A Day at Fan's Expense for Keir and Ed

[GMF 745]

3 hours ago, essex canary said:

In a sense you didn't understand that right. What was stated was that as a Season Ticket Holder for life unlike other Annual Season Ticket holders I didn't get a refund for the match I couldn't attend  v Preston in August 2020. That was despite the fact that one non- shareholder ST holder the MP for King's Lynn James Wilde claimed to attend then declared in a House of Commons debate that his prime allegiance was to King's Lynn FC.

Isn’t it actually a truer reflection of fact that, for the Preston match, you expected, as a seat for lifer, an automatic entitlement to a ticket for a match with a limited attendance of 2,000, given the ongoing pandemic, despite the club advertising it as a random ballot.

As a consequence of being unsuccessful with your sense of entitlement, you launched a personal crusade, via the ombudsman, for a rebate?

Other recollections of fact are, of course, available….

[daly 501]

15 minutes ago, Duncan Edwards said:

He had a pizza for tea tonight the b***tard; cynically going for the Italian vote…

🙄🤦🏻‍♂️

Who leaked the photo the the Press

 

 

 

[Grando 260]

29 minutes ago, Duncan Edwards said:

He had a pizza for tea tonight the b***tard; cynically going for the Italian vote…

🙄🤦🏻‍♂️

And apparently the swine had a Lancashire hotpot with Yorkshire pudding at lunch today in a brazen attempt to court Red Wall voters…

[Mr Angry 1,561]

10 minutes ago, Grando said:

And apparently the swine had a Lancashire hotpot with Yorkshire pudding at lunch today in a brazen attempt to court Red Wall voters…

If he was pictured eating gammon maybe Daly would vote for him?

[Herman 9,767]

8 hours ago, daly said:

Who leaked the photo the the Press

 

 

 

Kate Middleton?

[Mello Yello 2,295]

10 hours ago, daly said:

Who leaked the photo the the Press

 

 

 

Honourable Ms Angela Rayner probably snapped that pic o' Keir...but like that Labour non-party at Durham...Angie wasn't....but was present?....Although at the time she was wearing her Romulan cloaking device...but unfortunately Angie's cloaking device didn't quite cover her thick soled multi laced 'big bovva boots'....and our 'you ain't seen me, roight'? Angie, was spotted by a keen eyed journo....'Fair Cop'....eventually muttered Keir....Although and unfortunately it was apparently an 'Unfair Cop' for that Boris naughty non-party....

Anyway 'Angie 2 homes all above board alleged non Landlady' had to use a wide angle lens as it was pleasantly plump Keir's second large meal o' the day after his gargantuan no peasants pre-match feast courtesy of Carra hospitality....'Yom Yom slurp burp Yom Yom'...."Oh thanks for the invite Mr Gangnam Style"....'Hey Ed can you pass me that extra dish o' scampi mate'...."Parp!"....

Keir then said before he chomped on a large onion bahji...."You can also tell that Randall Flagg Mandleson i'm not fat...I'm just big-boned'.... 

Edited March 16 by Mello Yello

[essex canary 496]

11 hours ago, GMF said:

Isn’t it actually a truer reflection of fact that, for the Preston match, you expected, as a seat for lifer, an automatic entitlement to a ticket for a match with a limited attendance of 2,000, given the ongoing pandemic, despite the club advertising it as a random ballot.

As a consequence of being unsuccessful with your sense of entitlement, you launched a personal crusade, via the ombudsman, for a rebate?

Other recollections of fact are, of course, available….

The first priority should have been given to the likes of Fans of the Season and those who religiously attend 46 league games a season. Far more important than anyone else including me. Nonetheless the point was that unlike myself other supporters got a refund.

[slaphead 17]

A NONE STOREY. 

[GMF 745]

11 minutes ago, essex canary said:

The first priority should have been given to the likes of Fans of the Season and those who religiously attend 46 league games a season. Far more important than anyone else including me. Nonetheless the point was that unlike myself other supporters got a refund.

Yet again, this is factually incorrect. Yes, a few fans did ask for their money back, however, the vast majority continued with their direct debit monthly payments. They kept putting their money into the club, at a time of global crisis, unlike you.

[essex canary 496]

13 hours ago, Bobzilla said:

I’m sorry about your friend, but that sort of event doesn’t change the terms and conditions of the share subscription.  The bottom line is that whilst the title can be inherited, the other benefits cannot, and the seat for life was seemingly clearly stated as such.  I can’t see how something specifically tied to the life of an individual can be seen as extending past that person’s life.  I cannot see how that could possibly be an arguable position (and it’s my job to find a way to argue the unarguable).  

As for Stephan Phillips (I presume that is who you are referring to), I have no idea about him - the directors have never really interested me.  He’d have got access to the Director’s box anyway as a senior director at the club from 2009.  Are you suggesting that he never bought any shares in the 2002(?) offer but STILL got AD benefits at that time (i.e. before 2009 when he joined the board)?  Or are you suggesting that someone else gave him the £25k to buy the shares?  Or that he owned the shares on behalf of someone else, or that he was the beneficiary of a trust that bought the shares?  It’s really not clear what you are suggesting (past ‘It’s not fair that I and a friend signed up to something we didn’t really understand and seemingly didn’t read properly’).  Regarding the bond scheme, it still isn’t clear what you are insinuating, other than he bought £25k of NCFC bonds (and his gf bought some too) and then got paid out on them, presumably in accordance with the Ts&Cs.

Stephan Phillips was, to my knowledge, the only AD to not have invested as such with the shares he was associated  with being purchased by his then employer Archant Newspapers. He then borrowed the token 100 shares from S&J during his Board tenure returning them upon stepping down from the Board. One Annual Report declared that he did subsequently invest £25,000 in Bonds, more than any other Director. It is not clear whether that included his girlfriend's portion who is declared alongside him on the Bond listing at Colney. During his Board tenure he was party to the Board"s apparent opinion in 2018 that AD'S had 'hugely benefitted' from their seat arrangement.

A somewhat less 'huge benefit' than he has gained from fan finance would be my opinion.

Edited March 16 by essex canary

[essex canary 496]

6 minutes ago, GMF said:

Yet again, this is factually incorrect. Yes, a few fans did ask for their money back, however, the vast majority continued with their direct debit monthly payments. They kept putting their money into the club, at a time of global crisis, unlike you.

You must be very very misinformed. NCFC's gate money as declared in their 2021 Accounts is only £118,000 little more than 1% of the usual annual total. Many other Clubs did exactly what you state, the likes of Hull and Swansea for instance declaring around 10 times as much from a much lower annual base and therefore retaining probably one third or so of their gate money. These people cannot have continued to pay their DD 's without reimbursement unless some false accounting has occurred.

[essex canary 496]

16 hours ago, shefcanary said:

Thanks for sharing Mr Angry. Like others I had not bothered previously to read the findings despite it being referenced on here. What a convoluted tale.

I've had to respond to similar complaints in my past employment usually relating to access to a city's art collections, in particular items donated on loan to said collections (and always written in green ink by the same person - so much so that my colleagues stopped opening the letters when they recognised the green ink), but was never privy to something as mind-blowing as this. I appreciate the idea that we prefer to watch the match with friends or family rather than being stuck with a load of aging, loaded and opiniated people, so can see why the exchange of a corporate seat for two "normal" seats might be appealing. But having agreed this with the club, expecting things to stay exactly the same having agreed the exchange and benefitting someone else in the process, and also expecting to be treated the same as Director's who have been appointed after a public vote on the basis of equality, whoooossshhhh, woah boy! And to pursue it so vigorously; really?? 🤦‍♂️🤷‍♂️

Come on shef. You need to level on something. Did you get away with that away membership this season? I mean when I queried it Sam Hall advised me that they had withdrawn 7 of them that had been mistakenly granted to Season Ticket Holders on account of their shareholding as they weren't prepared to extend the offer to away membership despite the wording in the AAs, You are not an ST holder though. Did you slip through the net?

[GMF 745]

11 minutes ago, essex canary said:

You must be very very misinformed. NCFC's gate money as declared in their 2021 Accounts is only £118,000 little more than 1% of the usual annual total. Many other Clubs did exactly what you state, the likes of Hull and Swansea for instance declaring around 10 times as much from a much lower annual base and therefore retaining probably one third or so of their gate money. These people cannot have continued to pay their DD 's without reimbursement unless some false accounting has occurred.

I was advised by the Club at the time that the £118k gate receipts related to the handful of games that were played with the 1,000, or 2,000 fans, during 2020-21.

The direct debit payments were treated as receipts in advance, as creditors falling due within one year.

I’m not an accountant but this seems far more logical than your explanation.

[Bobzilla 144]

39 minutes ago, essex canary said:

Stephan Phillips was, to my knowledge, the only AD to not have invested as such with the shares he was associated  with being purchased by his then employer Archant Newspapers. He then borrowed the token 100 shares from S&J during his Board tenure returning them upon stepping down from the Board. One Annual Report declared that he did subsequently invest £25,000 in Bonds, more than any other Director. It is not clear whether that included his girlfriend's portion who is declared alongside him on the Bond listing at Colney. During his Board tenure he was party to the Board"s apparent opinion in 2018 that AD'S had 'hugely benefitted' from their seat arrangement.

A somewhat less 'huge benefit' than he has gained from fan finance would be my opinion.

Right.

As you should know, a company is a bit of paper at companies house. It is legally deemed to be a person, but it cannot actually act on its own (it needs people to do so) and it cannot sit on a seat at carrow road.  So, are you sure that he was an AD by right, or simply ex officio as a representative of the actual shareholder? Did he occupy his seat by right or because Archant, the seat holder, permitted or to happen, much as happened for the daughter of your friend when another AD couldn't attend? 

And, if I get this right, you're bitter because he's caused £50k to go to the club, half equity half debt?  Wow. Just wow...

Edited March 16 by Bobzilla

[GMF 745]

1 hour ago, essex canary said:

Stephan Phillips was, to my knowledge, the only AD to not have invested as such with the shares he was associated  with being purchased by his then employer Archant Newspapers. He then borrowed the token 100 shares from S&J during his Board tenure returning them upon stepping down from the Board. 

As of last October Stephan still owned these shares.

[First Wazzock 902]

I haven't read the article (or all of this thread, so this may already have been brought up!), so i don't know how much we are talking about.

Just for balance, how much did it cost when we had royalty visit for the Aston Villa game?

[essex canary 496]

1 hour ago, GMF said:

I was advised by the Club at the time that the £118k gate receipts related to the handful of games that were played with the 1,000, or 2,000 fans, during 2020-21.

The direct debit payments were treated as receipts in advance, as creditors falling due within one year.

I’m not an accountant but this seems far more logical than your explanation.

Yes re the first paragraph.

Yes re the second paragraph too but that is smoke and mirrors in relation to what many other Clubs did. 

Norwich City continued to collect the money in 20/21 then gave fans the value in 21/22 therefore it was a Receipt in Advance in 20/21 and shunted to the Income Account in 21/22.

It is very doubtful very NCFC could have acted like that were it not for Premier League TV monies which is why many EFL clubs acted very differently. Rightly or wrongly NCFC's decision has still contributed to its' £96 million debt figure. 

At Cambridge United for instance they claimed the majority of the 20/21 season ticket money against ifollow fees then gave only a 10% discount in paying again for 21/22. Not very generous you may say. Then again their owners have put in an equity injection this season broadly equivalent to one seasons gate money which is a little different to racking up Interest on Debt which could at least have been partially mitigated with better decision making.

[Branston Pickle 3,659]

1 hour ago, GMF said:

I was advised by the Club at the time that the £118k gate receipts related to the handful of games that were played with the 1,000, or 2,000 fans, during 2020-21.

The direct debit payments were treated as receipts in advance, as creditors falling due within one year.

I’m not an accountant but this seems far more logical than your explanation.

Yes, unsurprising that Essex is (deliberately) misunderstanding things. He claims to know stuff but gets it wrong oh so often. It is obvious that the gate receipts only reflect ticket sales for those games…it is even stated in the Accounting Notes.

Edit: I’ve just seen his reply - it is wholly nonsensical to compare NCFC with Cambridge Utd, who probably have 2-3k s/t holders tops, but there you go.

Edited March 16 by Branston Pickle

[shefcanary 2,409]

13 hours ago, Grando said:

And apparently the swine had a Lancashire hotpot with Yorkshire pudding at lunch today in a brazen attempt to court Red Wall voters…

Sacrilege - mixing white and red rose food! Away with him.

[shefcanary 2,409]

1 hour ago, essex canary said:

Come on shef. You need to level on something. Did you get away with that away membership this season? I mean when I queried it Sam Hall advised me that they had withdrawn 7 of them that had been mistakenly granted to Season Ticket Holders on account of their shareholding as they weren't prepared to extend the offer to away membership despite the wording in the AAs, You are not an ST holder though. Did you slip through the net?

It was withdrawn. I haven't revisited. A genuine mistake by a new employee at the club.

[GMF 745]

31 minutes ago, essex canary said:

Yes re the first paragraph.

Yes re the second paragraph too but that is smoke and mirrors in relation to what many other Clubs did. 

Norwich City continued to collect the money in 20/21 then gave fans the value in 21/22 therefore it was a Receipt in Advance in 20/21 and shunted to the Income Account in 21/22.

It is very doubtful very NCFC could have acted like that were it not for Premier League TV monies which is why many EFL clubs acted very differently. Rightly or wrongly NCFC's decision has still contributed to its' £96 million debt figure. 

So that’s two yes, which infers that your original statement about me being, “very, very misinformed” is incorrect then?

Notwithstanding, the Club was quite clear when it offered season ticket holders the opportunity to continue their direct debits, those credits would be rolled over into 2021-22. Therefore, the accounting treatment is both logical and correct.

[Branston Pickle 3,659]

2 minutes ago, GMF said:

So that’s two yes, which infers that your original statement about me being, “very, very misinformed” is incorrect then?

Notwithstanding, the Club was quite clear when it offered season ticket holders the opportunity to continue their direct debits, those credits would be rolled over into 2021-22. Therefore, the accounting treatment is both logical and correct.

Totally correct.  And I don’t recall too many complaints at the time.

[essex canary 496]

27 minutes ago, GMF said:

So that’s two yes, which infers that your original statement about me being, “very, very misinformed” is incorrect then?

Notwithstanding, the Club was quite clear when it offered season ticket holders the opportunity to continue their direct debits, those credits would be rolled over into 2021-22. Therefore, the accounting treatment is both logical and correct.

The fans did not 'keep putting their money in the Club.'  They, unlike at many other Clubs where STHs substantially paid for both years,  gave the Club an interest free loan for one year. By comparison the inheritor shareholder, assuming as you have that there is to be no capital growth, has loaned 40 times a season ticket value for 6 years and counting for their 'interest free loan."

Stephan acquired his 100 shares from S&J. If he has still got them maybe they gifted them? Maybe he has yet to take his Bond Loan back or indeed its' profits which could be sitting in Creditors? Rest assured he will somewhere further down the line. He was still accruing money during a time period in which shareholders cannot be deemed to be doing so.

[GMF 745]

4 hours ago, essex canary said:

The fans did not 'keep putting their money in the Club.'  They, unlike at many other Clubs where STHs substantially paid for both years,  gave the Club an interest free loan for one year. By comparison the inheritor shareholder, assuming as you have that there is to be no capital growth, has loaned 40 times a season ticket value for 6 years and counting for their 'interest free loan."

This is nonsense. You can’t say on the one hand that fans didn’t put money into the club and then say that they gave the club an interest free loan. It’s cash into the club irrespective of how the club accounts for it.

As for the original AD’s, their interest comes from the benefit of being able to use a seat during their lifetime. Obviously that position disappears for the subsequent holders, but there’s little point in complaining about it, as that was quite explicit in the offer documentation.

Quite why they continue to hold the shares in the circumstances is a mystery to me. And don’t say it’s because they are impossible to sell, they aren’t. Difficult, yes, but with a little thought, they can be sold in smaller bundles.

As for your comparison between clubs, it’s wrong, simply because the vast majority of clubs, unlike City, hadn’t even commenced their season ticket sales when the pandemic struck. 

[The Real Buh 3,432]

Can a shareholder give me one share so I can go to an AGM and cause absolute chaos? My shenanigans are legendary.

[essex canary 496]

On 16/03/2024 at 19:05, GMF said:

This is nonsense. You can’t say on the one hand that fans didn’t put money into the club and then say that they gave the club an interest free loan. It’s cash into the club irrespective of how the club accounts for it.

As for the original AD’s, their interest comes from the benefit of being able to use a seat during their lifetime. Obviously that position disappears for the subsequent holders, but there’s little point in complaining about it, as that was quite explicit in the offer documentation.

Quite why they continue to hold the shares in the circumstances is a mystery to me. And don’t say it’s because they are impossible to sell, they aren’t. Difficult, yes, but with a little thought, they can be sold in smaller bundles.

As for your comparison between clubs, it’s wrong, simply because the vast majority of clubs, unlike City, hadn’t even commenced their season ticket sales when the pandemic struck. 

As I understand it the 30% of STs who pay up front rather than DD made a payment to the Club in 2020 then did not pay again until 2022 whilst getting the benefit of their 2020 payment from August 2021 onwards. Am I correct? That was far more generous than many other Clubs. 

As an AD, I don't understand how I can make a judgement about what is in my best interests when the Club has not informed me about how the Norfolk Group issue is likely to settle going forwards. Then as a group we may be inclined to think that we want the same exit terms on both rhe sale price and ,where applicable, on our seat arrangements. How could all this be coordinated? If, as seems the case the Club were willing at least at one stage to buy these 30,000 at £25 as per MF why didn't they just offer the same for the other 120,000 or so which by shear numbers must be must more expensive to maintain not to mention the Rule 9 waiver expense?

None of it seems logical. All of it is poorly communicated and not at all coordinated.

[GMF 745]

@essex canary you are conflating two parties with your above argument.

Any existing shareholder (in this instance MF) is free to do whatever they want with their shares.

Similarly, any prospective buyer is free to make offers to whoever they choose.

This situation normally applies until the acquirer has a notifiable interest . As the Club isn’t listed on the stock exchange, but is a plc, that’s 30% before the Takeover Panel needs to be advised.

This fact shouldn’t be ignored and, unfortunately for you, renders your above comments irrelevant, I’m afraid. 

 

[Duncan Edwards 2,237]

50 minutes ago, GMF said:

@essex canary you are conflating two parties with your above argument.

Any existing shareholder (in this instance MF) is free to do whatever they want with their shares.

Similarly, any prospective buyer is free to make offers to whoever they choose.

This situation normally applies until the acquirer has a notifiable interest . As the Club isn’t listed on the stock exchange, but is a plc, that’s 30% before the Takeover Panel needs to be advised.

This fact shouldn’t be ignored and, unfortunately for you, renders your above comments irrelevant, I’m afraid. 

 

 

 

Edited March 17 by Duncan Edwards

[norwich canary 73]

Anyway what did he have in the curry house? 

[Google Bot 3,278]

39 minutes ago, norwich canary said:

Anyway what did he have in the curry house? 

Curry.