Some shareholders get a free season ticket ticket?!?

[GMF 745]

36 minutes ago, essex canary said:

It is therefore a no brainer for the Club if they tuned into the issue seriously which is in accordance with their claim in the 2002 Prospectus that  'Shareholders are encouraged to retain shares.'  

The share offer document actually said:-

By offering these benefits, the Board intends to encourage potential investors to subscribe and retain ordinary shares subscribed under the offer. Accordingly, the benefits are personal to the subscribers for the ordinary shares and may not be transferred.

[chicken 2,625]

1 hour ago, essex canary said:

First of all I didn't say the last bit at all. Not everything in life is that binary. It is a balanced debate.

Which was exactly my point. Flippant remarks are not a balanced debate are they? They don't tend to have the desired effect of making one look considered and engaging in a thought process. Such remarks are common place and tend to ignore that actual death toll around wars for resources like oil as well. But yes, never binary. But then why make it so if you know it isn't? 
 

1 hour ago, essex canary said:

Notwithstanding the previous paragraph I agree with you. Free gift must be the verdict. Nonetheless you can't give a free gift and deny it's usage. In this case perhaps they had no viable alternative but should they still compensate?

If you return something to a company without all of the components they would not give you a refund or compensate. This is because you could, buy said item for the freebie, then return said item without the freebie and end up with something that can sometimes end up more valuable than the item it came with. I can think of a few things like this with magazines and collectables that come with it.

If you were to sell it on yourself - different matter. But to ask for compensation for a free ticket impacted by covid when there was a method of people getting a seat who had season tickets... is taking the p!zz. There's no other way of looking at it - and the ombudsmen agree. Everyone on this forum agrees with that finding, and yet here you are, pointlessly trying to justify your continued stance. No one here can change the outcome for you, no one wants to, no one even agrees with you.

It's also a pretty shoddy reason to pour so much hate and conspiracy onto the club you supposedly love. And as I have point out, the level of spin you are willing to go to, to try and buy favour... to quote Chris Kamara "It's unbelievable Jeff!". Attacks on the club being community orientated because you didn't get your way, for example.

[dylanisabaddog 4,930]

On 16/03/2024 at 16:05, JonnyJonnyRowe said:

I found out that the club has some arrangement where they are dishing out free season tickets every year to those who own 1000 shares. One of the posters on this forum is happily taking his free season ticket.

Am I the only person who thinks that little 'perks' like this need to be scrapped immediately ahead of us losing parachute payments?

If these large shareholders really have the best interests of the club at heart they would be happy to continue to pop their money in the meter each year to help with the clubs budget and cashflow, help keep the lights on at Colney and our wonderful academy buildings.

I suggest the club has a vote among these owners of 1000 shares to see if a majority can approve the scrapping of this overly generous perk. Assuming most are true fans they will surely agree to end his free for all?

The really big issue is over 65's getting a discount. Some will tell you this is a loyalty bonus but that's nonsense. As I've said before, my 70 year old friend had never set foot in Carrow Road until 2 years ago when he bought the seat next to me. He pays £170 a year less than me but makes up for it by giving me a lift in his £80k Merc. Heated leather seats are lovely on a cold winter's day. 

[chicken 2,625]

6 minutes ago, dylanisabaddog said:

The really big issue is over 65's getting a discount. Some will tell you this is a loyalty bonus but that's nonsense. As I've said before, my 70 year old friend had never set foot in Carrow Road until 2 years ago when he bought the seat next to me. He pays £170 a year less than me but makes up for it by giving me a lift in his £80k Merc. Heated leather seats are lovely on a cold winter's day. 

Unfortunately, there are a lot of things that we have now that were introduced for past generations and remain because we are a nation with a lot of folks 65+ (not a bad thing) who tend to vote in larger numbers and tend to vote one way more than not.

Historically, even back 20-30yrs ago, pensioners were a very different make-up to those retiring now, or who have retired in the last, say 10-15yrs.

If you take folks of my grandparents generation, born in 1919 for example, it wasn't at all uncommon for only one of them to have earned an income for the majority of their working lives. My grandparents did, but that wasn't all that common. The discounts and freebies handed out to that generation was because pensions had not always been a fantastic thing, or even been a thing to some born earlier, and they needed a bit of assistance to do things that everyone else could.

Now, I'm not saying that there are still pensioners that struggle, and there most certainly are, but generally, the reality is that the landscape has changed and yet many of these things like discounts and freebies still exist.

I suspect that by the time I get there, many will be gone. Actual retirement age has gone up... even though the average age is actually falling.

[JonnyJonnyRowe 446]

39 minutes ago, dylanisabaddog said:

The really big issue is over 65's getting a discount. Some will tell you this is a loyalty bonus but that's nonsense. As I've said before, my 70 year old friend had never set foot in Carrow Road until 2 years ago when he bought the seat next to me. He pays £170 a year less than me but makes up for it by giving me a lift in his £80k Merc. Heated leather seats are lovely on a cold winter's day. 

Tough one really, the boomers as a whole have high levels of disposable income compared with younger generations, but there are lots of poor pensioners. I'm sure that concession was set to state retirement age though when it was 65 for men and 60 for women, which isn't 65 for either anymore, I'm surprised given the constant cash grabs in football these days that the club hasn't already lifted the concession age to 66, and then do so again to 67 in 2028. 

Edited March 19 by JonnyJonnyRowe

[Bobzilla 144]

10 minutes ago, JonnyJonnyRowe said:

Tough one really, the boomers as a whole have high levels of disposable income compared with younger generations, but there are lots of poor pensioners. I'm sure that concession was set to state retirement age though when it was 65 for men and 60 for women, which isn't 65 for either anymore, I'm surprised given the constant cash grabs in football these days that the club hasn't already lifted the concession age to 66, and then do so again to 67 in 2028. 

Cash poor asset rich pensioners. Who won't divest of their assets and expect 'society' to pick up the tab on the cash poor bit of it.

And their inability to bring themselves to divest very often puts up process for the rest of us, so their asset base increases in value at the expense of younger generations.

[dylanisabaddog 4,930]

48 minutes ago, JonnyJonnyRowe said:

Tough one really, the boomers as a whole have high levels of disposable income compared with younger generations, but there are lots of poor pensioners. I'm sure that concession was set to state retirement age though when it was 65 for men and 60 for women, which isn't 65 for either anymore, I'm surprised given the constant cash grabs in football these days that the club hasn't already lifted the concession age to 66, and then do so again to 67 in 2028. 

It's 65

[shefcanary 2,409]

Not sure if this helps the argument or not, but at Sheffield United the concession kicks in at 60! Probably because of demographics I suppose ... perhaps our friend should try football a bit further North. Nah, that's too close for comfort ..... 🙂 

[JonnyJonnyRowe 446]

57 minutes ago, dylanisabaddog said:

It's 65

Yes the discount is still set at 65.

I'm saying that I'm surprised they haven't already put that up to 66 to mirror the increase in the retirement age.

[JonnyJonnyRowe 446]

10 minutes ago, shefcanary said:

Not sure if this helps the argument or not, but at Sheffield United the concession kicks in at 60! Probably because of demographics I suppose ... perhaps our friend should try football a bit further North. Nah, that's too close for comfort ..... 🙂 

I wonder what the average lifespan is of somebody who worked for years in front of the coalface or in front of a furnace at a steelworks, maybe they set it at 60 because so many die by 65! 

[shefcanary 2,409]

Just now, JonnyJonnyRowe said:

I wonder what the average lifespan is of somebody who worked for years in front of the coalface or in front of a furnace at a steelworks, maybe they set it at 60 because so many die by 65! 

TBF, nowadays (and since the 80's when the steelworks were essentially shut apart from those which were highly mechanised) most fans who could/ can afford a season ticket in the first place there were / are white collar and professionals. From the richest part of Sheffield to the poorest there is still a 20 year average lifespan difference - and it ain't the poorest that live longest.

But yes, you are right, those poor but skilled ****s in the furnaces were all pretty much dead within a year of retirement. 

[chicken 2,625]

1 hour ago, Bobzilla said:

Cash poor asset rich pensioners. Who won't divest of their assets and expect 'society' to pick up the tab on the cash poor bit of it.

And their inability to bring themselves to divest very often puts up process for the rest of us, so their asset base increases in value at the expense of younger generations.

This is mainly only an issue because people are generally living longer and because historically, the model of where folks live is based upon ownership rather than rental. Other places in Europe the model is rent until retirement where essentially you convert your savings into assets for your offspring as it's safer than bank accounts. They then inherit the property and either sell it / convert it into money again to use there and then, or rent it out so they can retire there too. 

[essex canary 496]

3 hours ago, GMF said:

The share offer document actually said:-

By offering these benefits, the Board intends to encourage potential investors to subscribe and retain ordinary shares subscribed under the offer. Accordingly, the benefits are personal to the subscribers for the ordinary shares and may not be transferred.

Therefore the last 2 sentences contradict each other. 

If they did it your way they could replace say 2 disaffected young people with 500 engaged young people at the next AGM. Why won't they do it? Because the Custodian Doyenne and her First Lieutenant prefer a comfortable life rather than the sense of challenge.

Why doesn't the fan engagement process take on the issue?

[TIL 1010 4,748]

1 hour ago, essex canary said:

Therefore the last 2 sentences contradict each other. 

If they did it your way they could replace say 2 disaffected young people with 500 engaged young people at the next AGM. Why won't they do it? Because the Custodian Doyenne and her First Lieutenant prefer a comfortable life rather than the sense of challenge.

Why doesn't the fan engagement process take on the issue?

This is reaching deep into absurdity FFS ! 

Seek professional help for the benefit of your sanity if it is not already to late.

[essex canary 496]

29 minutes ago, TIL 1010 said:

This is reaching deep into absurdity FFS ! 

Seek professional help for the benefit of your sanity if it is not already to late.

Or use a flashlight. I will ensure my phone is charged albeit nowhere near Dereham.

[TIL 1010 4,748]

14 minutes ago, essex canary said:

Or use a flashlight. I will ensure my phone is charged albeit nowhere near Dereham.

You are a complete and utter clown and it would do this forum and Norwich City Football Club a massive favour if you were to let your phone go flat or better still if you lost it.

[dylanisabaddog 4,930]

3 minutes ago, TIL 1010 said:

You are a complete and utter clown and it would do this forum and Norwich City Football Club a massive favour if you were to let your phone go flat or better still if you lost it.

Ditto

If I said what I really thought I'd probably get banned. 

Absolutely pathetic 

Edited March 19 by dylanisabaddog

[essex canary 496]

4 minutes ago, dylanisabaddog said:

Ditto

If I said what I really thought I'd probably get banned. 

Absolutely pathetic 

Pathetic that you can't articulate why the Club's shareholder cohort should not better reflect the demographic of its supporter base and provide better representation of young supporters instead of the gerontocracy.

[dylanisabaddog 4,930]

5 minutes ago, essex canary said:

Pathetic that you can't articulate why the Club's shareholder cohort should not better reflect the demographic of its supporter base and provide better representation of young supporters instead of the gerontocracy.

Pathetic that you can't understand that Norwich City Football Club has a majority shareholder. If it annoys you so much I suggest you write a cook book.

[TIL 1010 4,748]

7 minutes ago, essex canary said:

Pathetic that you can't articulate why the Club's shareholder cohort should not better reflect the demographic of its supporter base and provide better representation of young supporters instead of the gerontocracy.

Nurse, nurse he is out of bed again.

[dylanisabaddog 4,930]

6 minutes ago, TIL 1010 said:

Nurse, nurse he is out of bed again.

So would you be if the sheets were a bit damp

[essex canary 496]

17 minutes ago, dylanisabaddog said:

So would you be if the sheets were a bit damp

Ir is because the faculties of the gerontocracy deteriorate to a position where they collectively behave like a 15 year old gang in a school playground.

[GMF 745]

2 hours ago, essex canary said:

Therefore the last 2 sentences contradict each other. 

Not really. The subscriber benefits were there as an incentive to encourage retention of the shares. If the original subscriber decides to sell, or passes away, the benefits are lost. It’s quite simple for anyone with a degree of common sense.

3 hours ago, essex canary said:

If they did it your way they could replace say 2 disaffected young people with 500 engaged young people at the next AGM. Why won't they do it? Because the Custodian Doyenne and her First Lieutenant prefer a comfortable life rather than the sense of challenge.

Inane ramblings on your part, but, if you genuinely want to see the highlighted bit, it’s in your own gift to make it happen.

3 hours ago, essex canary said:

Why doesn't the fan engagement process take on the issue?

It’s because supporter engagement has to be on issues that are of interest to fans generally, rather than something of personal self-interest, especially when the specific topic lacks any substance.

[essex canary 496]

42 minutes ago, GMF said:

Not really. The subscriber benefits were there as an incentive to encourage retention of the shares. If the original subscriber decides to sell, or passes away, the benefits are lost. It’s quite simple for anyone with a degree of common sense.

Inane ramblings on your part, but, if you genuinely want to see the highlighted bit, it’s in your own gift to make it happen.

It’s because supporter engagement has to be on issues that are of interest to fans generally, rather than something of personal self-interest, especially when the specific topic lacks any substance.

In other words shareholding is a spent anachronistic gerontocracy in which any young people will be treated as second class citizens alongside any dissenters such as myself whilst the much weaker supporter engagement approach allocates power to the executive in direct contradiction of the Government and Opposition benches fan-led approach.

[Greavsy 2,415]

On a bike! 

[Duncan Edwards 2,237]

5 hours ago, essex canary said:

In other words shareholding is a spent anachronistic gerontocracy in which any young people will be treated as second class citizens alongside any dissenters such as myself whilst the much weaker supporter engagement approach allocates power to the executive in direct contradiction of the Government and Opposition benches fan-led approach.

“Dissenter” 😂

Thats definitely NOT what they call you.

I think it would be more accurate that your self interest is matched by the club’s disinterest in your perpetual bleating.

And how can you claim to be treated as a second-class citizen when it is apparent to everyone that the club and various employees have spent an inordinate amount of time dealing with you and you alone in your one-man crusade against (one of) the club(s) you support? I wonder how many other shareholders have had that level of attention and correspondence from the club?

Anyway, you serve a purpose, your posts are better than a few beers, a double shot of Night Nurse and twenty minutes counting sheep. 

[essex canary 496]

7 hours ago, Duncan Edwards said:

“Dissenter” 😂

Thats definitely NOT what they call you.

I think it would be more accurate that your self interest is matched by the club’s disinterest in your perpetual bleating.

And how can you claim to be treated as a second-class citizen when it is apparent to everyone that the club and various employees have spent an inordinate amount of time dealing with you and you alone in your one-man crusade against (one of) the club(s) you support? I wonder how many other shareholders have had that level of attention and correspondence from the club?

Anyway, you serve a purpose, your posts are better than a few beers, a double shot of Night Nurse and twenty minutes counting sheep. 

The second class citizen comment wasn't a reference to myself but to the, often younger, inheritor members of the AD Group. That said, an element of the comment could be applied to me in that if I hadn't objected to such a preposterous 2 tier process going forward I would still be able to make my contributions to that group going forward. Well at least up to now where it appears that I wasn't the only villain of the peace.

[essex canary 496]

I guess to keep the local version of the Stasi happy I should have referred to:

'The Custodian Doyenne and largely silent Doyen and their First Lieutenant'

All humble apologies offered.

Perhaps I should have added as an Insurance Policy:

'Boris Johnson has been the most preposterous PM in British history in stark contrast to his immediate predecessor Theresa May who battled diligently in extremely difficult circumstances in an endeavour to achieve a positive outcome.' (not that it is relevant to this thread).

Edited March 20 by essex canary

[Google Bot 3,278]

2 hours ago, essex canary said:

'Boris Johnson has been the most preposterous PM in British history in stark contrast to his immediate predecessor Theresa May who battled diligently in extremely difficult circumstances in an endeavour to achieve a positive outcome.'

Hiya! We're just popping down the shops, 

I've left the lights on out the back so you can get yourself a sandwich from the fridge if you get hungry, they're on the second shelf down wrapped in the foil.  Don't have the ones in the door as you didn't like the cheese so don't want to be cleaning that off the walls again, i'll have those later rather than going to waste.

There's plenty of crisps and chocolate in the cupboard, and your squash is in the blue bottle with the white labels on.

We'll read your messages later when we come back, have fun x

[Bobzilla 144]

22 hours ago, essex canary said:

Therefore the last 2 sentences contradict each other. 

If they did it your way they could replace say 2 disaffected young people with 500 engaged young people at the next AGM. Why won't they do it? Because the Custodian Doyenne and her First Lieutenant prefer a comfortable life rather than the sense of challenge.

Why doesn't the fan engagement process take on the issue?

No they don’t.  They encourage subscription by offering the seat for life.  They encourage holding by making that seat for life conditional upon retention of the 1,000 shares.  They don’t incentivise heirs as a result of the offer document - I believe the incentive for heirs became the inheritability of the title of AD, whatever that’s worth.