These 'board out' posts are pointless....

[The Fish Seller 0]

[quote user="Camuldonum"]

FFS.  How many times! You can''t do that.  If you want control of an existing PLC you have to buy out every shareholder.

It''s hard work here sometimes.  I guess you are not investors.

[/quote]

No you do not.You must make an offer when you reach 30% but even then there are dispensations available. The shareholders are under no obligation to sell but they are bound to be made an offer under City Rule 9.

By your logic Lloyds TSB are about to pay top dollar for all the HBOS shares which will I''m sure come as a relief to many fund managers and small shareholders who will be making a profit or recouping much of their losses. The reality is that HBOS share values have slumped alarmingly, Lloyds are set to make a revised offer, the majority shareholders have little option but to sell all the other shareholders will receive an offer at no lower than that price whether they accept any offer or choose to retain their shares is entirely up to them. You are being unrealistic if you believe you are in an unassailable position of strength in a takeover, normally you would be but the performance of the Company is important although most friendly takeovers push the price up ( as stockbrokers anticipate a good offer) any gain can be temporary and an offer can also quite often be lower than expected.

There is a legal obligation to include a caveat with all investment offers and advertising I suggest you take the time to read it Cam.

The value of your investment can go down as well as up and you may get back less than you invested.

 

 

[yellow hammer 0]

OK, let''s kill this myth that there are no new investors out there for Norwich City. Regardless of what the board claims at the AGM, there are PLENTY of investors who would be willing to buy into the club.

And as you''re all now rushing to the keyboard to demand to know who these people are, I will explain.

The only issue that is holding back new investment is the asking price for the shares in NCFC. Currently they are valued at thirty-pounds per share by the club. On the open market there are no takers at that price. But start to drop that price - 20,15,10,5 and the lower you value the shares the great the number of buyers will see the club as a potential investment. It''s simple economics that the lower the price for an item, the greater the demand for that item.

Thirty-quid a share is a valuation that is designed to keep potential investors away. Five quid a share will see plenty of investors at the door of NCFC.

Now don''t give me that old squit about Delia getting a fair price for her shares, we''ve been through all that at length. She taken a gamble on what is probably the most speculative investment area possible - up there with race horses and sub-prime futures. She could have got out at any time over the past twelve years but chose not to do. Her decision not ours.

But let''s not kid ourselves there are no investors out there.

[canary cherub 1]

[quote user="Rethinking the future"]As far as i am aware, no business can be given away for nothing, but can be sold for a nominal fee (£1) as only by a consideration being paid is there legally a sale. As Delia only owns 60% of the club, she can not sell the 40% owned by these other people and lf there is a takeover, then the same price per share must be offered to all shareholders. The only way to get around this is for the club to go into administration. If this were to happen, then the shares would be worthless and the administrator can accept offers for the business. In this example, Cullum could purchase the club for £1 BUT only by purchasing the debt in full.

Would you be happy for the club to be docked 10 points for going into administration in order to ''force'' a sale?

[/quote]

"Happy" isn''t the right word but it''s beginning to look like the least worst option. 

 

[Mr.Carrow 380]

[quote user="Camuldonum"][quote user="Mr.Carrow"][quote user="Gazza"]

[quote user="Rethinking the future"]Big difference Gazza is that Haywood owned 100% of the Wolves shares. If that was the case with Delia, she could sell the club for whatever figure she wanted and would not be legally bound with responsibilities to the other shareholders.[/quote]

 

Fair enough if that is the case although there must be legal ways around things or does he potentially have to own 100% of the club?

[/quote]

People seem to have conveniently forgotten that what Cullum proposed was essentially a co-operative deal with Delia remaining at the club as the figurehead.  Bearing this in mind it is blindingly obvious that he wanted new shares issued for his £20m giving him a majority stake and reducing D and M`s holding to about 20% due to dilution.  He even said "i don`t want to buy Delias shares". 

IMO D and M took umbrage and took it as a personal insult (as they do when faced with any kind of criticism) therefore were not prepared to negotiate a compromise deal.

[/quote]

FFS.  How many times! You can''t do that.  If you want control of an existing PLC you have to buy out every shareholder.

It''s hard work here sometimes.  I guess you are not investors.

 

 

[/quote]

NO YOU DO NOT.  I own shares in a company called Emerald Energy.  Another company called Waterford Group bought over 30% of their shares in a rights issue and Emerald obtained a waiver from the takeover panel to allow this to happen.  They are currently applying for more waivers.  It seems to be standard practise and indicates that where there`s a will there`s a way....

[GMF 757]

[quote user="yellow hammer"]

The only issue that is holding back new investment is the asking price for the shares in NCFC. Currently they are valued at thirty-pounds per share by the club. On the open market there are no takers at that price. But start to drop that price - 20,15,10,5 and the lower you value the shares the great the number of buyers will see the club as a potential investment. It''s simple economics that the lower the price for an item, the greater the demand for that item.

[/quote]

You''re assuming this is "the only reason" probably because nothing has been forthcoming from our Board about their contact with PC.

However, there is always the possibility that any takeover proposal "tabled" so far may come burdened with debt to fund the purchase of some, or all of the majority shareholding. That''s the way many of the recent football club takeovers have actually been funded.

Bearing in mind the majority of fans think the Club already has too much debt, is this a route we really want to go down?

[GMF 757]

[quote user="Mr.Carrow"][quote user="Camuldonum"][quote user="Mr.Carrow"][quote user="Gazza"]

[quote user="Rethinking the future"]Big difference Gazza is that Haywood owned 100% of the Wolves shares. If that was the case with Delia, she could sell the club for whatever figure she wanted and would not be legally bound with responsibilities to the other shareholders.[/quote]

 

Fair enough if that is the case although there must be legal ways around things or does he potentially have to own 100% of the club?

[/quote]

People seem to have conveniently forgotten that what Cullum proposed was essentially a co-operative deal with Delia remaining at the club as the figurehead.  Bearing this in mind it is blindingly obvious that he wanted new shares issued for his £20m giving him a majority stake and reducing D and M`s holding to about 20% due to dilution.  He even said "i don`t want to buy Delias shares". 

IMO D and M took umbrage and took it as a personal insult (as they do when faced with any kind of criticism) therefore were not prepared to negotiate a compromise deal.

[/quote]

FFS.  How many times! You can''t do that.  If you want control of an existing PLC you have to buy out every shareholder.

It''s hard work here sometimes.  I guess you are not investors.

 

 

[/quote]

NO YOU DO NOT.  I own shares in a company called Emerald Energy.  Another company called Waterford Group bought over 30% of their shares in a rights issue and Emerald obtained a waiver from the takeover panel to allow this to happen.  They are currently applying for more waivers.  It seems to be standard practise and indicates that where there`s a will there`s a way....

[/quote]

As  Mr Carrow point out, you don not have to "buy out" every shareholder, you merely have to "make every shareholder an offer" once you get a 30% shareholding. There''s a big difference.

The complete buy out option only applies once you have a 90% shareholding. 

[Jim Smith 2,363]

[quote user="GazzaTCC"][quote user="Mr.Carrow"][quote user="Camuldonum"][quote user="Mr.Carrow"][quote user="Gazza"]

[quote user="Rethinking the future"]Big difference Gazza is that Haywood owned 100% of the Wolves shares. If that was the case with Delia, she could sell the club for whatever figure she wanted and would not be legally bound with responsibilities to the other shareholders.[/quote]

 

Fair enough if that is the case although there must be legal ways around things or does he potentially have to own 100% of the club?

[/quote]

People seem to have conveniently forgotten that what Cullum proposed was essentially a co-operative deal with Delia remaining at the club as the figurehead.  Bearing this in mind it is blindingly obvious that he wanted new shares issued for his £20m giving him a majority stake and reducing D and M`s holding to about 20% due to dilution.  He even said "i don`t want to buy Delias shares". 

IMO D and M took umbrage and took it as a personal insult (as they do when faced with any kind of criticism) therefore were not prepared to negotiate a compromise deal.

[/quote]

FFS.  How many times! You can''t do that.  If you want control of an existing PLC you have to buy out every shareholder.

It''s hard work here sometimes.  I guess you are not investors.

 

 

[/quote]

NO YOU DO NOT.  I own shares in a company called Emerald Energy.  Another company called Waterford Group bought over 30% of their shares in a rights issue and Emerald obtained a waiver from the takeover panel to allow this to happen.  They are currently applying for more waivers.  It seems to be standard practise and indicates that where there`s a will there`s a way....

[/quote]

As  Mr Carrow point out, you don not have to "buy out" every shareholder, you merely have to "make every shareholder an offer" once you get a 30% shareholding. There''s a big difference.

The complete buy out option only applies once you have a 90% shareholding. 

[/quote]

 

Yes agreed. Camuldonum - if you are going to come on here and poke your nose in to matters which don''t concern you and make patronising comments about other posters then please at least try and get your facts right!

The point that annoys me about the claims its £16m plus the debt is that whilst technically that is what it would take to buy the whole issued share capital and technically yes the loans are stated to be repayable on a change of control the reality is that it would be likely to cost nothing like that sort of amount to the right buyer. That is why i have always thought the statement put out was defensive and not particularly indicative of an open to offers type of approach.

The £16m figure is based on a valuation of £30 per share. Whilst that may be the "nominal" value, and the price you would have to pay to buy newly issued shares as far as I can see the reality is that (as has been aluded to above) the shares are worth whatever anyone is prepared to pay for them. If someone made D&M an offer then yes they would have to offer to buy the remaining shareholders shares at the same price but those shareholders would not have to sell and I would be amazed many of them took up any such offer. Many of the remaining shareholders have very small shareholdings, bought to help the club out during the various share issues and not with any view to making any money out of them. I personally have never thought I would make any money out of my 8 shares and would not even consider making a new investor buy them were he to come in. So whilst it is correct to say an investor may need to show they have the funds to be able to buy up the remaining shares should it become necessary, the reality is they would be likely to just need enough to acquire the majority stake.

As to what that stake is worth then as I said above as far as I can see that depends what any buyer is willing to pay and D&M are willing to accept. If, however, they were to demand £30 a share then so far as i can see they would make a not insignificant profit on their shares given that only the most recent batches of shares were acquired at £30 a share. I think (although i stand to be corrected) they got the first 40% from Watling for something like £750K and converted some further loans to shares at £25 a share. Personally I would therefore regard a fair offer (i.e. one I would expect them to seriously consider) as being one that sees them walk away with what they have put into the club to acquire their shareholding thus far.

During the PC debacle it was never revealed whether or not he was expecting to pay for D&M''s shares. I guess another way of achieving what he wanted would have been to issue £20m worth of new share capital which would have seen all the funds go into the club. That would have rendered D&M''s majority stake a minority stake overnight which would in effect have knocked millions off its value. If thats what was on the table then I can understand why they would not have gone for it!

Also interesting to note the reference above to Steve Morgan and the fact he acquired Wolves for £10. I don''t think it would be fair to expect Delia to do the same thing as Haywood did but I have to say i found it very interesting indeed to note during her recent TV series that D&M have been close friends with Morgan and his wife for some time and even stayed at his house the night before the game at Crewe a couple of seasons ago. Guess though "there just aren''t any people out there prepared to put £20m into a championship football club"!

 

 

 

 

 

[yellow hammer 0]

[quote user="GazzaTCC"][quote user="yellow hammer"]

The only issue that is holding back new investment is the asking price for the shares in NCFC. Currently they are valued at thirty-pounds per share by the club. On the open market there are no takers at that price. But start to drop that price - 20,15,10,5 and the lower you value the shares the great the number of buyers will see the club as a potential investment. It''s simple economics that the lower the price for an item, the greater the demand for that item.

[/quote]

You''re assuming this is "the only reason" probably because nothing has been forthcoming from our Board about their contact with PC.

However, there is always the possibility that any takeover proposal "tabled" so far may come burdened with debt to fund the purchase of some, or all of the majority shareholding. That''s the way many of the recent football club takeovers have actually been funded.

Bearing in mind the majority of fans think the Club already has too much debt, is this a route we really want to go down?

[/quote]

 

I''m not making those assumptions at all GazzaTCC. At the right price I would put together a consortium and bid for the club. This is the point I''m making. There are plety of buyers for the club but they will only come in at what they see is the right price. It is a myth to say no one is interested - it is just a matter of price.

[Mr.Carrow 380]

If Delia wanted to sell out cheaply she can and it would either trigger an offer to buy out all shareholders for the same price which they can accept or reject as suits them, or a waiver can be obtained and voted through at an EGM (if Delia approves the deal then it will obviously be voted through due to her 62% holding).  Like i say, where there`s a will there`s a way.....

[GMF 757]

[quote user="Mr.Carrow"]If Delia wanted to sell out cheaply she can and it would either trigger an offer to buy out all shareholders for the same price which they can accept or reject as suits them, or a waiver can be obtained and voted through at an EGM (if Delia approves the deal then it will obviously be voted through due to her 62% holding).  Like i say, where there`s a will there`s a way.....[/quote]

Mr Carrow, my understanding of this wavier point, which I know we''re discussed before, is only applicable if the increased shareholding results from a fund raising exercise, such as a rights issue, where the existing shareholders have underwritten a specified level of of finance. Therefore, if there isn''t a full take up of the rights issue by all existing shareholders, the main shareholder''s holding could increase to over the 30% threshold and it''s for this reason that approval has to be obtained from the Takeover Panel.

[GMF 757]

But my point Yellow Hammer, is a takeover isn''t just about the price, it''s also about the conditions attached to the offer.

What would you prefer,  a takeover with a takeout price at, say £10M, virtually paid for by increased debt, which rests with the Club, or a straight take out at £10M, with no extra debt?

[canary cherub 1]

Camuldonum it is obvious that you take more than a passing interest in this issue.

My only question is WHY FFS???  I really really don''t understand.  No offence but I don''t give a flying ferrari what happens to Colchester or its board of directors. 

Don''t give us that crap about your daughter being a Norwich fan.  Most self respecting Us fans whose offspring decided to support a "bigger" club would be put off said club for life and wish them nothing but ill fortune. 

WHY??

 

[Appletonandy 0]

Evening all.

It seems that my original post has certainly caused quite a debate amongst our loyal fans.  I have to say that I really don''t know what to think any more; there are so many conflicting views.  The one thing that is clear is that we all genuinely want to see the club do well and perform significantly better than we are currently doing.

Couple of observations:-

1.  Giving Cam a hard time is rather unnecessary.  He may not be a NCFC supporter but he clearly enjoys getting involved in this forum and comes up with some very interesting and valid posts.

2.  Tomorrow night could be very interesting.  I hope that there will be some positive news about future investment and I also hope that individual shareholders get the opportunity to raise pertinent questions as well as having them fairly answered.

OTBC (and no, I''m not Neil Doncaster in disguise!)

Cheers everyone.

[corbs 0]

''Noit as pointless as your posts and silent support of a failing regime... move along.... baaaaaaaaaah!!!'' says the brilliant intellect. The same self-appointed noddy who thinks ROSS and BRAND are ''edgy'' comedy. Like those two, his comments are about as edgy as the River End bores that stood next to me in the 70''s, moaning and groaning about the Chairman, Manager etc etc, and not one original idea between them.

[lucky green trainers 0]

[quote user="GazzaTCC"][quote user="Mr.Carrow"][quote user="Camuldonum"][quote user="Mr.Carrow"][quote user="Gazza"]

[quote user="Rethinking the future"]Big difference Gazza is that Haywood owned 100% of the Wolves shares. If that was the case with Delia, she could sell the club for whatever figure she wanted and would not be legally bound with responsibilities to the other shareholders.[/quote]

 

Fair enough if that is the case although there must be legal ways around things or does he potentially have to own 100% of the club?

[/quote]

People seem to have conveniently forgotten that what Cullum proposed was essentially a co-operative deal with Delia remaining at the club as the figurehead.  Bearing this in mind it is blindingly obvious that he wanted new shares issued for his £20m giving him a majority stake and reducing D and M`s holding to about 20% due to dilution.  He even said "i don`t want to buy Delias shares". 

IMO D and M took umbrage and took it as a personal insult (as they do when faced with any kind of criticism) therefore were not prepared to negotiate a compromise deal.

[/quote]

FFS.  How many times! You can''t do that.  If you want control of an existing PLC you have to buy out every shareholder.

It''s hard work here sometimes.  I guess you are not investors.

 

 

[/quote]

NO YOU DO NOT.  I own shares in a company called Emerald Energy.  Another company called Waterford Group bought over 30% of their shares in a rights issue and Emerald obtained a waiver from the takeover panel to allow this to happen.  They are currently applying for more waivers.  It seems to be standard practise and indicates that where there`s a will there`s a way....

[/quote]

As  Mr Carrow point out, you don not have to "buy out" every shareholder, you merely have to "make every shareholder an offer" once you get a 30% shareholding. There''s a big difference.

The complete buy out option only applies once you have a 90% shareholding. 

[/quote]which is what the glaziers did at man u wasn''t it???

[Tangible Fixed Assets anyone? 0]

Appletonandy,

The acceptance of manure is pointless.

 

[Tangible Fixed Assets anyone? 0]

[quote user="Appletonandy"]

As for Ipswich, they''ve hardly spent a fortune, have they?  They already had contracted players as well as (it pains me to say it) a production line churning out excellent kids.  They have shown that the players already there were good enough to compete in the league and who have they bought?  I can only think of Norris (£2m) and McCauley (£1.5m) costing anything of note.  Richard Wright and Ivan Campo were free transfers and the Fulham defender is on loan.  You also have to remember that to acquire their club Marcus Evans did not have to buy the ground as they don''t own it so he got the club for next to nothing.

[/quote]

Ipswich - have Stead on loan with a view to a perm. Then theres the goalscoring Ambrose who looks like he is returning to Portman Rd.

 

 

[Tangible Fixed Assets anyone? 0]

[quote user="Appletonandy"]

Delia and Wynn-Jones want a realistic price for their shares  [/quote]

£30 per ordinary share is not realistic given that the club has really gone nowhere if you consider where we were 10 years ago and today. Secondly its a poor market to be selling shares in. 

[Barclay_Boy 0]

[quote user="yellow hammer"]

OK, let''s kill this myth that there are no new investors out there for Norwich City. Regardless of what the board claims at the AGM, there are PLENTY of investors who would be willing to buy into the club.

And as you''re all now rushing to the keyboard to demand to know who these people are, I will explain.

The only issue that is holding back new investment is the asking price for the shares in NCFC. Currently they are valued at thirty-pounds per share by the club. On the open market there are no takers at that price. But start to drop that price - 20,15,10,5 and the lower you value the shares the great the number of buyers will see the club as a potential investment. It''s simple economics that the lower the price for an item, the greater the demand for that item.

Thirty-quid a share is a valuation that is designed to keep potential investors away. Five quid a share will see plenty of investors at the door of NCFC.

Now don''t give me that old squit about Delia getting a fair price for her shares, we''ve been through all that at length. She taken a gamble on what is probably the most speculative investment area possible - up there with race horses and sub-prime futures. She could have got out at any time over the past twelve years but chose not to do. Her decision not ours.

But let''s not kid ourselves there are no investors out there.

[/quote]

Fan - bloody - tastic post YH

[Tangible Fixed Assets anyone? 0]

Beware the invasion of the Wynnies!!! 

:(

[Tangible Fixed Assets anyone? 0]

[quote user="Camuldonum"]Your price is £16m plus the clearance of outstanding loans around £20m.  The debt clearance must, by law, be included in the sale price.  You are a PLC.  The £56m will only be involved if as Mr Cullum suggested he would  also put in  £20m for players.  Otherwise it''s his for around £36m I would say.  Given your freehold assets and development potential I wouldn''t think that unreasonable - just not very saleable at the moment, like any other business in this country. [/quote]

A pre money capitalisation of £16m is not cheap for NCFC Plc. If this wasn''t a football club where people get emotional about it, I would be looking for a DEEP discount to £30 per ordinary share.

[Mello Yello 2,311]

[quote user="Potless Percy "]

Camuldonum it is obvious that you take more than a passing interest in this issue.

My only question is WHY FFS???  I really really don''t understand.  No offence but I don''t give a flying ferrari what happens to Colchester or its board of directors. 

Don''t give us that crap about your daughter being a Norwich fan.  Most self respecting Us fans whose offspring decided to support a "bigger" club would be put off said club for life and wish them nothing but ill fortune. 

WHY??

[/quote]

I bet he meanders around all the Championship/lower football league message board''s - sniffin'' for a scoop of a story....Remember the invasion by the naughty posters on Delia''s cookery web-site?...Made the Mail on Sunday that did. TOP NEWS!....of sorts.

Probably have his eyes peeled here tomorrow, hoping for a headliner after the NCFC AGM....."Delia and Doncaster duff up Director Doubters!" "Gazzer and City Angel in semi-naked sit-down protest!" "Nutty Nemo Nigella - leaps out of front row fish tank and flops in Delia''s lap!".....etc.[:|] 

[Mello Yello 2,311]

[quote user="Potless Percy "]

Camuldonum it is obvious that you take more than a passing interest in this issue.

My only question is WHY FFS???  I really really don''t understand.  No offence but I don''t give a flying ferrari what happens to Colchester or its board of directors. 

Don''t give us that crap about your daughter being a Norwich fan.  Most self respecting Us fans whose offspring decided to support a "bigger" club would be put off said club for life and wish them nothing but ill fortune. 

WHY??

[/quote]

I bet he meanders around all the Championship/lower football league message board''s - sniffin'' for a scoop of a story....Remember the invasion by the naughty posters on Delia''s cookery web-site?...Made the Mail on Sunday that did. TOP NEWS!....of sorts.

Probably have his eyes peeled here tomorrow, hoping for a headliner after the NCFC AGM....."Delia and Doncaster duff up Director Doubters!" "Gazzer and City Angel in semi-naked sit-down protest!" "Nutty Nemo Nigella - leaps out of front row fish tank and flops in Delia''s lap!".....etc.[:|] 

[Mello Yello 2,311]

[quote user="Mello Yello"][quote user="Potless Percy "]

Camuldonum it is obvious that you take more than a passing interest in this issue.

My only question is WHY FFS???  I really really don''t understand.  No offence but I don''t give a flying ferrari what happens to Colchester or its board of directors. 

Don''t give us that crap about your daughter being a Norwich fan.  Most self respecting Us fans whose offspring decided to support a "bigger" club would be put off said club for life and wish them nothing but ill fortune. 

WHY??

[/quote]

I bet he meanders around all the Championship/lower football league message board''s - sniffin'' for a scoop of a story....Remember the invasion by the naughty posters on Delia''s cookery web-site?...Made the Mail on Sunday that did. TOP NEWS!....of sorts.

Probably have his eyes peeled here tomorrow, hoping for a headliner after the NCFC AGM....."Delia and Doncaster duff up Director Doubters!" "Gazzer and City Angel in semi-naked sit-down protest!" "Nutty Nemo Nigella - leaps out of front row fish tank and flops in Delia''s lap!".....etc.[:|] 

[/quote]

Double scoop.......with a flake....

[vos 155]

As I understand it from the accounts the shareholders (mainly Delia and hubby) paid around £9 million for the shares. The balance sheet book value is £15 million because added to the above is £4 million past retained profits which are on the point of disappearing plus £2 million revaluation of hotel which is totally optimistic.So the book value is around £10 million. As most people state it is a case of how much an investor is prepared to pay. Bearing in mind there is no return on the shares because of lack of profitability then there is no incentive for an ordinary investor to be interested. An investor might show some enthusiasm if there was a possibility of a good capital gain in the future - but again highly unlikely.

So it comes down to a)Delia and hubby having no desire to sell because they do not need any money b) Peter Cullum - Norwich boy - has plenty of cash and wants to help out his home city or c) some foreign investor who, as we have seen with other Clubs, for some unknown reason thinks it is a good idea to buy an English football club.

By the way the past comment about there being a problem to renegotiate the existing loans is a "red herring". Someone like PC would have no problem with this.

[gazzathegreat 0]

I really will have to take you to task on that slanderous accusation Mr Mello. As if......

For no cause, and I mean not even for my beloved club, would I do anything even semi naked in the ice cold climate of the iceberg they call the Norfolk Lounge....I am more a warm weather fan myself. Sorry, does this mean I will now be tagged with the flip flops, I do hope not.

[The Fish Seller 0]

[quote user="vos"]

As I understand it from the accounts the shareholders (mainly Delia and hubby) paid around £9 million for the shares. The balance sheet book value is £15 million because added to the above is £4 million past retained profits which are on the point of disappearing plus £2 million revaluation of hotel which is totally optimistic.So the book value is around £10 million. As most people state it is a case of how much an investor is prepared to pay. Bearing in mind there is no return on the shares because of lack of profitability then there is no incentive for an ordinary investor to be interested. An investor might show some enthusiasm if there was a possibility of a good capital gain in the future - but again highly unlikely.

[/quote]Thank you VOS.Delia and Michael own 62% of £9,000,000''s worth of shares ie. £5.4m worth.This is a much more realistic valuation of their input in terms of share purchase those who are convinced they''ve put in £10m+ are very wide of the mark indeed.Anyone else able to spot how D & M might be looking to make a significant profit by claiming their shares are worth 62% of the £16m net worth of the Club?

[Mello Yello 2,311]

[quote user="gazzathegreat"]I really will have to take you to task on that slanderous accusation Mr Mello. As if...... For no cause, and I mean not even for my beloved club, would I do anything even semi naked in the ice cold climate of the iceberg they call the Norfolk Lounge....I am more a warm weather fan myself. Sorry, does this mean I will now be tagged with the flip flops, I do hope not.[/quote]

You could always get a couple of those latex flesh coloured ''muscle suits'' that David Walliams and Matt Lucas wear in Little Britain USA....Or maybe, the popular ''Bubbles'' suit? Then plonk yourself on the Chief Executive''s lap for an uncompromising photo shot.....[:D]  

[gazzathegreat 0]

Mello, I would rather buy a season ticket at that old council owned recycling yard down the A140 than do anything in the CE''s lap. Heaven forbid I have come over all peculiar......

Just the thought of it........anyway, he''s too slimy, I would most certainly slide off.

[Mello Yello 2,311]

[quote user="gazzathegreat"]Mello, I would rather buy a season ticket at that old council owned recycling yard down the A140 than do anything in the CE''s lap. Heaven forbid I have come over all peculiar...... Just the thought of it........anyway, he''s too slimy, I would most certainly slide off.[/quote]

Recycling ain''t so bad.....