Why I am not excited…yet

[Feedthewolf 4,861]

2 hours ago, Dean Coneys boots said:

The club have said stressed that any investment “would not lead to a change in the status of Delia Smith and Michael Wynn Jones as joint majority shareholders.” 

This makes me a little more pessimistic over the nature of what is being offered. Because anyone who is looking to invest heavily would almost certainly want overall control not just being a free income source for Smiths

Where did the club stay that? I haven't seen any such statement, please can you link me to it? Had a quick look on the website and social media feeds but can't see anything...

EDIT: Ignore that. Just seen the other thread, apparently it was ITV claiming it was from a club source. So nothing substantiated as yet.

Edited May 29, 2022 by Feedthewolf

[TIL 1010 4,776]

11 minutes ago, Feedthewolf said:

Where did the club stay that? I haven't seen any such statement, please can you link me to it? Had a quick look on the website and social media feeds but can't see anything...

EDIT: Ignore that. Just seen the other thread, apparently it was ITV claiming it was from a club source. So nothing substantiated as yet.

Just pointed that out on the main thread US takeover/investment thread wolfie no official statement has come out of Carrow Road nor will there be until it is finalised one way or the other.

A club spokesman told some unknown journo at ITV.......yeah ,yeah, yeah whatever of course they did.

[Yobocop 1,105]

7 hours ago, cambridgeshire canary said:

Barnsleys owners are worth billions. Just you know, saying.

As are many in championship and league one, you haven’t said anything ground breaking here 

goes to show how bigger achievement it is for a club like Norwich with their lack of budget to be in the Premier League two out of the last three years 

[hogesar 9,711]

Just now, Yobocop said:

As are many in championship and league one, you haven’t said anything ground breaking here 

goes to show how bigger achievement it is for a club like Norwich with their lack of budget to be in the Premier League two out of the last three years 

Exactly.

[Nora's Ghost 157]

2 hours ago, Yobocop said:

As are many in championship and league one, you haven’t said anything ground breaking here 

goes to show how bigger achievement it is for a club like Norwich with their lack of budget to be in the Premier League two out of the last three years 

Two out of three utter humiliation seasons in the Premier League.

 

Hardly any sort of achievement.

[TheGunnShow 5,973]

10 hours ago, cambridgeshire canary said:

Barnsleys owners are worth billions. Just you know, saying.

They also got relegated from the Championship this season, just saying. 🙂

[cambridgeshire canary 6,757]

47 minutes ago, TheGunnShow said:

They also got relegated from the Championship this season, just saying. 🙂

Which is the point I was making.. Money does not mean evreything

Edited May 29, 2022 by cambridgeshire canary

[chicken 2,640]

10 hours ago, king canary said:

I think that's very harsh.

Lots of people were excited at the time until the actual details came out. At that point we were battling relegation to league one, had a squad filled with crap and generally everything was headed in the wrong direction. I don't blame anyone for being excited about the prospect of one of the richest men in the UK at the time being keen to get involved.

Honestly, I don't remember anyone being excited about it. Mainly because it became pretty clear, very quickly, that it was an almost impossible deal. For someone supposedly so well versed in financial affairs, Cullum's offer was... well, quite frankly, pathetic.

He literally wanted a controlling stake in the club in return for putting £20m into the playing squad. That was it. Essentially valuing the club at £00.00. That was back in 2007. It just needs to be left there really. It was a huge non-event. It was essentially a huge con and pretty much an insult to the club to be valued at nothing.

What we are seeing at the moment, if the reports are accurate, is entirely different. It is exactly what our current owners have said they were looking for previously. Someone willing to invest into the club, to show their commitment and intention first.

Am I excited, not just yet. Once this investment deal is done, and we get the detail and we find out more. Then I'll get excited. It looks good, it feels good - so you can't really blame anyone for getting a bit excited about it. This isn't just some person with money and a vague interest in football/soccer. This is someone who is part of a business that has nearly 20yrs worth of experience running sports teams. 

[chicken 2,640]

4 hours ago, Nora's Ghost said:

Two out of three utter humiliation seasons in the Premier League.

 

Hardly any sort of achievement.

I don't find either season particularly humiliating, difficult - yes, humiliating - no.

Now, you can take those two seasons in complete isolation and say yes, yes we should have done better. And that is true. Or, if you are able, you can take a step back and look back at the last 27 years.

I say that because much of the EFL is still trying to modernise whilst trying to keep up with the Jones'. They are always steps behind, and frequently falling further behind owing to TV deals, sponsorship etc.

You can look at it that we should have done better, and that is fine, but it isn't also mutually exclusive to also accepting that we still do well considering the model we use. Contrary to what many people have said, the model IS working.

Case in point is that most people's issues is with the signings... as in, we had £50m to spend and people are not happy with how it was spent. Would more money have helped that? Possibly. Could the money we had be spent better? Most probably.

In the grand scheme of things, the very fact that we can be here, now, and argue that we could, and should have done better, not once, but twice, suggests that actually, our current set up is the 2nd most successful since relegation from the Premier League in the mid 90's.



 

[chicken 2,640]

9 hours ago, Feedthewolf said:

Where did the club stay that? I haven't seen any such statement, please can you link me to it? Had a quick look on the website and social media feeds but can't see anything...

EDIT: Ignore that. Just seen the other thread, apparently it was ITV claiming it was from a club source. So nothing substantiated as yet.

Tbh, I wouldn't be surprised or bothered if this were the case. Kroenke did similar at Arsenal, buying up shares until he had more than 12% of them. Also, it would appear that these folks are not scared of playing the long game and perhaps value that causing as few ripples as possible is beneficial to a smooth hand over.

IMHO, investing in some shares. Perhaps investing in the club too a bit away from just shares. It all means they aren't here for the short term, or to asset strip, or as a pension fund tax write off etc. Just because it doesn't impact on the position of the joint majority shareholders right now, it doesn't mean that won't change in the future. I'm liking what I am seeing/hearing so far.

[Yobocop 1,105]

13 hours ago, Nora's Ghost said:

Two out of three utter humiliation seasons in the Premier League.

 

Hardly any sort of achievement.

Compared to Barnsley and the like it is 

[Capt. Pants 4,265]

I think this will go through and they will be the eventual owners of the club.

It was a neatly timed leak to the media. Fans are largely behind it and there will be uproar if it doesn't go through, hence the leak.

[LaUnionCanary 86]

One thing not mentioned by any poster yet, more finance available means we can get better quality players AND be able to pay a higher salary,  previously we have failed to sign such players due to salary thresholds.  😀

[Nora's Ghost 157]

56 minutes ago, Yobocop said:

Compared to Barnsley and the like it is 

Comparing NCFC with a club like Barnsley is a pretty low bar.

[Nora's Ghost 157]

9 hours ago, chicken said:

I don't find either season particularly humiliating, difficult - yes, humiliating - no.

Now, you can take those two seasons in complete isolation and say yes, yes we should have done better. And that is true. Or, if you are able, you can take a step back and look back at the last 27 years.

I say that because much of the EFL is still trying to modernise whilst trying to keep up with the Jones'. They are always steps behind, and frequently falling further behind owing to TV deals, sponsorship etc.

You can look at it that we should have done better, and that is fine, but it isn't also mutually exclusive to also accepting that we still do well considering the model we use. Contrary to what many people have said, the model IS working.

Case in point is that most people's issues is with the signings... as in, we had £50m to spend and people are not happy with how it was spent. Would more money have helped that? Possibly. Could the money we had be spent better? Most probably.

In the grand scheme of things, the very fact that we can be here, now, and argue that we could, and should have done better, not once, but twice, suggests that actually, our current set up is the 2nd most successful since relegation from the Premier League in the mid 90's.



 

Some reasonable thinking in there chicken but I see it as two massive opportunities lost and who knows if our luck will run out. in the seasons ahead.

 

Mid table Championship for a few years with no parachute money and we could easily drift into mediocrity as an entity, especially if the current owners cling on. With no Paul Lambert sat in the manager's chair or Grant Holt on the pitch that sadly is the likely scenario. We had our chance to push on and wasted it.... twice.

[littleyellowbirdie 2,565]

18 minutes ago, Nora's Ghost said:

Some reasonable thinking in there chicken but I see it as two massive opportunities lost and who knows if our luck will run out. in the seasons ahead.

 

Mid table Championship for a few years with no parachute money and we could easily drift into mediocrity as an entity, especially if the current owners cling on. With no Paul Lambert sat in the manager's chair or Grant Holt on the pitch that sadly is the likely scenario. We had our chance to push on and wasted it.... twice.

Two championship titles in the last two Championship seasons for Norwich is not luck; that's a consequence of the strategic actions that Webber has taken at Norwich.

Edited May 30, 2022 by littleyellowbirdie

[TIL 1010 4,776]

7 minutes ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

Two championship titles in the last two Championship seasons for Norwich is not luck; that's a consequence of the strategic actions that Webber has taken at Norwich.

Can you please identity the strategic actions taken by Webber that brought about the quickfire relegations to follow ?

[Yobocop 1,105]

36 minutes ago, Nora's Ghost said:

Comparing NCFC with a club like Barnsley is a pretty low bar.

And yet you have missed the point yet again 

[sonyc 5,539]

24 minutes ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

Two championship titles in the last two Championship seasons for Norwich is not luck; that's a consequence of the strategic actions that Webber has taken at Norwich.

Indeed. It's not even something for debate but a fact. You don't just win promotion from the Championship. The whole club has to be aligned in such matters. Look at Forest and their renaissance after Cooper joined. It galvanised the whole club. 

Secondly, if you consider our record there is only Fulham that you might compare us to in the last 2/3 years...maybe West Brom. Whether we dislike our lack of competitive edge in the PL you cannot just ignore our recent history (decade). And I'm not a particular fan of Webber. It takes more than just one person for a club to be successful. Let's not give him too little respect but also not lionise him. 

The crucial thing is proper investment but we must wait and see (a) if it happens and (b) what the terms are.

There is an openness for external investment. Perhaps there has been for years? Whatever, it's a refreshing change as far as I'm concerned.

Edited May 30, 2022 by sonyc

[littleyellowbirdie 2,565]

23 minutes ago, TIL 1010 said:

Can you please identity the strategic actions taken by Webber that brought about the quickfire relegations to follow ?

That's nothing to do with strategy; that's everything to do with insufficient capital to simultaneously improve chances of securing a foothold in the Premier League and to safeguard the club's financial situation in the event that safety in the Premier League is not achieved. 

Overall, given we have now got yo-yoing down to a fine art, this puts the club in a position where it can potentially secure a foothold in the Premier League in time with patience, persistence, learning from mistakes, and some long-overdue luck, or potentially our excellent track record for being capable of being promoted into the Premier League of late will attract investment on good terms for the club to move onto the next level. 

Edited May 30, 2022 by littleyellowbirdie

[PurpleCanary 5,577]

1 hour ago, Capt. Pants said:

I think this will go through and they will be the eventual owners of the club.

It was a neatly timed leak to the media. Fans are largely behind it and there will be uproar if it doesn't go through, hence the leak.

I don't follow the logic of that. If the club leaked this news before the deal was done then it risked the kind of uproar you talk about if the deal then fell through. Better to keep it all quiet until everything was settled, and hope that if it did collapse that would never become public.

As it happens I am not 100 per cent certain but I am led to believe the club definitely did not leak the story, not least precisely because nothing had been settled, and did not want it coming out now. Bear in mind Webber talked about a big surprise in a few weeks' time, rather than very soon.

[king canary 7,644]

2 minutes ago, PurpleCanary said:

I don't follow the logic of that. If the club leaked this news before the deal was done then it risked the kind of uproar you talk about if the deal then fell through. Better to keep it all quiet until everything was settled, and hope that if it did collapse that would never become public.

As it happens I am not 100 per cent certain but I am led to believe the club definitely did not leak the story, not least precisely because nothing had been settled, and did not want it coming out now. Bear in mind Webber talked about a big surprise in a few weeks' time, rather than very soon.

I'm assuming Pants is suggesting the leak came from the US side to make sure they had fans onside.

[PurpleCanary 5,577]

3 minutes ago, king canary said:

I'm assuming Pants is suggesting the leak came from the US side to make sure they had fans onside.

Stupid of me. That makes sense, but I doubt the US side leaked it either. If you parade seven unknown men in the directors’ box at a game then someone is going to wonder just who are those people. 

[littleyellowbirdie 2,565]

18 minutes ago, PurpleCanary said:

I don't follow the logic of that. If the club leaked this news before the deal was done then it risked the kind of uproar you talk about if the deal then fell through. Better to keep it all quiet until everything was settled, and hope that if it did collapse that would never become public.

As it happens I am not 100 per cent certain but I am led to believe the club definitely did not leak the story, not least precisely because nothing had been settled, and did not want it coming out now. Bear in mind Webber talked about a big surprise in a few weeks' time, rather than very soon.

The club made zero effort to conceal a conspicuously large party of sports business people being hosted and entertained by the club in front of a global array of sports journalists in the ground and seeing the faces on TV around the world. One of them actually wearing a Norwich scarf wasn't exactly subtle either. 

You don't really need a leak as such for it to be clear that the club was happy for the public to be aware that the club was doing something proactive on the outside investment score and for journalists to start asking questions on their own bat. 

Edited May 30, 2022 by littleyellowbirdie

[king canary 7,644]

1 minute ago, PurpleCanary said:

Stupid of me. That makes sense, but I doubt the US side leaked it either. If you parade seven unknown men in the directors’ box at a game then someone is going to wonder just who are those people. 

Yeah I agree but I also agree with @littleyellowbirdie below that the club can't be hugely surprised this info is now out there considering how public it all was. 

[dylanisabaddog 4,958]

They hardly tried to hide in the directors box against Spurs then they were photographed together on the pitch. No one seemed to be trying to hide anything. 

I'd be very surprised if that was their first visit here and would guess they've been talking for some time. 

Those of you who are thinking we're going to spend fortunes on transfer fees and wages should curb your enthusiasm. Looking at their baseball team, that isn't how these people do business. The baseball team is run along very similar lines to Norwich City but in Baseball I assume they don't have relegation to worry about. 

And of course there is due to be a change in FFP which @Badger@Badger can explain.

[TheGunnShow 5,973]

6 minutes ago, dylanisabaddog said:

They hardly tried to hide in the directors box against Spurs then they were photographed together on the pitch. No one seemed to be trying to hide anything. 

I'd be very surprised if that was their first visit here and would guess they've been talking for some time. 

Those of you who are thinking we're going to spend fortunes on transfer fees and wages should curb your enthusiasm. Looking at their baseball team, that isn't how these people do business. The baseball team is run along very similar lines to Norwich City but in Baseball I assume they don't have relegation to worry about. 

And of course there is due to be a change in FFP which @Badger@Badger can explain.

Exactly this. I said they seem to run a similar ethos, but with more money behind them. It doesn't mean we're going to splash out willy-nilly if it transpires they do take over - and this is the exciting thing for me. They seem to have seen similarities with the Brewers at the time they took over when the Brewers were ran by the Seligs, who were basically cutting debt (Selig brought the team from Seattle to Milwaukee when they went bankrupt, I think, so no doubt that played a part in his thinking. Delia's essentially decided on the self-financing model after a couple of close financial calls herself).

Throw in the steady, gradual improvement the Brewers seem to have had under their leadership whilst also focusing on building a team around younger players and it's not hard to see the commonalities.

[PurpleCanary 5,577]

12 minutes ago, king canary said:

Yeah I agree but I also agree with @littleyellowbirdie below that the club can't be hugely surprised this info is now out there considering how public it all was. 

I am limited in what I can say about this, but I do not believe the club is at all happy that this has come out before any deal has been signed.

[king canary 7,644]

4 minutes ago, PurpleCanary said:

I am limited in what I can say about this, but I do not believe the club is at all happy that this has come out before any deal has been signed.

If that is true then it makes me think the people at the club are pretty thick then. Were they expecting nobody would notice? Or were they hoping they could convince the local press to sit on it for a period? If so they might want to start giving them interviews again...

[canarydan23 4,060]

57 minutes ago, Yobocop said:

And yet you have missed the point yet again 

@Nora's Ghost is nothing if not consistent in that regard.