There is a deep malaise at the club and it starts at the top

[Badger 2,412]

14 hours ago, essex canary said:

I would be happy to settle for 10 successive seasons either in the PL or promotion slots in the Championship

Not really an "established" PL side though is it? (Which was the point that I was responding to). It is the yo yo, without the hope of staying up, which the OP (along with many others) finds so dispiriting. I was interested in the perceived amount that a new donor has to shell out and for how long to been seen as viable.

 

[Badger 2,412]

19 hours ago, Midlands Yellow said:

I’d settle for not looking doomed by October if and when we find ourselves back in the top league. Southampton are poor but still have more points now compared to City’s last two no shows. 

I rather suspect that next time we go up this will be the case. I this that we have moved away from the pretence that we can "out-football" established PL clubs. I think that we will be more physical and pragmatic next time we are promoted. 

[GMF 757]

14 hours ago, wcorkcanary said:

Yes, anyone with 999 shares or less should benefit  as of 1/4/23 . 

Amusing as it would be, to some, once the 30% threshold is crossed, all shareholders must be treated equally. That would be interesting in the context of any benefits to existing shareholders, such as free memberships, or seats for life. They’d presumably have to end too! 

[Soldier on 168]

I’m a shareholder and don’t even remember taking or being offered free membership . Missed a trick there 

[wcorkcanary 4,338]

3 hours ago, GMF said:

Amusing as it would be, to some, once the 30% threshold is crossed, all shareholders must be treated equally. That would be interesting in the context of any benefits to existing shareholders, such as free memberships, or seats for life. They’d presumably have to end too! 

😉 yup, i get that's   not gonna happen (999 shares  bit)  .... i do wonder what  the wording  would have been about benefits for shareholders... the seats for  life bit in particular... Ethics likes to think they should be in perpituity . Surely they are for as long as the purchaser holds the required no.  of shares, a shame Ethics isnt gonna be around for a few days , as I'd love to hear his own special take on things. 

[TIL 1010 4,797]

2 minutes ago, wcorkcanary said:

😉 yup, i get that's   not gonna happen (999 shares  bit)  .... i do wonder what  the wording  would have been about benefits for shareholders... the seats for  life bit in particular... Ethics likes to think they should be in perpituity . Surely they are for as long as the purchaser holds the required no.  of shares, a shame Ethics isnt gonna be around for a few days , as I'd love to hear his own special take on things. 

You obviously have not been paying attention as he is both lurking and posting.

[GMF 757]

3 minutes ago, wcorkcanary said:

😉 yup, i get that's   not gonna happen (999 shares  bit)  .... i do wonder what  the wording  would have been about benefits for shareholders... the seats for  life bit in particular... Ethics likes to think they should be in perpituity . Surely they are for as long as the purchaser holds the required no.  of shares, a shame Ethics isnt gonna be around for a few days , as I'd love to hear his own special take on things. 

Interesting (hypothetical, for the moment) question, as once the shares are acquired, any benefits disappear. You can imagine someone asking, but what about my “benefits?”, to which the logical answer is that all shareholders should be treated equally. Cue much gnashing of teeth, probably! 

[GMF 757]

4 minutes ago, TIL 1010 said:

You obviously have not been paying attention as he is both lurking and posting.

If only there had been holiday wifi about when the bond issue was launched…. 

[wcorkcanary 4,338]

18 minutes ago, TIL 1010 said:

You obviously have not been paying attention as he is both lurking and posting.

I clearly haven't, logged on and saw GMEffO had quoted me , replied and sat down  to lunch after my mornings work. I could have sworn Ethics said he was off for a bit, but do recall him mentioning delays....maybe he got his dates/times/ prices/airports  muddled...he has form you know.

Always banging on about transparency etc then getting his facts wrong( or very skewed) half the time.

[Soldier on 168]

Attanassio Junior enjoyed our win 

 

[Tetteys Jig 830]

The malaise is still clear!

[Capt. Pants 4,278]

12 minutes ago, Tetteys Jig said:

The malaise is still clear!

Yeah I'm starting to see it now.

[Midlands Yellow 4,082]

Time to wake up folks, we are ****. 

[essex canary 506]

On 07/04/2023 at 10:15, GMF said:

Amusing as it would be, to some, once the 30% threshold is crossed, all shareholders must be treated equally. That would be interesting in the context of any benefits to existing shareholders, such as free memberships, or seats for life. They’d presumably have to end too! 

Pity our Club doesn't think that all shareholders should be treated equally all the time. Sarah Foulger's inheritance being a clear case. Probably a good time to exit following 6 successive wins under Deano. The contempt for ordinary supporters knows no bounds.

[GMF 757]

39 minutes ago, essex canary said:

Pity our Club doesn't think that all shareholders should be treated equally all the time. Sarah Foulger's inheritance being a clear case. Probably a good time to exit following 6 successive wins under Deano. The contempt for ordinary supporters knows no bounds.

Contrary to your suggestion, the Club doesn’t have any control over what shareholders do with their shares, once they have been allotted.

MF decided to transfer his shares to his daughter some time ago, and then decided to arrange for their disposal. You’re free to do exactly the same, should you so wish.

[wcorkcanary 4,338]

10 minutes ago, GMF said:

Contrary to your suggestion, the Club doesn’t have any control over what shareholders do with their shares, once they have been allotted.

MF decided to transfer his shares to his daughter some time ago, and then decided to arrange for their disposal. You’re free to do exactly the same, should you so wish.

And remove his "reason for being"?.....i doubt that somehow. Ethics thinks his shares give him extra whining privilege, what he is unaware of is that anyone normal would just let go and sell up if they were so unhappy with the clubs reaction to their  'help'. His latest , the anti Zoe Ward campaign is just anotber me me me moment.

So smart ( by qualifications)  yet so dumb about his importance, relevance and usefulness. What a clown. 

[essex canary 506]

1 hour ago, GMF said:

 

MF decided to transfer his shares to his daughter some time ago, and then decided to arrange for their disposal. You’re free to do exactly the same, should you so wish.

From a position of comparative advantage and lack of transparency upon sale.

Presunably nothing need have stopped him securing the same offer for all minority shareholders which is otherwise generally not available or only with great difficulty?

 

[GMF 757]

6 minutes ago, essex canary said:

Presunably nothing need have stopped him securing the same offer for all minority shareholders which is otherwise generally not available or only with great difficulty?

 

No, he couldn’t, as he didn’t control more than 30% of the total shares.

[essex canary 506]

5 minutes ago, GMF said:

No, he couldn’t, as he didn’t control more than 30% of the total shares.

Why does that stop him?

Couldn't he have just said to Attanasio that he would only sell if the offer was on the table to other minority shareholders at the same price take it or leave it. How would that be illegal?  That seems to be effectively what he did in favour of his daughter.

[littleyellowbirdie 2,596]

On 02/04/2023 at 21:59, PockthorpePete said:

For all the griping there are probable around 10 clubs of our size currently below us. Clubs like Liverpool with the Klippty Klopp are struggling, and even worse with Chelsea. There is no magic formula that we discovered which gave us regular success. Yes, there has been quite a failing in player recruitment. Too much focus on Europe after Farkes time. An almost complete failure to bring through a decent striker, yet have had, and still have, keepers coming out of our ears.

We've had great success with developing promising talent from lower league clubs...Godfrey, Lewis, Maddison, McCallum, Mumba, Gibbs. Maybe we just need to move the focus on UK players ?  Neither Holt nor Hoolahan were pulling up any trees before they joined us.

Other wise the fundamentals are sound, despite the frequent howls of anguish.... from the usual suspects.

 

Great perspective.

Football has a horrific number of variables. You're attempting to get a consistent performance out of 11 or so fallible human beings all individually susceptible to variations in performance. It's really complicated; that's why the small number of people on here who seem to really have some insight into what's going on on the pitch in a strategic and tactical sense and have some insight into what is missing on the pitch genuinely impress me.

Then compare that to Formula 1, where the product isn't something made up of many people, but simply lumps of inanimate material designed by engineers behaving according to the laws of physics.

Mercedes dominated for nearly 10 years until the rule change, a few years back. Since then, they've struggled to keep up with Red Bull. What they haven't done though, is sack Toto Wolff, and half their engineering crew expecting that to suddenly deliver them a winning car, yet that's a field where the performance of the the product is almost entirely on those who design it, in contrast to football where you're ultimately dependent on how the players on the pitch perform individually and collectively on any given day. Nor do they get a bad result and demand the sacking of Lewis Hamilton or George Russell.

Football has become almost entirely about who can sign the best players, which is significantly predicated on how much money you can throw at them to get them to come to your club instead of other clubs. We had an edge on that score for a while, but it's a competitive market where if you get an edge, others are looking to catch up.

So then I suppose you start looking at whether you can get more bang for your buck trying to identify the next Webber instead of simply leaving it to the people in place to try and identify players to correct our shortcomings.

What's really daft about this perennial argument coming around yet again though, is that we're in the process of seeing a major transition on the biggest factor of all - money - which makes arguments to change  everything else off pitch at the same time seem more absurd than usual.

Edited April 15, 2023 by littleyellowbirdie

[Harry53 211]

On 01/04/2023 at 20:47, mannings bandy legs said:

So where are these six signings coming from,and who and what is paying for them. We are constantly being told there are no funds do this unless we sell. We have possibly one or two players which would fetch a fee.Neither if which would be fee that would enable us to enhance this team to a level that's required.We are f#c#ed.

Webber would rather spend money on a swimming pool, huge posters on Carrow Road and the team even flew to or from Watford this season!!! Seems like we have money to pi55 against the wall,  but not on signing better players

[PurpleCanary 5,582]

24 minutes ago, GMF said:

No, he couldn’t, as he didn’t control more than 30% of the total shares.

GMF, you need to walk away. I know It can be hard but summon the willpower!🤩

[essex canary 506]

The deep malaise at the Club is driven by the Nepotistic Network more suitable for a corner shop than a seriously focused professional organisation.

[Indy 3,320]

I do tend to agree that this entire takeover situation isn't mirrored anywhere else, is it a masterstroke by the  long term owners to ensure it puts a lot of potential buyers off?

I've been saying for a long time this season, its all too comfortable at Norwich, no leadership from the top and on the pitch, just a boardroom who look like more like a weekends Abigail's Party than a serious professional leadership.

The club is flat from top to bottom and it shows.

[GMF 757]

2 hours ago, essex canary said:

Why does that stop him?

Couldn't he have just said to Attanasio that he would only sell if the offer was on the table to other minority shareholders at the same price take it or leave it. How would that be illegal?  That seems to be effectively what he did in favour of his daughter.

At this point I’m going to plead the equivalent of the @PurpleCanary amendment…