Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Mister Chops

Reasons you support the current Board

Recommended Posts

I''m guessing most of us are fairly fed up with the board, with prudence with ambition, and so on.  But we know why we feel this way, and have aired those views to death.

Equally, most people seem to be anti-protests at this stage.  That doesn''t necessarily make them pro-board.  What interests me is when posters here make statements such as "I''m 100% behind the board", and they are challenged as to why, the silence is deafening.

So here''s an opportunity for anyone who is behind the current board (T07 for one) to tell us why they feel the current board deserve our continued support.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="fuzzyfelt"]

I''m guessing most of us are fairly fed up with the board, with prudence with ambition, and so on.  But we know why we feel this way, and have aired those views to death.

Equally, most people seem to be anti-protests at this stage.  That doesn''t necessarily make them pro-board.  What interests me is when posters here make statements such as "I''m 100% behind the board", and they are challenged as to why, the silence is deafening.

So here''s an opportunity for anyone who is behind the current board (T07 for one) to tell us why they feel the current board deserve our continued support.

 

 

 

 

[/quote]

Yep come on squit, Hartson Gut, Big M, NN, Ardee to name but a few, Why Exactly are we .....Fools,Traitors, Scum,Binners, Moaners,Codgers,C#!ts,To@@ers ect ect [yes i have been called them all]? Im fed up of the smug comments against my views bearing in mind when i talk to people outside the City they''re surprised we havent taken action against the current board already! [ ask anyone about Norwich and they will say about Delias Rant and our fall from being a very good club to a S?@t one] Go on i beg you, some off you might actually realise that we have fallen big time. But never mind hey?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Arthur Whittle"]

Yep come on squit, Hartson Gut, Big M, NN, Ardee to name but a few, Why Exactly are we .....Fools,Traitors, Scum,Binners, Moaners,Codgers,C#!ts,To@@ers ect ect [yes i have been called them all]? Im fed up of the smug comments against my views bearing in mind when i talk to people outside the City they''re surprised we havent taken action against the current board already! [ ask anyone about Norwich and they will say about Delias Rant and our fall from being a very good club to a S?@t one] Go on i beg you, some off you might actually realise that we have fallen big time. But never mind hey?

[/quote]

Ok.. come on Arto ... produce the post where I have accused you of being Fools,Traitors, Scum,Binners, Moaners,Codgers,C#!ts,To@@ers ect ect [:^)]

Every so often you go on a rant like this at me for no reason[:''(]

This time I suggest you either put up or shut up [:#]

But then again... maybe.....

And as I went home on Tuesday night as drunk as drunk could be
I saw a post on the board where my old post should be
Well, I called me wife and I said to her: Will you kindly tell to me
Who wrote that post on the board where my old post should be

Ah, you''re drunk,
you''re drunk you silly old fool,
still you can not see
That''s just some fuzzy felt that me mother sent to me
Well, it''s many a day I''ve travelled a hundred miles or more
But felt on a messageboard I never saw before.

[B][B][B][B][B][B][B][B][D][D][:^)] ...hic! [Y]

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Arthur Whittle"][quote user="fuzzyfelt"]

I''m guessing most of us are fairly fed up with the board, with prudence with ambition, and so on.  But we know why we feel this way, and have aired those views to death.

Equally, most people seem to be anti-protests at this stage.  That doesn''t necessarily make them pro-board.  What interests me is when posters here make statements such as "I''m 100% behind the board", and they are challenged as to why, the silence is deafening.

So here''s an opportunity for anyone who is behind the current board (T07 for one) to tell us why they feel the current board deserve our continued support.

 

 

 

 

[/quote]

Yep come on squit, Hartson Gut, Big M, NN, Ardee to name but a few, Why Exactly are we .....Fools,Traitors, Scum,Binners, Moaners,Codgers,C#!ts,To@@ers ect ect [yes i have been called them all]? Im fed up of the smug comments against my views bearing in mind when i talk to people outside the City they''re surprised we havent taken action against the current board already! [ ask anyone about Norwich and they will say about Delias Rant and our fall from being a very good club to a S?@t one] Go on i beg you, some off you might actually realise that we have fallen big time. But never mind hey?

[/quote]

Just because I am not in favour of any protest, that does NOT mean that I support the board. I certainly do not support them, and have not shown them any support at all in what I''ve posted on this site.

You clearly have a serious problem with my posts Arthur - it''s either that, or it''s the wording in my signature bit. Maybe it''s both.

Whatever the reason, just try and ignore them. Why don''t you post something useful, like a post paying respect to the late Graham Paddon and all your condolences to his family and friends, in the thread stickied at the top of this page? Six pages, and not a single one from either yourself, Cluck or Smudger. If Ricky and Wiz etc can find it within themselves to do so, I''m sure you can as well.

Fuzzyfelt, I think you''ve opened up a right little can of worms with this one...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To look at why people are for / againt the board, you have to consider our current position.

Before our second Lemming September in 2 seasons, I felt that Grant was able to do the job, and that this season would be an improvement on last.  Then it appears that he lost the dressing-room as a result of slanging matches with players in private and castigations of players in the press, and on top of that was unwilling to spend the money that had been made available to him to, among other things, fill the number 5 shirt. We lost Safri as a result of Grant, and the early promise of Cureton and Brellier dwindled. We went 11 hours without a goal, and it appears that the players who switched off have been unable to switch back on yet, possibly as a result of coasting through 6 weeks worth of games, losing match fitness as a result, leaving us with 11 or 12 games without a win, frankly I''ve lost count.  

The board are to blame for appointing an inexperienced man to the job at the worst possible time, and in the opinion of most people, to blame for not removing Worthington either. 

However - Munby and Turner have come out and admitted the failings of the last season or two, and it appears that money for Premiership standard loanees has been made available for Roeder.  Bankrolling Pattison and Camara in the long term in January, subject to performance, would be a good first step to getting us back to respectability in this division, there is speculation that more signings will come in before Thursdays'' loan deadline.  The Turners as non-exec directors are taking a personal interest in the performance of the chief exec, and the Wynn-Joneses seem to be taking more of a back seat, as they approach the end of their tenancy.  They have to retire from the board at aged 70, some time in the next 3-4 years.  Andrew Turner also stated that his aim is Premiership football, and that if he feels that he can''t help the club to do that, he will step down and give someone else the chance to try.

Peoples'' opinions come down to a question of whether they want a coronation or a revolution.  The way I see it, the Turners will be crowned at a time of their choosing unless fan pressure forces the incumbents out.  The main worry of most fans has been the lack of investment on the pitch, if the loan signings pay off and we start winning matches, most of the fans will be pacified.  If they don''t, spontaneous protests will occur and a couple towards the top of the football rich list might decide to look for something else to do with their money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fed up summarises how I feel.They have made a series of poor decisions, and portray an image of amateurs in a professional world. I am angry with them for wringing their hands whilst Rome has been burning, and the club has been spiralling towards the abyss of League 1, from where no club has ever returned.

What I want to happen is for the Board (whomever they are) to learn from past mistakes and show the firm leadership needed to move the club forward. Now, if anyone can summon some names to replace and improve the board, as well as genuine investors who want the club to succeed.

Most people share the thought that the club has suffered at the hands of the directors. No one has yet come up with a suitable or serious alternative. Persoanlly, I think that the Turners may/will/have bring/brought the hard-nosed business acumen that seems to be missing from the Board. I intend to wait and see what develops.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
an unusually nicely worded post this, it is commonly felt that whilst the protest is not widely supported the protesters would be thought of and treated with much more respect where it not for the millitent aggressive way the likes of mr whittle and co air there views, they pertein to hold the opinion that everyone has a right to a say then sleight those that attempt to hold a conversation with them in an extremely rude manner.You will not find I beleive anybody that holds strong pro board views because obviously mistakes have been made and things could be much better, I think the average supporter believes that the smiths, as self confessed "poor millionaires" have acted with the club at heart and have given all they have to the cause, this is a job for which you can have no prior experience and wether they have failed or succeeded they have acted with the club at heart, for this reason wether  we believe they have done well or not it is difficult for the average supporter to endorse the personal attacks on these people. which is why i say a less millitant protest would achieve much wider support.The second point is that in order to believe that this   board should be ousted requires for most of us the belief that a better alternative is available, again the average supporter is not convinced that this is the case, I belief the constitution of this club does not allow for a shareholder to own more than 50% of the club which is why we are not such an interesting proposition as ipswich and clubs of that type, again wether this is your opinoin or not is for you but certainly most of us believe that the protest to oust the current board has no plan for the future other than there view that there must be someone out there who wants to buy us for all the right reasons. I think if we all knew that this person existed we all ( including mrs smith & co) would welcome hom in with open arms. I hope this hurried and badly worded text awnsers your questions as to the views of the other 23995 Norwich city supporters. At the end of the day we all seek the same end and so should keep it civil, constuctive discussion not playground rubbish

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Arthur Whittle"]Yep come on squit, Hartson Gut, Big M, NN, Ardee to name but a few, Why Exactly are we .....Fools,Traitors, Scum,Binners, Moaners,Codgers,C#!ts,To@@ers ect ect [yes i have been called them all]? Im fed up of the smug comments against my views bearing in mind when i talk to people outside the City they''re surprised we havent taken action against the current board already! [ ask anyone about Norwich and they will say about Delias Rant and our fall from being a very good club to a S?@t one] Go on i beg you, some off you might actually realise that we have fallen big time. But never mind hey?[/quote]

Hang on a minute Arthur, that works both ways.

For the last year or so, anyone who has even so much dared show any support to the board, and Delia in particular, has also been branded with unfair names.

Sheep, Apologists, Traitors, Morons, Blind Fools, Deliaites, Doomists etc etc, just some of the stuff I can remember off the top of my head.

The fact is that regardless of someone''s opinion, they should be allowed to express it without receiving petty name calling and abuse.

Sadly though, when you often ask someone from either of the camps to clarify why they feel the way they do, you often just get sarcastic replies such as "I don''t have time to waste explaining obvious facts to a sheep like you, baaaah".

If this was the only real response you''d get from the vast majority of people when posting an opinion, is it any wonder at times why people from both sides of the fence seem to be cagey in offering explanations?

I''m not in support of the board and feel changes need to be made, yet I don''t feel that at the minute a protest is the way to go, especially considering the changes we''re already starting to see following Roeder''s appointment, yet as soon as I aired this viewpoint, I instantly received sarcastic replies and sheep comments... 

In many cases it would seem that the best way to get a high response on here these days, is to simply post a load of inflammatory nonsense which has no supporting evidence behind it, and then simply sit back and wait for the fireworks to go off. As soon as you start putting more than 1 sentence threads out which actually have some substance and thought behind them - they get ignored.

Simply seems to be the way this forum has been going in recent months, and it''s not a change for the better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don''t think many people " support" the board, in terms of approving their decisions in the way the club has been run; certainly nobody could be happy at the plight NCFC is currently in. However, this is a long way from the continual allegations of  theft, closet support for opposition clubs, psychopathic egomania etc.etc.that repeatedly  recur on this message board. It seems that those making these allegations assume that anyone not believing said allegations to be gospel truth are beloved of Delia & all her works & are probably employed by the club.

I would "support" the board in the sense that they genuinely have the club''s best interests at heart; whether they are competent to deliver the best football is another matter. One thing I am sure of is that they are by no means the worst management team out there. You might find yourselves looking at them in a different light in a few years time.

And things could yet change for the better. I believe Roeder to be a higher calibre of manager than Grant. Again, time will tell.

And as always, Lady Luck has a huge part to play. Football is a funny old game.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a long post, so for those who can''t be bothered, a bullet point summary of why I am not anti-board:

  • They have got the prudence/ambition balance wrong, but there are understandable reasons for this
  • Decisions made by Worthington, Grant and Duffy have been much more harmful than decisions made by the board
  • I am disgusted by the personal attacks on board members who may have made mistakes but who have, I believe, decent motives.

Ok, here goes...

I don''t consider myself to be a board supporter or a board protestor - I don''t know nearly enough about what actually goes on in the boardroom to make a confident judgement.

Like almost everyone, I think that the board has got their prudence/ambition balance wrong. Clearly if you continually replace departing players with ones who aren''t as good, your team is going to get worse, regardless of the hotels and restaurants you have built. I think the board has realised this, and January is a time for putting as much money as is humanly possible into strengthening the team.

But, I can see where the board has been coming from over the last few years. I think the collapse of ITV Digital was a huge moment for this club: I think it was the point where the board resolved to make the club as self-financing as possible: they didn''t want to get into a situation where the loss of TV money would bankrupt the club. People laughed at Doncaster''s description of the board as "custodians of a Norfolk institution", but that is exactly what they are and their first responsibility is to guarantee the future existence of the club.

In the absence of a squillionaire emerging with Ronaldhino in his pocket, the board''s much-maligned investment in off-field interests is precisely that: an investment. In the current football climate, NCFC is a reasonably healthy business, and those who blindly parrot that ''football must come first'' ignore the fact that the money for football needs to come from somewhere, unless we are happy to have our ticket prices doubled.

So, to sum up, any board of a club of this size has to balance prudence with ambition. I think NCFC''s board has got this balance slightly wrong, but I can understand their reasons for doing so.

There is a second issue, which is their judgment in hiring and firing managers. I would say that they have made two stinkers, Hamilton and Grant, one excellent choice in Worthington and two reasonable choices in Rioch and Roeder. I am trying to eliminate hindsight here: Rioch came to City as an experienced and successful manager (and, as the man who signed Bergkamp, the instigator of the revolution at Arsenal). The fact that it didn''t work out for him doesn''t mean the board made the wrong choice.

Against the poor appointments of Hamilton and Grant must be set the superb appointment of Worthington, who was greeted with much scepticism by the fans when he took over. If anyone doesn''t think he did a a good job at City, ask yourself: would you settle for Roeder taking us to the Championship play-offs next year, with promotion two seasons later? With the appointment of Worthy, the board''s judgment was better than the fans''.

Clearly Worthington should have been sacked sooner, but I would prefer a board to be over-loyal than over-trigger-happy.

I have a hunch that the appointment of Roeder is an outstanding one. If he can keep us up, I think he could build a really decent football set-up here. I just hope he has enough time. Since promotion to the Prem, the club''s various football managers have made many more obvious mistakes than the board. Obviously the board appointed those managers, but managerial appointments are far from an exact science.

One final point - I am always astonished at how personal the attacks on the board get. As I have detailed above, they have clearly made mistakes and need to learn from them. But the allegations that the Wynn-Joneses are exploiting the club seem baseless to me. And the suggestion that Delia Smith, one of the most famous women in Britain, is using a provincial football club to boost her profile - well, that''s just laughable. If anything, it''s the other way round. The debate about the board is not helped by sneering references to "the cook", who should "get back in the kitchen and stick to what she knows." I know some men find it difficult to see a woman in charge, but they should really get a life. The focus should be on what the board is doing, not on personalities.

So my position is this.

  • I appreciate the efforts the board have made on behalf of NCFC over the last ten years.
  • I think they have made serious errors since promotion to the Prem.
  • I think the appointment of Roeder is a huge step forward
  • I look forward to him being backed with pots of cash in January.
  • If he isn''t, I will be protesting.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="blahblahblah"]

To look at why people are for / againt the board, you have to consider our current position.

Before our second Lemming September in 2 seasons, I felt that Grant was able to do the job, and that this season would be an improvement on last.  Then it appears that he lost the dressing-room as a result of slanging matches with players in private and castigations of players in the press, and on top of that was unwilling to spend the money that had been made available to him to, among other things, fill the number 5 shirt. We lost Safri as a result of Grant, and the early promise of Cureton and Brellier dwindled. We went 11 hours without a goal, and it appears that the players who switched off have been unable to switch back on yet, possibly as a result of coasting through 6 weeks worth of games, losing match fitness as a result, leaving us with 11 or 12 games without a win, frankly I''ve lost count.  

The board are to blame for appointing an inexperienced man to the job at the worst possible time, and in the opinion of most people, to blame for not removing Worthington either. 

However - Munby and Turner have come out and admitted the failings of the last season or two, and it appears that money for Premiership standard loanees has been made available for Roeder.  Bankrolling Pattison and Camara in the long term in January, subject to performance, would be a good first step to getting us back to respectability in this division, there is speculation that more signings will come in before Thursdays'' loan deadline.  The Turners as non-exec directors are taking a personal interest in the performance of the chief exec, and the Wynn-Joneses seem to be taking more of a back seat, as they approach the end of their tenancy.  They have to retire from the board at aged 70, some time in the next 3-4 years.  Andrew Turner also stated that his aim is Premiership football, and that if he feels that he can''t help the club to do that, he will step down and give someone else the chance to try.

Peoples'' opinions come down to a question of whether they want a coronation or a revolution.  The way I see it, the Turners will be crowned at a time of their choosing unless fan pressure forces the incumbents out.  The main worry of most fans has been the lack of investment on the pitch, if the loan signings pay off and we start winning matches, most of the fans will be pacified.  If they don''t, spontaneous protests will occur and a couple towards the top of the football rich list might decide to look for something else to do with their money.

[/quote]

Blah, Munby et al have indeed admitted "mistakes" over the last few years, but have been very coy about defining them. Wrong colour carpets in the executive suites perhaps? Until i hear from someone on the board that using the team as a cash-cow to pay for extravagencies off the pitch has been a complete disaster for the club, i will believe that the board are simply trying to whitewash over their wrong priorities and incompetence-and the likes of you are playing along with them. As for the Turners, what evidence is there that their approach will be any different? What`s the big plan we should all rally around?

As for Grant being "unwilling to spend the money available to him" has Doncaster not stated that "All money recieved in tranfer fees is available to be re-invested in the squad" and "The loss of parachute payments will be bridged,in part,by profits in the transfer market"? They can`t both be true can they?

As for "Premier standard loans" i believe the two you mentioned have less than 10 Prem games between them. Still, well done for having a stab at answering the point of the thread. Any more takers......?[^o)]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mr C - it would be good if someone could some how go through the non-football expenditure and get some explanations from the board so a rational assessment of their decisions could be made.

One reason to support the board is that like or not they have supported the club by gambling something like 10 million of their own money in the club with an uncertain return when they could have made money by investing in property or money markets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote]Until i hear from someone on the board that using the team as a

cash-cow to pay for extravagencies off the pitch has been a complete

disaster for the club, i will believe that the board are simply trying

to whitewash over their wrong priorities and incompetence-[/quote]You''re never going to get that from a board member, unless it''s in their resignation speech, and probably not even then. Whether any of us likes it, the decisions they have made have been theirs to make, not ours.  Robert N. Lim put it better than I did, that the club has to consider the long-term future, and the steps they have made will guarantee our independence from TV money, albeit at the short-term expense of the current team.[quote]As for the Turners, what evidence is there that their approach will be any different? [/quote]Andrew Turners'' speech at the AGM.  That he is monitoring Doncasters'' performance, that he is willing to step down unless he can help the club to get to the Premiership.  That sounds a lot more like accountability to the fans than I have heard from anyone else on the board in a long time.[quote]As for Grant being "unwilling to spend the money available to him" has

Doncaster not stated that "All money recieved in tranfer fees is

available to be re-invested in the squad" and "The loss of parachute

payments will be bridged,in part,by profits in the transfer market"?

They can`t both be true can they?[/quote]I''d point to Grants'' quotes regarding loans rather than Doncasters : The cost of a loan from a Premiership team, 250k loan fees before wages are taken into account, the quote from the Middlesborough chairman that if you can''t shop in Harrods, don''t go there to look, etc.  Roeder doesn''t appear to have had the same problem finding players, if not of a Premiership standard, then certainly of a high-Championship standard, players who can win you games at this level.  Whether that''s as a result of demanding more money from the board, the board realising that they have to prop the team up financially in the short term, or as a result of Roeders'' better contacts, who knows ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="RUDOLPH HUCKER"]

That''s interesting Nutty.

 

My Great-Granny lived to 102 and died nearly 30 years ago but I recall a similar rhyme from her.

It must be an old Norfolk ditty.

[/quote]

It''s Irish I think Rudolph.

Seven Drunken Nights

AAAAAAAAARRTTTOOOOO..... How''s the head mate [+o(][;)]

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="fuzzyfelt"]Nigel, I like your style!

But it''s still oh so quiet...
[/quote]

Sorry for helping to spoil your thread[;)]

To answer seriously I don''t think many people actually support the current board without reservations. I certainly don''t although I am perceived to on here. Bein'' accused of bein'' Delia''s cousin ''n''all [*-)][;)] I was actually among the few who were critical of the board when Worthy was the focus of all blame.

There can be no doubt that this board have made mistakes, and there''s no hiding place with the team cut adrift at the bottom of the championship. For my money the biggest mistake is that they haven''t go the balance right between investment on the team and investment on additional revenue streams. Thats the big one for me, and compounded because it has been allowed to go on for so long.

Mistakes with manager appointments aren''t such a big issue to me. Other clubs have all made mistakes too. If you compare our board with others their record in this is no worse than most.

If I may rephrase your original question to "Reasons why you don''t continually attack the board" then the answer would be easier. In my view doing this to the extent it''s done on here is counter productive. It muddies the waters if you like. I have posted before that football club boards are strange in that it''s assumed that builders, fur traders, taxi operaters, lord mayors, councillors, publishers and even celebrity chefs miraculously know how to run a football club. And then when they mess up - us postmen, barmen, salesmen, plumbers, and the like all know how to run a football club better than them. Unfortunately, they are the ones who have invested their money, it''s their trainset, so like it or not they have the last say. If we really want them to change their approach and invest more money on the football team then I believe we should concentrate on that whilst recognising the need to invest in additional revenue streams for the future.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In answer to Robert N.Lim and Blah`s posts the simple fact is that the vast amounts of money the club have recieved in recent years has been through having a successful team on the pitch, with massive income from Sky and selling off valuable players, not from off-pitch stuff. The fact that the board have actually chosen to switch priorities and de-invest the team to fund other things makes a repeat of that money-spinning success almost impossible and in fact has created the crisis we are now in.

One of the usual arguments which comes up when talking about investing significant sums in the team is that it doesn`t guarantee success, so it`s quite funny to see that people are quite happy to assume that the off-pitch things are guaranteed money-makers. I trade in the stock market and it ain`t that simple. Will anyone want to buy the land in the current financial turmoil? Will the £4million infill be full if the club spend years in the lower leagues? Will the plush executive suites be full? How many queues will the lovely new ticket office have to cater for? Merchandising revenue has been dropping since relegation.

Personally i don`t care if Mickey Mouse is running the club but i won`t put another penny of my money into a club which would much rather spend it on a plot of land or restaurant than the team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mr C - I think you have some entirely legitmate questions which the board should explain but many other clubs have also put their money into facilities so there is nothing wrong with that per se. It is the balance which given the current league position clearly has not been right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Mr.Carrow"]

In answer to Robert N.Lim and Blah`s posts the simple fact is that the vast amounts of money the club have recieved in recent years has been through having a successful team on the pitch, with massive income from Sky and selling off valuable players, not from off-pitch stuff. The fact that the board have actually chosen to switch priorities and de-invest the team to fund other things makes a repeat of that money-spinning success almost impossible and in fact has created the crisis we are now in.

One of the usual arguments which comes up when talking about investing significant sums in the team is that it doesn`t guarantee success, so it`s quite funny to see that people are quite happy to assume that the off-pitch things are guaranteed money-makers. I trade in the stock market and it ain`t that simple. Will anyone want to buy the land in the current financial turmoil? Will the £4million infill be full if the club spend years in the lower leagues? Will the plush executive suites be full? How many queues will the lovely new ticket office have to cater for? Merchandising revenue has been dropping since relegation.

Personally i don`t care if Mickey Mouse is running the club but i won`t put another penny of my money into a club which would much rather spend it on a plot of land or restaurant than the team.

[/quote]

Mr. Carrow, I was just going to observe how others responded to the good question asked by fuzzyfelt but, given that you felt the need to respond with the same points you have made on different threads many, many times, I found one of your comments ( which I highlighted ) interesting.

When people say to me that they "trade" in the stock market I usually find ( not always ) that they are a different  breed from those that "invest" in the stock market, the former being more of a gambler. I know one or two gamblers who always tell me about their winnings but I never seem to hear from them regarding losses. You have a lot of questions about whether we will see the benefit of past off-pitch investments. We don''t really know the answer to those questions at this point do we? However, we do know that many clubs have gone the other route and gambled the works on on-pitch investments only to end up with nothing, on or off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
An excellent thread people with no slanging matches or anything about protests (hurray!!).

I must lie somewhere in the middle on all this, but towards the stance of Mr C I suppose. Like him, I would like some simple answers as to why so much of the Premiership money was not concentrated on team building rather than other areas such as the much maligned restaurants and offices.

As triple B says, Andrew Turner DID mention that he and Sharon were brought onto the board to monitor Mr Doncaster and would continue to do so. This in itself I took as an admission that they were acknowledging that they needed to change tack and were trying to make amends for their past errors, also that perhaps they were concerned with fans'' perceptions of them.

It''s also interesting to read BBB''s first post re the timing of Delia and Michael going and presumably handing over to the Turners. IF there is significant money available in January and the old adage of prudence and ambition starts swaying towards ambition (and thus we can assume more concentration on the team rather than off field activities) then I might just start believing in the board again. I can''t say I support them, they are as someone pointed out custodians of the club and there to do a job. If they are incompetent and found failing then surely that should be questioned, as it is being by some city fans.

There will always be the extremes on both sides, the truth maybe lies somewhere in between. If the board found someone with really deep pockets to invest (and let them make all the decisions) I am sure Delia and co would be happy. I am myself uncomfortable with her and Michael''s shareholding percentage and their silence in the past few weeks. Yes, they have made mistakes, they have admitted such (AGM). Now we really need to know what they aim to do about getting us back to a position in which to go forward.

Appointing Mr Roeder seems to be the start of that. I just hope they back him in January, should they not and he walks, I think the revolution may begin early.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Personally i don`t care if Mickey Mouse is running the club but i won`t put another penny of my money into a club which would much rather spend it on a plot of land or restaurant than the team."

That has always been my thread Mr Carrow. The board got the clubs priority''s wrong years ago with their ambitions "off the pitch" and their prudence "on the pitch"

I think its now too late to reverse the doctrine as the money has already gone "off the pitch"  Unless we have changes in the board with a new attitude of FOOTBALL can save the club we are going to continue to free fall.

And to finish as I have always said.....

 

FOOTBALL MUST COME FIRST  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

whilst i do believe the board have the clubs best interests at heart (find me a supporter that doesnt want best for their club?) what i do feel is that they simply have little or no understanding of how to implement these interests.

 Its glaringly obvious to all that a football team is only as good as its players... yes the board are right to want to add businesses and structures to carrow road... But how many sides in the championship/League 1 have such things?

they have sacrificed the playing side to get these things in.. the priorities have been wrong, We should of been aiming for the premiership first.

Yes once we are in the premiership and have ESTABLISHED oursleves then build the hotels, the offices, the car dealers, stick a bidet and golden taps in the directors box bog... but before anyof that was done the club should of been in the premiership... with sky (and Setantas) money these things would of been paid for in a matter of a season or 2... not long term through loan after loan and debt after debt... we would then of been able to of held onto players such as Francis, Helveg, Mckenzie, Ashton, Green and Earnshaw and perhaps have been like pompey.. constantly upsetting the big boys....  then look at building the businesses.

 the board meant well from day one.. but did they really sit and plan it out.. or did hearts rule heads? thats the reason they nheed to go.. they lost sight of the ultimate objective which would of secured the future of the club AND paid for all the businesses.

jas :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="YankeeCanary"][quote user="Mr.Carrow"]

In answer to Robert N.Lim and Blah`s posts the simple fact is that the vast amounts of money the club have recieved in recent years has been through having a successful team on the pitch, with massive income from Sky and selling off valuable players, not from off-pitch stuff. The fact that the board have actually chosen to switch priorities and de-invest the team to fund other things makes a repeat of that money-spinning success almost impossible and in fact has created the crisis we are now in.

One of the usual arguments which comes up when talking about investing significant sums in the team is that it doesn`t guarantee success, so it`s quite funny to see that people are quite happy to assume that the off-pitch things are guaranteed money-makers. I trade in the stock market and it ain`t that simple. Will anyone want to buy the land in the current financial turmoil? Will the £4million infill be full if the club spend years in the lower leagues? Will the plush executive suites be full? How many queues will the lovely new ticket office have to cater for? Merchandising revenue has been dropping since relegation.

Personally i don`t care if Mickey Mouse is running the club but i won`t put another penny of my money into a club which would much rather spend it on a plot of land or restaurant than the team.

[/quote]

Mr. Carrow, I was just going to observe how others responded to the good question asked by fuzzyfelt but, given that you felt the need to respond with the same points you have made on different threads many, many times, I found one of your comments ( which I highlighted ) interesting.

When people say to me that they "trade" in the stock market I usually find ( not always ) that they are a different  breed from those that "invest" in the stock market, the former being more of a gambler. I know one or two gamblers who always tell me about their winnings but I never seem to hear from them regarding losses. You have a lot of questions about whether we will see the benefit of past off-pitch investments. We don''t really know the answer to those questions at this point do we? However, we do know that many clubs have gone the other route and gambled the works on on-pitch investments only to end up with nothing, on or off.

[/quote]

Maybe they don`t make any losses Yankee......[:)] One point about holding shares is that you have only made a loss when you choose to sell them. With patience a paper loss can become a real profit. I don`t really class myself as trader, investor or gambler. I buy shares in good companies when i think they look cheap and sell them when i think it is best to do so. The longest i have held was for four years, the shortest two weeks.

No we don`t know when (if) we are going to see any return on the off-pitch stuff, but the effect the lack of funds has had on the team has been blindingly obvious since relegation. Maybe if supporters had put pressure on the board to focus resources on the team earlier (particularly when Worthington asked for more backing) we would not be in this mess now. And yet we still have people on here trying to deflect criticism away from the board.

I know my posts are probably like a stuck record but if people didn`t keep posting rubbish i wouldn`t have to keep repeating myself.....[:P]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...