Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
er indoors

NCFC Shareholders - A Warning

Recommended Posts

Delia has ALWAYS put a high price on her shares - for example when PC came calling he was given a prohibitive price tag of £50m plus which valued the shares at the current issue price of £30 each.However, all of a sudden in todays EDP she appears to be claiming they are infact worthless and is admitting she has seen the last of her £11m investment.So, being a cynic, I smell a rat, and I wonder what price a change of ownership at the end of the season to someone, say, like Michael Foulger for a nominal price of £5 per share?All existing shareholders would therefore be offered peanuts for their £25 a share investment and Foulger meanwhile would pick up the club for an absolute song.Could this happen? If so are there any rules in place to ensure any new owner doesn''t acquire the club on the cheap whilst secretly paying the majority shareholders a much larger sweetener under the radar?!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Show me where Delia has asked for anything for her shares. I have seen loads of links to where she says she doesn''t expect to get her money back but none to where she expects £30 or any other amount of money.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder how many fan shareholders actually invested in the Club as an investment, hoping to see growth in their share values. Not me. I took the attitude at the time that this was effectively a pledge of support, when funds were required, and in return I get a piece of paper with some numbers on it and access to a set of Accounts each year. I think that all this talk about Delia manipulating the share price to her advantage is absolute tripe. Football generally is in a financial mess, and I am glad we resisted the urge to spend even more beyond our means than we already have. The reality is that there are no serious investors out there with deep pockets who are remotely interested in throwing money at Football Clubs, unless they see proper returns and well run business models. Yes, they make noises, and seem to be saviours, then the good old ''due diligence'' starts, and thats the end of it. Or the recession bites and they need to manage their own debt, and not ours. We''ll just have to go with what we''ve got, for the forseeable future, and with some talented young players at last getting a look in, maybe the future is less bleak than we think. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="CT the Jarrold king"]I may be wrong but surely the £56 m asked for money in return for shares?[/quote]Either this is a wind-up, or:FFS!!!!!!!!!FOR THE FINAL, FINAL, TIME!!!!!£20M FOR INVESTMENT IN PLAYERS£20M IMMEDIATELY REQUIRED TO COVER DEBT£16M TO PURCHASE SHARES AT NOMINAL VALUATION OF £30 PER SHARE

Share this post


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

I wonder how many fan shareholders actually invested in the Club as an investment, hoping to see growth in their share values. Not me. I took the attitude at the time that this was effectively a pledge of support, when funds were required, and in return I get a piece of paper with some numbers on it and access to a set of Accounts each year. I think that all this talk about Delia manipulating the share price to her advantage is absolute tripe. Football generally is in a financial mess, and I am glad we resisted the urge to spend even more beyond our means than we already have. The reality is that there are no serious investors out there with deep pockets who are remotely interested in throwing money at Football Clubs, unless they see proper returns and well run business models. Yes, they make noises, and seem to be saviours, then the good old ''due diligence'' starts, and thats the end of it. Or the recession bites and they need to manage their own debt, and not ours. We''ll just have to go with what we''ve got, for the forseeable future, and with some talented young players at last getting a look in, maybe the future is less bleak than we think. 

[/quote]

I wrote the value of my small holding off when i bought it, but i suppose if someone has a larger holding they are going to be more precious about it.

On "no serious investors", the club told us not so long ago that "no-one is interested in investing in loss-making Championship clubs", now they tell us that most of our rivals have either parachute payments or "wealthier benefactors".  Which is it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="ron obvious"][quote user="CT the Jarrold king"]I may be wrong but surely the £56 m asked for money in return for shares?[/quote]

Either this is a wind-up, or:

FFS!!!!!!!!!

FOR THE FINAL, FINAL, TIME!!!!!

£20M FOR INVESTMENT IN PLAYERS

£20M IMMEDIATELY REQUIRED TO COVER DEBT

£16M
TO PURCHASE SHARES AT NOMINAL VALUATION OF £30 PER SHARE


[/quote]

So she has asked for £16m for £30 worth of shares? Isnt that asking for money for shares or am I missing the point?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="nutty nigel"]

Show me where Delia has asked for anything for her shares. I have seen loads of links to where she says she doesn''t expect to get her money back but none to where she expects £30 or any other amount of money.

 

[/quote]

Cant find the link nutty sorry but I''m sure she quoted £16m for her shares in the boards statement if anyone wanted to buy the club. Nice little £5m profit.

 

FOOTBALL MUST COME FIRST

Share this post


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

Cant find the link nutty sorry but I''m sure she quoted £16m for her shares in the boards statement if anyone wanted to buy the club. Nice little £5m profit.

 

FOOTBALL MUST COME FIRST
[/quote]This is simply untrue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
that was 16m for 100% of the shares. Delia/MWJ own 60 odd percent so a 5m profit is simply untrue as purple says.  My impression from that board statement and their other quotes is that they would like to get their money back but are not looking to make a return on the money they have put in

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

T is right. The £16m was for 100% of the shares in NCFC at £30 per share.

However it is not right to say that would get her her money back because she did not buy or convert most of her shares for £30. If all her shares were bought by an investor for £30 they would presumably make a profit on the shares.

In any event for those who keep banging on about Delia not having ever said she wants any money for her shares how do yuo reconclie that with the £16m valuation set out in the board''s statement?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="T"]that was 16m for 100% of the shares. Delia/MWJ own 60 odd percent so a 5m profit is simply untrue as purple says.  My impression from that board statement and their other quotes is that they would like to get their money back but are not looking to make a return on the money they have put in[/quote]

Agreed.

Share this post


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

T is right. The £16m was for 100% of the shares in NCFC at £30 per share.

However it is not right to say that would get her her money back because she did not buy or convert most of her shares for £30. If all her shares were bought by an investor for £30 they would presumably make a profit on the shares.

In any event for those who keep banging on about Delia not having ever said she wants any money for her shares how do yuo reconclie that with the £16m valuation set out in the board''s statement?

[/quote]

This is what I was trying to say yesterday.

Not looking for a return on investment does not mean I am not looking for my investment back.

Shares when sold would be at an agreed value between them and any purchaser. I can''t see anyone getting the club UNLESS they purchased the shares from them at a reasonable value.

I will let the club go for nothing to the right person is fine as long as I am the one to say who the right peson is. Fine words!!

Loans made to the club would either be repaid immediately (if that was in the agreement of the loan) or defered (like Turners) to an agreed date.

As a portion of their shares were bought from Chase (via Uncle G) then I assume they COULD make a profit.

All if''s and buts as there does not seem to be anybody remotely interested at present.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="ron obvious"][quote user="CT the Jarrold king"]I may be wrong but surely the £56 m asked for money in return for shares?[/quote]

Either this is a wind-up, or:

FFS!!!!!!!!!

FOR THE FINAL, FINAL, TIME!!!!!

£20M FOR INVESTMENT IN PLAYERS

£20M IMMEDIATELY REQUIRED TO COVER DEBT

£16M
TO PURCHASE SHARES AT NOMINAL VALUATION OF £30 PER SHARE


[/quote]

I''d give up if I were you Ron.  Do the words banging, head and brick wall mean anything to you?  Some people will work figures out to fit their own agenda, regardless of the facts, so just sit back and laugh. I am

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="The Butler"][quote user="Jim Smith"]

T is right. The £16m was for 100% of the shares in NCFC at £30 per share.

However it is not right to say that would get her her money back because she did not buy or convert most of her shares for £30. If all her shares were bought by an investor for £30 they would presumably make a profit on the shares.

In any event for those who keep banging on about Delia not having ever said she wants any money for her shares how do yuo reconclie that with the £16m valuation set out in the board''s statement?

[/quote]

This is what I was trying to say yesterday.

Not looking for a return on investment does not mean I am not looking for my investment back.

Shares when sold would be at an agreed value between them and any purchaser. I can''t see anyone getting the club UNLESS they purchased the shares from them at a reasonable value.

I will let the club go for nothing to the right person is fine as long as I am the one to say who the right peson is. Fine words!!

Loans made to the club would either be repaid immediately (if that was in the agreement of the loan) or defered (like Turners) to an agreed date.

As a portion of their shares were bought from Chase (via Uncle G) then I assume they COULD make a profit.

All if''s and buts as there does not seem to be anybody remotely interested at present.

 

 

[/quote]

 

But the question is would they be interested if Delia was prpared to step aside for nothing? Thats why these quotes she keeps coming out with need clarifying!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="BBFF"][quote user="nutty nigel"]

Show me where Delia has asked for anything for her shares. I have seen loads of links to where she says she doesn''t expect to get her money back but none to where she expects £30 or any other amount of money.

 

[/quote]

Cant find the link nutty sorry but I''m sure she quoted £16m for her shares in the boards statement if anyone wanted to buy the club. Nice little £5m profit.

 

FOOTBALL MUST COME FIRST

[/quote]

You won''t find it BB because it doesn''t exist. The 16m comes from the clubs valuation of the total shares and is not a demand from Smith&Jones for 10.7m for their shares anymore than it''s a demand from me for 750 quid for mine. If you don''t agree with this surely it would be easy enough for one of you trawlers to find the relevant quote from Delia. I keep seeing quotes where she doesn''t expect to see her money again and other quotes where she say''s it''s not about the money but in all this time I haven''t seen one quote that makes her a liar. Surely if posters can be bothered to trawl out Prestons accounts to try and prove a point they can find this one little quote from Delia to definitely prove a point.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="T"]that was 16m for 100% of the shares. Delia/MWJ own 60 odd percent so a 5m profit is simply untrue as purple says.  My impression from that board statement and their other quotes is that they would like to get their money back but are not looking to make a return on the money they have put in[/quote]Have you got the link T then I am happy to be corrected.

FOOTBALL MUST COME FIRST

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="The Butler"]

This is what I was trying to say yesterday.

Not looking for a return on investment does not mean I am not looking for my investment back.

Shares when sold would be at an agreed value between them and any purchaser. I can''t see anyone getting the club UNLESS they purchased the shares from them at a reasonable value.

I will let the club go for nothing to the right person is fine as long as I am the one to say who the right peson is. Fine words!!

Loans made to the club would either be repaid immediately (if that was in the agreement of the loan) or defered (like Turners) to an agreed date.

As a portion of their shares were bought from Chase (via Uncle G) then I assume they COULD make a profit.

All if''s and buts as there does not seem to be anybody remotely interested at present.

 

 

[/quote]

Butler my friend I have never ever seen any quote from Delia saying she expects to get any money back. Her quotes have always been consistent in that she doesn''t expect to see the money again. If the quote exists you can be sure that either Buckethead, Mr Carrow or our friend Tangy will find it. If they prove Delia Smith is a liar I will apologise to everyone on here and will put the lie on my signature.

Of course she will only pass the club over to who she believes is the right person. And she is without a doubt in the best position to judge who that person may be. We wouldn''t really want her to pass it on to the wrong person would we? Or just walk away and see what happens?

She obviously could make a profit but she obviously doesn''t want to and I think the most likely thing that is going to happen is that she will chuck more of her money down the pit never to see it again. We don''t have to be grateful but we shouldn''t be ungrateful.

 

Share this post


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

[quote user="T"]that was 16m for 100% of the shares. Delia/MWJ own 60 odd percent so a 5m profit is simply untrue as purple says.  My impression from that board statement and their other quotes is that they would like to get their money back but are not looking to make a return on the money they have put in[/quote]Have you got the link T then I am happy to be corrected.

FOOTBALL MUST COME FIRST

[/quote]

OFFICIAL CLUB STATEMENT

Posted on: Mon 30 Jun 2008

In

the light of headlines in this morning''s press we thought it would be

helpful to supporters to share the process the club uses when

evaluating any potential investment in Norwich City Football Club PLC.

We look at the individual, we look at what they want to achieve and

we look at the financial viability of their proposition. In the case of

someone seeking to take control of the club and at the same time invest

£20 million in the playing squad this would take a minimum of £56

million made up as follows:

Investment in playing squad£20 million
Purchase of shares based on current share issue price of £30 per share£16 million*
Repayment of bank debt that would be triggered by a change of control£16 million
Repayment of directors'' loans£4 million
TOTAL£56 million

In the last 12 months we have talked to a number of potential

investors. We have also reviewed a number of different propositions.

Unfortunately none of these investors have made a proposal which we

have considered financially viable.

Notwithstanding this the board remains open minded about future

investment and will continue to seek new investors and evaluate their

propositions using the process described above.

*This figure is based on an offer for 100% of the

issued share capital as required by the rules of the City Code which

apply to Norwich City Football Club PLC

Share this post


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

[quote user="T"]that was 16m for 100% of the shares. Delia/MWJ own 60 odd percent so a 5m profit is simply untrue as purple says.  My impression from that board statement and their other quotes is that they would like to get their money back but are not looking to make a return on the money they have put in[/quote]Have you got the link T then I am happy to be corrected.

FOOTBALL MUST COME FIRST

[/quote]

OFFICIAL CLUB STATEMENT

Posted on: Mon 30 Jun 2008

In the light of headlines in this morning''s press we thought it would be helpful to supporters to share the process the club uses when evaluating any potential investment in Norwich City Football Club PLC.

We look at the individual, we look at what they want to achieve and we look at the financial viability of their proposition. In the case of someone seeking to take control of the club and at the same time invest £20 million in the playing squad this would take a minimum of £56 million made up as follows:

Investment in playing squad£20 million
Purchase of shares based on current share issue price of £30 per share£16 million*
Repayment of bank debt that would be triggered by a change of control£16 million
Repayment of directors'' loans£4 million
TOTAL£56 million

In the last 12 months we have talked to a number of potential investors. We have also reviewed a number of different propositions. Unfortunately none of these investors have made a proposal which we have considered financially viable.

Notwithstanding this the board remains open minded about future investment and will continue to seek new investors and evaluate their propositions using the process described above.

*This figure is based on an offer for 100% of the issued share capital as required by the rules of the City Code which apply to Norwich City Football Club PLC


[/quote]Thank you Purple I stand or at the moment sit corrected.

FOOTBALL MUST COME FIRST

Share this post


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

[quote user="T"]that was 16m for 100% of the shares. Delia/MWJ own 60 odd percent so a 5m profit is simply untrue as purple says.  My impression from that board statement and their other quotes is that they would like to get their money back but are not looking to make a return on the money they have put in[/quote]Have you got the link T then I am happy to be corrected.

FOOTBALL MUST COME FIRST

[/quote]

OFFICIAL CLUB STATEMENT

Posted on: Mon 30 Jun 2008

In the light of headlines in this morning''s press we thought it would be helpful to supporters to share the process the club uses when evaluating any potential investment in Norwich City Football Club PLC.

We look at the individual, we look at what they want to achieve and we look at the financial viability of their proposition. In the case of someone seeking to take control of the club and at the same time invest £20 million in the playing squad this would take a minimum of £56 million made up as follows:

Investment in playing squad£20 million
Purchase of shares based on current share issue price of £30 per share£16 million*
Repayment of bank debt that would be triggered by a change of control£16 million
Repayment of directors'' loans£4 million
TOTAL£56 million

In the last 12 months we have talked to a number of potential investors. We have also reviewed a number of different propositions. Unfortunately none of these investors have made a proposal which we have considered financially viable.

Notwithstanding this the board remains open minded about future investment and will continue to seek new investors and evaluate their propositions using the process described above.

*This figure is based on an offer for 100% of the issued share capital as required by the rules of the City Code which apply to Norwich City Football Club PLC


[/quote]Thank you Purple I stand or at the moment sit corrected.

FOOTBALL MUST COME FIRST

Share this post


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

[quote user="The Butler"]

This is what I was trying to say yesterday.

Not looking for a return on investment does not mean I am not looking for my investment back.

Shares when sold would be at an agreed value between them and any purchaser. I can''t see anyone getting the club UNLESS they purchased the shares from them at a reasonable value.

I will let the club go for nothing to the right person is fine as long as I am the one to say who the right peson is. Fine words!!

Loans made to the club would either be repaid immediately (if that was in the agreement of the loan) or defered (like Turners) to an agreed date.

As a portion of their shares were bought from Chase (via Uncle G) then I assume they COULD make a profit.

All if''s and buts as there does not seem to be anybody remotely interested at present.

 

 

[/quote]

Butler my friend I have never ever seen any quote from Delia saying she expects to get any money back. Her quotes have always been consistent in that she doesn''t expect to see the money again. If the quote exists you can be sure that either Buckethead, Mr Carrow or our friend Tangy will find it. If they prove Delia Smith is a liar I will apologise to everyone on here and will put the lie on my signature.

Of course she will only pass the club over to who she believes is the right person. And she is without a doubt in the best position to judge who that person may be. We wouldn''t really want her to pass it on to the wrong person would we? Or just walk away and see what happens?

She obviously could make a profit but she obviously doesn''t want to and I think the most likely thing that is going to happen is that she will chuck more of her money down the pit never to see it again. We don''t have to be grateful but we shouldn''t be ungrateful.

 

[/quote]

Why is she the right and only person Nutty? Her judgement so far is, to say the least questionable, on what is "good for the club". Her 60% of the shares CERTAINLY puts them in an unassailable position to decide, but that was not supposed to happen either was it?

I repeat I can state I will give everything I own to someone of my choice, but as long as I never make that choice..............or I make the criteria an impossible one.............

I am not ungrateful Nutty but she put herself into the position deliberately, no one held a gun to her head as far as I know, She sought to buy the club, I can''t remember the fans begging her to. She has gained majority control against all that was stated at the end of Chases tenure. Was/is that good for the club?

She has used the club for her pleasure and qudos  for the last 10years and I don''t think she haas the mind to finish playing just yet!

Share this post


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

I am not ungrateful Nutty but she put herself into the position deliberately, no one held a gun to her head as far as I know, She sought to buy the club, I can''t remember the fans begging her to. She has gained majority control against all that was stated at the end of Chases tenure. Was/is that good for the club?

She has used the club for her pleasure and qudos  for the last 10years and I don''t think she haas the mind to finish playing just yet!

[/quote]

These are the exact reasons why I said we don''t have to be grateful. She chose to do that with her money. Nobody held a gun nto her head. We agree! Of course the fact that she did that I believe is reason enough not to be ungrateful - do we still agree?

I didn''t say she was the right and only person. I said that she is without a doubt in the best position to judge. I believe that because the 12 years experience Smith&Jones have gained put them in the best position. Experience in running a business that nobody can learn to run is quite important in my book.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="The Butler"][

I am not ungrateful Nutty but she put herself into the position deliberately, no one held a gun to her head as far as I know, She sought to buy the club, I can''t remember the fans begging her to. She has gained majority control against all that was stated at the end of Chases tenure. Was/is that good for the club?

She has used the club for her pleasure and qudos  for the last 10years and I don''t think she haas the mind to finish playing just yet!

[/quote]

These are the exact reasons why I said we don''t have to be grateful. She chose to do that with her money. Nobody held a gun nto her head. We agree! Of course the fact that she did that I believe is reason enough not to be ungrateful - do we still agree?

I didn''t say she was the right and only person. I said that she is without a doubt in the best position to judge. I believe that because the 12 years experience Smith&Jones have gained put them in the best position. Experience in running a business that nobody can learn to run is quite important in my book.

 

[/quote]

I disagree Nutty, most of the decisions they have made during their reign have been questionable.

From being pressured by Worthington into giving him the managers job, not getting rid of him when they should have. Grant ,Roeder, lack of investment and backing in the prem season the list is endless, and you say they are in the best position to make a decision on who best to sell the club to??

Words now fail me, they say love is blind Nutty.....................

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="The Butler"][quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="The Butler"][

I am not ungrateful Nutty but she put herself into the position deliberately, no one held a gun to her head as far as I know, She sought to buy the club, I can''t remember the fans begging her to. She has gained majority control against all that was stated at the end of Chases tenure. Was/is that good for the club?

She has used the club for her pleasure and qudos  for the last 10years and I don''t think she haas the mind to finish playing just yet!

[/quote]

These are the exact reasons why I said we don''t have to be grateful. She chose to do that with her money. Nobody held a gun nto her head. We agree! Of course the fact that she did that I believe is reason enough not to be ungrateful - do we still agree?

I didn''t say she was the right and only person. I said that she is without a doubt in the best position to judge. I believe that because the 12 years experience Smith&Jones have gained put them in the best position. Experience in running a business that nobody can learn to run is quite important in my book.

 

[/quote]

I disagree Nutty, most of the decisions they have made during their reign have been questionable.

From being pressured by Worthington into giving him the managers job, not getting rid of him when they should have. Grant ,Roeder, lack of investment and backing in the prem season the list is endless, and you say they are in the best position to make a decision on who best to sell the club to??

Words now fail me, they say love is blind Nutty.....................

[/quote]

It''s easier to knock it down than be constructive. Who do you think is in a better position then?

Crazy comment saying love is blind. You haven''t been proved right once since we started this conversation. Words fail me now..................

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="The Butler"][quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="The Butler"][

I am not ungrateful Nutty but she put herself into the position deliberately, no one held a gun to her head as far as I know, She sought to buy the club, I can''t remember the fans begging her to. She has gained majority control against all that was stated at the end of Chases tenure. Was/is that good for the club?

She has used the club for her pleasure and qudos  for the last 10years and I don''t think she haas the mind to finish playing just yet!

[/quote]

These are the exact reasons why I said we don''t have to be grateful. She chose to do that with her money. Nobody held a gun nto her head. We agree! Of course the fact that she did that I believe is reason enough not to be ungrateful - do we still agree?

I didn''t say she was the right and only person. I said that she is without a doubt in the best position to judge. I believe that because the 12 years experience Smith&Jones have gained put them in the best position. Experience in running a business that nobody can learn to run is quite important in my book.

 

[/quote]

I disagree Nutty, most of the decisions they have made during their reign have been questionable.

From being pressured by Worthington into giving him the managers job, not getting rid of him when they should have. Grant ,Roeder, lack of investment and backing in the prem season the list is endless, and you say they are in the best position to make a decision on who best to sell the club to??

Words now fail me, they say love is blind Nutty.....................

[/quote]

It''s easier to knock it down than be constructive. Who do you think is in a better position then?

Crazy comment saying love is blind. You haven''t been proved right once since we started this conversation. Words fail me now..................

 

 

[/quote]

 You base your statements on the press releases by them. Comments in the press against them are not authentic, that''s selective. I haven''t seen a retraction on share price yet or Lakeys comments, but that''s for the future to show.

I have questioned their suitability based on their record, that is a record of history, not conjecture. I don''t want to knock them down, I have argued as you know well, against the Smudgers on that score. Get a replacement first that is essential and highly unlikely at present.

She may be all the things you believe Nutty, I don''t know but to say she is the best person to decide on her replacement with that record of  selection behind them beggars belief.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="The Butler"][quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="The Butler"][

I am not ungrateful Nutty but she put herself into the position deliberately, no one held a gun to her head as far as I know, She sought to buy the club, I can''t remember the fans begging her to. She has gained majority control against all that was stated at the end of Chases tenure. Was/is that good for the club?

She has used the club for her pleasure and qudos  for the last 10years and I don''t think she haas the mind to finish playing just yet!

[/quote]

These are the exact reasons why I said we don''t have to be grateful. She chose to do that with her money. Nobody held a gun nto her head. We agree! Of course the fact that she did that I believe is reason enough not to be ungrateful - do we still agree?

I didn''t say she was the right and only person. I said that she is without a doubt in the best position to judge. I believe that because the 12 years experience Smith&Jones have gained put them in the best position. Experience in running a business that nobody can learn to run is quite important in my book.

 

[/quote]

I disagree Nutty, most of the decisions they have made during their reign have been questionable.

From being pressured by Worthington into giving him the managers job, not getting rid of him when they should have. Grant ,Roeder, lack of investment and backing in the prem season the list is endless, and you say they are in the best position to make a decision on who best to sell the club to??

Words now fail me, they say love is blind Nutty.....................

[/quote]

It''s easier to knock it down than be constructive. Who do you think is in a better position then?

Crazy comment saying love is blind. You haven''t been proved right once since we started this conversation. Words fail me now..................

[/quote]

Share this post


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

 You base your statements on the press releases by them. Comments in the press against them are not authentic, that''s selective. I haven''t seen a retraction on share price yet or Lakeys comments, but that''s for the future to show.

I have questioned their suitability based on their record, that is a record of history, not conjecture. I don''t want to knock them down, I have argued as you know well, against the Smudgers on that score. Get a replacement first that is essential and highly unlikely at present.

She may be all the things you believe Nutty, I don''t know but to say she is the best person to decide on her replacement with that record of  selection behind them beggars belief.

[/quote]

What do I believe she is then Butler? I just call it as I see it. She means no more to me than Robert Chase or Geoffrey Watling. The only Chairman/owner/whatever who really means anything to me was Sir Arthur. The other three of my time, in my view, couldn''t hold a candle to him. That doesn''t mean that I will go along with stuff that''s made up to discredit them because, like you and I, they are all Norwich City Fans.

In my job everyone believes they know better than me. We have an AGM every year and people who have no understanding of accounts scrutinise their bits of paper and have their twopenneth worth before going back to their own jobs. I know that 99% of the time they are wrong and ill-informed. I know that because I have been doing my job for nearly 21 years and have had to learn. Where as they just spend a few minutes a year making ill-informed judgements. This is why I believe that two people, who are committed enough to their football club to chuck away half their wealth, and have been doing it for 12 years, and have spent hours and hours with people who run other football clubs, would be the best people to know who would be a suitable replacement.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="The Butler"]

 You base your statements on the press releases by them. Comments in the press against them are not authentic, that''s selective. I haven''t seen a retraction on share price yet or Lakeys comments, but that''s for the future to show.

I have questioned their suitability based on their record, that is a record of history, not conjecture. I don''t want to knock them down, I have argued as you know well, against the Smudgers on that score. Get a replacement first that is essential and highly unlikely at present.

She may be all the things you believe Nutty, I don''t know but to say she is the best person to decide on her replacement with that record of  selection behind them beggars belief.

[/quote]

What do I believe she is then Butler? I just call it as I see it. She means no more to me than Robert Chase or Geoffrey Watling. The only Chairman/owner/whatever who really means anything to me was Sir Arthur. The other three of my time, in my view, couldn''t hold a candle to him. That doesn''t mean that I will go along with stuff that''s made up to discredit them because, like you and I, they are all Norwich City Fans.

In my job everyone believes they know better than me. We have an AGM every year and people who have no understanding of accounts scrutinise their bits of paper and have their twopenneth worth before going back to their own jobs. I know that 99% of the time they are wrong and ill-informed. I know that because I have been doing my job for nearly 21 years and have had to learn. Where as they just spend a few minutes a year making ill-informed judgements. This is why I believe that two people, who are committed enough to their football club to chuck away half their wealth, and have been doing it for 12 years, and have spent hours and hours with people who run other football clubs, would be the best people to know who would be a suitable replacement.

 

[/quote]

That''s like saying if you put a chimp in a room with a lot of solicitors he would understand the law! Well he might not be worse

They do not seem to have learnt from their mistakes. So we let them (we have no choice) make an even bigger one?

Out of my and your hands.

Keep the faith[:D]

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...