official club news Norfolk Holdings to to enable majority control of club

[essex canary 610]

9 hours ago, SouthwellC said:

Expecting him to be at the AGM - so we will ask the question, yes. 

Connor, what a great opportunity to ask Delia how this poll compares with Brexit?

The average age of the electorate could be a good place to start. Then there is the likely turnout around 22% by share number last time or 7% by number of voters. Then there is the fact that the near 133,000 shares owned by 2 directors families have been excused from these polls by share settlement whereas in a great show of equality (not) the remaining 157,000 or so haven't.

If I knew exactly where Letsbee Avenue is I would return to sender.

Take along your armour suit and wishing you the best of luck.

[Soldier on 285]

36 minutes ago, dylanisabaddog said:

I think you need to read his post again 

Likewise 

[dylanisabaddog 6,108]

43 minutes ago, dylanisabaddog said:

I think you need to read his post again 

We'll have to beg to differ but if PurpleCanary is asking Connor to delve into a highly complex financial arrangement I'm afraid he's wasting his time. I spent a lifetime looking at this sort of arrangement and I don't fully understand it, mainly because we don't have all the information required. Nor, I doubt, will we get it. 

There is no point in asking a sports reporter to ask questions if he won't understand the answer. I'm not being rude, there's no reason he should understand and there's no one else at Archant who can either. 

[essex canary 610]

My question is straightforward enough. If the issues are too complex for the ordinary folk to understand a poll should not take place.

[wcorkcanary 4,748]

1 hour ago, essex canary said:

My question is straightforward enough. If the issues are too complex for the ordinary folk to understand a poll should not take place.

As usual , your apples and oranges comparisons leaves everyone disinterested In pretty much everything you say, try to not put yourself above others in the comprehension stakes, you've proved time and again that you have enough trouble with it yourself . Nothing you have said in the last 7000 posts would make anyone believe,  follow or trust you.

[Bobzilla 207]

6 hours ago, dylanisabaddog said:

I think you're missing the point. MA has acquired control of Norwich City with a view to making a profit. It's not the first time, Chase did it as well. 

The bare minimum of supporter contact so far has simply been a box ticking exercise. The truth is that to MA, the views of non shareholding supporters are irrelevant and the minority shareholders are a bit of a nuisance. 

Don't expect @SouthwellCto get any more information than MA wants him to have. It isn't going to happen. 

If the minority shareholders were a nuisance, he'd have gone for 90% and force the full buyout. It wouldn't be difficult for him.

[PurpleCanary 6,361]

1 hour ago, Bobzilla said:

If the minority shareholders were a nuisance, he'd have gone for 90% and force the full buyout. It wouldn't be difficult for him.

To do that he would either have to buy out all the minorities, or buy about half S&J's shares, or some combination of the two. But I doubt S&J want at the moment to sell any of theirs to Norfolk. It is probably no coincidence that Attanasio has not - yet - got to 90 per cent.

[GMF 1,006]

3 minutes ago, PurpleCanary said:

To do that he would either have to buy out all the minorities, or buy about half S&J's shares, or some combination of the two. But I doubt S&J want at the moment to sell any of theirs to Norfolk. It is probably no coincidence that Attanasio has not - yet - got to 90 per cent.

Just as a matter of fact, they haven’t sold a single share yet. Everything here has been driven by MF’s initial decision to sell his 16% minority holding. 

[essex canary 610]

38 minutes ago, GMF said:

Just as a matter of fact, they haven’t sold a single share yet. Everything here has been driven by MF’s initial decision to sell his 16% minority holding. 

...at what now appears to be a far more favourable price than the underlying finances could justify.

[GMF 1,006]

59 minutes ago, essex canary said:

...at what now appears to be a far more favourable price than the underlying finances could justify.

Cry me a river.

[Soldier on 285]

Pack finally arrived yesterday !!

[GMF 1,006]

12 minutes ago, Soldier on said:

Pack finally arrived yesterday !!

Lucky you. I’m still waiting, as are several other shareholders. 

[TIL 1010 5,227]

48 minutes ago, GMF said:

Lucky you. I’m still waiting, as are several other shareholders. 

You do realise that this will attract a post about the maintenance of the shareholder database and untraceable shareholders which is all down to poor administration within the club ?

[GMF 1,006]

3 minutes ago, TIL 1010 said:

You do realise that this will attract a post about the maintenance of the shareholder database and untraceable shareholders which is all down to poor administration within the club ?

Yes, probably, even though it’s being processed by an external mailing company.

Oops, that’s more expense that could have been used to settle with the pesky minorities, even those who’ve shown little inclination to sell, especially at that price! 

[wcorkcanary 4,748]

22 hours ago, GMF said:

Cry me a river.

What a very nice way of laughing,directly in someone's face, he deserves  it. 

[wcorkcanary 4,748]

23 hours ago, essex canary said:

...at what now appears to be a far more favourable price than the underlying finances could 

They agreed a price, you're too greedy to do that,  you may have missed out chap. Why do I find  that so so amusing? Because you are a cont. 

[essex canary 610]

3 hours ago, GMF said:

Lucky you. I’m still waiting, as are several other shareholders. 

My letter box has been assaulted by the latest episode. There is nothing 'lucky' about receiving it as an ex EDP journalist friend confirmed today when he asked me for a translation into common English whereupon I advised that this one is a little beyond me. 

There will be far more than 'several' who ought to suffer this postbox assault who will not do so as a result of poor database maintenance though most of them will be relieved rather than disappointed.

Edited September 29 by essex canary

[GMF 1,006]

11 minutes ago, essex canary said:

who will not do so as a result of poor database maintenance

And there it is @TIL 1010

[wcorkcanary 4,748]

15 minutes ago, essex canary said:

My letter box has been assaulted by the latest episode. There is nothing 'lucky' about receiving it as an ex EDP journalist friend confirmed today when he asked me for a translation into common English whereupon I advised that this one is a little beyond me. 

There will be far more than 'several' who ought to suffer this postbox assault who will not do so as a result of poor database maintenance though most of them will be relieved rather than disappointed.

You should volunteer  to sort it out, then with your hands not idle , there would be no work for the devil to make for them, you've been keeping  him pretty busy lately.  

[essex canary 610]

14 minutes ago, wcorkcanary said:

You should volunteer  to sort it out, then with your hands not idle , there would be no work for the devil to make for them, you've been keeping  him pretty busy lately.  

I should politely enquire about your anxiety levels given that I have 5 times as many votes as Michael Foulger.

[essex canary 610]

On 28/09/2024 at 17:06, GMF said:

Cry me a river.

if posting on here from your position it may be best to decide whether you are doing it from a professional perspective or joining the rabble?

It certainly isn't professional to confuse the positions.

The attached may be helpful.

[GMF 1,006]

Thanks for the lecture @essex canary.

Can I respectfully suggest that you reread all the advice I’ve given you previously, both on here, and in numerous emails.

You’ve ignored most of it, which is, of course, your prerogative.

The original acquisitions were as a consequence of the NG’s offer to MF, and their agents approaching various other leading shareholders.

Let’s not forget how that subsequent discussion with the AD’s was actually facilitated, or, more importantly, who (you) was also advised about it at the time (and by whom).

To be absolutely clear, the Club could not interfere with who NG approached, or who they didn’t at that time.

Of course, the Takeover Code wasn’t relevance then, in 2022, because the initial acquisitions only totalled about 22%. Which makes you copying the above completely unhelpful and irrelevant in the context of the initial acquisitions. 

It only became relevant with the subsequent debt to equity conversion in 2023, which was based upon the same price as the initial acquisitions. So, no issues there. However, for that to actually happen, shareholders voted for the waiver against the requirement for an offer.

That happened, of course. You might not have liked it, but that’s democracy in action for you.

Edited September 29 by GMF

[shefcanary 2,936]

Recoeved my pack yesterday, but still not had time to try and translate things.

BUT very disappointed the GM is being progressed on the basis of financial information that will be 16 months old! How is this allowable? I'm at a loss.

[PurpleCanary 6,361]

40 minutes ago, shefcanary said:

Recoeved my pack yesterday, but still not had time to try and translate things.

BUT very disappointed the GM is being progressed on the basis of financial information that will be 16 months old! How is this allowable? I'm at a loss.

Shef,  I think paragraphs 1, 4 and 6 on page 12 are interesting.

[MrBunce 282]

I've only just had a chance to read the documents (for the record, I received an email link around the same time it appears that Purple did). All the documents can be accessed here as well: https://www.canaries.co.uk/rule9waivercircular

I've very little to add to the excellent summaries @PurpleCanary has provided. 

At least we have a clearer idea of who some of our new overlords may be: https://www.efl.com/governance/owners-and-directors-test-public-register-of-directors/

 

[shefcanary 2,936]

Thanks Mr B. I've copied said list from the EFL's OADT page and share below. The key to the letters after their names in the list are:

(a) Any Person occupying the position of director of a Club whose particulars are registered or registrable under the provisions of section 162 of the Companies Act 2006 and includes a shadow director, that is to say, a Person in accordance with whose directions or instructions the directors of the Club are accustomed to act* 

(b) A Person having Control over the Club

(e) A Relevant Signatory (any Person who is authorised to sign on behalf of a Club a Declaration, a written contract of employment with a Player (other than an Academy Player), a transfer agreement and/or any transfer or registration form in respect of a Player (other than an Academy Player) as may be required by the League from time to time. 

The list of named people are:

Ben Knapper (e)

Dan Fumai (b)

Deborah Attanasio (b)

Delia Smith (a, b)

James Hill (e)

Mark Attanasio (a, b)

Marti Wronski (b)

Michael Attanasio (b)

Michael Wynn-Jones (a, b)

Richard Ressler (b)

Richard Schlesinger (b)

Tom Smith (a)

Zoe Webber (a)

Most names are familiar to is but the new names to discussion on this MB are Dan Fumai, Martin Wronski and Richard Schlesinger. Anyone with any info?

Edited September 29 by shefcanary

[Soldier on 285]

We’ve heard of Schlesinger before haven’t we or is he just affiliated to brewers ?

[MrBunce 282]

11 minutes ago, shefcanary said:

Thanks Mr B. I've copied said list from the EFL's OADT page and share below. The key to the letters after their names in the list are:

(a) Any Person occupying the position of director of a Club whose particulars are registered or registrable under the provisions of section 162 of the Companies Act 2006 and includes a shadow director, that is to say, a Person in accordance with whose directions or instructions the directors of the Club are accustomed to act* 

(b) A Person having Control over the Club

(e) A Relevant Signatory (any Person who is authorised to sign on behalf of a Club a Declaration, a written contract of employment with a Player (other than an Academy Player), a transfer agreement and/or any transfer or registration form in respect of a Player (other than an Academy Player) as may be required by the League from time to time. 

The list of named people are:

Ben Knapper (e)

Dan Fumai (b)

Deborah Attanasio (b)

Delia Smith (a, b)

James Hill (e)

Mark Attanasio (a, b)

Marti Wronski (b)

Michael Attanasio (b)

Michael Wynn-Jones (a, b)

Richard Ressler (b)

Richard Schlesinger (b)

Tom Smith (a)

Zoe Webber (a)

Most names are familiar to is but the new names to discussion on this MB are Dan Fumai, Martin Wronski and Richard Schlesinger. Anyone with any info?

They are all directors of Norfolk and are involved at the Brewers being CFO, COO and president of business operations (i.e. CEO) respectively.

[MrBunce 282]

Stepping back. On relegation in 2022 the club owed about £60m secured on parachute payments and future transfer receipts, accruing interest at around 5.6%/5.75%. Two and half years later, after two seasons in the championship (and never looking like going back up) and selling most of the most marketable player assets, the club owes around £60m to a "friendly face" accruing interest at 11%.

I think that highlights just how catastrophic that premier league 'campaign' was.

Edited September 29 by MrBunce

[GMF 1,006]

39 minutes ago, MrBunce said:

I think that highlights just how catastrophic that premier league 'campaign' was.

Bearing in mind that Covid resulted in £30m loss of revenues, over the tail end of 2019-20 season, and the 2020-21, they effectively doubled down on their budget projections for 2021-22, having secured promotion back to the Premier League, only to compound the problem as a consequence of relegation at the end of that season.

Hardly surprising that MF saw the writing on the wall, recognising the need for additional external funding, pronto, and acted accordingly.

Edited September 29 by GMF