EXCLUSIVE: US tycoons in Norwich City investment talks

[Worthy Nigelton 1,055]

5 hours ago, hogesar said:

Continues to ignore that she wouldn't have known the value of the club would rise as our finances have meant we could have easily not been promoted once in the past 10 years and we've been in difficult financial situations too.

It also ignores her age and lack of family meaning her chance to enjoy all these hundreds of millions...

She's passing it on to family (or was) so the lack of family argument falls down.

You don't need to be an accountant and know the value of the club to the penny to realise that football was becoming a business awash with cash. 

You're failing to see things from another's perspective as you have your Delia specs on. The club has been an investment for Delia that has performed financially beyond her wildest dreams. The ironic thing is, I dont think she took it over originally as an investment and I think her motives have been mostly genuine, but she's not a soppy old idiot who hasn't a clue what she has on her hands...

[nutty nigel 7,542]

1 minute ago, Worthy Nigelton said:

She's passing it on to family (or was) so the lack of family argument falls down.

You don't need to be an accountant and know the value of the club to the penny to realise that football was becoming a business awash with cash. 

You're failing to see things from another's perspective as you have your Delia specs on. The club has been an investment for Delia that has performed financially beyond her wildest dreams. The ironic thing is, I dont think she took it over originally as an investment and I think her motives have been mostly genuine, but she's not a soppy old idiot who hasn't a clue what she has on her hands...

I really think it's you with the Delia specs Worthy. They obviously totally obscure MWJ and his input🙃

[Worthy Nigelton 1,055]

1 minute ago, nutty nigel said:

I really think it's you with the Delia specs Worthy. They obviously totally obscure MWJ and his input🙃

Fair point! 

Can I retroactively amend all mention to 'Delia' to read 'Delia and MWJ'? 🤣

[GMF 747]

24 minutes ago, essex canary said:

Would Chapter 8 of the Government's Fan Led Review concerning a Golden Supporters Share offer any comfort in this regard.

It’s still just a report, with a set of recommendations. Until it’s included in a Queen’s speech, I’m not holding my breath.

[Badger 2,407]

1 minute ago, GMF said:

It’s still just a report, with a set of recommendations. Until it’s included in a Queen’s speech, I’m not holding my breath.

I thought that it was included in the Queen's speech. 

[nutty nigel 7,542]

Just now, Worthy Nigelton said:

Fair point! 

Can I retroactively amend all mention to 'Delia' to read 'Delia and MWJ'? 🤣

Lol 

Not really because he's not a soppy old idiot who hasn't a clue. Nor is Delia to be fair. 

If you look at them as a couple who have majority owned a football club for nearly 25 years you'd realise they very much know and understand the challenges involved. Far more than us, journos and other owners.

[GMF 747]

Just now, Badger said:

I thought that it was included in the Queen's speech. 

Aside from a white paper, I don’t  think so, but happy to be corrected. It’s unlikely to be included in legislation before 2023-24.

[Badger 2,407]

4 minutes ago, GMF said:

Aside from a white paper, I don’t  think so, but happy to be corrected. It’s unlikely to be included in legislation before 2023-24.

It said, "Proposals will be published to establish an independent regulator of English football." I see your point - it doesn't specify legislation but nor did it say anything about a White paper. I agree that nothing will be ready until the 23-24 season at the earliest.

https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/queens-speech-2022

Edited May 29, 2022 by Badger
Added link

[PurpleCanary 5,564]

1 hour ago, TIL 1010 said:

In that case i would think calling him Gary would be more appropriate or even GMF.

I never would have guessed from your posts that you were a stickler for Edwardian etiquette, but in this case Field (and I had no idea he is GMF, if that is indeed the case)  is writing as a journalist, so the surname is appropriate, just as I call Paddy Davitt simply Davitt and don’t pretend any personal connection I don’t have.

 

 

[CirclePoint 205]

On 27/05/2022 at 10:44, The Real Buh said:

Let’s get one things straight before we start here guys. Before anything.

American Sports are Lame.

That's funny. If true, where then would you place cricket?

To say that American sports are lame, when American sports programs clearly produce the majority of the best athletes in the world, is somewhat off-base.

[Big Vince 318]

5 hours ago, hogesar said:

Why not peddle some more of your Delia socialist / train set / ignores investors BS just so I can laugh at you yet again?

Any investor chosen by the Socialists must by definition be the same as them and therefore totally incapable of moving the club any further forward.

[TIL 1010 4,755]

20 minutes ago, PurpleCanary said:

I never would have guessed from your posts that you were a stickler for Edwardian etiquette, but in this case Field (and I had no idea he is GMF, if that is indeed the case)  is writing as a journalist, so the surname is appropriate, just as I call Paddy Davitt simply Davitt and don’t pretend any personal connection I don’t have.

 

 

Etiquette has no date stamp and GMF is Gary Field but it is reassuring to learn that you do not in fact know everything despite not being able to guess from your posts.

[hogesar 9,702]

9 minutes ago, TIL 1010 said:

Etiquette has no date stamp and GMF is Gary Field but it is reassuring to learn that you do not in fact know everything despite not being able to guess from your posts.

[Big Vince 318]

6 hours ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

Actually, each and every one of them has been hundreds of millions of pounds that have gone back into developing the club,keeping it away from receivership, and strengthening the squad so we've achieved promotion back to the Premier League more and more frequently. Easy for nobodies like you to dismiss that from the sidelines. 

Nonsense. The club has made no progress whatsoever. The squad is lame, lacks heart, fight and desire and most of the players are unfit to wear the shirt. Bottom of the league in successive EPL campaigns tells you all you need to know. All the money put into Colney has been a catastrophic failure. A Botsoccer gizmo will never make players have what it takes between the ears. Either you have it or you don't.

[essex canary 497]

50 minutes ago, GMF said:

Aside from a white paper, I don’t  think so, but happy to be corrected. It’s unlikely to be included in legislation before 2023-24.

Acknowledged but wouldn't it be wise to be considering the likely implications in any new deal?

[Diane 500]

42 minutes ago, PurpleCanary said:

I never would have guessed from your posts that you were a stickler for Edwardian etiquette, but in this case Field (and I had no idea he is GMF, if that is indeed the case)  is writing as a journalist, so the surname is appropriate, just as I call Paddy Davitt simply Davitt and don’t pretend any personal connection I don’t have.

 

 

Gary isn't a journalist Purple, he's the treasurer of the Canaries Trust who is very knowledgeable about shares, so has written a piece ( and answered lots of questions on twitter ) which helps some of us who don't have his expertise 🤣

[GMF 747]

6 minutes ago, essex canary said:

Acknowledged but wouldn't it be wise to be considering the likely implications in any new deal?

@essex canary the Club, in common with many others within football, seems intent at kicking this particular can down the road for the moment. The timeframes between the fan led review and this potential takeover are never likely to match.

[cornish sam 954]

1 hour ago, Worthy Nigelton said:

She's passing it on to family (or was) so the lack of family argument falls down.

You don't need to be an accountant and know the value of the club to the penny to realise that football was becoming a business awash with cash. 

You're failing to see things from another's perspective as you have your Delia specs on. The club has been an investment for Delia that has performed financially beyond her wildest dreams. The ironic thing is, I dont think she took it over originally as an investment and I think her motives have been mostly genuine, but she's not a soppy old idiot who hasn't a clue what she has on her hands...

But you're failing to see it from an obvious perspective, it is only a financially successful investment if she cashes in on it and liquidates. At the moment the club has made her negative money as she has put in more than she has taken out. On paper she is worth more because of it but she has no extra money thanks to it...unless you're counting 25 years of free season tickets, but even Essex canary has had that (maybe not for 25 years)...

As she has no family to pass her money on to there is no reason for her to liquidate her holdings, they are old and already acknowledge they have more money then they will be able to spend so to view any of their decisions as being for their best financial outcome is just pie eyed.

[norfolkngood 1,087]

i do not know how it will work 

but my feeling is if the once the American businessman is in and he passes the test and it suits all he will then take overall control somewhere down the line ,

if they can see money is to be made the American businessmen i know will want full control ASAP

 

[The Real Buh 3,445]

45 minutes ago, CirclePoint said:

That's funny. If true, where then would you place cricket?

To say that American sports are lame, when American sports programs clearly produce the majority of the best athletes in the world, is somewhat off-base.

I never said cricket was any good. It’s not, it’s crap.

American sports are soulless and don’t translate outside of the USA. That’s why nobody cares about NFL outside of the USA. They can’t translate it worldwide.

because it’s boring.

[essex canary 497]

2 minutes ago, GMF said:

@essex canary the Club, in common with many others within football, seems intent at kicking this particular can down the road for the moment. The timeframes between the fan led review and this potential takeover are never likely to match.

I guess that is the football industry. The Government takes action to defend Community principles in football and the football industry ignores it including Clubs such as ours with apparently strong community values.

[essex canary 497]

30 minutes ago, cornish sam said:

But you're failing to see it from an obvious perspective, it is only a financially successful investment if she cashes in on it and liquidates. At the moment the club has made her negative money as she has put in more than she has taken out. On paper she is worth more because of it but she has no extra money thanks to it...unless you're counting 25 years of free season tickets, but even Essex canary has had that (maybe not for 25 years)...

As she has no family to pass her money on to there is no reason for her to liquidate her holdings, they are old and already acknowledge they have more money then they will be able to spend so to view any of their decisions as being for their best financial outcome is just pie eyed.

Agreed no crystallised gain for S&J at the moment. There is of course considerable kudos in being majority shareholders. Mortality gives them the option of either crystallising such a gain ( at least where we are at present) or pasing on the same ownership  position to Tom who would presumably inherit  any and all benefits they receive. For some reason they don't think that latter situation is applicable to holders of 1,000 shares. Also they can choose if and when to crystallise a gain which is not an option open to minority shareholders who topped up funds they didn't have. 

[cornish sam 954]

7 minutes ago, essex canary said:

Agreed no crystallised gain for S&J at the moment. There is of course considerable kudos in being majority shareholders. Mortality gives them the option of either crystallising such a gain ( at least where we are at present) or pasing on the same ownership  position to Tom who would presumably inherit  any and all benefits they receive. For some reason they don't think that latter situation is applicable to holders of 1,000 shares. Also they can choose if and when to crystallise a gain which is not an option open to minority shareholders who topped up funds they didn't have. 

But they have more recently said that they weren't going to pass it on to Tom and share holders are able to pass on their shares to anyone they choose at death, just not necessarily confer all of the benefits attached to the initial purchase of the shares. Also, if you want to crystallise gains in the share value attached to your shares, offer them on the open market and try to find someone to buy them for whatever you think is a fair price...

[nutty nigel 7,542]

5 minutes ago, cornish sam said:

But they have more recently said that they weren't going to pass it on to Tom and share holders are able to pass on their shares to anyone they choose at death, just not necessarily confer all of the benefits attached to the initial purchase of the shares. Also, if you want to crystallise gains in the share value attached to your shares, offer them on the open market and try to find someone to buy them for whatever you think is a fair price...

Failing that he could take the issue to the football ombudsman...

[Cowboy 197]

1 hour ago, CirclePoint said:

...when American sports programs clearly produce the majority of the best athletes in the world, is somewhat off-base.

Yee-haw! Virtually every athlete in the World Series of baseball, and that turgid month-long game of forward passes, shoulder pads and world class advertising breaks. Beyond that a handful of track and field athletes, and the male and female World Champions of Burger Munching. So, yeah...

[essex canary 497]

11 minutes ago, cornish sam said:

But they have more recently said that they weren't going to pass it on to Tom and share holders are able to pass on their shares to anyone they choose at death, just not necessarily confer all of the benefits attached to the initial purchase of the shares. Also, if you want to crystallise gains in the share value attached to your shares, offer them on the open market and try to find someone to buy them for whatever you think is a fair price...

The 'just not necessarily' is the substantive issue. The latter point is, of course, true but such a price is likely to be substantially unattractive relative to their options so nothing particularly socialist about it.

[vos 155]

5 hours ago, FenwayFrank said:

I can’t imagine it’s a good time to be opening new restaurants for a start if this multi use venue is going to generate money. What sports do you suggest that people are going to get behind or use ? 

Quite agree FF. If an established well known brand called the Canaries cannot make any money out of it, and this is despite never paying a dividend to its shareholders, then what other sporting venture is going to run a profitable enterprise ?? Certainly not the local badminton club and you can swim at the nearby Riverside Centre for a modest cost. In reality the only tangible value of the Club is the stadium itself, but if football folded then the inevitable construction of cheaply built flats would follow. But what would the site before worth after taking in to account the demolition costs etc ?? I really do not get this desire for Americans  to invest in English Football Clubs. Nearly all Clubs are losing money and up to their necks in debt. Yes, plenty of money comes in from Sky, but in next to no time it all goes out on inflated players wages and transfer fees. Non Premier teams just tick over. In all normal businesses the general idea is to make profits and build up the business via reinvestment. Football is now a fantasy business run for the benefit of TV companies. When will the balloon go up !!!

[cornish sam 954]

6 minutes ago, essex canary said:

The 'just not necessarily' is the substantive issue. The latter point is, of course, true but such a price is likely to be substantially unattractive relative to their options so nothing particularly socialist about it.

So your complaints are:

A) you cannot confer a perk attached to an initial purchase of a thing to someone else (a common clause in prizes and giveaways)

And

B) selling shares is not "particularly socialist"

fair enough, I've got nothing..................

[Hairy Canary 705]

1 hour ago, The Real Buh said:

I never said cricket was any good. It’s not, it’s crap.

Cricket is a thinking man’s game Buh. It won’t appeal to you.

[Worthy Nigelton 1,055]

1 hour ago, cornish sam said:

But you're failing to see it from an obvious perspective, it is only a financially successful investment if she cashes in on it and liquidates. At the moment the club has made her negative money as she has put in more than she has taken out. On paper she is worth more because of it but she has no extra money thanks to it...unless you're counting 25 years of free season tickets, but even Essex canary has had that (maybe not for 25 years)...

As she has no family to pass her money on to there is no reason for her to liquidate her holdings, they are old and already acknowledge they have more money then they will be able to spend so to view any of their decisions as being for their best financial outcome is just pie eyed.

She has said that she has taken her money back out again so she is nett and I know how an asset works.

She has never needed to cash in as you have said as she has plenty enough for her life but wanted to pass it on to nephew Tom (her extended family) and it made no financial sense to cash it in while she was enjoying being involved, going to games, he was drawing a salary anyway and it was in an increasingly lucrative industry. 

Again,I want to reiterate, I'm a Delia fan and don't want her to sell particularly but get real everyone!