; the poor external communication; the stasis caused by executive conflict of interests; the run of poor player recruitment and finally (but most importantly) poor performance on the pitch.

Don't they own 53% and i am sure there are in excess of 6000 shareholders ?

[littleyellowbirdie 2,551]

5 hours ago, BigFish said:

Never said it was easy @norfolkngood 😀. Me, as a common or garden fan, I am accepting the fundamentals of the club and football in general, swallowing the disappointment of this year and looking forward to a better one next year.

If I felt something needed to be done, I would look to organise with other fans a vehicle that could act as a shadow of the current regime. Put this on a legal basis with articles of association, whether a Trust, a Parnership or even Ltd company. Get some expertise involved in marketing, communications, finance and football. Elect representatives, build a network, raise cash and buy shares. Use this to produce alternative strategies and plans and yes, engage with S&J even to the point of gaining a seat on the board.

That is impressive creative thinking. 

[shefcanary 2,409]

36 minutes ago, TIL 1010 said:

Don't they own 53% and i am sure there are in excess of 6000 shareholders ?

My bad, you are right on both accounts; however the thrust of my argument still holds, if not strengthened by such figures.  As I've said elsewhere, perhaps it was a way of Smith & Jones protecting their role as "owners" that they arrived at such a numerical position.

[PurpleCanary 5,562]

1 hour ago, TIL 1010 said:

Should not be a problem finding a financial expert to assess the viability of any offer as this forum is littered with them who have an extensive knowledge gleaned from their microscopic analysis of numerous clubs quoted on here virtually on a daily basis. 😜

I agree absolutely. The collective wisdom and sound commonsense of those financially knowledgeable posters here you are talking about would certainly be extremely useful in assessing any bid for the club.

[PurpleCanary 5,562]

1 hour ago, shefcanary said:

My bad, you are right on both accounts; however the thrust of my argument still holds, if not strengthened by such figures.  As I've said elsewhere, perhaps it was a way of Smith & Jones protecting their role as "owners" that they arrived at such a numerical position.

Shef, it was comfortably above 60 per cent at one point but Foulger's purchase of 80,000 or so (can't remember the exact figure) new shares mainly brought it down into the low 50s.

[TIL 1010 4,748]

1 hour ago, PurpleCanary said:

I agree absolutely. The collective wisdom and sound commonsense of those financially knowledgeable posters here you are talking about would certainly be extremely useful in assessing any bid for the club.

I am trying to think of a room to hold meetings at Carrow Road that could accommodate their combined egos.

[king canary 7,609]

8 hours ago, BigFish said:

Never said it was easy @norfolkngood 😀. Me, as a common or garden fan, I am accepting the fundamentals of the club and football in general, swallowing the disappointment of this year and looking forward to a better one next year.

If I felt something needed to be done, I would look to organise with other fans a vehicle that could act as a shadow of the current regime. Put this on a legal basis with articles of association, whether a Trust, a Parnership or even Ltd company. Get some expertise involved in marketing, communications, finance and football. Elect representatives, build a network, raise cash and buy shares. Use this to produce alternative strategies and plans and yes, engage with S&J even to the point of gaining a seat on the board.

Such an organisation already exists but it has been slow progress so far for the Trust. I do wish the majority shareholders would look to engage with things like this more actively though- they talk the talk about how fans need to be treated better and how they are just custodians but engaging with the trust or similar to sell a smallish % of their shares to remove majority control and add fan representation to the board before handing over their remaining shares to their nephew would be a legacy to be admired.

[yellowrider120 763]

3 minutes ago, king canary said:

Such an organisation already exists but it has been slow progress so far for the Trust. I do wish the majority shareholders would look to engage with things like this more actively though- they talk the talk about how fans need to be treated better and how they are just custodians but engaging with the trust or similar to sell a smallish % of their shares to remove majority control and add fan representation to the board before handing over their remaining shares to their nephew would be a legacy to be admired.

Totally agree but as likely as the sun not rising in the morning unless (that is) they now feel so p****d off with the whole thing that they now decide to call it a day. The Cook brusquely dismissed the idea / request for an 'elected fans representative to the Board' at the last AGM if I recall. Her dismissive reason was ..............'why do we need that when all the Board members are fans anyway'!   If ever you needed a quote to sum up the bunker mentality of her and her husband it was that. She has no intention of letting anyone anywhere near the Board who she doesn't personally know and can vet / control. 

[Dr Greenthumb 749]

On 22/05/2022 at 18:26, hogesar said:

Queried 5 lads shouting Delia Out behind me what happens next. Everyone around me (a couple of you i know post on here) will vouch that their response was "billionaire owner and we do better"

I like their optimism but thats as far as their knowledge on the subject went.

How were people behind you when you levitate above everyone?

[hogesar 9,676]

2 minutes ago, Dr Greenthumb said:

How were people behind you when you levitate above everyone?

2/10

Levitating is vertical, thus people can still be behind you.

[Dr Greenthumb 749]

7 minutes ago, hogesar said:

2/10

Levitating is vertical, thus people can still be behind you.

Not when you are as god like as you are, surely? 

[hogesar 9,676]

17 minutes ago, Dr Greenthumb said:

Not when you are as god like as you are, surely? 

To the contrary, everyone is behind me.

[Mengo 823]

6 hours ago, Jim Smith said:

I'm not sure their age is irrelevant. People respond differently to aging. Some retain their drive. Others lose it somewhat and just want a relaxed, easy life. In the case of Delia and Michael i think they clearly very much enjoy something that has become their lives (and certainly a focal point of their social lives) over the last 25 years and probably can't imagine giving it up and I think that does come into their decision making in a way that it might not were they 20 years younger. But also when someone has been doing something for a very long time you can become a bit institutionalised and benefit from a fresh pair of eyes or a fresh way of thinking. 

Speaking personally, as much as i'd love a "billionaire" new owner I want to see some new, dynamic thinking at the club and also as others have said some new blood at CEO/chairman level to put some checks on Webber and Ward because it really does concern me how they seem to have free reign and I am far from convinced that either is doing a good job, yet their grip seems to have tightened rather than been loosened in the last year. 

The Webber-Ward show (Reality TV live from Carrow Road). Celebrity  Podcasts . Me me me. Us us us.

It's one sh!t show as it 🧍‍♂️ 🧍‍♀️ stands.

[PurpleCanary 5,562]

2 hours ago, TIL 1010 said:

I am trying to think of a room to hold meetings at Carrow Road that could accommodate their combined egos.

St. Andrew’s Hall then..

[BigFish 1,988]

3 hours ago, king canary said:

Such an organisation already exists but it has been slow progress so far for the Trust. I do wish the majority shareholders would look to engage with things like this more actively though- they talk the talk about how fans need to be treated better and how they are just custodians but engaging with the trust or similar to sell a smallish % of their shares to remove majority control and add fan representation to the board before handing over their remaining shares to their nephew would be a legacy to be admired.

To be honest, I don't know much about the Trust but I think that fact alone indicates why it isn't the same as what I was trying to articulate. That organisation would have a much higher profile, it would be agitating, educating and organising amongst the fan base and evangelising as well.

[shefcanary 2,409]

11 hours ago, BigFish said:

 agitating, educating and organising 

That Petrol Emotion? 

 

Edited May 24, 2022 by shefcanary

[king canary 7,609]

13 hours ago, BigFish said:

To be honest, I don't know much about the Trust but I think that fact alone indicates why it isn't the same as what I was trying to articulate. That organisation would have a much higher profile, it would be agitating, educating and organising amongst the fan base and evangelising as well.

Yeah my sense (from the outside at least) is the Trust isn't particularly aggressive about trying to buy shares and are more focused on being a fan group. However it is, I guess, a chicken and egg situation- are they not as aggressive because people aren't interested or are people just unaware of them because they aren't as aggressive in this mission.

[BigFish 1,988]

11 minutes ago, king canary said:

However it is, I guess, a chicken and egg situation- are they not as aggressive because people aren't interested or are people just unaware of them because they aren't as aggressive in this mission.

😀 And that is the big question to which I don't have a big answer @king canary

Edited May 24, 2022 by BigFish

[BigFish 1,988]

2 hours ago, shefcanary said:

That Petrol Emotion? 

 

A little earlier @shefcanary, four minutes 23 seconds into this 😀

 

 

[shefcanary 2,409]

32 minutes ago, BigFish said:

A little earlier @shefcanary, four minutes 23 seconds into this 😀

 

 

Cool, first listen of that.  Will explore further. 👍

[essex canary 496]

On 23/05/2022 at 17:29, TIL 1010 said:

Don't they own 53% and i am sure there are in excess of 6000 shareholders ?

53% and 6,863. Only 1,493  who own 11 or more shares. 

Might be good to chip away at both ends in favour of a consolidated Supporters Trust arrangement- the Golden Share referred to in the Fan Led Review.

Perhaps those who own 4 or so could have the option of increasing their holdings to a minimum 10 or more to retain free membership or an equivalent season ticket discount or alternatively be encouraged to transfer to the Golden Share arrangement?

 

[Duncan Edwards 2,237]

3 minutes ago, essex canary said:

53% and 6,863. Only 1,493  who own 11 or more shares. 

Might be good to chip away at both ends in favour of a consolidated Supporters Trust arrangement- the Golden Share referred to in the Fan Led Review.

Perhaps those who own 4 or so could have the option of increasing their holdings to a minimum 10 or more to retain free membership or an equivalent season ticket discount or alternatively be encouraged to transfer to the Golden Share arrangement?

 

Are you in the middle bit that doesn’t need chipping away at?