Webber still in control of the club?

[lake district canary 4,544]

2 hours ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

Flattering to deceive literally means looking better than it really is. The failure of a squad at Premier League level in such disastrous terms that did so well at Championship level proved that they looked better than they really were because they didn't have opposition that could exploit the weaknesses that were always there in the Championship.

Ultimately the inability to coach a team to survive in the Premier League is a massive failing in Farke's game that is the whole reason he was sacked, and his inability to do so makes promotion worthless in all terms other than a short term cash injection and a whole season of misery in the Premier League watching him fail.

I'd rather not go on and on about Farke's weaknesses, but the delusions you and others hold onto about how amazing he was are beyond a joke.

He was not amazing - he was a very good fit for our club though.

You seem to think it was his fault we didn't do well in the PL but at the same time agree that our players weren't good enough. You can't have it both ways.

The chances are that he did the best with what was available. 

[PurpleCanary 5,580]

1 hour ago, essex canary said:

So the SD who wasn't on the SMT albeit his wife is and a Director to boot made all the decisions that were simply rubber stamped at Board level. A very strange textbook that preached that.

 

I didn't say that.

Edited January 10 by PurpleCanary

[shefcanary 2,444]

41 minutes ago, nutty nigel said:

Our FPAs and business owners told me Webber was reporting to his wife…

Don't tar me with that brush.

I've complained regularly that there wasn't an experienced "football person" on the Board (to whom he did report to) to challenge and mentor him. I know you will respond that most of the Board had been in charge of a football club for 25 years or so, but prior to the Webber's there was also a person on the Board independent of them who was not a large shareholder and with the exception of Balls had a modicum of experience running a football club elsewhere, who could have challenged someone like Webber. 

[Sufyellow 223]

3 hours ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

To put it another way, it looked really nice at Championship level and delivered excellent results at Championship level, but completely fell apart at Premier League level to a level so bad we haven't seen a poor a points tally since 1903, underlining it wasn't really as good as it looked at Championship level.

Or in other words, it flattered to deceive.

You seem to keep missing the part that we are a mid championship run club , anything above that was an achievement. So getting to the prem was the achievement. I guess you think we are a premier league club , so you must want everyone sacked now? I was happy with going up, and trying our best , the board and webber moved the goal posts but never backed it up with the money. Dean Smith was lucky to be backed in the championship with a 10 million plus spend , farke did it twice with a minus 20 million spend. How can you defend the club in the position we find ourselves,  yet think farke was average for getting us in the Premier League.  It doesn't make sense. 

[shefcanary 2,444]

5 hours ago, Soldier on said:

Any mention of how much longer we can be expected to wait for EFL to ratify MA as a proper person to complete share acquisition ?

The silence on this is golden. All I have seen is Connor / Paddy / Samuel in their Q&A's when asked directly that things are progressing and there are no issues. Otherwise noet, so we await the smoke from the EFL chimney - will it be white or soot grey?

[nutty nigel 7,598]

2 hours ago, shefcanary said:

Don't tar me with that brush.

I've complained regularly that there wasn't an experienced "football person" on the Board (to whom he did report to) to challenge and mentor him. I know you will respond that most of the Board had been in charge of a football club for 25 years or so, but prior to the Webber's there was also a person on the Board independent of them who was not a large shareholder and with the exception of Balls had a modicum of experience running a football club elsewhere, who could have challenged someone like Webber. 

It's a general point. And the bulk of my post was factual so why cut it?

You've had plenty to say about husbands and wives on how our club has been run. I have no wish to make this personal. Have no personal gripe with you. So why make it so?

Let love shine a light

Edited January 10 by nutty nigel

[shefcanary 2,444]

22 minutes ago, nutty nigel said:

It's a general point. And the bulk of my post was factual so why cut it?

You've had plenty to say about husbands and wives on how our club has been run. I have no wish to make this personal. Have no personal gripe with you. So why make it so?

Let love shine a light

Er, you missed my tongue in cheek there 😊😍, the emoji's were taking too long to appear and I had an opticians appointment - there was supposed to be a smiley face after "brush" (this damn site). My apologies if it did not read like that. I have no gripe with you either, I just would like to know ,ore about your view on things I have a deep concern for.

I have expressed my general concern about husbands and wives running companies together. All well and good if they own it or if there is appropriate governance around to ensure on behalf of shareholders that they are performing effectively. All we have formally on the performance of the football club's key senior managers are comments from a majority joint shareholder who expresses her satisfaction. All well and good, but ....

Given on field performance, financial performance, regular departures of key customer facing staff and reducing attendances, I find that a wee bit difficult not to pass comment on as a shareholder and supporter. 🤷‍♀️

So, is everything in the garden rosy at Carrow road behind the scenes? Duncan has access to people feeling free to comment on things behind the scenes there. Perhaps you or he can persuade me my concerns are unfounded. All academic once the EFL give their assent to Attanasio coming fully on board to steer the ship hopefully into calmer waters.

😘

Edited January 10 by shefcanary

[nutty nigel 7,598]

12 minutes ago, shefcanary said:

Er, you missed my tongue in cheek there 😊😍, the emoji's were taking too long to appear and I had an opticians appointment - there was supposed to be a smiley face after "brush" (this damn site). My apologies if it did not read like that. I have no gripe with you either, I just would like to know ,ore about your view on things I have a deep concern for.

I have expressed my general concern about husbands and wives running companies together. All well and good if they own it or if there is appropriate governance around to ensure on behalf of shareholders that they are performing effectively. All we have formally on the performance of the football club's key senior managers are comments from a majority joint shareholder who expresses her satisfaction. All well and good, but ....

Given on field performance, financial performance, regular departures of key customer facing staff and reducing attendances, I find that a wee bit difficult not to pass comment on as a shareholder and supporter. 🤷‍♀️

So, is everything in the garden rosy at Carrow road behind the scenes? Duncan has access to people feeling free to comment on things behind the scenes there. Perhaps you or he can persuade me my concerns are unfounded. All academic once the EFL give their assent to Attanasio coming fully on board to steer the ship hopefully into calmer waters.

😘

I don't think we have to look so hard for solutions. Things will never be rosy behind the scenes when football's disappointing on the stage. This is a fact of my life from Watling to Attanasio?. Watling got a much tougher ride at Carrow Road when football was disappointing. But if we won games the abuse from the terraces didn't happen. If that was now it would be different I guess because win, lose or draw the utter negativity across social media is relentless. By the time matchday arrives the mood is black. Hopefully soon better performances and more wins will lift this. If the head coach can't effect the change then he will be replaced. We know that. And we also know that the board will ''leave that to Ben'. 

Despite all the noise I reckon the board actually comunicate quite a lot to us fans. There was no requirement to say as much as they did in those AGM interviews. Afterall the AGM is to discuss the previous years performance. But they spent half an hour on interviews about the current season and the Attanasio situation. When a board director says "this is maybe more detail than I should give" then I think we are getting more than we should expect. If that's not enough then Attanasio also mentioned calling Canary Call...

@Duncan Edwards can speak for himself. He's not my little boy anymore (still love him to bits though). In fact he's a grandad himself.

Let the love light shine

[Jim Smith 2,339]

5 minutes ago, nutty nigel said:

I don't think we have to look so hard for solutions. Things will never be rosy behind the scenes when football's disappointing on the stage. This is a fact of my life from Watling to Attanasio?. Watling got a much tougher ride at Carrow Road when football was disappointing. But if we won games the abuse from the terraces didn't happen. If that was now it would be different I guess because win, lose or draw the utter negativity across social media is relentless. By the time matchday arrives the mood is black. Hopefully soon better performances and more wins will lift this. If the head coach can't effect the change then he will be replaced. We know that. And we also know that the board will ''leave that to Ben'. 

Despite all the noise I reckon the board actually comunicate quite a lot to us fans. There was no requirement to say as much as they did in those AGM interviews. Afterall the AGM is to discuss the previous years performance. But they spent half an hour on interviews about the current season and the Attanasio situation. When a board director says "this is maybe more detail than I should give" then I think we are getting more than we should expect. If that's not enough then Attanasio also mentioned calling Canary Call...

@Duncan Edwards can speak for himself. He's not my little boy anymore (still love him to bits though). In fact he's a grandad himself.

Let the love light shine

All well and good except the head coach can’t effect that change and yet we don’t know he will be replaced. That is one of the biggest issues. He should have been replaced weeks ago. 

[nutty nigel 7,598]

8 minutes ago, Jim Smith said:

All well and good except the head coach can’t effect that change and yet we don’t know he will be replaced. That is one of the biggest issues. He should have been replaced weeks ago. 

Well, that maybe true and it may not. I suspect you're right but it's not our call. I've been surprised before. If you're going to undermine Knapper and the new dynamic with Attanasio already what hope can you possibly ever have? 

[essex canary 504]

11 minutes ago, nutty nigel said:

 

Despite all the noise I reckon the board actually comunicate quite a lot to us fans. There was no requirement to say as much as they did in those AGM interviews. Afterall the AGM is to discuss the previous years performance. But they spent half an hour on interviews about the current season and the Attanasio situation. When a board director says "this is maybe more detail than I should give" then I think we are getting more than we should expect. If that's not enough then Attanasio also mentioned calling Canary Call...

@Duncan Edwards can speak for himself. He's not my little boy anymore (still love him to bits though). In fact he's a grandad himself.

Let the love light shine

The nature of the communication is strange though. The audience at the AGM is overwhelmingly elderly so no young supporters get the chance to make a contribution to the Q&A albeit it is outside the formal business. Then when a shareholder raises an issue they may get answers that refer to non-shareholder groups such as the OSP.  To what extent are press interviews part of fan engagement? The Supporter Engagement Plan should address these issues.

[Jim Smith 2,339]

1 minute ago, nutty nigel said:

Well, that maybe true and it may not. I suspect you're right but it's not our call. I've been surprised before. If you're going to undermine Knapper and the new dynamic with Attanasio already what hope can you possibly ever have? 

I lose a bit of hope with every passing week to be honest because I simply cannot comprehend why they have not acted. I am aware of the argument re better to wait for the summer but any decision maker within our club who thinks that is the best strategy is, in my view not up to the job. 

[nutty nigel 7,598]

Just now, essex canary said:

The nature of the communication is strange though. The audience at the AGM is overwhelmingly elderly so no young supporters get the chance to make a contribution to the Q&A albeit it is outside the formal business. Then when a shareholder raises an issue they may get answers that refer to non-shareholder groups such as the OSP.  To what extent are press interviews part of fan engagement? The Supporter Engagement Plan should address these issues.

These were press interviews.

[nutty nigel 7,598]

Just now, Jim Smith said:

I lose a bit of hope with every passing week to be honest because I simply cannot comprehend why they have not acted. I am aware of the argument re better to wait for the summer but any decision maker within our club who thinks that is the best strategy is, in my view not up to the job. 

Well, I think you're stuck with Attanasio and Knapper for a bit longer...

[essex canary 504]

1 minute ago, nutty nigel said:

These were press interviews.

Indeed but they are part fan engagement in that the fan doesn't a question opportunity.

[Indy 3,314]

25 minutes ago, nutty nigel said:

Well, I think you're stuck with Attanasio and Knapper for a bit longer...

I do sense a little resentment in your attitude of how MA is operating in a lot of your posts Nutty! Yet the guy has already invest (loaned) ten times the money that the other equal share holders (if it all goes through) have in nearly 30 years! Why?

Edited January 10 by Indy

[nutty nigel 7,598]

8 minutes ago, Indy said:

I do sense resentment in your attitude of how MA is operating! Yet the guy has already invest (loaned) ten times the money that the other equal share holders (if it all goes through) have in nearly 30 years! Why?

Really?

That's ridiculous. It seems I'm the only one on here who recognises the part he plays. 

I didn't say it on that post but the only criticism I have is Absentassio. He's been a board director for 18 months. When did you last see him at a game at Carrow Road?

 

Edited January 10 by nutty nigel

[Indy 3,314]

Just now, nutty nigel said:

Really?

That's ridiculous. It seems I'm the only one on here who recognises the part he plays. 

I'd didn't say it on that post but the only criticism I have is Absentassio. He's been a board director for 18 months. When did you last see him at a game at Carrow Road?

 

So it’s more important that he attends football matches, not that he’s pretty much bailed the club out of the ****e? Where would we be had he not come on the board?

[nutty nigel 7,598]

2 minutes ago, Indy said:

So it’s more important that he attends football matches, not that he’s pretty much bailed the club out of the ****e? Where would we be had he not come on the board?

Where did I say it was more important?

You'd make a good pink un journo.

Edited January 10 by nutty nigel

[Big Vince 319]

4 hours ago, lake district canary said:

He was not amazing - he was a very good fit for our club though.

You seem to think it was his fault we didn't do well in the PL but at the same time agree that our players weren't good enough. You can't have it both ways.

The chances are that he did the best with what was available. 

That goes for Webber as well. Buendia had to be sold to generate funds before the first broadcasting instalment came in. The problem lies with the owners. They do not back the sporting director and head coach with hard cash of their own. McNasty fell on his sword for the same reason under the old structure. Unless there is an external money source, we should all forget about ever going back to the EPL.

[Indy 3,314]

8 minutes ago, nutty nigel said:

Where did I say it was more important?

You'd make a good pink un journo.

You said you are critical of his absence from attending games! So you’re implying it’s more important in your view that our potential owner attend games! Funny I think it’s more important he bailed the club out and wants to be on the board!

We all have different criticisms I suppose! That’s not one I’ll aim at MA if being an armchair support but setting up a successful football club is his way so be it! Better than falling asleep in the directors box during a game I suppose!

[nutty nigel 7,598]

12 minutes ago, Indy said:

You said you are critical of his absence from attending games! So you’re implying it’s more important in your view that our potential owner attend games! Funny I think it’s more important he bailed the club out and wants to be on the board!

We all have different criticisms I suppose! That’s not one I’ll aim at MA if being an armchair support but setting up a successful football club is his way so be it! Better than falling asleep in the directors box during a game I suppose!

Whatever Indy.

I'd rather be judged by what I post rather than your version. 

But either way as sooo many people believe Webber is running the show I don't think it matters.

Let love shine a light

Edited January 10 by nutty nigel

[Fen Canary 866]

29 minutes ago, Indy said:

So it’s more important that he attends football matches, not that he’s pretty much bailed the club out of the ****e? Where would we be had he not come on the board?

Has he actually bailed the club out in any way? As far as my (limited) understanding goes all he has done is forwarded the club the parachute money payment which he will get back when the next tranche is payed by the Premier League, and the rest came from him purchasing newly created C Preference shares.  

[Indy 3,314]

6 minutes ago, Fen Canary said:

Has he actually bailed the club out in any way? As far as my (limited) understanding goes all he has done is forwarded the club the parachute money payment which he will get back when the next tranche is payed by the Premier League, and the rest came from him purchasing newly created C Preference shares.  

There’s around 30 million in difference between what he’s invested and owed to the tv parachute & transfer money, as Sheffield pointed out on other threads.

So there might be a considerable amount still outstanding against that potential income.

[Indy 3,314]

21 minutes ago, nutty nigel said:

Whatever Indy.

I'd rather be judged by what I post rather than your version. 

But either way as sooo many people believe Webber is running the show I don't think it matters.

Let love shine a light

Your words by implication!

I'd didn't say it on that post but the only criticism I have is Absentassio. He's been a board director for 18 months.When did you last see him at a game at Carrow Road?
 

As for Webber the ridiculous nature of him being here still day to day running the show is far fetched I totally agree! Though I wouldn’t be surprised as I’ve said that he’s still utilised and he views talked through if wanted. Pretty standard stuff if the owners respect you and wife works at your company you’re leaving! 

Edited January 10 by Indy

[nutty nigel 7,598]

1 minute ago, Indy said:

Your words by implication!

I'd didn't say it on that post but the only criticism I have is Absentassio. He's been a board director for 18 months.When did you last see him at a game at Carrow Road?
 

As for Webber the ridiculous nature of him being here still day to day running the show is far fetched I totally agree! Though I wouldn’t be surprised as I’ve said that he’s still utilised and he views talked through if wanted. Pretty standard stuff if the owners and wife works at your company you’re leaving! 

Words by implication is a new one on me.

Your words by implication are that Zoe is just a puppet for Webber that allows him to control Attanasio, Knapper and Wagner.

I'm going to enjoy this new debating style

Let love shine a light

[Indy 3,314]

6 minutes ago, nutty nigel said:

Words by implication is a new one on me.

Your words by implication are that Zoe is just a puppet for Webber that allows him to control Attanasio, Knapper and Wagner.

I'm going to enjoy this new debating style

Let love shine a light

Funny you criticise the new US board member for not coming to watch games, who nearly invests into the club 100 million, so it’s more important to you that they attend games! Good to know, I can see why you love our current majority shareholders so much…..indeed let the love shine a light.

Night Nutty I’m off out to play old man’s footy! 

[hogesar 9,725]

47 minutes ago, Indy said:

You said you are critical of his absence from attending games! So you’re implying it’s more important in your view that our potential owner attend games! Funny I think it’s more important he bailed the club out and wants to be on the board!

We all have different criticisms I suppose! That’s not one I’ll aim at MA if being an armchair support but setting up a successful football club is his way so be it! Better than falling asleep in the directors box during a game I suppose!

MA hasn't really bailed us out he's just changed debt from being owed externally to being owed to him.

And that's not out of love for Norwich City. Its for MAs benefit. Which is fine, I'm totally on board with that. But there's a significant difference between DS and MWJ contributing half their entire wealth with absolutely zero certainty of getting that back at the time vs MA helping out with 1% of his with guarantees of getting it back. 👍

[nutty nigel 7,598]

By implication Indy thinks he's given us the money, doesn't expect to see any of it back and won't fall asleep in the directors box like a couple of old duffers who actually have given half their wealth without expecting to see it again.

Let love shine a light

[Fen Canary 866]

38 minutes ago, Indy said:

There’s around 30 million in difference between what he’s invested and owed to the tv parachute & transfer money, as Sheffield pointed out on other threads.

So there might be a considerable amount still outstanding against that potential income.

But again, he hasn’t gifted that money to the club. All he’s done is bought the debt off the bank, the club simply owes him now rather than whoever they did before. This puts him in a powerful negotiating position and also means the club he de facto owns isn’t paying interest on debts when it doesn’t need to which saves him money. He’s never going to write any of these debts off, he’ll want repaying in full and more on top