Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
|BA

Why isn't MWJ Chairman?

Recommended Posts

Or his good Mrs for that matter? Is there a legal reason?I wondered why this hasn''t been raised, or is it that the anti MWJ/Delia brigade dont want the fact that they are actually far from control freaks to hinder their conspiracy theories.Personally if I were majority shareholder, I''d want to hold sway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We know already.....It cynically saves them from being blamed for anything doesn''t it?

The old "it''s not my fault" routine being played out once again........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Cluck is God"]

We know already.....It cynically saves them from being blamed for anything doesn''t it?

The old "it''s not my fault" routine being played out once again........

[/quote]Click...whir...ding..And the Cluck cliche machine churns out another soundbite so banal it makes Smudger''s contributions look fresh.Sweet Jesus you must be a dull person in real life....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
When you have the final say in all decisions you don''t need to a title. Jack walker wasn''t chairman at Blackburn but no significant decision was made without his approval.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote]Or his good Mrs for that matter? Is there a legal reason?

I wondered why this hasn''t been raised, or is it that the anti MWJ/Delia brigade dont want the fact that they are actually far from control freaks to hinder their conspiracy theories.

Personally if I were majority shareholder, I''d want to hold sway.
[/quote]

I think both Delia and MWJ have both admitted they are out of ideas and needed fresh blood with new ideas to come in and help run the club.

Obviously appointing a chairman who was very vocal against the way things have been run in the past kind of proves that.......

The haters like cluck would bash a "yes man" appointment.......... yet they claim an "outsider" is a fall guy.

There comes a point where the haters will never be happy..........unless they are hating.

What a sad pathetic existence.

Share this post


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

[quote]Or his good Mrs for that matter? Is there a legal reason?I wondered why this hasn''t been raised, or is it that the anti MWJ/Delia brigade dont want the fact that they are actually far from control freaks to hinder their conspiracy theories.Personally if I were majority shareholder, I''d want to hold sway.[/quote]

I think both Delia and MWJ have both admitted they are out of ideas and needed fresh blood with new ideas to come in and help run the club.

Obviously appointing a chairman who was very vocal against the way things have been run in the past kind of proves that.......

The haters like cluck would bash a "yes man" appointment.......... yet they claim an "outsider" is a fall guy.

There comes a point where the haters will never be happy..........unless they are hating.

What a sad pathetic existence.

[/quote] What matters who they appoint when they have the final say on everything ?  exactly , we may as well have kept Doncaster and Munby .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Loan City Fc "]What matters who they appoint when they have the final say on everything ?  exactly , we may as well have kept Doncaster and Munby .[/quote]And Cluck''s slightly less intelligent and coherant understudy chimes in with his entry to the "most predictable response" competition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good article here:

The New Chairman: a breath of fresh air?

Vital Norwich''s vanblerk shares his views on City''s new chairman...
Delia and Michael have heralded the addition of new chairman Alan Bowkett (and new directors Stephan Phillips and David McNally) to the Board as being like a ''breath of fresh air'' for the club.

But what will the chairman actually do and will it make a difference?

Well that depends. It depends on what his role is within the club and what his ''Terms of Reference'' are.

In a conventional business the role of the chairman is meant to be; to manage the board and its meetings and to have (an extra) casting vote in the event of the board not being able to come to a decision. So in addition to the normal director duties, this person should be steering the ship.

I suspect this will not be the case with our football club and his role will be to try and bring in some of his obvious commercial expertise, and ideas to the table ''for consideration''.

The composition of the Board has been chosen by Smith and Jones (not the comic duo, although many fans may disagree about which pair has the biggest joke potential), rather than the Chairman, which means they are not likely to be truly impartial - just like the non-executive directors responsible for approving huge bonuses in banks over the last couple of decades, their continuing presence on the gravy train depends on this.

It seems Bowkett''s success or failure will depend on how far he can influence Smith and Jones to avoid some of the appalling decision making of the last few years.

If he is successful and is given free rein to act as a proper chairman I have no doubt his impressive business background will bring real benefits to the club. Especially when it comes to areas like overseeing contract negotiations and making difficult decisions such as when to remove under performing staff (of the last 5 managers most would agree at least 4 were left in place to do more damage than was necessary - a situation that could have been resolved with some tough decision making). As well as helping the new CEO with other commercial matters.

He is making all the right noises at the beginning of his tenure: recognizing the dire situation we are in and bemoaning the policy of bringing in too many loan players last year. And he has made it clear he has football connections far and wide.

If he is allowed to wield the power a chairman should he could be a valuable asset and be at the heart of revitalizing the club''s fortunes.

Only one thing concerns me: that he is flatly refusing to invest any of his considerable personal wealth into the club from the off. This indicates a certain lack of confidence in the business whichever way you look at it.

Is this because he realizes he has little real influence on the decisions of the board? Or does he think the club is in such dire straits he won''t waste his cash on it?

Or is he just waiting for the right moment to give the club a boost? Or maybe waiting to see if he is likely to end up a scapegoat like Roger Munby (a decent chap by all accounts, who seems to have taken most of the fans ire at Charlton and elsewhere: Delia and Michael choosing not to face the fans…), and finish up taking the blame for the board''s performance overall.

So the chairman has arrived, looks to have an impressive business background and is making all the right noises. It remains to be seen whether the majority shareholders will let him act as a proper chairman and run the board, or give him just enough rope to hang himself. History says the power base will remain with the majority shareholders and nothing will change. We''ll find out soon enough.

Either way we wish him all the best.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Cluck is God"]

We know already.....It cynically saves them from being blamed for anything doesn''t it?

[/quote]Yeah you''re right - they''re not getting blamed for anything are they?[quote user="Cluck is God"]

The old "it''s not my fault" routine being played out once again........

[/quote]Again?[quote user="Cluck is God"]

What matters who they appoint when they have the final say on

everything ?  exactly , we may as well have kept Doncaster and Munby [/quote]So they appoint people who have been critical of the club and you see them as yes men?You made more sense as a banana

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="IBA"]Or his good Mrs for that matter? Is there a legal reason?

I wondered why this hasn''t been raised, or is it that the anti MWJ/Delia brigade dont want the fact that they are actually far from control freaks to hinder their conspiracy theories.

Personally if I were majority shareholder, I''d want to hold sway.
[/quote]

Perhaps Bowkett has decided that he can do a better job than his predecessor and having had his bluff called he''s taken up the offer. If this is the case, good on him, and well done.

I expect that the appointment of a Chief Exec that on the face of it, appears to know what he is doing, (unlike ND) may well have influenced his decision to join the NCFC Board.

But - I can''t believe Bowkett didn''t know of the proposed board''s make up when he accepted the role of Chairman, and unless he has his head buried in the sand, he would have been aware of reaction to Stephan Phillips'' appointment, and the conflict of interest (or the potential for future conflict of interest) that may be on the horizon.

So, either D & MWJ have decided on the make up of the board not taken this into account

or

Bowkett has had no say in this (difficult to believe that this is not the case)

or

Bowkett has raised this potential conflict and nothing has been done or he''s been over-ruled.

or

Bowkett has decided that there is no conflict, a position that I do not agree with.

It''s all very well to say that there''s no conflict as there is none now, but what''s to say is round the corner in the soap opera that is NCFC. It''s an incredibly naive position to take.

My view is that it is a very inauspicious start to Bowkett''s tenure as Chairman, and leads me to believe that it''s still same ''ole same ''ole at NCFC.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And here have an apologists party on our hands....... [<:o)] [<:o)]

And all the usual suspects there on parade... I almost feel nostalgic......

What joy..........

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Cluck is God"]

And here have an apologists party on our hands....... [<:o)] [<:o)]

And all the usual suspects there on parade... I almost feel nostalgic......

What joy..........

[/quote]

Rentaquote number two! And not before time.

It never gets old does it?

Actually, yes it does, about 3 years ago.

Share this post


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

[quote user="IBA"]Or his good Mrs for that matter? Is there a legal reason?

I wondered why this hasn''t been raised, or is it that the anti MWJ/Delia brigade dont want the fact that they are actually far from control freaks to hinder their conspiracy theories.

Personally if I were majority shareholder, I''d want to hold sway.
[/quote]

Perhaps Bowkett has decided that he can do a better job than his predecessor and having had his bluff called he''s taken up the offer. If this is the case, good on him, and well done.

I expect that the appointment of a Chief Exec that on the face of it, appears to know what he is doing, (unlike ND) may well have influenced his decision to join the NCFC Board.

But - I can''t believe Bowkett didn''t know of the proposed board''s make up when he accepted the role of Chairman, and unless he has his head buried in the sand, he would have been aware of reaction to Stephan Phillips'' appointment, and the conflict of interest (or the potential for future conflict of interest) that may be on the horizon.

So, either D & MWJ have decided on the make up of the board not taken this into account

or

Bowkett has had no say in this (difficult to believe that this is not the case)

or

Bowkett has raised this potential conflict and nothing has been done or he''s been over-ruled.

or

Bowkett has decided that there is no conflict, a position that I do not agree with.

It''s all very well to say that there''s no conflict as there is none now, but what''s to say is round the corner in the soap opera that is NCFC. It''s an incredibly naive position to take.

My view is that it is a very inauspicious start to Bowkett''s tenure as Chairman, and leads me to believe that it''s still same ''ole same ''ole at NCFC.

 

[/quote]

I am going to offer the opinion that not only is the Archant "conflict of interest" a little bit overblown BUT.................

I think it will actually work in reverse because everyone is now so aware of the archant connection to the club, the local press will bend over backwards to show there is no conflict of interest.

They will actually run negative stories/letters that they probably wouldn''t have run before so they appear "more" than impartial.

If it were ever proven that Mr Phillips ever censored the editorial staff regarding the club he would almost certainly have to resign his position instantly........

That''s not even up for debate..........

With advent of the internet it would be easy for a disgruntled employee to reveal the details anonymously.

The rival press such as TV/radio and internet websites will not hesitate to run such a story as long as the facts are proven.

Although Archant holds a strong position in the local print media, they don''t hold a monopoly of the local media.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="USAcanary"][quote user="Tim Allman"]

[quote user="IBA"]Or his good Mrs for that matter? Is there a legal reason?I wondered why this hasn''t been raised, or is it that the anti MWJ/Delia brigade dont want the fact that they are actually far from control freaks to hinder their conspiracy theories.Personally if I were majority shareholder, I''d want to hold sway.[/quote]

Perhaps Bowkett has decided that he can do a better job than his predecessor and having had his bluff called he''s taken up the offer. If this is the case, good on him, and well done.

I expect that the appointment of a Chief Exec that on the face of it, appears to know what he is doing, (unlike ND) may well have influenced his decision to join the NCFC Board.

But - I can''t believe Bowkett didn''t know of the proposed board''s make up when he accepted the role of Chairman, and unless he has his head buried in the sand, he would have been aware of reaction to Stephan Phillips'' appointment, and the conflict of interest (or the potential for future conflict of interest) that may be on the horizon.

So, either D & MWJ have decided on the make up of the board not taken this into account

or

Bowkett has had no say in this (difficult to believe that this is not the case)

or

Bowkett has raised this potential conflict and nothing has been done or he''s been over-ruled.

or

Bowkett has decided that there is no conflict, a position that I do not agree with.

It''s all very well to say that there''s no conflict as there is none now, but what''s to say is round the corner in the soap opera that is NCFC. It''s an incredibly naive position to take.

My view is that it is a very inauspicious start to Bowkett''s tenure as Chairman, and leads me to believe that it''s still same ''ole same ''ole at NCFC.

 

[/quote]

I am going to offer the opinion that not only is the Archant "conflict of interest" a little bit overblown BUT.................

I think it will actually work in reverse because everyone is now so aware of the archant connection to the club, the local press will bend over backwards to show there is no conflict of interest.

They will actually run negative stories/letters that they probably wouldn''t have run before so they appear "more" than impartial.

If it were ever proven that Mr Phillips ever censored the editorial staff regarding the club he would almost certainly have to resign his position instantly........

That''s not even up for debate..........

With advent of the internet it would be easy for a disgruntled employee to reveal the details anonymously.

The rival press such as TV/radio and internet websites will not hesitate to run such a story as long as the facts are proven.

Although Archant holds a strong position in the local print media, they don''t hold a monopoly of the local media.

[/quote]Yes quite correct Yankee nothing less than a full page expose with lurid pics in the village newsletter shall suffice should there be such a conflict of interests. How many times has Cam told us there''s no story in Norwich outside Norfolk????? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A conflict of interest is always overblown where there''s no conflict at the time, and when a decision is made which prevents the potential of one, I''d wager the first thing that is said is, "That''s a bit harsh". Of course when eventually there is real conflict of interest, we all think, "How the hell did we get ourselves into that position in the first place!", and the benefot of hindsight team are out in force.

FYI - and you might not have seen this, there was a thread pulled which originated from a relative of a disgruntled Archant employee a couple of days ago (sure Pete will confirm this). I''ve no idea about the validity or otherwise of the comments made on this thread.

I''ve yet to be convinced by you, the comments made by NCFC, or others on this message board that Stephan Phillips is good appointment to the board. Sorry.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Herb"][quote user="Cluck is God"]

And here have an apologists party on our hands....... [<:o)] [<:o)]

And all the usual suspects there on parade... I almost feel nostalgic......

What joy..........

[/quote]


Rentaquote number two! And not before time.

It never gets old does it?

Actually, yes it does, about 3 years ago.

[/quote]

Another painful lightweight ..........

Come back when you''re big enough.......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why is it good?  He totally failed to mention how Foulger fits into all this![quote user="Canaries in Bed"]

Good article here:

The New Chairman: a breath of fresh air?

Vital Norwich''s vanblerk shares his views on City''s new chairman...
Delia and Michael have heralded the addition of new chairman Alan Bowkett (and new directors Stephan Phillips and David McNally) to the Board as being like a ''breath of fresh air'' for the club.But what will the chairman actually do and will it make a difference?Well that depends. It depends on what his role is within the club and what his ''Terms of Reference'' are.In a conventional business the role of the chairman is meant to be; to manage the board and its meetings and to have (an extra) casting vote in the event of the board not being able to come to a decision. So in addition to the normal director duties, this person should be steering the ship.I suspect this will not be the case with our football club and his role will be to try and bring in some of his obvious commercial expertise, and ideas to the table ''for consideration''.The composition of the Board has been chosen by Smith and Jones (not the comic duo, although many fans may disagree about which pair has the biggest joke potential), rather than the Chairman, which means they are not likely to be truly impartial - just like the non-executive directors responsible for approving huge bonuses in banks over the last couple of decades, their continuing presence on the gravy train depends on this.It seems Bowkett''s success or failure will depend on how far he can influence Smith and Jones to avoid some of the appalling decision making of the last few years.If he is successful and is given free rein to act as a proper chairman I have no doubt his impressive business background will bring real benefits to the club. Especially when it comes to areas like overseeing contract negotiations and making difficult decisions such as when to remove under performing staff (of the last 5 managers most would agree at least 4 were left in place to do more damage than was necessary - a situation that could have been resolved with some tough decision making). As well as helping the new CEO with other commercial matters.He is making all the right noises at the beginning of his tenure: recognizing the dire situation we are in and bemoaning the policy of bringing in too many loan players last year. And he has made it clear he has football connections far and wide.If he is allowed to wield the power a chairman should he could be a valuable asset and be at the heart of revitalizing the club''s fortunes.Only one thing concerns me: that he is flatly refusing to invest any of his considerable personal wealth into the club from the off. This indicates a certain lack of confidence in the business whichever way you look at it.Is this because he realizes he has little real influence on the decisions of the board? Or does he think the club is in such dire straits he won''t waste his cash on it?Or is he just waiting for the right moment to give the club a boost? Or maybe waiting to see if he is likely to end up a scapegoat like Roger Munby (a decent chap by all accounts, who seems to have taken most of the fans ire at Charlton and elsewhere: Delia and Michael choosing not to face the fans…), and finish up taking the blame for the board''s performance overall.So the chairman has arrived, looks to have an impressive business background and is making all the right noises. It remains to be seen whether the majority shareholders will let him act as a proper chairman and run the board, or give him just enough rope to hang himself. History says the power base will remain with the majority shareholders and nothing will change. We''ll find out soon enough.Either way we wish him all the best.

[/quote]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="IBA"][quote user="Cluck is God"]

We know already.....It cynically saves them from being blamed for anything doesn''t it?

[/quote]Yeah you''re right - they''re not getting blamed for anything are they?[/quote]Well Chuck?

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...