Webber Wages

[dylanisabaddog 4,983]

20 minutes ago, essex canary said:

A little like the politicians network where they get multiple consultancy jobs for themselves, recommend that the rest of the senior population retrain as white van delivery drivers and the fabric of society collapses due to inequalities of income and wealth.

And I guess the share prices of these medium sized companies haven't increased in 21 years?

You're going a bit off topic there! This has absolutely nothing to do with politicians or white van drivers. 

As for the value of football clubs (including Norwich City) you're talking complete nonsense. Robert Chase acquired a controlling interest in Norwich City for £60,000. The club is now worth well in excess of £60m. 

[TIL 1010 4,791]

13 hours ago, hogesar said:

Nah, I have plenty of decent chats on here, but it tends to be with posters that reflect that decency themselves.

Oh you do love yourself don't you ?

[Duncan Edwards 2,262]

23 minutes ago, essex canary said:

A little like the politicians network where they get multiple consultancy jobs for themselves, recommend that the rest of the senior population retrain as white van delivery drivers and the fabric of society collapses due to inequalities of income and wealth.

And I guess the share prices of these medium sized companies haven't increased in 21 years?

Do share prices ever, you know, decrease? Or do they just go up and up and up the longer you leave them?

I’m too stupid to understand investments and things but if shares always go up then I want in on it.

Then I got to thinking if you’d put your £25000 into a different medium sized company in 2002, what would that investment have been worth when the bottom fell out of the financial market, Lehmann Brothers went bust etc? Would your investment have recovered to parity? Have Norwich City Football Club, and through her professional efforts Zoe Webber, actually done you a massive favour by retaining the value of your investment through their hard work and competence?

[hogesar 9,743]

5 minutes ago, TIL 1010 said:

Oh you do love yourself don't you ?

Coming from Mr ooooh i must post in italics to stand out because the content I post is boring and mundane so hopefully this gets the attention i crave!

[TIL 1010 4,791]

1 minute ago, hogesar said:

Coming from Mr ooooh i must post in italics to stand out because the content I post is boring and mundane so hopefully this gets the attention i crave!

I have posted before how i ended up making my posts in italics but i won't trouble you with the in and outs of it. As for you and your thought that i am attention seeking for goodness sake have a word with yourself. Anyway as i obviously have your attention ever thought of starting your own forum ?

[hogesar 9,743]

7 minutes ago, TIL 1010 said:

I have posted before how i ended up making my posts in italics but i won't trouble you with the in and outs of it. As for you and your thought that i am attention seeking for goodness sake have a word with yourself. Anyway as i obviously have your attention ever thought of starting your own forum ?

You keep doing you, boo.

[Google Bot 3,300]

[essex canary 505]

47 minutes ago, Duncan Edwards said:

Do share prices ever, you know, decrease? Or do they just go up and up and up the longer you leave them?

I’m too stupid to understand investments and things but if shares always go up then I want in on it.

Then I got to thinking if you’d put your £25000 into a different medium sized company in 2002, what would that investment have been worth when the bottom fell out of the financial market, Lehmann Brothers went bust etc? Would your investment have recovered to parity? Have Norwich City Football Club, and through her professional efforts Zoe Webber, actually done you a massive favour by retaining the value of your investment through their hard work and competence?

I would give far more credit to Allan Bowkett or David McNally (first half) in terms of what you are referring to here. If the Webbers have built on it further that should also be reflected in the Share price.

[essex canary 505]

58 minutes ago, dylanisabaddog said:

You're going a bit off topic there! This has absolutely nothing to do with politicians or white van drivers. 

As for the value of football clubs (including Norwich City) you're talking complete nonsense. Robert Chase acquired a controlling interest in Norwich City for £60,000. The club is now worth well in excess of £60m. 

Shows what a good businessman Robert Chase was then albeit much denigrated amongst certain parties on here. The £60 valuation seems about right to me. Pity then that we haven't got an exit option based on it.

[wcorkcanary 4,337]

6 minutes ago, essex canary said:

Shows what a good businessman Robert Chase was then albeit much denigrated amongst certain parties on here. The £60 valuation seems about right to me. Pity then that we haven't got an exit option based on it.

You have got  an exit option....it's called selling to someone who wants to buy at an agreed price... if you can get £60 then take it, fack Off and don't come back. It's no one else's job to sell your shares. I've ready offered you an out. 

[dylanisabaddog 4,983]

6 minutes ago, essex canary said:

Shows what a good businessman Robert Chase was then albeit much denigrated amongst certain parties on here. The £60 valuation seems about right to me. Pity then that we haven't got an exit option based on it.

Good businessman!  Really?  We came within 2 days of Barclays Bank issuing a winding up order! 

Sorry but I don't understand the rest of your post. 

[TheBaldOne66 697]

16 hours ago, Indy said:

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, no issue with that but at least have some substance behind you statement or it just sounds like moaning! I mean when you say 

“My POV is that I actually think the club has been poorly run over the last 20 years when we’ve had numerous promotions and pathetic relegations. It would be nice to see the football club actually make a go of staying up, and no I don’t mean get into massive debt doing so either.” 

Then it’s not correct as we spent three seasons in to top flight under Lambert & Hughton! Does that not count at giving it a good go?

Ffs, which part of it’s MY opinion don’t you understand? Not your opinion, MINE! 
 

Are you really that stupid? 

[essex canary 505]

20 minutes ago, dylanisabaddog said:

Good businessman!  Really?  We came within 2 days of Barclays Bank issuing a winding up order! 

Sorry but I don't understand the rest of your post. 

Presumably he walked away with far more than £60k for his 34%?

£60 million plus now would be  £100 per share pre dilution. Why isn't it on the table now for existing shareholders?

[dylanisabaddog 4,983]

7 minutes ago, essex canary said:

Presumably he walked away with far more than £60k for his 34%?

£60 million plus now would be  £100 per share pre dilution. Why isn't it on the table now for existing shareholders?

They're not paying you what you would like for your shares because legally they don't have to. And they are somewhat brighter than you. Life's like that sometimes. I'm afraid that shouting 'it's not fair' won't help you much. Were you really daft enough to think you were paying market value when you bought your shares and even more daft to think they were a good investment? 

The transactions between Chase and Watling and then Watling and Smith/Jones were private and undisclosed. 

[essex canary 505]

12 hours ago, slaphead said:

Well said Essex Canary, on this site you are no allowed have a  opinion with out people being so childish. Grow up. Go read the Dandy. 

 

Good to hear from a sensible poster. An ironic moniker since that is what I spend my time doing to the Beano and Dandy readers on here.

Any thoughts about how you are going to vote?

I just think it is completely inept that Mrs. Webber is apparently going to vote albeit that she has no shares. Tom Smith - the nephew of one of the majority owners - is apparently going to vote with 104 shares, 100 of which he purchased for a nominal £1 whilst most of us paid a £24 premium and some up to £99. 

Furthermore the circular refers to a 'poll' with no definition of what it is. Unlike the last 2 times it means that the vote will be  determined by number of shares held rather than per head.

For Resolutions 1 and 2 it is minority shareholders only and there are no clear quorate rules. Turnout last time was very low and whilst it is likely to improve this time, I am thinking that as one of the larger minorities I could easily represent 2% of the poll.

So what to do? I am thinking 'for' for Resolution number 1 on the grounds that we clearly need fresh blood in the Boardroom and this is the only game in town. 'Against' for Resolution number 2 on the grounds that we don't know enough about Norfolk Groups intentions longer term re debt management and attitude to minority shareholding going forwards including the original concept of it being the foundation stone of fan engagement.

Perhaps an opportunity to make a point here. Why not take it?

[essex canary 505]

20 minutes ago, dylanisabaddog said:

They're not paying you what you would like for your shares because legally they don't have to. And they are somewhat brighter than you. Life's like that sometimes. I'm afraid that shouting 'it's not fair' won't help you much. Were you really daft enough to think you were paying market value when you bought your shares and even more daft to think they were a good investment? 

The transactions between Chase and Watling and then Watling and Smith/Jones were private and undisclosed. 

It turned out different for Burnley's minorities didn't it. They were still high risk when bought.

[hogesar 9,743]

10 minutes ago, essex canary said:

It turned out different for Burnley's minorities didn't it. They were still high risk when bought.

Again, what happens at Burnley doesn't necessarily happen here and arguably shouldn't. Pointing at one club out of all the clubs in the EFL / EPL and complaining it's not fair doesn't wash with anyone, in particular the club apparently.

[essex canary 505]

2 hours ago, hogesar said:

As you feel strongly about it, what do you think a fair salary for Zoe / Stuarts job positions are? 

My concern is whilst it would be lovely to have far more performance-related salary bonuses rather than big basic one's, I'm not sure that's competitive in an industry where, even in this division, clubs will chuck £60,000 a week at a single player. 

And we can't afford "best in class" players because the salaries are north of that figure.

But we can just about afford "best in class" in other areas of the club, if we're willing to sacrifice some potential transfer budget to do so. 

Looking at the figures from 21 years ago wasn't Neil Doncaster effectively covering both jobs for around 1% of the Turnover? The TV money was far more insignificant then. Clearly there would re an expectation that the Sporting Directors Salary would be more reflective of the latter seeing as he has to engage in recruiting higher quality players. The extent to which that should apply to the non-football driven ED post should surely be dampened in comparison?

[essex canary 505]

1 minute ago, hogesar said:

Again, what happens at Burnley doesn't necessarily happen here and arguably shouldn't. Pointing at one club out of all the clubs in the EFL / EPL and complaining it's not fair doesn't wash with anyone, in particular the club apparently.

That is a moot point. In a sense it isn't sensible taking money out simply when on a high. On the other hand that is exactly what seems to be happening with the salaries. If the Club has a viewpoint on that it should express it very clearly in context. I am not aware that it has though backdoor whispering is again a possibility.

[dylanisabaddog 4,983]

24 minutes ago, essex canary said:

Looking at the figures from 21 years ago wasn't Neil Doncaster effectively covering both jobs for around 1% of the Turnover? The TV money was far more insignificant then. Clearly there would re an expectation that the Sporting Directors Salary would be more reflective of the latter seeing as he has to engage in recruiting higher quality players. The extent to which that should apply to the non-football driven ED post should surely be dampened in comparison?

You still don't get it. If you pay peanuts you get monkeys. Their salaries may seem high to you but they're industry standard. 

You may also think the Webbers aren't very good at their jobs. That's very subjective but the fact remains that it will cost a lot of money to replace them. If we don't pay that money we will suffer in the long run. Robert Chase, who you think of as a good businessman, insisted we replace an international standard goalkeeper with someone not long out of school. We were relegated as a result and lost 10 years of Sky money as a result. That's what happens when you leave big decisions to people who aren't up to the task. 

Some people do well financially in life, others don't. There's usually a very good reason for that. 

Edited September 11, 2023 by dylanisabaddog

[hogesar 9,743]

40 minutes ago, essex canary said:

Looking at the figures from 21 years ago wasn't Neil Doncaster effectively covering both jobs for around 1% of the Turnover? The TV money was far more insignificant then. Clearly there would re an expectation that the Sporting Directors Salary would be more reflective of the latter seeing as he has to engage in recruiting higher quality players. The extent to which that should apply to the non-football driven ED post should surely be dampened in comparison?

I'm not convinced using figures from 21 years ago is relevant in any industry, even less so in football where the economic landscape is hugely different.

[Indy 3,315]

2 hours ago, TheBaldOne66 said:

Ffs, which part of it’s MY opinion don’t you understand? Not your opinion, MINE! 
 

Are you really that stupid? 

Not as stupid as you it would appear!

[hogesar 9,743]

2 hours ago, TheBaldOne66 said:

Ffs, which part of it’s MY opinion don’t you understand? Not your opinion, MINE! 
 

Are you really that stupid? 

You can have an opinion but when there's facts that make your opinion wrong, it'll still get called out...

[Indy 3,315]

3 hours ago, hogesar said:

You can have an opinion but when there's facts that make your opinion wrong, it'll still get called out...

Exactly I don’t think he actually reads the threads, then makes an opinion but lacks any backing! I mean that one statement I pointed out that we had three consecutive season in the premier league in those twenty years and to me that was giving it a good go, his statement refused to acknowledge anything of those three years! Still some just whine for the sake of it! See Essex is now going into full History Meltdown! Jesus some on here are really hard work, it’s a football club with limitations of size, money and resources. They all want something which we can achieve if lucky! The same as Fulham, WBA, Watford etc……

Edited September 11, 2023 by Indy

[TIL 1010 4,791]

4 hours ago, essex canary said:

Shows what a good businessman Robert Chase was then albeit much denigrated amongst certain parties on here. The £60 valuation seems about right to me. Pity then that we haven't got an exit option based on it.

Yeah i mean all those unsecured loans he took out never resulted in a fire sale of Ward and Newsome when Barclays Bank came knocking at the door for their money now did it ?

[TheBaldOne66 697]

3 hours ago, hogesar said:

You can have an opinion but when there's facts that make your opinion wrong, it'll still get called out...

Who the hell do you think you are ffs? I don’t give a **** if you don’t like what I say, I’m not gonna change MY opinion to appease the likes of you or Indy, maybe you ought to just accept that I’ve got MY opinion, it’s different to yours and just move on. As other people have pointed out you just like to argue with people you don’t agree with. I don’t agree with a lot that you say but I don’t tell you that it’s garbage I just ignore it, maybe you ought to think of that instead of being so high and mighty for once! 

[Kenny Foggo 1,116]

6 hours ago, TIL 1010 said:

Oh you do love yourself don't you ?

Doesn't he just 🐵

[Kenny Foggo 1,116]

4 minutes ago, TheBaldOne66 said:

Who the hell do you think you are ffs? I don’t give a **** if you don’t like what I say, I’m not gonna change MY opinion to appease the likes of you or Indy, maybe you ought to just accept that I’ve got MY opinion, it’s different to yours and just move on. As other people have pointed out you just like to argue with people you don’t agree with. I don’t agree with a lot that you say but I don’t tell you that it’s garbage I just ignore it, maybe you ought to think of that instead of being so high and mighty for once! 

I stopped reading and replying ages ago... life is, in a small way, a little bit better for it.

[hogesar 9,743]

15 minutes ago, TheBaldOne66 said:

Who the hell do you think you are ffs? I don’t give a **** if you don’t like what I say, I’m not gonna change MY opinion to appease the likes of you or Indy, maybe you ought to just accept that I’ve got MY opinion, it’s different to yours and just move on. As other people have pointed out you just like to argue with people you don’t agree with. I don’t agree with a lot that you say but I don’t tell you that it’s garbage I just ignore it, maybe you ought to think of that instead of being so high and mighty for once! 

What are you on about?

I simply pointed out why Indy was disagreeing with you, because he had facts that made your "opinion" wrong. Facts beat opinion, even in this Fake News era.

13 minutes ago, Kenny Foggo said:

Doesn't he just 🐵

Not at all. The same posters have a little go at me then cry if I give it back. It's a forum so of course I respond to people I disagree with. Otherwise there would be no discussion. If you can't handle that then the Internet is always going to be a struggle...

[hogesar 9,743]

3 hours ago, Indy said:

Exactly I don’t think he actually reads the threads, then makes an opinion but lacks any backing! I mean that one statement I pointed out that we had three consecutive season in the premier league in those twenty years and to me that was giving it a good goal, his statement refused to acknowledge anything of those three years! Still some just whine for the sake of it! See Essex is now going into full History Meltdown! Jesus some on here are really hard work, it’s a football club with limitations of size, money and resources. They all want something which we can achieve if lucky! The same as Fulham, WBA, Watford etc……

Unfortunately there's a small subset of posters who think this forum is a place for them to state whatever they want, even if it's completely made up and fabricated, and have it sit here on the forum with no challenge. And if you do challenge it, you're being mean or offending or something.

The irony is they don't seem to realise me and you have disagreed on some (most? 😉 ) things over the years but have generally been respectful back and forth. If either of us have stepped over the line we've made up and continued. And from it we've had some decent discussions.