The "Delia Out" Campaign

[Ron Jeremy, City fan. 0]

Hmmm, a new manager chosen by amongst others...Delia.

[As my login causes problems [ :o) ] 0]

[quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="gazzathegreat"]

It''s no secret that Delia and the two Michael''s appointment of Gunn did not sit well with either Doncaster or Munby.
[/quote]

Gazza, I am just as much a cricket fan as you, and probably celebrating as much. However I am still clear-headed enough to know that your latest (admirably long) post to Nutty doesn''t answer the question he and I have both raised. Which is this. What evidence do you have for the idea that Munby and Doncaster were closet anti-Smith and Jonesers in general, and in particular what evidence do you have for your statement above?[/quote]

With three of my favourite posters in discussion it is surprising that it has taken me so long to enter the debate, but I guess that is more to do with my bewilderment at what has happened to our once great club.

Purple you will have to forgive people in not offering evidence as clearly this is  a touchy subject, and indeed I cannot claim any knowledge of where ND sits, who I personally blame for so much and feel he said whatever he thought was best for Neil Doncaster (and probably still does).  However I do firmly believe that Roger had supported what he didn''t agree with for as long as he possibly could and now is probably glad to be free of the Smith/Jones stranglehold (he certainly seemed more relaxed on Saturday).

Clearly the events since May show that Delia''s fear of public opinion turning against her has made her "support" decisions that go against all she believes in. She like many of the non-footballing "fans" (of which most of the 50+ women in Norfolk can be counted) believe in ideals of "niceness" that have no place in any sport (else we wouldn''t have won the Ashes as "nice" cricketers got their place at the expense of Trott, Broad and Swan).

This whole thread although well meant underlines the problems that have impeded Norwich for far too long of my footballing life.  My children have grown up in the Jones era and it has taken my stories of the past to get them to come to Carrow Road, as they have seen nothing in the last 14 years to persuade them (Nigel''s hero amongst them with his defensive non-action each game).

Hopefully Paul Lambert, David McNally et al do herald a new beginning, as if not the slump will continue and Luton may be the model we follow.

So Myra there is no campaign as such, just a spreading of the knowledge that Delia Smith has done more damage to this club than Ken Bates ever did to Leeds!

[Camuldonum 0]

 

The problem with sport is that it is just of the here and now.  It can be predicted before and analysed afterwards but no one has any idea as to what will happen of the moment.  Not those taking part, not those organising it.

 

 

[hugoagogo 0]

[quote user="cityangel"]

[quote user="Myra Hawtree"]Well I don''t know who you associate with to come to the conclusion that Delia is so unpopular as that would not be the view of the supporters that I know - and I do know quite a lot! [/quote]

If you took a vote amongst the 24,000 fans I think you''d find that she''d be unpopular with a majority of people. Our club is a shambles at the moment and its Delia  who has got us into this mess by appointing Grant, Roeder and then Gunn. She''s also put prudence before ambition, refused to price the club reasonably and won''t let any investors in if it means losing her majority share.

I''d stick to talking about netball if I was you Myra [:)]

P.S. Who do you blame for the mess the club is in??

[/quote]

 

Cityangel what is the other option then?

You have your wish DS has walked with her money so now what?

Blinkered ,stick to having meetings with the few who share your opinion( NCISA lets try and get in the EDP or Look East brigade)

The whole thing is getting very tiresome did not notice to many anti Delia chants at yesterdays game or pro Gunn ones either come to think of it!

Football is a results game a few wins down the line and your bilge will be forgotten til we lose a game and you and yours trot out the told you so line.

Yawn

[ca 1]

[quote user="hugoagogo"]

 

Cityangel what is the other option then?

 

[/quote]

The other option is that Delia feels the heat in the kitchen and values her shares realistically and puts the club up for sale. At the moment she has instructed Keith Harris to look for investors only rather than buyers which means she still has control.

 

[Dronny Canary 0]

[quote user="ron obvious"]

I wonder if she has "gone", in spirit if not in body.
I feel McNally is not really her cup of tea. Perhaps she realised over the summer that the game was up, & the only direction the club was going in was down. She finally realised just how out of her depth she was, that it was simply not possible to run a "nice" football club; the choices boiled down to either a "nasty" football club or no club at all.
Appointing Gunn permanently was probably her last act. I don''t expect she''ll get much enjoyment out of it now, no matter how successful NCFC become.
Her apotheosis was when promotion was acheived with Nice Nigel Worthington in charge. Unfortunately it was only ever going to go one way.

It''s all a bit of a shame really.

Mr. Lambert  looks to be an angry & ambitious man. I expect him to have a fair degree of success.



[/quote]

Pretty much my feelings too Ron

[hugoagogo 0]

[quote user="cityangel"][quote user="hugoagogo"]

 

Cityangel what is the other option then?

 

[/quote]

The other option is that Delia feels the heat in the kitchen and values her shares realistically and puts the club up for sale. At the moment she has instructed Keith Harris to look for investors only rather than buyers which means she still has control.

 

[/quote]

You have a short memory,there is no knight in shining armour riding to our rescue the whole board out brigade are totally wasteing their time,oh and what happened to the mass protest being organized??????oh nobody turned up it was a sunny day and the cricket was on in the pub!Thats the depth of the anti DS feeling running through the support swayed by a pint of fosters and Freddie Flintoff.(rightly so i may add)I am done commenting on this subject to boring.

 

[ca 1]

[quote user="hugoagogo"][quote user="cityangel"][quote user="hugoagogo"]

 

Cityangel what is the other option then?

 

[/quote]

The other option is that Delia feels the heat in the kitchen and values her shares realistically and puts the club up for sale. At the moment she has instructed Keith Harris to look for investors only rather than buyers which means she still has control.

 

[/quote]

You have a short memory,there is no knight in shining armour riding to our rescue the whole board out brigade are totally wasteing their time,oh and what happened to the mass protest being organized??????oh nobody turned up it was a sunny day and the cricket was on in the pub!Thats the depth of the anti DS feeling running through the support swayed by a pint of fosters and Freddie Flintoff.(rightly so i may add)I am done commenting on this subject to boring.

 

[/quote]

 

They''ll never be a shining knight riding to the rescue until she puts a realistic value on the club which will attract buyers.

You may think she''s doing a great job and you''re entitiled to your opinion but there''s thousands that would like to see her relinguish her hold on our club.

[BlyBlyBabes 0]

[quote user="Camuldonum"]

The problem with sport is that it is just of the here and now.  It can be predicted before and analysed afterwards but no one has any idea as to what will happen of the moment.  Not those taking part, not those organising it.

[/quote]

Of course, viewed another way, that is the beauty of sport rather than the problem with sport

OTBC

[gazzathegreat 0]

KD - I believe I am in the minority who wish her gone. Full stop. There are indeed many who can see her mistakes and concede she''s made many, but (as Nutty says) fear the unknown and believe it will bring administration. To be honest I think we are pretty near that point and only her annual hand out or investment, whichever way you view it, keeps us from going down that route. The route which, as we look at it historically, is down to her and her employees running of the club, not as she would have it, because football has changed. As Nutty says, many clubs have gone into admin, but have they all had the money IN that we have? The crowds, flirtations with the Premiership, players sold for millions? Look where we are and how we have been run under Delia and for me there is only one outcome, she must go. Presently it seems she has at least seen she should take a back seat, for which we should all be grateful. Thank her though. No. The last few years have been abysmal. Not only on the pitch. As she is top of the pile, she takes the blame. Whether or not there has been a recent offer, I suspect many of us will never know.

[Mr.Carrow 376]

[quote user="Dronny Canary"]The difference is that Delia did genuinely step in and do the club and the supporters a huge favour.  Cullum quite clearly wanted something for nothing and was exploiting the situation to get a good deal!![/quote]

Delia was allowed in, Cullum wasn`t.  Simple.

[Mr.Carrow 376]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]

Gazza - we will never agree about many things and it''s always a pleasure to debate things with you. So it''s best to agree to disagree and enjoy the evening.  However, Surely enough clubs have gone into administration over the last few seasons for it not to be fear of the unknown. I think we all pretty well know what would happen if we hound out Smith & Jones.

 

 

[/quote]

Yes we do.  She would have to sell her shares to someone else.  Change happens nutty, you really need to get over your terror of it.

[Metatron 0]

"Delia was allowed in, Cullum wasn`t. Simple."

Not really as simple as that at all.

[Dronny Canary 0]

[quote user="Mr.Carrow"]

[quote user="Dronny Canary"]The difference is that Delia did genuinely step in and do the club and the supporters a huge favour.  Cullum quite clearly wanted something for nothing and was exploiting the situation to get a good deal!![/quote]

Delia was allowed in, Cullum wasn`t.  Simple.

[/quote]

It''s easy when it''s not your money!  How many of us, in Delia''s position, would honestly have accepted the Cullum deal?  Unlike Delia he could afford to make a difference and if he''d put a half reasonable proposal together there would have been a huge build-up in public opinion that even Delia wouldn''t have been able to resist.  That seemed to be happening until it became clear exactly what Cullum wanted!  Delia''s hardly the only villain of the piece now is she?!

 

[Arthur Whittle 0]

[quote user="hugoagogo"][quote user="cityangel"][quote user="hugoagogo"]

 

Cityangel what is the other option then?

 

[/quote]

The other option is that Delia feels the heat in the kitchen and values her shares realistically and puts the club up for sale. At the moment she has instructed Keith Harris to look for investors only rather than buyers which means she still has control.

 

[/quote]

You have a short memory,there is no knight in shining armour riding to our rescue the whole board out brigade are totally wasteing their time,oh and what happened to the mass protest being organized??????oh nobody turned up it was a sunny day and the cricket was on in the pub!Thats the depth of the anti DS feeling running through the support swayed by a pint of fosters and Freddie Flintoff.(rightly so i may add)I am done commenting on this subject to boring.

 

[/quote]

What makes you think no ones out there who would buy city? Can you give us proof? I''d say its more likely that there are people willing to have a pop with NCFC but certain "custodians" and "saviours" won''t sell their Toy.

[Arthur Whittle 0]

[quote user="Dronny Canary"][quote user="Mr.Carrow"]

[quote user="Dronny Canary"]The difference is that Delia did genuinely step in and do the club and the supporters a huge favour.  Cullum quite clearly wanted something for nothing and was exploiting the situation to get a good deal!![/quote]

Delia was allowed in, Cullum wasn`t.  Simple.

[/quote]

It''s easy when it''s not your money!  How many of us, in Delia''s position, would honestly have accepted the Cullum deal?  Unlike Delia he could afford to make a difference and if he''d put a half reasonable proposal together there would have been a huge build-up in public opinion that even Delia wouldn''t have been able to resist.  That seemed to be happening until it became clear exactly what Cullum wanted!  Delia''s hardly the only villain of the piece now is she?!

 

[/quote]

Hang about mate, wasn''t it DS who said she''d sell the club for a Tenner? The cook talks a good game and you''ve only got to see that by the way she takes credit for all the good things even though she has jack to do with it .....[   Huckerby]

[nutty nigel 7,531]

[quote user="Mr.Carrow"][quote user="nutty nigel"]

Gazza - we will never agree about many things and it''s always a pleasure to debate things with you. So it''s best to agree to disagree and enjoy the evening.  However, Surely enough clubs have gone into administration over the last few seasons for it not to be fear of the unknown. I think we all pretty well know what would happen if we hound out Smith & Jones.

 

 

[/quote]

Yes we do.  She would have to sell her shares to someone else.  Change happens nutty, you really need to get over your terror of it.

[/quote]

Mr.Carrow wrote:

What really makes me laugh is that the Delia-ites branded Cullum a selfish ogre for waiting until City were at one of its lowest ebbs ever and in a financially precarious position, yet Delia is apparently a "saviour" for doing exactly the same thing.  Where exactly was she when we badly needed a new keeper to maintain our Premiership status?  Where was she when we were apparently 24 hours from going under?  Watling stepped in and Bennett sorted out the off-field mess of extravagences, Delia came in later when the shares were offered on the cheap.  Everyone bangs on about how we might end up with a "dodgy owner".....Wake up folks, we`ve already got one.

Who are these Delia-ites Mr Carrow? Delia has put money in... where''s Cullums money? After saving the club why didn''t Watling and Bennett find someone deserving of our club? Why did they sell all those shares to the wicked cook? Especially after saying they wouldn''t? And selling them on the cheap too??? So many questions.......

 

Mr Carrow - why don''t you try addressing these questions that your previous post begged to be asked instead of making glib and condescending comments to me.

A few more things that don''t stack up after reading comments on this thread : -

Gazza - If you base your yardstick on Mike Walker then how come Worthy pales into comparison when Walker was manager for two of the 15 seasons I referred to?

Angel - I don''t believe Delia has ever put a price on her shares. All I have ever heard from her on that subject is that new investment would be welcome whether she and MWJ kept all their shares, some of them or none of them. The valuation that is referred to is one that was set by shareholders at an AGM a couple of years ago that you were probably present at. You may have even voted for it! I don''t believe (and this is just a personal opinion because I couldn''t know) that Smith & Jones shareholding was the problem when Cullum came calling. I believe that finding a workable solution to the debt which is inextricably linked to ownership that was more of a problem.

Arthur - What makes me think no ones out there who would buy City is because historically that is the case. Back in the 90''s if Watling hadn''t brought Chase''s shares and put up seven figure guarantees at the bank the club would have gone to the wall and dogs would have been fighting over the scraps. Delia could well be prepared to sell her shares for a tenner my friend but it would cost at least 20m more to buy the club.

 

[Arthur Whittle 0]

[quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="Mr.Carrow"][quote user="nutty nigel"]

Gazza - we will never agree about many things and it''s always a pleasure to debate things with you. So it''s best to agree to disagree and enjoy the evening.  However, Surely enough clubs have gone into administration over the last few seasons for it not to be fear of the unknown. I think we all pretty well know what would happen if we hound out Smith & Jones.

 

 

[/quote]

Yes we do.  She would have to sell her shares to someone else.  Change happens nutty, you really need to get over your terror of it.

[/quote]

Mr.Carrow wrote:

What really makes me laugh is that the Delia-ites branded Cullum a selfish ogre for waiting until City were at one of its lowest ebbs ever and in a financially precarious position, yet Delia is apparently a "saviour" for doing exactly the same thing.  Where exactly was she when we badly needed a new keeper to maintain our Premiership status?  Where was she when we were apparently 24 hours from going under?  Watling stepped in and Bennett sorted out the off-field mess of extravagences, Delia came in later when the shares were offered on the cheap.  Everyone bangs on about how we might end up with a "dodgy owner".....Wake up folks, we`ve already got one.

Who are these Delia-ites Mr Carrow? Delia has put money in... where''s Cullums money? After saving the club why didn''t Watling and Bennett find someone deserving of our club? Why did they sell all those shares to the wicked cook? Especially after saying they wouldn''t? And selling them on the cheap too??? So many questions.......

 

Mr Carrow - why don''t you try addressing these questions that your previous post begged to be asked instead of making glib and condescending comments to me.

A few more things that don''t stack up after reading comments on this thread : -

Gazza - If you base your yardstick on Mike Walker then how come Worthy pales into comparison when Walker was manager for two of the 15 seasons I referred to?

Angel - I don''t believe Delia has ever put a price on her shares. All I have ever heard from her on that subject is that new investment would be welcome whether she and MWJ kept all their shares, some of them or none of them. The valuation that is referred to is one that was set by shareholders at an AGM a couple of years ago that you were probably present at. You may have even voted for it! I don''t believe (and this is just a personal opinion because I couldn''t know) that Smith & Jones shareholding was the problem when Cullum came calling. I believe that finding a workable solution to the debt which is inextricably linked to ownership that was more of a problem.

Arthur - What makes me think no ones out there who would buy City is because historically that is the case. Back in the 90''s if Watling hadn''t brought Chase''s shares and put up seven figure guarantees at the bank the club would have gone to the wall and dogs would have been fighting over the scraps. Delia could well be prepared to sell her shares for a tenner my friend but it would cost at least 20m more to buy the club.

 

[/quote]

NN, as much as you hate change, the whole football scene has moved on since the Watling days and its clear people would buy in to NCFC if only the goal posts didn''t move all the time.

[Arthur Whittle 0]

[quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="Mr.Carrow"][quote user="nutty nigel"]

Gazza - we will never agree about many things and it''s always a pleasure to debate things with you. So it''s best to agree to disagree and enjoy the evening.  However, Surely enough clubs have gone into administration over the last few seasons for it not to be fear of the unknown. I think we all pretty well know what would happen if we hound out Smith & Jones.

 

 

[/quote]

Yes we do.  She would have to sell her shares to someone else.  Change happens nutty, you really need to get over your terror of it.

[/quote]

Mr.Carrow wrote:

What really makes me laugh is that the Delia-ites branded Cullum a selfish ogre for waiting until City were at one of its lowest ebbs ever and in a financially precarious position, yet Delia is apparently a "saviour" for doing exactly the same thing.  Where exactly was she when we badly needed a new keeper to maintain our Premiership status?  Where was she when we were apparently 24 hours from going under?  Watling stepped in and Bennett sorted out the off-field mess of extravagences, Delia came in later when the shares were offered on the cheap.  Everyone bangs on about how we might end up with a "dodgy owner".....Wake up folks, we`ve already got one.

Who are these Delia-ites Mr Carrow? Delia has put money in... where''s Cullums money? After saving the club why didn''t Watling and Bennett find someone deserving of our club? Why did they sell all those shares to the wicked cook? Especially after saying they wouldn''t? And selling them on the cheap too??? So many questions.......

 

Mr Carrow - why don''t you try addressing these questions that your previous post begged to be asked instead of making glib and condescending comments to me.

A few more things that don''t stack up after reading comments on this thread : -

Gazza - If you base your yardstick on Mike Walker then how come Worthy pales into comparison when Walker was manager for two of the 15 seasons I referred to?

Angel - I don''t believe Delia has ever put a price on her shares. All I have ever heard from her on that subject is that new investment would be welcome whether she and MWJ kept all their shares, some of them or none of them. The valuation that is referred to is one that was set by shareholders at an AGM a couple of years ago that you were probably present at. You may have even voted for it! I don''t believe (and this is just a personal opinion because I couldn''t know) that Smith & Jones shareholding was the problem when Cullum came calling. I believe that finding a workable solution to the debt which is inextricably linked to ownership that was more of a problem.

Arthur - What makes me think no ones out there who would buy City is because historically that is the case. Back in the 90''s if Watling hadn''t brought Chase''s shares and put up seven figure guarantees at the bank the club would have gone to the wall and dogs would have been fighting over the scraps. Delia could well be prepared to sell her shares for a tenner my friend but it would cost at least 20m more to buy the club.

 

[/quote]

I might be wrong but with regards to the Shares and Cullum it was 20 million debt,20 million investment,16 million shares, which valued the shares at £30 a pop. Far to high for our club at the time.

[nutty nigel 7,531]

A glib and condescending comment about me hating change just like Mr Carrow. Without change nothing ever progresses and I know that better than most. Neither of you are prepared to address the questions that your flawed opinions raise so I''m just glad you will not be responsible for any change that may happen.

 

[nutty nigel 7,531]

[quote user="Sir Arthur Whittle OBE CBE OAP."]

I might be wrong but with regards to the Shares and Cullum it was 20 million debt,20 million investment,16 million shares, which valued the shares at £30 a pop. Far to high for our club at the time.

[/quote]

You are indeed right - the £30 was agreed at an AGM, it''s in my previous post. But that doesn''t mean my shares are worth £30 does it? I could value them at a tenner too. Make me an offer?

 

[Mr.Carrow 376]

[quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="Mr.Carrow"][quote user="nutty nigel"]

Gazza - we will never agree about many things and it''s always a pleasure to debate things with you. So it''s best to agree to disagree and enjoy the evening.  However, Surely enough clubs have gone into administration over the last few seasons for it not to be fear of the unknown. I think we all pretty well know what would happen if we hound out Smith & Jones.

 

 

[/quote]

Yes we do.  She would have to sell her shares to someone else.  Change happens nutty, you really need to get over your terror of it.

[/quote]

Mr.Carrow wrote:

What really makes me laugh is that the Delia-ites branded Cullum a selfish ogre for waiting until City were at one of its lowest ebbs ever and in a financially precarious position, yet Delia is apparently a "saviour" for doing exactly the same thing.  Where exactly was she when we badly needed a new keeper to maintain our Premiership status?  Where was she when we were apparently 24 hours from going under?  Watling stepped in and Bennett sorted out the off-field mess of extravagences, Delia came in later when the shares were offered on the cheap.  Everyone bangs on about how we might end up with a "dodgy owner".....Wake up folks, we`ve already got one.

Who are these Delia-ites Mr Carrow? Delia has put money in... where''s Cullums money? After saving the club why didn''t Watling and Bennett find someone deserving of our club? Why did they sell all those shares to the wicked cook? Especially after saying they wouldn''t? And selling them on the cheap too??? So many questions.......

 

Mr Carrow - why don''t you try addressing these questions that your previous post begged to be asked instead of making glib and condescending comments to me.

A few more things that don''t stack up after reading comments on this thread : -

Gazza - If you base your yardstick on Mike Walker then how come Worthy pales into comparison when Walker was manager for two of the 15 seasons I referred to?

Angel - I don''t believe Delia has ever put a price on her shares. All I have ever heard from her on that subject is that new investment would be welcome whether she and MWJ kept all their shares, some of them or none of them. The valuation that is referred to is one that was set by shareholders at an AGM a couple of years ago that you were probably present at. You may have even voted for it! I don''t believe (and this is just a personal opinion because I couldn''t know) that Smith & Jones shareholding was the problem when Cullum came calling. I believe that finding a workable solution to the debt which is inextricably linked to ownership that was more of a problem.

Arthur - What makes me think no ones out there who would buy City is because historically that is the case. Back in the 90''s if Watling hadn''t brought Chase''s shares and put up seven figure guarantees at the bank the club would have gone to the wall and dogs would have been fighting over the scraps. Delia could well be prepared to sell her shares for a tenner my friend but it would cost at least 20m more to buy the club.

 

[/quote]

I haven`t answered your questions because they are either beside the point, are self-explanatory or make little sense.  I`ve also learned to my cost that there is no point spending valuable time writing long, detailed, factual posts when virtually none of it gets through.  You are one of those people who believe what you want to believe and ignore evidence to the contrary.  Whatever makes you happy......

As for your Delia quotes, i suggest you read the reports from the Capital Canaries meeting and compare them to yours- just a little bit contradictory......

[nutty nigel 7,531]

Mr Carrow - we are both "one of those people who believe what they want to believe". We both produce the facts to back up these beliefs. Neither of us makes those facts up. This in turn drags the focus away from football and I''m afraid the longer I look at those facts the more I believe that football failure is down to football errors of judgement. Anyway, this thread is not about that. It''s about getting Delia out of the club. You, I and I suspect Delia would all like to see a rich benefactor in her place. The difference is that you seem to want her out regardless. I repeat, it''s not fear of change or the unknown, it''s fear of the known. Administration is not just a 10 point penalty, tear it up and start again situation. It''s far more serious than that. When ipswich and leicester cheated their way out of financial trouble the rules were very different to what they are now.

 

 

[The Butler 0]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]

Mr Carrow - we are both "one of those people who believe what they want to believe". We both produce the facts to back up these beliefs. Neither of us makes those facts up. This in turn drags the focus away from football and I''m afraid the longer I look at those facts the more I believe that football failure is down to football errors of judgement. Anyway, this thread is not about that. It''s about getting Delia out of the club. You, I and I suspect Delia would all like to see a rich benefactor in her place. The difference is that you seem to want her out regardless. I repeat, it''s not fear of change or the unknown, it''s fear of the known. Administration is not just a 10 point penalty, tear it up and start again situation. It''s far more serious than that. When ipswich and leicester cheated their way out of financial trouble the rules were very different to what they are now.

 

 

[/quote]

The club is like a man with a gangrene leg.

Surgery is needed or he will die, but he puts it off because he is also frightened how he will manage with just one leg and if the replacement will work.

The devious duo have become like that leg, slowly poisoning our club.

Bandages and ointment are applied to disguise the infection but it is still there.

Bits of the leg have been removed, but the main infection still exists and while it does the whole is in danger.

At some point the surgeon is going to be needed or the whole body will die just because of fear of the removal of one part.

How the infection was caught or how good the leg has been becomes irrelevant.

 

[Mr.Carrow 376]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]

Mr Carrow - we are both "one of those people who believe what they want to believe". We both produce the facts to back up these beliefs. Neither of us makes those facts up. This in turn drags the focus away from football and I''m afraid the longer I look at those facts the more I believe that football failure is down to football errors of judgement. Anyway, this thread is not about that. It''s about getting Delia out of the club. You, I and I suspect Delia would all like to see a rich benefactor in her place. The difference is that you seem to want her out regardless. I repeat, it''s not fear of change or the unknown, it''s fear of the known. Administration is not just a 10 point penalty, tear it up and start again situation. It''s far more serious than that. When ipswich and leicester cheated their way out of financial trouble the rules were very different to what they are now.

 

 

[/quote]

Utter rubbish.  The fact that you repeat quotes from a year ago yet ignore more recent quotes which blatantly contradict them says it all.

"Fear of the known" hey?  Well all-knowing clairevoyant nutty, please pray tell exactly what would happen should Delia be persuaded to sell up?

[blahblahblah 2]

The "fear" in her selling up, from my assumption of Delias'' perspective, is that the person / people she sells up to won''t put as much into the club, every year, as she and her husband have, and without those regular cash injections the club might go into admin.  But they''ve wasted a lot of cash on manager compensation packages, and the managers have wasted money (as all managers do) on duff purchases and loans, and then there is those land deals too, so you could argue that in pumping money into the club every year, they''ve just been righting their own wrongs, which is their prerogative to do.D & M won''t just walk away from the club, or sell to anyone that would inject less than they do currently (or, I suspect anyone that didn''t take care of community aspects of club development).  The main admin threat lies with the debt to the banks, who I imagine are very keen to get their money back.  But the banks won''t call in that debt unless they think they won''t get their money back at all, as doing so would force us into administration, which would give them a return of pennies in the pound, and only then after a long time.  While the club are making repayments, the banks should be happy.The most likely future ?  McNally tightens off-field spending up, Lambert gets a small transfer budget from player sales, we bimble along in the hope that Lambert can build a team capable of winning league 1, this might take 2 or 3 seasons.  The club won''t go into admin for the reasons outlined above, and will try to find a buyer that meets D & Ms'' stringent criteria.  They will probably fail.  The tipping point would only come if D & Ms'' retirement plans are in trouble, I''d imagine.  Thing is, Delia can always re-release a book to make more money.

[The Butler 0]

[quote user="blahblahblah"]The "fear" in her selling up, from my assumption of Delias'' perspective, is that the person / people she sells up to won''t put as much into the club, every year, as she and her husband have, and without those regular cash injections the club might go into admin.  But they''ve wasted a lot of cash on manager compensation packages, and the managers have wasted money (as all managers do) on duff purchases and loans, and then there is those land deals too, so you could argue that in pumping money into the club every year, they''ve just been righting their own wrongs, which is their prerogative to do.

D & M won''t just walk away from the club, or sell to anyone that would inject less than they do currently (or, I suspect anyone that didn''t take care of community aspects of club development).  The main admin threat lies with the debt to the banks, who I imagine are very keen to get their money back.  But the banks won''t call in that debt unless they think they won''t get their money back at all, as doing so would force us into administration, which would give them a return of pennies in the pound, and only then after a long time.  While the club are making repayments, the banks should be happy.

The most likely future ?  McNally tightens off-field spending up, Lambert gets a small transfer budget from player sales, we bimble along in the hope that Lambert can build a team capable of winning league 1, this might take 2 or 3 seasons.  The club won''t go into admin for the reasons outlined above, and will try to find a buyer that meets D & Ms'' stringent criteria.  They will probably fail.  The tipping point would only come if D & Ms'' retirement plans are in trouble, I''d imagine.  Thing is, Delia can always re-release a book to make more money.
[/quote]

Ever thought that if the "new owner" did not make so many mistakes then perhaps the amount needed extra year on year might not be so much?

[7rew 0]

[quote user="The Butler"]

[quote user="blahblahblah"]The "fear" in her selling up, from my assumption of Delias'' perspective, is that the person / people she sells up to won''t put as much into the club, every year, as she and her husband have, and without those regular cash injections the club might go into admin.  But they''ve wasted a lot of cash on manager compensation packages, and the managers have wasted money (as all managers do) on duff purchases and loans, and then there is those land deals too, so you could argue that in pumping money into the club every year, they''ve just been righting their own wrongs, which is their prerogative to do.D & M won''t just walk away from the club, or sell to anyone that would inject less than they do currently (or, I suspect anyone that didn''t take care of community aspects of club development).  The main admin threat lies with the debt to the banks, who I imagine are very keen to get their money back.  But the banks won''t call in that debt unless they think they won''t get their money back at all, as doing so would force us into administration, which would give them a return of pennies in the pound, and only then after a long time.  While the club are making repayments, the banks should be happy.The most likely future ?  McNally tightens off-field spending up, Lambert gets a small transfer budget from player sales, we bimble along in the hope that Lambert can build a team capable of winning league 1, this might take 2 or 3 seasons.  The club won''t go into admin for the reasons outlined above, and will try to find a buyer that meets D & Ms'' stringent criteria.  They will probably fail.  The tipping point would only come if D & Ms'' retirement plans are in trouble, I''d imagine.  Thing is, Delia can always re-release a book to make more money.[/quote]

Ever thought that if the "new owner" did not make so many mistakes then perhaps the amount needed extra year on year might not be so much?

[/quote]Ever thought that it might not and so a commitment to providing ongoing financial support is important.  Ever thought that even if it does happen and it may not reduce the the ammount needed year on year 0 and so a commitment to providing ongoing financial support is important.Certainly IMO whatever takeover does eventually happen an ongoing commitment to the future will be a big part of it.

[Tangible Fixed Assets anyone? 0]

[quote user="blahblahblah"]The "fear" in her selling up, from my assumption of Delias'' perspective, is that the person / people she sells up to won''t put as much into the club, every year, as she and her husband have, and without those regular cash injections the club might go into admin.  But they''ve wasted a lot of cash on manager compensation packages, and the managers have wasted money (as all managers do) on duff purchases and loans, and then there is those land deals too, so you could argue that in pumping money into the club every year, they''ve just been righting their own wrongs, which is their prerogative to do.

D & M won''t just walk away from the club, or sell to anyone that would inject less than they do currently (or, I suspect anyone that didn''t take care of community aspects of club development).  The main admin threat lies with the debt to the banks, who I imagine are very keen to get their money back.  But the banks won''t call in that debt unless they think they won''t get their money back at all, as doing so would force us into administration, which would give them a return of pennies in the pound, and only then after a long time.  While the club are making repayments, the banks should be happy.

[/quote]

Blahblahblah - good post re the waste on managers compensation, duff purchases etc.

As for the Loan Notes (Jarrold stand related debt) - we keep paying and there are assets e.g., land and the hotel stake  to sell when the recovery comes.  The Loan Note holders must be happy to receive 7% + when Sterling LIBOR is less than 1% as long as we keep paying.

 

[Tangible Fixed Assets anyone? 0]

Nutty - my evidence is the overwhelming vote of no confidence in the NCFC Plc board (including the Stowmarket Two) at the St. Andrews Hall meeting.

The vote was - confidence in the board         a BIG zero!

                     - abstained                              5

                     - no confidence                       495

 

Enjoy!