[The Earl of Chesterfield]

 Bankrobber, on 13 October 2011 - 08:25 PM, said:

Didn't Norton have to lend Brown the money? If he suspected he wasn't going to get it back, why would someone with his undoubted penny-pinching rep look forward to losing a massive wedge?

Good question, though i suspect no actual half a million quid ever changed hands. Perhaps CFC being around that amount in the black at the time of the deal, allied to Brown's first payment to Lea being of a similar sum is relavent.

 freelander2, on 13 October 2011 - 08:26 PM, said:

I wonder why we (CFC) preferred to opt for a CVA when other clubs chose to go down the route of liquidate / New Co?

Another good question. Could it've been something to do with Mike Warner's shares? Unless i'm mistaken his were the only ones passed from the 'old' to the 'new' CFC whilst retaining their value. I also seem to remember some complications involving the umbrella company Lea used to purchase CFC. Perhaps someone involved at the time can elucidate.

[Wooden Spoon]

 MDCCCLXVI, on 13 October 2011 - 08:19 PM, said:

I can only repeat my earlier interpretation: Brown comes up with the payments, Lea gets more than three times what he originally paid for CFC. However Brown blows it - and i simply can't believe someone in Lea's position wouldn't check up on the young suitor's legitimacy - and Lea retains CFC whilst having made a point to protesting fans. Was he above such spiteful and petty gestures? Behaviour i witnessed during meetings and demonstrations, allied to anecdotes passed on in the wake of the CFSS obtaining the controlling shareholding in CFC suggests not.

My understanding of the situation also

[Guest_freelander2_*]

 MDCCCLXVI, on 13 October 2011 - 08:40 PM, said:

Good question, though i suspect no actual half a million quid ever changed hands. Perhaps CFC being around that amount in the black at the time of the deal, allied to Brown's first payment to Lea being of a similar sum is relavent.



Another good question. Could it've been something to do with Mike Warner's shares? Unless i'm mistaken his were the only ones passed from the 'old' to the 'new' CFC whilst retaining their value. I also seem to remember some complications involving the umbrella company Lea used to purchase CFC. Perhaps someone involved at the time can elucidate.

MW's shareholding would have been of no importance.

I suspect those involved wanted to come out of the mess with some credibility and not do a Rotherham, but we paid a price. On the other hand, perhaps JNL via Neal Hook was prepared to do a Rotherham.

[Radders]

 Bankrobber, on 13 October 2011 - 08:25 PM, said:

Didn't Norton have to lend Brown the money? If he suspected he wasn't going to get it back, why would someone with his undoubted penny-pinching rep look forward to losing a massive wedge?

But did he lend him the money or did he simply tell Brown where to look for it? Lets not forget there was a fair amount of cash sloshing about in CFC at the time. One thing is for certain, Lea knew Brown didn't have the cash to put down as a deposit and probably guessed he didn't have the brains to make the cash to pay him. I'm not sure Norts wanted to come in and save us, I think after what had happened he was happier watching the whole lot crumble. However, I do believe that he more or less told Brown how to pay him for the club. The problem was he hadn't reckoned on Brown being a massive crook.
I know for a fact that certain people working in the office were still on Nortons payroll (so to speak) and reported back to him about the dodgey dealings on a regular basis. Also some of the stuff passed on to me by a local journalist at the time beggered belief - and before anyone decrys that profession we should remember that all the local papers wanted a satisfactory outcome for CFC. I don't see Norts as a legend, not even close. I'm not ashamed to say that I never liked the man and the few conversations I had with him were, well - a little one sided - as in, I hardly got a word in.
From my point of view Norts saw the paying supporter as cattle, we came in and were expected to be milked without saying much in return. He really didn't like it when we did. But then he never was a fan of the Crooked Spireite was he!

[Siberian Spireite]

 Stuart Basson, on 13 October 2011 - 07:08 PM, said:

Prior to us, he was on the board at Sheffield United and Mansfield Town. (source: Rothmans Football Yearbooks) Am I also right in thinking that he voted against the CVA that Duncan and Randall voted in favour of? I can see that he might have wanted the club to survive while ever he owned it, but I can't think it was all done for the good of the club.

Whatever resentment I had had of Johnny D's dull tactics and selling of Nozzer evaporated when he supported that CVA- never mind semi-finals, he deserves to be a true CFC hero for that.

The only time Norton Lea spoke to me was during the friendly with Papistratos (McMenemy era) when he told me to get my feet off the back of the seats in the Director's Box. Fair play.

Edit: Forgot to say, this is a really interesting discussion. Plenty of stuff I missed at the time despite being a Crooked Spireite reader and trying to get every scrap of CFC info I could. Shows what a great source of info this tinterweb is.

This post has been edited by Siberian Spireite: 13 October 2011 - 10:45 PM

[60s 70s Spireite]

To my mind Norton Lea’s weaknesses as owner/chairman began to be exposed once the team had some success on the pitch:

• The club failed miserably to make commercial gain from the semi final cup run-eg I think I am right in saying he owned all the photos from inside Old Trafford which he did nothing with. (I maybe wrong – but that is what a press agency photographer who was there told me).
• He let Kevin Davies go for a relatively small fee with no sell on clause- typifying his lack of football commerciality
• Sitting on a large sum of cash, he appeared determined to make some kind of statement and appeared to buy Jason Lee without reference to the manager (JD publically said ‘ errr I hope the chairman has still got some cash for a midfielder..)

Then came the Brown fiasco. I think Radders is on the right tack. CFC were sitting on a very large amount of cash; Lea wants out and no one is offering the right sum- or are perhaps wanting a full due diligence (investigation) before any completion. Lea suggests to Brown all he needs is the cash out of the business, and the tax efficient way to do this is through a sale not dividend extraction. Now this could have been done legally in the same way as the Glazers have- [Brown]forms a new holding company (holco), football club loans all spare cash to the holco, and holco uses this to purchase shares from Lea.

Except that Brown suddenly realises he has loads of cash at his disposal and, well we know what happened next.......Lea, through lack of taking proper advice and carrying out due diligence on the man he is dealing with is left high and dry; the ability to take back the shares is meaningless in view of the empty coffers.

[firedodger]

I never knew or met the bloke so don't feel it appropriate to comment on him as a person other than to say it seems clear he was his own man!
I worked on his wifes funeral, at which he appeared 'crushed', there was a strong CFC presence there and can only assume the same will be true at his own funeral

[If Carlsberg Made Chairmen]

RIP Norton

(Suprised no ones mentioned Jason Lee yet)

Edit; they have done, I just read the whole thread properly.

This post has been edited by If Carlsberg Made Chairmen: 14 October 2011 - 07:57 AM

[Spireite61]

Have I missed something, but why no mention of this yet on the official site? Whatever anyones opinion of the man, his passing should at least be acknowledged by the club on its official media outlet (apologies if it has been).

[isleaiw]

 60s 70s Spireite, on 14 October 2011 - 06:30 AM, said:

CFC were sitting on a very large amount of cash; Lea wants out and no one is offering the right sum- or are perhaps wanting a full due diligence (investigation) before any completion. Lea suggests to Brown all he needs is the cash out of the business, and the tax efficient way to do this is through a sale not dividend extraction. Now this could have been done legally in the same way as the Glazers have- [Brown]forms a new holding company (holco), football club loans all spare cash to the holco, and holco uses this to purchase shares from Lea.

Except that Brown suddenly realises he has loads of cash at his disposal and, well we know what happened next.......Lea, through lack of taking proper advice and carrying out due diligence on the man he is dealing with is left high and dry; the ability to take back the shares is meaningless in view of the empty coffers.

There are strict rules around the use of a company's cash to buy its own shares - its called a Whitewash process i think. I was once a subsidiary director at a UK PLC that was bought out by a Private German company that borrowed a LOT of money to takeover the UK business. because the UK business was sitting on c£180m cash we all had to go through the whitewash proces to make sure the company's own cash couldnt effectively be used to buy the shares in the company by the acquiring co. seem to recall that my own personal property was on the line when I signed that!

Ian

[johnd51]

Has there actually been an official announcement on the main site or have we just used the same forum that others use to insult people? I trust that this will be put right on Saturday at the latest and a suitable tribute paid.
If we had a minute's silence for the likes of Bob Paisley then the demise of a long standing chairman is surely worthy of the same.

[Mr.Spireite]

 johnd51, on 14 October 2011 - 12:48 PM, said:

Has there actually been an official announcement on the main site or have we just used the same forum that others use to insult people? I trust that this will be put right on Saturday at the latest and a suitable tribute paid.
If we had a minute's silence for the likes of Bob Paisley then the demise of a long standing chairman is surely worthy of the same.

I think the club will be putting it officialy on Spireites Player, "every little helps"

[60s 70s Spireite]

 isleaiw, on 14 October 2011 - 12:07 PM, said:

There are strict rules around the use of a company's cash to buy its own shares - its called a Whitewash process i think. I was once a subsidiary director at a UK PLC that was bought out by a Private German company that borrowed a LOT of money to takeover the UK business. because the UK business was sitting on c£180m cash we all had to go through the whitewash proces to make sure the company's own cash couldnt effectively be used to buy the shares in the company by the acquiring co. seem to recall that my own personal property was on the line when I signed that!

Ian

That was the law at that time; but the whitewash was the process/procedure by which the rules were covered off, and the deal as I set out could be concluded.

Need for whitewash now gone as Company law on the matter has been repealed (from 1 Oct 2008).

[Wooden Spoon]

 Mr.Spireite, on 13 October 2011 - 07:38 PM, said:

This "tactic" of Norton Lea was a bad one. He held off of redevloping Saltergate to a decent standard in the hope of getting a new stadium. However the clubs that redeveloped their grounds were getting grants of 90-95% from the "football trust" - source (Rothmans Yearbooks).

We spent nothing, doing only the bare minimum to keep the ground open so we were saving 5-10% of what everupme else was spending. This was very shortsighted of the man and this meant that when things went tits up with Saltergate who payed for it ??????

He also tried to go to poolsbrook, but this was rejected by the fans.

Redevlop or move is a one off thing, you wouldnt get a second chance. Saltergate was hemmed in by houses and no room to develop any facilities, so while we might have had a small and tidy ground at the rec it would in the long run have hampered the club and held us back, and kept us in the basement division. Why would anyone want to do that?

[Wooden Spoon]

 MDCCCLXVI, on 13 October 2011 - 07:47 PM, said:

During a discussion i had with Lea, he produced several envolopes from his pocket telling me they were all from people interested in taking over. Moreover i know a local businessman and Town fan, someone Lea knew had the wherewithall to finance CFC as he'd been a sponsor and advertiser for many years, who made a legitimate offer yet was snubbed in favour of Brown.

And as for this 'at least he kept us afloat' rhetoric, should that've been the full extent of a multi-millionaire's ambition? It appeared to be the case for much of his tenure.

I'll say it once more: Lea could've done so much for this football club, could've left a wonderful legacy and today be remembered as a true CFC legend. However perhaps the saddest thing of all is that the remarkable accomplishments he witnessed whilst Chairman will be forever shrouded by acrimony, bitterness, and recriminations.

I recall he had ambitions to build a complex with the new ground that would have generated some serious cash, at WM and Poolsbrook.For the late 80`s early 90`s I think thats showing ambition and foresight dont you?

[The Earl of Chesterfield]

 Spinach chin, on 14 October 2011 - 05:15 PM, said:

I recall he had ambitions to build a complex with the new ground that would have generated some serious cash, at WM and Poolsbrook.For the late 80`s early 90`s I think thats showing ambition and foresight dont you?

I agree, and as i pointed out no one can deny we enjoyed a remarkable few seasons whilst he was at the Club.

Indeed if someone could produce a list of all our Chairmen, allied to our average league standing throughout their respective tenures, then i'm sure Lea would be pretty near to the top.

However my point was that simply keeping CFC in business shouldn't be regarded as reason for tribute - as one or two posts seem to suggest - when the bloke running things is a multi-millionaire.


PS: whilst it's fair to say the proposed complex at WM would've been a terrific step forward for the Club, it was made abundantly clear to Lea such a plan would clash with the Alma development and could never be passed. Indeed i'm led to believe he was told a stand-alone stadium would probably be accepted, however not for the first time he ignored advice and pressed ahead with an ultimately doomed agenda.

[RPL42YEARS]

We had the best of times when you were chair.

We had some bad ones as well.

You had your faults but then we all do.

I guess we'll never know why DB and what happened to due diligence.

Thank you in any event and RIP.

[Guest_freelander2_*]

 Spinach chin, on 14 October 2011 - 05:15 PM, said:

I recall he had ambitions to build a complex with the new ground that would have generated some serious cash, at WM and Poolsbrook.For the late 80`s early 90`s I think thats showing ambition and foresight dont you?

Spot on Death.

Had the no marks at the Council approved JNL's plans, he'd have done their job for them.

The WM plot was a s'hole then & it remains one 20yrs on.

[Spire Power]

 MDCCCLXVI, on 13 October 2011 - 01:15 PM, said:

Funny how folk suddenly portray things differently when someone dies, isn't it.

I guess we should pay tribute to the fact Norton Lea's underwriting of our debts - i understand he never actually put his own money into CFC but instead guaranteed our overdraft - offered us a form of stability, whilst no one can deny the promotion, cup run, and respectable league standing we enjoyed during his tenure. However were they because of, or in spite of his parsimonious and autocratic approach? Certainly his intransigent, almost dismissive attitude towards those that disagreed with him cost the Club dearly in the longer term, something even he later admitted in a meeting with SIFA representatives.

Then there's the sale of CFC to Brown.

I'm convinced Lea knew exactly what he was doing when he accepted Brown's offer yet considered the deal a win-win for himself. If Brown did somehow manage to pay what he owed Lea - including the half a million the former Chairman loaned the new owner to buy CFC from him - then he'd made well in excess of three times what he'd actually paid for his shares. If not, then he'd return to rescue the situation as some sort of saviour whilst silencing all those that'd called for his exit. But what Lea hadn't bargained for was the sheer magnitude of Brown's criminal intent allied to just how loathed he was amongst many, perhaps most Town fans.

And let's not forget Lea's cynical attempts to undermine the CFSS's efforts to save our club, eventually leading to his spiteful purchase of the Steelers from under the nose of Cook when that individual handed CFC back to the fans.

The way i see it Lea took over a club playing fourth tier football, watched by two or three thousand fans, in an antique of a stadium. When he left it was plummeting back towards that level with embarrassing ease, with most of it's rapidly diminishing fanbase left alienated and angry, whilst playing in that same dilapidated ground. Sure the bank balance was in the black, but his choice of 'the right man to take Chesterfield forward' would soon sort that out. In my mind it could all have been so much different if Norton Lea had only listened to people from time to time.

But then he wasn't dubbed 'The Old Dictator' for nothing.

One of the best posts ever written on here.

[jack bauer]

I think in norton's case a minutes silence is the most appropriate tribute we could give, please not a minutes applause, we are sad to see any human go (thatcher excepted but she isn;t human) NL we will see you pass but consider you in that minute