Did Norwich try hard enough to keep Lambert?

[Herman 9,698]

I''m sure that the club had to pay off the debt. Anybody have the full facts?

[PurpleCanary 5,553]

[quote user="Herman "]I''m sure that the club had to pay off the debt. Anybody have the full facts?[/quote]Oh Herman! Surely you understand we are not in a universe where facts matter!

[whoareyou? 0]

The agreed deal with Axa(? i think it was) was that the loan would be repaid in full early if we reached the Premier League before the end of the agreement.

[A Load of Squit 5,111]

[quote] user="whoareyou?"]The agreed deal with Axa(? i think it was) was that the loan would be repaid in full early if we reached the Premier League before the end of the agreement.[/quote]

We had to complete 2 season in the Prem then the loans had to be repaid. It was common knowledge at the time, Lambert would have been aware of this.

[Cumbria Canary 0]

You need to get out more. Do your homework, go for a run, play a game of squash, do some DIY whatever. We really don''t need any pointless posts about PL. He''s history, gone, never to come back. And, oh, his team lost 5-0 today to Arsenal.

[havemyhowsonit 0]

How has he not been sacked by villa yet?

Get him back with Culverhouse and karsa. Bring back the good times!

[KoromaCrab 0]

just had a look at the Aston Villa Forum with a 1447 page thread about Paul Lambert.

"This man has turned one of the proudest clubs in football into a laughing stock.

He should be shot let alone sacked."

Was one quote I found.

"No matter how much some might try to shift the blame away from Lambert it is his fault and his fault alone that we find ourselves having not won or scored for 6 games

He has to go and very soon."

Is another.

[JF 694]

Lol, those Villa fans deserve everything they at getting. Chanting his name whilst he was still out manager. About time they were relegated, they have flirted with it often enough now.

[Newton 0]

Herman wrote the following post at 01/02/2015 5:43 PM:

I''m sure that the club had to pay off the debt. Anybody have the full facts?

Herman r u & Purple naive enough to think that a business with an income of £90M, assets worth a bomb (ground in City Center with large \Car Park & Training Ground on edge of City with up-teen acres could not renegotiate debts of £15M with another lender - they would have been queuing up to take that small debt on board

The pair of you get your heads out of the clouds (if thats where it is)& get real

The majority Shareholders wanted the debt cleared asap to protect there interests - not for footballing reasons

[Making Plans 936]

[quote user="JF"]Lol, those Villa fans deserve everything they at getting. Chanting his name whilst he was still out manager. About time they were relegated, they have flirted with it often enough now.[/quote]Be patient - what goes around comes around

[Jack Flash 13]

Just had a look KC and at post number 28,996 on that thread is this one "The high-line strategy was utter madness. Lambert has time and time again proven to be tactically clueless".  And yet on here he is still referred to as the Messiah. Bizarre.

[gitto 0]

When someone grassed Lambert up to his wife there was no way back. And you can call me a Billy Bullsh**** but that did happen.

Any guesses who that could''ve been? Mack the Knife? After all the more successful the club the more money needed to sustain the success and the less money for the blue chip stockbrokers and Big business Chairmen type at the top to cream off. Not that Im cynical at all you understand

[nutty nigel 7,506]

But who were the certain parties from your original post who told him his services were not required? This grassing up wasn''t mentioned on that.

[KoromaCrab 0]

What is this thing about Lambert being grassed up to his wife?

[whoareyou? 0]

[quote user="A Load of Squit"][quote] user="whoareyou?"]The agreed deal with Axa(? i think it was) was that the loan would be repaid in full early if we reached the Premier League before the end of the agreement.[/quote]

We had to complete 2 season in the Prem then the loans had to be repaid. It was common knowledge at the time, Lambert would have been aware of this.

[/quote]The accounts say otherwise. The loan to Axa was moved to being due within one year in 2010 because the agreement was that we could defer repayments for a year on the proviso that if we got promoted to the Premier League the debt would be repaid in full at the end of that first season.

[Newton 0]

That may have been the agreement with Axa but why did the Board not renogotiate the loan with another lender ?

 

The amounts involved were small compared to our income and assets ?

 

Why do we blindly accept everything the Owners throw at us without question ?

[TCCANARY 263]

[quote] user="whoareyou?"][quote user="A Load of Squit"][quote] user="whoareyou?"]The agreed deal with Axa(? i think it was) was that the loan would be repaid in full early if we reached the Premier League before the end of the agreement.
[/quote]


We had to complete 2 season in the Prem then the loans had to be repaid. It was common knowledge at the time, Lambert would have been aware of this.



[/quote]

The accounts say otherwise. The loan to Axa was moved to being due within one year in 2010 because the agreement was that we could defer repayments for a year on the proviso that if we got promoted to the Premier League the debt would be repaid in full at the end of that first season.
[/quote]

 

Apologies, it must have been during the AGM of the second year in the Premier League that it was announced that we''d paid the external debt, I''m getting confused with that statement that after completing two years in the Premier League the ground expansion was going to be looked at.

 

 

[Newton 0]

TC for some reason the Boards priority changed from developing the ground to paying off all external debt - we were never told the reason why

 

For others to claim we had agreed with Axa that we would clear the debt by this time is fine but we never bothered to attempt to renegotiate the facilitites elsewhere

[TCCANARY 263]

[quote user="Newton"]

TC for some reason the Boards priority changed from developing the ground to paying off all external debt - we were never told the reason why

 

For others to claim we had agreed with Axa that we would clear the debt by this time is fine but we never bothered to attempt to renegotiate the facilitites elsewhere

[/quote]

 

Developing the ground was put off because no-one could come up with an idea where the season ticket holders in the City Stand would go when the development work was taking place. It was a completely different issue.

 

 

[PurpleCanary 5,553]

[quote user="TCCANARY"]

[quote] user="whoareyou?"][quote user="A Load of Squit"][quote] user="whoareyou?"]The agreed deal with Axa(? i think it was) was that the loan would be repaid in full early if we reached the Premier League before the end of the agreement.[/quote]

We had to complete 2 season in the Prem then the loans had to be repaid. It was common knowledge at the time, Lambert would have been aware of this.

[/quote]The accounts say otherwise. The loan to Axa was moved to being due within one year in 2010 because the agreement was that we could defer repayments for a year on the proviso that if we got promoted to the Premier League the debt would be repaid in full at the end of that first season.[/quote]

 

Apologies, it must have been during the AGM of the second year in the Premier League that it was announced that we''d paid the external debt, I''m getting confused with that statement that after completing two years in the Premier League the ground expansion was going to be looked at.

 

 

[/quote]The money we owed to Axa (which was our main debt) was to have been repaid by May 2018. Under the financial restructuring signed in November 2010, when we had only just come up from League One, that date was put back to May 2022.However it later transpired there was a Premier League clause, pushing the date sharply forward, and not just forward from 2022 but even forward from the original date of 2018.If we got to the PL and only stayed one season we would have to pay Axa by May 2016, but if we stayed up into a second season, as we did, then May 2013 was the repayment date.Our other debt, to Bank of Scotland, had to be repaid by October 2013.

[Newton 0]

Purple amounts were small given our assets & turnover - why did the Board not renegotiate elsewhere and invest in the squad ?

[whoareyou? 0]

[quote user="Newton"]Purple amounts were small given our assets & turnover - why did the Board not renegotiate elsewhere and invest in the squad ?[/quote]Because we were in the middle of the worst world recession for 70 years. Banks were not interested in lending money to businesses ( and especially football clubs) even with assets as collateral.

[Lessingham Canary 99]

We need to let the whole Lambert thing go, Messiah ? or just right place at right time ?. There is a saying that luck is what happens when preparation meets opportunity, we had the opportunity and he was prepared, came in and got some momentum into a club in turmoil.

Lots happened and we may never know the whole story, but it does not matter, not one bit, I believe Lambert felt he had done all he could with that group of players and the budget available, he wanted a bigger club and bigger spend and nothing was going to stop that from happening.

So let it go, and lets look to the future and forget all the politics surrounding him and the board.

[PurpleCanary 5,553]

[quote user="whoareyou"][quote user="Newton"]Purple amounts were small given our assets & turnover - why did the Board not renegotiate elsewhere and invest in the squad ?[/quote]Because we were in the middle of the worst world recession for 70 years. Banks were not interested in lending money to businesses ( and especially football clubs) even with assets as collateral.[/quote]The speed with which Axa forced us to pay up as soon as we came into some money emphasises that point. Far from being allowed more time by the restructuring, we ended up having to pay the money back five years ahead of the old date of 2018. Football debt in particular had become very unpopular.

[KoromaCrab 0]

What are they called the Stowmarket 2?

[nutty nigel 7,506]

Because they live in Stowmarket?

Now its my turn....

Why are they called the Devious Duo?

[Herman 9,698]

Because there''s two of ''em?

[nutty nigel 7,506]

Sometimes there''s just the cook.....

And her cohorts ;)

[KoromaCrab 0]

hah, I was trying to find too much into the name ''stow market 2''. I was thinking it was general name for a cult

[nutty nigel 7,506]

I''ve heard ''em called a couple of cults too...

;)