Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
singing canary

delias love for the fans

Recommended Posts

[quote user="Jim Smith"]

1. I agree the £11m is a touch excessive from the facts i have seen as that appears to be based on valuing the shares at £30 when she bought the majority of them for a lot less.

2. This I don''t expect to see ANY of the money again is consistent with earlier statements about "i will walk away for nothing" or "if any idiot wants to put £20m into the club i will stand aside." This is not the first time she has publically said this sort of thing. Surely there must be some decent local journo at the EDP that can get some clarification on this point because its pretty damn crucial in terms of how attractive the club might be to potential investors!

 

[/quote]

City''s joint majority shareholder estimates that she and husband Michael Wynn Jones have pumped around £11m into Norwich City - and that they never expected to get a financial return on their investment.

As I have posted on the other thread conflicting statements in the same interview!!

Share this post


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

No but it''s certainly trying to mislead the fans and there''s also no doubt that she said doesn''t expect to see any of that money again. If these statements are lies then why aren''t they challenged? Chase would never have got away with it. Neither would Worthy. How about if Doncaster had done this interview?

There was no evidence there when the "where''s all the money gone campaign" was launched at Big Bob. Still no evidence against him all these years later.

 

[/quote]

Lots of differences Bob didn''t have the stranglehold on the club that these two have for a start.

Fueled agression to Chase seemingly didn''t need evidence,mobs rarely do and yes it did turn into mob rule and individual threats.

Times have changed as you keep telling me Nutty, football in all it''s guises has changed. If you are going to shout about misleading statements you will need hard evidence to back it, the EDP would certainly not print without it!

Our house trained accountants on here should be able to come up with figures of their input of cash( I am sure TFA has)

Then and only then can fingers be firmly pointed.

Oh and please don''t keep dragging poor old Worthy into every argument, it''s time he was allowed his retirement in Ireland[;)]

[/quote]

The thing is all Delia''s statements on this our consistent. She believes it to be 11m and doesn''t expect to see any of it back. Now on one hand I could get in my trawler and drag up lots of statements from her and articles about her saying the same thing. But on the other hand I have yet to see one statement or article from her stating that she wants £30 each for her shares.

Which hand smells of coffee[C]

 

Share this post


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

No but it''s certainly trying to mislead the fans and there''s also no doubt that she said doesn''t expect to see any of that money again. If these statements are lies then why aren''t they challenged? Chase would never have got away with it. Neither would Worthy. How about if Doncaster had done this interview?

There was no evidence there when the "where''s all the money gone campaign" was launched at Big Bob. Still no evidence against him all these years later.

 

[/quote]

Lots of differences Bob didn''t have the stranglehold on the club that these two have for a start.

Fueled agression to Chase seemingly didn''t need evidence,mobs rarely do and yes it did turn into mob rule and individual threats.

Times have changed as you keep telling me Nutty, football in all it''s guises has changed. If you are going to shout about misleading statements you will need hard evidence to back it, the EDP would certainly not print without it!

Our house trained accountants on here should be able to come up with figures of their input of cash( I am sure TFA has)

Then and only then can fingers be firmly pointed.

Oh and please don''t keep dragging poor old Worthy into every argument, it''s time he was allowed his retirement in Ireland[;)]

[/quote]

The thing is all Delia''s statements on this our consistent. She believes it to be 11m and doesn''t expect to see any of it back. Now on one hand I could get in my trawler and drag up lots of statements from her and articles about her saying the same thing. But on the other hand I have yet to see one statement or article from her stating that she wants £30 each for her shares.

Which hand smells of coffee[C]

 

[/quote]

Sorry Nutty but even this one statement is not consistent. Not talking about share prices just what she expects or is willing to take.

The £30.00 came from the figures quoted from Doncaster as to what Cullum might have to find. Reasonable to expect that he did not state that without the majority shareholders approval. Might just have been a sprat but..........

Share this post


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

No but it''s certainly trying to mislead the fans and there''s also no doubt that she said doesn''t expect to see any of that money again. If these statements are lies then why aren''t they challenged? Chase would never have got away with it. Neither would Worthy. How about if Doncaster had done this interview?

There was no evidence there when the "where''s all the money gone campaign" was launched at Big Bob. Still no evidence against him all these years later.

 

[/quote]

Lots of differences Bob didn''t have the stranglehold on the club that these two have for a start.

Fueled agression to Chase seemingly didn''t need evidence,mobs rarely do and yes it did turn into mob rule and individual threats.

Times have changed as you keep telling me Nutty, football in all it''s guises has changed. If you are going to shout about misleading statements you will need hard evidence to back it, the EDP would certainly not print without it!

Our house trained accountants on here should be able to come up with figures of their input of cash( I am sure TFA has)

Then and only then can fingers be firmly pointed.

Oh and please don''t keep dragging poor old Worthy into every argument, it''s time he was allowed his retirement in Ireland[;)]

[/quote]

The thing is all Delia''s statements on this our consistent. She believes it to be 11m and doesn''t expect to see any of it back. Now on one hand I could get in my trawler and drag up lots of statements from her and articles about her saying the same thing. But on the other hand I have yet to see one statement or article from her stating that she wants £30 each for her shares.

Which hand smells of coffee[C]

 

[/quote]

 

Apart from the official club statement issued by the Directors stating that anyone wanting to buy the share capital would have to pay £16m equating to £30 a share!

 

Basically it needs clearing up because it will cause further friction. Even this latest little soundbite stirs up the Cullum thing again because if she does not want any money for he shares then why did negotiations never even get beyond the initial approach?

Share this post


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

The thing is all Delia''s statements on this our consistent. She believes it to be 11m and doesn''t expect to see any of it back. Now on one hand I could get in my trawler and drag up lots of statements from her and articles about her saying the same thing. But on the other hand I have yet to see one statement or article from her stating that she wants £30 each for her shares.

Which hand smells of coffee[C]

 

[/quote]

Sorry Nutty but even this one statement is not consistent. Not talking about share prices just what she expects or is willing to take.

The £30.00 came from the figures quoted from Doncaster as to what Cullum might have to find. Reasonable to expect that he did not state that without the majority shareholders approval. Might just have been a sprat but..........

[/quote]

But if you wanted to buy my shares we could agree a price we wouldn''t have to do the deal based on the club statement. The board have a duty to all shareholders. I have never seen anything to suggest Delia has put any price on her shares and I rather suspect you''d only find out by making her an offer and seeing if she would sell.

I''m afraid I don''t know the legal implications to other shareholders if the price you paid her was less than the clubs valuation. For instance if there was an EGM called and Delia said she had accepted an offer from The Butler of 1p each for her shares would you then get mine for 25p too[:^)]

I like ya[:)] But not that much[:@]

[;)]

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="rjwc22"]

She certainly does provoke strong sentiments in all - like the marmite of the boardroom!

I am still proud that whatever her other failings as a board member, I feel she is a real fan who loves the club unlike some of these here foreign owners.  Last thing I would want is some oil guzzling sheik coming over here and throwing £50m at the club to sign players and turning our club into a Prem team overnight.

Whatever would we moan about then!

[/quote]

God forbid we should have some success!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="First Wizard"][quote user="Libbra Lives"][quote user="First Wizard"]

So City start to pick up points and Ms Slyness crawls out from under her rock.

Yesterday, I foolishly said that if Doncaster was removed, I would try, try and tolerate her, well sod that! I near damn choked over brekkie reading her crap this morning.

Me tolerate her? despise her would be a more accurate description of my true feelings towards her!

[/quote]

Despise her??  You really are a pathetic excuse for a human being First Wizard.  I dont feel that she is the right person to take Norwich forward and she may have taken unpolopular decisions, but let''s get a little perspective please!

[/quote]

Lol......sorry, you make me laugh.

I actually toned it down too![:D]

[/quote]

 

Then Wiz how do you feel about Myra Hindley, Mrs Mugabe, Rosemary West and other similiar women who are just the teeniest bit more wicked than the diabolical Delia?

Or has your sense of perspective and common sense completely deserted you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

The thing is all Delia''s statements on this our consistent. She believes it to be 11m and doesn''t expect to see any of it back. Now on one hand I could get in my trawler and drag up lots of statements from her and articles about her saying the same thing. But on the other hand I have yet to see one statement or article from her stating that she wants £30 each for her shares.

Which hand smells of coffee[C]

 

[/quote]

Sorry Nutty but even this one statement is not consistent. Not talking about share prices just what she expects or is willing to take.

The £30.00 came from the figures quoted from Doncaster as to what Cullum might have to find. Reasonable to expect that he did not state that without the majority shareholders approval. Might just have been a sprat but..........

[/quote]

But if you wanted to buy my shares we could agree a price we wouldn''t have to do the deal based on the club statement. The board have a duty to all shareholders. I have never seen anything to suggest Delia has put any price on her shares and I rather suspect you''d only find out by making her an offer and seeing if she would sell.

I''m afraid I don''t know the legal implications to other shareholders if the price you paid her was less than the clubs valuation. For instance if there was an EGM called and Delia said she had accepted an offer from The Butler of 1p each for her shares would you then get mine for 25p too[:^)]

I like ya[:)] But not that much[:@]

[;)]

 

 

[/quote]

You missed the first bit Nutty! Inconsistency in her statement. I know she could give her shares away if she so wished without altering the price you could sell yours for. But she is the majority shareholder and influential board member and power at Carrow road. Therefore you would think the statements coming from that quarter would have been with her approval.

Share this post


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

You missed the first bit Nutty! Inconsistency in her statement. I know she could give her shares away if she so wished without altering the price you could sell yours for. But she is the majority shareholder and influential board member and power at Carrow road. Therefore you would think the statements coming from that quarter would have been with her approval.

[/quote]

This is where I don''t agree with the crowd[:O]

The statement from the club was a valuation of the club. Had the statement been a valuation of Delia''s personal shares then I would agree with you.

 

Share this post


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

You missed the first bit Nutty! Inconsistency in her statement. I know she could give her shares away if she so wished without altering the price you could sell yours for. But she is the majority shareholder and influential board member and power at Carrow road. Therefore you would think the statements coming from that quarter would have been with her approval.

[/quote]

This is where I don''t agree with the crowd[:O]

The statement from the club was a valuation of the club. Had the statement been a valuation of Delia''s personal shares then I would agree with you.

 

[/quote]

And still you avoid The Inconsistency in her latest statement! I don''t give a hoot for what she will or wont sell her shares at. Totally not my,or anyother persons concern(other than someone wishing to buy a controlling interest in the club)

But the valuation of the club DID include buying the majority shares did it not? So one must assume it could just could include theirs.

Share this post


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

You missed the first bit Nutty! Inconsistency in her statement. I know she could give her shares away if she so wished without altering the price you could sell yours for. But she is the majority shareholder and influential board member and power at Carrow road. Therefore you would think the statements coming from that quarter would have been with her approval.

[/quote]

This is where I don''t agree with the crowd[:O]

The statement from the club was a valuation of the club. Had the statement been a valuation of Delia''s personal shares then I would agree with you.

 

[/quote]

And still you avoid The Inconsistency in her latest statement! I don''t give a hoot for what she will or wont sell her shares at. Totally not my,or anyother persons concern(other than someone wishing to buy a controlling interest in the club)

But the valuation of the club DID include buying the majority shares did it not? So one must assume it could just could include theirs.

[/quote]

There is no inconsistency in anything Delia has said. The only inconsistency is with things other people assume she said.

The valuation of the club included my shares but I have never priced them at thirty quid.

I''m not giving them to you though [;)]

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Call me anything you like but doesn''t Delia know how much she has spent on the Club?   If she has spent something other than £11m I suspect she would know.  Also, corporate governance requires that precise records are kept so it is a matter of company record exactly how much has been lent or used for share purchases

Share this post


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

You missed the first bit Nutty! Inconsistency in her statement. I know she could give her shares away if she so wished without altering the price you could sell yours for. But she is the majority shareholder and influential board member and power at Carrow road. Therefore you would think the statements coming from that quarter would have been with her approval.

[/quote]

This is where I don''t agree with the crowd[:O]

The statement from the club was a valuation of the club. Had the statement been a valuation of Delia''s personal shares then I would agree with you.

 

[/quote]

And still you avoid The Inconsistency in her latest statement! I don''t give a hoot for what she will or wont sell her shares at. Totally not my,or anyother persons concern(other than someone wishing to buy a controlling interest in the club)

But the valuation of the club DID include buying the majority shares did it not? So one must assume it could just could include theirs.

[/quote]

The valuation of the Club at the time of Cullen was £16 m for all the shares because a purchaser of more than 29% has to be willing to buy all the shares that are offered.  That values Michael and Delia''s shareholding at about £10m

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"]

You missed the first bit Nutty! Inconsistency in her statement. I know she could give her shares away if she so wished without altering the price you could sell yours for. But she is the majority shareholder and influential board member and power at Carrow road. Therefore you would think the statements coming from that quarter would have been with her approval.

[/quote]

This is where I don''t agree with the crowd[:O]

The statement from the club was a valuation of the club. Had the statement been a valuation of Delia''s personal shares then I would agree with you.

 

[/quote]

And still you avoid The Inconsistency in her latest statement! I don''t give a hoot for what she will or wont sell her shares at. Totally not my,or anyother persons concern(other than someone wishing to buy a controlling interest in the club)

But the valuation of the club DID include buying the majority shares did it not? So one must assume it could just could include theirs.

[/quote]

There is no inconsistency in anything Delia has said. The only inconsistency is with things other people assume she said.

The valuation of the club included my shares but I have never priced them at thirty quid.

I''m not giving them to you though [;)]

 

[/quote]

Let me try just one more time Nutty.

Her statement printed today in the EDP she says "they are not looking for a return on their investment" That IS NOT saying they don''t want their investment back is it?

I''ll stop there and wait a reply to that bit!

Share this post


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

You missed the first bit Nutty! Inconsistency in her statement. I know she could give her shares away if she so wished without altering the price you could sell yours for. But she is the majority shareholder and influential board member and power at Carrow road. Therefore you would think the statements coming from that quarter would have been with her approval.

[/quote]

This is where I don''t agree with the crowd[:O]

The statement from the club was a valuation of the club. Had the statement been a valuation of Delia''s personal shares then I would agree with you.

 

[/quote]

And still you avoid The Inconsistency in her latest statement! I don''t give a hoot for what she will or wont sell her shares at. Totally not my,or anyother persons concern(other than someone wishing to buy a controlling interest in the club)

But the valuation of the club DID include buying the majority shares did it not? So one must assume it could just could include theirs.

[/quote]

There is no inconsistency in anything Delia has said. The only inconsistency is with things other people assume she said.

The valuation of the club included my shares but I have never priced them at thirty quid.

I''m not giving them to you though [;)]

 

[/quote]

Let me try just one more time Nutty.

Her statement printed today in the EDP she says "they are not looking for a return on their investment" That IS NOT saying they don''t want their investment back is it?

I''ll stop there and wait a reply to that bit!

[/quote]

Now the bit I read said ..... "But we knew we would never see any of that money again." Which is where I came in.

Where''s the quote where she said "they are not looking for a return on their investment"?

 

 

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

You missed the first bit Nutty! Inconsistency in her statement. I know she could give her shares away if she so wished without altering the price you could sell yours for. But she is the majority shareholder and influential board member and power at Carrow road. Therefore you would think the statements coming from that quarter would have been with her approval.

[/quote]

This is where I don''t agree with the crowd[:O]

The statement from the club was a valuation of the club. Had the statement been a valuation of Delia''s personal shares then I would agree with you.

 

[/quote]

And still you avoid The Inconsistency in her latest statement! I don''t give a hoot for what she will or wont sell her shares at. Totally not my,or anyother persons concern(other than someone wishing to buy a controlling interest in the club)

But the valuation of the club DID include buying the majority shares did it not? So one must assume it could just could include theirs.

[/quote]

There is no inconsistency in anything Delia has said. The only inconsistency is with things other people assume she said.

The valuation of the club included my shares but I have never priced them at thirty quid.

I''m not giving them to you though [;)]

 

[/quote]

Let me try just one more time Nutty.

Her statement printed today in the EDP she says "they are not looking for a return on their investment" That IS NOT saying they don''t want their investment back is it?

I''ll stop there and wait a reply to that bit!

[/quote]

Now the bit I read said ..... "But we knew we would never see any of that money again." Which is where I came in.

Where''s the quote where she said "they are not looking for a return on their investment"?

 

 

[/quote]

Read the aricle from the begining, second paragraph " and they never expected to get a financial return on their investment" . Thats not we don''t want our money back is it? Further in the interview she changes to your quote.

So as I said this one interview is inconsistent, let alone any others.

It is very easy to say I will give it all away IF I am the arbiter of when and if and maybe. Words are cheap actions seem very slow in that direction.

Share this post


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

Read the aricle from the begining, second paragraph " and they never expected to get a financial return on their investment" . Thats not we don''t want our money back is it? Further in the interview she changes to your quote.

So as I said this one interview is inconsistent, let alone any others.

It is very easy to say I will give it all away IF I am the arbiter of when and if and maybe. Words are cheap actions seem very slow in that direction.

[/quote]

Surely those are Chris Lakey''s words.

The quote attributed to Delia is  "But we knew we would never see any of that money again."

 

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

You missed the first bit Nutty! Inconsistency in her statement. I know she could give her shares away if she so wished without altering the price you could sell yours for. But she is the majority shareholder and influential board member and power at Carrow road. Therefore you would think the statements coming from that quarter would have been with her approval.

[/quote]

This is where I don''t agree with the crowd[:O]

The statement from the club was a valuation of the club. Had the statement been a valuation of Delia''s personal shares then I would agree with you.

 

[/quote]

And still you avoid The Inconsistency in her latest statement! I don''t give a hoot for what she will or wont sell her shares at. Totally not my,or anyother persons concern(other than someone wishing to buy a controlling interest in the club)

But the valuation of the club DID include buying the majority shares did it not? So one must assume it could just could include theirs.

[/quote]

There is no inconsistency in anything Delia has said. The only inconsistency is with things other people assume she said.

The valuation of the club included my shares but I have never priced them at thirty quid.

I''m not giving them to you though [;)]

 

[/quote]

Let me try just one more time Nutty.

Her statement printed today in the EDP she says "they are not looking for a return on their investment" That IS NOT saying they don''t want their investment back is it?

I''ll stop there and wait a reply to that bit!

[/quote]

Now the bit I read said ..... "But we knew we would never see any of that money again." Which is where I came in.

Where''s the quote where she said "they are not looking for a return on their investment"?

 

 

[/quote]

 

There isn''t a quote that said she is not loking for a return on her investment - as far as i can tell its an incorrect archant statement about her radio interview which contains the words she actually used which are about how "we would never see any of that money again."

The problem with it all is it all comes down to spin and semantics which is what annoys me so much about elements of the club at the moment. That is what annoyed me most about the statement put out at the time of the Cullum saga. It may have been technically correct that was the price (or to be more accurate the price that a buyer would potentially need to offer) to buy the whole of the issued share capital at £30 a share but thats not really that relevant. The relevant price is what Delia and MWJ want for their majority shareholding. Based on that statement (and I accept it was not referring to their specific shareholding) the implication was that they were looking for £11m. Based on at least THREE very public statements Delia has made in the last 2 years however she has hinted she is not necessarily looking for anything back as she accepts the money has gone. Now which is it because its quite a difference? if she is not looking to get her money back when she exits why put out a defensive board statement - why not simply say if Mr Cullum wants to make an offer or enter into negotiations with the majority shareholders then they are willing to listen to what he has to say rather than quoting values that bear little relation to what someone would actually have to or be willing to pay for the shares?

 

Share this post


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

You missed the first bit Nutty! Inconsistency in her statement. I know she could give her shares away if she so wished without altering the price you could sell yours for. But she is the majority shareholder and influential board member and power at Carrow road. Therefore you would think the statements coming from that quarter would have been with her approval.

[/quote]

This is where I don''t agree with the crowd[:O]

The statement from the club was a valuation of the club. Had the statement been a valuation of Delia''s personal shares then I would agree with you.

 

[/quote]

And still you avoid The Inconsistency in her latest statement! I don''t give a hoot for what she will or wont sell her shares at. Totally not my,or anyother persons concern(other than someone wishing to buy a controlling interest in the club)

But the valuation of the club DID include buying the majority shares did it not? So one must assume it could just could include theirs.

[/quote]

There is no inconsistency in anything Delia has said. The only inconsistency is with things other people assume she said.

The valuation of the club included my shares but I have never priced them at thirty quid.

I''m not giving them to you though [;)]

 

[/quote]

Let me try just one more time Nutty.

Her statement printed today in the EDP she says "they are not looking for a return on their investment" That IS NOT saying they don''t want their investment back is it?

I''ll stop there and wait a reply to that bit!

[/quote]

Now the bit I read said ..... "But we knew we would never see any of that money again." Which is where I came in.

Where''s the quote where she said "they are not looking for a return on their investment"?

 

 

[/quote]

 

There isn''t a quote that said she is not loking for a return on her investment - as far as i can tell its an incorrect archant statement about her radio interview which contains the words she actually used which are about how "we would never see any of that money again."

The problem with it all is it all comes down to spin and semantics which is what annoys me so much about elements of the club at the moment. That is what annoyed me most about the statement put out at the time of the Cullum saga. It may have been technically correct that was the price (or to be more accurate the price that a buyer would potentially need to offer) to buy the whole of the issued share capital at £30 a share but thats not really that relevant. The relevant price is what Delia and MWJ want for their majority shareholding. Based on that statement (and I accept it was not referring to their specific shareholding) the implication was that they were looking for £11m. Based on at least THREE very public statements Delia has made in the last 2 years however she has hinted she is not necessarily looking for anything back as she accepts the money has gone. Now which is it because its quite a difference? if she is not looking to get her money back when she exits why put out a defensive board statement - why not simply say if Mr Cullum wants to make an offer or enter into negotiations with the majority shareholders then they are willing to listen to what he has to say rather than quoting values that bear little relation to what someone would actually have to or be willing to pay for the shares?

 

[/quote]

Then it''s Chris Lakey who has altered the meaning.  Because that is what has happened.Archant would surely not allow such a thing!! OR WOULD THEY.

I am waiting for a quote from Cullum saying he didn''t listen to womans hour as he prefered Radio 3 but ................

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And I''m still waiting for a Delia quote to show her inconsistency. All the ones I have seen say the same thing. It''s amazing how myths become facts through the Pink Un message board and Archant opinion.

 

Share this post


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

And I''m still waiting for a Delia quote to show her inconsistency. All the ones I have seen say the same thing. It''s amazing how myths become facts through the Pink Un message board and Archant opinion.

 

[/quote]

In her latest book she says use instant mash having stated previosly that you should always use fresh produce!![;)]

There is not an icon for desperation is there?

Lakey want''s his nuts boiled if that is not a quote as he has changed the meaning of the statement.

Sorry NN for the hassle based on Archant''s reporters( I should have known better than to trust that particular source of info) By the way were does yours come from?

Share this post


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

And I''m still waiting for a Delia quote to show her inconsistency. All the ones I have seen say the same thing. It''s amazing how myths become facts through the Pink Un message board and Archant opinion.

 

[/quote]

In her latest book she says use instant mash having stated previosly that you should always use fresh produce!![;)]

There is not an icon for desperation is there?

Lakey want''s his nuts boiled if that is not a quote as he has changed the meaning of the statement.

Sorry NN for the hassle based on Archant''s reporters( I should have known better than to trust that particular source of info) By the way were does yours come from?

[/quote]

I just read the link on the other thread. But I always believe people first and then ask questions if there''s cause for doubt. It may well be that Smith&Jones are being greedy to the detriment of the club but I have never seen the slightest evidence of it so I prefer to trust them.

The opinions of Lakey, Balls, Aitken, Waghorn, Dennis etc. etc. are just that.. opinions. They are worth no more than the opinion of a poster on this message board. Trouble is that many people believe opinion is fact if it''s written by a journo and printed in a newspaper.

There is nothing to be sorry for, I enjoyed the distraction while I have been sorting out the music for Ma-In-Laws diamond wedding party. Bingo calling bog cleaner becomes DJ for the evening [;)]

 

Share this post


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

 

Then Wiz how do you feel about Myra Hindley, Mrs Mugabe, Rosemary West and other similiar women who are just the teeniest bit more wicked than the diabolical Delia?

Or has your sense of perspective and common sense completely deserted you?

[/quote]

Eh?

Those woman are nowt to do with, or are destroying the club I love, therfore they are irrelevent to me

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="CambridgeCanary"][quote user="First Wizard"]

Lol......sorry, you make me laugh.

I actually toned it down too![:D]

[/quote]

 

Then Wiz how do you feel about Myra Hindley, Mrs Mugabe, Rosemary West and other similiar women who are just the teeniest bit more wicked than the diabolical Delia?

Or has your sense of perspective and common sense completely deserted you?

[/quote]He didn''t have either of those to start with.

Share this post


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

And I''m still waiting for a Delia quote to show her inconsistency. All the ones I have seen say the same thing. It''s amazing how myths become facts through the Pink Un message board and Archant opinion.

 

[/quote]

In her latest book she says use instant mash having stated previosly that you should always use fresh produce!![;)]

There is not an icon for desperation is there?

Lakey want''s his nuts boiled if that is not a quote as he has changed the meaning of the statement.

Sorry NN for the hassle based on Archant''s reporters( I should have known better than to trust that particular source of info) By the way were does yours come from?

[/quote]

I just read the link on the other thread. But I always believe people first and then ask questions if there''s cause for doubt. It may well be that Smith&Jones are being greedy to the detriment of the club but I have never seen the slightest evidence of it so I prefer to trust them.

The opinions of Lakey, Balls, Aitken, Waghorn, Dennis etc. etc. are just that.. opinions. They are worth no more than the opinion of a poster on this message board. Trouble is that many people believe opinion is fact if it''s written by a journo and printed in a newspaper.

There is nothing to be sorry for, I enjoyed the distraction while I have been sorting out the music for Ma-In-Laws diamond wedding party. Bingo calling bog cleaner becomes DJ for the evening [;)]

 

[/quote]

It just did''t read like an opinion to me but..........

I have never accused them of being greedy nor stupid either! The truth lies somewhere in between I suspect.

Have a good evening Fat boy Slim.[<:o)]

Share this post


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

It just did''t read like an opinion to me but..........

I have never accused them of being greedy nor stupid either! The truth lies somewhere in between I suspect.

Have a good evening Fat boy Slim.[<:o)]

[/quote]

I know you haven''t accused them of that but that''s the assumption based on the spin that they have asled 56m for their shares. Plenty of people have been quite happy to allow that myth to spread.

I''m not Fat Boy Slim ''til Saturday week, Bingo to call and bogs to clean in the meantime [;)]

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I''m grateful that Delia has put £11M into the club cause I couldn''t and how many other Norwich fans could? - Next to none of them is the answer!

Even if I could of bought the club and always want the best for the club I''m pretty certain I''d of also made mistakes as I''m only human - born to make mistakes - line from the Human League classic from 1986!!

They know they''ve messed up with Grant, Roeder and other things and know their over the hill which is why they''ve been trying to sell for over a year now. The Keith Harris guy hasn''t found investment for Premiership clubs so god knows how we''re expected to find investment just like that?

 

Believe me I want Delia and CO replaced by financially able and Norwich City FC loving tycoons as much as all you board knockers cause of the above reasons but that person(s) hasn''t materialised yet so what are the board expected to do?

 

If they just said F*ck it and got out do you think that''d really benefit us?

 

If that happened then I''m sure some wealthy backers like Carl Moore and others could pick up the strings but I''d doubt they''d be able to offer the club any more finance than Delia and CO. In fact it would probably be less!

Reality check needed amongst many posters on here and I just gave it to them!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks Cambridge, just what I thought when I read the interview piece. Why doesn''t Delia know exactly what she''s put into the club. I am sure the tax man does. Yet again we have a wishy washy statement. If she has put £11m in, fair enough, if I were her I would have expected a little bit more success for that kind of investment. Thing is though, WHAT has the £11 been spent on? Accountants, please reveal.

Share this post


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

So City start to pick up points and Ms Slyness crawls out from under her rock.

[/quote]The interview was conducted mid Feb., broadcast yesterday

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...