Norwich Board refuses to talk to Cullum

[Big Down Under 0]

[quote user="Citizen Journalist Foghorn"][quote user="Big Down Under"]

But which is more beneficial to the club, £2 million or £20

million?  It''s a nobrainer.  Club''s best interests first, as I have

said before.

But then its not your 8m, you don''t stand to lose a thing.

[/quote]I thought Delia had previuously said she doesnt expect to get back any of the money she put into the club.  And that putting money in NCFC was like chucking it on a bonfire??Obviously when push came to shove she wants her money back....  Which is understandable, just a shame she came out with that claptrap which turned out to be rubbish.  In the end she could have invested her money elsewhere and turned a tidy profit, but on mondays valuation will get back more than she put in but not a great amount more.No money was GIVEN to NCFC.[/quote]She would have made considerably more money leaving it in the bank.There is a difference between not expecting her money back, and being happy to leave her money in to enable a billionnaire to get the club on the cheap.

[Binky 0]

[quote user="Big Down Under"]

Everyone is expecting Delia to compromise, but happy for Cullum not to. I don''t agree. Cullum has two options;
- bid more money
- use fan pressure
No prizes for spotting his tactic.

[/quote]

I agree with BDU. No fan wants to lose new investment of the amount being mooted but hang on, apart from the mention of £20m not much detail has been given other than Cullum''s insistence on having majority control. £20m is not a big sum that would guarantee promotion (Cullum has said he won''t promise more). Why shouldn''t he table a full and proper offer? What''s more, if the size of his wealth is to be believed , another £10m or so would be peanuts for him.

Just supposing Delia & Co really do want out (why shouldn''t they after everything that''s been said?). Then why shouldn''t they get something for their shares - rather than having to maintain their "investment" ("We don''t want you anymore Delia but we still wnat your money!") while handing control to Cullum? What exactly is he promising us in return for supporting his acquisition of full control - besides a seat on the board, whatever that means. Cullum''s tactics I find odd for a successful business man and Archant''s wholehearted support for this man seems less than even handed. I hope it''s down soley to its conviction that he is the right man to step in and run our club. But reading some of their press, I can''t help thinking we are being gently led along a certain path without really knowing what''s around the corner.

[Big Down Under 0]

[quote user="Fat Prophet"][quote user="Big Down Under"]

Their £8 million is money that''s already been spent, and they had full control over the spending of it.  Naturally PC expects the same.  Of course their investment should be protected but that''s a different issue.  As previously posted, both sides need to reach a compromise.

Everyone is expecting Delia to compromise, but happy for Cullum not to. I don''t agree. Cullum has two options;- bid more money- use fan pressureNo prizes for spotting his tactic.

The problem from D&M''s point of view is that PC has offered too much money, not too little.  £2 million from the Turners (thank you Andrew and Sharon btw) suited them fine, because it wasn''t enough to give them any real clout.  Far be it from me to suggest that''s the reason why theirs was only only approach they have felt able to accept until now . . .  Pure conjecture that you can''t ever back up. The Turners wern''t insisting on a controlling interest for their 2m, totally different.

But which is more beneficial to the club, £2 million or £20 million?  It''s a nobrainer.  Club''s best interests first, as I have said before.

But then its not your 8m, you don''t stand to lose a thing.

[/quote]

Please read more carefully.  I said BOTH SIDES NEED TO REACH A COMPROMISE.

The fact that the Turners didn''t insist on a controlling interest for their £2m is precisely the point I was trying to make.  £2m is not enough to insist on a controlling interest.  £20m is.

Re. their £8m.  Again please read the above: I said OF COURSE THEIR INVESTMENT SHOULD BE PROTECTED BUT THAT''S A DIFFERENT ISSUE.

Please excuse block caps.  BDU I know that in this post-moderation era it''s tempting to reply to a post before you''re read it properly.  I do it myself, all the time.  But I''m getting a little frustrated here.

 [/quote]

I am reading your posts properly.

You are saying their investment should be protected but advocating they allow Cullum on board in a way where their money wouldn''t be protected. 20m is only enough for a controlling interest if some of it is going to be used to buy out the existing controlling interest, OR if those with the existing controlling interest are happy to stand by and see their investment lose value. Yes both sides need to negotiate to reach a conclusion, but Cullum is currently only making out that he is willing to negotiate, whilst stating that he won''t budge.

I''m now out of here for a while.

[Binky 0]

PS - memo to Archant and the EDP: The poll on the EDP website - "Should Peter Cullum be allowed to buy in to Norwich City? is utterly pointless IMO. The answer has to be a resounding YES!

Surely anyone should be allowed to buy into the club (it is a PLC afterall) and even acquire control provided they are honourable and honest. The question needs to explain the TERMS on which he is to be handed control. Why not ask Cullum to spell his offer out for us all?

[milan marcus 0]

Big Down Under

And all the other crazy mad people on this board.....

Are you really serious in your concerns over a billion pound investor wanting to put £20 million in new players at NCFC?

Have you seen how many players we have signed this season?

Do you think we are going to breeze into the playoffs?

Did you watch us last season?

Have you seen how much money other championship clubs have been spending to reach the premiership this season?

PC does not want to and will not buy out the other shareholders.  He wants his money to go into buying new players....that’s right new players, something our board seems to forgotten how to do.

Delia and shareholders do not lose out because his £20 million is turned into new share equity.

As other posters have rightly said if this all about Delia wanting her money now then the deal will blow up.  Delia will have betrayed us all.  There is no reason to say that she could maybe have an option to sell out at an agreed price if we reach the premiership. 

These are the things she needs to be talking to PC about today at Carrow Road not telling PC to go away unless he coughs up £56 million!!!!

The point is we are not going to get to the premiership without major investment and therefore it is in everyone’s interest to accept the money.  This is especially valid for the existing shareholders because without the investment the club will slowly sink in the new world of football where money and only money gets you to the premiership.

Please stop moaning about a guy who wants to out £20 million into the club, we should be throwing the keys to the city instead Big Down Under and the board want to throw two fingers up at him....well done guys.

If he does walk away what is your plan for getting us into the premiership?

[Fat Barman 0]

Maybe I''m reading this too simplistically, but it''s difficult to see how the valuations of PC and the Board differ by much.The Board say the existing shares are worth £16 million. Peter Cullum wants to put in £20 million - albeit with the money to be earmarked for transfers (just like the Board used the share issue under Worthy to buy players). His £20 million trumps the existing £16 million, making his share worth 55% and the existing shares the remaining 45%.Does this suggest that the real argument is over the spending of the new money? Are the Board asking for it to be used to pay off the debt? This would free up new money every year as the repayments would no longer be required. Long term this could be the better strategy, but not as appealing to the ego of a large investor looking to make an immediate impact.Can anyone advise me how much the existing debt costs to service each year?I can see the other side of the coin too. As the debt is currently affordable (we are assured), why not make a big splash this season to try and improve our promotion chances? A season or two in the Premiership could clear the debt just as easily.Don''t tell me this is the old ''Prudence with Ambition'' stalling talks?I have now read the online article from yesterdays EDP. They very carefully don''t mention when third-party contact was made between PC and Andrew Turner - only that it was since October. The earlier articles mention that PC wants to add a couple of his people to the Board, not that he wants to remove anyone from the Board. Why then would any Directors want their loans repaid?

[Grando 283]

Are both sides of this argument really unable to convene a mutually acceptable meeting, as the first step in the negotiating process?

I imagine PC spends much of his time in London''s financial district, and from what I remember from some olf TV documentary is that Delia and Michael have a place by the Thames. Shouldn''t be that hard for them to meet up somewhere close by. Unless one side doesn''t want to, and, as PC says he wants to get together, the conclusion that has to be reached is that Delia and Michael are being ''obtuse''.

Which, if true, is indefensible.

[canary cherub 1]

[quote user="Big Down Under"][quote user="Fat Prophet"][quote user="Big Down Under"]

Their £8 million is money that''s already been spent, and they had full control over the spending of it.  Naturally PC expects the same.  Of course their investment should be protected but that''s a different issue.  As previously posted, both sides need to reach a compromise.

Everyone is expecting Delia to compromise, but happy for Cullum not to. I don''t agree. Cullum has two options;
- bid more money
- use fan pressure
No prizes for spotting his tactic.

The problem from D&M''s point of view is that PC has offered too much money, not too little.  £2 million from the Turners (thank you Andrew and Sharon btw) suited them fine, because it wasn''t enough to give them any real clout.  Far be it from me to suggest that''s the reason why theirs was only only approach they have felt able to accept until now . . . 

Pure conjecture that you can''t ever back up. The Turners wern''t insisting on a controlling interest for their 2m, totally different.

But which is more beneficial to the club, £2 million or £20 million?  It''s a nobrainer.  Club''s best interests first, as I have said before.

But then its not your 8m, you don''t stand to lose a thing.

[/quote]

Please read more carefully.  I said BOTH SIDES NEED TO REACH A COMPROMISE.

The fact that the Turners didn''t insist on a controlling interest for their £2m is precisely the point I was trying to make.  £2m is not enough to insist on a controlling interest.  £20m is.

Re. their £8m.  Again please read the above: I said OF COURSE THEIR INVESTMENT SHOULD BE PROTECTED BUT THAT''S A DIFFERENT ISSUE.

Please excuse block caps.  BDU I know that in this post-moderation era it''s tempting to reply to a post before you''re read it properly.  I do it myself, all the time.  But I''m getting a little frustrated here.

 [/quote]

I am reading your posts properly.

You are saying their investment should be protected but advocating they allow Cullum on board in a way where their money wouldn''t be protected. 20m is only enough for a controlling interest if some of it is going to be used to buy out the existing controlling interest, OR if those with the existing controlling interest are happy to stand by and see their investment lose value. Yes both sides need to negotiate to reach a conclusion, but Cullum is currently only making out that he is willing to negotiate, whilst stating that he won''t budge.

I''m now out of here for a while.
[/quote]

I''m saying that there''s no reason why the deal that''s finally done can''t contain a legally binding guarantee that D&M will get their money back over a specified time period, if that''s what they want. 

The problem now appears to be that D&M want him to make a formal offer before they are willing to sit down and talk.  He wants to talk first.  Even an offer on their terms surely cannot be made out of the blue, without some discussion taking place first?  They haven''t spoken since January by all accounts. 

He wouldn''t bother to talk if he had no intention of changing his position.  He''s made enough deals in his life to realise that compromise is the essence of dealmaking.  

Enough from me too.  Have to go and tackle the garden which is starting to look like a location shot from Day of the Triffids.  I''m going out, and I may be some time . . .

 

[Mark .Y. 352]

[quote user="Grando"]Are both sides of this argument really unable to convene a mutually acceptable meeting, as the first step in the negotiating process? I imagine PC spends much of his time in London''s financial district, and from what I remember from some olf TV documentary is that Delia and Michael have a place by the Thames. Shouldn''t be that hard for them to meet up somewhere close by. Unless one side doesn''t want to, and, as PC says he wants to get together, the conclusion that has to be reached is that Delia and Michael are being ''obtuse''. Which, if true, is indefensible.[/quote]

 

Exactly, of course they should all meet. It sounds to me as if both sides have large egos (not unsurprisingly, given most successful business people do) and the egos have

got in the way of good old common sense.

 

Mark .Y.

 

[Evil Monkey 52]

[quote user="Grando"]Are both sides of this argument really unable to

convene a mutually acceptable meeting, as the first step in the

negotiating process?[/quote]

Do you mean FP and BDU? [8-)]

I''ve only really just had a chance to digest this information and now,

after reading the constant back and forth between those two, have

become so confused and bored with the whole thing that I rather think

my head might explode.

There''s a press conference at 1pm, a little chatette with Roeder... if

Archant are indeed p*ssing off NCFC they should continue this by

standing at the front and screaming "Where are you? Let''s be having

you?" in the general direction of Doomcaster''s office... then apologise

to Roeder for being caught up in the whole thing, poor lad...

[First Wazzock 916]

[quote user="ron obvious"]Perhaps PC alienated her with his initial "friendly arm-wrestling" offer?

If I''m selling a table for, say, £100 & someone offers me £20 I tend to get red in the face & walk away. I write them off as serious buyers.

And perhaps she''s not even selling - does she HAVE to?
[/quote]

I think thats Ricky''s strong suit. [:D] 

[Big Down Under 0]

Sorry all if we are boring you - you are certainly wlecome to Australia to talk about it over a beer if you want.The problem now appears to be that D&M want him to make a formal

offer before they are willing to sit down and talk.  He wants to talk

first.  Even an offer on their terms surely cannot be made out of the

blue, without some discussion taking place first?  They haven''t spoken

since January by all accounts. 

If he shows any willingness to offer the something I would expect them to sit down and talk. Right now he is indicating otherwise, so whats the point? Him "wanting to talk" is just guff to get more fans on his side. If D&M meet him under these conditions, they are just showing weakness. When negotiating with people like Cullum (ie someone who is very, very good at it) you can''t afford to show weakness.

He wouldn''t bother to talk if he had no intention of changing his

position.  He''s made enough deals in his life to realise that

compromise is the essence of dealmaking.

No he wouldn''t, but by making out via the EDP that he is the injured party here, he has lots to gain by the fans putting more pressure on the board. Cullum has made his pile by buying companies below their market value. You don''t get to his position by compromising an awful amount.

I have now read the online article from yesterdays EDP. They very

carefully don''t mention when third-party contact was made between PC

and Andrew Turner - only that it was since October. The earlier

articles mention that PC wants to add a couple of his people to the

Board, not that he wants to remove anyone from the Board. Why then

would any Directors want their loans repaid?

He wants to get over all control of the club without buying out Delia and MWJ. FB If you owned 62% of a pub, and a deal was done so you only earned 45% and received no financial compensation as a result, would you be happy?

Are both sides of this argument really unable to convene a mutually

acceptable meeting, as the first step in the negotiating process?

They have done this already. There is nothing new in Cullum;s offer, except now its public. Cullum is trying to use Fan power to get the club to accept an offer they have previously refused, for what is to me an understandable reason.

[kdncfc 0]

[quote user="ron obvious"][quote user="kdncfc"]

I don''t care if Cullum is trying to get the club on the cheap, it''s called business and none of us would want to pay more than we have to for anything.

[/quote]

Or sell something we don''t have to for a derisory sum.
[/quote]Delia is the one who said she doesn''t want money for herself she only wants money for the club. If she is serious about that then why doesn''t she sell her shares to Cullum for say 5 million and there would then still be 15 million of the 20 still avaliable for players. She won''t do that because the truth is she does want to make some money out of it and is only really interested in herself. And remember SHE is the one who said she didn''t want any money for herself, it''s now becoming clear that she didn''t mean a word of it.

[Evil Monkey 52]

[quote user="Big Down Under"]Sorry all if we are boring you - you are

certainly wlecome to Australia to talk about it over a beer if you want.[/quote]

Nice offer, but I''ve tasted Australian beer so I reckon I''ll be okay thank you... [:P]

[Big Down Under 0]

Marcus, I understand your frustrations and agree with a lot of what you say. On other threads I have repeated that I would love Cullum to be on board. Our Board haven''t forgotton how to buy players, but they can''t afford to bankroll us. As a club we have to balance the books by making profits on player sales.Cullum might not want to buy out existing shareholders, but I fully understand why they want their money back. Why should they allow Cullum to buy the club cheaply, at their expense? The guy is worth 1.7billion, why should they effectively give their money to him?I''m not crazy mad Marcus. I just understand why this is a terrible deal for the Smiths, and am trying to explain why. I would LOVE it if Cullum stumped up the cash and bought them out. I just won''t join a Delia lynch mob just because Cullum cries to the EDP.

[woody 0]

[quote user="kdncfc"][quote user="ron obvious"][quote user="kdncfc"]

I don''t care if Cullum is trying to get the club on the cheap, it''s called business and none of us would want to pay more than we have to for anything.

[/quote]

Or sell something we don''t have to for a derisory sum.
[/quote]Delia is the one who said she doesn''t want money for herself she only wants money for the club. If she is serious about that then why doesn''t she sell her shares to Cullum for say 5 million and there would then still be 15 million of the 20 still avaliable for players. She won''t do that because the truth is she does want to make some money out of it and is only really interested in herself. And remember SHE is the one who said she didn''t want any money for herself, it''s now becoming clear that she didn''t mean a word of it.[/quote]

Why should such a true saint as Cullum want to use his financial muscle to bully & f**k over someone worth 100 times less than him - and, further, why should Delia or anyone else let him?

[Fat Barman 0]

[quote user="Evil Monkey"][quote user="Big Down Under"]Sorry all if we are boring you - you are

certainly wlecome to Australia to talk about it over a beer if you want.[/quote]

Nice offer, but I''ve tasted Australian beer so I reckon I''ll be okay thank you... [:P][/quote]I can offer you some Cooper''s Hahn & Little Creatures that might change your mind - it''s not all XXXX!BDU - He wants to get over all control of the club without buying out Delia

and MWJ. FB If you owned 62% of a pub, and a deal was done so you only

earned 45% and received no financial compensation as a result, would

you be happy?I would still own 45% and be in a position to seek purchasers for my stake if I didn''t like the way the pub was run. I could also raise future funds to buy 6% of the new owners share to retake overall control - assuming things went t!ts up. I would also expect to be consulted over how the business was run. Let''s face it, that''s what we''ve all had to put up with from Delia & Michael with their controlling interest isn''t it?

[Citizen Journalist Foghorn 0]

[quote user="Big Down Under"]

I have now read the online article from yesterdays EDP. They very

carefully don''t mention when third-party contact was made between PC

and Andrew Turner - only that it was since October. The earlier

articles mention that PC wants to add a couple of his people to the

Board, not that he wants to remove anyone from the Board. Why then

would any Directors want their loans repaid?

He wants to get over all control of the club without buying out Delia and MWJ. FB If you owned 62% of a pub, and a deal was done so you only earned 45% and received no financial compensation as a result, would you be happy?

[/quote]Delia did the same thing when she took a controlling interest in the club.  She converted her loans to new shares and dissolved the value of others shares at that time?

[pete_norw 0]

Delia and Jones are holding our club to ransom, what have the Turners got that he don''t have, all they did was loan the club £2 Poltry million they are only thinking of thier own proffits here and not the clubs interest, this offer seems the best way forward so wake up SMITH JONES

[Buncey 1]

Unfortunately this is going to end in a stalemate. Both sides are being very economical with he truth and with what they say. Tbh if I had to take sides it would have to be with Cullum. Because at least he is bothering to make statements, at least he appears interested. All the board have came up with this week is some crappy retort saying you need to pay £56 million to get this club. I don''t understand why delia is always missing a key times at NCFC and why at key times we have to rely on scraps on infomation. The club have been far to secetive for me and it''s getting to breaking point. The "evaluation" of the club at £56million is total rubbish and then they expect Cullum to waltz in with an offer, it is clear Delia and the board don''t know what they want and Cullum doesn''t know what they want either. It''s safe to say that I can''t see an offer coming until Delia and Cullum sit down and talk and release a joint statement. This "two-sides" argument is petty to say the least and I''m disapointed that Cullum has had to use the media to get people on his side, that said it''s about time us fans knew something of what might be going on in the background.

[Evil Monkey 52]

[quote user="Fat Barman"]I can offer you some Cooper''s Hahn & Little Creatures that might change your mind - it''s not all XXXX!

[/quote]

Watch out mate, I may be coming to Norwich tomorrow and I might take

you up on that, not been into your gaff for ages (used to live around

the corner, loved it!)

[Coelho 0]

[quote user="Evil Monkey"][quote user="Fat Barman"]I can offer you some Cooper''s Hahn & Little Creatures that might change your mind - it''s not all XXXX!

[/quote]

Watch out mate, I may be coming to Norwich tomorrow and I might take

you up on that, not been into your gaff for ages (used to live around

the corner, loved it!)[/quote]Give us a ring if you''re about, mate. Will be out and about anyway, would be good to see you.

[norfolkchance1 0]

What concerns me is that the 56 million was deemed to be a minimum price, if that is the case what would the maximum price be?

[Coelho 0]

[quote user="norfolkchance1"]What concerns me is that the 56 million was deemed to be a minimum price, if that is the case what would the maximum price be?[/quote]We''ll find out if Cullum offers £56m, the cynics might say... [;)]

[Evil Monkey 52]

[quote user="Coelho"][quote user="Evil Monkey"][quote user="Fat Barman"]I can offer you some Cooper''s Hahn & Little Creatures that might change your mind - it''s not all XXXX!

[/quote]

Watch out mate, I may be coming to Norwich tomorrow and I might take

you up on that, not been into your gaff for ages (used to live around

the corner, loved it!)[/quote]Give us a ring if you''re about, mate. Will be out and about anyway, would be good to see you.[/quote]

Not sure of the plans yet, but will do... [:)]

[CaptnCanary 0]

[quote user="2Cakes"]It sounds like talks aren''t underway because he still hasn''t made an offer to buy the shares yet. Whilst the implied offer of £20 million in the transfer kitty in return for the majority ownership of the club might be great for the fans it isn''t great for the shareholders.

Whilst I would like the board to be open about what is going on, they have made clear what their asking price is. Now it''s time for PC be clarify the exact details of what his offer is. Perhaps the board think there has been no progress on PC''s side since discussions last took place and therefore further discussions aren''t worthwhile at this point in time.

We only know the details that the board and PC wish to be made public.
[/quote]

How else do you expect him to clarify that other than by sitting down to discuss it with them?!?!?!?

[Fat Barman 0]

I''d better stock up those coolers! Every Saturday Midday - Midnight, I need to change my shifts...

[Evil Monkey 52]

Nice one, you''ll be able to spot me if I wear the same t-shirt as today!

[SWP = Poor Mans Ruel Fox!! 0]

I think both sides of the argument are correct here (referring to the ongoing retort between FP and BDU), i''m not going to go through all of it lol!!  A meeting should still be arranged to see if any negotiated agreement could be reached for the good of the club.

I do not agree that Delia would be showing weakness if she agreed to a meeting.  Although we understand that football is a business nowadays, in the end it is still not a normal business and there are lots of people with a vested interest, i.e. the fans.  At the moment Delia is coming across as obstructive and unwilling to discuss the possibility of a large investment into the club.  That is not doing her public opinion any good whatsoever.

As someone (I think) posted somewhere, if a meeting was arranged with Cullum and afterwards Delia, or a spokeman for her, came out and said "we have met with PC and his terms are unacceptable, if he is prepared to reconsider these we will talk further" that would go some way to satisfying the fans and she would not seem weak in the slightest.

Yes it is a bit of a PR war, but PR is very important and Cullum is winning it hands down.  Delia is coming across as an angry old woman sitting in the corner saying its my club you cant have it!

I get the feeling someone on the board is dead against Cullum having anything to do with the club.

[Syteanric 1]

[quote]

on the board is dead against Cullum having anything to do with the club.

[/quote]

thats a very interesting point.. isnt Central Trust a finance company too????  are the Turners worried that Cullum might be coming in?

jas :)