Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
ricardo

Ricardo's report AGM 2014

Recommended Posts

It was the usual good attendance tonight with perhaps even a few more than last year. The evening began with questions on the Annual Report and election of officers. The inevitable question on "what does Stephen Fry do" was first in the list and we were told about his contribution re his contacts and his celebrity status in the entertainment business and his 8 million twitter followers which gave us tremendous reach in several commercial aspects re kit sales and videos etc. Stephen was re-elected as was McNally, albeit with one or two nay sayers.Bowkett then gave us his usual thorough run through on the financial figures. Income last year was £95.5 million but relegation means that we will be looking at £40 million less this year. He said the reason we made a £6.7 million profit last year was mainly due to bonuses that went unpaid due to our relegation and that this year we would be looking to break even. His remarks about the future were that "its not looking too rosey" but costs were being reduced by £33.4 million although at some stage we would need a £3.6 million overdraft in order to manage cash flow. On the plus side Bowkett revealed that all players were on a 40% reduction and that McNally had insisted on this for every player that we had signed last year.McNally then gave us his usual report on the clubs mission statement which to paraphrase is "all profits to be ploughed back into football",All players out of contract had been resigned so nobody can leave except for a fee and that unlike many other clubs that have been relegated we did not have to sell anyone against our wishes.Apparently at the end of last season they sat down and produced a new vision for the club because so many people had been disillusioned with the negative style that Hughton had played. We were now going to play the "Norwich way", which means play to win in an attractive attacking style and entertainment would be at the forefront of the clubs approach. They would also continue to invest in top class facilities for players and fans.Whilst we could not do anything about the loss of the TV income we could expand other areas and the plan was to double our controlled income. This means catering, retail,commercial etc.We then watched a short film about "the Sporting Light Appeal",narrated by Stephen Fry showing the good work the club does in the community for disabled and disadvantaged people. It was notable how very involved the players and staff are in this project, the players have given 141 hrs of their time in visits to hospitals etc. Now Ricardo can be a cynical old sod but I have to say that is was moving to watch and it gives me a sense of pride that my club is leading the way in this venture. It''s something we should all be very proud to support.Bowkett next apologised for the mess last season and admitted something that many of us thought at the time, they thought Hughton would keep us up. He noted several games where if just one had been different we would have been ok. (beating WBA OR Hull or Villa) and also Sunderlands remarkable finish.The questions began with one about the seats Radio Norfolk were vacating and then onto the fair play rules. The first doesn''t affect me and the second won''t affect us.Inevitably the timing of the sacking of Hughton came up and we got the usual answers which amounted to.........nobody suitable was available when we wanted them and we thought he would keep us up anyway.Then there were questions about Phelan, he was coming in a coaching role as a direct replacement for Robson. We also heard that the reason we lost Joe Royle was because of his wifes illness. This was followed by a bit of argee-bargee regarding why nobody was appointed sooner.Someone then commented that he didn''t think the players were busting a gut because they had had a wage cut but Adams dismissed this and said he didn''t see it in training. McNally chimed in saying that six or seven players had offers to go to Prem clubs but all wanted to stay and help the club gain promotion.There were then a few more complaints about the way we let things go at Forest and various opinions were offered. Neil Adams gave all his replies in a frank and courteous manner and didn''t shirk any of the tough questions although not everyone on the floor agreed with them.Someone thought the squad was too big, Adams didn''t. Someone thought Redmond didn''t score enough, Adams agreed and said he had spoken to Nathan today and was encouraging him to come infield more when the ball was crossed from the opposite wing. Another questioner thought we lacked a leader like Grant Holt. Adams said that to an extent he thought this was true and that some of his players are too quiet.There was then a bit about Bassong and Neil said that he didn''t play him at Fulham last year because he wasn''t playing well enough and that during the summer break he didn''t feel that Seb''s heart was fully committed to the cause. On the question of loaning him to a rival he said you can''t chose where to send him and that otherwise we would be paying him big money not to play.At the end we heard that Ryan Bennett is back in training and hopefully available for selection after an under 21 game. Also there will be money in January should we need to buy.If I think of anything else I will post it later.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Cumbria Canary"]Thanks for taking the trouble, as always, to post a report for those of us who weren''t able to be there. Lets hope we can kick on when Phelan arrives tomorrow. [/quote]Bowkett said tonight that the target is still automatic promotion. They seem convinced that it will come right so I reckon Adams has until Xmas at the very least.And barring some disaster, the whole season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks Ricardo. An interesting read. Responses as could be predicted!

As you said last week Phelan''s appointment will have taken the sting out of it. I recall your phraseology was a bit more graphic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Sussexyellow"]Thanks Ricardo. An interesting read. Responses as could be predicted!

As you said last week Phelan''s appointment will have taken the sting out of it. I recall your phraseology was a bit more graphic.[/quote]LOL indeed.[:D]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks Ricardo. [Y]Sounds like nutty has got your card marked.......should be seeing you in the Nelson pretty soon then. [;)]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Ricardo.

Was there really not one single question relating to the decision to appoint Adams an/or his current performance in the job?

If so I find that amazing and it sounds as though he has succeeded in passing the buck onto the players for our current performance levels which worries me if he is still here come the january transfer window.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Jim Smith"]Thanks Ricardo.

Was there really not one single question relating to the decision to appoint Adams an/or his current performance in the job?

If so I find that amazing and it sounds as though he has succeeded in passing the buck onto the players for our current performance levels which worries me if he is still here come the january transfer window.[/quote]No Jim, there seemed to be more anger aimed at the lack of action over sacking Chris Hughton and our relegation than at the current situation.There was a low level of unrest from the start because when the board take their seats there is usually some applause but none this time. Several of the questions were thinly veiled digs at team selection and the fragility of our defence but I can''t say that either the Board or Neil Adams came under any concerted pressure from the floor. My take on all this is that anyone hoping for an early removal of the manager may have a longer wait than they anticipate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="ricardo"][quote user="Jim Smith"]Thanks Ricardo.

Was there really not one single question relating to the decision to appoint Adams an/or his current performance in the job?

If so I find that amazing and it sounds as though he has succeeded in passing the buck onto the players for our current performance levels which worries me if he is still here come the january transfer window.[/quote]No Jim, there seemed to be more anger aimed at the lack of action over sacking Chris Hughton and our relegation than at the current situation.There was a low level of unrest from the start because when the board take their seats there is usually some applause but none this time. Several of the questions were thinly veiled digs at team selection and the fragility of our defence but I can''t say that either the Board or Neil Adams came under any concerted pressure from the floor. My take on all this is that anyone hoping for an early removal of the manager may have a longer wait than they anticipate. [/quote]

Having read the reports the line I cling to is "and at the earliest opportunity means this season." Surely means Adams has little or no wriggle room now if there is not a relatively immediate upturn in results and performances. I really feel they need to sort it before January one way or another because (i) if we continue to struggle we may have too much of a mountain to climb and (ii) he could do quite a bit of damage if allowed to offload/recruit players in a desperate bid to save his own job.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Very fair report. An incredible turnout which I would put at well in excess of 300. As expected you could sense there was a strong feeling of dissatisfaction with the current team performance but I believe not one word was mentioned re "scouring the continent for the new manager". I did predict the reticent Norfolk audience would not ruffle many feathers.

Being far more cynical than Ricardo I thought the community video showed the Club in a good light but was partly included to take the heat out of difficult questions. Maybe I am more cynical than I thought I was. At least I had the satisfaction of voting against Stephen Fry as I was far from convinced that nobody was aware of his whereabouts and McNally''s defence did not get me excited.

The question raised re lack of motivation because of the 40% pay cut. I noticed the Chairman nodding in agreement but quite rightly Neil stood by his players.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="ricardo"][quote user="Jim Smith"]Thanks Ricardo.

Was there really not one single question relating to the decision to appoint Adams an/or his current performance in the job?

If so I find that amazing and it sounds as though he has succeeded in passing the buck onto the players for our current performance levels which worries me if he is still here come the january transfer window.[/quote]No Jim, there seemed to be more anger aimed at the lack of action over sacking Chris Hughton and our relegation than at the current situation.[/quote]

I bet the board lapped that up.  Easy to talk about something that''s in the past and long gone than deal with present day realities.  Disappointed if  something more wasn''t said about  Adam''s performance to date.  Why is that?  Because he was in the room?  Surely the present situation is what matters more than what happened with Hughton? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="lake district canary"][quote user="ricardo"][quote user="Jim Smith"]Thanks Ricardo.

Was there really not one single question relating to the decision to appoint Adams an/or his current performance in the job?

If so I find that amazing and it sounds as though he has succeeded in passing the buck onto the players for our current performance levels which worries me if he is still here come the january transfer window.[/quote]No Jim, there seemed to be more anger aimed at the lack of action over sacking Chris Hughton and our relegation than at the current situation.[/quote]

I bet the board lapped that up.  Easy to talk about something that''s in the past and long gone than deal with present day realities.  Disappointed if  something more wasn''t said about  Adam''s performance to date.  Why is that?  Because he was in the room?  Surely the present situation is what matters more than what happened with Hughton? 

[/quote]
 There was plenty of chat about our current team performances, specific games were talked about and dissected,  tactics , individual performances  Redmond) lack of usage of the new centre backs,  no leaders on the field and more.
Would you have stood up and questioned Adams specifically about his own performance in front of 300 people face to face Lake District Canary?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="cityangel"][quote user="lake district canary"][quote user="ricardo"][quote user="Jim Smith"]Thanks Ricardo.

Was there really not one single question relating to the decision to appoint Adams an/or his current performance in the job?

If so I find that amazing and it sounds as though he has succeeded in passing the buck onto the players for our current performance levels which worries me if he is still here come the january transfer window.[/quote]No Jim, there seemed to be more anger aimed at the lack of action over sacking Chris Hughton and our relegation than at the current situation.[/quote]

I bet the board lapped that up.  Easy to talk about something that''s in the past and long gone than deal with present day realities.  Disappointed if  something more wasn''t said about  Adam''s performance to date.  Why is that?  Because he was in the room?  Surely the present situation is what matters more than what happened with Hughton? 

[/quote]
 There was plenty of chat about our current team performances, specific games were talked about and dissected,  tactics , individual performances  Redmond) lack of usage of the new centre backs,  no leaders on the field and more.
Would you have stood up and questioned Adams specifically about his own performance in front of 300 people face to face Lake District Canary?
[/quote][:D]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="cityangel"][quote user="lake district canary"][quote user="ricardo"][quote user="Jim Smith"]Thanks Ricardo.

Was there really not one single question relating to the decision to appoint Adams an/or his current performance in the job?

If so I find that amazing and it sounds as though he has succeeded in passing the buck onto the players for our current performance levels which worries me if he is still here come the january transfer window.[/quote]No Jim, there seemed to be more anger aimed at the lack of action over sacking Chris Hughton and our relegation than at the current situation.[/quote]I bet the board lapped that up.  Easy to talk about something that''s in the past and long gone than deal with present day realities.  Disappointed if  something more wasn''t said about  Adam''s performance to date.  Why is that?  Because he was in the room?  Surely the present situation is what matters more than what happened with Hughton?  [/quote]
 There was plenty of chat about our current team performances, specific games were talked about and dissected,  tactics , individual performances  Redmond) lack of usage of the new centre backs,  no leaders on the field and more.
Would you have stood up and questioned Adams specifically about his own performance in front of 300 people face to face Lake District Canary?
[/quote]

That was kind of my point.  People are too nice - or scared to say things face up. But it was an opportunity to air views to the horse''s mouth - whether they did that forcefully or not only those that went can tell. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Having looked at the average of the attendee in the edp photo of the meeting, i doubt many of them still had their marbles let alone be able to confront the board.

Regretably another opportunity wasted.

Share this post


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

Having looked at the average of the attendee in the edp photo of the meeting, i doubt many of them still had their marbles let alone be able to confront the board.

Regretably another opportunity wasted.

[/quote]
There''s 12 people in that picture and must have been well over 300 there last night and a complete range of ages.

Share this post


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

Having looked at the average of the attendee in the edp photo of the meeting, i doubt many of them still had their marbles let alone be able to confront the board.

Regretably another opportunity wasted.

[/quote]What average? Test match batting average?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="lake district canary"]

That was kind of my point.  People are too nice - or scared to say things face up. But it was an opportunity to air views to the horse''s mouth - whether they did that forcefully or not only those that went can tell. [/quote]
Not sure its people being too nice or scared, thinks it''s more a matter of being respectful or a bit shy in front of a large audience. Lots of people were queuing up to chat to Neil afterwards so I''m sure they would have been voicing their opinions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="cityangel"][quote user="John thaw"]

Having looked at the average of the attendee in the edp photo of the meeting, i doubt many of them still had their marbles let alone be able to confront the board.

Regretably another opportunity wasted.[/quote]

There''s 12 people in that picture and must have been well over 300 there last night and a complete range of ages.
[/quote]
Norwich City Football Club Annual general meeting to discuss the annual report 2014 at Carrow Road. Photo: Steve AdamsLooks like a good cross section of the support to me, average age 63..........Seriously, though,  McNally is a shrewd operator at these kinds of events.  It would take quite something for  open revolt to be allowed to  show its head, something like appointing a manager with no experience then keeping that manager when things are going wrong.....oh wait a minute.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks as usual to ricardo for the report and follow-up posts. The view

that Adams seems safe until Christmas looks valid. A few observations.1)

The non-attendance of Stephen Fry really is a red herring. And, as Jim

Smith pointed out, it was an odd sense of priorities that had fans being

more concerned by that than by the appointment of the manager. Fry,

unlike most of the other amateur directors, has to work for a living,

works nights and often works abroad, at times not of his choosing. It is

hardly a surprise he often cannot attend. The AGM is

essentially a bit of PR, and in any event the main speakers are the

chairman and the three professionals - the CEO the finance director and

the manager. How often recently, for example, has Stephan Phillips said

anything notable, or even Michael Foulger? If Fry is not pulling

his weight at board meetings or by way of his massive fanbase that is

another matter, but no-one here has ever shown that to be the case.2)

McNally''s mea culpa that relegation was his "biggest failure in 32

years of work" ought - although it won''t -  to silence that small band

who, without ever providing the slightest bit of evidence, assert that

there must have been some kind of boardroom split over Hughton last

season, with Smith and Jones wanting him kept on and overruling the

chairman and the CEO. Of course McNally would never go public

about a rift if there had been one, but to go out of his way to tie

himself so personally to relegation like that is hardly the action of a

man who feels deep down he wasn''t to blame. Nor did the very united

front he and Smith and Jones presented in that Radio Norfolk interview

suggest there had been any serious dissent around the boardroom table,

and the same applies to Bowkett''s comments last night that they all

thought Hughton would - presumably just - keep us up.3) Tilly''s

revelation about doubling controlled income in three years is

interesting. Assuming no increase in capacity then, apart from ticket

sales, the main sources of income are catering and commercial. In the

four years from 2009-10 to 2013-14 catering and commercial income,

despite being in the Premier League for three seasons, did not double.

It went from £7.3m to £13.2m. Nor did ticket sales double; they went

from £6.9m to £11.3m. Overall, controlled income went from £14.2m to

£24.5m, under beneficial circumstances. There are other ways of

boosting income; concerts have been tried in the past with, I believe,

mixed results. But as things stand, a doubling in three years looks a

tough ask.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="lake district canary"][quote user="cityangel"][quote user="John thaw"]

Having looked at the average of the attendee in the edp photo of the meeting, i doubt many of them still had their marbles let alone be able to confront the board.

Regretably another opportunity wasted.[/quote]

There''s 12 people in that picture and must have been well over 300 there last night and a complete range of ages.
[/quote]

Norwich City Football Club Annual general meeting to discuss the annual report 2014 at Carrow Road. Photo: Steve AdamsLooks like a good cross section of the support to me, average age 63..........Seriously, though,  McNally is a shrewd operator at these kinds of events.  It would take quite something for  open revolt to be allowed to  show its head, something like appointing a manager with no experience then keeping that manager when things are going wrong.....oh wait a minute.....

[/quote]

 

Well there''s a couple of supporters there that I know well who go to every game, home and away. And if I''m not mistaken Mr Norwich City of 1947 is hiding behind them.....

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="PurpleCanary"]3) Tilly''s

revelation about doubling controlled income in three years is

interesting. Assuming no increase in capacity then, apart from ticket

sales, the main sources of income are catering and commercial. In the

four years from 2009-10 to 2013-14 catering and commercial income,

despite being in the Premier League for three seasons, did not double.

It went from £7.3m to £13.2m. Nor did ticket sales double; they went

from £6.9m to £11.3m. Overall, controlled income went from £14.2m to

£24.5m, under beneficial circumstances. There are other ways of

boosting income; concerts have been tried in the past with, I believe,

mixed results. But as things stand, a doubling in three years looks a

tough ask.
[/quote]Purps. I''m assuming ''controlled income'' is turnover minus TV money. Like you, I can''t see how they can increase this much let alone double it in three years, especially if we remain in this division. This recent Football League report shows that season ticket prices are actually falling so any increase there is highly unlikely.Another thing I''m struggling with is Bowkett''s comment "at some stage we would need a £3.6 million overdraft in order to manage cash flow". Why wouldn''t we just sell a player rather than borrow from the bank? With the size of our squad and the availability of loan players from the Prem for most of the season, this doesn''t seem to make much sense.

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...