Skip to Main Content
Members:   Log In  |  Sign Up
NewsRumoursReportsVideoTalking PointsArticles
Text Size:  A  A  A
FAN ARTICLES

Missed the boat...

By Sean Mckenna :  02/09/2009 :  Comments (135) :
Well folks the summer has gone the window has closed (thank god because now I might be able to get a good nights sleep!) while some of the mass of Evertonians have woken up this morning with a feeling of either utter despair or the feeling of "yea we done OK in the transfer window" Whichever way you look at it, the summer's tranfer activity has been a mess again and here's why.

First thing, start of the summer, Everton FC announce record season tickets sold, a new 10-year sponsorship with Kitbag (yet another record), David Moyes states that "We will be looking to bring in quality signings early doors"... then we get statements by directors that he is EXCITED by the possible transfers comming in this summer!! Sounds all great and rosey doesn't it?

We all know what happened next, don't we? Yes, we wait until the last few weeks, after we sell one of best defenders to one of our main rivals, before we make a purchase; we're left running about like headless chickens on the last day, trying to sign everyone any anyone.

I have learned a lot about Everton FC this summer; for one, David Moyes is not a ditherer; and Bill Kenwright for all his faults does NOT run this club, his fellow cronies DO! If Everton fans could call an EGM (which we can't anymore for some strange reason), these would be the questions that I and I'm sure nearly every Evertonian would like to hear the answers to.

1. Where is the Sky money, Bill? (or Rob ?or Phil? in other words...)

2. Where's the money from Kitbag, the FA Cup run, final league position, season tickets sales, merchandise etc?

3.Why do you and the directors tell blatant lies regarding all of the above?

4. Do you want to sell the club or just get investment and remain in charge of our club? And if so, is this a major stumbling block in finding a buyer?

5. Are we a selling club now?

6. If we are broke, why apply and get a work permit for a player we don't sign (Banega), therefore wasting money and time?

We would all love to get these questions answered but dont hold your breath: Everton FC don't do the truth, do they? ("Free Stadium" — need I say more?)

The fact is that we have missed the boat again after we finish fifth, we were FA Cup Finalists... so the next step has to be 4th and win the Cup — easier said than done, I know, but the Board and Chairman have to give Moyes the tools to do the job... and they haven't. AGAIN!

But who knows... Bily could turn out to a world beater, the Heit might get 10 goals this season, Distin could be the new Rio, Jo might wake up one morning and realize he is Brazilian and score a bucketload of goals, Yak could return and start banging them in for fun, the best little Spaniard we know might have the best season of his life and actually get into the Spanish squad, and finally Osman might get dropped (some chance!)

We the fans are still the same bunch of loyal supporters so I hope every Evertonian gets behind the team and with a bit of luck we might finish 6th in the league, win the Europa Cup, and find a buyer for the club...

Well, here's to the new season, optimism is a wonderful thing. COYB

Reader Comments

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


Alan Clarke
1   Posted 02/09/2009 at 13:47:42

Report abuse

Another question:

When Moyes says he hopes to bring in some players in "the next 48 hours", what does this mean?

Also, how does "4, maybe more" equate to 1? (He said this after he signed Distin).

For all those who seem think this has been a good transfer window, our manager must be fairly distraught because he didn’t get the numbers in he wanted. In which case these above quotes must have been directed at whoever is in charge of the purse strings.

I am happy with the players we brought in but they will only help us tread water.
Will Green
2   Posted 02/09/2009 at 14:01:59

Report abuse

My thoughts exactly. Moyes must be gutted.
Nick Entwistle
3   Posted 02/09/2009 at 13:59:46

Report abuse

Here’s a theory. BK is so frightened of the bottom falling out of football finances, that he’s hording all our wealth, so that when all those overseas contracts and foreigh investors bugger off, we’ll be the financially dominant force in world football, he’ll unleash the cash, once again being called the Mersey Millionaires.
David Barks
4   Posted 02/09/2009 at 14:22:23

Report abuse

Our playing squad has improved from last season, so we did not stand still. But this is what is driving me crazy, all the questions of "where’s the sky money, the kit bag money, etc, etc???" It’s as if people think the only money that goes into football is transfer fees. "Well we received x amount of millions from sky, so we should have that for transfer...."

No, that is not how it works. Everton has employees to pay (other than the footballers), travel expenses, maintenance to the stadium, vendors to pay, investing in the form of a club shop in Liverpool One, loan payments to the banks, installment payments to make from past transfers, maintenance of the training facility, running the academy and reserves, and then we have the wages paid to the footballers on the pitch, and the list goes on. People are acting as if we have 25 million in profits just vanishing. That’s simply not true. But here’s an idea, raise ticket prices. This is what Chelsea and the like have done to offset some of their expenditures, while Everton have kept their ticket prices relatively stable for years now. If people want more money spent on transfers, start a petition calling for ticket prices to be doubled and all that revenue to be invested in player transfer fees. I’ll wait to see if that happens. No, it’s much easier just to expect somebody else to have millions upon millions to just throw into the team, while demanding the cost to the fan not go up.

Ciarán McGlone
5   Posted 02/09/2009 at 14:51:11

Report abuse

The sky money goes on wages...the other money is clearly being snatched by squirrels.

Raise ticket prices? Behave.

How about raising the quality of the product, then raising the prices.
Gavin Ramejkis
6   Posted 02/09/2009 at 14:49:42

Report abuse

David it’s a fallacy to say that the likes of the upkeep of Finch Farm has been swallowed by the team’s over performance last season, the club will be reliant on a standard Sky revenue package but the cup run with it’s extra TV revenue could not have been a component of it’s fiscal strategy as it was unknown and merely dreamt of. Equally you ask why Everton have not raised their ticket prices, I’ve had a season ticket in the Park End for many years and can tell you that the cost in 05/06 was £494 and this season £586 which I would say is above the cost of inflation. Given the recession it would be folly to think a club with the largest lower income support of any EPL would just swallow these rises a la Chelski is again folly. The lies piss the paying fans off, the earlier and earlier "early bird discount" which in effect makes Everton a bank for your interest instead of yourself for fuck all return.
Ciarán McGlone
7   Posted 02/09/2009 at 15:29:06

Report abuse

Why exactly would we be maintaning a traning facility we only rent?

Surely that’s the owners job.
Jay Harris
8   Posted 02/09/2009 at 15:27:24

Report abuse

David
"Wow" "I’m still watching this space" from last year.

And this year’s quotes range from "We will get the players in early this year to get a proper pre season in"
"I’m excited by the prospect of the new players we’ll be getting"
"we have the funds to do business early this year"

we supposedly offered around 10 million for Naughton etc earlier on.

Are you now saying that nothing but the Lescott money was available so that was all a pack of lies like the 12 million for Manny "He’ll be signing in the morning"Fernandes that mysteriously disappeared.

There are not many sets of accounts that tell the absolute truth so if people are capable of telling lies to the masses they’re certainly capable of creative accounting.
Norman Grimwood
9   Posted 02/09/2009 at 15:52:21

Report abuse

BK told Sky sports after the signing of Johnny Heitinga that the Blues were not done yet, I took to mean that more were on the way and guess what no other players arrived.

The club may have been trying to bring more players, but were unsuccessful. I really think it would be best for Mr. Kenwright to say nothing until a deal is done, because he has been an embarrassment to himself and the club with the ill-advised statements to the press.
John Martin
10   Posted 02/09/2009 at 16:04:15

Report abuse

I would beleive the money has to pay wages, finch farm costs etc as a reason for lack of spending early if every other team had to do the same. I assume all other clubs have other staff, training facilities to pay for and for a number of clubs higher wages bills. So i wonder how all these teams were able to spend money on players and not just money received for a player who all summer the board said would not be sold. As for BK not saying anything chance would be a fine thing only time you dont hear from him is when the shit hits the fan, funny how we hardly heared from him all summer until we sold Lescott then on deadline day.
Tony Marsh
11   Posted 02/09/2009 at 16:25:44

Report abuse

Sean I got slaughtered on here in early July for daring to say that this would happen again.We didnt miss the boat this time around because we never had any intention of boarding the fucking thing in the first place.

I was quite happy yesterday but since then I have had time to reflect on whats gone on and its all very devious once more.All wehave spent is the
Lescott money so where are the funds
we pretended to spend early doors?

Was Spurs nipping in for Naughton a blessing in desguise for Kenwright because he was skint at the time?

Is Moyes party to all these shennanigans thus his bumper salary.,hush money if you like?

Can any one at the top at this club be trusted with so much as selling a meat pie?

Will the same scenario repeatr it self
groundhog da fashion for as long as BK and DM run the show?

It annoys the fuck out of me that all the goodie two shoe supporters we have these days are all now back on board
and everything is hunky fucking dory once more because we signed 3 players.

It would of been none but for Lescott going so I guess you can say Julian has saved the club for the time being so no more slagging him off eh lads???
Suzy Whitehead
12   Posted 02/09/2009 at 16:38:17

Report abuse

Another question;

Alan Clarke - when you going to give me my cash?

Alan Clarke - what does humble p[ie taste like?
David Barks
13   Posted 02/09/2009 at 16:32:32

Report abuse

There was no embarrassment by Kenwright saying we were still working on more deals, when in fact we were and just failed to complete them. Every side fails to complete deals, Spurs failed to do a couple with the swap deal for Anton Ferdinand falling through as well as failing to send Bentley to City for Petrov. And it is a fact that we were trying to make further signings, Kranckar has come out and stated this was true, Everton tried to buy him but he chose Spurs. Just because deals didn’t happen doesn’t mean they weren’t being worked on and we are not the only team to have deals not go through.
Richard Dodd
14   Posted 02/09/2009 at 16:35:37

Report abuse

Only a fool would not realise that with wages and all other costs related to the playing side escalating at an unprecentated rate together with the need to have cash in place for our new ground comes November,every penny of income is spoken for.
Blue Bill has been true to his word-all the Lescott money has been put at the manager’s disposal and -as ever-he has spent it well!
Neil Pearse
15   Posted 02/09/2009 at 16:33:27

Report abuse

John Martin (and others) - see Dan Brierley’s excellent posts on ’The Everton Way’ thread. We have less money to spend than other clubs because we have significantly lower revenues. Not rocket science.

And of course David is spot on about the wages issue. If a player is on £50K a week (and Bily and Heitinga certainly will be at the least) that’s over £5M we have to find a year. AvdM and Jacobsen were probably on less than half that. Everyone keeps going "Jo doesn’t count because he’s on loan". Aren’t we paying him then? We’ve also signed new higher contracts for a whole bunch of players in the last six months (Jagielka, Rodwell....).

The wage bill has gone up significantly this year over last. (Unlike say Portsmouth and West Ham.) Believe it or not, that is where a lot of the money goes...
Ciarán McGlone
16   Posted 02/09/2009 at 16:42:55

Report abuse

No it hasn’t.

We spent about 10 mill of 24 mill.

Dont talk bollocks Dodd.
Steven Connor
17   Posted 02/09/2009 at 16:29:59

Report abuse

John Martin... Do you really ’wonder how all these teams were able to spend money on players and not just money received for a player. By ’all these teams’ who exactly do you mean? Have every team in the prem gone out and spent more money than us? Only Spurs, Villa, Liverpool, Sunderland & City have actually spent more money than us...and of those only City have actually bought players without selling any to finance their deals. Net spending by virtually all clubs in the premier league, once transfers in and out are looked at, ranges from nothing to about seven /eight million, with the exception of city and chelsea.
Its pretty obvious where City, Sunderland, Chelsea and Spurs get their money from...they are all owned by overseas investors with deeper pockets....But even then spurs recouped over twenty million through players sales.
The bottom line is pretty simple...the money that comes in from Sky, sponsorships etc goes into the running of the club, primarily players astronomical wages ( and if the retort is that we dont pay top whack...well we clearly have several players on the better side of 35k a week...tot that up over a year.)
Premier leage economics are crazy and headinf for meltdown unless players wages are reigned in...that is a fact...but if you think Everton are the ’only’ club not spending money other than that which comes in from transfers the you have not been paying attention this summer.
Steve Pugh
18   Posted 02/09/2009 at 16:48:34

Report abuse

"Here’s a theory. BK is so frightened of the bottom falling out of football finances, that he’s hording all our wealth, so that when all those overseas contracts and foreigh investors bugger off, we’ll be the financially dominant force in world football, he’ll unleash the cash, once again being called the Mersey Millionaires."

Nick, how I wish you were right. If Bill was a astute business man I would say yes, but with the best will in the world he isn’t. God only knows how his theatrical empire keeps going.

Keeping an eye on the finances is one thing, but the Mersey Millionaires are rapidly turning into the Mersey Misers
Neil Pearse
19   Posted 02/09/2009 at 16:56:41

Report abuse

Er... Ciaran and your £10M - did we get Bily for free or something and I missed it?
David O'Keefe
20   Posted 02/09/2009 at 17:00:57

Report abuse

EFC more like cash converters FC.

Face it EFC are a basket case and mersly signing 3 and bringing one on loan is papering over the cracks. The squad size has decreased by one each season and the clubs low turnover and comparitively high debts in relation to the turnover will mean that we are selling club for the forseeable future.
Gerry Quinn
21   Posted 02/09/2009 at 17:03:44

Report abuse

Well, love him or hate him, BK must have got one of his script writers to come up with this one, in particular the last comment about Chile.......from the OS........
Mr Kenwright was equally unequivocal – and somewhat surprised by Kranjcar’s apparent claim that he was actively courted by Everton.

“I couldn’t believe my eyes when I read what Kranjcar is alleged to have said," he said. “We made no approach either to Portsmouth or to the player’s respresentatives; maybe he was talking about Everton Chile."
Ciarán McGlone
22   Posted 02/09/2009 at 17:08:18

Report abuse

Er... Ciaran and your £10M - did we get Bily for free or something and I missed it?
-------------------

No Neil, we paid all the money up front - like we usually do.

Have an ounce of wit.
Anthony O'Sullivan
23   Posted 02/09/2009 at 17:14:10

Report abuse

Ciaran are you an accountant ?

10 + 6+ 5 = 10 ??????

Thank god transfer season is over i couldnt take much more of it
Jay Harris
24   Posted 02/09/2009 at 17:09:16

Report abuse

Neil and Doddy
If you’re right about the club having no money why did the club make noises about bringing players in early and funds were available.

And why place bids for Naughton,delph etc.

I’m still waiting for an answer as to where the 12 Million for Manny’he’ll be signing in the morning" fernandes went to.

David Barks
Appy Arry came on Sky sports to deny the Bentley and Ferdinand rumours saying they were blatantly untrue and Darling Bill has stated EFC never made any approach for Krancjar.
Ciarán McGlone
25   Posted 02/09/2009 at 17:14:01

Report abuse

Gerry...well spotted.

I thought it would’ve been at least the weekend before the club moved into destructive PR mode...

Absolutely priceless..Here we have a club who were screaming out for a playmaker - and we actually have Bill Kenwright boasting that we didn’t bother making an approach..for possibly the best value signing of the window!

Fuck me..has this man got any fucking brains whatsoever!

I am literally astounded...
Brian Williams
26   Posted 02/09/2009 at 17:10:09

Report abuse

Where’s all the money gone?

How much interest do you think there is on circa £80 million?
Some people need to get real."Where’s all the money gone?"
It goes on keeping the club operating that’s where it’s gone. If people think the board are squirreling cash away and getting rich they’re seriously deluded. Simply because, by the time all the cash we get has gone to pay for everything we owe and keeping the club running, there’s nowt left....end of! We’re skint, but don’t expect the board or anyone else to shout that from the rooftops, although there have been more than several instances of our lack of funds being admitted to by employees of the club, David Moyes most of all.
If we were getting gates of 60,000 every home game there’d be something to complain about, but last season we were only the tenth best attended club in the premiership......
Jay Harris
27   Posted 02/09/2009 at 17:17:43

Report abuse

Ciaran
it’s like the £15 miilion we are reported to have spent on Fellaini when they were only asking 15 million Euros in the first place.

People still come on here as if we paid the 15 million up front last year.

The only milions we operate in are millions of Mars bars over the next 20 years.
David Barks
28   Posted 02/09/2009 at 17:18:34

Report abuse

That is not what Redknapp said:
"Alan Hutton and Anton Ferdinand was something that was put about a bit, but it didn’t happen." That is quite different than "blatantly untrue".
David Barks
29   Posted 02/09/2009 at 17:22:13

Report abuse

Jay,

you just helped answer your question about the money with your Fellaini post. Installment payments for transfers done in previous years.
Jay Harris
30   Posted 02/09/2009 at 17:21:17

Report abuse

Brian
I’m not suggesting the directors are stashing millions under their mattresses but something is blatantly wrong when we get a 5th place finish and a cup final appearance neither of which were planned for and we let VDM,Jacobsen,Valente,Lescott and Castillo go and now we cant even afford a cup of coffee over and above the Lescott fee.

That together with the last minute panic and the charade all close season says to me that something is fundamentally wrong at EFC.
Nigel Rickman
31   Posted 02/09/2009 at 10:38:14

Report abuse

Again after a summer of no transfer activity, we managed to get three players in the final couple of days. We haven't actually strengthened the squad, ie players out Jacobsen, Castillo, and Lescott have only been replaced. And there was still some left in the coffers through the sale of Lescott, so were we in fact going to buy anybody?

Or, are we again going to be told in December that we are looking to strengthen the squad for the final push? Time will only tell if the new recruits are better than what we had; let's hope so.

Jay Harris
32   Posted 02/09/2009 at 17:27:34

Report abuse

David
He did not say it didnt happen.

He said there was never anything in it and bentley was training at Spurs training ground.
Neil Pearse
33   Posted 02/09/2009 at 17:25:34

Report abuse

Strewth! Do you think then that Man City deposited £22M directly into our bank account the week before last? (Possibly not.)

Even if you do, do you think it is a good idea to pretend that we will never have to pay the extra installments on Bily, Distin and Heitinga, and so can blow all the money now? (Hopefully not.)

By the way, since I do criticism as well as praise (you might want to try it Ciaran), I think the PR of the club is thoroughly amateurish. I have no idea why they say stupid things like "we will buy early this year". Everyone knows that we can’t afford to do that.
Ciarán McGlone
34   Posted 02/09/2009 at 17:32:25

Report abuse

No Neil, Man city would clearly want to string teh deal out over 5 years..because they’re skint.

No idea what your second paragraph means.
Neil Pearse
35   Posted 02/09/2009 at 17:30:26

Report abuse

Jay -

We get less revenues than other clubs (see Dan Brierley on other threads). Our wage bill has gone up significantly (see me and others). We are in significant debt (not the worst, but hardly trivial). The three we bought cost the same or more than Lescott anyway (taking away the Wolves money).

This kind of explains what’s going on.
Mike Green
36   Posted 02/09/2009 at 17:37:28

Report abuse

Jay - with the greatest of respect, it was plain to see that Harry was lying out of his arse about there being nothing in the Bentley think. Just as it was totally obvious as soon as he was convicted of DD he wanted to get rid - small matter of being in a crash himself caused by a drink driver, NOT a Happy Harry.

The blokes hilarious though - my kids give away less. Next time he gets asked a question if he looks down and a bit to the side, shakes his head, goes a little pink and goes "No... no... there was nothing in it... nothing at all..." he’s lying, simple as.

Great entertainment though.
Neil Pearse
37   Posted 02/09/2009 at 17:37:05

Report abuse

Ciaran, on Man City they will still of course keep the money in the bank if they can. Even with these Arabs, a year’s interest on say £10M is worth having.

Tthe second para means that we now have a commitment to pay £20M+ for the three players we bought. Not a commitment to pay £10M. So we can’t just pretend that we have £10M Lescott money to spend. We don’t. If we did spend it now, how are we going to make the future payments? Sell Arteta then perhaps?
Sean McKenna
38   Posted 02/09/2009 at 17:36:57

Report abuse

Tony marsh I like got slated on another post the other week because I stated that our brand of football is shite, I was even called a villa fan and a koptie. What’s wrong with wanting to see a decent brand of footie eh, it just shows how stupid and ignorent some evertonians are. Back to the point in hand, some people seem to think all our money goes on ground maintainence, players wages etc, ok then answer me this, dosnt every over club have these outgoing. Y

ES, dosnt the clubs like fulham bolton Wigan west ham and so on have less average gate money than us YES, have they all spent more money than us this year, YES, did these teams spend more than us last season,YES, that’s right folks we havnt spent a penny in transfer fees in these last two years, and don’t forget we don’t buy in January like other clubs, too deer they say, so back to the question where the fucks the money??

Jay Harris spot on mate, if were broke why don’t them tossers just sAy look we are broke this so no signings, I could live with the truth, instead of comming out with bullshit every year and raising hopes, so pretending to be competitive. The whole thing sticks jay

Jay Harris
39   Posted 02/09/2009 at 17:46:34

Report abuse

Neil
that is the nub of the problem.

Kenwright can bang on all he likes about seeking new investment 24/7 and needing billionaires but our main problem is our commercial income is second rate for a top premiership club.

Do we get the image rights for new high profile players?

Why dont we improve Everton TV and charge more?

Why dont we improve the merchandising effort?

Why are we missing out on the Aussie market that has been created by Tim cahill?

Spurs get around 40 million in commercial activities we get about 3 million.

Kenwright may go on about 24/7 but in truth it’s about 24 minutes a week running the club and about 7 hours a week milking the limelight and watching games.

Only Moyes and Elstone are putting effort into the club.There is no other leadership.
David O'Keefe
40   Posted 02/09/2009 at 17:48:47

Report abuse

"Sell Arteta perhaps then?"

Neil, bang on the money. Its just like cash converters, that is how it will be for the foreseeable future.

The squad is getting smaller and smaller; meaning that any serious injuries suffered by our players leaves the squad exposed.

The club is an absolute shambles, the turnover may be low, whose fault is that?

The stadium solution is unsuitable, whose fault is that?

Where’s the ambition, Neil, your realism is nothing more than explaining away the failures of the current regime and worst still defending a stadium move that even you consider risky.

Put a positive spin on it if you like but the club is in serious trouble and many supporters are sick of the lies and are no longer willing to listen to Bill, considering that he won’t listen to his own shareholders.
David O'Keefe
41   Posted 02/09/2009 at 17:59:43

Report abuse

Sorry, Jay, but Elstone doesn’t care about the club.

He was asked at the shareholders forum about the clubs future if Kirkby fell through, his response: he shrugged his shoulders.
Neil Pearse
42   Posted 02/09/2009 at 18:00:32

Report abuse

Jay Harris - I am very happy to agree with you on the commercial failings. I think that there are signs of improvement, but I basically agree.

David - I hardly think the club is "in serious trouble" (that would be Portsmouth and others, including Liverpool if they don’t make the CL). Also I don’t really see how the squad is smaller (Valente was finished and Moyes wouldn’t play Castillo or VdM).

I promised myself I wouldn’t use the K word today since we are talking about the transfer window. I think we all know all the arguments about that by now. Suffice to say that I think sitting in GP hoping for a sugardaddy is the riskiest strategy of all.
David O'Keefe
43   Posted 02/09/2009 at 18:11:21

Report abuse

Neil, Face facts we are in serious trouble, we are selling our best players to keep the banks at bay, if we keep selling our best players the club will not progress, in fact it will go backwards.

For the record Neil waiting at GP for a sugar daddy to turn up is a far better option than kirkby.

Kirkby will be a millstone around the clubs neck for the next 25 years. There is no guarantee of a sugar daddy with that pile of shite stadium. If we stay at GP the sugar daddy will effectively have all options open to him. For the record Neil, the clubs former commercial director had some sugar daddies lined up, but they went to Notts County along with the said commercial director. There are buyers out their Neil, the only barrier is Bill Kennwright not the stadium.
Neil Pearse
44   Posted 02/09/2009 at 18:18:45

Report abuse

David, if we are selling our best players to keep the banks at bay, why did we buy three players who cost more than Lescott minus the Wolves payment, and also increase our wages bill by a good few millions? Spending more is an odd way of saving money for the banks.

We need rather more money than is going into Notts County. Not really a relevant comparison.
John Martin
45   Posted 02/09/2009 at 18:18:41

Report abuse

To a couple of people above, all these clubs did spend more money than us early on, we only spent after we sold Lescott. My point was how come we have no money to spend while other clubs did ? Every club has bills to pay like we have and its down to the boards mis management that the only way we can buy players is by selling. Next up will be Rodwell going to Man Utd and we’ll spend all that money and fans will be happy because we have and ignore that we have lost a another talent to do it. I was lucky enough to see a great Everton side win the league i’ll never see that again with Billy Bullshitter in charge selling our best players to bail out his incompetance. Still Nil satis nisi optimum means fuck all to some of our fans who think 5th is the new 1st so accept it. Actually we’ll take 6th now i suppose city making a big 5. Like Tony Marsh says we;ll do the same next summer with the same old bullshit spouted from the club.
David O'Keefe
46   Posted 02/09/2009 at 18:22:48

Report abuse

Neil, the headline figures tell a differnet tale, it gives the club a £1 million pound profit, but the fees are likely to spread out in installments spread over the length of the player contracts. So I’m afraid your wrong, the club has still made a profit despite signing three players and paying off Wolves.
Tony Marsh
47   Posted 02/09/2009 at 18:15:05

Report abuse

Alienating your fan base by moving to the K word is another risky strategy Niel
Neil Pearse
48   Posted 02/09/2009 at 18:27:59

Report abuse

David, still not sure how 22-3 is more than (I’ll be conservative) 6+6+9 plus the wage hike. As I say, odd way to please your bank manager.

And so what if the installments are spread? No odds. We still have a legal commitment to pay that money. (And that’s assuming all the Lescott money was instant.)
Martin Mason
49   Posted 02/09/2009 at 18:46:04

Report abuse

Can I play devils’s advocate. Is it possible that many of the so called "buys" for Everton were press driven and not reality? Is it possible that Everton are trying to run a financially sound ship where they balance income with outgoings and don’t run up the debts that the foreign franchised clubs run by asset strippers (Liverpool and Man U) do with several hundred million of debt secured against the clubs itself. In the worst case both could do an Accrington Stanley. Is it wrong that instead of paying stupid prices for players (22million for Lescott is stupid), that they try to get the best value for their stakeholders?

Are we being bled dry by avaricious owners for personal gain or to pay for a new Stadium? I really don’t know but I also believe that the conspiracy theorists on here don’t neither. If the alternative is to stay financially solvent or become a debt ridden foreign franchised club like Liverpool I’ll stay as we are any day and get my kicks from seeing us perform well against them. As has been pointed out above don’t just look at transfer costs but total costs including wages. What we pay managers and players at around 3million a year each is fucking scandalous for what was once a working class pastime.
Jay Harris
50   Posted 02/09/2009 at 19:15:15

Report abuse

Martin
totally agree with your last point but since Kenwright took over Everton have made continuous losses almost every year and have taken debt from 5 to over 75 million and sold off or mortgaged anything and everything.

Granted this is the crazy world of football right now but we are no better placed than anybody due to our particularly low income, seriously weak marketing and total lack of assets.

at least the Sky 4 have brand value so theoretically will not go bust anytime soon whereas the rest of us may see a casualty possibly Portsmouth or West ham doing a Leeds before some sense comes back into football.
Victor Johnson
51   Posted 02/09/2009 at 19:31:15

Report abuse

Anyone with even the most rudimentary understanding of the term ’going concern’ knows that cash flow is king in this world - just ask those good folks at AIG. For Jay, Ciaran and the rest of the hot-heads the challenge is simple - go study some maths. Let’s start with 1+1=?
David O'Keefe
52   Posted 02/09/2009 at 19:38:31

Report abuse

Including wages are we? Shifting the goalpost already. Neil the players that were released and the player sold picked up a wage as well, so whats your point?

"David, still not sure how 22-3 is more than (I’ll be conservative) 6+6+9 plus the wage hike. As I say, odd way to please your bank manager."

Dishonest and shameful, you know the situation very well.
Victor Johnson
53   Posted 02/09/2009 at 19:51:55

Report abuse

David
The reality is as clear as day. You either run the operation within one’s means and protect shareholder value, take a big gamble in the hope it will work out (therefore risking shareholder value) or go find a Sugardaddy who is oblivious to the term ’debt obligation’. Remember somebody always has to pay up. Question is only when and how. Makes me shudder (rather smile) to think how the Shite are gonna square their circle and you lot are looking to follow suit.
David O'Keefe
54   Posted 02/09/2009 at 20:04:03

Report abuse

Victor, face reality and less of the strawman arguments. The club is struggling to finance its operations, remember that when you think of that lot across the road.
Victor Johnson
55   Posted 02/09/2009 at 20:12:27

Report abuse

David
Yes that’s true and you want them to further struggle by buying players they can ill afford. The club obviously needs to develop a strategy to increase revenues, not risk its well-being. That, I understand, is what they are doing, although it took them long enough to get round to it. So, David what is this reality thing you are going on about?
David O'Keefe
56   Posted 02/09/2009 at 20:28:01

Report abuse

Victor, Please stop attributing to me opinions that I have not made.
James Boden
57   Posted 02/09/2009 at 20:25:21

Report abuse

This will be the same every year so long as Kenwright is in charge. How we can have no money is beyond me.
Victor Johnson
58   Posted 02/09/2009 at 20:31:39

Report abuse

"Face it EFC are a basket case and mersly signing 3 and bringing one on loan is papering over the cracks. The squad size has decreased by one each season..."

So you are not suggesting we should have bought more players? Whatever, let’s agree to differ.

By the way, would you call ManU, Arsenal and the Shite selling clubs too?
Graeme Bradman
59   Posted 02/09/2009 at 20:34:13

Report abuse

The financial guy on Sky sports news stated this morning that if you take Man City out of the equation, the premiership as as a whole spent less than they took in sales. As we get depressed comparing our outlay with Spurs and Sunderland, we should take some encouragement from the fact that Liverpool, Villa, and West Ham are all weaker, and Fulham are no stronger. If our new signings perform as DM would want then we will definately be stronger.
David O'Keefe
60   Posted 02/09/2009 at 20:50:35

Report abuse

Thank you Victor, but like a dog with a bone you won’t leave it alone.

Well the Liverpool squad (62 paid professionals) could do with some trimming, the size of the man utd and arsenal squad is about the same, so no I wouldn’t call them selling clubs, their need to sell is not as stark as our own need to sell.

Not very good at this debating lark are you. Lame.
Victor Johnson
61   Posted 02/09/2009 at 21:18:43

Report abuse

David
Let’s say you win, if that’s the point. Don’t think Xavi Alonso would be happy with you calling him trimmings though.
David O'Keefe
62   Posted 02/09/2009 at 21:27:13

Report abuse

Perhaps not but Seb Leto was trimmings and Xavi been replaced by a 20 million pound italian.

You get no sympathy from me, Vic, you falsly attributed to me an opinion I never expressed, moved the goalposts when called upon it and when I still caught you out... you start sulking.
Victor Johnson
63   Posted 02/09/2009 at 21:39:05

Report abuse

David
Before it turns farcical pls remind me what I said that pricked your sensibilities? I don’t remember saying anything other than the complete opposite of what you were saying - i.e that we are not in as serious shit as you would have your mates believe, and the club is run sensibly, albeit unspectacularly. You ordered me to get real. Presumably, that meant according to your interpretation of the real world. That’s too much to ask anyone without solid facts to back up the rhetoric. Go get some Horlicks.
John Chambers
64   Posted 02/09/2009 at 21:45:17

Report abuse

Glad to see we are all enjoying ourselves with the usual bickering/slagging one another off. Whilst I suspect Sean may have had his tongue in his cheek with his comments
"We the fans are still the same bunch of loyal supporters so I hope every Evertonian gets behind the team and with a bit of luck we might finish 6th in the league, win the Europa Cup, and find a buyer for the club...

Well, here’s to the new season, optimism is a wonderful thing. COYB "

I think there are some reasons for optimism in the squad.
I grant defensively we are a bit short with only 6 ’established’ defenders (Neville being classed a midfielder) so the likes of Heitinga and Distin may have to cover other positions but a back 4 of Heitinga, Jags, Distin & Baines is as good as any back 4 we have had in a long time. Hibbert & Yobo, 2 reguar top 6 premiership defenders for most of the last 5 years on the bench.
In midfield we might have to get by with Pienaar, Arteta, Rodwell and Bily. I appreciate that is putting some faith in an 18 year old and a new signing but hey if that doesn’t work we have got Cahill, or Fellaini or Neville or Osman available, another set of top 5 premiership players.
And then we have our forwards to worry about where we will only have the Yak and Saha on the pitch with Jo, Vaughan, Anichebe to call on.
Oh and I forgot about giving some youngsters a chance, Gosling, Baxter, Wallace the 2 Americans.

Perhaps we should look back to those heady days under Smith and Johnson when we could look forward to seeing Pistone, Nyarko, Gemmil, Ginola, Gascoine gracing Goodison!!
Lets get real. We may all get frustrated about some of the expectation set by the club, but instead of moaning about only getting 3 players in instead of 4 and only spending £21m of the £22m we got for Lescott the team is moving forward so lets focus on that and look to be more constructive instead of moaning all the time
David O'Keefe
65   Posted 02/09/2009 at 22:09:38

Report abuse

"Before it turns farcical" — It's already farcical, Vic. When you face reality I will be willing to enter into a dialogue with you, but to claim the club is run sensibly... for gawd's sake man the small shareholders at the club would certainly take issue with that, as would Messers Birch and Wyness.

I could continue this lame debate, but I must admit defeat some people just don’t want to face the truth.

So Vic, I will leave you with this thought as I go to get my Horlicks...PJ will always be a better chairman than BK.
Sean Stevenson
66   Posted 02/09/2009 at 22:33:48

Report abuse

Has everyone forgotten that we are trying to build a new stadium. Given that we would have made in excess of £20m just in TV money, I would guess some would have gone on wages, but most would have gone into the overdraft so that if planning permission is given in October/November we will be in a sound position to borrow more money for the stadium.

I think that is the fundamental reason why we have not spent money this year.
John Parker
67   Posted 02/09/2009 at 22:35:01

Report abuse

Transfer window/buying club/selling club? Think weare all missing the major point, the EPL is in meltdown. None of the B4 spent money over what they had brought in. The reasons for this the balance of power in football is shifting from the EPL to La Liga, the top quality players have opted to move or stay there eg Ronaldo, Kaka, Alonso, Da Silva Villa ect any of these would have been snapped up by the B4 or City if they would have come to EPL. Why did they not attempt to sign them? Simple WAGES, because of the drop in the £ against the Euro and the tax advantages of playing in Spain(only 25% for first 5 yrs) against the 40% soon to be 50% here. This means the wages to cover the difference would have to be approaching the silly £150K week that JT is now reputedly on. Non of the B4 could afford this over a long term 4/5yr contract, City could but with no pedigree in Europe(yet) non of the top players from outside the EPL will join them eg Kaka. Within 10 yrs I would expect to see a European League with possibly our top 4/5 with same no. from Spain and Italy and possibly Russia. In between the league games could see these teams bringing in extra revenue by playing games in far east for huge TV rights. Sad to see cannot see EFC being involved more than likely we will end up in league similar in standard to SPL with Villa, Spurs and best of rest and become feeder clubs(talent wise)for B5. Bit depressing but thats my vision for the future anyone else see things differently?
David Hallwood
68   Posted 02/09/2009 at 23:44:25

Report abuse

John, like you I worry about the creation of a European Super league, not because EFC won’t be in it (and we won’t be) but because it would be the final nail in football’s coffin. Consider the EPL or any of the domestic leagues; 20 teams 4 with a realistic chance of winning a futher 1-2 with a chance of finishing in the top 4, thens there’s 4-5 teams that will be in the top half and could qualify for Europe. Then there’s about 10 teams that could go down; this keeps the league competitve practically up to the last week of the season.

Now the Super League, obviously there’s no Europe so the propects of finishing anything other than 1st is irrelevant, and unless they have 2-3 divisions no teams going to get relegated. Realistically only 4-5 teams will have a chance of being champions, so who is going to watch a game between Athletico Madrid v Anderlect for instance that is a pre-season friendly in all but name. A super league would take the competitve edge out of 75% of games, and football would wither away and die
Richard Jones
69   Posted 02/09/2009 at 23:53:22

Report abuse

I have to say Neil your defence of the board and there dealings this year is becoming desperate, you already admitted on the damning The truth about Lescott, Kenwright and Kirkby thread that you were being mischievious with your figures, which seems strange for someone who always claims to be taking a full and balanced view on everything to do with Kenwright etc.
Jay Harris
70   Posted 03/09/2009 at 01:32:05

Report abuse

Victor
which part of your spectacular ability with Maths or Pseudo Accountabcy led you to conclude that an organisation that has made a loss in 7 of the 9 years it has operated,sold off and/or mortgaged all it’s assets and continuously ran it’s debts up from 5 to over 75 milllion could be described as "Being run sensibly".

You are obviously either a crank or a wind up merchant and I would thank you to note that there is nothing wrong with my mathematical ability whilst there is obviously something blatantly wrong with yours if you think EFC is "Being run sensibly".

Oh and I think you should look up the definition of "hothead" because your comprehension of English is not that great either.
Jay Harris
71   Posted 03/09/2009 at 01:41:01

Report abuse

Neil
so you think the wage bill for Distin,Billy and Heitiga is more than the wages of Lescott,Jacobsen,VDM,Castillo and Valente.

Check it out you may be surprised.
Eric Myles
72   Posted 03/09/2009 at 02:22:20

Report abuse

The answer to 1 and 2 is that the money is in the Desperation Kirkby piggy bank.
Kirk McArdle
73   Posted 03/09/2009 at 05:54:44

Report abuse

The answer to 1 and 2 is that the money is in the Desperation Kirkby piggy bank.


Does that mean that when the inquest goes against Kirkby, that come January we will have the biggest transfer kitty going!!!!

Don’t think so!!!!

Also can anyone confirm that LFC have withdrawn building plans for Stanley Park from LCC????
Kirk McArdle
74   Posted 03/09/2009 at 05:58:59

Report abuse

"But who knows... Bily could turn out to a world beater, the Heit might get 10 goals this season, Distin could be the new Rio, Jo might wake up one morning and realize he is Brazilian and score a bucketload of goals, Yak could return and start banging them in for fun, the best little Spaniard we know might have the best season of his life and actually get into the Spanish squad, and finally Osman might get dropped (some chance!)"

1. If Bily is a world beater how comes Hiddink didn’t tell Chelsea to go for him instead of Zirkov

2. Is Heitinga the defensive cover that Moyes was on about? How is cover goon score 10 goals?

3. Distin is older than Rio. How can he be the new?

4. The only way Jo with score is if he goes back to that second rate league in Russia.

5. The only Yak will start to score for fun is if he gets some support. CANNOT PLAY LONE STRIKER. How many more times do I have to say it!!!!

6. Alonso, Fabregas, Xavi, Inesta, Senna & Silva. Where is Arteta going to get in that midfield? The only way he is going to South Africa is if he buys a ticket and sits in the stands.

7. Osman should be renamed Jesus. Cos Jesus always sits on Gods ( Moyes ) rigth hand side!!!

Its going to be a long season me thinks!!!
Neil Pearse
75   Posted 03/09/2009 at 07:27:30

Report abuse

On the wages Jay: you’ve also got to add some more of Jo if we are now comparing this year with last. And the usual pessimists and conspiracy theorists on this site we’re wailing that we would never be able to sign Heitinga because of his wages: so we can rest assured that is on a lot more than Jacobsen! I doubt Russian internationals come cheap either.
Neil Pearse
76   Posted 03/09/2009 at 07:30:10

Report abuse

Richard - where did you pop up from again? As I’ve told you, I will be happy to respond to your posts when they contain more than personal attacks with no other useful contribution. There is nothing to respond to in your latest.
David O'Keefe
77   Posted 03/09/2009 at 08:31:45

Report abuse

Neil, Richard didn’t make a personal attack and in this thread at least you have been mischievous with your use of figures when defending the current regime. So that counts as a fair criticism.

Neil, we have taken five wage earners off the books and replaced them with three, Jo was at the club last year, so not exactly a new signing. The wages of those five included those of VDM and Lescott on about £4 million a year combined factor in another couple of million for Castillo and Jacobsen and we have a substantial saving of perhaps seven to eignt milion pounds and considering that the top wage at EFC is £2.5 million we have distributed that saving amongst the three new siginings. The wage bill is about the same, the squad is smaller.

That is the reality-now please have another attempt at denying it.
Richard Jones
78   Posted 03/09/2009 at 09:01:10

Report abuse

Neil, like I say desperate and if your claiming my last post contained personal abuse then you’re merely backing that up.

I think claiming I was fantasist and an idiot when I predicted to you that Lescott would be sold and we would get a couple forigners on the never, never and undiscloseded fee signings, was more like personal abuse, but its all part of the toffeeweb community that we enjoy I’m just pointing out that you seem to be going away from your stance. I think your silence speaks volumes.
David O'Keefe
79   Posted 03/09/2009 at 09:13:15

Report abuse

Let's also add Nuno Valente to that list as well Neil his wage of £2 million pa has also been redistributed. My point beingdespite the attempts of the likes of Brierley and yourself to claim that the board has increased the wage bill — it hasn’t happened.
Victor Johnson
80   Posted 03/09/2009 at 09:18:24

Report abuse

Jay
Can you enlighten me on the ’assets’ we have stripped that have somehow damaged our chances of success..
David O'Keefe
81   Posted 03/09/2009 at 09:20:20

Report abuse

Vic’s had his first coffee of the day. Vic, get down to Sayers and buy yourself a bacon butty — it's going to be a long day and you're going to be moving a lot of goalposts today.
Victor Johnson
82   Posted 03/09/2009 at 09:22:53

Report abuse

Good morning to you too, David — perhaps you could answer the question on Jay’s behalf.
David O'Keefe
83   Posted 03/09/2009 at 09:25:01

Report abuse

Jay’s a big boy and is more than capable of looking after himself. So wait for him to log on and enjoy that bacon butty.
Ciarán McGlone
84   Posted 03/09/2009 at 09:37:44

Report abuse

Victor....

1+1 = 1 Victor. I went to the Kenwright school of maths.
Ciarán McGlone
85   Posted 03/09/2009 at 09:45:02

Report abuse

’ i.e that we are not in as serious shit as you would have your mates believe’
-------------------------

Victor,

are you suggesting you know more than Kenwright? and that the club isn’t ’struggling to make ends meet’?

Curious.
Victor Johnson
86   Posted 03/09/2009 at 09:49:08

Report abuse

Ciaran
Can you try and answer the question I submitted. Feel free to do it in your inimitably witty way, but do answer it in such a manner that your facts are there for us to put to the test. If you do it well enough I will bow to your superiour wisdom and kiss your cyber arse. Go for it.
Ciarán McGlone
87   Posted 03/09/2009 at 10:15:33

Report abuse

What question?

If it involves maths, according to you - I’m already stumped!
Victor Johnson
88   Posted 03/09/2009 at 10:27:43

Report abuse

"Can you enlighten me on the ’assets’ we have stripped that have somehow damaged our chances of success.."
Victor Johnson
89   Posted 03/09/2009 at 10:30:05

Report abuse

If you need a kickstart perhaps the obvious way to answer the question is to (i) list those stripped assets and (ii) explain why and how their ’stripping’ has damaged the club’s chances of achieving success.
Ciarán McGlone
90   Posted 03/09/2009 at 10:40:08

Report abuse

You want to to qualify someone else’s opinion? An opinion that I’ve never even suggested I agree with...

Why?

Victor Johnson
91   Posted 03/09/2009 at 10:42:44

Report abuse

Ok. Glad you are (possibly, perhaps, maybe) with me on that one. Sorry to bother you and beg your forgiveness.
Ciarán McGlone
92   Posted 03/09/2009 at 11:11:50

Report abuse

We have been gradually asset stripped..whether that’s detrimental is debatable...

Outsourcing certainly lowers the value of the club..but that could be considered a good thing for a buyer - if you were looking to sell.
Victor Johnson
93   Posted 03/09/2009 at 11:35:04

Report abuse

Are you saying that it may be possible that BK (majority shareholder) and the Board are eschewing self-interest by making the club more attractive to a buyer?
Ciarán McGlone
94   Posted 03/09/2009 at 12:05:41

Report abuse

No. Not at all. It may be a pre-adaption. His main motivation for stripping assets has been to provide money for transfers, pay the banks and ultimately stay at the helm..

But the irony of this is that it’s made his positon less tenable...
Jay Harris
95   Posted 03/09/2009 at 12:21:55

Report abuse

Victor
I see you’re at it again and you’re understanding of English has ’nt improved.

Nowhere did I say "asset strippng" and nowhere did I say it "had damaged our chance of success" although any fool can see it certainly doesnt help to put yourself in a position of such debt...

However it is common knowledge that GP has been mortgaged for 15 million, Season ticket sales for the next 22 years have been mortgaged, the Netherton training ground was sold off and we’re now leasing Finch Farm instead.

Neil,
Jo was on the payroll last year and Moyes was on Sky Sports stating that reports of Heitinga’s wages were wildly exaggerated and he had no problem accommodating him into our wage structure.
Victor Johnson
96   Posted 03/09/2009 at 12:10:04

Report abuse

Why choose the word ’irony’ and not ’sacrifice’?
Victor Johnson
97   Posted 03/09/2009 at 12:51:33

Report abuse

"Martin, totally agree with your last point but since Kenwright took over Everton have made continuous losses almost every year and have taken debt from £5M to over £75M and sold off or mortgaged anything and everything.

"Granted this is the crazy world of football right now but we are no better placed than anybody due to our particularly low income, seriously weak marketing and total lack of assets".


Jay - I am I missing something here?
Victor Johnson
98   Posted 03/09/2009 at 12:53:52

Report abuse

Jay, What’s your gripe with Finch Farm being leased?
David O'Keefe
99   Posted 03/09/2009 at 12:55:30

Report abuse

"Jay — am I missing something here?"

Open goal alert.
David O'Keefe
100   Posted 03/09/2009 at 13:00:55

Report abuse

The point that Jay is making is that the club is using its assets to secure loans from the banks to fund its operations; instead of raising it revenues through a business strategy. The club is currently paying off 13 loans at the moment, which explains why we have no transfer budget — until a player is sold.
Victor Johnson
101   Posted 03/09/2009 at 13:02:56

Report abuse

David, To clarify, does ’a total lack of assets’ and ’sold off and mortgaged everything’ not imply asset stripping or reducing net asset value?
Victor Johnson
102   Posted 03/09/2009 at 13:07:33

Report abuse

David
Thanks for speaking up for Jay finally. By ’increasing revenues’ are you saying ’current streams by volume’ or ’new streams’ or both?
Jay Harris
103   Posted 03/09/2009 at 13:09:37

Report abuse

Victor
Definition of "Asset stripping" from Collins dictionary:

"If a person or company is involved in asset-stripping, they buy companies cheaply, sell off their assets to make a profit, and then close the companies down."

David totally understands the point I am trying to make.
David O'Keefe
104   Posted 03/09/2009 at 13:15:50

Report abuse

Vic, you're doing it again your attributing to me words that I have not written.
Victor Johnson
105   Posted 03/09/2009 at 13:21:13

Report abuse

’instead of raising it revenues through a business strategy’.

David, by saying raising revenues can I possibly understand that as increasing revenues, or not?
Victor Johnson
106   Posted 03/09/2009 at 13:24:04

Report abuse

Jay
Call it what you wish - mortgaging, sale-and-leaseback, selling - my challenge is this..
By freeing up capital (for whatever reason) on those assets you mention would you please demonstrate where it is damaging the club (and presumably its chances of success.
David O'Keefe
107   Posted 03/09/2009 at 13:25:52

Report abuse

Yes, you can understand that as increasing revenues, new revenue streams and increasing existing streams. It's called growing the business.
Ciarán McGlone
108   Posted 03/09/2009 at 13:27:55

Report abuse

’Why choose the word ’irony’ and not ’sacrifice’?’
--------------------

Because I think it’s ironic.
David O'Keefe
109   Posted 03/09/2009 at 13:28:46

Report abuse

Lord have mercy on us.

The trouble with that strategy is that it gives us capital in the short term, but it restricts growth in the long term if there is no strategy to grow the business. The club has 13 loans to repay thats the problem — it's why there is no transfer budget.
Victor Johnson
110   Posted 03/09/2009 at 13:37:18

Report abuse

David
Regarding existing streams- In your view is this to be done by increasing supply (stocking up) or demand (finding new fans or asking existing ones to consume more, or maybe asking non-EFC fans to buy our goods and services)?
Victor Johnson
111   Posted 03/09/2009 at 13:42:29

Report abuse

David
Why does selling netherton and leasing back Finch Farm restrict future growth? I am intrigued. Please address the issue and stop spouting off the platitudes.
David O'Keefe
112   Posted 03/09/2009 at 13:43:44

Report abuse

Vic, for the past three years the club didn’t have a city centre presence. It's called marketing, putting the club in the marketplace, something that they have failed to do for years.
David O'Keefe
113   Posted 03/09/2009 at 13:48:31

Report abuse

Vic, I have explained the problem with lease back strategy. When you pay off your mortgage your disposalable income increase, when you have a mortgage you have a smaller disposable income.
Jay Harris
114   Posted 03/09/2009 at 13:28:54

Report abuse

Victor
I dont know if you get bored everyday but final point from me as I have a business to run and much as I would love to cant spend all day on here discussing semantics.

You should only keep borrowing/mortgaging things to increase revenues otherwise the result is you soon hit the point where your costs (Including the much increased interest bill) exceed your income to such an extent that you end up in a downward spiral.

My concern with BK’s regime is that they have no business plan to increase revenues substantially.They are hanging all their hopes on Kirkby which most of us recognise will be a white elephant.

The days when gate receipts fund a club are long gone and have been replaced by worldwide branding and marketing something we cant even get right at local level.

So instead of pushing for Kirkby IMO we should put another tier on the Park end for 20 million increasing capacity by 8000 and sell the restricted views cheaply or give them to local schools and put all our efforts into exploiting "The 4th most successful club in history" .

Have a good day.
Victor Johnson
115   Posted 03/09/2009 at 13:51:35

Report abuse

David

I smell fudge. Go get some rest.
David O'Keefe
116   Posted 03/09/2009 at 13:58:03

Report abuse

Vic — once again you have lost the argument and claim that I fudged the issue... wrong, I acknowledge them.
Victor Johnson
117   Posted 03/09/2009 at 17:53:46

Report abuse

David
Your argument and example would hold water if Everton were in the property game, and unless you know something different we are not. Spare me the metaphor and blanket statements and tell me again, why and how does selling Netherton and leasing back Finch Farm restrict future growth?

And saying we can increase revenue by simply ’putting the club in the marketplace’ is a fudge. What does that actually mean — increasing awareness among non-EFC supporters as to our existence and history in the hope they will buy merchandise?

David O'Keefe
118   Posted 03/09/2009 at 18:59:17

Report abuse

Vic, Do you want an honest answer or an answer that confirms your viewpoint?

I have answered those questions, but if you want to stick your head in the sands and hysterically claim that BK’s critics want the club to do a Leeds, go ahead; just don’t expect to be treated with due consideration or respect.
Victor Johnson
119   Posted 03/09/2009 at 20:09:52

Report abuse

David
Rather than giving me your due consideration and respect why not answer the question? Is your marketing strategy aimed at (a) enlisting non-EFC supporters to the cause and have them buy merchandise, (b) asking existing EFC supporters to buy more and/or pay more, or (c) both? If you commit yourself to any of the three we can then look into how we go about that.
David O'Keefe
120   Posted 03/09/2009 at 20:51:09

Report abuse

Vic, considering that you consider the club to be sensibly run, is it worth continuing this discussion?
Victor Johnson
121   Posted 03/09/2009 at 21:13:15

Report abuse

David
So don’t commit yourself. That’s your prerogative... but by doing so you are somehow undermining your stance on the club’s current marketing operation. Over and out.
David O'Keefe
122   Posted 03/09/2009 at 22:20:41

Report abuse

Vic, this the first time on TW and you have made the claim that the club is sensibly run and had your arse handed to you.

You have been challenged on that statement, found wanting and have resorted to the petulant whine of "I’d Like to see you do better".

If you can’t back up your original claim, then piss off and save yourself the embarrassment.
Neil Pearse
123   Posted 05/09/2009 at 00:06:04

Report abuse

Interesting thread I am just getting to.

Good for you, Victor, largely with you. Most of the stuff about ’owning physical assets’ is ignorant sentimental tosh. (Successful companies have been ’selling off their non-core assets’ for years. It’s become a business cliche. A company I used to work in didn’t own an office or a desk or a computer.)

Owning footballers — good. Owning fields — irrelevant. (Man City rent Eastlands — enough said.)

It nearly always makes sense to focus on your core business (in our case, playing football), and not tie up your capital in real estate and commercial ventures (e.g. catering) that others can do better.

Of course, if you then can’t make sufficient revenues from your core activity (playing football in our case) you are up shit creek. But retaining other non-core assets which prevent you e.g investing in Heitinga and Bily is arse about face. You have then simply revealed that your business model is fundamentally fucked. Hoping to make money out of real estate because your football business doesn’t work — that’s idiotic.

What we need to do is improve the fundamental attractiveness of our business model as a football club. That’s where having a new stadium and improving our related commercial activies comes in. But that’s of course another story....
David O'Keefe
124   Posted 05/09/2009 at 00:48:22

Report abuse

Neil, Did you even read the thread or are you a BK spambot? Or did you just read Vic’s contributions (apart from the part in which he claimed the club was "run sensibly") and ignore my contributions and Jay’s?

Well, Neil you're not an idiot, you're a blinkered idiot.
Richard Jones
125   Posted 05/09/2009 at 06:57:11

Report abuse

I think he's just being in his own words "mischievious" again, David.
Neil Pearse
126   Posted 05/09/2009 at 07:18:20

Report abuse

David, I was only referring to the part of the debate on the ’asset stripping’, not getting into the more general ground of whether the club was ’run sensibly’.

On the latter for what it’s worth I think it’s all a bit relative. Relative to e.g. Leeds, Newcastle, Portsmouth and West Ham we’ve been run very sensibly indeed. West Ham have been breaking their banking covenants which puts them in rather severe peril - if the banks wanted - of being shut down. Liverpool are also not so far from this position, and most observers believe could be in serious difficulties if they don’t qualify for the CL. Not very sensible, and we are nowhere near anything like that. Perhaps also in a different context relative to Chelsea and perhaps soon Man U we’re quite sensible - we’ve not been banned from buying players yet.

On the other hand, we have clearly not been maximising our potential commercial revenues, and that’s not very sensible in this day and age.

The point about the misleadingly called ’asset stripping’ is - and this is probably where I do agree with you David and Jay - it is covering over the deficiencies in our basic football business model. Obviously you should sell these assets if you can get good money for them (buy players instead), but what happens when you’ve no more assets to sell?

Jay then makes the point that the plan to ’fill the hole’ and increase revenues substantially is - Kirkby. I agree. (I think it’s also at that point to get a richer owner with deeper pockets.) So we end up back at the same place. If you think that, combined with getting our act into gear on the commercial side, Kirkby will in fact raise revenues, then it all looks reasonably sensible. If you don’t, then of course you don’t.

But ’selling the assets’ is a bit of a red herring, and has been a very sensible thing to do.
Neil Pearse
127   Posted 05/09/2009 at 08:12:59

Report abuse

Richard - On the Lescott sale, your prediction was completely and utterly wrong.

What you predicted (and I called you a fantasist over) was that Lescott would be consciously and deliberately sold by Kenwright on the last day of the transfer window so that he could keep all the money (no doubt siphoning it off in your fevered and paranoid imagination into some personal Swiss bank account), and would not have to buy any replacements.

What happened? Lescott was NOT sold on the last day of the window. We bought Heitinga and Distin and Bily and at least spent all the Lescott money.

So, once more, your wild Kenwright hating led you to predict things which were just plain wrong. You might want to learn from this example, but I’m sure you won’t.
Neil Pearse
128   Posted 05/09/2009 at 08:19:06

Report abuse

By the way, Richard, your repetitive ’mischievous’ point is getting more than a bit boring. It’s also rather strange that you bring it up.

I admitted to being ’mischievous’ in using a KEIOC number of £500M+ as what a new owner of our club would need to put in. It was mischievous of me to use a KEIOC number because I was using it to make the rather obvious point that — since we are talking such numbers — it’s not that surprising that billionaires are not queuing up outside Kenwright’s office to take the club off his hands.

Your insinuation seems to be that I was mischievously using some dodgy number. Maybe I was. But it was your friends at KEIOC who produced it, not me. (Actually I think the estimate is a little low but definitely in the right ballpark.)
Neil Pearse
129   Posted 05/09/2009 at 08:26:30

Report abuse

On the numbers, I was a bit surprised David at your "shameful and dishonest" point. None of us really knows what we paid and got for people (and how and when) but I thought 22-3 and 6+6+9 was a reasonable guess based on what we’ve heard. I’m very happy to be told that you have more reliable numbers and what they are.

On the wages, I stand by my point. Let’s just say (not unlikely) Distin = Lescott. Then, comparing the likely out turns for last season and this, we have Valente, Castillo, Jacobsen, VdM gone, and Bily and Heitinga in, plus half a season more of Jo this time.

Now, I am sure you would accept that football wages have gone dramatically up over the last few years. Valente and VdM were never top earners at the club, and were on old contracts. Castillo and Jacobsen were one year loan signings, again likely to be at the lower end of our wage scale. None of the four can have got any big performance bonuses last year!

Heitinga and Bily on the other hand will be at the very top of our wage scale. And Jo not far off. Easy to image that all three are getting paid double if not more than the four who’ve gone. Add in substantial new contracts in the past year for Rodwell and Yobo (these are just the ones I can recall)... It’s very likely that the wage bill has gone up.

We were also clearly very willing to add Banega to the wage bill too — which even you guys would surely have to admit would have produced a total increase. So again the paranoid point that the club is deliberately lowering the total wages bill — it just flies in the face of the evidence.

Moyes's comment that Heitinga has not broken our wage structure? Well, first of all he HAS to say that if he wants to keep Arteta and Cahill from his door! And he didn’t say that Heitinga wasn’t right at the top of our wage structure.
Richard Jones
130   Posted 05/09/2009 at 09:05:27

Report abuse

Neil, please point me to a thread where I've said I hate Kenwright; making wild presumptions again, hey Neil?
Neil Pearse
131   Posted 05/09/2009 at 09:08:00

Report abuse

Richard - for pity’s sake! All you ever do is come on here and uselessly sound off against Kenwright and those who you believe are his defenders such as me. (Even though I keep saying that he’s made mistakes and needs to be replaced!)

Go on, you tell me what you think of him, I would be very interested. But everything you post suggests you don’t like him very much. Even on the Lescott thing you were attributing that he was going to do something rather underhand in selling him at the last minute and not replacing him.

By the way, any comments on your completely disproven prediction about Lescott?

Still think there’s something terrible about me using KEIOC numbers?

Richard Jones
132   Posted 05/09/2009 at 10:46:50

Report abuse

It's true, Neil, that I predicted he would go very late, you were lording Kenwright for standing up to City insinuating that Kenwright wasn't selling — that was when you called me a fantasist and asking me why he hadn’t pocketed the money already. I predicted he would go very late and be replaced by foreign signings on the drip, adding more debt to our club and undisclosed-fee signings — keep up, Neil!! I think that's exactly what happened.
Neil Pearse
133   Posted 05/09/2009 at 13:24:03

Report abuse

Okay, Richard, we perhaps should agree to see this one differently. We may not be as far apart as you think.

I think what the Lescott affair showed is that we are clearly financially tight (so we didn’t have another £10M to splash around after the Lescott money), but that we are not having to sell players or reduce the wage bill simply to keep the banks happy. The glass is half-full.
Victor Johnson
134   Posted 05/09/2009 at 14:11:21

Report abuse

Neil, Thanks for your support in some of the issues I was addressing.

David, You clearly acknowledge the need for EFC to increase revenues — for that I pat you on the back. The problem is that, when it comes to details, your approach starts getting fuzzy. You are not offering a position as to how this can or ought to be done.

A little more clarity from you would have helped this thread move into interesting and probably unchartered waters — ie, weighing up possible solutions to the problem and not just restating the same old party line.

I believe the "I’d Like to see you do better" approach is necessary here because you get no points for blowing the same old holes again and again. Why not try and take the intellectual plunge into the swirling currents of problem solving. Neil seems to be one of the few on this site who reside there comfortably.

David O'Keefe
135   Posted 05/09/2009 at 14:30:14

Report abuse

Vic, It is not really my job to develop a business plan — that is the point.

Another point I want to make is that EFC should be held to account by its supporters — not just those with Business degrees and finance experience.

First things first though: recognise the problems — that anyone can do. Solutions? We can but try. KEIOC have...

As for Neil's solution (correct me if I am wrong here, Neil): Move to Kirkby and wait for the new owner to move in? It's wishful thinking.

The solution I’m afraid resides with Bill or Phillip Green. The only thing the fans can do is voice their displeasure and make life as uncomfortable as possible for our Board of complacent liars.

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.

Log in now

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.



© ToffeeWeb

About these ads


Latest News


Betting Promo Codes

Bet on Everton and get a deposit bonus with bet365 at TheFreeBetGuide.com



Recent Articles




Talking Points & General Forum

Pinned Links

OK

We use cookies to enhance your experience on ToffeeWeb and to enable certain features. By using the website you are consenting to our use of cookies in accordance with our cookie policy.