When I think of Everton today, my mind is firmly fixed on those desperate scenes inside Hitler's bunker in the film "Downfall" or of comical Ali telling the world Iraq were winning the conflict and no Americans were anywhere near Baghdad... as an American tank rumbled by. The regime built on spin, on misinformation, on who has been running the club is falling apart at the seams and even their most fervent supporters in the press are waking up the fact that something isn't right.
The club are getting desperate; they've long since issued threats to journalists over talking to KEIOC but they've now reached a new low ? banning the decent guys at the Echo from speaking to the players. How these people are in a job at the club is simply a further indictment of the calibre of the people who allegedly run the club.
The parts of my original piece not printed by the Echo are below; it's taken a long time for them to start printing what's really happening... it will take them a little more time or perhaps a big story to act as a catalyst for greater change ? "watch this space" is all I can say at the moment!!
At the 2008 inquiry into Destination Kirkby, I had the opportunity to publicly question Everton CEO Robert Elstone, a person I respect as he has always answered my questions with a degree of honesty. I asked if any of the current directors had ever invested in Everton, apart from their personal shareholdings? "Not a single penny" came the reply.
Enquiring if the business plan, based on asset utilisation, was sustainable, Robert answered that it wasn't; my suggestion that it was in fact inherently unsustainable, that the loans would overwhelm the club?s ability to provide the manager with funds, was answered with ?We have a highly qualified finance team and a good relationship with the bank. That wouldn't be allowed to happen.? But this scenario has happened ? and it?s only going to get worse in the 2010-11 accounts.
Everton's multi-million pound net losses that are posted aren?t all cash, they?re mainly due to accountancy conventions applied to the value of the playing squad. That doesn?t mean that everything is fine at Goodison, it?s not; those with even a rudimentary knowledge of accounts can work out the financial ratios which confirm Everton are in, and heading for some more, serious trouble.
Ten years ago, Everton had net assets of £18.5m on their balance sheet; today, this position has deteriorated to having net liabilities of £30m. Everton, like another 14 Premier League clubs, are officially insolvent using the legal definition. Using the accountancy definition, we?re not... as, if needs be, we can sell players to balance the books; but, if this situation were to arise, how are we expected to operate as a football club?
Some of the main issues fans have with Everton are the veil of secrecy that has descended over Goodison and the constant and insulting level of spin that is used to cover-up the inadequacies of a board bereft of ideas and ability. As an example of secrecy, the accounts show staff costs representing 69% of turnover whilst almost all the rest, 30%, is simply posted as ?other operating costs?. Ten years ago, these costs were just £1.2m, or less than 4% of total turnover, yet the board can?t be questioned on this as they have banned Annual General Meetings in favour of stage-managed "Shareholder Forums" ? when the chairman can tell fellow owners of the club that he?s bored by their questions and refuses to answer.
With these latest accounts, the devil is in the detail: the club secretary?s narrative explains that, post year-end ? that is to say, outside the scope of these latest accounts ? the club has, yet again, obtained further funding through borrowing against future revenue, the latest being in December 2010, which was a loan from Barclays that was used to pay off a previous loan.
Perhaps the most surprising information from Martin Evans is that the money from the sale of Bellefield, also obtained in December 2010, was used to pay ?the previous working capital loan facility?... So that?s Bellefield, our last remaining useable asset, gone. Taken in conjunction with other events, I would suggest that the bank has put pressure on the club to reduce its overdraft and control costs by shipping out players to reduce expenditure against dwindling income. Commendable fiscal measures... but ones that diminish our ability to compete on the field of play.
We all know what is required: Everton need to increase their own commercial performance, specifically the amount of revenue delivered from the stadium. Currently, fans and shareholders alike are being given very little information concerning the new £9m building behind the Park End; sadly Everton?s reputation and performance tells you that there?s a tale to be told over this latest ?at no cost? project.
The boards last attempt to address the income situation was Destination Kirkby, a proposal described by Liverpool Council and Sefton Council as a con. For Everton, this was a truly appalling solution which would, in my opinion, have failed to provide the club with any additional income whatsoever when factors such as attendance, additional financing charges and attendance capping (due to being demonstrably unable to meet government transport targets) were applied.
For me, Kirkby represented the last straw for Bill Kenwright and his board. Destination Kirkby, or DK as it became known, joined a long list of initials that angers any Evertonian worth their salt:? KD, NTL, FSF... Destination Kirkby being the worst as the board stood impotently by whilst outside influences dictated the detrimental direction the club was taking. Perhaps the revelations and repercussions of this decision aren?t yet at an end...
The next chapter for Everton will undoubtedly be new ownership but, given the current board's track record, they cannot be allowed to be involved in this process. Too many clubs have committed major errors of judgement on this matter, our neighbours being just one of them. It is my belief that Bill Kenwright has forfeited the honour of being chairman of our great club. I would suggest that the way forward is to replace the current directors with an interim board, as was done at Liverpool, with the sole objective of identifying and securing a suitable new owner who has the means, capacity and vision to halt the decline and take the club forward.
"Trust Everton" for me, and many others, is the type of organisation that should be the way forward and should have a representative say on the future direction of the club. If this would have been in place, it's doubtful Bill Kenwright could have got up to what he did with Green and Leahy. It would be an organisation for the benefit of the club and its fans and not just about the wealth and opportunities for the selected few. Well known and respected Evertonian, Andy Burnham, is a great advocate of supporters trusts.
Colin Fitzpatrick KEIOC
BK: "But to get to 4th, we need more money. Banks, will you lend us more money. We know what's going on at the moment in the world, the banks are tighter than they've ever been. Our bank's fantastic to us. All I can tell you, with absolute, genuine honesty, I don't know what to do anymore other than to get more money."
Shout from audience: "Sell it then."
BK: "Sell it? You're right. If I can sell it, it will be sold tomorrow, the next day or the next day. There's a man called Keith Harris who I'm sure you all know, he did the Randy Lerner deal, he?s done most of the big deals in the last few years. He's out there looking for me, Jon?s [Woods] been out there looking for the last ten months. We are out there with an open door policy.. Everyone knows this football club needs investment. I don't know what more I can do to serve you, to serve the football club and to get you the success that you deserve."
6.10 A further point that is of relevance to any debate on the options that might be available to the Club to fund a new stadium, is the willingness and abilities of the Club?s directors to sell some or all of their interests in the Club in order to attract an investor who or which might have the ability in financial terms to fund a new stadium in its entirety or at the very least fund the shortfall that exists in the context of this proposals. As is pointed out in greater detail in the financial statement (document 26), this is not an option as the current directors have no intention of selling any of their interests in the Club.
Mr Roger Lancaster, the barrister representing Sefton, West Lancs? and St Helens Council?s, then began his cross examination. Mr Lancaster asked why Everton should receive a cross subsidy from money derived from public land; ?would you expect Woolworth?s to be given such a subsidy to help them??
Robert Elstone replied, wittily, that he wasn?t familiar with their business model!
Mr Lancaster then examined Everton?s methods of raising their financial contribution towards the stadium construction cost; Mr Lancaster asked if Everton had considered a rights issue, Robert Elstone explained that the Club hadn?t because it was not affordable on top of the £78m figure that their advisors had indicated was achievable.
Mr Lancaster then enquired if a sale and leaseback scheme on the stadium had been considered, ?No it hadn?t? was the reply. Mr Lancaster then referred to the applicant?s own DTZ report which stated that the major shareholders had no intention of selling their interest in the Club. Robert Elstone pointed out that selling shares would not raise funds for the club just the shareholders.
Mr Lancaster focused his attention on Bill Kenwright?s statement at the recent EGM concerning the sale of the club to a billionaire and the apparent engagement of Keith Harris of Seymour Pierce; Robert Elstone refuted this, adding that the club hadn?t engaged Seymour Pierce or anyone else. It was established that the club is for sale, although this is not mentioned in any of the 6,000 pages of the planning application.
Mr. Lancaster hypothesized that if the club was sold, there wouldn?t be a requirement for the £52M cross subsidy; the £52M wouldn't be needed. Mr. Lancaster asked, ?What happens if a Manchester City occurred the day after this inquiry closes?? Robert Elstone replied, ?Who knows??
Mr Lancaster asked about average attendances in recent Premier League fixtures, indicating that no game had an attendance of 50,000 and only Manchester United and Arsenal actually had gates of that magnitude, Robert Elstone explained that Newcastle, Sunderland and Manchester City have those capacities and that Liverpool, Tottenham and Chelsea plan to develop grounds with that capacity.
Mr Lancaster, now in full flow, then suggested that Everton were trying to steal a march over their rivals by getting a bigger stadium, a stadium that they can't afford. He established that no investment had gone into GP in the last thirteen years and that it wouldn't cost that much to improve facilities. He finished off by suggesting to Robert Elstone that if a private business received £52m from a council and then its owners sold up and made an increased profit due to that money, ?there would be a public outcry wouldn't there?? ?Perhaps? replied the Everton CEO
Now once again changing quickly to finance, Colin asked ?This asset utilization and disposal plan that has been adopted by the board, it can?t be sustained forever can it??
?No? came the reply.
?It?s inherently unsustainable, won?t the assets run out and the loan repayments overwhelm the club's ability to provide sufficient funds to obtain better players??
?We have a highly qualified finance team and a good relationship with the bank, that wouldn't be allowed to happen? replied Robert Elstone.
?The lack of available funding clearly indicates that a change is needed? continued Colin, ?we can completely understand the need to become facility led. One would assume that improvements in the Stadium would, if correctly managed, lead to increased revenue streams from ticket sales, increased ticket prices that reflect the better amenities available, increased catering, hospitality and corporate sales and higher commercial and merchandise revenue, this is what you?re after is it not??
?In broad principles, yes? replied the CEO.
Colin, returning to investment, asked, ?In the main, highly successful business people typically own these Premiership clubs, how do these owners obtain a return on their investment??
In a bizarre reply for a chartered accountant, Robert Elstone told the inquiry, ?In a variety of ways: emotion, profile, status.?
A clearly confused Colin put the question another way, ?would you agree that they take the long view, that they?ll obtain their return when they sell their club??
?There is evidence of substantial capital growth in the Premier League.?
Obtaining the accountants answer he wanted Colin went on to ask ?You indicate that Everton have failed to invest in their revenue generator, their stadium; would it be a fair observation to state that the current board have never invested a single penny in the club??
Robert Elstone answered honestly, ?Yes, that's true, so when they sell, that's a return.?
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. The Club is "officially insolvent using the legal definition" ? This is simply not true. The legal definition is "not being able to meet its liabilities as they fall due". The Club can do this, at the moment. So it is not insolvent. It would become insolvent if the banks asked for their money back and the Club could not re-finance. Hence all Elstone's talk of the good relationship with the banks. I share you concern (as a shareholder myself) of the risks this creates, but the Club is not insolvent.2. For all Kenwright's weaknesses I do not think there is much evidence that he is in it for the money. It is true that a subsidy for a new stadium would effectively enrich the shareholders of the Club ? and Kenwright could cash in on this by selling the Club as soon as the new stadium was developed. But I would still want the Club to obtain the subsidy ? and to have the new stadium.
Also, the new stadium may not increase the value of the Club because of all the extra debt that would be required. The reason a subsidy is needed is because the increased revenue from a new stadium is probably not sufficient to finance the cost of building it in the first place. If this is the case, the new stadium would actually reduce the value of the Club ? thus removing the ability of Kenwright to cash in on any increase in value. But this would depend on how a number of variables panned out after the event, eg, interest rates, actual costs of construction, value of GP, attendances, ticket prices etc.Elstone is quoted as saying that the price of Premier League clubs has risen over time so anyone who sells would make a gain. This is true during the life of the Premier League ? largely because revenue has been constantly rising since the league was formed in 1992. But profitability of Premier League Clubs has generally not changed over the period ? on average, they are consistently around zero (with Man U being the one consistent exception because they are the one club that can match others wage bills and still have some money left over, by definition only one club can do this at any one time, the one with the highest revenue).
If revenue stalls or falls, the clubs will all start to lose money rapidly because it is not easy for them to reduce costs, it will be impossible to reduce costs if the entire league is affected at the same time because there will be no buyers for players or clubs willing to take over contracts negotiated when wages are at the current peak levels. Football faces a potential systematic risk like that affecting subprime mortgages in 2008. My point being that the value of Mr Kenwright's shares (and my one share) is quite likely to drop dramatically, so he will likely not make a great return, particularly given his long holding period, compared to say putting the money in a bank savings account for the same period.For all that, I think it is a good article. I am dismayed by the lack of a coherent financial strategy. I fear our period of "out-performance" is over for now and mediocrity beckons. I have successfully managed my 7-year-old son's expectations ? my own are a bit harder to manage!
We ain't seen Bill for ages now. The last I heard he was in Hollywood getting some investment lined up. It really is time he went, and I was a BK fan. Maybe he did have the best interests of the club at heart, but his total lack of vision and business acumen, not to mention some bizarre decisions, have left the royal blues in the brown stuff.
You only have to remember Kings Dock, Fortress Sports Fund, NTL, DK, Watch this space, Rooney would not be sold for £50m (I suppose that one was true!), WOW!, Trevor Birch, Races across the Med in a yacht to catch hold of Wyness, the appointment of Wyness, Gregg, Gosling's contract, Manuel Fernandes disappearing the day of his supposed signing, Getting rid of our forwards this January when we struggle to score, the last 5 transfer windows and the AGMs
Shit, that list even suprised me!
ps: Where's the money going to come from this June, when EFC want all to renew season tickets?
On the sane principle, why would anyone buy West Ham or for that matter ANY London club, until recently surely Arsenal and Chelsea had it all tied up? The fact is none of these issues has hindered the sale of nearly ALL other clubs in the time that Everton has been supposedly looking for similar. I believe there is great potential in our club. A massive fanbase that repeatedly shows that we could be as big as anyone if properly invested in. (As witnessed by the away-following due to descend on London tomorrow, being significantly larger than that which came the other way from one of the nouvo-rich).
The stadium issue is grossly overplayed IMO. Yes, this represents additional costs but it can be spread over a few years and in any case, most of Goodison's defficiencies can be addressed for a fraction of the costs oft-quoted..... not to mention other options that could be available to a more receptive leadership (perhaps not constrained by out-of-town retail-led enabling, that can't exist).
Even then, if this board's shares were transferred at the current nominal value to a new owner, Everton would be a very attractive proposition, even with debts and an ancient stadium. Even the devil-incarnate, Peter Johnson was honourable enough to do that much. You'd expect at least that from "one of our own". We'll see!
You state the obvious with the fiscal comments, anybody with an ounce of intelligence will see we spend more than we get in. Slagging the board off for using the Bellefield revenue to pay off debt is good management by the club, are you asking that we get more loans to buy players so our predicament becomes even worse?
EFC is a business and under new law it?s doesn?t have to hold AGMs any longer, and I don?t blame them as the past meetings have turned in to a debacle and added no value whatsoever. We as fans have no legal claim at all to suggest that the major shareholders stand aside so the fans can decide who buys the club and for what price, it's complete fantasy.
LFC created a new board not by choice but due to its major creditors applying this caveat ? otherwise they would have withdrawn finance and placed the company in to administration. EFC are not to date in such a predicament.
I like the sound of the EFC trust and let?s see if it gets the support from the fans, but again, the shareholders of EFC don?t have to accept the EFC trust. BK or any of the board doesn?t have to put their own money in, they take the risk by purchasing shares that offer no dividend ?pay?s your money takes your chance?.
DK failed because it was half a mile out of the boundary, simple as... but the idea of going to a new stadium with two commercial backers was a sound alternative and quoting councils that had the most to lose with the project being successful adds no intellectual argument at all to the failure, they did it not for KEIOC but for their own selfish reasons.
And I ask you a question: what if EFC was offered a new stadium at Speke Industrial Park as apposed to say Hillside School/Bootle Stadium ? both of the same quality ? which one would you choose as Speke is 11.1 miles away and in the City and Bootle is 1 mile away but outside the City limits? COYB
Alan, I don't think Colin is speaking for all of us, it isn't an opinionated article, it's a factual outline on where we stand as a club.
Kenwright now reminds me of the old days on an away trip on the coach. Nearing journey's end after a long day, a guy steps up with his Everton hat and does a collection for the driver. We all chip in and the guy with the hat looks the good guy as he hands over the shrapnel to a grateful driver. Thing is, the guy probably didn't put any money in and the "investors" made him look good.
Next trip, no-one invests and the same guy looks out of his depth. Yep, some definite parallels going on here...
Thanks again, Colin.
My point is that them lot had shit owners putting them in trouble and they let it be known they were not happy. We have the same type of owner but not a protest in sight. Unbelievably, we still have people thinking that Blue Bill is fine and just skint.
Presumably, they hold more than 5% of the shares between them and therefore have the power to call a general meeting at which all these points could be raised and the Board would be forced to respond.
A vote of no confidence could also be organised.
00-01 (£3.0m)01-02 £1.5m02-03 £5.6m 03-04 (£2.6m)04-05 £10.4m05-06 £3.1m 06-07 (£0.5m)07-08 £7m 08-09 £6m 09-10 (£0.5m)Everton have only spent more than they have earned on four occasions during the last decade and the total is just £6.6m profit over that period of time. If you're unaware of how football accounts work, if you're unaware that the net losses posted aren't actual cash movements, then I suggest you attempt to obtain this information before posting any further misleading statements. Like I said, Everton run a tight ship, you're talking bollocks. I'll come to the erroneous statements in your third paragraph at the end. In paragraph six you state "DK failed because it was half a mile out of the boundary, simple as..." Alan, are you on medication? Is this what you actually believe? I could of course give you chapter and verse at this point but frankly I can't be bothered these days with anyone making such ridiculous statement as that. Do you genuinely believe we had commercial backers? I think you need to seriously read what the planning inspector said; you'll be telling me next that Tesco were giving Everton a £52m subsidy!!!To confirm your lack of knowledge and confusion on the stadium location situation, you ask me a bizarre question which you must think is somehow clever; my answer and probably the answer of everyone I know, is Bootle, why wouldn't it be? You clearly must have swallowed the club's propaganda which attempted to dumb down the location issue into a boundary issue.Returning to your earlier allegation, in paragraph three, when, in relation to the club's abandonment of general meetings, you state "I don't blame them as the past meetings have turned into a debacle and added no value whatsoever" ? were you at these meetings? Can you give me a specific instance of a meeting becoming a debacle? Because if you can I'll happily get on the phone to one of the guy's who called the last EGM and you can put your allegations to him and in return he will post the real reason on here I'm sure.
I for one cannot remember any meeting being a debacle, I also don't remember any member of the board being abused, as has been claimed by others, yet I clearly remember the chairman abusing a shareholder who asked a legitimate question, a shareholder who has since sold his shares in disgust of being spoken to in such a manner. Nobody is saying the fans have the right to remove the board, but expert advice, from lawyers versed in company law and Everton's Articles of Association, assures me the shareholders can, complicated yes, but the board can be removed.You've asked me a question, now I'll ask you one, why do most people who post shite always end their posts with COYB? Do you think it admonishes them of their sins against intelligence? (Two questions I know; I like to give value for money!!)
And if Eugene wants to become the official poet for Toffee Web, that's fine by me too.
I don't knock you for holding your views but I think its unfair of you to criticise Colin for laying down facts, FACTS, so that other blues can make their own minds up. I for one think that this club is going up shit creek without a paddle and the fans themselves need to get active before we leave it too late.
Not really sure why anyone thought the Bellefield money would be used in any other way than it has, it was an asset that was unwanted and unused and sold a long time after it should've been, and then the money went back into the business, using that money to reduce liability is sensible even though it may be undesirable.
Colin thinks an interim board should be in place, why and for what purpose? How would an interim board run the club better than the current one? Given the fact that an interim board would have to act on the wishes of the shareholders, this is nonsense or to put it another way, it would be the same as Philip Green telling this current board what to do wouldn't it?
Quite funny but not really an explanation of what an interim board could or couldn't do, in fact, a bit of a bollocks answer don't you think?
it's ok trying to be smart on here but if you're going to have a proper debate about this, let's do just that, tell me what an interim board could actually do?
I don't know how long you have been coming on this site, but I think I've answered that one many times over the last few years.... several others have done similar also, and have been backed up by respected stadium architects, who agree that GP offers truly great opportunities to create something unique.
There are many options to address GP's main issues and deficiencies.... ranging from gradual but full rebuild, to partial rebuild and/or extending existing tiers. The vast majority of existing obstructed views can be eradicated simply with new roof systems. Exec boxes can readily be perched under the Top Balcony and/or above (or below) the Upper Bullens. Boxes can also take the form of corner towers in upto 3 of the existing corners. Lounges added to the rear of extended stands due to increased footprint/floor-space etc.
Capacity can most readily be added by extending the Park End or Bullens.... but the Upper Gwladys street can also be extended. One simple solution would be a simple 20-row tier wrapped around these 3 sides bringing the whole stadium upto the height of the Top Balcony...... etc. This could be done in phases, unlike any newbuild.TBH tho mate, I've done this to death lots of times, and right now my head's banging and my farts would knock a rhino out, and are even making me feel nausious..... also my back's aching after going ape in the almost definitely non-compliant upper tier yesterday, so I'll leave it there for now.
Double decker stands with seats on all 4 sides, a triple decker stand, elevators, one of the best pitches, a state of the art Training Ground we owned, the 300 and 500 Clubs, a lottery, Blue Streak Travel, undersoil heating, floodlights on the stand roofs, not on pylons, they even experimented with putting in a Travel Agents in the Bullens Road stand in 1973!We were forerunners in everything. Around 1975, John Moores took more of a back seat, Phillip Carter joined the Board and we had a collection of local businesmen and Littlewoods people running the Club. And also a certain Jim Greenwood became Club Secretary and morphed into a Chief Exec later. And from then on it went downhill. CAUTION & COMPLACENCY seemed to be their watch words. They abandoned a a legal challenge to the Heysel ban with a whimper, they only finally put a roof on the Gwladys Street after we won the League twice, they thought they were being clever only spending £800k of Everton money on a single tier basic Park End stand, they failed to recognise the impending boom in football and 'just bolted seats to terraces' while every other club was building new stands to house corporate clients as well as everyday fans. They brought in people like Kenwright who have clearly had no money to invest and by the time Sir John died in 1993 we were left with the impotent (not in the medical sense, although who knows?) Dr David Marsh in charge and Kendall Mk 2 resigned because they would not stump up £150k to buy Dion Dublin.We then had Hamper-man and Cliff Finch who at least built a new Club Shop and had a go at dealing with the Stadium situation, although they also lied saying Goodison would only have a capacity of 30,000 if redeveloped due to Health & Safety laws. So they wanted to also go to Kirkby (golf course) and then wanted to re-plant us in Cronton ? nearly in bloody Cheshire.
The Nigel Martyn debacle and the Jurgen Klinsmann as Manager farce summs up that era with Joe Royle also resigning over lack of transfer funds for Tore Andre Flo and Kendall Mk 3's sacking announced by a Goodison doorman before Johnson's Emperor's New Clothes act was exposed by our Bank Manager, forcing him to sell Duncan Ferguson.That just brings us round to Kenwright who has spent over a decade like fat bastard on a treadmill desperately trying to keep up as the Premier League wage bubble has just made the treadmill go faster and faster. Moyes, whatever any of you may say, has been the only reason he hasn't flown off the end of it years ago. Despite all the opportunities to progress the Club during an income boom, an economic boom (gone for some time now), City of Culture, regular Top 6 finishes, 15 years of near sell out crowds, Kings Dock, NTL, etc, etc the Club have almost always got it wrong.In my mind, what all these administrations have had in common is a total lack of vision. Carter and the earlier ones could perhaps point to the crumbling economy and infrastructure on Merseyside from 1975 to 1993 as reasons for a degree of caution (although the arrogant way they often dismissed concerns of supporters should also not be forgotten), but since then that excuse does not wash. Granted, Kenwright cannot help Abramovich or those Arabs distorting the whole picture, but not enough has been done.
Where is there any semblance of a Plan at work other than to sell off the assets, rob Peter to pay Paul and hide behind the sofa hoping it will get better? And in case anybody says it, NO, Kirkby was not a proper plan, just a disaster that would have benefitted others far more than Everton FC that, luckily for us fans, failed.More than anything else we need LEADERS with LONG TERM PLANS and a VISION. I can accept it if the Board are not Billionaires, but what I cannot accept is the total lack of a decent, forward looking plan that has been prevalent for the last 35 years.
Goodison can be redeveloped just like Villa, Newcastle, Man Utd, Spurs etc have done. It's never too late to start ? even if it's 15-20 years later than it should have been.
1. An interim board HAS to represent and act on the wishes of the shareholders;2. The shareholders are the present board.So what you want is a paid quango to come out with the same shite as the current board, but because it's a different person saying it, everything's rosy in the garden?Total bollocks mate, it makes no sense whatsoever, and anyway if you believe Colin, our current board are acting on a shadow's instructions.So we will then have the shadow telling our current board what to do/say who will then pass it on to the interim board verbatim for them to tell us; sounds great to me... not.
An interim board would NOT be shareholders would they? Because, as is stated on here a million times, the current shareholders will NOT sell. An interim board can only act on the SHAREHOLDERS instructions, so how the fuck would it be any better than what we've got now?
In order to post a comment, 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 Talking Points submissions across the site.
About these ads
Get rid of these ads and support ToffeeWeb
Bet on Everton and get a deposit bonus with bet365 at TheFreeBetGuide.com
View full table
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.