A really interesting (and long!) article on our recent turnaround

[Harleston Canary 0]

http://swissramble.blogspot.com/2011/04/norwich-citys-remarkable-transformation.html

If you''ve got some time on your hands and are interested in a really well-written article about City''s recent turnaround, this is worth a read.

Makes you realise the difficult financial back-ground to our recent on-pitch revival.

OTBC

[Canary_on_the Trent 0]

From what I can gather, Sheffield United are in real trouble if they go down, much like ourselves they failed to go up with parachute payments and are now struggling. Even with the West Ham compensation their accounts don''t make good reading.

[PurpleCanary 6,365]

This link Harleston mentioned...

 

http://swissramble.blogspot.com/2011/04/norwich-citys-remarkable-transformation.html



...is indeed to a very long piece on NCFC''s finances. For anyone interested in the subject (which is not everyone here) it is required reading. There are far too many statistics to check, but those I have checked are accurate. As is the piece in general, there are a couple of comments on Cullumgate that are not wrong exactly but potentially a touch misleading. That apart it is invaluable, especially for the light it sheds on the Fag Packet v. Anti-Fag Packet argument.

 

Various points come out strongly:

 

 

1. The club got hit by a perfect storm (the collapse of ITV Digital and relegation from the Premier League, with the consequent loss of TV money) that would have tested any set of directors.

 

2. The club has been kept afloat by money from directors. "Norwich''s business model relies on regular injections of cash from its owners." And that business model includes transfer spending. That is where the money has been coming from.

 

3. Far from being net sellers, over the 11 years quoted we have been net sellers five years, net buyers five years and level the other year.

 

4. The often-derided off-field activities are vital, especially in comparison to other clubs. The chart comparing us and Burnley in terms of TV money and commercial activites tells quite a story.

 

5. If, as predicted by Alan Bowkett, the club makes an operating profit this year it will be the first time since we were in the Premier League. Something to be applauded if so.

 

[Dani Peacock 0]

A very interesting piece, i noted the bit about us being second highest spenders in the championship this season, surely that can''t be true can it??

[jed exodous 0]

A good article, i remember reading an article the done on the Zlatan Ibrahimovic transfer to Barca, that was well worth a read and if its still about will blow you mind when you realise how much he had cost them...

 

 

[jed exodous 0]

[quote user="Dani Peacock"]A very interesting piece, i noted the bit about us being second highest spenders in the championship this season, surely that can''t be true can it??[/quote]

Think about it though, Surman, Ruddy, Jackson, Barnett, Wilbraham, Crofts, Fox, and loans of Lansbury, Pacheco, Barnett before he signed perm and Vokes.  We''ve spent a fair bit really over the last year and i reckon we weren''t too far off being the highest spenders last season in league 1.  Its great to see us signing good players without compromising the squad by selling some of our best players.

 

I''m really struggling to think of many other teams who''ve spent cash on players other than QPR.  Cardiff signed a few and i dunno how much Bellamy contributes to their total, Swansea must''ve spent a fair bit too, teams like Forest, Leeds, even relegated prem clubs like Hull, Boro, Pompey and Burnley haven''t pumped in millions.

[26mjw 0]

Swiss Ramble is superb and produces epics like this regularly. It''s nice to see him turn his attention to a less fashionable club. He''s well worth reading regularly and following on twitter, and you don''t have to doubt the legitimacy of the stats or claims - he puts in tons of research and factchecking into it. He''s relied on by many of the major rags.

[nutty nigel 7,897]

[quote user="26mjw"]Swiss Ramble is superb and produces epics like this regularly. It''s nice to see him turn his attention to a less fashionable club. He''s well worth reading regularly and following on twitter, and you don''t have to doubt the legitimacy of the stats or claims - he puts in tons of research and factchecking into it. He''s relied on by many of the major rags.[/quote]

 

Yes but that was before his article was published on here. Good luck with convincing The Butler & Tangie that the cook has put 12 million in!

 

 

[Bill 1,788]

One point I would query is the use of our 2009/10 accounts to be set accunts Championship clubs accounts. As far as I can work out those accounts relate to the season wewere in the Legue 1.

If that is the case then a more meaningful comparison would be if the extra TV money and parachute payments were stripped out. The chart has the paupers marginally below us yet if the extra £2.75m TV money was removed you would see them way below us in income as with most of the others.

Much of this was available via the accounts that were published in the autumn. Sadly those that should read this report will not read it, prefering to spend the same amount of time trawling the net to find worthless sh!te that ican be put up on the forum as if it has any other worth beyond demonstrating what a dimwit the poster is.

The other point is the Cullum stuff. He should have been dismissed along with the other fantasists such as De Stephano, Michael Knighton, the bookie chap and the other sundry timewasters who seem to rappear regularly to over exite the slow witted.

[Mr.Carrow 394]

"Rappear regularly to over exite the slow witted". Oh the irony......

[nutty nigel 7,897]

ahhh... my new friend Mr Carrow.. how you doin'' Mr?

 

Do you reckon the stats and claims in this article are legit?

 

See you at Pompey[Y]

 

 

[Mello Yello 2,553]

[quote user="City1st"]One point I would query is the use of our 2009/10 accounts to be set accunts Championship clubs accounts. As far as I can work out those accounts relate to the season wewere in the Legue 1. If that is the case then a more meaningful comparison would be if the extra TV money and parachute payments were stripped out. The chart has the paupers marginally below us yet if the extra £2.75m TV money was removed you would see them way below us in income as with most of the others. Much of this was available via the accounts that were published in the autumn. Sadly those that should read this report will not read it, prefering to spend the same amount of time trawling the net to find worthless sh!te that ican be put up on the forum as if it has any other worth beyond demonstrating what a dimwit the poster is. The other point is the Cullum stuff. He should have been dismissed along with the other fantasists such as De Stephano, Michael Knighton, the bookie chap and the other sundry timewasters who seem to rappear regularly to over exite the slow witted.[/quote]

Spellun....4/10.....sit at the back of the class with the rest of the dimwits and slow-witted.

 

Then consider attending an anger-management class......Before the throbbing pulsating veins on your forehead explode.