IF delia and co left before the start of the new season...

[hogesar 9,618]

where would that leave us?

she says she''d only sell to someone who would invest alot of money into buying players, god hopes she was being serious.

Who could replace her?

How much transfer money do you expect from a bigger investor, assuming they''ve come in promising to "Invest alot of money into buying players"?

Would it have a toll on our league position, if so, where?

these are all interesting points, but before we all say "Sack the Board", we must think, would it be any better?

i leave you to decide!

hogesarrrr

[hogesar 9,618]

Well, im writing again because im generally interested in what Cluck, smudger and whoever else thinks..not saying i''d disagree with you i simply want to hear. If it''s going to be a too lengthy reply send me a link if you''ve done it somewhere already! :)

cheers

hogesarrr

[Branston Pickle 3,637]

The problem is that people like to think there are dozens of potential investors out there, but in reality there isn''t really any money to be made out of football per se - people tend to do it out of love rather than for an investment (eg Stoke, the recent Coventry link) - so there are even fewer than there might otherwise be (and anyone that does try to do it as a business is soon slagged off) . 

What we''d need is a multi-millionaire businessman who can do it on the side whilst lobbing a few £m into the kitty every now and then.  I think people did expect Delia to bankroll the club to a large extent, but she doesn''t seem to want to/to be able to - and that is her prerogative.  I''ve no doubt that her name has attracted money into the club that otherwise wouldn''t be there, but should we expect her to continually put her own money up, for no likelihood of a return?  It is a difficult one. 

[dickyst220 0]

Nice to hear some common sense on this message board, it makes a change !!!!

It is easy to say Sack the Board but what are the alternatives ????

For what it is worth I think that Delia will only sell for a profit, she will want back all the money she has put in & then some ! Football in the championship does not make a profit, so the only clubs that will be invested in, in this league are ones with a good chance of going up. So our best hope of success is to get a really good manager, with an A1 coaching/scout team behind him. Who can get the most out of what they have got, or can get in.

Have we got this in Peter Grant, for me the jury is out......... 

[Cluck 0]

[quote user="hogesar"]

Well, im writing again because im generally interested in what Cluck, smudger and whoever else thinks..not saying i''d disagree with you i simply want to hear. If it''s going to be a too lengthy reply send me a link if you''ve done it somewhere already! :)

cheers

hogesarrr

[/quote]

Well....as you ask         [:)]

I don''t think DS departing would make a jot of a difference in the short term...only maybe in terms of the club image, which may just revert to football first and foremost again rather than the blatant celebrity showboating we''ve been forced to accept.

Whoever came in would have a large and involved job on his/her hands to turn the club around. It has long been starved of financial input in terms of the squad....but with lavish and disproportionate outgoings on corporate infrastructure....This investment may well become largely redundant should the new owners have a different structure in mind involving minimal culinary aspirations.

If the club was genuinely offered for sale I am certain there would be a list of potential investors....as the club has a decent long term history....and painfully loyal fans to fill the ground if remotely successful. There are endless sneers about "who" would come in....but like all business deals....no-one shows their hand until the time is right....and the time is not right yet with DS holding the reins so tightly. No-one in their right mind would grant DS a penny of their investment until a deal is done....and she has departed.

So no Delia...no problem.  We would survive and prosper with our "new saviour"...and maybe Norfolk might just get it''s team back again. It really is as simple as that.

[Putney Canary 0]

Cluck,

Sorry, I''m confused about a couple of your points. What ''blatent celebrity showboating'' are you talking about? Also, I didn''t think the squad HAD been starved of financial input, haven''t we got one of the most expensive squads in the league in terms of wages paid? Aren''t the likes of Thorne, Hughes, Etuhu, Earnshaw, Safri, Huckerby etc on big wages?

[Cluck 0]

[quote user="Putney Canary"]

Cluck,

Sorry, I''m confused about a couple of your points. What ''blatent celebrity showboating'' are you talking about? Also, I didn''t think the squad HAD been starved of financial input, haven''t we got one of the most expensive squads in the league in terms of wages paid? Aren''t the likes of Thorne, Hughes, Etuhu, Earnshaw, Safri, Huckerby etc on big wages?

[/quote]

Point one....Cast your mind back to the glamourous days of the Prem campaign when DS was the "pin-up" of the club and media...but the all important team was hopelessly underfunded and basically laughable. Cast your mind back also the the MacDonald''s Childrens tea party that was when we played Chelsea in the FA Cup. Blateant "showboating" and grabbing the limelight as the fan''s "favourite"....That''s that one.

Point two....if I have to explain this one we don''t co-exist on the same planet. I could decise to pay my toilet cleaner £500 per week...but have no-one else in the building to generate income. That wouldn''t equal financial input...but it would indicate ridiculously poor business and a complete misuse of funds. A poor squad grossly over-paid is not "funding"...it''s plain bad management.....enter our "showboating" saviour!

[nutty nigel 7,509]

[quote user="Cluck "][quote user="Putney Canary"]

Cluck,

Sorry, I''m confused about a couple of your points. What ''blatent celebrity showboating'' are you talking about? Also, I didn''t think the squad HAD been starved of financial input, haven''t we got one of the most expensive squads in the league in terms of wages paid? Aren''t the likes of Thorne, Hughes, Etuhu, Earnshaw, Safri, Huckerby etc on big wages?

[/quote]

Point one....Cast your mind back to the glamourous days of the Prem campaign when DS was the "pin-up" of the club and media...but the all important team was hopelessly underfunded and basically laughable. Cast your mind back also the the MacDonald''s Childrens tea party that was when we played Chelsea in the FA Cup. Blateant "showboating" and grabbing the limelight as the fan''s "favourite"....That''s that one.

Point two....if I have to explain this one we don''t co-exist on the same planet. I could decise to pay my toilet cleaner £500 per week...but have no-one else in the building to generate income. That wouldn''t equal financial input...but it would indicate ridiculously poor business and a complete misuse of funds. A poor squad grossly over-paid is not "funding"...it''s plain bad management.....enter our "showboating" saviour!

[/quote]

Point one.... Cast your mind back to the dark days of Brian Hamilton. Delia did nothing different at Stockport away on a Tuesday night to Chelsea away in the FA Cup. The only difference was that the Cup game was on TV. You can have "blatant showboating" for both if that is what you believe, but you can''t just single out the cup game to put spin on the point you are trying to make.

Point two a)... We obviously don''t exist on the same planet because the board did make that money available for our squad. For various reasons the money was wasted by the people charged with making the decisions on how it was spent and mis-used the funds. The board then sacked the guy who made those decisions and his replacement is at present trying to sort the resultant mess.

Point 2 b)... If you paid your toilet cleaner £500 per week he would probably do a good job. I am off to a "high powered business meeting" with other toilet cleaners at Costessey Pits this afternoon. I should be back in time for tea and I will be at the game tonight.

 

[Putney Canary 0]

I remember Delia being interviewed more than any other board member, but wouldn''t you expect the media to single her out? I certainly don''t see her courting publicity in the same way say Ken Bates has over the years. Delia Smith is a household name in this country, she has been for years and years, of course she became the face of the club. If she was in the paper every week I would understand your point of view, but she isn''t and I don''t.

As for point two, if you pay a toilet cleaner £500 per week then that is £500 of financial investment. I am under the impression our squad wage bill is about £9m per year. Now you might think this is under funding, you are entitled to that opinion, but I don''t.

You might argue that that is too much to be paying our squad based on size and performance, and that this is bad management. On this I would agree. Didn''t we already sack the manager for this bad management?

And another thing that confuses me, why do you pick on Delia when she isn''t chairman or CEO? She is just one board member, why do you seem so fixated on her?

[macdougalls perm 0]

It really is laughable that you call yourself a realist Cluck. You are the most blatant example I can think of of someone who lives in an invented parallel universe. Of course higher wages represents funding, whether it is shrewd funding or not is the point that is debatable - to say that it is not funding is such a wacky conclusion it is quite literally ''unreal''. And your obsession with Delia''s celebrity showboating is equally unreal, all she has done in my opinion is to give a few interviews when asked and attend the matches of the team that she supports. You are confusing her intentions and agency with the agenda of the national media who do admittedly go for the angle of any story which is most likely to sell - ie the most publically recognisable feature. Actually, that is way too charitable an interpretation, you are not confusing them, you are deliberately manipulating them.  

[Cluck 0]

[quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="Cluck "][quote user="Putney Canary"]

Cluck,

Sorry, I''m confused about a couple of your points. What ''blatent celebrity showboating'' are you talking about? Also, I didn''t think the squad HAD been starved of financial input, haven''t we got one of the most expensive squads in the league in terms of wages paid? Aren''t the likes of Thorne, Hughes, Etuhu, Earnshaw, Safri, Huckerby etc on big wages?

[/quote]

Point one....Cast your mind back to the glamourous days of the Prem campaign when DS was the "pin-up" of the club and media...but the all important team was hopelessly underfunded and basically laughable. Cast your mind back also the the MacDonald''s Childrens tea party that was when we played Chelsea in the FA Cup. Blateant "showboating" and grabbing the limelight as the fan''s "favourite"....That''s that one.

Point two....if I have to explain this one we don''t co-exist on the same planet. I could decise to pay my toilet cleaner £500 per week...but have no-one else in the building to generate income. That wouldn''t equal financial input...but it would indicate ridiculously poor business and a complete misuse of funds. A poor squad grossly over-paid is not "funding"...it''s plain bad management.....enter our "showboating" saviour!

[/quote]

Point one.... Cast your mind back to the dark days of Brian Hamilton. Delia did nothing different at Stockport away on a Tuesday night to Chelsea away in the FA Cup. The only difference was that the Cup game was on TV. You can have "blatant showboating" for both if that is what you believe, but you can''t just single out the cup game to put spin on the point you are trying to make.

Point two a)... We obviously don''t exist on the same planet because the board did make that money available for our squad. For various reasons the money was wasted by the people charged with making the decisions on how it was spent and mis-used the funds. The board then sacked the guy who made those decisions and his replacement is at present trying to sort the resultant mess.

Point 2 b)... If you paid your toilet cleaner £500 per week he would probably do a good job. I am off to a "high powered business meeting" with other toilet cleaners at Costessey Pits this afternoon. I should be back in time for tea and I will be at the game tonight.

 

[/quote]

Point one...DS appointed Hamilton in the first place and wept when he left. Nuff said on that issue. If you are so easily sucked in by the PR element of DS "sitting with her followers"...good luck to you....because I follow the club...not one individual who has been allowed to hijack the club''s persona.

Point two....The people "charged" with spending the clubs money were appointed by DS....and overseen by DS and her cronies. No excuses...and no-one yet in my businesss experience has ever spent a large sum without my signature of approval. 

So....down to our showboating cook and her sidekicks once again. Good luck with the rest of the toilet cleaners NN...but mine will be busy at work polishing up my own personal urinal.  [:)]      

[Cluck 0]

macdougall''s perm...It really is laughable that you call yourself a realist Cluck. You are the most blatant example I can think of of someone who lives in an invented parallel universe. Of course higher wages represents funding, whether it is shrewd funding or not is the point that is debatable - to say that it is not funding is such a wacky conclusion it is quite literally ''unreal''. And your obsession with Delia''s celebrity showboating is equally unreal, all she has done in my opinion is to give a few interviews when asked and attend the matches of the team that she supports. You are confusing her intentions and agency with the agenda of the national media who do admittedly go for the angle of any story which is most likely to sell - ie the most publically recognisable feature. Actually, that is way too charitable an interpretation, you are not confusing them, you are deliberately manipulating them.

 

Macd...I reply only to tell you that that was a pile of emotional ovine plop.....

Baaaaaah........

[Evil Monkey 52]

Can I just point out that the Chelsea game wasn''t even on normal telly, it was only on Yank channels and the like being streamed over the web... Delia also sits with the fans on a cold Tuesday night when there''s no cameras at all... I''ve made the point in a seperate thread dedicated entirely to this "publicity seeking" subject that these don''t sound like the actions of a woman whoring herself out to the media... but then the person to whom the questions were directed ignored the thread mostly and failed to give any evidence or reasons for his arguments, instead resorting to name-calling... wonder if you can work out who that was...?? [:)]

[7rew 0]

This issue is really Complex, having both Real and Imaginary parts.  (C = IR x i.IR)

The real part is a field and the sheep live in the field, so the hen yard must have a non-zero imaginary component.

- a little maths joke for you all.

sorry its been a hard day at work.

I reply to cluck just to say that even if it was ovine plop then it still has more substance than pullus stool.

[nutty nigel 7,509]

Cluck

Point one.. was an attempt to show to you and others that your assumption that Delia Smith only sits with the fans for publicity. You changed your tack yet again because the facts don''t suit your argument.

Point two.. the board make the money available to the football management and the board appoint the manager. As I don''t get an invite to these occasions I couldn''t possibly say how much input Delia Smith has in these matters. It suits my argument to point out that David Stringer was consulted over the appointment of Grant. It suits yours to voice your opinion that the club is Delia''s train set.

Our meeting was quite profitable thankyou. Some of us are going to be much better off with the news that many toilets are going to show Sky TV above the urinals. The resultant mess will bring many of us over the £500 per week bracket! And we are looking forward to being able to pi...........

ok mods!

 

[ricardo 7,347]

[quote user="Cluck "]

macdougall''s perm...It really is laughable that you call yourself a realist Cluck. You are the most blatant example I can think of of someone who lives in an invented parallel universe. Of course higher wages represents funding, whether it is shrewd funding or not is the point that is debatable - to say that it is not funding is such a wacky conclusion it is quite literally ''unreal''. And your obsession with Delia''s celebrity showboating is equally unreal, all she has done in my opinion is to give a few interviews when asked and attend the matches of the team that she supports. You are confusing her intentions and agency with the agenda of the national media who do admittedly go for the angle of any story which is most likely to sell - ie the most publically recognisable feature. Actually, that is way too charitable an interpretation, you are not confusing them, you are deliberately manipulating them.

 

Macd...I reply only to tell you that that was a pile of emotional ovine plop.....

Baaaaaah........

[/quote]

So thats you sorted out McD.

Note how each point you made was refuted in detail

[Smudger 0]

[quote user="hogesar"]

Well, im writing again because im generally interested in what Cluck, smudger and whoever else thinks..not saying i''d disagree with you i simply want to hear. If it''s going to be a too lengthy reply send me a link if you''ve done it somewhere already! :)

cheers

hogesarrr

[/quote]

hehehe sorry I haven''t taken the time to respond to you HOGESAR...

You see if I did I would of feared that you would of had something similar to the response that Cluck has given you and others on this thread.

As Cluck points out on this thread it would probably be no picnic for a few months or so if Delia walked away tomorrow... I for one would sure as hell party though [B]

There would definetly be somebody else to take over the reigns (as to who that person will be, then we will only find out after Delia has walked).

We have gone over these concerns many times before...  Maybe you could get YANKEE to trawl up some old threads for you (seeing as trawling up old threads seems to be his F/T occupation).

Am sure I went in to it in some depth regarding the Mandaric takeover at Leicester and the attempted takeover by Souness at Wolves....  Again with the proposed deals at Sheff Weds and more recently Coventry.

[Cluck 0]

[quote user="ricardo"][quote user="Cluck "]

macdougall''s perm...It really is laughable that you call yourself a realist Cluck. You are the most blatant example I can think of of someone who lives in an invented parallel universe. Of course higher wages represents funding, whether it is shrewd funding or not is the point that is debatable - to say that it is not funding is such a wacky conclusion it is quite literally ''unreal''. And your obsession with Delia''s celebrity showboating is equally unreal, all she has done in my opinion is to give a few interviews when asked and attend the matches of the team that she supports. You are confusing her intentions and agency with the agenda of the national media who do admittedly go for the angle of any story which is most likely to sell - ie the most publically recognisable feature. Actually, that is way too charitable an interpretation, you are not confusing them, you are deliberately manipulating them.

 

Macd...I reply only to tell you that that was a pile of emotional ovine plop.....

Baaaaaah........

[/quote]

So thats you sorted out McD.

Note how each point you made was refuted in detail

[/quote]

I''m glad at least you spotted that fact ricardo.....and I try so hard as well...........[;)]