However, naivety is not really what I want to discuss here. What is neatly ingrained in the fabric of this transfer is the preservation of Bill Kenwright. No doubt this will be labelled as ‘Bill Bashing’ — or as I like to call it ‘a discussion of the facts’. But here goes anyway.
Bill Kenwright is a man who has apparently been looking to sell this club ever since he bought it — which begs the question — why buy it in the first place? But that’s another story. His tenure has been marked by several important occurrences. The most important of these for his longevity was the sale of Wayne Rooney.
In my opinion, Dick Turpin, might as well have pulled a gun on us. We sold the greatest talent in modern times for a series of paltry sums that were structured in a way that gave minimum financial investment back into our team — or, as the cynical would suggest — a structure that made it less obvious that the money was not going into the team. It’s no wonder that condescending twat Ferguson has been fawning over us ever since. However, the money which did find its way back into the team not only allowed Moyes to improve us on the field, it also kept Kenwright in his position, as the less insightful were appeased.
Roll forward to summer 2009 and we have a mirror of that situation. The sale of Lescott could again appease the less insightful — and keep Kenwright here comfortably for another few years. However, a couple of differences apply this time — the club are in a hell of a lot more debt... and Kirkby is likely to get the go ahead. Could it be that in this chess match of smoke and mirrors that Kenwright has actually outflanked himself?
It is unlikely that City will not stump up the entire cash amount, so any instalment and/or honours deal will be viewed with a hell of a lot of cynicism. In a full cash deal, the majority of the money would need to be immediately reinvested in the team to appease a set of fans that are becoming increasingly agitated — and used to support a manager who clearly deserves a bit of cash and a team which clearly needs improving. But can Bill (or whoever is pulling the financial strings at Everton) afford to do this?
In my opinion, it’s a lose-lose situation. Either we get the majority of any potential sale money pumped straight back into the team, and Bill gets another few years. Or the money disappears into the black hole of Kirkby and debt — and we have a season of discontent which could ultimately be the tipping point for Bill’s tenure at this club.
Personally, as much as I dislike the way Bill runs this club, I’d take the first option. But what will Bill do? And what happens if it’s not his call?
Dark times and difficult decisions ahead, even if we do manage to get a good deal from Cty.
Note: the following content is not moderated or vetted by the site owners at the time of submission. Comments are the responsibility of the poster. Disclaimer
1 Posted 31/07/2009 at 14:56:16
Then, come January, when the enquiry decision is known, how our "free, world-class" stadium has incurred unforseen costs which has severely restricted our transfer budget. Of course, come next summer, Rodwell / Arteta/ Jags / Yak will be one of our rich rivals targets .... "No sale," says Bill, "Moyesy said so" ... and so on.
2 Posted 31/07/2009 at 15:28:10
You think it was not a good thing for Bill to take over from Johnson? For all Bill’s faults, I would hate to think where we would be now had he not come in....
3 Posted 31/07/2009 at 15:44:16
This is about the possible scenario’s if we do sell Lescott — and the effects on our club and Kenwright.
4 Posted 31/07/2009 at 15:48:22
Surely DM should be given funds at the start of the window, even if he doesn’t spend them, so at least any new signings have time to bed in before the season. Getting new players in right at the start of the season is no good for the team or us.
Bill, we are grateful but please GTF and be serious about selling... because as far as I’m concerned he is still treating the Club like ’his’ Club and nobody else is allowed to play with it.
5 Posted 31/07/2009 at 15:49:36
Rooney and his shithouse agent engineered that move. Stretford started the bidding by encouraging a bid from Newcastle to provoke Man U into making a bid. Rooney was tapped up by Man U players whilst on international duty and then handed in a transfer request. He then accused Moyes of leaking stories of him visiting OAP prostitutes to the press.
I don’t mind a bit of Bill bashing because he is not fit to be our chairman but the Rooney transfer was not his fault. I really don’t think he could have done anything to prevent that greedy little bastard from leaving.
6 Posted 31/07/2009 at 15:58:23
Can you please point out where I did this?
I don’t remember writing it.
7 Posted 31/07/2009 at 15:13:57
If a player decides to move on to better himself financially, that's life, it's his decision, but I fail to see how you can describe the people who have contributed to his wages and supported him through bad times as being irrational if they’d feel betrayed and angry. It's the most natural reaction, surely?
8 Posted 31/07/2009 at 16:00:29
BK and Co obviously feel we’re a more attractive proposition for potential investors with a new stadium. Chances are if it goes ahead he will look to sell for a profit and keep a role at the club.
If it gets knocked back (fingers crossed), there will be huge pressure from the fans on the board and LCC to come up with an alternative sooner rather than later.
Crossroads are approaching...
9 Posted 31/07/2009 at 16:12:26
Rooney’s leaving is not anybody’s fault at EFC. He simply had the chance to go to a top club, that could offer him the stage to really show his talents. The side he was in was utter crap in all honesty. He has now gone on to win major honours. You cannot blame him for wanting to leave, but the badge kissing... well that proves who was responsible for engineering the move away from Goodison. He didn't come back showing the respect to fans of a player who was forced out.
But again I’ll raise the point. You truly believe that, unless someone has £3-500 million to pump into a football club to challenge the top, they shouldn’t even bother? So we should just pack it in, and give up at this moment in time then, as we cannot win it?
10 Posted 31/07/2009 at 16:06:52
Bill isn’t the best chairman in the world, even he admits that, but what good does it do just to point at what he is not doing? Everyone knows Moyes has his hands tied to a certain extent but so does Kenwright. He can’t generate more money if there is none out there. There has never been any official confirmation of anyone wanting to buy our Club. Even the recent UAE speculation was denied by the so-called ’investor’ himself. It’s Kenwright who has found the money for Moyes to break our transfer record four seasons in a row, whether it be by hook or crook, you have to admit Kenwright has found the money. Kenwright is getting criticised for not giving Moyes enough money to spend, but breaking the transfer record four years in a year, what more do you want? Do you want Kenwright to borrow £100m from the banks (which they won’t lend us) to go and splash on mercenaries?
You said that you don’t want a Kenwright v Johnson debate, but previous chairmen are the ideal people to compare to Kenwright as they held the same position. As far as I could tell, Johnson actively went out of his way to tear Everton apart, Kenwright actively went out of his way to save Everton. I didn’t see you or anyone else coming forward to help at the time, in fact I don’t see anyone else coming forward right now to help Everton.
My hometown club, Brighton had a chairman in charge who wanted to destroy the club and actually sold the stadium and made them move 150 miles away to try and bankrupt the club. Is that what you want instead of Kenwright? Bill is a loyal Evertonian who is trying to do his best for the club, afterall it was Bill who appointed Moyes as manager, who himself is finally recognised for the excellent manager he is.
How about you try and write something constructive about Bill, and even Everton for a change?
11 Posted 31/07/2009 at 16:52:45
Sorry but it's no OK; this club is in serious danger of folding up or doing a Notts Forest if Kenwright gets his way. Forget selling Lescott, he is going and all this sabre-rattling from the club won't change that. If City want him, then Lescott will go. The big problem is DK.
I reckon we will lose at least 10,000 off our average gate within the first two seasons. I don't know many if any who voted No who say they will continue going once we leave for the Tescodome... then what? With all the new money pouring in to the PL every other week and all of it by-passing us, we will be fucked big style. If you don't believe me about the stay-aways, just look on this site to see how many match goers say they will Jib it once we go. It's scarey alright.
Kenwright is a curse, a virus, a leeech and I feel like vomiting every time I see or hear this prick. Clap your hands and hum to Z-Cars all you want Kenwright your nothing but a Spiv who wants to line his pockets at the club's expense... Evertonian, my fuckin' Arse.
12 Posted 31/07/2009 at 17:13:20
13 Posted 31/07/2009 at 17:39:03
14 Posted 31/07/2009 at 17:25:08
I’m not trying to defend Kenwright, I’m just wondering.
As for the Lescott scenario, I think Ciaran made some valid points. I would hope Lescott stays. I personally think City will make sure he wants a move, and hope Everton get somewhere in the region of £22m. What happens then, if such a scenario does transpire, will tell us whether it was ALWAYS going to happen regardless of any public posturing.
If we sell, and get the FULL amount to spend on transfers, then regardless of whether we see any real benefit in terms of being better on the field (ie, are those we bring in as good as Lescott), at least we can assume that we WANTED to keep him as all money received went straight back into the team.
If, however, we sell and only get partial funds and sign stop-gap players rather than ones that may improve us, then it’s a reasonable assumption that as soon as City came calling it was decided we were going to sell for reasons other than team building (the ground move, debts etc),
If that is the case then we would also have to assume that Moyes was aware of the situation. That being said, is his integrity still as intact as prior? If we are all being lied to and fed bullshit, then surely those who go along with it are as guilty as those who instigate it?
Let’s for once have some fucking truth, regardless of whether it stings hearing it. At least we would know where we stand for a change.
15 Posted 31/07/2009 at 18:00:24
Alan, I don't think anyone blames Kenright for selling the fat one. But the deal he got for us stinks, we got £10 million up front for a player who at the time was the most exciting young talent in world football.
Regardless of what happens at the club he must take responsibility and also the credit. Despite what happened last season, we are yet to put silver in the cabinet. Yet all the time we are accruing debt. Even if you are in favour of the move, splitting your customer base pretty much down the middle is a suicidal move in any business, regardless of how many new customers you think you can get.
16 Posted 31/07/2009 at 18:11:20
This negativity is shocking, comes to terms that Everton are a feeder club for the masses.
Blame Bill, blame DM, blame whoever you like, but it will achieve nothing.
But once you have got your head around that, you will realise that if we get £20mill+ we have achieved our target, buy low, sell high.
Finally he is only a player, a player who until a couple of seasons ago, was not even on the big clubs radars, so fear not we will sign a replacement, and given time he will leave too.
But Everton will not end, Everton will not crumble, Everton will not fall. We will continue to exist and you will continue to support.
17 Posted 31/07/2009 at 18:53:32
18 Posted 31/07/2009 at 19:49:51
Tony M, I’m still unsure who is out there that definitely wants to buy Everton? I’d love to see the back of Kenwright because of the Kirkby issue and the way he’s betrayed us. But billionnaires don’t grow on trees and those that do still don’t seem that willing to pump all their cash into their respective clubs. Look at Villa, they have a squad of 21 going into their new season and European campaign. They’ve lost Barry and Laursson and not replaced them. It seems even a billionnaire owner is not the answer to our problems.
19 Posted 31/07/2009 at 19:55:15
20 Posted 31/07/2009 at 20:07:01
I agree and overall I think it has worked out really well for us, as this brought the squad togetherness that is revered throughout the league, which I think our relative "success" has been built upon.
It’s a shame we never got a better deal and kicked on but I’ve been saying we should kick on for years. Were obviously not going to any time soon.
When we do a deal for Lescott, which we obviously will, we should try and weaken City in some way.
I would be quite happy to take Ireland and Richards in a straight swap. They would fill positions that we desperately need filling and would be a blow to them as the bigger the turnover of players the longer it will take them to gel.
21 Posted 31/07/2009 at 19:54:15
I suspect Lescott will leave, simply for economic, rather than footballing, reasons.
Now, indulge me for a moment, but fast forward a year. Lescott may still be at the peak of his powers at 27/28, or he may well have "knee injury issues". Remember his complete season out at Wolves following knee surgery ? Remember other clubs having a look at him, but not taking the risk ? Remember the protracted transfer to us, with seemingly endless medicals ? He’s a big lad, and these issues could return.
Don’t get me wrong. I love Lescott to bits, and wish him nothing but health and happiness for another 5 years in an Everton shirt. But, now that the transfer fee is moving into the region of 22-25 million, it could be cashing in our chips time.
A replacement ? Yes please, and quick ! Probably yet another rag-rumour, but the name of Gary Cahill has just popped up. Interesting. Now in the England set-up, scouted for Bolton by a certain Colin Harvey, Bolton’s Player of the Season (yes, I know, I know !!), and presumably within our wage structure. Also, aged 23, and getting better all the time, and again presumably, settled in the North West. Although Megson apparently slapped a 20 Million price tag on him, my hunch is that a bid for half that amount would prove very tempting, to both Bolton and Cahill.
Hey-hey, two Cahills at the club. A commentators nightmare to rival the AJ-Carsley-Gravesen baldy confusion !
22 Posted 31/07/2009 at 21:59:10
WHAT transfer ??????? you’re as bad as the fookin’ red tops Ciaren.
23 Posted 31/07/2009 at 21:48:07
As I understand it, a selling club takes money for its players to pay the bills (no pun intended), and there was certainly a suspicion of this in the Rooney fiasco, but no matter what, the problem primarily came from Rooney and his advisors. Money was the root of it all. Forget "winning things" , he was the ’saviour of English football’ on our books and hasn’t been since.
If Lescott goes it will be because an oil rich Sheik will double (at least) his already considerable wages. I can’t see how Kenwright can do anything about that.
The bold move would, of course, be to make Lescott serve out his contract playing for the reserves. Just to prove we’re not a selling club.
Kirkby has got nothing to do with this.
24 Posted 31/07/2009 at 21:45:30
If we sell Lescott, we get a good few quid that we obviously desperately need and can spend (hopefully most of that) on "strengthening" — hmmm after selling an England international??? If we keep him, we are telling him and the rest of the team we are serious about going forward (in which case, we STILL need to bring players in). Where does the money come from to drive all this forward if we do not intend selling our best players??
Yes, yes, I know, I know — the stadium issue/Bill etc. It's here where I really despair. I do not live in Liverpool, but from speaking to fans of other clubs, they all seem to agree Goodison is a clapped out relic of earlier times.
As the Kings Dock plans fell through the floor, it seems we have this dreadful ongoing saga of Kenwright and the proposed Kirkby move. Have those who are so much against Kirkby thought about toffee fans who don't live in the city or its vicinity who nevertheless are prepared to travel long distances to watch their team, and take on board the financial burdens of doing so? Doesn't their opinion count for anything?
Would those who insist on staying at Goodison come what may, be prepared to remain in situ even if relegation beckoned (as it has done before)? They could still claim to be proud supporters of the club as it slid down to the depths of the Championship, bow proudly pointing to the sky as that little Canadian songbird sang about how her heart would go on??? Could we (again at least) contemplate a ground sharing with senor Benitez’ team and perhaps have a few bob left in the biscuit tin for a few signings???
God, this Old Speckled Hen is making me waffle. Kenwright out??? I am afraid I just dont know... I only wish I were a porn baron worth a few billion. I know where my main thrust would be. COYB
25 Posted 31/07/2009 at 22:48:45
26 Posted 01/08/2009 at 00:18:12
27 Posted 01/08/2009 at 03:51:33
I was actually living and working there for a couple of years, and when I couldn’t get to Everton games, would go to watch Brighton play.
The owner of the club at the time, Bill Archer, also owned Focus DIY. He sold the Goldstone Ground, without a home to Brighton to go to, and they ended up playing 2 seasons at Gillingham, before returning to play in a temporary stadium at Withdean. They now have permission, and funding from a private investor who made his money on Internet bookmaking, to build a new stadium at Falmer, around 7 miles outside of Brighton (but Brighton being a small town relative to Liverpool, very little opportunity of a city Stadium).
It’s a long story that you can read elsewhere, but the crux of the matter is:
The stadium was sold for retail development (land prices back then would far exceed what Goodison would fetch now) and the developer, having cleared the site, sold it on at a significant profit.
The owner of the club was out to make a profit.
There was a retail element to the decision to move.
The temporary relocation (through geography and lack of direct public transport access - you had to go into London and out via another terminal, or drive) led to a plummeting of attendance figures.
I’m not suggesting the situations are comparable, but there are a couple of common threads.
As I recall though, direct fans’ action, supported by other clubs through "Fans Reunited" - made a difference. Fans were a lot less apathetic in them days.
28 Posted 01/08/2009 at 03:44:44
That team was an absolute mess. Sorry if my facts are wrong, but I believe his contract was up in one year when all this took place. Rooney and his agent engineered the whole thing and if we refused to sell we would have eventually lost him for nothing.
Unfortunately no bidding war started...I was rather hoping at the time that Chelsea would waded in. Yes the transfer money came in drips and drabs, but it eventually totalled about 28 million, and fulfilled most of our add-ons etc.
The BK 50 million boast gets bandied about a lot, but what could Everton do when the team’s relationship with the player grew that toxic? It essentially came down to Rooney playing for us one more year, and under duress, or the deal we made? Neither was ideal, but we ended up building something quite special with those monies.
The Rooney debacle may well have saved the club, at least from impending Championship oblivion.
29 Posted 01/08/2009 at 05:36:53
This is easily one of the worst titles I have ever seen.
I am not sure we have any right to complain about tabloids and their mistreatment of Everton or about the way other clubs conduct their business. To echo someone earlier in this tread WHAT TRANSFER.
The club has declared about a gazillion times they WILL NOT sell. They have instantly rejected two sizable offers and publicly stated that matters are in the managers hands. The player despite much invitation to do so has done nothing disruptive whatsoever. This somehow adds up to- A. He is going for the money. B. Our chairman is trying to make sure as little of it as possible goes back into the team. And C. Quite sickeningly, we hear a supposed fan, actually saying that he thinks it MIGHT BE GOOD THAT WE HAVE AN AWFUL SEASON IF THAT MEANS OUR CHAIRMAN LEAVES. Fortunately he stops short of saying he actually prefers that to money going into the team, but its sickening that anyone could even find that a close decision.
I wish fans over here had some perspective. As Arsene Wenger says "Price and Quality are not linked". We dont "Desperately need money" (Not to pump into our squad anyway). If you get out of economics mode and just look at the players we have, they are a good squad and stepping up from here is achieved by team building, not randomly throwing money ALA Spurs, Newcastle and Leeds.
I am glad Moyes understands this and that the decisions are not in the hands of posters here. Sorry for rant, but this negativity from our own fans is shocking.
30 Posted 01/08/2009 at 08:53:57
How can you say we will end up like Forest if Kenwright stays in charge. Since Kenwright has been in charge we have gone from relegation fighting team every season to European team virtually every season and cup semi’s and finals as well. FACT. Doesn’t that mean Everton have improved and gone forwards since Kenwright has taken over? How can you say we are and will go backwards? You are making an argument against truth, statistics and fact!!!
As far as Kenwright wanting to line his pockets out of Everton’s money is purely c**p as well. If that was the case, why has Kenwright borrowed money to break the club’s transfer record over the last four seasons, knowing that borrowed money incurrs interest, interest on loans means less money for the club, surely less money for Kenwright? Also, a recent report in the Telegrath showing the highest paid directors in the Premier League stated that Wyness was Everton’s highest paid on £470k per year, not Kenwright.
Who would you rather have in charge? A multi-billionaire Arab, American or other foreigner that has never heard of Everton that just wishes to use them as a pawn in their own personal game or just to make money out of the club? Kenwright is an Evertonian and has always put Everton’s interests first. That is how any Evertonian would run the Club.
31 Posted 01/08/2009 at 09:58:13
Kenwright must know by now none of us want DK but yet he pushes on with it knowing thousands will stay away
WHY?Sorry but it has to be money.
Mathew you must be mad to trust BK after all the lies and skullduggery.As you say Everton have improved beyond belief in the last few seasons
5th place finishes and Wembley I agree.So why then wont any investors touch us????Kenwright thats why.He is poison.
32 Posted 01/08/2009 at 11:32:07
Could you explain how this works in practice?
Usually people who destroy businesses LOSE money on them. The counter-examples are when the investing counter-party is ignorant of key features of the business or its future. But any investor is going to know all about Kirkby, and is going to throughly investigate the possibility that it will decrease rather than increase revenues. If it is as obvious as you think that Kirkby will be the ruin of the club, won’t it also be obvious to them?
So how does this work in your opinion?
33 Posted 01/08/2009 at 11:11:19
Whether you like it or not, if DK goes ahead, it will be sold out for a while until the buzz dies down. Going the match will become an exciting proposition for more people than today. Who the fuck enjoys going to sit in the Upper Bullens Road as a matchday experience? 60% of Goodison is simply awful to visit, unless you are a die hard Everton fan who would watch it sitting on a bed of nails (like me). But the majority of fans are not die hards, they are ’take it or leave it’. Facilities can make a big difference to those people.
To suggest that Kenwright KNOWS that DK will destroy the love of his life, and he is doing it on purpose is complete fucking bollocks. I am sure there are quite a few investors waiting over the decision on DK. Of course they wont come in now, as if DK goes tits up, then they are not going to have a ground capable of making the money, should the side become a top team again after investment. Its pointless pumping money into the team, if you have to wait 10 years for the drip return from poor facilities. Its so fucking obvious to me, so it cant be hard for experienced investment companies to see it.
if you are outside of London, the location doesn’t even come into it. If you are a top footballing side, with great facilities then people will go to watch you. If you are that passionate about it, going and fucking do something! Just like the thousands of ’Real Utd’ group of supporters that thought the Glaziers were going to destroy the club, and refused to go to Old Trafford ever again.
Of those thousands that protested it, I wonder how many still believe it? Its the same for DK. 80% of those saying they will never go, will certainly be there on the opening day. Its very easy to say now ’I wont go’. But if it goes ahead, you can guarantee that the majority will be there. And those that don’t go, will be replaced easily by those looking forward to a more enjoyable matchday experience. If travelling an extra hour to watch your team is such a big deal, then fucking stay at home. Simple. There are people that travel the length and breadth of this country to watch our blue boys.
I respect your views about BK as a fellow Evertonian. But I think your views are poisoned by paranoid idea’s. if you can provide some solid evidence that BK refutes any investors that can take this club forward, then I will take into account what you are saying. Until then, I will dismiss it as bollocks.
34 Posted 01/08/2009 at 11:50:49
Yes, DK will certainly upset a lot of fans, and these grievances need to be aired, but to state the bleedin’ obvious, "if things don’t change, they’ll stay the same". As pointed out time and again, the current Goodison experience is grim for a lot of fans, many of whom would gladly pay a few quid more, and travel a few miles more, to watch the team they love. I too do not buy into the "attendances will plummet the club will be relegated" scenario. To be honest, I could easily live without the negative comments of doom-mongers I often seem to sit next to at matches, with their stream of hatred and vitriol, often aimed at our players, playing in a winning team !
As ever, success on the pitch determines our future.
I trust Moyes to do the right thing, within the obvious economic restraints placed on him. So, if Lescott leaves, so be it. No player is bigger than the club, and I’m confident that Moyes has already identified, and made efforts to secure, a suitable replacement.
35 Posted 01/08/2009 at 12:28:55
Now if we move to Kirkby and Kenwright sells up, which he says he will, don't you think he stands to make at least quadruple his initial stake if not more?
Any sane Evertonian/Businessman knows that, for a club/business to function properly, it needs to be close to the essential things it needs to prosper. Good transport links: Liverpool city has trains, ferries, underground, bus station, taxi ranks etc along with hotels, bars and, most important, a large population to reach out to. What the fuck has Knowsley got to offer???
If Kirkby is such a great location, why didn't the Grosvenor Group who opened the Liverpool One retail and Leisure complex recently in the city center open it in Kirkby??? Simple: all of the above. It makes no buisness sense whatsoever to move the club away from the heart of the city to a wilderness like Kirkby.
Selling sand to the Arabs has more chance of working than selling a corporate dream on a retail park in the middle of nowhere.
36 Posted 01/08/2009 at 13:03:57
If what you say is true, and Kirkby is so obviously the end of Everton (as a football club, and therefore as a money making business), how on earth is Bill Kenwright going to sell the club for a profit.
This is the question Neil has asked, both today and on numerous occasions, and I have never seen a satisfactory answer from anyone.
You can’t have it both ways!
37 Posted 01/08/2009 at 13:12:18
If Tony Marsh and others are correct and Kenwright sells the club and soon as we set foot in Kirby, hasn’t he and others got what they want? Kenwright out at all costs, and new owners in. If this does happen then we have new investment and funds for new players, adding to a good team already, which in turn adds to the attraction of going to the match watching a winning team. So those people who say I and others will stop going the match will be replaced.
Also, for the ones that stop going, maybe you should consider your loyalty; is it to Everton Football Club or Goodison Park? If it’s the latter maybe make an offer after the club moves.
38 Posted 01/08/2009 at 13:54:47
There is a chance that people will still go. It will mostly depend on how much success there is on the pitch. If Everton are successful, the crowds will watch.
39 Posted 01/08/2009 at 14:04:26
Alan, this is the second time I’ve asked you to confirm where I have writen or even implied this. If you’re not willing to validate your assertions then I would be grateful if you’d stop deciding (in cases where I haven’t even offered them) what my opinions are.
40 Posted 01/08/2009 at 14:08:33
41 Posted 01/08/2009 at 14:07:14
[insert Victor Meldrew’s iconic incredulity here]
42 Posted 01/08/2009 at 15:16:42
I think you and other anti-Kirkbys should stick to your guns. You are telling us: Kirkby WILL be a dreadful disaster for the club, fans won’t go, new commercial revenues will not happen, Arteta et al will all leave, and the club will slip into the Championship.... (Personally I think this is possible but rather unlikely.)
In this scenario, of course, Kenwright will STILL in fact be the owner, because Kirkby will have made the club unsellable (or he will be desperately trying to flog it for whatever he can get a la Ashley at Newcastle — and hardly making a mint).
But of course if Kirkby IS the enabler of a bumper payout for Kenwright, then by definition we will have a new richer owner, who believes that Kirkby will make the club even richer and is most likely providing considerably more funds for the team (else why would they have bought us?).
You can’t have it both ways.
43 Posted 01/08/2009 at 15:39:34
I think that staying at GP is a kind of ’middle scenario’: unlikely to pitch us dramatically into the Championship, but also unlikely to get us the richer new owner we need either (someone could have bought us already after all, but they haven’t, and now we are in less favourable economic times).
Given the likely lack of new investment, on balance I think the risk of slipping into the Championship is greater if we stay at GP than if we go to Kirkby (although the risk of either should not be hysterically over-estimated). The fans will come to Kirkby if we have even better players after new investment and are still competing near the top of the league.
44 Posted 01/08/2009 at 15:56:45
Kenwright and his cronies are telling the fans they can't sell the club unless they move to Kirkby because every one knows LFC and they are overshadowing us, which is bollocks.
If DK comes off and we do move there, then Kewnright's initial money input was so small in real terms that he cannot fail to make a massive profit if he does snag a buyer. Tesco and chums get what they want; Kenwright gets a pay-off, and we get left in Kirkby, in the plastic cowshed.
BK sails off in to the sunset and doesn't give a fuck about where the club finds itself as it ain't his problem no more. BK makes money every which way you look. WHY the fuck can't you three grasp this concept? Get your heads out of your arses and take a look at what's going on
FFS some Evertonians are so gullible... it's scarey!
45 Posted 01/08/2009 at 16:11:58
And if you must quote me, at least don’t quote out of context excerpts of what I said.
I said we don’t desperately need money (NOT TO PUT IN THE TEAM ANYWAY). Instead of "inserting incredulity" why not tell me why you think this team "desperately needs money chucked into it" and I reempashize my earlier comment that money DOES NOT guarantee you quality. I would rather not have the tons of players Spurs and Newcastle used their money on.
46 Posted 01/08/2009 at 16:13:47
IF Kirkby is going to be the obvious commercial disaster you maintain, why wouldn’t Kenwright make more money (if that his only motivation) by selling his stake in the club NOW? Why take the club to Kirkby and (as you must believe) reduce his payout?
Please answer this. You really don’t make more money from a business by destroying it. The world is not quite that crazy yet.
What I am talking about has nothing to do with gullibility either, so we can drop that. It’s simply plain common sense. You don’t make more money out of a business if you have just destroyed all its future prospects. What is preventing you from seeing this obvious fact?
47 Posted 01/08/2009 at 16:40:05
If you, or anyone else, ever manages to answer it, I’ll take my head out of my arse, and show it (the arse, I mean, there’ll be a bag on my head!) in the window of Lewis’s.
FFS some Evertonians are so blinded with hatred and irrationality it’s scary.
48 Posted 01/08/2009 at 16:50:45
That's life in football: players come and go. He will be quickly forgotten about.
49 Posted 01/08/2009 at 16:47:10
I come from a large family of season ticket holders and whilst none of us want to leave Goodison we all know with a heavy heart we have to.
I’ve a feeling we’ll all be laughing about the Kirkby contoversy in a few years when we’re CL regulars and competing for the league... COYB!!!
50 Posted 01/08/2009 at 17:03:44
The stadium will be a millstone, primarily due to a split fan-base and poor transport links, leading to reduced revnues. Bill will make a profit because said stadium increases asset value, when he decides to sell.
You're trying to have it both ways, Neil, in fact you're deliberately ignoring the evidence, despite having it explained to you by Michael Kenrick on numerous occasions.
Neil, the denial has to stop, this is getting rather tedious.
51 Posted 01/08/2009 at 16:55:49
It’s quite simple, you want rid of Kenwright, you state that he will make all kinds of money as soon as the keys are in the front door of Kirby, yet you slate him for selling.
What would appease you, Tony? I can’t think of one single scenario where you would be happy. You have the worst case of myopia I have ever seen.
52 Posted 01/08/2009 at 17:14:14
FFS the club couldn’t make a case for Kirkby at the inquiry and it's supposed to be their idea. If they can’t sell it, you and Neil and the pro-Kirkbyite rump have no chance.
53 Posted 01/08/2009 at 17:20:29
Try this. Man Utd sells Old Trafford to me for say £100M, so that I now own it, and we sign a deal for them to lease it back for their use over say a 30-year period. Is Man Utd as a business now worth £100M less? Of course it isn’t. (Perhaps they bough Franck Ribery with the money and are more likely to win the Champions League this year.) Businesses are not valued that way, nor is this what determines what people pay for them.
One more for you. Newcastle United has the same net asset value (more or less) that it did before it was relegated to the Championship. They still own St James’s Park just the same after all. Would you David pay the same for them now as you would a year ago? If not, why not? Mike Ashley would ’really really love it’ if businesses were valued the way you think!! (I could go on, but indeed it would be tedious.)
No-one has yet explained to me how you manage to sell a business for more money by obviously destroying its future business prospects. I will be delighted to join Bob with arse and paper bag in Lewis’s window when somebody does.
54 Posted 01/08/2009 at 17:24:22
I consider myself to be fairly open-minded, and like to judge things on merit after considering both sides. There are too many people on here that make blanket statements and expect others to take it a gospel.
55 Posted 01/08/2009 at 17:31:36
Absolutely sums you up, you arrogant twat.
Neil you have had this explained to you many times, you even actually agreed with Michael. Then you back-tracked.
If EFC move to a stadium worth £100 million will it increase the value of EFC? The answer is yes. In football it is about asset value, not turning a profit.
56 Posted 01/08/2009 at 17:38:07
We all know BK owes them both money; we also know that Green is a retail magnate and we also know that Terry Tesco and Green are big buddies. Put two and two together and you get DK, Kenwright in deeper than the Titanic, and a club called Everton being sold down the river. A river you lot voted for.
Good job there are some clued up Everton fans left to fight our corner — not that it matters though as you jokers would belive Kenwright if he told you Micheal Jackson was headlining the opening of the Tescodome.
57 Posted 01/08/2009 at 17:39:32
Someone has got to put a business head on here, as much as I want him to stay, we can’t always be ruled by our hearts.
58 Posted 01/08/2009 at 17:48:57
59 Posted 01/08/2009 at 17:45:20
Anyway, once more with feeling. I take it your point is NOT now that we are going to Kirkby because it will make more money for Kenwright personally. That’s obviously stupid given your belief that Kirkby will destroy the future business prospects of the club.
Your point is now that we are going to Kirkby because Kenwright needs to ’pay back’ Green, Earl and Leahy for ’services rendered’ over recent years. I assume you mean: guaranteeing loans to buy players such as Yakubu and Fellaini. The idea is presumably something like: they will call in their loans / guarantees unless we go to Kirkby.
This is obviously interesting, and we all wish we knew more about Kenwright’s relationships here. There are a few problems with it though. The first is that there is not even a sniff of evidence that Leahy has provided any loans or guarantees to us. So what is he being ’paid back’ for?
On Green, he may well have done, but why the hell does he need Everton in Kirkby to get into any retail outlets? The man can get into any retail outlets in the UK that he wants. He certainly doesn’t need Bill Kenwright’s help.
So we are left with Earl. Everton are going to Kirkby mainly to pay back Earl for something. Maybe. Maybe there is something to this. And at least it’s not directly self-contradictory.
Of course, another rather simpler view is that we are going to Kirkby because we need a new ground to get more revenues and a new owner, and can’t unfortunately afford anything better. But, again, that has the big disadvantage of not making Kenwright out to be a selfish evil man. So it must be wrong.
60 Posted 01/08/2009 at 18:09:19
Did they teach charm at that business school of yours?
61 Posted 01/08/2009 at 18:16:04
I never of course agreed with Michael about net asset values - Michael is simply wrong, and companies are not and never will be bought on the basis of their net asset values (unless perhaps they are property portfolios). Assets matter in terms of what revenues they can generate. Not much point having a stadium which cost £100M if no-one goes.
Again, please explain to me David: how are Newcastle United worth less now to a buyer than they were twelve months ago? The net asset value is still the same.
62 Posted 01/08/2009 at 18:31:54
The new stadium allied to the new stadium effect, will increase the value of the club and may snare a new investor, but that is highly unlikely.
I’m sorry Neil, but a shiny new asset will increase the value of the club, and yes, I’m sure that revenue streams play their part as well. I have explained the plan and the rational behind it, but I don’t think Bill will get a buyer out of Kirkby and that is the fundamental difference between us.
63 Posted 01/08/2009 at 18:42:00
You may be right that Bill won’t get a buyer for the club if we move to Kirkby (then of course we are really in the shit). I just think it is much more likely. At the moment a potential buyer is looking at a massive outlay on either redoing GP or finding somewhere else. Kirkby is a relatively cheap and predictable deal, and in that way at least will make the club more attractive.
Again, whether Kirkby will destroy the future success of the club or indeed its soul - I can see arguments on both sides. Personally, I think the club and its support are easily strong enough to carry it through a move, and that attendance will be largely determined by the success of the team on the pitch. But of course there are important arguments against Kirkby. But don’t you see that there are also worries about just sitting where we are?
64 Posted 01/08/2009 at 18:57:29
65 Posted 01/08/2009 at 08:48:19
If Lescott wants to go, make him put in a transfer request and then tell the Arabs that the fee is £30m cash on the table or he is going nowhere. O'Neill had the balls to fuck off the Fat Waiter last season; unfortunately our Club wants the money but BK is not prepared to admit it.
I posted on here in May that he would go... but at the last minute, in typical EFC fashion — and nothing has been done thus far to change my mind — or my opinion of the ghost, BK, who only appears during Cup Final week. The man couldn't negotiate with a 6-year-old...
We all now Lescott will have his price and that's the case in all business dealings. Most of us deep down realise that he will go, so get the best price for him and make him ask for a transfer. We can then move on.
66 Posted 01/08/2009 at 19:36:22
1) The club has made the assumption that going to Kirkby will increase attendances with the widely held belief that there are untapped masses out in the East Lancs, to the tune of 10,000 odd that will come along and boost attendance
2) The club have said that moving to a new stadium will make them a more attractive proposition to an outside investor and their hope I guess is that the club can be sold once the Kirkby deal is finalised. That’s where the buyer comes in and Kenwright does one.
3) The reality of the situation is that the club has made SERIOUSLY flawed assumptions:
a) It has underestimated how many fans they will lose as a result of this move;
b) they have also over estimated how many new fans they expect to get;
c) It also has the idea that somehow there will be large corporate interest in going out far from the city centre with no ready access to get back to the city centre and its facilities;
d) It has the mistaken belief that the transport plans are somehow adequate to cope with the fans that do actually go. Turning up on bicycles for Christ's sake...
4) Of course by the time this shitstorm comes to fruition and in the years after, when there are 25,000 turning up to watch Sunderland at home (when there should be 50k+), it will be too late and any investor who has bought the club based on the mistaken assumptions of Kenwright et all will be left holding a lemon of signicant proportions.
67 Posted 30/07/2009 at 19:43:24
68 Posted 01/08/2009 at 20:49:27
Here’s a question for you Neil, it only requires a one word answer: Will you be getting a season ticket for Kirkby ?
Just the one word now...
69 Posted 01/08/2009 at 21:01:59
Given this, what sort of idiot multi-millionaire is going to give Bill Kenwright et al the bumber pay out they’re supposedly after to buy a business that’s worth less than it currently is?
Dave, if this is the question you reckon has been answered, could you please point out the answer for Neil and my benefit, as we’ve obviously overlooked it — our arses are up for a public showing...
70 Posted 01/08/2009 at 23:36:16
The fundamental point I am making is that DK is all based on flawed assumptions where the truth of the matter will come out in the fullness of time — and by 'truth' I mean not being able to get enough bums of seats and corporate bods in to sustain the predicted attendances/revenues which are essential to the whole viability of this project. By that time EFC would be in serious shit with dwindling support, unable to service the debt it had taken on to fund this move.
It’s a bit different for Tesco, they would have the retail generation they are PRIMARILY after and wouldn’t give a rats arse if Everton couldn’t get enough numbers into their new stadium and went tits up. Does that make sense to you?
Wyness/Kenwright/Elstone have been guilty of some serious cart-before-horse thinking and I hope the shambles that is DK seriously unravels later in the year for the good of the club.
71 Posted 02/08/2009 at 09:25:12
72 Posted 02/08/2009 at 19:00:21
Add Your Comments
In order to post a comment to Fan Articles, you need to be logged in as a registered user of the site.
Or Sign up as a ToffeeWeb Member — it's free, takes just a few minutes and will allow you to post your comments on articles and MailBag submissions across the site.