Jump to content
ricardo

Annual Report

Recommended Posts

33 minutes ago, GMF said:

I’ve not had the opportunity to check properly, however, from recollection, one of the resolutions at last year’s AGM was for shareholders to reappoint BDO LLP, no? It’s quite unusual to change auditors mid-year, especially without explanation.

Which rather begs the question, is this in any way linked to the qualified going concern statement that has appeared this year? 

Auditing standards have tightened regarding going concern sign off, the better known audit firms are particularly focused on it.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


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

Sadly, this is indicative of a shoddy set of accounts, masked by glossy front pages.

Notes 18 and 19 are poor - how can a “short term” loan be > 1 year and it should be clearer that the wording in 19 also covers amounts in note 18.

The “short term loan” is incorrectly merged with “Other loans” in note 19 too.

As a chartered accountant, I personally would be embarrassed if these were my accounts.

I also note a change of auditors to an obscure firm, which is a red flag.

 

That obscure firm was where the current FD got his training and formerly worked for. So now we have a married couple as owners, a married couple as senior executives, supported by an FD who is "married" to the auditors. Given the errors everybody has spotted on the corporate shareholding notes, the Legal & Governance Director is shirking a major part of his job. So we have a fan friendly publication which contains lots of mis-truths whilst any real engagement face to face with fans is shunned.

FFS, I know people take the **** out of me for this, but where is the Corporate Governance here and clear distinction between executive and non-executive control. 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

That obscure firm was where the current FD got his training and formerly worked for. So now we have a married couple as owners, a married couple as senior executives, supported by an FD who is "married" to the auditors. Given the errors everybody has spotted on the corporate shareholding notes, the Legal & Governance Director is shirking a major part of his job. So we have a fan friendly publication which contains lots of mis-truths whilst any real engagement face to face with fans is shunned.

FFS, I know people take the **** out of me for this, but where is the Corporate Governance here and clear distinction between executive and non-executive control. 

 

They shouldn’t take the **** as this sort of thing is really serious.

Lack of governance mirrors lack of transparency currently at the Club and that is never good news.

These are a worrying set of accounts, both in terms of debt and presentation, but the inexperienced people in senior positions believe that masking this with a glossy front section that provides nothing of substance hides the issue.

Whilst this may work short term, the reality of the cash requirements will eventually speak for themselves.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The change to Macintyre Hudson is very strange but they are hardly obscure. They are one of the top 20 in the UK and an independent partner of Baker Tilly which is the 10th biggest accountancy firm in the world. 

But the partner who has signed the accounts appears to have no experience or expertise in football. 

I'm going to ask about this at the shareholders meeting. Despite not being obscure we should surely be looking at a top 4 company? 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


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

The change to Macintyre Hudson is very strange but they are hardly obscure. They are one of the top 20 in the UK and an independent partner of Baker Tilly which is the 10th biggest accountancy firm in the world. 

But the partner who has signed the accounts appears to have no experience or expertise in football. 

I'm going to ask about this at the shareholders meeting. Despite not being obscure we should surely be looking at a top 4 company? 

An independent partner of Baker Tilly still doesn’t compare to BDO. If the FD used to work there, then that (plus the poor quality of the accounts) does raise concerns with me, but then I am a pessimistic accountant!

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

I'm going to ask about this at the shareholders meeting. Despite not being obscure we should surely be looking at a top 4 company? 

If you could do this @dylanisabaddog I would be in your debt; i'm trying to rearrange things to attend the AGM but fear this may be impossible. I would use such a question as pre-cursor to question the lack of true corporate governance more broadly, using the non-existence of a formally appointed Chair and my example of "married couples" in positions of control as evidence.  I expect even if I did, the same line as presented at the EGM would be spun, but if we can link it to a general lack of confidence in the running of the club then with the Milwaukee crew waiting in the wings there might be a more positive response?

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

If you could do this @dylanisabaddog I would be in your debt; i'm trying to rearrange things to attend the AGM but fear this may be impossible. I would use such a question as pre-cursor to question the lack of true corporate governance more broadly, using the non-existence of a formally appointed Chair and my example of "married couples" in positions of control as evidence.  I expect even if I did, the same line as presented at the EGM would be spun, but if we can link it to a general lack of confidence in the running of the club then with the Milwaukee crew waiting in the wings there might be a more positive response?

This will all end if Milwaukee make us famous. If I was you I'd make a real effort to get here to ask your questions in November. It could be the last chance you ever get.

Edited by nutty nigel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, nutty nigel said:

This will all end if Milwaukee make us famous. If I was you I'd make a real effort to get here to ask your questions in November. It could be the last chance you ever get.

In every good joke my brother…..

The arrival of Milwaukee may be part of a wider recognition that the maths is against us with our current parameters - however well we manage the marginal sporting gains. 

These realities ‘cost us’ the Faustian bargain to sell Buendia, it forced Webber’s hand emotionally-ambitionally(sic)-sportingly to spear Farke, when our limits and ceilings were reached despite his best efforts, not because of them.

To keep Buendia risked too much and would have prevented the purchase of tomorrow’s jewels (as was believed in at the time), to retain Farke was to embrace the ‘little old Norwich’ that it was Webber raison d’être to replace. 

And yet…..and yet…..

Farke was historically successfully. The football was Guardiola-lite beautiful and the colosseum was entertained….

Buendia would not have needed to be sold with different financial parameters. The remaining players would not have had their sporting joie-de-vivre momentum punctured, the limited farm would not have been bet on half-way house ‘maybe tomorrows’ and ‘a bit better than we already haves’. 

So we end up in Milwaukee with a kind of resigned wistfulness. We got so excited that we could, we never asked if we should.

Parma 

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

In every good joke my brother…..

The arrival of Milwaukee may be part of a wider recognition that the maths is against us with our current parameters - however well we manage the marginal sporting gains. 

These realities ‘cost us’ the Faustian bargain to sell Buendia, it forced Webber’s hand emotionally-ambitionally(sic)-sportingly to spear Farke, when our limits and ceilings were reached despite his best efforts, not because of them.

To keep Buendia risked too much and would have prevented the purchase of tomorrow’s jewels (as was believed in at the time), to retain Farke was to embrace the ‘little old Norwich’ that it was Webber raison d’être to replace. 

And yet…..and yet…..

Farke was historically successfully. The football was Guardiola-lite beautiful and the colosseum was entertained….

Buendia would not have needed to be sold with different financial parameters. The remaining players would not have had their sporting joie-de-vivre momentum punctured, the limited farm would not have been bet on half-way house ‘maybe tomorrows’ and ‘a bit better than we already haves’. 

So we end up in Milwaukee with a kind of resigned wistfulness. We got so excited that we could, we never asked if we should.

Parma 

Indeed Parma.

Events happen when they happen. What if Alan Bowkett had discovered Milwaukee? Would we ever have had Farke or Emi? Perhaps we'd have had better? Perhaps not? We can only wonder.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is perhaps a little strange that BDO and Norwich have parted ways. But it's not entirely unusual to change audit firms. Norwich had previously done so, moving from Grant Thornton to BDO. It might be the case the MHA Macintyre Hudson were a significantly cheaper option or maybe BDO were the ones who wanted to end the engagement. It should be noted that the former statutory auditor from BDO, Ian Clayden, is the auditor for several football and sports clubs. I can't recall stumbling across MHA auditing a football club. A Big 4 firm would probably be prohibitively expensive for Norwich - it's most only the 'top' teams that use one of the Big 4 (with a few exceptions). I'm not particularly concerned with Anthony Richens' prior employment with MHA - it was nearly 10 years ago.

The little mistakes in the accounts seem impervious to correction. Various of them have persisted for some years. As far as I can tell, this year's accounts cast, which hasn't always been the case historically... These errors and lack of attention to detail bled into the EGM a month or so ago. It's a shame the corrections the club were forced to make hasn't led to them double checking things.

On that subject, it's a shame that the post-balance sheet events note is rather vague. It would suggest Mr Attanasio has bought all of Mr Foulger's shares - but it's not clear if those shares are only the ones Mr Foulger directly holds or all the shares he effectively controls. The note also says that the C shares were allotted as at the date of the accounts 29 September. [The allotment has not yet been filed at Companies House.]

I agree on the corporate governance issues. This has been a problem for many years going back to when Ed Balls as Chair was asked to perform executive functions. It's not best practice. But I can't see the club doing anything about it unfortunately. As Nutty hints, if Mr Attanasio completes a takeover then we might end up looking at the current level of transparency with rose tinted spectacles.

  • Like 3

Share this post


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

This will all end if Milwaukee make us famous. If I was you I'd make a real effort to get here to ask your questions in November. It could be the last chance you ever get.

Perhaps bring it on on both counts?

The Club's non-executive directors have been very vocal in recent years about running a debt-free club and the likes of Bury etc. then suddenly we have £46 million debt and a change of auditor presumably because the auditor approved at the last AGM would have insisted on a more robust 'Going Concern' declaration. 

As for the Executive Director the Accounting entry suggests she alone is earning around £700k a year compared to only around £100k a year for Neil Doncaster who effectively was doing the job of both Webbers around 13 years ago.

Despite this the Club cannot come up with any initiative to ensure greater participation of younger or newer supporters within the shareholder initiative or always ensure that all shareholders within the same classification are treated equally.

Given £46 million debt, financial returns on the shares could well be modest but unless shareholding is to take on principles of full participation, response and inclusiveness there really is no point. 

Accept that Attanassio is a gamble in terms of responsiveness to fans and/or success. What reason is left not to take that gamble.

Share this post


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

Perhaps bring it on on both counts?

The Club's non-executive directors have been very vocal in recent years about running a debt-free club and the likes of Bury etc. then suddenly we have £46 million debt and a change of auditor presumably because the auditor approved at the last AGM would have insisted on a more robust 'Going Concern' declaration. 

As for the Executive Director the Accounting entry suggests she alone is earning around £700k a year compared to only around £100k a year for Neil Doncaster who effectively was doing the job of both Webbers around 13 years ago.

Despite this the Club cannot come up with any initiative to ensure greater participation of younger or newer supporters within the shareholder initiative or always ensure that all shareholders within the same classification are treated equally.

Given £46 million debt, financial returns on the shares could well be modest but unless shareholding is to take on principles of full participation, response and inclusiveness there really is no point. 

Accept that Attanassio is a gamble in terms of responsiveness to fans and/or success. What reason is left not to take that gamble.

That's a very selfish attitude to take. I don't think you understand what a hole that will leave in the lives of the FPAs on here. Imagine not being able to "know best" and only having the manager and Kenny to moan about.

And I'll miss the AGMs. I will particularly miss seeing how high a few people can get their hands when board members are up for re-election. One year when MWJ was up for re-election I saw a hand so high I'm sure the guy must have been standing on his chair...

 

Share this post


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

That's a very selfish attitude to take. I don't think you understand what a hole that will leave in the lives of the FPAs on here. Imagine not being able to "know best" and only having the manager and Kenny to moan about.

And I'll miss the AGMs. I will particularly miss seeing how high a few people can get their hands when board members are up for re-election. One year when MWJ was up for re-election I saw a hand so high I'm sure the guy must have been standing on his chair...

 

Given that some people rather like Boris Johnson on the grounds that he is a real life Spitting Image and brings some humour into their lives, I take your point about my selfishness.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, shefcanary said:

If you could do this @dylanisabaddog I would be in your debt; i'm trying to rearrange things to attend the AGM but fear this may be impossible. I would use such a question as pre-cursor to question the lack of true corporate governance more broadly, using the non-existence of a formally appointed Chair and my example of "married couples" in positions of control as evidence.  I expect even if I did, the same line as presented at the EGM would be spun, but if we can link it to a general lack of confidence in the running of the club then with the Milwaukee crew waiting in the wings there might be a more positive response?

Is it best to submit a written question in advance? In general I would think so as it gives them preparation time especially this year given Attanassio's presence.

That said I did it last year and I wasn't entirely clear whether my question was addressed as possibly it was amalgamated with others as part of a general theme but in some respects lost the nuance.

The best solution would be if the question could be submitted in advance then the individual could read it out on the night but they haven't got there.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 19/10/2022 at 10:02, Davidlingfield said:

Sadly, this is indicative of a shoddy set of accounts, masked by glossy front pages.

Notes 18 and 19 are poor - how can a “short term” loan be > 1 year and it should be clearer that the wording in 19 also covers amounts in note 18.

The “short term loan” is incorrectly merged with “Other loans” in note 19 too.

As a chartered accountant, I personally would be embarrassed if these were my accounts.

I also note a change of auditors to an obscure firm, which is a red flag.

 

Another interesting issue here is the last line entry for 'Other Loans' in Note 18 and the description in the paragraph below it.

This seems to imply that a good proportion of the Bond settlements are still outstanding in which case why were many settled and others not?

Whilst the interest is claimed to be NIL the movement in year at this Note shows only £27K whilst the Cash Flow Statement shows bond repayments in year of £204k. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, essex canary said:

Is it best to submit a written question in advance? In general I would think so as it gives them preparation time especially this year given Attanassio's presence.

That said I did it last year and I wasn't entirely clear whether my question was addressed as possibly it was amalgamated with others as part of a general theme but in some respects lost the nuance.

The best solution would be if the question could be submitted in advance then the individual could read it out on the night but they haven't got there.

 

The nuance being your own personal agenda perhaps? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, CANARYKING said:

Can someone explain why this £66m loan has suddenly appeared and has to be paid back at end of season 

Norwich have - as many other clubs do - in effect taken out a mortgage on future premier receipts (the parachute payments).

Instead of waiting for that cash to arrive - on a date proscribed by the PL - they have got most of it in cash now from a finance house that will make a percentage return on the process. 

This is reasonably standard practice in Football. It can either be used to front load a huge investment upon promotion, or to - in many ways quite prudently - ensure a decent, even and positive cash flow when costs are high, then simply tighten belts later (upon relegation) when income takes a dramatic drop.

This is the real answer to ‘where’s the money gorn Neil?’….in that the amounts talked about for transfers - out as well as in - do not come in on the day the Sun writes the headline figure (which may or may not include contingencies, spread payments, bonuses et al). 

Cash and profits and costs and transfer receipts and transfer spends and timings of all of those in-out is a moving feast that has to be managed within your financial limits (your cash available, your overdraft facility, your access to more shareholder funds).

It is a perfectly conceivable scenario to run out of cash having sold your best player the day before for a fortune. It depends what cash you had in hand before, what your costs and debts are and when you’re going to get the money for your star you just sold. 

Norwich have ‘borrowed’ in advance on monies they are sure of getting tomorrow, next month or next year (s).

Parma 

post script: I think it should be pointed out - if there is any doubt or confusion - that Norwich have not (on the surface) done what Leeds allegedly did some years ago and borrowed against future (possible) gate receipts or  (possible) success. Nor have they ‘done a Barcelona’ and sold shares-income streams from parts of their brand-business. 

 

Edited by Parma Ham's gone mouldy
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


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

Norwich have - as many other clubs do - in effect taken out a mortgage on future premier receipts (the parachute payments).

Instead of waiting for that cash to arrive - on a date proscribed by the PL - they have got most of it in cash now from a finance house that will make a percentage return on the process. 

This is reasonably standard practice in Football. It can either be used to front load a huge investment upon promotion, or to - in many ways quite prudently - ensure a decent, even and positive cash flow when costs are high, then simply tighten belts later (upon relegation) when income takes a dramatic drop.

This is the real answer to ‘where’s the money gorn Neil?’….in that the amounts talked about for transfers - out as well as in - do not come in on the day the Sun writes the headline figure (which may or may not include contingencies, spread payments, bonuses et al). 

Cash and profits and costs and transfer receipts and transfer spends and timings of all of those in-out is a moving feast that has to be managed within your financial limits (your cash available, your overdraft facility, your access to more shareholder funds).

It is a perfectly conceivable scenario to run out of cash having sold your best player the day before for a fortune. It depends what cash you had in hand before, what your costs and debts are and when you’re going to get the money for your star you just sold. 

Norwich have ‘borrowed’ in advance on monies they are sure of getting tomorrow, next month or next year (s).

Parma 

post script: I think it should be pointed out - if there is any doubt or confusion - that Norwich have not (on the surface) done what Leeds allegedly did some years ago and borrowed against future (possible) gate receipts or  (possible) success. Nor have they ‘done a Barcelona’ and sold shares-income streams from parts of their brand-business. 

 

Thanks 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For those interested in an external perspective, you can hear Kieran Maguire's thoughts on today's Price of Football podcast, roughly 29 to 30 minutes in. He even refers to perusing a Norwich message board to see the thoughts of Norwich fans... 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


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

Thanks 

 The wages overhang from having players on Premier League contract rates must still be paid out monthly so still a little perplexing why so much is required upfront.

Share this post


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

 The wages overhang from having players on Premier League contract rates must still be paid out monthly so still a little perplexing why so much is required upfront.

It was an influx of approx £41m of cash. This is almost exactly the amount of cash paid out last year for transfers (signings from last year and previous years). Despite not selling any players for significant sums in the accounting period covered, the club received about £27m in cash for transferred out players, no doubt Buendia but also sales from previous years. That cash covers most of the operating loss and working capital movements. Overall, the club had a cash out flow of around £11m, leaving £5m in the bank. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


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

It was an influx of approx £41m of cash. This is almost exactly the amount of cash paid out last year for transfers (signings from last year and previous years). Despite not selling any players for significant sums in the accounting period covered, the club received about £27m in cash for transferred out players, no doubt Buendia but also sales from previous years. That cash covers most of the operating loss and working capital movements. Overall, the club had a cash out flow of around £11m, leaving £5m in the bank. 

One reasonably plausible scenario would be that whilst the Buendia sale was made more attractive by a high early cash payment, the remaining contingencies are on much more delayed cash terms. 

It might also be - I’m afraid - that any or all of the Rashica-Tzolis-Sargent deals that represented a comparatively huge investment by Norwich standards (plus the painful acceptance of a sale  of a rare Norwich weapon), were also negotiated at higher up-front cash than usual in order to get them over the line. 

Even Giannoulis and Gibson were quite big investments - overtly designed and proposed for Premier League football - which when added to Covid might square your maths with the sporting reality @MrBunce

Parma 

 

Edited by Parma Ham's gone mouldy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Parma Ham's gone mouldy said:

One reasonably plausible scenario would be that whilst the Buendia sale was made more attractive by a high early cash payment, the remaining contingencies are on much more delayed cash terms. 

It might also be - I’m afraid - that any or all of the Rashica-Tzolis-Sargent deals that represented a comparatively huge investment by Norwich standards (plus the painful acceptance of a sale  of a rare Norwich weapon), were also negotiated at higher up-front cash than usual in order to get them over the line. 

Even Giannoulis and Gibson were quite big investments - overtly designed and proposed for Premier League football - which when added to Covid might square your maths with the sporting reality @MrBunce

Parma 

 

Oh to see the cash flow forecasts that supported the short term loans! But that's never going to happen ... 🙁

Share this post


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

Oh to see the cash flow forecasts that supported the short term loans! But that's never going to happen ... 🙁

As mentioned before, the club has recruited multiple forecasters in recent times.

There will be a huge number of ‘what if’ spreadsheets that are here-and-now, soon, quite soon, next window, multiple windows, with Pukki, without Pukki, If Omobamidele sold, If Omobamidele sold for x squared, if Max injured to contract end, who replaces who, what they might costs, how it might be paid, what wages they might get, what bonuses, all multiplied by ‘events dear boy, events’…

….thus the short terms loans are supported  by a vast array of variable ever-moving forecasts. Keeping on top of this - with the Head Coach popping his head round every 5 minutes saying ‘I’ve got my old mate x on the phone, he says we can have y in January if we do z and pay z2 via z3 terms…’ - is thus a full time job for multiple people. 

The answer therefore to ‘Can we buy x?’ is ‘’if we do y’….’’which changes z’ and we forecast all over again….

Aah the forecasting joy of ‘self-funding’ at the eternal breadline…

Parma  

Edited by Parma Ham's gone mouldy
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


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

As mentioned before, the club has recruited multiple forecasters in recent times.

There will be a huge number of ‘what if’ spreadsheets that are here-and-now, soon, quite soon, next window, multiple windows, with Pukki, without Pukki, If Omobamidele sold, If Omobamidele sold for x squared, if Max injured to contract end, who replaces who, what they might costs, how it might be paid, what wages they might get, what bonuses, all multiplied by ‘events dear boy, events’…

….thus the short terms loans are supported  by a vast array of variable ever-moving forecasts. Keeping on top of this - with the Head Coach popping his head round every 5 minutes saying ‘I’ve got my old mate x on the phone, he says we can have y in January if we do z and pay z2 via z3 terms…’ - is thus a full time job for multiple people. 

The answer therefore to ‘Can we buy x?’ is ‘’if we do y’….’’which changes z’ and we forecast all over again….

Aah the forecasting joy of ‘self-funding’ at the eternal breadline…

Parma  

I know all that Parma, I just want to review and tweak them myself. It's what I did at work. I "what if"'d for hours on lots of my assignments, they used to have to promise me gallons of beer just to drag me away from my PC. I love all that stuff, get lost in spreadsheets.....

As for Xg and Xga ❤️

🤣🤣🤣🤣

  • Haha 1

Share this post


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

I know all that Parma, I just want to review and tweak them myself. It's what I did at work. I "what if"'d for hours on lots of my assignments, they used to have to promise me gallons of beer just to drag me away from my PC. I love all that stuff, get lost in spreadsheets.....

As for Xg and Xga ❤️

🤣🤣🤣🤣

Xg and xga quite possibly keep many people employed at Carrow road and  colney. It's all beyond me but I've heard at supporters meetings  about the modelling if x, y or z happens. Parma nails it as usual. It's not just which possibilities depending on which league we end up in but also which players will be here.

Same with the football stats and xg. I was fortunate enough to spend a day at Colney in 2008. One of the stats guys showed me the various stats they study for the game just gone and the one coming up. There was waaayyyy too much for me to take in then. Now, 14 years later with Webber determined that we should explore every advantage I should imagine there's a huge team analysing stats including xg.

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


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

Xg and xga quite possibly keep many people employed at Carrow road and  colney. It's all beyond me but I've heard at supporters meetings  about the modelling if x, y or z happens. Parma nails it as usual. It's not just which possibilities depending on which league we end up in but also which players will be here.

Same with the football stats and xg. I was fortunate enough to spend a day at Colney in 2008. One of the stats guys showed me the various stats they study for the game just gone and the one coming up. There was waaayyyy too much for me to take in then. Now, 14 years later with Webber determined that we should explore every advantage I should imagine there's a huge team analysing stats including xg.

 

Yep Nutty, you have the financial modelling team and a team of football analysts at Norwich now. That's conservatively about 10 people at the club who spend all day staring at loads of data trying to make sense of it all. It worries me however that at the top of the club there may be Truss-like people who ignore it all and do whatever they want rather than taking note of what the experts and us fans say. 

🤔😵💫

Share this post


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

Yep Nutty, you have the financial modelling team and a team of football analysts at Norwich now. That's conservatively about 10 people at the club who spend all day staring at loads of data trying to make sense of it all. It worries me however that at the top of the club there may be Truss-like people who ignore it all and do whatever they want rather than taking note of what the experts and us fans say. 

🤔😵💫

I doubt they ignore it. They even had the away dressing room painted pink so we could win the league....

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...