Elstone: Time to Go

By David   O'Keefe  ::  21/03/2012   41 Comments (»Last) Robert Elstone has been complaining for a considerable amount of time about supporters and supporters groups that want to see him sacked. Thus far, his complaint has been baseless as not one individual has called for him to be sacked; they have called for a new board/interim board/new owners, but as far as the CEO?s position not a word has been spoken about his employment status. However, if there was a change of ownership would he remain as the CEO?

The answer has to be an unequivocal and emphatic...NO!

Elstone's record is abysmal, even taking into account the unfortunate fact that the Board he works for and answers to are the worst board in the club's history. Bill Kenwright and the Board are no excuse, he was Keith Wyness?s deputy before accepting the top job, he cannot plead ignorance.

Let?s move on to Elstone's record: Deputy CEO and CEO of Everton during Destination Kirkby ? millions of pounds spent; end result ? nothing. Everton Place ? millions spent, one hole in the wall later and the project collapses with a number of excuses given. So that?s two major projects and I haven?t even mentioned his lamentable defence of the club's transfer policy; how the club spends its money that was taken apart by the Blue Union; and his "85p in the pound is spent at Finch Farm", yet.
Everton are falling behind their Premier League peers, not just in terms of facilities, but commercial revenue.

Everton earn £17 million from commercial sources (sponsorship, kit deals, conferences etc); Liverpool?s new kit deal is worth £25 million per season. Everton's kit deal is worth £0.6 million by comparison. Also of interest is that Bolton, a small-town club based on a hill outside Horwich, earn £17 million from commercial sources. It?s not all Elstone's fault, the decision to outsource merchandising and catering was made by his superiors, but he has done precious little to improve the club's commercial income.

"85p in the pound is spent at Finch Farm" ? is the current party line spouted by Elstone, a chartered accountant, but it just doesn?t stand up to scrutiny. 85% of £82M is £70M. 97% of the wage bill goes to the players, which is £56M; subtract this from the £70M then divide by 365 and you?re left with £38,000 per day. As many Toffeewebbers may have noticed, this doesn?t add up, Liverpools academy in Halewood costs £8,000 a day, Finch Farm in the same local authority costs an extra £30,000 and the reasons given are not convincing ? be it lawn mowers or medical equipment.

The main source of contention for me is that Elstone has offered the Kirkby finance model as the only way to secure a new stadium. My objection to this is not based on my initial objections to Kirkby, but on the outcome of the Public Inquiry in which he participated and attended that rejected not only the scheme, but had a few harsh words about Everton's funding formula. In short, Elstone is lying.

?We have to look for a new site and use the Kirkby funding model which involved 40% to 45% of the capital cost coming from retail uplift subsidy.

?I don?t think there are a shortage of sites, I believe there is a shortage of funding.

?I think our optimum capacity is around 50,000, which generates an extra £5m [a year]. That means it's tight, it needs a great naming rights deal or subsidy, or probably both.?

The Kirkby funding Model simply didn?t exist.
The Everton board and CEO know this and to suggest to the supporters five years later that such a model is viable is a lie. Tesco were not going to give Everton 40 to 45% of the capital cost.

8.3.18 The Council is funding the Stadium through the uplift in the value of its land which is being passed on to Tesco. ? From the Report to the Secretary of State on the planning application for Destination Kirkby. He must have read the report.

As for the shortage of sites for retail-led enablement, he means that there is a shortage of sites for such developments in Liverpool. As for shortage of funding, that's solely down to the Board of Directors that haven?t invested a single penny in the club, but are demanding a free lunch in the form of a retail enablement in order to increase the value of their shareholding.

There is also no demand for a 50,000-seater stadium... in fact, there is no demand for Goodison as evidenced by the falling attendances this season.

?Chelsea FC recently did some work about the challenge of redeveloping and staying at Stamford Bridge, and it said their capacity would go down.?

He said the London club had been told it would be hugely complex and also cost £600m.

?There are similar problems to rebuilding Goodison.

?The only sensible option is land acquisition. I genuinely believe that the redevelopment of Goodison is not a realistic option.?

The Chelsea example makes no sense for a number of reasons: It?s not going to cost £600 million to redevelop Goodison nor will it require land acquisition on such a scale. It could be done on the existing footprint, but we don?t know that because as Elstone knows a feasibility study has not been commissioned.

Retail led enablement is the only option ? a decision made by Bill Kenwright on a train journey that he shared with Terry Leahy. Man sits next to a fella on a train and enters into a major construcution project with him that leads to nothing and costs the club £4 million...

So Elstone is lying, but at Everton Football Club that's no surprise when you take the Board and Chairman into consideration. It?s a necessity.
My major concern is that Elstone is still pushing a Kirkby model that he knows to be a non-starter. Allied with his poor performance in improving the club's commercial income and his failure to control the senior management team that have succeeded in taking from him some of his responsibilities, Baxendale-Baxter is now Chief of Operations, that Bill Kenwright doesn?t trust him to find the necessary funds to keep the club afloat. What is Robert Elstone doing to earn his quarter of a million?

Elstone's major failure is that he can?t convince the board to follow a new strategy, to abandon outsourcing and retail-led enablement. I don?t think he has tried... or, if he has, he hasn?t tried hard enough. He may be an employee and he has to do as the Board tell him, but has he offered them an alternative? I believe a good CEO should offer his own ideas to an organisation, not just follow orders.
Yet that is what Elstone is doing and that in my opinion makes him worse than the much maligned Keith Wyness. He had a backbone and stood up to the interference from the advisor.

Elstones not going to do that, he?s just parroting the Board's discredited position on retail-led enablement and approving dismal commercial deals that do little to enhance the clubs finances. No wonder Bill has to work around the clock to get the funds to keep the club afloat; if he left it to Elstone the interest rates on the mortgage would rival that of a payday loan from Wonga. He?s also being undermined by his senior management team, the only people around Everton that want him sacked.

I don?t want Robert Elstone sacked; I think he should resign and negotiate a handsome pay-off. He just isn?t very good, he can organise an attack on a fans group, but that was only necessary because he gave the militants access to the Chairman. The nicest thing you can say about him is that he has charisma, an over-rated quality, but nothing else. A Charismatic Void.

back See other Fan Articles  :  Add your Comments back

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


Alex Bonnar
539   Posted 21/03/2012 at 07:06:09

Report abuse

What a load of rubbish. I think Robert Elstone has done a good job for Everton. Making up 'facts' to suit your argument does not make it valid. Please let us all know what your basis of experience/success is in major business to allow us all to make a proper judgement. Until we know you will just appear as another critic (thats easy) with too much time to spare.
Stephen Kenny
541   Posted 21/03/2012 at 07:39:09

Report abuse

This is a ridiculous article, but not for the childish reasons Alex has stated.

Elstone is nothing more than a shield for the current board, just as Wyness was. A convenient mouthpiece who will lie to fans, spout the party line and dish out meaningless platitudes wherever his boss can't be bothered to.

There isn't a CEO in the world who could make a blind bit of difference working under this board.

Knowing how Bill acts I genuinely doubt he carries anything like the same authority and responsibility held by others in his position.
Martin Mason
545   Posted 21/03/2012 at 08:31:58

Report abuse

Why don't you write a point that adds something new to the debate?
Richard Jones
547   Posted 21/03/2012 at 07:33:28

Report abuse

Critisism based on facts there Alex, when you say hes done a "good job" can you give us some facts please Alex ? stats that proove this. David has provided to failed schemes for example DK and Everton place.
Richard Jones
548   Posted 21/03/2012 at 08:51:32

Report abuse

Matins back he'll be able to help !!
Richard Jones
549   Posted 21/03/2012 at 08:51:32

Report abuse

Matins back he'll be able to help !!
Richard Jones
550   Posted 21/03/2012 at 08:51:32

Report abuse

Matins back he'll be able to help !!
Tony J Williams
552   Posted 21/03/2012 at 08:59:53

Report abuse

Blooming heck, there will be no one left at Goodison if this goes on....don't like him, get rid!!
Paul Gladwell
554   Posted 21/03/2012 at 08:57:06

Report abuse

Done a good job!!!!!!!! leaked emails slaughtering the chairman, holes in walls,Pink kits,Being proved a liar in court and all this has cost us a fortune.
he may sound a nice honest man, but every word he has spouted in his time with us has been riddled with lies and if you could bother to read the Kirkby inquest Alex, it shows his lies and yet here he goes again rambling on about the Kirkby model.
Martin Mason
559   Posted 21/03/2012 at 09:18:15

Report abuse

Richard J, you can call me Martian but not Matin, I'm not a morning person.

Remember too, Alex doesn't have to prove that Elstone is doing a decent job. The null hypothesis is that he is until it can be proved that he isn't. David's article is just the same old innuendo, lack of understanding why EFC's revenue is low compared to big clubs and plain old opinion as facts.

DK wasn't a bad idea neither as it got us a new ground at a low cost. It was just handled very badly. Anyone got any better ideas on how we get a new ground?
Chris Matheson
560   Posted 21/03/2012 at 09:27:29

Report abuse

David, in this article you criticise Robert Elstone. In another parallel article next door, Ged Dwyer has a similar go at David Moyes.

Both articles have valid points but miss the main target: Kenwright.

He sets the standards for the club, he sets the vision, the buck stops with him.

And right now he must be laughing his head off, in disbelief that two of his lightning conductors have once again just taken a full blast on his behalf.

Get rid of Kenwright, get someone in who knows how to run a football club, and things will soon improve. Leave him there and any other CEO will perform to his tune - and continue the failure.
Kevin Tully
563   Posted 21/03/2012 at 09:37:59

Report abuse

There are no future plans for the club - they are living hand to mouth.

By their own admission, we will be looking a losses again for the next financial period, a lot more than the £5m posted in the latest accounts.

We are a basket case.
Richard Jones
565   Posted 21/03/2012 at 09:38:44

Report abuse

Chris you do have a big point lets route out the cancer in our club, Elstone etc are mearly symptoms !!

Martin "Kirkby not a bad idea" I agree it wasnt a bad idea for the directors to make £54 million on there shares, as for Everton, god only knows where it would have left us!! It failed though Martin so did Everton Place,
Proof that the guy in charge couldn't be trusted to make a cup of coffee!!
Stephen Kenny
566   Posted 21/03/2012 at 09:56:42

Report abuse

It's called Trolling, I believe?
Richard Jones
568   Posted 21/03/2012 at 09:57:43

Report abuse

Martin ive never called you Martian because I dont know what planet you're from but my instincts tell me it's not earth!!
Peter Laing
571   Posted 21/03/2012 at 10:09:25

Report abuse

Before Elstone we had Keith Wyness who mysteriously resigned under murky circumstances and was allegedly visited at great haste in the med (silenced ?) by Philip Green. Philip Green who is a 'friend' of Everton and who is potentially the silent partner (source : Paul Gregg) in Everton. Philip Green who offered his private jet to fly Marouane Fellaini in for his medical (source : Baz Rathbone's autobiography). Before Wyness we had Trevor Birch who lasted all of a month in post and was shocked by the state of Everton's books and finances in 2004 and told Kenwright that the only way he could keep Everton solvent was through the sale of Wayne Rooney. Birch who was later disparagingly insulted recently by Kenwright as conveniently only having eyes for the other lot across the park.

Elstone is merely a stooge and hired mouthpiece for the current failed board. In terms of developing the stadium he is merely towing the official line which continues to see the only viable option as continuing with the failed destination Kirkby model which enables the silent major shareholders who have invested zero money in the Club besides their shares to potentially recoup their money with a favourable return.
Paul Watson
576   Posted 21/03/2012 at 10:31:29

Report abuse

In all the flak flying there appears to be one group of people who are avoiding any criticism here and that is Liverpool City Council.

On 29th February Tottenham announced more deails of the Northumberland Development Project. This is their plan to build a state of the art stadium along with a revamp of North Tottenham - see link:
http://www.tottenhamhotspur.com/spurs/The+Stadium/new-stadium-plans.page

I hope you take a look, because it not only involves commercial partners ? particularly Sainsbury's ? but also the local community and Haringay Council. Spurs have driven this, they were not frightened to go for the Olympic Stadium in the High Court and then charge Boris Johnson for the legal fees plus £8.5m towards the project.

Well what have Liverpool City Council done with all this EU money? Last installment of £313m due 2006. Please see BBC link below with all the promises made from the council.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/merseyside/6077940.stm

As you can see, the council earmarked a huge chunk for the regeneration of the Anfield area to help with the new Anfield stadium. Why didn't Everton jump down there throat and say, "This money is for the people of Liverpool ? what about us?"

The new stadium will not happen, the EU money has gone, the board are incompetent and without vision and the City Council are... well we all have our view on them.
James Flynn
605   Posted 21/03/2012 at 12:26:08

Report abuse

Said before and am saying again, The Shite's ownership had a similar situation to Goodison with Fenway Park in Boston for their Red Sox.

Here's a quote from an article discussing their current ownership's outlay over 9 years of $140 Million. Dollars not pounds.

"This American icon that once was cramped and congested now has more seats and spaces, wide open concourses, new and improved facilities and many more food and beverage options for our fans. Leading up to its 100th anniversary in 2012, our focus has been always to improve and expand the physical structure without disturbing the warmth, charm and authenticity that surrounds this ballpark,"

At $140 million over 9 years! £600 million? What an insult to intelligence.

I wonder often just what it is this group intends? Players the only assets left to sell. Two failed attempts at a new stadium. Really, I'm not even taking shots at them. What exactly are their plans? They must have SOME idea. Yet, we just keep dripping and drabbing along.

At this stage, I can't see interested parties swooping in without a significant drop in asking price which seems is only coming along if relegation does.

And we're not even asking some new financial wheel be invented. Between American and European professional sport, many simple revenue streams have been well-established. We're not even copying some of them.

There's really no plan at all? None?

What the Fuck?
Ste Traverse
609   Posted 21/03/2012 at 12:37:59

Report abuse

Elstone is compeltely out of his depth. Most of us couldn't stand Ian Ross, but even he knew that when talking about Elstone is those leaked e-mails.

I find the man patronising and did not like the scare stories he was spouting during the DK farce to make people accept the dubious move.

In short, the sooner this bloke is out of our club the better. And that goes for the clowns above him in the boardroom.
Mick Gallagher
616   Posted 21/03/2012 at 13:00:22

Report abuse

Have you tried emailing Mr Elstone lately? Never seem to get a reply. You just have to wait for his blog and hope he answers your questions through that.

What is the latest on the interested parties wanting to buy us, or just more shite from the board???
Paul Jamieson
618   Posted 21/03/2012 at 13:10:51

Report abuse

No wonder these repetitive articles appear when Evertonians understanding of what Kenwright is all about is equal to my understanding of Einstein?s special theory of relativity.

Kenwright tried to sell Everton out by relocating to an unsuitable stadium in an unsuitable location nine miles from the city centre. Anyone thinking that this was a good idea is a fool. Nobody in their right mind would build a stadium there, no other Premier League club has a ground that far away from their regional centre, so why was it proposed?

Because it offered Kenwright the ability ? just the ability, not the guarantee ? to recoup the money borrowed from Green and the money invested by Green through that other waste of space Earl.

Kenwright is up to his neck in debt and needs the opportunity of getting a sizable return to pay off his debt ? not Everton?s debt, his debt. Staying at Goodison and doing the most cost-effective and sensible thing that is best for the future of the club won't enhance the price of the club. Kenwright is acting in his interests and not that of Everton or Evertonians.

Kirkby would have added value to the club?s balance sheet at a rate redevelopment will never do, hence Kenwright, through his poodle Elstone,  persistently promoting the need to find a scheme with the highest yield and that type of scheme is an enabling development. Kirkby was £78m in and, potentially, £130m out. It would have improved the chances of Everton being sold for a decent price but at what cost to the club because there was no money from Tesco towards the cost of the stadium...Who believes people give you money for nothing?

For a club with a negative balance sheet (business-wise), this enabling trick makes sense. The problem for Everton as a long-term business, and more specifically for Evertonians, is that, as evidence has shown, Kenwright is happy to relocate to any area, irrespective of the fact that it would be detrimental to the future health of the club; Kirkby ? with its poor transport, inability to reach government transportation targets, meaning capping, and being a grossly unsuitable location to take advantage of non-football income because of its location away from the city infrastructure, even before you consider the extra inconvenience to people that actually attend the games ? was perhaps the worst idea put forward by any board in the clubs history. Most fell for it, some didn?t; some things never change, some of them are still clapping him ? proving in the process that they?re as thick as a gurkha?s cock.

Blaming the council is a lame excuse. Everton lied to the council over the Kings Dock and those lied to are still at the council today. In today's Echo Joe Anderson offers a thinly veiled swipe at Everton when he says ?We are in discussions with both clubs about how to develop the area they are in. Nothing will happen without it coming through cabinet. Our relationship with Liverpool is fine and we have regular dialogue as the stadium issue is one we are involved in.?

If that needs spelling out to you then thank god we have some fans who actually understand about the relationship between the club and the city.

Everton has too many phonies working for them: Kenwright with all his Boys? Pen rubbish shouldn?t fool any decent blue, but he does. Elstone, a Liverpool supporter, is as much use as a chocolate teapot... and now we have another Red replacing Ian Ross, a man who held Evertonians in exactly the same contempt as Bill Kenwright does.

Anyone handing money over to prop up this traitorous regime needs to revaluate their reason for being an Evertonian, away from all the rhetoric such as, born not manufactured and standing together... 

Stephen Kenny is right; he's doing Bill's bidding, he has no interest in the club and little ability. In short, a poodle.
Anthony Doyle
620   Posted 21/03/2012 at 13:20:38

Report abuse

#554 Paul Gladstone

Why you having a go at the pink kits? I for one like them; real men wear pink.

*I'm not gay.

**Each to their own.

COYB!!!
Tom Hughes
621   Posted 21/03/2012 at 13:15:34

Report abuse

Paul...... pretty much spot on!
Richard Jones
623   Posted 21/03/2012 at 13:42:43

Report abuse

Very good post Paul.
Danny Broderick
630   Posted 21/03/2012 at 14:37:23

Report abuse

Just one thing though Paul,

Elstone's a City fan.
Matt Traynor
631   Posted 21/03/2012 at 14:43:27

Report abuse

David (OP), I don't agree with your argument, but you don't enhance it by claims that the stalled Everton Place was "millions spent". And by the way, our current deal with Thai Beverage is for £2.6m pa, not £0.6m. I will agree it's piss poor - even Man U's training kit sponsorship gets £4m pa.

Paul Watson (576), surely you must accept that there will be a degree of cynicism / reticence on behalf of LCC when it comes to dealing with a board who have previously proven incapable of delivering? Officers and Councillors may have changed, but many will remember the Kings Waterfront fiasco, when political pressure was applied to elevate Everton's bid from "7th out of 6 bids" (according to RS Councillors at the time) to Preferred Bidder.

I've worked on multi million pound schemes on both sides of the fence (private and public sector), and to be honest it's human nature to treat certain scheme promoters with a dose of "'kin 'ell, they've gotta be joking" due to previous history.

I think you'll find that now extends to potential private sector enablers after the DK fiasco.

Whilst I am not their biggest fan across a number of issues, I'll give LCC a pass on this one.
Eugene Ruane
654   Posted 21/03/2012 at 16:49:14

Report abuse

Paul Jamieson (618) - Great post.
David O'Keefe
657   Posted 21/03/2012 at 16:44:21

Report abuse

Matt: I didn't bring up the shirt sponsorship issue. I did compare and contrast EFC and LFC's respective kit deals.

As for Everton place that was supposedly a cash-neutral £9million pound project that went all the way to the construction phase, until the owners of the land called a halt to it.

"The new development plan was unveiled by chief executive Robert Elstone at a Shareholders Forum before a match versus Everton Chile on Wednesday.

Mr Elstone said the plans would be "self-funded" as cash would be taken from extended deals with catering partner Sodexo and retail partner Kitbag."

Thats were the millions of pounds spent came from an advance from existing contracts. Putting in development plans, legal agreements/contracts and knocking down a wall, that's many hours of work that must have run into the millions. Of course I can't find the total costs I would have to ask an evasive CEO for them. That it ran into millions is a reasonable assumption-it got as far as the construction phase-and is apparently due to start up again this summer...watch this space.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-merseyside-10876811

http://www.liverpooldailypost.co.uk/sport/everton-fc/everton-fc-news/2011/03/23/everton-fc-9m-retail-development-delayed-until-summer-2012-100252-28387602/

The substantive point of disagreement is that you believe that Elstone has done a good job. The chairman and SMT at GP don't quite share your faith in his abilities.
Matt Traynor
659   Posted 21/03/2012 at 17:11:13

Report abuse

David, Everton Place was never built, therefore it never cost £9m. I agree money was wasted in site prep, but that's minute.

I'm not saying he's done a good job. A CX is supposed to lead the management team in delivering the objectives of the business plans as agreed by the board of directors.

I just really don't see what his job is. Every time he speaks at a public event, he has nothing to say, and it's obvious. His self-apologising manner of speaking publicly at such events bears this out in my opinion.

Clubs these days pay their top execs big money as well as their top players. Garry Cook, the much-maligned CEO at Man City till a careless email did for him was on £1.8m a year, or around £35k a week.

How much do you think Bob is on at Everton? I'd guess less than what Bully was on. We just are a small club from the board to the training pitch I'm afraid.
David O'Keefe
661   Posted 21/03/2012 at 17:18:27

Report abuse

I agree it never cost £9 million, Matt, but this project got to the construction phase, the cost to the club in financial terms must be more than minute! Lets ask the chartered accountant at the club...

Now, Matt, what is the nature of your disagreement with my OP?
Matt Traynor
718   Posted 22/03/2012 at 00:55:59

Report abuse

David, my disagreement is that he needs to go. I think as others have pointed out, he's caught up in the mess above him.

A lot of Moyes fans would like to see how he would operate under new owners. I'd also like to see how Robert Elstone would work. If I had to put money on one departing into the wilderness when BK eventually goes, it wouldn't be on our CEO.

But it's all hypothetical.
Eric Myles
721   Posted 22/03/2012 at 01:12:11

Report abuse

David "85% of £82M is £70M. 97% of the wage bill goes to the players, which is £56M; subtract this from the £70M then divide by 365 and you?re left with £38,000 per day."

What figure are you calculating 97% of? Certainly none of the figures you've quoted.

97% of 82 is 79.54
97% of 70 is 68.
56 is 97% of 62, what does that 62 represent in your calculations?
Eric Myles
723   Posted 22/03/2012 at 01:29:02

Report abuse

Elstone is only a sock ppuppet spouting what his masters voice says and it's Kenwright's (and his friend's) hand that's up his arse.

If the board think that the only viable solution is another Desperation Kirkby then they need to go NOW.

But I suspect that this statement is a little seed planted to grow into a statement later regarding another ground move with an enabling commercial development.

I smell a rigged vote coming on.

Thomas Windsor
751   Posted 22/03/2012 at 09:23:34

Report abuse

I wonder if it is possible to do Goodison up, not that I could see it being easy...

Sometimes I go in the Lower Bullens ? it's not changed since I first went in 1962 with me dad!
Barry Jones
787   Posted 22/03/2012 at 12:56:11

Report abuse

Come on Eric, you asked the same question in my thread. It's wages, it tells you that, and the wages are £58m, so 97% is £56m.
Barry Rathbone
818   Posted 22/03/2012 at 15:45:13

Report abuse

30k attendance for Arsenal.

Says it all really.

A new stadium debate is pointless under white flag Moyes.

Turning away in their droves as the truth of this mans ineptitude is becoming clear.
Ray Said
822   Posted 22/03/2012 at 15:34:53

Report abuse

Good post Paul (618).

The council may have a better relationship with Liverpool FC because it seems to be run as a business?. There is nothing businesslike about EFC board and so there is nothing for the council to work with in regard to EFC.

If we had a business brain on the board, EFC could ask the council to reroute roads around the ground to extend the footprint, relocate the school, work out a lease arrangement for the yard at the back of the Bullen's if they really wanted to redevelop Goodison. Yes it would cost money but on an 'Invest to Save' model some financial institution would surely be interested in putting the money up?
Paul Jamieson
834   Posted 22/03/2012 at 11:30:36

Report abuse

Thanks Ray, the people at keioc have been doing what you say since the demise of Kirkby. I know a couple of them slightly and I know for a fact that they have no objection to moving to a suitable new stadium but in the absence of this they?ve engaged with the council and agencies such as Liverpool Vision and whatever The Mersey Partnership is called these days to make possible the only realistically deliverable alternative to our present situation and that is a phased redevelopment of Goodison.

There are no free lunches for a club of the size of Everton, Kings Dock, Kirkby and Goodison Place confirms this and tells you that this board, through its mouthpiece, doesn?t have a clue and if the council and these other agencies are listening to keioc why don?t the board see sense and speak with them? Because they think it?s a waste of time talking with people who actually want to improve the club, strange they want free money but they?re not willing to accept free advice and if measured on performance, its exceptionally good advice.

Everton can?t deal with the council, their fans can, it?s not rocket science is it Ray?
Ray Said
835   Posted 22/03/2012 at 18:22:09

Report abuse

Spot on Paul. It is unfair the give the current and previous leader of the council stick for not doing anything. Both are lifelong blue but they have a responsibility to the citizens. The board want to be treated to handouts of public cash that would benefit a private business.
The council would engage as enablers but the board would have to invest or borrow the finances to invest. If i want to improve my shop, i borrow to invest-i dont stand outside the Town Hall singing 'Buddy can you spare a dime'/
Robby Daniels
849   Posted 22/03/2012 at 19:43:08

Report abuse

David O'Keefe,

Spot on: he should be sacked or resign. The fact that he takes orders and acts on them from Kenwright is no excuse. How many of Hitler's Generals tried to hide behind the same old "just obeying orders" bullshit.....

Anyone who hasn't read the e.mails needs to read them before making a comment. Plotting against the fans to hide the truth... he's a dog.

Paul Jamieson,

Again ... spot on....
Eric Myles
883   Posted 23/03/2012 at 00:59:23

Report abuse

Barry, possibly the confusion is that there is no indication of what the 97% is of.

You didn't mention a figure of £58m in your previous post and David has just cut and paste it so the same incorrect calculation appears in his post.

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