Over the years I’ve been to a fair few Norwich City AGMs – the annual opportunity for shareholders to gather to approve the latest set of accounts.
Normally, they’re quite staid affairs, with the formal business typically taking less than 20 minutes, often followed by brief presentations, by various people within the Club’s hierarchy, and always followed by a Q&A session between shareholders and Board members.
This year, however, was different. Very different.
For starters, there’s the refreshed look to the accounts, with lots of added commentary and photos, certainly all going well beyond any legal requirements – all befitting of a Club that champions itself as part of the wider community, with an emphasis upon supporter engagement, openness, and transparency.
All the feedback I’d seen was overwhelmingly positive.
Then there was the “yesterday’s news” story, breaking on Thursday morning, namely that none of the local media were going to be present on the night.
Of course, the AGM is for shareholders, so there’s no automatic entitlement for them to be present, that’s a given. Nevertheless, the Club has nearly 7,000 shareholders, just over 200 of whom were present on the night. The remote access option, a leftover from the pandemic, still allows access to those unable to attend, although its take-up rate is far from clear.
Then, of course, there are the thousands of fans who’re not shareholders – the vast majority. And, while for many it’s just about the football, there’s still a significant number who take more than a passing interest in the Club’s finances.
These fans, who are equally important stakeholders in the Club, have always been to obtain information from various sources; whether that’s from traditional newspapers, local radio and TV, or via numerous sources online.
For sure, those unable to attend can still refer to the Club-produced content, but this begs the wider questions of the true extent of scrutiny, openness, and transparency. And, whatever happened to the mantra, “ignore the noise?”
In this context, the backstory, most of which will probably never be told, becomes almost irrelevant – but if you exclude a significant portion of your stakeholders, the fans, you do so at your peril. That’s the direct consequence of the current situation.
As would be expected, the stand-off with the local media was revisited on two or three occasions in the subsequent Q&A and the response was that some of the content was still very personal.
To be honest, there seems no point in referring to the latest indiscretion, as to do so would simply amplify a headline, which, in reality, actually seems to have got very little traction online.
Personally, I’m not sure if shareholders were overly content with the responses given on this particular issue. Ultimately, it’s an unedifying mess, a sideshow, a distraction, which really needs to be resolved once and for all.
Of course, that’s going to take willingness on both sides and I’m not holding my breath that it’s going to be anytime soon.
As for the main event of the night, the whole board was present, including Mark Attanasio, who had traveled across from the States, with his family and some of his team.
One shareholder voiced concerns about the possibility of having to repay his £10m investment in seven years’ time.
Mark’s response was positive. He was keen to emphasise that he, and his group, did not intend to do anything which would cause the Club financial distress. Quite the opposite, in fact, as they were viewing this as a long-term investment opportunity and intent on looking to enhance the club going forwards.
Of course, only time will tell if this actually happens, but there seemed no reason for immediate concern – a view that seemed to be shared by many of those present.
As for the actual formal business of the night, which preceded the Q&A, all five ordinary resolutions, requiring just a simple majority to be passed, were approved (despite a handful of objections to each resolution, either via proxy votes submitted in advance, or by a show of hands) in less than ten minutes.
The accounts were approved, and so was the reappointment as directors of Zoe Ward, Delia Smith, and Michael Foulger, together with the auditors, MHA MacIntyre Hudson LLP.
As AGMs go, this was probably the most interesting in recent years. The Q&A lasted for well over an hour, with most responses generally well received.
Obviously, how the Attanasio role plays out from here, will be the most important factor. For the moment,
I’m encouraged, but time will tell.
I think that the EDP/EEN/PinkUn (or whatever collective noun you prefer) have been very thoughtless, stupid burning years of hard earned trust for a few splashy headlines. It’s a shame, but only they can rebuild that trust…
There seems to be a presumption that this was all the result of seeing the US team at the Spurs game. In fact the media already knew about it and were working on it. If the Club really didn’t want it to go public, arguably they should have been more discreet on the day of the game.
Hi Gary – a very useful read and thank you.
I thought this was less to do with Mark Attanasio and more with a new EDP/EEN editor coming in and *making his mark* with that ridiculous headline questioning if Stuart Webber even wanted his job.
That was nothing to do with Paddy and crew at all as I understand it although it might have served as a trigger for other issues reaching the surface.
I think we have to bear in mind that the EDP/EEN are struggling too in this modern jurnalistic climate as well and sometimes make rash decisions as a result.
It’s easily done. I’ve got at least half a dozen T-shirts to prove it!
I’m not sure it was that ridiculous. Webber bad just done an incredibly tone deaf interview and at that point was out of contract in the coming summer..
Fair point Dave – I probably should have descibed it as *unnecessarily provocative*, which would have been more accurate.
I think the local press has let the community down by being very light on the club’s management and should be hammering them with every printed issue. They treat the supporters with contempt, but in the end the main supporters get what they deserve. While they keep opening their wallets and forking out their hard-earned cash on season tickets nothing will change, because that is all Delia and co are interested in. I don’t think any other club’s set of supporters would have put up with the S!!!t slung at the fans by their club’s owners. But then again too many small-minded “Happy Clappers”.
Another point I found interesting was the re-appointment of Foulger as a director, I thought he wanted out and sold his interest to the yank? and his investment we are told is ten million- bloody small change in context, real investment of ten times that amount as starters is needed and you won’t get that from Attanasio just ask the supporters of his ” Brewers ” who are crying out for him to invest, and if he ever takes control at Norwich it’ll be “Same Old- Same Old” nothing will change, he’s made from the same mould as the cook
It’s a shame but really can’t blame the club if they’ve been wronged by local media. There’s too much fake news and click bait available everywhere, and too much of it paint our club in a negative light at the first opportunity. Yes we’re in a bit of a transition after a second disasterous sitting at the top table, on more fronts that just the football, but hey we all make mistakes right? Attanasio can only be a good thing and one which has not occurred since the 90’s give it time and who knows we might make it further than the starter course at the top table soon😉
Were the Club actually wronged, though? Awful headlines, yes, but the Club doesn’t control the media and that’s the bigger issue, in my opinion.
Totally with you on this one Gary. Too many organisations look upon the press as their mouthpiece rather than their actual purpose which is to impartially inform the public.
Thank god they don’t Gary !!!
Good summary. My take home thoughts from the AGM were:
1 Our new investor mentioned that his group were 1 of 4 who the Board spoke to. This suggests an active search for new investment.
2 The general feeling is that shareholders value seeing the club link with the local press. This might not be so important for younger fans but it mattered to that demographic.
3 I don’t think mushroomgate is the real reason for the fall out. It was clear from their reactions to a direct question, that the owners have a dislike of Archant and maybe for good personal reasons but this is not a new issue
4 Some of the questions touched on the accounts, these points were well answered but the overall picture is concerning especially if we fail to win promotion. Stuart Webber mentioned Brighton which is an excellent comparison as a similar size outfit from a 1 club county. They lose £30m a year in the PL. The owner is happy to support that as he knows that they would lose £30m a year maintaining a Championship side. This is a football wide issue but how will we bridge that gap
5 Tom Smith did a good job chairing the meeting
All fair points, John and I thought that Tom’s response to that anonymous question was superb.
For those who are interested, the Club has put a report about last night on its website.
Unlike in previous years, there was no reference made on the night to providing a report on the Q&A. Whether that was merely an oversight, and one will follow, time will tell.
Thanks for the information, Gary.
I feel that the directors have thrown their toys out of their prams about a real, or imagined, breaking of trust by some of the local media. I don’t know who is right or wrong about this, but I do feel that historically if senior management of a football club criticises its own fans and pulls up the drawbridge to stop accountability from the local press, it doesn’t end well for them.
This must be a strange scenario for Mark Attanasio. American sports clubs seem to value and respect and value their media relationships in a way that has never happened here, but looked like it might in Webber’s early days.
I’m really glad you found encouragement in the potential of M.A’s role-as you said, time will tell.
Don, I’m not sure just how much of this is really down to the directors, to be honest, rather certain members of the executive team. Just a personal opinion, obviously.
As you say Gary, the local media see the potential American investors at the Spurs game, what were they meant to do?
The board/executive have, as Don said, thrown their toys out of the pram.
And don’t they just love to keep us fans in the dark.
So much for the ” New openness”
I don’t know the ins and outs of what’s happening behind the scenes but I have noticed that this season, for the first time that, in my local pub, usually packed, pre- match and post match, the general chat is NOT about football anymore. Weird.
I think that’s a wider football issue, to be honest. NCFC fans have experienced the lows of two awful Premier League seasons and the PL seems to be getting more detached from the rest of football.
I’m not happy of how Norwich City are treating the local media. Their collective attitude is one of petulance.
If they don’t like what is written about them or said about them – tough. They’ve had a relatively easy ride under the circumstances over the years.
Maybe the local media should boycott the club full stop, other than stating the result as basic fact? No Archant, No BBC East and so forth. I don’t think any of these organisations would be brave enough to consider this, but I cannot see things being resolved in an objective manner, so the media appear to be content to be given any crumbs available.
I’ve supported Norwich City all my life, but I have to say they are not a very likeable club right now.
Hey Gary,
Fascinating article. The major problem for me, living in Australia, is that I am totally out of the loop concerning the whole story.
Are you aware of a reasonably balanced synopsis of what is happening?
We all know that off-field matters can hurt a club on-field. I for one would like to understand the story better.
Am I the only one confused by the Michael Foulger situation??
I thought he had sold out to Attanasio, so how come he is re-elected to the board?
And just how much net investment have Delia and Michael made since they’ve been “in charge”??
Overall, probably not as much as many season ticket holders I suspect!
O T B C
Hello John,
I made a comment along the same lines earlier @ 2.32pm in this segment you might find interesting. I think ” Not much ” might answer your question a more pertinent question might be ” how much ” have they taken out.
For those asking about Michael Foulger, it’s been previously announced that he will remain in the board until the end of the season so as to help with the transition. So, as the term for which he’d been elected ended at the AGM, he needed to be re-elected.
Gary’s report of the meeting is very fair and accurate: the accounts that we’ve already seen we’re passed and the five motions we already knew about were also passed (as we knew they would be).
Does anyone really, honestly, feel disenfranchised because the local reporters weren’t there to see what we knew would happen happen?
As the “Where’s the money gorn?” comments every year demonstrate, a huge swathe of supporters don’t make any effort to read about or understand the accounts — and for those of us who do, they were published weeks ago.
What happened to the “look at our great owners having a pint with fans before the match”, “we do things differently” Mick Dennis?
Replaced by the “the club doesn’t need to talk to any press at all” Mick Dennis, it appears.
Remind us how you made your name again?
The press should have been there and always should be there. Period.
Mick;
I didn’t ask in any way, shape or form “where has the money gorn??”.
I have never, and will never, suspect that the “custodians of the club” have taken any monies out of the club.
What I do find curious however, is that it seems any/all of any loans they have made to the club have been re-paid…..so, what exactly have they put in?
Prior to this season, I had been contributing around 1k per season for 2 season tickets…over a period of around 25 consecutive seasons. Prior to that, ad-hoc attendance from the mid-60’s when it was allowed, and around 10 seasons of ST’s 70’s to 80’s.
Over all that time my total outlay/expenses on tickets alone must be north of £35k…., not to mention at least 1 shirt per season, plus odds and ends for children and grandchildren.
I no longer go, as I found the “entertainment” on the pitch, but more particularly, the attitude of the club in the latter part of last season nothing short of laughable!
NCFC is my club; always has been; always will be….but for now, given what I’ve contributed compared to those at the top, I’ve had enough.
They just don’t care for the fans anymore.
O T B C
There’s an “opportunity cost” of giving interest free loans, as the majority shareholders have done, repeatedly, whenever there’s been a need to do so.
The reported ten million put in by Attanasio wasn’t an interest free loan- far from it- he’ll be very well paid- particularly in today’s economic climate, and I feel disenfranchised the reporters weren’t there because more pertinent questions might have been asked, secret meetings lead to innuendo————–but that’s the way the club does business nowadays, ” The fans don’t need to know “
It’s an ego trip for them keeping alive a celebrity status that has long on,
Many years ago people bought cars that were only used on a Sunday as they could afford the petrol all week they have a football club that gives them status, free travel and entertainment and advertise cooking lesson sadly they have outlived their sell by date and don’t recognise the signs and now by the looks of it have got investers in that will carry on the trend of self funding which eventually will dump us down into league 1.
Sorry Mick but would you have felt unhappy had you been ostracized by the club when you were the EDP/EEN reporter?
Im sure I remember in one of your books you mentioned that you weren’t too happy with Ron Saunders during his time here.
I think the punishment doesn’t fit the “crime” as it were.
Would you have published the fact you knew investors were at a game in your reporting days?
As I have said before I respect completely the position you are in.
You have very good friends in Delia and Michael and it is impossible to be critical.
If my mate Marty owned Norwich City FC I would tell him face to face what I felt he was doing wrong but not in print.
Delia and Michael have done so much for Norwich City as I have said many times on here but I feel the way they and the executive have treated the fans in the last 18 or so months has been dreadful.
We didn’t make the signings last summer, the club did but rather than just admit it they blamed us !!!!
Hi Gary, an interesting view on the media situation.
I can understand the EDP and the EEN being told they were not allowed to come to the AGM but all media?
My guess is that no difficult questions wanted to be answered?
1. Self funding (nonsense)
We are £60m in debt to loan payments with all parachute money used up for the next to seasons! That is quite a gamble Mr Webber is taking.
How is that self funding? Call it what it is, FAN FUNDING!
Mark Attensio is a C share holder so basically he has no say in how the club is run. He is there as an advisor and probably there to coach TOM for the future when Delia and Micheal hang there coats up.
My guess is his £10m investment will be used to pay the interest on these new self funding loans that we now have? Hence the long term investment, he will want to see that money back like anyone would.
It’s also very interesting to see the £30m of webber stock playing for other teams on loan. Any other Owner of a club with little cash to spare might have reigned him in?
All media were not invited, although Michael Bailey used the proxy of a shareholder to gain access.
There’s nothing fundamentally wrong with accelerating future receipts that would normally have been received 12 or 24 months down the line. However, that does depend upon how you actually spend it now and, by implication, if you do spend it now, you won’t have as much revenue in the future, when the need may actually be far greater.
C-preference shares just means that Attanasio can’t vote at the AGM, however, as a director, he will have influence in the board room and it’s highly likely that the C-preference shares will be converted to ordinary shares, rather than paid back, in seven years time.
Of course, those of us with memories remember being constantly told that “PL money comes in tranches, no one will just loan us the money up front”.
Except they have, when our position is far more precarious.
Another we can add to the long line of myths we’ve been sold by those “in the know”.