Attanasio = red herring

[Michael Starr 519]

I understand why some feel that it's a red herring, but, honestly, we just have to be patient here. The fact that Norwich City is a PLC makes it incredibly challenging to get things done (lots of red tape) which is out of our hands. In the meantime, we're clearly gaining good knowledge on the database side of things already. I don't think we need to panic here.

[Yobocop 1,099]

5 minutes ago, Indy said:

Yes but that’s also 7 top flight seasons out of the last 28 too. Stats can be so damming too!😉

Classic ‘Ipswich syndrome’ there, if you go back far enough you’ll find a European cup win there somewhere ; - ) 

[Michael Starr 519]

1 minute ago, Yobocop said:

Classic ‘Ipswich syndrome’ there, if you go back far enough you’ll find a European cup win there somewhere ; - ) 

I agree. I don't buy this "Norwich isn't attractive to a buyer" vibe. Only 24 teams can ever be in the biggest most global football league at any time and we've seen our fair share of time at the captains table in recent years. I'd say we are probably one of the most attractive clubs to buy right now as we are under achieving with a premier league set up already in place.

[PurpleCanary 5,562]

Just now, essex canary said:

The waive option can still be denied by the Takeover Panel, can't it?

This situation also arises because we are the only 1 of next season's 24 Championship Clubs to be a Public Company which is presumably to offer protection to our minority shareholders that by and large other Clubs don't have.  Why be a Public Company and then opt for a waiver?

I suspect trying to get approval from the Takeover Panel for having a shareholder vote on a waiver has been a significant factor in the delay. Of course even if approval is given minority shareholders still have to vote in favour.

I don't know if we are the only plc in the Championship, but, yes, one aspect of that status is certainly meant to be the protection of the rights of such shareholders.

Your rhetorical question as to why be a plc and then want a waiver is chronologically flawed. S&J turned us into a plc but it is Attanasio, new on the scene 20 years later and prospective owner, who wants the waiver. And quite possibly aims to take the company private again.

[norfolkngood 1,087]

13 hours ago, KeiranShikari said:

I think she's talking more about the immediate future in regards to expertise over investment. Why would a minority shareholder be splashing the cash?

Once he's takes the helm I'd be surprised if there wasn't investment. Not throwing around cash for the sake of throwing around cash but his aim will be to increase the value of the club and it'd be a struggle to do that without investment. Doing that is literally his job.

Obviously we'll know when we know but I wouldn't be worried yet,

That's how i see it

why would MA say buy the shares so his share of club is say 40 % and then put for example 25 million into the club for players if Delia and MWJ sit there with 40 % and put nothing in ? ,

Nobody in there right mind would do that ,

if he owned the club outright then it might be different not saying mega oil money but might put in money when needed 

[essex canary 496]

1 minute ago, PurpleCanary said:

I suspect trying to get approval from the Takeover Panel for having a shareholder vote on a waiver has been a significant factor in the delay. Of course even if approval is given minority shareholders still have to vote in favour.

I don't know if we are the only plc in the Championship, but, yes, one aspect of that status is certainly meant to be the protection of the rights of such shareholders.

Your rhetorical question as to why be a plc and then want a waiver is chronologically flawed. S&J turned us into a plc but it is Attanasio, new on the scene 20 years later and prospective owner, who wants the waiver. And quite possibly aims to take the company private again.

Given that all other 23 clubs in the Championship are private that may well be the sensible route to go. As minority shareholders though we bought into S&J's project so why shouldn't we feel we are entitled to settlement under S&Js rules? Of course Attanasio would need to pay but perhaps that should be looked at as an issue of honour or otherwise on his part. Failing that he could consider other options too such as vouchers for shareholders similar to the bond scheme. 

What are the implications for current minority shareholders in going private?

[Google Bot 3,278]

4 hours ago, Soldier on said:

Connor Southwell said there’s white smoke in relation to Attanassio during the match day blog.

White smoke as in when a new pope has been chosen, or the sort that causes asphyxiation?

[PurpleCanary 5,562]

6 minutes ago, essex canary said:

Given that all other 23 clubs in the Championship are private that may well be the sensible route to go. As minority shareholders though we bought into S&J's project so why shouldn't we feel we are entitled to settlement under S&Js rules? Of course Attanasio would need to pay but perhaps that should be looked at as an issue of honour or otherwise on his part. Failing that he could consider other options too such as vouchers for shareholders similar to the bond scheme. 

What are the implications for current minority shareholders in going private?

In short that there would no longer be any minority shareholders.

[Nuff Said 5,141]

14 hours ago, Dean Coneys boots said:

There has been a lot of talk of take over from Attanasios - and it gave a lot of people hope. But the interview with Zoe Webber made clear they don’t plan to invest in the team or take over any time soon. Just here for solid advice etc. In which case, whilst it’s nice to have them along for the contribution and ride, they clearly aren’t what we still actually need- which is serious investment. Where will it come from? As we seem to be back to lacking a pot to pee in and going backwards at a rate of knots 

 

10 hours ago, Yobocop said:

Jesus Mary and Joseph 

do you ever have anything positive to add? 

Jesus Mary and Joseph

do you really need to ask?

[essex canary 496]

19 minutes ago, PurpleCanary said:

In short that there would no longer be any minority shareholders.

So in voting for the waiver would we be voting for our shares to be deemed valueless or would the 90% hurdle or some other hurdle still apply?

[lake district canary 4,531]

1 hour ago, Bomber said:

1 hour ago, lake district canary said:

Apart from being in the top league 6 out of the last 12 years......

And coming straight back down mostly being an embarrassment 

Only if you want to be embarrassed.

[Leedscanary 340]

42 minutes ago, Nuff Said said:

 

Jesus Mary and Joseph

do you really need to ask?

Jesus Mary and Joseph more apt than you think 

[NFN FC 1,123]

14 hours ago, By Hook or Ian crook said:

Depends what you’re classing as serious investment these days. By top 24 clubs in the country standards their investment falls way short of some of the other owners around us. 
 

Newcastle for example were around us in the league when taken over by the Saudis. now we are light years apart 

I'd rather be where we are than run by Saudis. 

2 hours ago, Bomber said:

Norwich is not an attractive club for any high end investment - we are not situated in London, Midlands, North West or North East and in fact our nearest rivals are in a different County which we somehow call a local derby despite a 40 mile gap - we have a ground that resembles a library most of the time and fans that will accept any sort of dire football clapping the players at the end of a match and players that love Costa del Norwich knowing they will play week in week out - we will never do anything in the Cups with the excuse at least we can concentrate on the league hence no ambition - would any of you invest millions in that - we are what we are a small (in the big scheme of things) self funded club that will never go anywhere 

And we love it! 

[Kenny Foggo 1,116]

2 hours ago, Bomber said:

Norwich is not an attractive club for any high end investment - we are not situated in London, Midlands, North West or North East and in fact our nearest rivals are in a different County which we somehow call a local derby despite a 40 mile gap - we have a ground that resembles a library most of the time and fans that will accept any sort of dire football clapping the players at the end of a match and players that love Costa del Norwich knowing they will play week in week out - we will never do anything in the Cups with the excuse at least we can concentrate on the league hence no ambition - would any of you invest millions in that - we are what we are a small (in the big scheme of things) self funded club that will never go anywhere 

Could not disagree more. Norwich City can draw fans from a County, it's a fantastic world class City with all the infrasture. I mean people invested in them down the road & that's a real hellhole in the middle of nowhere...

[GMF 744]

2 hours ago, essex canary said:

Given that all other 23 clubs in the Championship are private that may well be the sensible route to go. As minority shareholders though we bought into S&J's project so why shouldn't we feel we are entitled to settlement under S&Js rules? Of course Attanasio would need to pay but perhaps that should be looked at as an issue of honour or otherwise on his part. Failing that he could consider other options too such as vouchers for shareholders similar to the bond scheme. 

What are the implications for current minority shareholders in going private?

Football clubs have always historically been private limited companies, indeed, NCFC was the same until 2002, but had to become public in order to undertake the public offering to deal with the fallout from the ITV Digital collapse.

It served a purpose at the time, not least because it raised circa £5m, which was much needed.

I don’t think it actually causes a problem, although it’s an issue that will have to be addressed at some point.

I’ve always been of the view that a combination of issuing new shares and / or acquiring the shares of the existing majority shareholders, would be the most likely way route to reach the 90% threshold and thus be able to take the company private again.

[BigFish 1,987]

3 hours ago, essex canary said:

What are the implications for current minority shareholders in going private?

Your shares will cease to exist and you will receive compensation.

I suspect the amount you receive will be a lower value than you expect or think you deserve.

As has been explained to you before it is likely that it will be the equivalent of the highest value paid for a share in the preceding 12 months.

[essex canary 496]

6 minutes ago, GMF said:

Football clubs have always historically been private limited companies, indeed, NCFC was the same until 2002, but had to become public in order to undertake the public offering to deal with the fallout from the ITV Digital collapse.

It served a purpose at the time, not least because it raised circa £5m, which was much needed.

I don’t think it actually causes a problem, although it’s an issue that will have to be addressed at some point.

I’ve always been of the view that a combination of issuing new shares and / or acquiring the shares of the existing majority shareholders, would be the most likely way route to reach the 90% threshold and thus be able to take the company private again.

Thanks for the historical background which is good to know. Only around £2 million came from minorities with the rest from Directors. I think the Directors were rather disappointed at the time that they didn't get more from the public but that is because they under cooked it.

In a sense it seems to be causing a problem at the moment in terms of delay to this process.

As 1 of the more generous contributors, albeit with some ongoing reward, the other problem it causes is that the current circumstances regarding multimillionaire foreign investors and greatly enhanced TV contracts are radically different to the circumstances then. That situation is exacerbated still further if. unlike me, the individual did not undertake the investment themselves and gets no ongoing reward.

[essex canary 496]

9 minutes ago, BigFish said:

Your shares will cease to exist and you will receive compensation.

I suspect the amount you receive will be a lower value than you expect or think you deserve.

As has been explained to you before it is likely that it will be the equivalent of the highest value paid for a share in the preceding 12 months.

Thanks. So probably less than Foulger?

[BigFish 1,987]

Just now, essex canary said:

Thanks. So probably less than Foulger?

Share trading in NCFC is a private transaction, so unless someone ITK provides that information we will never know. That assumes any end game to this process is more than a year after the Foulger transactions, which seems a safe assumption. Also assuming this process continues to resolution (not guaranteed, and not guaranteed to be quick-Arsenal took 10 years over it) and @GMF is correct in his view you will get a big clue to value of your shareholding when the new shares are finally issued.

[Indy 3,300]

5 hours ago, Yobocop said:

Classic ‘Ipswich syndrome’ there, if you go back far enough you’ll find a European cup win there somewhere ; - ) 

Yes but we beat Bayern at their ground, worth more than a noddy European cup which any team could win in the 70’s as it wasn’t important!

[Indy 3,300]

5 hours ago, Michael Starr said:

I agree. I don't buy this "Norwich isn't attractive to a buyer" vibe. Only 24 teams can ever be in the biggest most global football league at any time and we've seen our fair share of time at the captains table in recent years. I'd say we are probably one of the most attractive clubs to buy right now as we are under achieving with a premier league set up already in place.

We should be, absolutely, yet it’s around 12 months since Foulger deal, he’s invested £10 million with potential return of 7%, but very slow since then, which is indeed frustrating going into a key summer, especially as we’re in transition on the field too with Webber going!

Not great in my opinion, would have been far better having off field takeover done, new SD in place….but like I said that’s football!

[Nexus_Canary 1,016]

I think watching us get humiliated by spurs slowed down or halted interest.

Blaming the media for the terrible result was the only option left to Stu's blame someone else culture.

[Heading South 24]

8 hours ago, Bomber said:

Norwich is not an attractive club for any high end investment - we are not situated in London, Midlands, North West or North East and in fact our nearest rivals are in a different County which we somehow call a local derby despite a 40 mile gap - we have a ground that resembles a library most of the time and fans that will accept any sort of dire football clapping the players at the end of a match and players that love Costa del Norwich knowing they will play week in week out - we will never do anything in the Cups with the excuse at least we can concentrate on the league hence no ambition - would any of you invest millions in that - we are what we are a small (in the big scheme of things) self funded club that will never go anywhere 

Couldn’t have put it better myself !

[Robert Ketts Yellow Army 15]

If I was investing in the club, the last thing I’d do is advertise how much I planned to spend on players…

Edited July 5, 2023 by Robert Ketts Yellow Army

[essex canary 496]

We certainly have the potential to outweigh the likes of Burnley and Middlesbrough.

Apparently Zoe Webber can understand the frustration of fans. Indeed. Whilst the prize of £200 million for the most valuable match in football is on the table,  NCFC have created all this delay in relation to £2 million borrowed 20 years ago.

[Jim Smith 2,319]

15 hours ago, Indy said:

We should be, absolutely, yet it’s around 12 months since Foulger deal, he’s invested £10 million with potential return of 7%, but very slow since then, which is indeed frustrating going into a key summer, especially as we’re in transition on the field too with Webber going!

Not great in my opinion, would have been far better having off field takeover done, new SD in place….but like I said that’s football!

It’s not really football though. It’s Norwich, under our owners and the SDs wife.

[Mello Yello 2,294]

D&M = Reluctant to Relinquish....

[GMF 744]

1 hour ago, essex canary said:

Apparently Zoe Webber can understand the frustration of fans. Indeed. Whilst the prize of £200 million for the most valuable match in football is on the table,  NCFC have created all this delay in relation to £2 million borrowed 20 years ago.

Has the accountancy profession started classifying shares as debt now? And, since when did NCFC have responsibility for the Takeover Code?

Come on, now. I know you like every opportunity to bash the Club, but, maybe, just maybe, the delay is down to what the executive officers are trying to do and, if so, the Takeover panel would certainly be justified in pushing back against those proposals, unless, of course, you’re now saying that you are happy to write off your investment in the club? 

[yellowrider120 762]

20 hours ago, Kenny Foggo said:

Could not disagree more. Norwich City can draw fans from a County, it's a fantastic world class City with all the infrasture. I mean people invested in them down the road & that's a real hellhole in the middle of nowhere...

With the very best will in the world, I would suggest that's stretching credibility somewhat!

[Indy 3,300]

The reality is NO ONE KNOWS, it's all every ones supposition, it's just a debate and reality is it could be any one of the above that's causing the time, indeed if there ever will be more movement......might just be that the club has fallen back to a point where MA has been advised not to buy anymore shares at a max set value.....who knows? Only those in the process and that's even if the process is still ongoing.