News of the World

[dhickl 0]

Know what we now know about them,  do you think there was any more in this story?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/norfolk/8492302.stm

 

They mave have got information, that they would not be able to submit when they were sued.  You can just imagine their defence:

 

"We know it''s tru m''Lord, we listened to Delia''s phone messages on the subject..."

[dhickl 0]

That should be - Now we know what we know about them

[BW 0]

Certainly was, it was common knowledge that the club was going that way.

[. 0]

There''s no smoke without fire... and while the News of the World has become totally discredited, it''s not because they lied... more that they had unlawfully obtained information on those in the firing line.

[nutty nigel 7,902]

Try reading this..

 

http://www.canaries.co.uk/page/NewsDetails/0,,10355~1942777,00.html

 

Then see if you believe the NOW and cluck or our football club. If it''s the former then you could maybe take a long hard look in the mirror.

 

 

[Mr Brownstone 0]

Do you think their source was Wiz? I seem to recall him starting a thread about the same thing?

[TIL 1010 5,246]

[quote user="Alan BowCLUCK"]There''s no smoke without fire... and while the News of the World has become totally discredited, it''s not because they lied... more that they had unlawfully obtained information on those in the firing line.




[/quote]

Forgive me Cluck but a couple of days ago you made reference to Norwich City being on a list of companies that was circulating who were about to go into administration around this time and that it was no secret but now apparently TNOW obtained such information unlawfully.[*-)][8-)][:^)]

[priceyrice 133]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]

Try reading this..

 

http://www.canaries.co.uk/page/NewsDetails/0,,10355~1942777,00.html

 

Then see if you believe the NOW and cluck or our football club. If it''s the former then you could maybe take a long hard look in the mirror.

 

 

[/quote]Have to say Nutty that NoW had this story right, or very close to right. I know most fans are aware of the fact we almost went into administration a couple of years ago but i am not sure that many are aware of how close we went, the NoW were not far off with their report at all. I think all we can do is be glad the board got us out of the difficult situation and really turned our fortunes round - for me that is the sign of a compotent board, when they don''t give up however miuch the odds are stacked against them, good on Delia and the rest of the board

[. 0]

Like I''ve said.... the News of the World is in trouble for unlawfully printing reality... if you want to read fairy tales however buy the Mirror.

[nutty nigel 7,902]

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

Try reading this..

 

http://www.canaries.co.uk/page/NewsDetails/0,,10355~1942777,00.html

 

Then see if you believe the NOW and cluck or our football club. If it''s the former then you could maybe take a long hard look in the mirror.

 

 

[/quote]

Have to say Nutty that NoW had this story right, or very close to right. I know most fans are aware of the fact we almost went into administration a couple of years ago but i am not sure that many are aware of how close we went, the NoW were not far off with their report at all. I think all we can do is be glad the board got us out of the difficult situation and really turned our fortunes round - for me that is the sign of a compotent board, when they don''t give up however miuch the odds are stacked against them, good on Delia and the rest of the board
[/quote]

 

Pricey buddy, I''m not sure where you got your information from or how you view administration. However, what I do know is that if we were "on the brink of administration" or "administration was just days away" the only way we would have survived would have been by some large investment. Which is what the NOW implied. Now by the time administration is imminent it''s common knowledge who is putting the club there. And no recovery would be possible by re-negotiating with the lenders.

 

 

[. 0]

[quote user="TIL 1010"]

[quote user="Alan BowCLUCK"]There''s no smoke without fire... and while the News of the World has become totally discredited, it''s not because they lied... more that they had unlawfully obtained information on those in the firing line.

[/quote]

Forgive me Cluck but a couple of days ago you made reference to Norwich City being on a list of companies that was circulating who were about to go into administration around this time and that it was no secret but now apparently TNOW obtained such information unlawfully.[*-)][8-)][:^)]

[/quote]Dear oh dear Plod... you really are a slow one aren''t you?Where have I said the News of the World saw a ''secret list''?  The list was circulated among various companies involved in insolvencies.... and seen by many of their staff.  It would have been classed as ''confidential'' at the time.... but people talk and once the cat is out of the bag and all that.The NOW simply printed what others wanted kept quiet... as it has done on many, many occasions before. It''s called investigative journalism.

[TIL 1010 5,246]

[quote user="Alan BowCLUCK"][quote user="TIL 1010"]

[quote user="Alan BowCLUCK"]There''s no smoke without fire... and while the News of the World has become totally discredited, it''s not because they lied... more that they had unlawfully obtained information on those in the firing line.




[/quote]

Forgive me Cluck but a couple of days ago you made reference to Norwich City being on a list of companies that was circulating who were about to go into administration around this time and that it was no secret but now apparently TNOW obtained such information unlawfully.[*-)][8-)][:^)]

[/quote]

Dear oh dear Plod... you really are a slow one aren''t you?

Where have I said the News of the World saw a ''secret list''?  The list was circulated among various companies involved in insolvencies.... and seen by many of their staff.  It would have been classed as ''confidential'' at the time.... but people talk and once the cat is out of the bag and all that.

The NOW simply printed what others wanted kept quiet... as it has done on many, many occasions before. It''s called investigative journalism.


[/quote]

So simply printing something that some wanted kept quiet made it unlawful then ? How interesting. A breach of confidentiality is not unlawful now is it Cluck?

[. 0]

Whatever.......

[priceyrice 133]

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

Try reading this..

 

http://www.canaries.co.uk/page/NewsDetails/0,,10355~1942777,00.html

 

Then see if you believe the NOW and cluck or our football club. If it''s the former then you could maybe take a long hard look in the mirror.

 

 

[/quote]Have to say Nutty that NoW had this story right, or very close to right. I know most fans are aware of the fact we almost went into administration a couple of years ago but i am not sure that many are aware of how close we went, the NoW were not far off with their report at all. I think all we can do is be glad the board got us out of the difficult situation and really turned our fortunes round - for me that is the sign of a compotent board, when they don''t give up however miuch the odds are stacked against them, good on Delia and the rest of the board[/quote]

 

Pricey buddy, I''m not sure where you got your information from or how you view administration. However, what I do know is that if we were "on the brink of administration" or "administration was just days away" the only way we would have survived would have been by some large investment. Which is what the NOW implied. Now by the time administration is imminent it''s common knowledge who is putting the club there. And no recovery would be possible by re-negotiating with the lenders.

 

 

[/quote]It''s common knowledge within certain departments of the club that we were very close for filling for adminstration, i don''t know exactly what starved it off as it wasn''t something i wanted to pursue and probably wasn''t something that the people i was working with should have let slip, so i cannot tell you for sure how many days away we were and what exactly it was that prevented it. I only mentioned it because i thought it was public knwoledge now as the club have slowly been releasing info about how close we really were, it''s something McNally and Lambert have mentioned a few times. Perhaps it was the threat of adminstration that led to the re-negotiation of our major loans or one of the board put up some cash, perhaps Mcnally came up with some last minute hocus pocus, i really do not know, all i know is that we were very very close to filling for adminstration.

[The DicTaTor 0]

If any ex News of the World staff are reading, then if you are looking for work the Republic of Wadiya Media will welcome you.Form an orderly queue gentlemen.

[nutty nigel 7,902]

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

Try reading this..

 

http://www.canaries.co.uk/page/NewsDetails/0,,10355~1942777,00.html

 

Then see if you believe the NOW and cluck or our football club. If it''s the former then you could maybe take a long hard look in the mirror.

 

 

[/quote]

Have to say Nutty that NoW had this story right, or very close to right. I know most fans are aware of the fact we almost went into administration a couple of years ago but i am not sure that many are aware of how close we went, the NoW were not far off with their report at all. I think all we can do is be glad the board got us out of the difficult situation and really turned our fortunes round - for me that is the sign of a compotent board, when they don''t give up however miuch the odds are stacked against them, good on Delia and the rest of the board
[/quote]

 

Pricey buddy, I''m not sure where you got your information from or how you view administration. However, what I do know is that if we were "on the brink of administration" or "administration was just days away" the only way we would have survived would have been by some large investment. Which is what the NOW implied. Now by the time administration is imminent it''s common knowledge who is putting the club there. And no recovery would be possible by re-negotiating with the lenders.

 

 

[/quote]

It''s common knowledge within certain departments of the club that we were very close for filling for adminstration, i don''t know exactly what starved it off as it wasn''t something i wanted to pursue and probably wasn''t something that the people i was working with should have let slip, so i cannot tell you for sure how many days away we were and what exactly it was that prevented it. I only mentioned it because i thought it was public knwoledge now as the club have slowly been releasing info about how close we really were, it''s something McNally and Lambert have mentioned a few times. Perhaps it was the threat of adminstration that led to the re-negotiation of our major loans or one of the board put up some cash, perhaps Mcnally came up with some last minute hocus pocus, i really do not know, all i know is that we were very very close to filling for adminstration.
[/quote]

 

Sorry Pricey. None of that makes any sense to me. I''ll just bow to your superior knowledge buddy.

 

Do you think we should consider paying back the NOW?

[PurpleCanary 6,372]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]

Try reading this..

 

http://www.canaries.co.uk/page/NewsDetails/0,,10355~1942777,00.html

 

Then see if you believe the NOW and cluck or our football club. If it''s the former then you could maybe take a long hard look in the mirror.

 

 

[/quote]

 

Hate to say this, nutty, but NCFC WAS close to administration in the first months of 2010. The chairman admitted so to The Guardian in February 2010 when announcing that they would, however, be able to avoid it:

 

"It has always been our intention to avoid administration, which may have been an easier option. My staff and I have been working tirelessly to not only assess the club''s finances but also to work out how best to resolve the underlying issues that exist and I am delighted to have reached the stage where I can make an informed decision [not to go into administration]."

 

Of course that is Notts County Football Club. But the idea that the News of the World got one NCFC mixed up with the other NCFC is too ludicrous to contemplate...[;)]

[The Gruffalo 0]

Did Mr Foulger not help keep the wolves from the door by putting substantial money in that summer? I thought some fans helped out too? I heard nothing about our majority shareholders delving deeper in to their own pockets though. Did you?

[priceyrice 133]

Haha i don''t have superior knowledge. i can''t say i know all the ins and outs of going into administration, I assume your are a bit older than me and i don''t doubt you have good commerical awareness, you seem like a very clued up poster, but this is one of the few topics i can say i have a bit of insider info in, so i was just sharing.I realise your NoW comment is a bit tongue in cheek and i am not sure of the reasons for our claim against NoW, from what i remember it was settled outside of court wasn''t it? If not let me know and i will do a bit of research, anything to take my mind away from researching the law behind virtual worlds. But i am sure we had very good grounds for a claim, perhaps we were aware NoW gathered their info illegally or perhaps they knew certain information but put 2+2 together and got 5 and were a bit gun how in publishing rumours as facts, such as stating the day we were going to go into admin

[nutty nigel 7,902]

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

Try reading this..

 

http://www.canaries.co.uk/page/NewsDetails/0,,10355~1942777,00.html

 

Then see if you believe the NOW and cluck or our football club. If it''s the former then you could maybe take a long hard look in the mirror.

 

 

[/quote]

 

Hate to say this, nutty, but NCFC WAS close to administration in the first months of 2010. The chairman admitted so to The Guardian in February 2010 when announcing that they would, however, be able to avoid it:

 

"It has always been our intention to avoid administration, which may have been an easier option. My staff and I have been working tirelessly to not only assess the club''s finances but also to work out how best to resolve the underlying issues that exist and I am delighted to have reached the stage where I can make an informed decision [not to go into administration]."

 

Of course that is Notts County Football Club. But the idea that the News of the World got one NCFC mixed up with the other NCFC is too ludicrous to contemplate...[;)]

[/quote]

 

Have you ever been tempted to take a look at the effects administration has had on the clubs who have been there Purple? I''ve been tempted but am not sure I have the neccessary skills. But I do think one of the strengths of our club is that in the modern era we have twice pulled ourselves out without going there.

 

I don''t subscribe to the views of many on here that administration is just a case of writing off the debts and starting over with a 10 point penalty. I''m sure there are lasting effects not least that there are no assets left.

 

 

[nutty nigel 7,902]

[quote user="priceyrice"]Haha i don''t have superior knowledge. i can''t say i know all the ins and outs of going into administration, I assume your are a bit older than me and i don''t doubt you have good commerical awareness, you seem like a very clued up poster, but this is one of the few topics i can say i have a bit of insider info in, so i was just sharing.

I realise your NoW comment is a bit tongue in cheek and i am not sure of the reasons for our claim against NoW, from what i remember it was settled outside of court wasn''t it? If not let me know and i will do a bit of research, anything to take my mind away from researching the law behind virtual worlds. But i am sure we had very good grounds for a claim, perhaps we were aware NoW gathered their info illegally or perhaps they knew certain information but put 2+2 together and got 5 and were a bit gun how in publishing rumours as facts, such as stating the day we were going to go into admin
[/quote]

Yep, I''m an old duffer Pricey[:D]

 

If you''re researching law then you''re probably more clued up than me. I just evaluate things from what I read. And from what I have read in other cases by the time administration is that close a bit of negotiation or a debt interest holiday wouldn''t be enough to keep the wolf from the door.

 

The law about virtual words is probably very tiresome. It would help if people respected a moral code and posted honestly. Especially in a forum such as this where we are all supposed to be on the same side. Good luck with that buddy.

[priceyrice 133]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]

[quote user="priceyrice"]Haha i don''t have superior knowledge. i can''t say i know all the ins and outs of going into administration, I assume your are a bit older than me and i don''t doubt you have good commerical awareness, you seem like a very clued up poster, but this is one of the few topics i can say i have a bit of insider info in, so i was just sharing.I realise your NoW comment is a bit tongue in cheek and i am not sure of the reasons for our claim against NoW, from what i remember it was settled outside of court wasn''t it? If not let me know and i will do a bit of research, anything to take my mind away from researching the law behind virtual worlds. But i am sure we had very good grounds for a claim, perhaps we were aware NoW gathered their info illegally or perhaps they knew certain information but put 2+2 together and got 5 and were a bit gun how in publishing rumours as facts, such as stating the day we were going to go into admin[/quote]

Yep, I''m an old duffer Pricey[:D]

 

If you''re researching law then you''re probably more clued up than me. I just evaluate things from what I read. And from what I have read in other cases by the time administration is that close a bit of negotiation or a debt interest holiday wouldn''t be enough to keep the wolf from the door.

 

The law about virtual words is probably very tiresome. It would help if people respected a moral code and posted honestly. Especially in a forum such as this where we are all supposed to be on the same side. Good luck with that buddy.

[/quote]Your right though, it doesn''t seem to make too much sense as to how we avoided Admin when so close, it is often an approach taken by clubs in real financial demise and it can be an easier route, short term, than fighting through financial problems, in a similar way you declaring yourself bankrupt could, but i am sure the long term impacts are grave.Your right, it is very tiresome, espicially after it has become your life for the past month, but i am very intrigued by the ways in which these new cyberspaces are regulated. Have to say this board does show all the fundamental characteristics that internet blogs and forums do, i am not surpirsed at the amount of arguments and aggresive exchanges take place and i do not expect it to change!

[Herman 11,135]

[quote user="The Gruffalo"]Did Mr Foulger not help keep the wolves from the door by putting substantial money in that summer? I thought some fans helped out too? I heard nothing about our majority shareholders delving deeper in to their own pockets though. Did you?[/quote]

Maybe they did,but kept it quiet.Not everyone likes blowing their own trumpet.Considering how much they have already pumped into the club what''s the betting they chucked a few more quids into the pot?!

[Tim Allman 1]

I think it was twitter that did it, and this theory was originally posted on WotB by Watford Canary very shortly after the story broke early on the Sunday morning.

The confusion arose as we use #ncfc hashtag although they are really #notts we see quite a few posts with #ncfc which relate to Notts County.

http://www.wrathofthebarclay.co.uk/interactive/board/message.php?pid=1239841

Apols if you have to cutnpaste the link.

[nutty nigel 7,902]

[quote user="The Gruffalo"]Did Mr Foulger not help keep the wolves from the door by putting substantial money in that summer? I thought some fans helped out too? I heard nothing about our majority shareholders delving deeper in to their own pockets though. Did you?[/quote]

I''m confused now. Are we talking about the summer of 2009, the autumn of 2009 or January 2010?

[The DicTaTor 0]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]

[quote user="priceyrice"]Haha i don''t have superior knowledge. i can''t say i know all the ins and outs of going into administration, I assume your are a bit older than me and i don''t doubt you have good commerical awareness, you seem like a very clued up poster, but this is one of the few topics i can say i have a bit of insider info in, so i was just sharing.I realise your NoW comment is a bit tongue in cheek and i am not sure of the reasons for our claim against NoW, from what i remember it was settled outside of court wasn''t it? If not let me know and i will do a bit of research, anything to take my mind away from researching the law behind virtual worlds. But i am sure we had very good grounds for a claim, perhaps we were aware NoW gathered their info illegally or perhaps they knew certain information but put 2+2 together and got 5 and were a bit gun how in publishing rumours as facts, such as stating the day we were going to go into admin[/quote]

Yep, I''m an old duffer Pricey[:D]

 

If you''re researching law then you''re probably more clued up than me. I just evaluate things from what I read. And from what I have read in other cases by the time administration is that close a bit of negotiation or a debt interest holiday wouldn''t be enough to keep the wolf from the door.

 

The law about virtual words is probably very tiresome. It would help if people respected a moral code and posted honestly. Especially in a forum such as this where we are all supposed to be on the same side. Good luck with that buddy.

[/quote]hmmm interesting...

[The Gruffalo 0]

[quote user="Herman "]

[quote user="The Gruffalo"]Did Mr Foulger not help keep the wolves from the door by putting substantial money in that summer? I thought some fans helped out too? I heard nothing about our majority shareholders delving deeper in to their own pockets though. Did you?[/quote]

Maybe they did,but kept it quiet.Not everyone likes blowing their own trumpet.Considering how much they have already pumped into the club what''s the betting they chucked a few more quids into the pot?!

[/quote]Was there any ecord of that in the following years accounts?

[The Gruffalo 0]

*record" even

[nutty nigel 7,902]

I wonder who would be sooo interested in whether Delia and MWJ put any more money into the club in 2009. [*-)]

 

I also wnder what backing Bowkett and McNally had when the re-negotiated with the lenders? Perhaps they backed themselves?

 

 

[Herman 11,135]

[quote user="The Gruffalo"][quote user="Herman "]

[quote user="The Gruffalo"]Did Mr Foulger not help keep the wolves from the door by putting substantial money in that summer? I thought some fans helped out too? I heard nothing about our majority shareholders delving deeper in to their own pockets though. Did you?[/quote]

Maybe they did,but kept it quiet.Not everyone likes blowing their own trumpet.Considering how much they have already pumped into the club what''s the betting they chucked a few more quids into the pot?!

[/quote]

Was there any ecord of that in the following years accounts?
[/quote]

Don''t know mate.The accounts could be written in pidgin English as far as i am concerned.Although there is a small note on a 300k bank guarantee if that means anything to you?!I am sure someone can clear that up.