Ricardo's report The AGM 2022

[Google Bot 3,270]

Just now, Mello Yello said:

I'm all for progress, but that's a step backwards and a travesty.... 

It's everywhere.  I sit in a restuarant or food outlet waiting to be served and then realise that everyone is doing it via an app while i'm waiting half hour for someone to take my order.

I'm also that idiot at the self service checkouts with the red lights spiralling around my head.

Even though i'd be without a job, there would be a wry smile if the system fell apart for a week and all of sudden people valued personal service once more. Ahhhh, i'm sounding like Chris Lakey and his articles on the club now! 🙂

[ricardo 7,384]

1 hour ago, keelansgrandad said:

Obviously many of the points raised mean little to us ex Pats. They are more parochial matters. But  Iwould ask those of you who attended what the atmosphere was like? Was anyone giving the BoD a bit of stick or was it more like a Philip Schofield interview.

I assume they do get information about this site and others and the temperature of the fans mood. But the AGM is the only point of face to face contact where pertinent questions can be asked. It would be difficult for the Chair to disallow a question.

I would describe the atmosphere as one of "Armed Neutrality"

There were big guns in attendance but nobody really wanted a call to battle stations.

[ricardo 7,384]

27 minutes ago, TheRock said:

Thanks for the write-up. Was there an explanation as to why?

Closing it was a step backwards, why would they want to turn potential business away?

The reason given was "efficiency"

if you want face to face you can still use the shop or the Fan Hub in the City.

[PurpleCanary 5,557]

2 hours ago, Google Bot said:

I don't know if you saw Conor talking about this with the TNC guys?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9QL08AsSrTs&t=400s

But he clarifies on there that they informed the club that the story was to go out, and it was "heavily implied" that the club didn't want them to run it.

That is essentially Southwell confirming what I posted, given that "heavily implied " is an understandably careful euphemism.

[Mello Yello 2,289]

10 minutes ago, Google Bot said:

It's everywhere.  I sit in a restuarant or food outlet waiting to be served and then realise that everyone is doing it via an app while i'm waiting half hour for someone to take my order.

I'm also that idiot at the self service checkouts with the red lights spiralling around my head.

Even though i'd be without a job, there would be a wry smile if the system fell apart for a week and all of sudden people valued personal service once more. Ahhhh, i'm sounding like Chris Lakey and his articles on the club now! 🙂

No cash, just card only gets my goat as well....Harrumph!!!...

[TheRock 170]

42 minutes ago, ricardo said:

The reason given was "efficiency"

if you want face to face you can still use the shop or the Fan Hub in the City.

I haven't heard of any good reviews from the Fan Hub so far lol.

There seemed to be alot of fobbing off, telling them to "telephone the ticket office as we can't do X from here".

[TheRock 170]

45 minutes ago, Mello Yello said:

No cash, just card only gets my goat as well....Harrumph!!!...

All business should always accept both methods for the benefit and equality of the customer. I do for mine.

On a spreadsheet they might save a few grand a year in cash collections and collations, but they will never know the true amount of sales they have lost and will coninute to lose through naively snubbing cash transactions.

...Not to mention businesses lose circa 2% of every card transaction due to card transaction service fees.

Edited November 11, 2022 by TheRock

[benchwarmer 625]

18 hours ago, Pyro Pete said:

That article reads like one of CC's threads on here citing Twitter as a source.

Daft of the club to even react to something so trivial.

My guess is there's more to it than that, and that 'mushroomgate' is a distraction.

Edited November 11, 2022 by benchwarmer

[ncfcstar 289]

22 minutes ago, TheRock said:

All business should always accept both methods for the benefit and equality of the customer. I do for mine.

On a spreadsheet they might save a few grand a year in cash collections and collations, but they will never know the true amount of sales they have lost and will coninute to lose through naively snubbing cash transactions.

...Not to mention businesses lose circa 2% of every card transaction due to card transaction service fees.

I'm sure you will also be aware that businesses with high volumes and values of card transactions will also be able to negotiate preferential transaction fees with card providers.

I sincerely doubt the club will have made the decision to go cashless without fully investigating the impact both on customers and financially.  The fact they've gone cashless suggests that their cash transactions counted for a v low % of all transactions they processed.  It also, in theory, allows for the smooth running of queues and therefore more transactions taking place.

The same applies to the ticket office being closed, if only a handful of people are using it then why would the club continue to operate something which only benefits a dwindling amount of people?  Especially when you can still talk face to face with someone in both the club shop at the ground and the fan hub in the city centre.

[TIL 1010 4,737]

22 minutes ago, benchwarmer said:

My guess is that there's more to it than that, and that 'mushroomgate' is a distraction.

Mushroom gate as you call it happened at the end of October and this media standoff nonsense has been going on for months so as you say a distraction.

[ncfcstar 289]

19 minutes ago, TIL 1010 said:

Mushroom gate as you call it happened at the end of October and this media standoff nonsense has been going on for months so as you say a distraction.

On the other hand you could argue it's not a very sensible thing to publish when you are apparently trying to 'build bridges'.

[TIL 1010 4,737]

3 hours ago, A Load of Squit said:

The report from Ricardo and the live feed from WOTB last night make a good case for Tom Smith to become our new Chair.

We haven't had a Chair since Ed Balls stood down 4 years ago next month.

[GMF 736]

23 minutes ago, TIL 1010 said:

Mushroom gate as you call it happened at the end of October and this media standoff nonsense has been going on for months so as you say a distraction.

A person with a cynical mind might suggest that someone is still looking for excuses to continue this stand off? 

[daly 501]

1 hour ago, Mello Yello said:

No cash, just card only gets my goat as well....Harrumph!!!...

Or if your a foreign national and only take cash   

[A Load of Squit 5,161]

19 minutes ago, TIL 1010 said:

We haven't had a Chair since Ed Balls stood down 4 years ago next month.

That's why I said 'new'.

[TIL 1010 4,737]

24 minutes ago, A Load of Squit said:

That's why I said 'new'.

Do you think we need one then as we are now run by an Executive committee since the days of 2018 ?

[A Load of Squit 5,161]

9 minutes ago, TIL 1010 said:

Do you think we need one then as we are now run by an Executive committee since the days of 2018 ?

I've no idea but if we did have a new Chair Tom would be a good choice as he showed last night.

[The Real Buh 3,432]

17 hours ago, ricardo said:

I arrived fairly early tonight and my old friend Roger Smith had already bagged a couple of seats in a nice position. Before proceedings began I had a nice chat with respected Pinkun poster Myra Hawtree, one of the very few who have been supporting this club longer than me. The surprise of the night was to see Mark Attanasio walk in with Delia, something I don't think any of us expected.

We kicked off with the now customary slick video, nice but I don't know what it really adds. Then quickly got on with the formal business where all resolutions passed on a show of hands. Tom Smith was chairing tonight and I thought he did it in a very professional manner and later on handled a few slightly difficult moments quite well.

On to the Q and A where the first question was obviously the rift between the club and the local media. Zoe explained how the arrangement worked in the past and how in her opinion the press had made unwarranted personal attacks on members of staff. The comparison of Dean Smith to rotting mushrooms was mentioned. There was a plea from the floor to the effect that the relationship needed to be healed which received affirmative applause.👍

There was criticism of Stuart Webbers recruitment and the man himself had the courage to stand up and admit mistakes were his responsibility. He also explained the difficulty of recruiting established Premier players when we had to include a 60% wage reduction if we were relegated. I expect we all wished it were different but wishing won't make it so.

The club are looking in to complaints about the new floodlights but the lumination is now controlled by what the broadcasters wanted rather than what suits spectators. However they hoped to make some changes.

For those who want the ticket office to reopen for face to face purchases, hard luck, its not going to happen.

Tom Smith explained that an expletitive email had been submitted by an unnamed person re the flying of the Pride flag. He rightly stated that the club were totally committed to equality and this again was received with affirmative applause.👍

A question was then asked of Mark Attanasio. There were thanks for his 10 million quid but reservations re the conditions which could see him getting his money back with interest if things didn't go as planned. I was quite impressed with his fullsome relpy and his statement that he was not here to take advantage of the club and supporters. Only time will tell us how this works out.

There were questions on fan engagement, betting companies as sponsors, season ticket prices etc and my friend Roger Smith asked the same question he did 20 years ago when we were all hoping for stadium enlargement. Apparantly there is still nothing concrete but the same firm of architects that did Liverpools enlargement are reporting on the feasibility of building over the top of the present main stand. I still expect that I will be long dead before this comes to pass.

Stuart Webber said a few words about his close relationship with Daniel Farke and explained why he felt we needed to go in a different direction. The intimation was that being pretty wasn't enough and that we would see a tougher approach from now on from the manager and players.

Questions were asked as to why Dean Smith was not in attendance and Zoe had to be corrected that this was not normal practice. To my recollection the manager has always been there to field football related questions, certainly since AGM's have been held in the Norfolk Lounge.

Finally there was another plea for peace with the local press from another old guy who used to read the EDP in the outside bog with a candle.

Thats about all I can remember.

Excellent report

I can only imagine you will be banned immediately from the ground for daring to share it with anybody else

[Canary Wundaboy 1,359]

7 hours ago, Parma Ham's gone mouldy said:

Mark Attanasio spoke well. The detail of what he said was interesting and - in my view - at huge counterpoint to the style and content others used and have used in the past. 

He said very clearly ‘it is not about training grounds’ and that ‘the fans don’t want to hear about that’ . He repeated on 3 or four occasions that it was ‘about winning’ …‘about winning football’ …’winning’.

Music to my ears. Time for Delia and MWJ to move aside and let someone serious about success push us to the next level.

[Mello Yello 2,289]

Surely we the supporters are the actual mushrooms?....Kept in the dark and fed a load o' bullsh!t....

[The Real Buh 3,432]

Just now, Mello Yello said:

Surely we the supporters are the actual mushrooms?....Kept in the dark and fed a load o' bullsh!t....

If mushrooms are blamed for everything then it’s a total fit

[Capt. Pants 4,225]

1 hour ago, Canary Wundaboy said:

Music to my ears. Time for Delia and MWJ to move aside and let someone serious about success push us to the next level.

The flipside to that is that I suspect the more 'corporate' NCFC with the harder edge will become the norm. I'm not sure some are ready for that.

[nutty nigel 7,528]

4 hours ago, ricardo said:

I would describe the atmosphere as one of "Armed Neutrality"

There were big guns in attendance but nobody really wanted a call to battle stations.

Pretty much this Rickyyyyy👍

Although the guy who had the little spat with Webber loaded his question by implying that Alice Piper was from North  Korea...  (Or something like that🙃)

A couple more things I remember...

Webber reminded us that the original bed sheet went to Brentford and said Farke Out. He also seemed genuine about his relationship with Daniel but pointed to 6 wins in 49 pl games. Also said that if we get back to the PL the football won't be so 'pretty'. 

Zoe Webber explained about the lights. I don't really understand it but it seemed to be something like Lux values in mid-air that were demanded by sky TV. Apparently it's not about lighting at pitch level. Sorry I can't be more explicit but I thought Lux was a soap.

 

[nutty nigel 7,528]

8 hours ago, Parma Ham's gone mouldy said:

 

post script: sorry I missed you @nutty nigel, had other directors with me and they had to shoot off

 

I did look out for you after the meeting but it was quite busy. Love that there were so many PUPs dotted around the room🙃💛⚽💚

 

[vos 155]

18 hours ago, repman said:

I don't have any problem with Dean Smith not being there, obviously it has been done in the past but when we have a sporting director like Webber in place he represents the on pitch arm of the club, like managers previously would have.

The Club exists because it has a product to sell i.e. football. Whilst I understand the role of the sporting director in my opinion the Manager/Head Coach has the primary role in maintaining the quality of the product. He should have been there to field questions as Webber is mainly concerned with purchasing players. To emphasise my point does anyone know the names of any other sporting directors !!!  It was fairly obvious that the new style corporate governance set and managed the Agenda, hence Dean was sheltered from criticism and the owners remained silent. To be fair Tom chaired the meeting very well but again a sticky subject - finance - was not mentioned. We have entered a new era.

[ricardo 7,384]

23 minutes ago, nutty nigel said:

 

Zoe Webber explained about the lights. I don't really understand it but it seemed to be something like Lux values in mid-air that were demanded by sky TV. Apparently it's not about lighting at pitch level. Sorry I can't be more explicit but I thought Lux was a soap.

 

You might be right. Perhaps the Lux makes the TV image looks "washed out"😉

[Google Bot 3,270]

1 minute ago, ricardo said:

Perhaps the Lux makes the TV image looks "washed out"😉

I've seen Carra and Neville talk some bo-Lux on a Monday night, perhaps they're put out to feed from the mid-air after matches?

[Mello Yello 2,289]

If Lux could kill....

[Parma Ham's gone mouldy 2,219]

10 hours ago, sonyc said:

Thank you Parma (and Ricardo) for your long replies. I'm disappointed by the club's stance on the local media and have posted that it is just another divisive thing, when we need to be a united club (which includes everyone) to be successful. That aside, what I'm most interested in is the playing side of course and what strategy underpins that? Am I right in thinking that the self funding model appears now quietly being put out into the long grass? A good idea at the time but failed on two testings? What then is our aim? I'm not sure if it's major investment (understanding the win/win/win message of course) or changing our style (clearly intimated) or I wonder if it might mean changing the management/coaching more often perhaps (someone to maximise what weapons we have, to reference your often-used description) Parma? 

If our finances cannot compete then what do we do? You raise a dilemma in the winning mantra by MA. In fact it feels a bit of a contradiction. We've got to win but our understanding is that we cannot compete financially.

I'm concluding therefore it's a mix of hope that we can play above our 'level' with some smaller investment whilst not overreaching. Will be remain dependent on player sales? I'm guessing so but seems this wasn't asked? MA is the key isn't he? More than Webber? And whilst a prickly question, I wonder if someone might have asked him about his personal strategy? He was linked with Chelsea, he has climbing ambitions, he stated he can give at least 90%. Is his plan joined to Zoe's? They are a team but might she be with us longer? I doubt it personally but don't know. If he leaves in 2023 would Zoe leave too? With Delia and WynnJones getting on too (retiring?) there is massive change ahead? A seamless transfer to Tom Smith I assume?

Lots of questions still! But I'm very grateful to everyone's accounts on here. I'm someone always with lots of questions. Apologies for that. And I also know that often there aren't any.

 

You are right on a number of these points @sonyc

‘

Zoe was surprisingly honest - perhaps a little put on the spot by Tom? (Which seems strange with pre-submitted questions) - when asked about whether the introduction and involvement of Mark Attanasio was an acceptance that the ceiling of the current self-sustaining model had been reached. 

She stated really quite clearly that there was now a more than tacit acceptance that Premier clubs  had basically all moved away from us. Not just those at the top end, but the vast body of the Premier. That our finances simply could not compete.’
 

Checking further in our notes, there were further direct quotes from Zoe as follows :

There was ‘no denying’ the sporting ceiling had been reached under the current sustainable model. The Premier League was ‘was beyond’ our capacity and that it was ‘too challenging’. 

In normal Board meetings we would naturally be a little more forensic at that point and ask whether and how that admission synchs with the presentation of the Annual Report 2022 which has Premier central to everything. If that is not achievable are the resources, parameters and capabilities of the company commensurate with its stated aims and mission statement?
 

If you want my clear opinion on this - particularly those who think it is ‘just business talk’ - it is precisely this lack of self-awareness and false self image that leads to sales of Buendias and over belief in Billy Gilmours ‘popping it around like Pirlo’.

Webber acknowledged this and took responsibility. Though of course he is in a job at Norwich and Farke isn’t. 

Webber described the sporting outcome of last season as a ‘disaster’….’not good enough’ ..and that they now have to face the ‘truth’

He didn’t want acknowledge any such ‘truth’ pre-season when almost 100% of football people I knew said proctor hoc that the approach was disastrous (yes including selling Buendia which he was a driver of, so other signings could be made, that he desperately wanted. A clear commercial choice. A case against Buendia was then built into a temple), that it would be destructive for momentum, team spirit and would negate the better players we had (Pukki and Cantwell were the two that pros said would suffer most).

We couldn’t help noting that that noise had been defiantly ignored, though the noise about ‘mushrooms’ could now somehow not be ignored. That is not good enough at Board level in my view. I believe I noted in Tom Smith’s mannerisms and responses that he wasn’t necessarily terribly impressed by it all either. Do something then my Prince. 
 

Stuart defensively said about his  signings that  …‘not every player was bad’…that they were ‘not too far off’ …before relenting. He sacked Daniel because of 6 wins out of 50 (I thought first one was a write off?) and that ‘the swing to Brentford was too far’…why aren’t we Brentford eh @nutty nigel ?…

He said next time we would be ‘more pragmatic…not so pretty…do things differently..’ . Then - I suppose it was intended as proof- he said how we had now only conceded 2 set piece goals against (2nd tier) and had to be ‘harder to beat’ for the top level. That we would need to sign ‘different types of players’ 

The problem with that is obvious. If you cannot sign players good enough upon promotion, why and how will you be able to build with them in the championship?

If you are just an ersatz Premier team in the second tier, aren’t you then just like everyone else? Why would that get you 97 points? It certainly won’t see Guardiola in the stands (which might get you tomorrow’s Man City reserves who would finish mid-table premier league though). 

Do different then? I would argue that was Farke, not pragmatism Premier  parodies.

Stuart referenced the £400m invested by Brighton (and also said that Forest might come good). I doubt that was intended for the quiet Delia’s ears. 

Truthfully we expected others to follow up the ‘Attanasio investment..acknowledgement self-sustaining model ceiling reached’ with a direct question on his intention-ambition-desire-option to effect a takeover of the club. It was the obvious sequitur. 

Though such obvious business-like questions appear not be ‘the flavour’ of Norwich City AGMs which we would suggest actually does the club-Company-Board no favours. 

There is some merit in leaving out managers from proceedings if - and only if - shareholders can ask the questions that hold decision-making, errors and future plans to more professional account. 
 

If people want 5 minutes of fame to talk about string and ceiling wax, that will set the tone and culture of these meetings. Whilst Zoe squirmed at being given some meaningful questions (why the surprise when they were pre-submitted? Nothing wrong with a board prepping individual members to sing a prepared hymn sheet, provided questions are forensic and poignant), much of the proceedings would be better suited to a different context. Perhaps this is what the club is trying to achieve by leaving out the managers (though I remember Farke speaking fantastically well - and commercially - at the only other one I attended). 

Mark Attanasio flew over to be here. He sat patiently, politely and was engaged. He spoke well, fluently and - we sensed - would have loved to have been asked more, though he wasn’t about to scene-steal unless the door opened freely. A chance missed. 

He is very different to what we have. I would suspect that his appointment is more to do with the horrible last 2 premier campaigns that any real long-term planning, as I cannot believe there are not other Attanasios. In fact I know some. I can certainly believe that there weren’t any other Delia’s over the years. 

Mark Attanasio talked of ‘smart’ investments, of his £10m being ‘help’. That is a lovely corporate finance term for ‘sweetener’ that I hadn’t heard before. Nice and gentle. 
He talked of it as ‘a runway’ and any further plans were airy, we can ‘work it out’ he said. 

Any thought he might sit on his ‘loan’ and take the interest was rebuffed ‘I wouldn’t do anything to drain the club’ he said. Not worth the paper its written on, though a very clear public statement nevertheless. I believed him. He is doing his ‘internal due diligence’ now and I very much doubt it is for a fairly passive minority shareholding.

His words - as stated before - were very much at odds with the rather tired, defensive tone of others. ‘Winning’…’consistent winner’…’win’ is what it’s about he said. Now that is consistent with the Annual Report 2022. 

Change is coming. I think it’s probably time. 

We were only one Attanasio away from keeping Buendia, sweet-talking Skipp and - who knows? - even engaging an Eriksen. 

I think Attanasio  understands Weapons and ‘special teams’ pretty well. He might be what we need. I don’t for one second think he was Mr Right succession planning, though he might be Mr Right Now anyway. 

Our bed is cold, we are on the rebound, our selection standards have dropped, he smells nice, he has good manners, he has money and is keen. 

It is solving yesterday’s problems again, though I think of what my father says ‘it’s not love, it’s the commitment to love’

Parma 

Edited November 11, 2022 by Parma Ham's gone mouldy
Written on phone, corrected after

[sonyc 5,510]

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

You are right on a number of these points @sonyc

‘

Zoe was surprisingly honest - perhaps a little out on the spot by Tom? (Which seems strange with pre-submitted questions) - when asked about whether the introduction and involvement of Mark Attanasio was an acceptance that the ceiling of the current self-sustaining model had been reached. 

She stated really quite clearly that there wa now a more than tacit acceptance that Premier clubs  had basically all moved away from us. Not just those at the top end, but the vast body of the Premier. That our finances simply could not compete.’
 

Checking further in our notes, there were further direct quotes from Zoe as follows :

There was ‘no denying’ the sporting ceiling had been reached under the current sustainable model. The Premier League was ‘was beyond’ our capacity and that it was ‘too challenging’. 

In normal Board meetings we would naturally be a little more forensic at that point and ask whether and how that admission synchs with the presentation of the Annual Report 2022 which has Premier central to everything. If that is not achievable are the resources, parameters and capabilities of the company commensurate with its stated aims and mission statement. 
 

If you want my clear opinion on this - particularly those who think it is ‘just business talk’ - it is precisely this lack of self-awareness and false self image that leads to sales of Buendias and over belief in Billy Gilmours ‘popping it around like Pirlo’.

Webber acknowledged this and took responsibility. Though of course he is in a job at Norwich and Farke isn’t. 

Webber described the sporting outcome of last season as a ‘disaster’….’not good enough’ ..and that they now have to face the ‘truth’

He didn’t want acknowledge any such ‘truth’ pre-season when almost 100% of football people I knew said proctor hoc that the approach was disastrous (yes including selling Buendia which he was a driver of, so other signing could be made. A case against Buendia was built into a temple), that it would be destructive for momentum, team spirit and would negate the better players we had (Pukki and Cantwell were the two that pros said would suffer most).

We couldn’t help noting that that noise had been defiantly ignored, though the noise about ‘mushrooms’ could now somehow not be ignored. That is not good enough at Board level in my view. I believe I noted in Tom Smith’s mannerisms and responses that he wasn’t necessarily terribly impressed by it all either. Do something then my Prince. 
 

Stuart defensively said about his  signings that  …‘not every player was bad’…that they were ‘not to far off’ …before relenting. He sacked Daniel because of 6 wins out of 50 (I thought first one was a write off?) and that ‘the swing to Brentford was too far’…why aren’t we Brentford eh @nutty nigel ?…

He said next time we would be ‘more pragmatic…not so pretty…do things differently..’ . hell he said how we had now only concede lad 2 set piece goals against and had to be ‘harder to beat’ for the top level. That we would need to sign ‘different types of players’ 

The problem with that is obvious. If you cannot sign players good enough upon promotion, why and how will you be able to build with them in the championship?

If you are just an ersatz Premier team in the second tier, aren’t you then just like everyone else? Why would that get you 97 points? It certainly won’t see Guardiola in the stands (which might get you tomorrow’s Man City reserves who would finish mid-table premier league though). 

Do different then? I would argue that was Farke, not pragmatism Premier  parodies.

Stuart referenced the £400m invested by Brighton (and also said that Forest might come good). I doubt that was intended for the quiet Delia’s ears. 

Truthfully we expected others to follow up the ‘Attanasio investment..acknowledgement self-sustaining model ceiling reached’ with a direct question on his intention-ambition-desire-option to effect a takeover of the club. It was the obvious sequitur. 

Though such obvious business-like questions appear not be ‘the flavour’ of Norwich City AGMs which we would suggest actually does the club-Company-Board no favours. 

There is some merit in leaving out managers from proceedings if - and only if - shareholders can ask the questions that hold decision-making, errors and future plans to more professional account. 
 

If people want 5 minutes of fame to talk about string and ceiling wax, that will set the tone and culture of these meetings. Whilst Zoe squirmed at being given some meaningful questions (why the surprise when they were pre-submitted? Nothing wrong with a board prepping individual members to sing a prepared hymn sheet, provided questions are forensic and poignant). 

Mark Attanasio flew over to be here. He sat patiently, politely and was engaged. He spoke well, fluently and - we sensed - would have loved to have been asked more, though he wasn’t about to scene-steal unless the door opened freely. A chance missed. 

He is very different to what we have. I would suspect that his appointment is more to do with the horrible last 2 premier campaigns that any real long-term planning, as I cannot believe there are not other Attanasios. In fact I know some. I can certainly believe that there weren’t any other Delia’s over the years. 

Mark Attanasio talked of ‘smart’ investments, of his £10m being ‘help’. That is a lovely corporate finance term for ‘sweetener’ that I hadn’t heard before. Nice and gentle. 
He talked of it as ‘a runway’ and any further plans were airy, we can ‘work it out’ he said. 

Any thought he might sit on his ‘loan’ and take the interest was rebuffed ‘I wouldn’t do anything to drain the club’ he said. Not worth the paper its written on, though a very clear public statement nevertheless. I believed him. He is doing his ‘internal due diligence’ now and I very much doubt it for a fairly passive minority shareholding.

His words - as stated before - were very much at odds with the rather tired, defensive tone of others. ‘Winning’…’consistent winner’…’win’ is what it’s about he said. Now that is consistent with the Annual Report 2022. 

Change is coming. I think it’s probably time. 

We were only one Attanasio away from keeping Buendia, sweet-talking Skipp and - who knows? - even engaging an Eriksen. 

I think Attanasio  understands Weapons and ‘special teams’ pretty well. 

 

Parma 

Thank you so much for your full reply Parma. Most interesting. And I'm curious about the "runway" comment. Because you only taxi around the airfield for a short while.

I also completely agree that the board feels to me very tired (as well as increasingly defensive) and these things ALWAYS transfer / translate in any organisation to the operational side (and the team).

I sense in you a real frustration. You are closer to it (literally - for me as an exile) but I share the same misgivings. Then, I can be criticised rightly for tuning into such stuff as club board cultures.

I've been a big fan of Delia and Michael and have been so happy to have their stewardship but I'm now more than looking forward to some different ideas. Attanasio feels like a good fit for starters but as you say, it's not words but actions that matter. We need some new footballing strategy. I think Webber has run his course and that's really a feeling based on what he has said.

Finally, there's that old saying "be careful what you wish for"..... 3 points on Saturday will help - as ever 😂