Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Pete Raven

THE MAN: Harris has a bigger chance of finding Nessie!

Recommended Posts

Perhaps someone should point out to "The Man" that the message-board on the Club''s official site is not "subscription-only"

It''s free and as easy to use as this one - and you get the benefit of (occasionally) interacting with Club officials.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Jackswan"]Strange this Keith Harris is involved with you, he''s recently joined the board as a director at Cardiff City.


[/quote]

Looks like a potential conflict of interests to me . . .

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
He was involved with us and all he could find as a possible investor was Bo Eklands brother.

Scumdiff fans seem to think he''s taking a hefty wage too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not sure if I can post links on here so sorry in advance if I cant.http://nigelblues.blogspot.com/2008/07/keith-harris-joins-cardiff-city-board.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Jackswan"]He was involved with us and all he could find as a possible investor was Bo Eklands brother.

Scumdiff fans seem to think he''s taking a hefty wage too.
[/quote]

yep, the news just gets better and better...

Share this post


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

It''s free and as easy to use as this one - and you get the benefit of (occasionally) interacting with Club officials.[/quote]Crikey that sounds worth having when you read the Mans article in full. Big problem with that messageboard is that you "get the benefit of (occasionally) interacting with Club officials" normally when you say anything that''s a little bit difficult for them to face up to. This board is moderated but it''s not subject to the amount of censorship as the official one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="jetstream"]Perhaps someone should point out to "The Man" that the message-board on the Club''s official site is not "subscription-only" It''s free and as easy to use as this one - and you get the benefit of (occasionally) interacting with Club officials.[/quote]

Jetstream please explain,define and discuss what on earth you mean or has someone else in your household used your name in vain?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

£56m for Norwich City?

Huckerby banned from the training ground.

Our owner saying there''s on point in "having a plan".

Jesus wept!

Sadly - IT CAN GET WORSE.

Share this post


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

[quote user="Sports Desk - Pete"]http://new.pinkun.com/content/columns/ManStands.aspx[/quote]

Third rate crap even by Archant standards.

[/quote]

As your critical observation is Cam. Even the poorest critics usually provide an example or two to substantiate their overall view. Is it the content ( or some of it ) or the writing style that you find poor or incorrect? There must be something you can elaborate on. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay YC if you are genuinely interested.

In order: the letter from Mr Cullum.  What provoked this letter?  Was he bored after a day of acquiring Independent Financial Advisors (his current thrill) and said to his PA (his wife): "I tell you what, let''s write a letter to Norwich City?"

Or was the letter either as a result of a letter from Norwich City asking him to state his situation pre AGM or was it as a result of an approach by Keith Harris or was he really bored in Maidstone?

I think the "reason" for that letter is important and might be a good story for the EDP.  Was it a last gasp attempt by Delia & Co, a first knockback for Keith Harris or Cullum saying: "Oops, I''m out of here..........."

The meeting: So there was a meeting?  Quite a number of posters seem to think that the two sides have never met.  Was it in Maidstone?  Norwich?  Halfway? Video conference?  We do know it was apparently in October last year. 

Again I would have thought the details might interest fans: who attended, how long it lasted but that''s just me. I''ve not seen the details in the EDP yet.

Cullum: I don''t know if it involves sneering but King of Deals comes from within the insurance industry and the City and is I think regarded as an accolade rather than a sneer but we''ll leave that one as a matter of opinion.

Most of the rest can be regarded as fair comment - or unfair comment, if the objects object- until we come to the most astonishing statement of all:

"The same financial wind that blew the Turners away............"

Aha, as Alan Partridge might say.

So that''s why they quit is it? In financial doo-doo? Well, not a word of that aside from Man in the Stands has appeared in the EDP so far.

But it is a Page One NEWS story if that is so.  Two of the richest people in Norfolk forced to quit as directors of Norwich City because they have problems of their own with implications for their business and for the staff they employ.

And yet it''s the last par in a staff written anonymous column at the back of the paper?

If the Board and Roeder have let down Norwich City fans - as many think - so, in my opinion, have their local newspaper who have got nowhere near this story from the moment Mr C appeared.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cam, that''s certainly a more interesting and, at the very least, a more thought provoking response than the first one you offered. While you raise one or two good points the essence of what you state is that there are outstanding questions that could certainly be pursued by journalists worth their salt in order to come up with a story that provides a more revealing picture. Possibly salt is no longer a fashionable commodity.  

Share this post


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

Okay YC if you are genuinely interested.

In order: the letter from Mr Cullum.  What provoked this letter?  Was he bored after a day of acquiring Independent Financial Advisors (his current thrill) and said to his PA (his wife): "I tell you what, let''s write a letter to Norwich City?"

Or was the letter either as a result of a letter from Norwich City asking him to state his situation pre AGM or was it as a result of an approach by Keith Harris or was he really bored in Maidstone?

I think the "reason" for that letter is important and might be a good story for the EDP.  Was it a last gasp attempt by Delia & Co, a first knockback for Keith Harris or Cullum saying: "Oops, I''m out of here..........."

The meeting: So there was a meeting?  Quite a number of posters seem to think that the two sides have never met.  Was it in Maidstone?  Norwich?  Halfway? Video conference?  We do know it was apparently in October last year. 

Again I would have thought the details might interest fans: who attended, how long it lasted but that''s just me. I''ve not seen the details in the EDP yet.

Cullum: I don''t know if it involves sneering but King of Deals comes from within the insurance industry and the City and is I think regarded as an accolade rather than a sneer but we''ll leave that one as a matter of opinion.

Most of the rest can be regarded as fair comment - or unfair comment, if the objects object- until we come to the most astonishing statement of all:

"The same financial wind that blew the Turners away............"

Aha, as Alan Partridge might say.

So that''s why they quit is it? In financial doo-doo? Well, not a word of that aside from Man in the Stands has appeared in the EDP so far.

But it is a Page One NEWS story if that is so.  Two of the richest people in Norfolk forced to quit as directors of Norwich City because they have problems of their own with implications for their business and for the staff they employ.

And yet it''s the last par in a staff written anonymous column at the back of the paper?

If the Board and Roeder have let down Norwich City fans - as many think - so, in my opinion, have their local newspaper who have got nowhere near this story from the moment Mr C appeared.

 

[/quote]

Cam the ''king of deals'' tag has been used in a sneering way for several months by Rick Waghorn and Mick Dennis....out of interest if you think there is a more interesting (and sellable) story here why as a journalist are you not researching and writing it? Maybe the NCISA could commission you to do the digging?

Share this post


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

Okay YC if you are genuinely interested.

In order: the letter from Mr Cullum.  What provoked this letter?  Was he bored after a day of acquiring Independent Financial Advisors (his current thrill) and said to his PA (his wife): "I tell you what, let''s write a letter to Norwich City?"

Or was the letter either as a result of a letter from Norwich City asking him to state his situation pre AGM or was it as a result of an approach by Keith Harris or was he really bored in Maidstone?

I think the "reason" for that letter is important and might be a good story for the EDP.  Was it a last gasp attempt by Delia & Co, a first knockback for Keith Harris or Cullum saying: "Oops, I''m out of here..........."

The meeting: So there was a meeting?  Quite a number of posters seem to think that the two sides have never met.  Was it in Maidstone?  Norwich?  Halfway? Video conference?  We do know it was apparently in October last year. 

Again I would have thought the details might interest fans: who attended, how long it lasted but that''s just me. I''ve not seen the details in the EDP yet.

Cullum: I don''t know if it involves sneering but King of Deals comes from within the insurance industry and the City and is I think regarded as an accolade rather than a sneer but we''ll leave that one as a matter of opinion.

Most of the rest can be regarded as fair comment - or unfair comment, if the objects object- until we come to the most astonishing statement of all:

"The same financial wind that blew the Turners away............"

Aha, as Alan Partridge might say.

So that''s why they quit is it? In financial doo-doo? Well, not a word of that aside from Man in the Stands has appeared in the EDP so far.

But it is a Page One NEWS story if that is so.  Two of the richest people in Norfolk forced to quit as directors of Norwich City because they have problems of their own with implications for their business and for the staff they employ.

And yet it''s the last par in a staff written anonymous column at the back of the paper?

If the Board and Roeder have let down Norwich City fans - as many think - so, in my opinion, have their local newspaper who have got nowhere near this story from the moment Mr C appeared.

 

[/quote]

I emailed one of our local journo`s asking him to quantify the old "Delia has put in £12m of her own money" line and received no reply.  They seem to want to jump to a conclusion and then if they repeat it enough it`s seen as fact.  Judging from the accounts the figure is about half that but heaven forbid a journalist should actually do a bit of research before printing a story read by thousands......[:^)]

Share this post


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

Okay YC if you are genuinely interested.

In order: the letter from Mr Cullum.  What provoked this letter?  Was he bored after a day of acquiring Independent Financial Advisors (his current thrill) and said to his PA (his wife): "I tell you what, let''s write a letter to Norwich City?"

Or was the letter either as a result of a letter from Norwich City asking him to state his situation pre AGM or was it as a result of an approach by Keith Harris or was he really bored in Maidstone?

I think the "reason" for that letter is important and might be a good story for the EDP.  Was it a last gasp attempt by Delia & Co, a first knockback for Keith Harris or Cullum saying: "Oops, I''m out of here..........."

The meeting: So there was a meeting?  Quite a number of posters seem to think that the two sides have never met.  Was it in Maidstone?  Norwich?  Halfway? Video conference?  We do know it was apparently in October last year. 

Again I would have thought the details might interest fans: who attended, how long it lasted but that''s just me. I''ve not seen the details in the EDP yet.

Cullum: I don''t know if it involves sneering but King of Deals comes from within the insurance industry and the City and is I think regarded as an accolade rather than a sneer but we''ll leave that one as a matter of opinion.

Most of the rest can be regarded as fair comment - or unfair comment, if the objects object- until we come to the most astonishing statement of all:

"The same financial wind that blew the Turners away............"

Aha, as Alan Partridge might say.

So that''s why they quit is it? In financial doo-doo? Well, not a word of that aside from Man in the Stands has appeared in the EDP so far.

But it is a Page One NEWS story if that is so.  Two of the richest people in Norfolk forced to quit as directors of Norwich City because they have problems of their own with implications for their business and for the staff they employ.

And yet it''s the last par in a staff written anonymous column at the back of the paper?

If the Board and Roeder have let down Norwich City fans - as many think - so, in my opinion, have their local newspaper who have got nowhere near this story from the moment Mr C appeared.

 

[/quote]a cloak of secrecy or fog of half-truths (depending upon your pov) has obscured the facts well enough to deny those who would like the know the truth of what happens at dear ole carra rd,,,the cullum/board saga takes the biscuit - the edp puts some of the story into the public domain, but there is never enough to know for certain exactly what happened...hopefully, when this current NCFC board moves on - the truth (of sorts) will leak out and be made plain,,,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"Jetstream please explain,define and discuss what on earth you mean or has someone else in your household used your name in vain?"

TIL1010 - it''s not a trick statement and the little dig is rather uncalled for. My wife has her opinions and I have mine. She always posts under her own name.

As for my comment, I meant that the Club''s official messageboard is free for anyone to use. It is not ''subscription-only'' (ie linked to being subscribed to Canariesworld). This level of research on a very simple point leads me to doubt the veracity of the rest of The Man''s points (as highlighted by Cam above).

On the rest of my point, I do not recall anyone from the Club EVER posting on here in an official capacity to give a direct answer to a question about ticketing, policy, scoreboards, the hotel, the accounts etc.

I simply meant that if you ask a reasonable question in the ''Questions for the Club'' section they will usually answer it. OK, the answer might not be exactly what some people want to hear but they will at least engage in a debate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mr Carrow - Surely it''s possible to find out how much money Smith&Jones have invested in the club. But the point you are attempting to prove will only be relevant when you find out  what they leave with, whenever that may be. What cannot be in doubt is that they keep putting in. We come up short and they continually put in. The way Smith&Jones bail out the club is often reactive but not always to problems of their own making. They reacted to the loss of ITV Digital and then reacted to the Turners walking by stumping up cash. They are being proactive now in recognising that if investment is not forthcoming they will need to stump up again in the next few years hence Delia''s comments about going back to work at the age of 67 to invest more. It''s believed that the board haven''t made enough effort to find investment until now but where is the evidence of this? Or is it just another opinion  like Delia "wanting to sell at a profit"  turned into fact by those who seem to have an agenda against her.

Lucky - I agree with this post. The EDP merrily reported away in the summer but go strangely quiet on the whole thing now. So fans naturally fit the Cullum story around their point of view. It''s time to find out the facts and having sold so many papers with the story in the summer surely the EDP have a moral duty to follow it up now. Not with opinion pieces where Journo''s play the same games posters on here play but do a bit of digging and print the facts.

Jetstream - I agree, the club are more open than fans give them credit for, the trouble is that in a lot of cases if they don''t give the answer that the fans want they are accused of spinning.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem with Cam''s critique is that it assumes questions will be answered on the record.

Anyone who has EVER dealt with the club, or people linked to it, will tell you that''s not as easy as it sounds.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
>Jetstream - I agree, the club are more open than fans give them credit for, the trouble is that in a lot of cases if they don''t give the answer that the fans want they are accused of spinning.

Agreed, or that the answer is often not as black-and-white as some would like it to be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The article is a farrago from start to finish.

“Delia Smith''s revelation this week that she had received a letter from Towergate confirming Peter Cullum will not be making an “offer” for the club was dreadful news.”

Only dreadful news if it was going to be a good offer.

”Let''s be clear folks, the only people that will be interested in owning Norwich City are Norwich City supporters.”

Opinion masquerading as fact. And not supported by recent evidence elsewhere in English football.

”It was an “excitement” that manifested itself in putting a prohibitive £56m price tag on the club.”

The price tag was not £56m. It was £36m. And it wasn’t a price tag. It was a statement of what a prospective owner would theoretically have to be prepared to pay under extreme circumstances, and it perfectly sensibly added £20m to the £36m in the case of anyone promising £20m for the transfer fund. What Smith and Jones would have accepted if it had ever got down to negotiations is publicly unknown.

”When Cullum again made the running this summer.”

That only makes sense if “making the running” means going public and dividing the fans with a non-offer that had been quite rightly rejected eight months earlier and which he had not improved and which he by then knew (as The Man acknowledges further down in the article) he would not be in a position to improve.

”The Man can only assume that Delia''s, and particularly Michael''s, enthusiasm for the Cullum deal diminished when it became apparent their majority shareholding would be reduced to a minority one by Cullum''s plan, without any financial compensation.”

A guess masquerading as an assumption.

”The Man really does not blame Delia and Michael for instinctively wanting some of their money back.”

An assumption masquerading as a statement of fact.

”Cullum''s deal, offering £20m in exchange for new shares, was a bitter pill for Delia and Michael to swallow.”

Another assumption masquerading as fact.

”Some people sneered at Cullum and called him the “King of Deals from Kent”; but as far as I was concerned he was the one chance we had of bringing some financial security, not to mention acumen, to the club.”

Why? He is (currently) a loss-making businessman who has only ever worked in insurance and has never run a football club.

”The club should have done everything it could to get Peter Cullum''s feet under the boardroom table, but I just don''t believe they did.”

Again, why?

”The same ill financial wind…means Cullum''s £20m plan would be difficult for him to finance now.”

That, at least, as I indicated above, has some connection with reality.

”Even if Delia and Michael did finally talk to him face-to-face.”

But Michael Wynn-Jones, already has done. A year ago.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Spot on Purple, the whole "article" is riddled with exactly the same sort of vague suppositions that caused all this ill-feeling in the first place.

Considering ''The Man In The Stand'' is written by one of the Archant journos it really is rather poor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I often wonder what I am doing here, as indeed I wonder what every other poster is doing here.

So often we get entrenched in a viewpoint we made a long time ago, and despite more information becoming available we find ourselves unable to change our stance.

Once again this thread demonstrates it with the same people being pro/anti Cullum despite the story having moved on since October 2007 when it all started.

My viewpoint has mellowed slightly in that I do feel that Peter Cullum is a lost cause at the moment but I do remain of the opinion that the Board once again has got itself into a corner that pride would not allow them to get out of.

Now we clearly would be glad of any money, even if it is of the Country Farmer six figure variety.  Yet once again the Board seems to have managed to talk the local business community out of that!

However painful the fact may be, we do need to say goodbye to at least half the Board, to give us a negotiating point for the future.

So forget Roeder Out - it has to be Boardroom Revolt!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote]So forget Roeder Out - it has to be Boardroom Revolt![/quote]

Intriguing - Without substantial money backing you, how would you achieve such a thing ?  Thinking back to Chase - For every NCISA there needs to be a Geoffrey Watling, doesn''t there ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
>Once again this thread demonstrates it with the same people being pro/anti Cullum despite the story having moved on since October 2007 when it all started.

But Face, my whole point (and that of Purple too) is that I am neither pro, nor anti as I don''t know enough of what he''s about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 Jetstream, with respect, it’s not quite right to suggest I am neither pro- nor anti-Cullum. I started out, as I approach anything new, as a sceptical but open-minded agnostic.

Cullum’s incompetent and blundering performance when he went public pushed me within five days from sceptical agnosticism to extreme distrust. And I stayed extremely distrustful until it became obvious what the (non-) offer was. Then I moved smartly from extreme distrust to straightforward opposition.

Which is not to say I’m pro-board. But if there is a next time for Cullum (which there won’t be, for at least two or three years, if ever) he will do well to push me from extreme distrust to a more receptive state of mind.

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...