Doncaster

[Scooby 0]

What does every one think about the statement from Doncaster in the EDP today regarding our finances?

[JJ 0]

If what Doncaster says is true then why the hell has is taken us until mid-August for the club to mention it?

[Herb 0]

Sounds very fishy on initial reading.

9m not 6m for a new stand?

Errr...did we not get a quote?

[sheded 0]

[quote user="Scooby"]What does every one think about the statement from Doncaster in the EDP today regarding our finances?[/quote]

I would think he was laying it on the line !    for instance  the Jarrold stand  ... that major  building  projects   do cost more than the original estimate  is now common  ,Wembley stadium ?  although why this should be  is a mystery to me , whatever happened to penalty clauses ? 

The deals involving Safri  , and Ashton   ?   it could well be as Doncaster describes  ,  dealing with vultures [ agents ]   must be a complex  business , and to give a blow by blow account to the fans   during this procedure   , could cock the  whole thing up !   having said that  I can`t see why the board  can`t disclose  the details of any transaction when its completed  ?   instead of waiting until they receive  massive mail input wanting to know whats going on !

Message to the board ,  be upfront with the fans !  

[Chip20 69]

Errr...yes we probably did. And I''d imagine the ''quote'' was £6m. Construction projects frequently go well over budget, just look at Wembley, the Channel Tunnel, the Scottish Parliament building. Constructors almost always quote the absolute minimum it could feasibly be done for to get the business, then costs inevitably escalate once the contract is signed and the project underway.

[Faded Jaded Semi Plastic SOB 1,036]

I would suggest that the club has decided to be more upfront with this sort of information as it is now more likely to be in the "public domain" following its recent meeting with members of NCISA.

[John Boubepo 0]

No Money - all the more reason to sign Sutton on a free then!       hows that for a one liner?

[Carrow89 0]

" why the hell has is taken us until mid-August for the club to mention it "

The article said

" I had intended to explain the club''s financial position after the transfer window had closed on August 31. But faced with a front-page article in the Evening News a fortnight ago (“Show Us The Money” - July 26), I felt it was important to set the record straight. "

[Herb 0]

[quote user="Lincoln Canary"]Errr...yes we probably did. And I''d

imagine the ''quote'' was £6m. Construction projects frequently go well

over budget[/quote]

Well it was an estimate, not a quote then.

A quotation is saying "I''ll do X for X pounds"

They can''t then say "Ah, we were a bit crap at adding stuff up, we need an extra 3 million quid"

Why not refuse to pay a penny until the jobs finished and to the original quoted price?

If a customer rings me for a quote the price I tell them is the price they pay, regardless of any difficulties my end.

[sheded 0]

[quote user="John Boubepo"]No Money - all the more reason to sign Sutton on a free then!       hows that for a one liner?
[/quote]

Isn`t that the question JB ?   ....  would Sutton  actually  come " on a free "   or would  he want a basic wage  [ which would be ? ]    and  paid for each  appearance  , the amount  paid  would be ? .....   its those two  financial factors  that could be the reason  why Sutton is not  signed up by now ?

[Tufnell Park Canary 0]

I just think this all smacks of mis-management of finances. We seem to pay too much for players and too much tio agents. We don''t other clubs of City''s stature seem to be suffering from the things we are? Is it because we blew 9m on a stand when we should have invested in players?

[jetstream 0]

Quoting the Wembley stadium build as an example of a project that has gone over budget is a bit mis-leading. Yes, it is costing more to build than originally planned but it is not costing the FA any more than the initial contract stated as it is being built at a fixed price - all the over-run costs are being borne by the construction company - ie a clever piece of business by Adam Crozier.

In fact most major construction projects have a set completion date and penalty clauses which usually reduce the bill by "X" amount per day of the over-run. It is possible that the contract might allow for extra costs depending on certain factors but to increase costs by 50% seems very high - but we''re not privy to the details.

 

[mbncfc 1]

"the stand cost £6m TO BUILD."

it then needded to be fitted out. bars/seats/communications/pa/the camera boxes - all built for the premiership so probably cost a little more - ending up at £9m. Quite a lot more i agree, but you have to be pretty stubborn to admit that it doesn''t go a fair way to explaining the situation, along with most of what Neil Doncaster said. It was hardly like building a conservatory.

But i guess if people have already made up their minds, there''s not much you can say to them anyway...

[The Fish Seller 0]

That''s very poor business by the club allowing the Contractors to operate like that.

In these situations a final price should be agreed beforehand with possible chargeable extras being setout in advance, anything else sshould be swallowed by the Contractor.

This stops a Company who budget the job at 8 million undercutting other tenders by quoting 6m then upping the price back to the original plus squeezing more profit once their feet are firmly in the door.

There''s no end of cheap labour in the Construction industry at the moment so over budget and overtime are two terms which really should not be in use if the Contractor is halfways reputable and competent.

(I put up the bigW on Riverside in 2001 £400,000 under budget and three weeks early proving it can be done. Should have given me a ring shouldn''t they those extra millions would have bought some good payers) 

[sheded 0]

[quote user="jetstream"]

Quoting the Wembley stadium build as an example of a project that has gone over budget is a bit mis-leading. Yes, it is costing more to build than originally planned but it is not costing the FA any more than the initial contract stated as it is being built at a fixed price - all the over-run costs are being borne by the construction company - ie a clever piece of business by Adam Crozier.

In fact most major construction projects have a set completion date and penalty clauses which usually reduce the bill by "X" amount per day of the over-run. It is possible that the contract might allow for extra costs depending on certain factors but to increase costs by 50% seems very high - but we''re not privy to the details.

 

[/quote]

As you say , a 50%  increase  in the price  of building the Jarrold  stand   is high !    and Doncaster hasn`t  disclosed  WHY this is !   if he`s so anxious to  explain to the fans  where the clubs money is going , then he should  tell us  why £3M   has disappeared  into the banks of the company thats building  the stand !    there`s something   smelly going on here !

[bobfleck 0]

Re - the Jarrolds stand overspend, the fans perception of a £6m pricetag -  "After the fit-out of the stand, the total cost was £9m" - what EXACTLY are the board and Doncaster trying to say here? Werent we told by the board that it would cost £6m? - thats not the perception of the fans, its taking at face value what the people running the club were telling us at the time. And if the original quote was for £6m and we ended up spending an extra £3m - something I find utterly astonishing - as a result of ''fitting-out'' the stand, well.......I feel more confused now than before Doncaster spilt the beans! And as for being only an extra £500k better off after a season in the Premier League, what of all this talk by Doncaster of chasing the ''Pot of Gold'' that promotion offered??

For the record, I do trust  Delia / Michael et al, and believe they are doing the best for Norwich City Football Club. But someone on the board should have a quiet word with Carters, and point out the massive overspend on the Jarrold Stand before we even consider giving them the contract to build the mystical 2nd tier on the City Stand.

And although it is laudable of the club to get Mr Doncaster to make regular statements about issues such as this, should we really be made to feel eternally grateful that the club chooses to do so? Surely other clubs have a similar type of dialogue with their fans - and are they told that they should feel so very lucky too?

 

[jetstream 0]

Apologies, I didn''t notice the line about "fitting out" being the reason for the extra 50% cost.

Still, where''s the other signings eh?

[FilletTheFishWife . 0]

sounds like they''re getting their excuses in so that they can ride the next 3 weeks of transfer inactivity and in the words of the great Phil Lynott :- "Don''t Believe A Word".

 

 

[Faded Jaded Semi Plastic SOB 1,036]

I may be wrong but I think that the Emirates Stadium was built on time and to budget, so it can be done, i would suggest one stand is "small beer" in terms of a construction project.

[Norfolkn Good 0]

9m not 6m for a new stand?

And the contractors were......????

[Chip20 69]

[quote user="Herb"][quote user="Lincoln Canary"]Errr...yes we probably did. And I''d imagine the ''quote'' was £6m. Construction projects frequently go well over budget[/quote]

Well it was an estimate, not a quote then.
A quotation is saying "I''ll do X for X pounds"
They can''t then say "Ah, we were a bit crap at adding stuff up, we need an extra 3 million quid"

Why not refuse to pay a penny until the jobs finished and to the original quoted price?
If a customer rings me for a quote the price I tell them is the price they pay, regardless of any difficulties my end.
[/quote]

You are quite right, Herb, the club proabably received an estimate rather than a quote. The fact is, though, that construction projects do regularly go over-budget and the responsibility for footing the extra costs does seem to lie with the customer. From what little knowledge I have of the construction industry, projects often run over-budget due to unforeseen difficulties (e.g. delays due to architectural finds under the old building) and ''estimates'' rather than quotes seems to be the norm. It annoys me to read people suggesting we should have spent that money on the team instead of the stadium, yet I didn''t hear many complaints when it was built. If I remember rightly, it was all a good thing back then because there weren''t enough seats to go round.

All that''s bothering me is that, yet again a number of people are jumping on the bandwagon, criticising the club when they don''t know all of the hard facts. People keep speculating based on snippets of newspaper reports. I''d never say you don''t have a right to do so, but what''s it actually going to achieve? In my opinion it just fosters bad feeling toward a club we should all be supporting to the hilt.

We all seem to be very good at thinking our club is uniquely badly run. We all look at other clubs and see that they''re spending x pounds on new players this season or they''re happily running on much higher debts than we are, and yet we actually know nowt about what''s really happening there. We only see what''s on the surface; we have no idea what''s going on behind the scenes. We don''t know what wages other teams'' players are on, what penalty clauses they might face, what risks they are taking. I, personally, think we''re doing alright. We might look with envy at West Ham, who have done alright since they were last relegated form the Premiership. Yet how many of us bother to look at Nottingham Forest, or Barnsley, or Bradford who fell out of the top flight and have now disappeared into obscurity? I want to see NCFC succeeding as much as the rest of you. I have my own opinions on what the club''s done right and wrong, but I keep them to myself because I don''t know all the facts.

How can any of us say the club aren''t bothered about getting promoted again? Putting aside the possibilty that Delia & Michael are as much fans of the club as the rest of us, surely just the financial incentive of a sustained period in the top flight is a big enough carrot for anybody?

 

[Herb 0]

[quote user="Lincoln Canary"]

All that''s bothering me is that, yet again a number of people are

jumping on the bandwagon, criticising the club when they don''t know all

of the hard facts. People keep speculating based on snippets

of newspaper reports. I''d never say you don''t have a right to do

so, but what''s it actually going to achieve? In my opinion it just

fosters bad feeling toward a club we should all be supporting to the

hilt.

[/quote]

Well when Doncaster leaves us with more questions than answers, whats the alternative?

Carters do seem to have a rather worrying monopoly on any work to do

with City, and when something we were told cost 6m suddenly costs 9m

then questions should be asked and proper explanations demanded.

Still, I suppose we should look on the bright side, at least they

didn''t award the contract to Billy Bodge and his merry band of

tarmacers who "restored" Norwich''s now wonkier than ever flyover.

[Bury Green 0]

It seems to me there are two significant issues this report throws up, the funding of the purchase of Dean Ashton and the clubs relationship with R G Carter, information on both these two areas was made avaialble to share holders

At the previous AGM immediately after we signed Dean Ashton we were told in no uncertain terms that there were two key issues the enabled the purchase, the sad death of Geoffrey Watling and the cancellation of his loan to the club and owners of A Shares electing to redeem them.

Importantly neither of these two things had anything to do with Sky monies. Alternatively had Geoffrey Watling not passed on and indeed a different stance had been adopted by the owners of as A Shares then we would not have signed Dean Ashton as he was bought from funds created outside of TV monies.

Sorry Mr Doncaster but this doesn’t add up., so what actually happened to the Sky money? Unless we were not told at the truth at the previous AGM this still leaves significant doubts in my mind.

The issue of the clubs relationship with R G Carter is a long and mysterious one, it never ceases to amaze that how we are lead to believe there was a long and lengthy tendering process before contracts of building work at the club are awarded and yet each and every time it’s the same contractor. Mind you Jackson’s in Ipswich might be slightly nervous of doing another football stand after the last one!

For the uninitiated that’s the one Sheepshanks didn’t get round to paying for instead he left Ipswich creditors to pick up the bill.

The terms of the contract with the club must surely warrant close scrutiny mindful of course that the contactor was also a significant contributor to the first share issue as an overrun of that magnitude is quite out of the ordinary. I do have a detailed knowledge of such matters and at no stage have I ever spoken with anybody in the building industry locally who has tendered for work at the club, perhaps some of you lot do?

A £3m overrun is simply unbelievable given the vast majority of costs were known and there is simply no way this could have all been down to both the archaeological dig and exceptional pilling costs. Sorry this really does not add up one little bit

Once the next set of accounts are released to the share holders we might have slightly better idea of the overall health of the club as cash is one thing but I am 99.9% certain the balance sheet value of the club won’t have dropped. Now remind me, who owns over 50% of it?

[sheded 0]

Indeed more questions than answers !     there`s thousands of fans out here Doncaster , some paying nearly a quarter of their weekly income  to get through the turnstiles ,  and shareholders to boot !!    so don`t go thinking we`re all idiots out here , who wont understand  " financial matters "   your part of a public company .... so make  it PUBLIC !    like why we have so little left   after a year in the prem , why the fee  for Safri  is so much more than was disclosed ,  why  the £6M  you said was the cost of the Jarrold stand  , now £9M  ?   why  Carter seems the " favoured "  construction company  ?  did you put it out to tender ?   time for disclosure Doncaster !  else  the suspicions will mount  ........

[Ramrod 258]

Was it not the case that the Jarrold Stand cost 6m with an over-run caused by an archeological dig thus losing seat revenue taking the price a bit higher then the decision being taken to build the corner ''Community Stand'' at a cost of over 2.5 million all of which gives you the 9m total cost.

This was a big and necessary capital expenditure and there is no smoking gun to theorise about,

[dr livingstone 0]

i for one do not believe anything that come out of this mans mouth.

he says things that he thinks the fans want to hear.

only 3 weeks ago he was saying that there would be 3 new faces coming in, because thats what we wanted to hear.

if we cant afford it now, we couldnt afford it then.

he complains about how much things cost. i wonder how much he gets paid ? i know he is not going to do the job for nothing , but i would think is a considerable amount.

[blacko 0]

mbncfc has hit the nail on the head

[Bury Yellow 2]

Hi Bury Green. Haven''t conversed with you for a while.Good to see that you are still in fine form.

Agree absolutely with your synopsis and look forward to asking a few searching questions at this years AGM. Unlike last year when the spin doctors took over in admirable fashion and stunned us into silence. I give advance warning it won''t work this year.

Always amusing to have the usual suspects supporting and swooning at all of the boards efforts. It aint healthy dont ya know!

At least the football has been extremely encouraging for the first two games and credit Worthy for that.

OTBC

[Ramrod 258]

Neil Doncaster is absolutely straight and is extremely hard working and committed. He does not deserve derision. The man also makes himself easily available and is upfront in his demeanor.

Is it really necessary for some of you to have a hate figure? And is it a coincidence Doncaster s in the firing line now that the football seems to be sorting itself out?

[sheded 0]

[quote user="Cupid Stunt"]Neil Doncaster is absolutely straight and is extremely hard working and committed. He does not deserve derision. The man also makes himself easily available and is upfront in his demeanor. Is it really necessary for some of you to have a hate figure? And is it a coincidence Doncaster s in the firing line now that the football seems to be sorting itself out?[/quote]

Hate figure ??    hardly !   its just that he`s  said a few things  which he seems to think  is enough to satisfy  the huddled masses .........  they didn`t !   eg there`s a big difference between £6M   and £9M  !   if there`s nothing to hide   let him go into detail  about club expenditure  , there`s been far to many  additions to what has been said months ago ! ........ calculators at the ready !!