Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Herb

Re. Cullum, let's not forget...

Recommended Posts

SPat

Let me explain why I feel betrayed and why I cannot understand fans like you

PC wanted to invest £20 million into NCFC

As a fan I know that money gives us a chance to compete for the Premiership which is where I believe we belong

As someone who understands business I understand what PC wants and it’s not unfair

The club issue new shares that give PC 51% of the club

The existing shareholders including Delia dilute their shares to 49%

In return for 51% of the shares he invests £20 million into the club for players

Yes that’s invest into players not hotels or kitchens or new stands

You must understand that £20 million easily warrants having control of the club.  Could someone tell us exactly what the existing shareholders paid to gain control

The sad irony is and it’s one that few seem to understand is that the current shareholders shares are worth far more at 49% with PC and £20 million than 100% with no ability to challenge for the premiership.

 

Share this post


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

SPat my poor deluded Delia fan.....

Let me explain it very simply for you:

In return for PC investing £20 million in players the club give him 51% of the shares

If you or any other fans do not think £20 million is enough for control of the club then please explain why. 

Delia and the existing shareholders 49% stake is worth far more with a transfer kitty of £20 million for players than 100% of a club with no ability to challenge for the top two postions and a very divided fan base

[/quote]

I don''t understand I''m afraid, sorry

As I see it Delia and Husband own 63% at the moment, if she supplies Callum with 51% she is left with only 12%.

Even if, (and it is if, investment is no guarantee), City did well she would achieve only marginal return compared with PC.

I can''t in all honesty see that as an attractive proposition for her.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I thought YC was female....[quote user="Neil Cluckcaster"][quote user="YankeeCanary"][quote user="Neil Cluckcaster"][quote user="YankeeCanary"][quote user="Neil Cluckcaster"][quote user="Herb"][quote user="Neil Cluckcaster"]

Additionally...some of us are less interested in Peter Cullum''s money than the direction and steel that a man of his business calibre would bring.

[/quote]Yeah, of course. I''m sure you didn''t even notice Cullum''s mention of 20m, you just started salivating at the direction and steel he''d bring.Meanwhile, back on planet earth....Theres a difference between wanting something better than the current board (which I think most fans would) and giving the club away to an insurance man no questions asked.And no questions are being asked. Hence why despite not making an offer for control of the club, everyone seems to have decided that Delia wants 150 squillion quid in unmarked note dropping off at Stowmarket before she''ll even talk.The more intelligent amonst us are reading between the lines and thinking "Whats his bloody game, then?"[/quote]

My apologies.....

When my arse starts talking next I''ll try to communicate better with you......

[/quote]

I see. Well, Cluck, we have a few spare guided missiles sitting around so, if you will be good enough to provide your address, we''ll send you one gift wrapped. We won''t concern ourselves with which end of your anatomy we target as your output from either end is remarkably similar.

[/quote]

I''d save those missiles for your next invasion plans Yank....and being the male of the species I fear I''ll never have the right equipment to communicate with you........

[/quote]

Your early days as Nora had some of us confused. Then again, you may have been going through a confusing period yourself. I''m actually pleased for you that you seem to have found yourself now.

[/quote]

I have indeed Yank...and so I have a number of nice dresses available for purchase....but being a Yank I guess a size 16 would be many sizes too small for you....eh fatty boy?

[/quote]

Share this post


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

In return for PC investing £20 million in players the club give him 51% of the shares

 [/quote]

"The club"?Surely you mean the shareholders?And what makes you think all of the shareholders would agree to sell their shares unanimously?What about the shares owned by supporters who have a couple of grand or so in shares? Reckon they''re going to be keen to sell just as a billionaire is about to take control?Why should any of the shareholders be expected to lay down their shares to someone few of us knew from Adam 12 months ago?Or are you envisioning the scenario Gorleston Canary rightfully points out as being ludicrous - cos if you are I want some of what you''ve been drinking....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Herb"][quote user="milan marcus"]

In return for PC investing £20 million in players the club give him 51% of the shares

 [/quote]

cos if you are I want some of what you''ve been drinking....[/quote]Actually what have I been drinking. Instead of "sell" I should have typed "give away"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi mate this is how I see it

If she owns 63% she would reduce that stake to half i.e 31.5% with the other shareholders doing the same. 

I would strongly argue that 31.5% stake in a NCFC financed with £20 million of money and supported by PC is worth far more than owning 63% that has no real cash to compete for the Premiership.

I can also bet you and every other supporter that Delia did not invest £20 million to get a 63% stake!! whereas PC is prepared to invest £20 million for a 51% stake 

I hope that explains what I am trying to say and thanks for trying to see my point

Share this post


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

SPat my poor deluded Delia fan.....

Let me explain it very simply for you:

In return for PC investing £20 million in players the club give him 51% of the shares

If you or any other fans do not think £20 million is enough for control of the club then please explain why. 

Delia and the existing shareholders 49% stake is worth far more with a transfer kitty of £20 million for players than 100% of a club with no ablity to challenge for the top two postions and a very divided fan base

 [/quote]

Milan let me explain it simply for you...

PC says to the club here''s £20 million - spend it on players and in return I want majority control of the club. The club say:

"Thanks, but by the terms of our loans we will have to pay back £16 million, plus £4 million in directors'' loans, if overall control of the club changes. Are you going to cover this in the event that the loans are called in by the lenders?"

The club also says

"By stock market rules, you will have to offer to buy all shareholders shares if you acquire a majority stake. Are you prepared to cover the cost of these too?"

Even if Delia sells out for nothing, PC must be able to cover the potential repayment of the loans and the buyout of the other shares. That is why PC''s offer as it was did not stand up.

Share this post


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

Hi mate this is how I see it

If she owns 63% she would reduce that stake to half i.e 31.5% with the other shareholders doing the same. 

I would strongly argue that 31.5% stake in a NCFC financed with £20 million of money and supported by PC is worth far more than owning 63% that has no real cash to compete for the Premiership.

I can also bet you and every other supporter that Delia did not invest £20 million to get a 63% stake!! whereas PC is prepared to invest £20 million for a 51% stake 

I hope that explains what I am trying to say and thanks for trying to see my point

[/quote]

Let me also explain it simply to you Milan:

If I were the owner of the club and I have the call over what actions we will or won''t take, and Peter Cullum came to me SAYING he would spend 20 million on players in return for control of the club I would have to be a very foolish business person to turn control over for what someone SAYS they want to do. Even if his motives are sincere I have no guarantee that is the case. Once he has control he can choose to spend nothing, or a little, or lots. The point is all of those options are now under his control. My influence on decisions would now have been reduced as would my negotiating position if I subsequently chose to withdraw from the club because Peter Cullum chose to do differently then he said he would do. Thanks, but no thanks. That scenario has very little appeal for me. If Peter Cullum really wants the club then let him make an offer while I have control. If you don''t understand that then you really understand far less about business than you like to suggest.

How do you think the Leicester and Ipswich fans ( to name just two clubs ) feel about the potential cash injection into their club from their new owners versus what their expectation might have been at the time of the change of control?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont want to keep on saying this but it needs to be rammed home it seems.

Club worth £16m in assetts - Delia owns £9m (56%) - Other investors own £7m (44%)

Club gains an extra investment of £20m

Club now worth £36M in assetts - PC owns £20m (55%), Delia owns £9m (25%) others own £7m (19%) (OK dont point out this does not add up to 100% - rounding etc)

The BIG BIG difference between PC £20m and Delia £9m and yours and my £7m is that the £20m is in cash and the rest is in fixed assets.........funny enough in the current climate the cash of £20m is probably worth more on future forecase £ to £ than the assets as most of the club assets are tied up in land, building which have decreasing value at the mo - we have very little assets which may increase in value (errrr - possibly Robert Eagle might be worth a fiver in ten years time if we are lucky!)

Share this post


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

I dont want to keep on saying this but it needs to be rammed home it seems.

Club worth £16m in assetts - Delia owns £9m (56%) - Other investors own £7m (44%)

Club gains an extra investment of £20m

Club now worth £36M in assetts - PC owns £20m (55%), Delia owns £9m (25%) others own £7m (19%) (OK dont point out this does not add up to 100% - rounding etc)

The BIG BIG difference between PC £20m and Delia £9m and yours and my £7m is that the £20m is in cash and the rest is in fixed assets.........funny enough in the current climate the cash of £20m is probably worth more on future forecase £ to £ than the assets as most of the club assets are tied up in land, building which have decreasing value at the mo - we have very little assets which may increase in value (errrr - possibly Robert Eagle might be worth a fiver in ten years time if we are lucky!)

[/quote]

You cannot "ram" things home with others until you can demonstrate that you are capable of ramming a few things home in your own thinking. Very few astute people are going to turn over something they own to somebody else for anything more than a STATEMENT from a prospective buyer of what they say they will spend on players.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

YankeeCanary

Norfolk fuzzy Logic has reached you out there?

"SAYING he would spend £20 million"

This is simply a legal contract nothing fuzzy to worry about

"I agree to invest £20 million in return for 51% of the club"

Even I don''t love PC enough to take his word if he fails to invest he gets sued and I think he is worth £20 million plus change

I still don''t understand why we as fans are more worried about the shareholders rather than what £20 million will do for the team?

Share this post


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

"SAYING he would spend £20 million"

This is simply a legal contract nothing fuzzy to worry about

"I agree to invest £20 million in return for 51% of the club"[/quote]

I''d love to see the wording of that contract. Also "in return for" means he''s getting the shares for nothing. Again.

Share this post


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

YankeeCanary

Norfolk fuzzy Logic has reached you out there?

"SAYING he would spend £20 million"

This is simply a legal contract nothing fuzzy to worry about

"I agree to invest £20 million in return for 51% of the club"

Even I don''t love PC enough to take his word if he fails to invest he gets sued and I think he is worth £20 million plus change

I still don''t understand why we as fans are more worried about the shareholders rather than what £20 million will do for the team?

[/quote]

Fuzzy logic? What legal contract are you referring to? The one that never materialised into a formal offer from Peter Cullum, or the one that is simply dancing around in your head on the end of pots of gold that sway your thought process without substance to support it? All you have in your rhetoric is your belief of what you think should happen because you want the money so badly. Answer the questions I asked and I may dialogue with you.

For example, how do you think the Leicester and Ipswich fans ( to name just two clubs ) feel about the potential cash injection into their club from their new owners versus what their expectation might have been at the time of the change of control? And if Peter Cullum acquired control, even if this "ghost contract" that you allude to was in place do you think Mr. Cullum, given the nature of the business he is in, is going to sign something that could subject him to a lawsuit. And who''s going to raise such a lawsuit, the minority shareholders, the fans? In your dream world none of this would ever materialise because Mr. Cullum is just wonderful. In my real world, if I own the club I will tell Mr. Cullum what I want while I have a say in the matter. That, I believe is precisely what Delia and Michael have done. Surprise, surprise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Answer the questions I asked and I may dialogue with you" ok fair play here goes:

"For example, how do you think the Leicester and Ipswich fans ( to name just two clubs ) feel about the potential cash injection into their club from their new owners versus what their expectation might have been at the time of the change of control"      

PC is a diffent class of an investor to those at Leicester and Ipswich he is a real deal billion pound investor who happens to be a Norwich fan.  He wanted to invest £20 million of cash.  He is not investing in NCFC for financial gain he is doing because he wants success for NCFC.  However nor is he a mug and for £20 million pound he wants control. 

"And if Peter Cullum acquired control, even if this "ghost contract" that you allude to was in place do you think Mr. Cullum, given the nature of the business he is in, is going to sign something that could subject him to a lawsuit. And who''s going to raise such a lawsuit, the minority shareholders, the fans?"

PC is not here to rip off the club...... please.....a commercial contract would be signed by everyone if he did not invest in the £20 million his whole reputation would be ruined plus he would be sued by the club.  I don''t think this really is a valid debate

"In my real world, if I own the club I will tell Mr. Cullum what I want while I have a say in the matter. That, I believe is precisely what Delia and Michael have done. Surprise, surprise"

You own a club that cannot compete at the top level needs urgent investment and if it does not find investment will need urgent injections of cash to ensure its viability.  You tell Mr Cullum what you want and tell him to stick £20 million where it hurts

My question to you is what did it cost Delia to gain contol of the club and was she forced to buy the whole club to get control? 

However mate at the end of the day we both love NCFC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Good grief I promised myself I wouldn''t get involved any more in this.Marcus I understand your frustrations, but you just don''t understand the business mindset at all.This whole issue is about control of the club, and control of invested money into the club. Delia currently has control, Cullum wants it. However, Cullum wants it without actually buying it from Delia (or so the offer currently appears). People seem to think that its obvious Cullum deserves control if he is putting in so much money, but remember it is a tiny part of his net worth. Delia is only worth about 30m (from the Times rich list and from memory, but I think that figure is about right) but has put in about 9m, a major proportion of her net worth. For that investment, she is (quite rightly) insisting on keeping control of HER MONEY.You presume that Cullum will spend 20m, take control of the club, and run it like a fan. Then why isn''t he acting like that now? If he was going to act like a fan and not a billionnaire business man, why not bid more right now? There are no guarantees he would act in the way you suggest, and believe me you don''t get to be worth 1.7Bn without having a huge ruthless streak running through your veins. I would suggest he is acting right now more like the billionnaire business man and less like the fan.All this rubbish about issuing new shares - it would dilute Delia''s investment value. However much people spin "but its better to own 49% of a Premiership club than 51% of a Championship club" I would say absolute rubbish.1. There are no guarantees that a 20m investment would see us into the Premiership. Loads of examples of cashed up 2nd tier clubs who don''t get promoted2. She would have no control. Cullum, with a majority vote on the board, could sell the ground, raise ticket prices, give his shares to Evans down the road, do what he wants. I''m not suggesting for a minute that he WOULD do this, but he could. Delia''s shares could become worthless over night. 3. Would you lose control of 33% of your net worth like this? Would you sign over control of your house to a property developer, in the expectation you could double your money? Only an absolute idiot would.4. Contracts are generally worth the paper they are written on. If Cullum gets control and DOESN''T put his money in, how much money do you think the club would have available to fight Cullum in a law suit? With the legal team he could afford, the case would be wrapped up in court for years. Meanwhile, the club have no 20m and our remaining board members have seen the value of their share wiped out. Not very good for the future of the club. Again, I am not saying this would happen, but it could.5. Do you really think other City (as in City of London) investors would care less about what he may or may not have promised to NCFC? Not while his other interests are growing at the rate they are, nobody would care less.6. Is this new share issue you suggest even legal? I don''t think Cullum is here to rip off the club, but I do think he is trying to buy it cheap and get a good deal. I don''t hold a grudge against him for trying, even if I am pissed off with the timing of his public statement (I also think Delia was dumb for what she said at the Royal Norfolk Show). However, it is only right that if he wants control, he should buy out the existing share holders and stop wasting everyone''s time. If he just wants to give a cash injection, loan the money and let the club get on with it.You and others are responding exactly how Cullum wanted you to respond. His only motive for going public was to get the fans on his side against Delia. At the expense of the club. HArdly the actions of a man acting like a fan, and not a business man trying to get a club cheaply. Did you notice how transfers in dried up after his announcement? We might never know how much damage this whole episode has done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Big Down Under"]Good grief I promised myself I wouldn''t get involved any more in this.

Marcus I understand your frustrations, but you just don''t understand the business mindset at all.

This whole issue is about control of the club, and control of invested money into the club. Delia currently has control, Cullum wants it. However, Cullum wants it without actually buying it from Delia (or so the offer currently appears). People seem to think that its obvious Cullum deserves control if he is putting in so much money, but remember it is a tiny part of his net worth. Delia is only worth about 30m (from the Times rich list and from memory, but I think that figure is about right) but has put in about 9m, a major proportion of her net worth. For that investment, she is (quite rightly) insisting on keeping control of HER MONEY.
[/quote]

This BDU, is completely contrary to what Smith has always said she will do. She has always maintained that she will hand over control if the right sort of investor came along. She also maintained that their had not been any offers made, whereas in truth we''ve since learnt that more than one approach has been made to the club by various investors. They have ALL been rebuffed. Cullum ticks all her boxes except one - that she can''t walk away having made a profit on her investment, and her deceit is what upsets a lot of fans right now.

[quote user="Big Down Under"]
You presume that Cullum will spend 20m, take control of the club, and run it like a fan. Then why isn''t he acting like that now? If he was going to act like a fan and not a billionnaire business man, why not bid more right now? There are no guarantees he would act in the way you suggest, and believe me you don''t get to be worth 1.7Bn without having a huge ruthless streak running through your veins. I would suggest he is acting right now more like the billionnaire business man and less like the fan.
[/quote]

I''m really pleased he is showing a ruthless streak. Our club has needed this for years, instead the culture has allowed to slacken off to such an extent that the club has a reputation of being a "nice" club that doesn''t compete any more. Read Dion Dublin''s comments when he left the club if you require proof.

[quote user="Big Down Under"]
All this rubbish about issuing new shares - it would dilute Delia''s investment value. However much people spin "but its better to own 49% of a Premiership club than 51% of a Championship club" I would say absolute rubbish.
1. There are no guarantees that a 20m investment would see us into the Premiership. Loads of examples of cashed up 2nd tier clubs who don''t get promoted
[/quote]

Of course there are no guarantees. Who ever claimed there was? It is the crux of the matter, though. If the club gets promoted everybody is a winner. Even Delia''s 9million will be worth more. If we are relegated everybody loses - including Peter Cullum. But do you think we have a better chance of promotion with or without 20million? Please answer that.

[quote user="Big Down Under"]

2. She would have no control. Cullum, with a majority vote on the board, could sell the ground, raise ticket prices, give his shares to Evans down the road, do what he wants. I''m not suggesting for a minute that he WOULD do this, but he could. Delia''s shares could become worthless over night.
[/quote]

Don''t worry about Smith''s investment. She has taken a gamble just as you and I will do if we buy shares on the Stock Market. The value of those shares may go up or they may go down. Her gamble was to invest in property, which is currently declining in value. The club ended the season a whisker away from relegation. That is not conjeecture of what may happen if she has control of the club - it is fact of the state of the club after 12 years of her ownership

[quote user="Big Down Under"]

3. Would you lose control of 33% of your net worth like this? Would you sign over control of your house to a property developer, in the expectation you could double your money? Only an absolute idiot would.

[/quote]

That we would invest in a playing squad to get us to the Premiership instead of investing in property!!

[quote user="Big Down Under"]
4. Contracts are generally worth the paper they are written on. If Cullum gets control and DOESN''T put his money in, how much money do you think the club would have available to fight Cullum in a law suit? With the legal team he could afford, the case would be wrapped up in court for years. Meanwhile, the club have no 20m and our remaining board members have seen the value of their share wiped out. Not very good for the future of the club. Again, I am not saying this would happen, but it could.
[/quote]

A little less drama, please. He cannot get control until he has written out a big, fat cheque for twenty big ones to buy newly issued shares. Both sides employ many worker drones to do the paperwork. You make it sound like this is the world''s first financial transaction.

[quote user="Big Down Under"]

5. Do you really think other City (as in City of London) investors would care less about what he may or may not have promised to NCFC? Not while his other interests are growing at the rate they are, nobody would care less.

[/quote]

Please point me to evidence where Cullum, who spends a considerable sum on charitable works, has ever acted improperly in a financial transaction. Has he or his companies ever been reported to the City financial watchdogs? What are you implying?

[quote user="Big Down Under"] 
6. Is this new share issue you suggest even legal?

[/quote]

See ''worker drones'', above. Take a deep breath and stay calm.

[quote user="Big Down Under"] 
I don''t think Cullum is here to rip off the club, but I do think he is trying to buy it cheap and get a good deal. I don''t hold a grudge against him for trying, even if I am pissed off with the timing of his public statement (I also think Delia was dumb for what she said at the Royal Norfolk Show). However, it is only right that if he wants control, he should buy out the existing share holders and stop wasting everyone''s time. If he just wants to give a cash injection, loan the money and let the club get on with it.

[/quote]

If you don''t think he is here to rip off the club then why do you claim that he could sell the ground, or wrap us up in the courts, or query if the deal is legal, or make innuendo about his City of London dealings . You are using scaremongering tactics but don''t really believe in them yourself. Or perhaps you do? BDU, you are coming over as being very confused and emotional. But it is not surprising because in times of great change many people find it difficult to let go. You fear the unknown. The familiar is a comfort blanket even though it is ragged and snot-ridden. But don''t panic, if Cullum takes control OUR club will still be there - Carrow Road will not disappear - the Yellow and Green will still fill the stadium.

Who cares if he buys it cheap? His proposal will put 20million directly into the playing squad. It will not go in Smith''s pocket. After years of no investment in quality players (refer to Hucks comments about quality players being sold) we now have an economic correction financed by one of the country''s most reputable businessmen.

I come back to my point that it is a gamble. One incidently, that Cullum expects to see no return on. But if we get promoted Delia''s shares are more valuable even if they are now a minority shareholding. Of course the difference is that she may find it more difficult to extract herself from the club as a minority shareholder. But then she always maintained that she was only ever concerned about the best interests of the club. Cullum came along, called her bluff, and demonstrated that she was less than honest in her public statements. So why should I care what she walks away with?

[quote user="Big Down Under"] 
You and others are responding exactly how Cullum wanted you to respond. His only motive for going public was to get the fans on his side against Delia. At the expense of the club. HArdly the actions of a man acting like a fan, and not a business man trying to get a club cheaply. Did you notice how transfers in dried up after his announcement? We might never know how much damage this whole episode has done.
[/quote]

Yes you are right, we are responding the way Cullum expects, because public opinion is a huge factor in all of this. At the end of the day it could be public opinion that sways where control of the club eventually ends up. Therefore all parties had better come out and tell us fans exactly why the deal failed to materialise. Fans should not be dumped on. Existing shareholders, imo,  have a right to know. I suspect that both parties are watching the early season results. If we get off to a good start then mention of Cullum will fade from these pages. A bad start and we may be back to the last days of the Chase era. Not exactly pro-active is it?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yellow Hammer, I don''t have time right now to respond to all your points at length (sigh of relief all round) but here is some of it;1. I''m not emotionally invested in Delia, just the club. I''m trying to show the reasons why the Cullum offer is bad for her. It is bad for her. I''m also trying to show that Cullum isn''t the white knight some think he is, if he was he would have made a better bid.2. I would love Cullum on board. I agree his hardened attitude is what the club needs. However until he liquidates more of his holding I doubt he will up his bid, so he is one for the future. 3. Show me a quote where Delia says she will give the club away. She has not gone back on anything she has said. Yes she is a bad PR person for the clubs, her public communications aer poor to say the least, but she has never said or hinted that she would give the club away.4. I don''t believe the share issue as put forward by Marcus is even legal. Thats not me being emotional, and I''m not implying Cullum is in any way acting illegally, I just think it breaks the rules.5. You are expecting Delia to gamble with 9m of her money, when track record shows she is risk averse. It isn''t going to happen. I certainly wouldn''t gamble with such a large % of my net worth.6. Contracts get broken all the time in business. I have seen this first hand. All is fair in love, war and business. I''m not accusing Cullum of doing this, but it certainly happens. 7. Generally property doubles in value evry 7 years in the UK. Its not a risk to the same level as stock market investments, if you have a long term view. I don''t think its suitable for a football club and I wish our board hadn''t done it. You are saying I am being over emotional, I''m not at all YH. In my view the emotion is coming from other posters, especially those who regard Delia as being a lying, conniving, Ipswich supporting 2nd rate has been celebrity with a Thatcher fixation, who is pocketing our transfer money whilst cooking the accounts. Truth is she (well the whole board) has stabilised the club financially, whilst making bad decisions on the playing side mainly through hiring Grant, but arguably by also holding on to Worthy too long. Thats why we struggled last season, rubbish squad and a rubbish manager for too much of it. This season with a decent manager who is making good acquisitions and obviously has some money to spend, we should be more competitive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BDU, Delia has stated at the AGM that "if any idiots want to invest in football, they can have the club" and "we don`t want money for our shares, that would give us lots of money but would do nothing for the team" and on Radio 5 "if someone came along and offered £20m for the team i don`t think the fans would forgive us if we stood in their way" (quotes from memory).  If she hasn`t catagorically stated that she would give the shares away to someone who would invest in the team she has certainly implied as much.  If you talk populist nonsense which can`t be backed up in reality then i don`t think you deserve any sympathy personally.

Again i am very puzzled by this obsession with the good of a very wealthy couple taking precidence over the good of NCFC.  Very strange.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yellow Hamer

I now defer to your expertise in helping our fellow fans understand why there are so many who feel so raw at what has happened. 

I just think the pressure on the team will be so intense this season and if the results go wrong there will be many asking why we did not take £20 million for players so many of us feel we need to get us in the Premiership.

However all of us will be behind the team but many will remain bitter with the board

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yellow hammer....what a splendid piece of work!

I''ll confess I come along here for a chuckle mostly....but every now and then I encounter something genuinely impressive.

My hat is duly doffed sir......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr Carrow you are demonstrating excellently how internet message boards work. Quotes get mangled, taken out of context, rearranged to suit a poster''s point, and after being repeated a few times become message board fact.Delia never said that. Why don''t you read this article from Kevin Baldwin, where he quotes what she ACTUALLY said, and come back. http://norwichcity.myfootballwriter.com/full_article.asp?i=3714 Same thing with her supposed quote about us being ''little old Norwich" when she was actually complaining about the attitude of the press to us. Its partly her fault, any senior exec at a large corporation would get media training to ensure they don''t provide potentially misleading sound bites, she is a nightmare with the press. But she never once gave the quote you give (or can you link me to it?).Yellow Hammer I would be interested to see your response to my points if you have the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Been having far too much fun with the “Don’t you just love the Yanks” thread to look at this one until now. In truth a bit baffled this argument is still going on.

It’s very simple. There is not a shred of hard evidence that a Cullum takeover would have produced £20m for transfers.

Such evidence as there is indicates that the £20m figure floated by Cullum was in fact for everything. Now even if you assume (and I wouldn’t for a moment) that the debt could be renegotiated, and the loans to directors wouldn’t be called in, Cullum still has to acquire most if not all of the Smith and Jones stake to gain control. Out of the £20m.

The only way the £20m can effectively stay intact is if Smith and Jones accept nothing for their shares or – say – a nominal 1p per share. And if the offer to Smith and Jones is a nominal 1p then it has to be 1p for all the shareholders. Myself included. So I get offered 1p for a share that cost £25.

Which is a non-starter. But an academic non-starter, because no-one could seriously expect Smith and Jones to accept 1p a share, and no-one could seriously expect them to force the minority shareholders to accept 1p either. Apart from anything else they’d be failing in their duty to protect the rights of minority shareholders.
 
So Cullum has to offer something remotely resembling a fair price, and in that case the £20m gets sharply reduced by whatever it costs to buy the shares. The £20m for transfers is a mirage.

Probably the best analogy is with the well-known Lithuanian story of the boy on Christmas Eve who sees what looks like his parents’ list of presents for the family and thinks he’s getting a matchstick model of Vilnius Cathedral and a train set and a toboggan. Actually the list was planted by his wicked twin sister and he finds out the next morning the only thing in his stocking is the matchstick model of Vilnius Cathedral. He never was getting the other two but he’s still naturally disappointed. It’s the kind of thing children get upset about.

Actually that’s not a well-known Lithuanian story (or at least I don’t think it is) but it will serve.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Big Down Under"]Mr Carrow you are demonstrating excellently how internet message boards work. Quotes get mangled, taken out of context, rearranged to suit a poster''s point, and after being repeated a few times become message board fact.

Delia never said that. Why don''t you read this article from Kevin Baldwin, where he quotes what she ACTUALLY said, and come back. http://norwichcity.myfootballwriter.com/full_article.asp?i=3714

Same thing with her supposed quote about us being ''little old Norwich" when she was actually complaining about the attitude of the press to us. Its partly her fault, any senior exec at a large corporation would get media training to ensure they don''t provide potentially misleading sound bites, she is a nightmare with the press. But she never once gave the quote you give (or can you link me to it?).

Yellow Hammer I would be interested to see your response to my points if you have the time.
[/quote]

BDU, i really can`t be bothered to link you to the quotes, because the articles and Youtube footage (Radio 5 interview) have been posted on here often enough for me to conclude that the likes of you are simply ignoring the bits you don`t like.  Those quotes are pretty much word-for-word what she has said and i know exactly what went on at the AGM (both on and off mike) because she was responding to one of my best friends questions.  That friend used to argue with me from a pro-board standpoint.  He doesn`t any more.

The "little norwich" thing has been done to death and personally i think she used that phrase at least twice in the Prem season.  The one i heard with my own ears was nothing to do with the press, it was more a "David vs Goliath" statement which, to be fair, was quite accurate in that season.  It`s the fact that we still seem to have that mentality in this league which annoys people.

Share this post


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

BDU, i really can`t be bothered to link you to the quotes, because the articles and Youtube footage (Radio 5 interview) have been posted on here often enough for me to conclude that the likes of you are simply ignoring the bits you don`t like.

[/quote]And the fact you "can''t be bothered to link to the quotes" but can be bothered to write several paragraphs about them makes me think you''re guilty of exactly the same thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mr Carrow, the quotes are in the article I linked, and discussed in there too. If you prefer, read the courtesy of the BBC here http://www.bbc.co.uk/norfolk/content/articles/2007/01/19/ncfc_deliasmith_agm_20070119_feature.shtml and you can even listen to her say the words. She is pretty clear to me, she won''t sell to someone just to profit on her shares, they also have to have money for the club. I don''t think Kevin Baldwin has a reputation for being too close to the board or a board lacky, if you won''t take it from me why don''t you take it from him?Go on, be bothered to link me to the quotes you think she said...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"The only way we would relinquish our shares is if somebody is going to put money into the football......Only if they put money into the squad- not if they buy our shares, we don`t want money.  It has to be that there is money for the squad, serious money for the squad".

Note the word "relinquish", not "sell" in relation to the shares.  How much more blatent do you want it BDU?  And you label Cullum as the bad guy because he comes along and offers exactly what Delia has asked for.....[8-)]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The bbc aricles indicates BDU is correct and that they were looking to sell their shares but only if more money was invested and based on what PC said he was not looking to buy their shares so it is correct there was no offer for their shares

The direct link on the Simon Mayo/interview no longer works for me but  I understand the key reported quote is that we are not looking for money for our shares which could be interpreted as we are not looking for any money from our shares  or that we are not looking to make a profit out of our shares which would be consistent with the 16m quoted for the shares and  and the bbc articles. So it comes down to how people interpret the words and if you look broader at the quotes in the bbc article for an interpretation it does indicates that they were looking to sell their shares. 

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...