Panorama to investigate Usmanov's links to Everton

Saturday 4 November 2017  260 Comments  [Jump to last]

Farhad Moshiri: sold his 15% stake in Arsenal to long-time business partner Alisher Usmanov last year to buy a 49.9% share of Everton
The question of Alisher Usmanov's involvement in Farhad Moshiri's investment in Everton FC will be an element of a special by BBC programme Panorama.

The two-part investigation to be broadcast tomorrow and Monday will focus on offshore tax havens and global finance as it pertains to some of the world's richest individuals.

Part of the programme will examine the original purchase of a 14.58% stake in Arsenal FC (later augmented to 30%) by Red & White Holdings, the investment vehicle of Usmanov, the billionaire Uzbek-Russian, and Moshiri who sold his share of the London club to his long-time business partner last year to buy 49.9% of Everton.

The BBC claim to have documents that show Moshiri's Arsenal stake was a gift from Usmanov which, by extension, could mean that the tycoon was the original source of the funds the Iranian-born businessman used for his investment in Everton.

Premier League rules prohibit any individual or concern buying into a club if they already own more than 10% of more than another but Moshiri's purchase of a major holding in the Blues was ratified by the League in March 2016.

According to a report in today's Times, both Everton and Usmanov's office deny that he has any involvement at Goodison Park, although the Panorama special is likely to explore the nature of Usmanov's company, USM Holdings, and their sponsorship of Finch Farm which commenced this year and was the subject of raised eyebrows at the time.  


Reader Comments (260)

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


David Barks
1 Posted 04/11/2017 at 04:08:56
Jesus, relegation might soon be the least of our concerns. That does not sound good at all.
Jamie Sweet
2 Posted 04/11/2017 at 04:34:04
Oh shit.
Dave Lynch
3 Posted 04/11/2017 at 04:39:03
Wonder if BK knew anything about it.
Surely due diligence would have turned something up ffs.

Can it get any worse.

Will Mabon
4 Posted 04/11/2017 at 04:41:42
Big Sam should fit right in.
James Watts
5 Posted 04/11/2017 at 04:50:38
So, what is exactly the problem?

Usmanov gave a gift to Moshiri. Moshiri cashed it in then bought a stake in us with the money. As it was a gift, Moshiri owned it from that point onwards and could do with it as he pleased. Or am I missing something?

The training ground sponsorship is another matter though .

Rudi Coote
6 Posted 04/11/2017 at 04:50:42
Surely our legal eagles went through this deal with a fine tooth comb, surely! If the shit does hit the fan then we are well and truly fucked! Talk about kicking a dog while it's down.

Say ta ra to Bramley Moor too.
Steve Barnes
7 Posted 04/11/2017 at 04:54:13
You couldn't make it up.
No manager
No striker
No pace
No points
No new stadium
No more money ?

Still, could be worse, at least we don't play in red...COYB.

Dave Lynch
8 Posted 04/11/2017 at 05:00:54
Unfortunately james big business is full of dodgy dealing.
Everyone knows Abramovich uses Chelsea to launder his wealth, allegedly, and Panorama would not waste money on a witch-hunt if they didn't smell a rat.
Could only happen to us and knowing our luck we'll get docked a load of points.
I love being a blue.
Will Mabon
9 Posted 04/11/2017 at 05:03:16
James, no problem at all. People like this are known for casting around gifts of this size all the time. Usmanov is likely just a highly beneficent sort.
Dave Lynch
10 Posted 04/11/2017 at 05:11:44
Steve@7.

The way things are going we'll be playing in the local park.

Why oh why oh why can't we ever catch a break.

As if being on nights isn't bad enough, I read this during my break.

Ian Jones
11 Posted 04/11/2017 at 05:16:01
I doubt Everton have done anything wrong. Probably sailing close to the wind but when there is such a close and widely known business association between Moshiri and Usmanov, not surprised Panorama are investigating. Feel sure Joey Barton will be the main reporter investigating.
James Watts
12 Posted 04/11/2017 at 05:17:54
Will #9. I'm actually gutted my best friend isn't Usmanov if they are the kind of gifts he gives!
Laurie Hartley
13 Posted 04/11/2017 at 05:44:36
Dave # 8 - apart from not having "a load of points" to be docked anyway ;), the Premier League would be hard pressed to penalise Everton if what the Times report says is true:-

The Premier League conducted a rigorous due diligence process before signing off Moshiri’s Everton purchase and is confident that he used his own money.

I wonder were the "documents" came from though. Perhaps someone doesn't like Usmanov.

Having said that I have always held the view that Usmanov was somehow involved in Moshiri's move on Everton - and I hope he is.

Lyndon Lloyd
14 Posted 04/11/2017 at 05:45:37
As James (5) suggests, it seems to me they would need to prove that if Usmanov gifted the money to Moshiri in the first place, it was his intention to have Farhad eventually use it to buy into another club. That's unlikely; they were tiring of waiting for Kroenke and Moshiri decided to try his hand elsewhere.

The USM sponsorship is a more tangible bone of contention but you would have thought that Everton did their due diligence over that deal and any potential conflict of interest.

Peter Larkin
15 Posted 04/11/2017 at 05:45:46
Farce of a club. How inept can we be, you know what fuck the lot. Get rid of that fraud Moshiri, kenwright, then overpaid pre-madonnas, rid of the lot. Start from scratch, be it the championship or lower. Put in the kids, maybe I will fall in love with the game again!

Dodgy owners, corrupt officals, the fucking F.A..HAAAA. FIFA. The whole thing is one big con! Some will say...ooooo if we go to the championship the club will die, ive got news for you, we died 23 years ago and we will continue dying a slow death with kenwright running the show. Coyb indeed.

Peter Larkin
16 Posted 04/11/2017 at 05:58:38
I wonder if a certain Stan Korenke had any involvement in these leaked documents...
Amit Vithlani
17 Posted 04/11/2017 at 06:10:32
No issue here. The pro-RS, biased broadcasting corporation has nothing better to investigate then a series of transactions involving a premier league club?

Where were the investigations relating to the activities of Karl Oyston at Blackpool? Or how about the Glazers taking over at United?

Or, one would have hoped, an investigation into the Russian involvement in the US Presidential elections, or indeed the source of North Korea's nuclear weapons?

Or closer to home, how about gender inequality in pay at the BBC?

Pissing away tax payers money.

Raymond Fox
18 Posted 04/11/2017 at 06:22:22
Great, just what we need at this time, we've become a comedy of errors.

You don't just give multi millions to someone!
Sponsorship can be and is a form of advertising, but they will ask the question why Everton?

I cant see that any good will come out of this, only the opposite.

Makes my choice of Allardyce if needed also less likely to happen now I would say.

Dave Lynch
19 Posted 04/11/2017 at 06:22:38
Tell you what Lyndon.

If BK had anything to do with the due diligence it probably involved him making sure he didn't live in a one bedroom flat.

It probably is nothing, but after years of disappointment and false dawns nothing will surprise me with regards this club.

Mike Green
20 Posted 04/11/2017 at 06:24:06
What do I know but I think the key to this is Usmanov being the "original source" of the money. If I gave someone £40 as a gift (i.e. no strings) and they then spent the money on a bottle of malt I wouldn't have any legal claim to it, or be responsible for how the money had been spent.

As for USM Finch Farm I think we would have a very strong case to say everything was done in the public eye (it's a sponsorship deal after all not brown paper bags in a car park) and if anyone had a problem with it then it's a bit late now.

This is just the BBC putting a story together for people to watch, that's their job after all. It won't go further than the 'off' button and have Reds claiming foul no doubt for a while (if not driven by them in the first place .).

On the upside it might be the last straw for Usmanov to finally give up on Arsenal and put his money into us with Moshiri, just like he did at Arsenal in the first place. The story could ultimately be the beginning of the Usmanov era at Everton, who knows. Not me, that's for sure, and I doubt the BBC either.

Stephen Brown
21 Posted 04/11/2017 at 06:34:20
Why us ???
Surely Man City and Chelsea have some underhand dealings going on! Investigate them !!
Easy prey !!!
Will Mabon
22 Posted 04/11/2017 at 06:36:24
A rather sharp reverse in fortunes in a short time, composed of some very unexpected elements and outcomes. One could wonder if some dark force has come after the club.
Gerard McKean
23 Posted 04/11/2017 at 06:53:22
Dave#3 and Lyndon #14, you both use the phrase “due diligence “, which is something you would expect from a multi million pound business concern.

Unfortunately EFC is run on parochial lines more akin to some ex Soviet tin pot dictatorship or the current American presidency. I call it “Meet the Fokkers” - the Fokkers being friends of Kenwright. The nepotism that is rife at the club ensures a “we’ll always do what we’ve always done” mentality. There is no meritocracy at Goodison, in fact just the opposite, people with new ideas, people who could bring about change for the better are actively discouraged.

Over the 7 years I was able to observe at close hand the inner workings of the club from my position as a casual employee in a senior role I became increasingly dismayed at the lack of competence and ambition for the club shown by people occupying important places in the hierarchy. Each of the people I’m thinking of was very ambitious for himself and herself, each had been “nominated “ to their job on the basis of being a PLU - people like us- and each was allowed to build their own empire within so long as they did nothing to rock the big boat.

I walked away on my own terms when I decided that I could no longer associate myself or the values that I thought my club stood for with the sheer greed of employees who are using Everton Football Club as a vehicle for their own financial and social advancement.

Moshiri has no idea what’s going on. He and his friends might be investing but what they are investing into is a rather private and exclusive club within a Club over which they have no insight or control.

Sam Hoare
24 Posted 04/11/2017 at 06:53:22
When it rains
Will Mabon
25 Posted 04/11/2017 at 07:01:18
Gerard, very damning. If you believe things are still operating today as you describe, and you believe Moshiri is unaware, I'd suggest you send that post to him, as a starter.
John Keating
26 Posted 04/11/2017 at 07:06:27
I just wish he'd give Moshiri another wedge of cash.
Any chance he could arrange to swap the MK Dons team with ours??
Alexander Murphy
27 Posted 04/11/2017 at 07:11:47
Just me that thinks Farhad Moshiri and Vic Reeves is one and the same person ?

Farhad:
Link

Vic:
Link

It was probably that friend of Dentists and Architects, the delusional Graham Lister that leaked on the documents.

Graham Lister:
Link

Tony Everan
28 Posted 04/11/2017 at 07:13:14
Bad blood between Kroenke / Usmanov and Moshiri .

A game of high stakes one upmanship going on between extremely powerful and proud men.

Makes me wonder whether Kroenke had a spanner thrown into the Giroud deal . Offered Giroud more money/guarantees and bonuses to stay at the very moment he was about to sign for Everton.

Gerard McKean
29 Posted 04/11/2017 at 07:29:43
Will, billionaires with no previous allegiance to Everton have their own reasons for wanting to own a business with a multimillion pounds turnover.

Unless he suddenly develops the passion that we have for our club, the commitment to NSNO, he’ll be happy to see Everton merely as an investment. The only thing that will trouble him at all is the risk to his investment if it drops out of the top tier. I hate that EPL stuff!

Tony Heron
31 Posted 04/11/2017 at 07:36:38
Yes I hope Everton have carried out " due dilligence" , but many have commented about the way our club is run and in particular how it compares unfavourably to others. Let me give you an example of my own. A few years back and in the course of my work I had to visit LFC & EFC on the dame day. When I walked into the reception at Anfield it was like walking into a luxury hotel with plush furnishing. There was a smart smiling young lady behind a shiny large reception desk. A young man immaculately dressed approached me and asked if he could help. All in all a very professional display which gave a really positive impression. Later I went to Goodison and went to the reception which was at the Park End. I walked into a rather small area which had what looked like a very cheap sofa and chair, the floor was dirty. In the corner was a small grubby desk behind which sat a girl in an equally grubby club anorak. I stood there waiting for her to look up, which she eventually did and said "yeah?". After giving the reason for my visit she called out to a male colleague who had come in behind me. They then engaged in some private banter/flirting before her colleague looked at me and said "come on then", and indicated for me to follow. It was all so unproffessional and a complete contrast to my experience at LFC. Later I remembered how Nigel Martyn had been treated by Johnson when we first tried to sign him before he went to Leeds ( left waiting in the foyer of Park Hampers), and I could empathise with him. As others have said the club, sadly, is a joke and I feel the only answer is a "root and branch" clear out but I'm not holding my breath.
Thomas Lennon
32 Posted 04/11/2017 at 07:47:51
If you or I received a gift of £80million we would be expected to pay tax on it. Can't really see any other issue. FA gave permission, if anything they need to look at their procedures, you can't issue fines in retrospect.
Sponsorship deal? Mosh is a co-owner. The business relationship is based overseas, I am sure the paperwork will ultimately be in order.
This year there have been several stories about Usmanov falling out with another powerful businessmen, someone who may well be behind this investigation.
It's going to be worth watching though.
Neil Copeland
35 Posted 04/11/2017 at 08:05:24
We can all pull comparisons to show almost what we want I suppose. A friend of mine is a Chief Steward at EFC which is a little surprising given that he supports LFC. He used to steward at LFC but joined EFC because he became very disillusioned with the arrogant attitude and poor man management of staff at our neighbours. He speaks very highly of us (reluctantly) tells me we are a fantastic, well run club amongst the best in the Premier League.

So, I suppose you believe what you want to. We are down at the moment and it is only natural to assume we are guilty of dodgey dealings given the way we perceive BK does things. I always thought it odd that Usmanov had put money into Finch Farm but surely that is too obvious - it’s not as if we are trying to hide anything when it is called USM Finch Farm.

This may actually turn out well for EFC, particularly if it is linked to Kroenke in some way and Usmanov decides enough is enough and invests in us instead.

Meanwhile, I suggest we stop getting overly excited until we have more facts.

Martin Nicholls
36 Posted 04/11/2017 at 08:22:22
Thomas#32 - why would the recipient of a gift be expected to pay tax on it? Surely it would have to be something more than a gift in order for the recipient to have a tax liability?
Mark Tanton
37 Posted 04/11/2017 at 08:26:05
Tony that is a super point on the Giroud deal. It goes on all the time I reckon, the smoothness of transfer deals determined by the good or bad relationships at the top of clubs. I seem to recall noises coming out of the club that Kenwright never wanted to deal with Levy again after Pienaar’s transfer back to Goodison.
Tony Marsh
38 Posted 04/11/2017 at 08:40:53
Stephen @ 21
My thoughts exactly mate.Why Us? Abromovich is as bent as a tow Bob note but they are left alone for some reason. City have been sponsored by the very guy who owns them.. Easy prey exactly what we are.
Charles Brewer
39 Posted 04/11/2017 at 08:49:39
If come in, folks. It's a BBC investigation. It will be done by a couple of Tristrams and Jacynthas who did PPE at Oxford and got in because Daddy was a Labour member of the House of Lords who supported the USSR in the 50s.

There will be lots of dramatic music, jerky camera work, murky lighting, and muffled sound. There will be several references to Aystollah Khomeini (Iran, y'know) and probably few to Borat (they didn't quite remember that a) it was a comedy and B) it was about Kazakhstan - it's all the sameplace isn't it?)

There will be lots of unconnected references to "Secret memos" and"meetings in Moscow hotels"and the entire thing will be drivel that a real newspaper man like Andrew Neil would have rolled up and inserted in the authors as they left the building very rapidly.

BBC "jounalism" is sub Beano stuff these days.

Jim Lloyd
40 Posted 04/11/2017 at 08:50:03
If someone has given anything, including money, as a gift, then it's no longer theirs and the recipient can use that gift for their own purpose. I suppose that only if it was lent to Mr Moshiri for the express purpose of buying the arsenal shares, could there be any form of nefarious doings about it I hope!

Anyway, I hope it all pisses old Usmanov right off; and he then buys the shares off Kenwright and Jon Woods and we get him on our board...and get rid of them!

Matt Traynor
42 Posted 04/11/2017 at 09:00:53
With all the speculation about who acquired Robert Earl's shares - rumoured to be "Friend of Everton" Sir Philip "Shifty" Green, and talk of Shadow Directors, this should be of no surprise to anyone. Kim Jong Bill has made his millions now, and is still around, maybe he really does love Everton eh?
Gary Edwards
44 Posted 04/11/2017 at 09:06:21
Frankfurt School point # 10 - dumbing down and control of the media.

It's the BBC in the words of Jonesy, "don't panic", as Charlie says "sub Beano".

.. then again Kenwright and Elstone. The only surprise is that Kenwright has been previously 'investigated' or 'outed' Panorama style.

Ian Horan
45 Posted 04/11/2017 at 09:06:58
Bizzare that the BBC never undertook a similar investigation to our alleged previous owner sorry non owner Philips Green, I didn't use the Sir due to his unsavoury mismanagement of the pensions of BHS staff.
Jim Lloyd
46 Posted 04/11/2017 at 09:10:56
Well said Ian!
Tony Everan
48 Posted 04/11/2017 at 09:17:33
I hope for the BBC and taxpayers’ sake that the investigation and accusations are backed up with legally sound watertight evidence.

Usmanov and Moshiri will have a pretty decent legal team onto it if it’s based on unsubstantiated heresay and unnamed whistleblowers who may have ulterior motives.

We may even get the BBC to buy us a new striker etc etc , with the compo.

Neil Copeland
49 Posted 04/11/2017 at 09:21:11
Tony, come back Gary Lineker, all is forgiven!
Denis Richardson
50 Posted 04/11/2017 at 09:22:04
That’s the first time I’ve ever heard of an £80m ‘gift’. Wasn’t/isn’t Moshiri supposed to be worth £1.5bn?

I just don’t believe someone would give that amount of money away for nothing. Either Moshiri seems to be a straw man for USM or the money was a loan. Either way the ultimate source of funds that paid for Moshiris Everton stake seems USM. The additional sponsorship of FF always seemed a bit dodge as well.

All in all doesn’t really look too clean. Then again the whole industry is a sess pit. From FIFA to UEFA to the respective FAs. Far too large a gravy train for anyone to want to derail, many many faces in the trough.

This will eventually lead to nothing, just like every other investigation and revelation of corruption in the game, of which there have been quite a few in recent years.

Too much money sloshing around for anything meaningful to change anytime soon. When the people at the top who make the rules are themselves corrupt, nothing will change until the money runs out.

Everton will go on as normal with BK still there.

Gerrard 23 - that’s exactly how I’ve imagined Everton to be run. Full of yes men happy to take the cash for a cosy life. The likes of BK and Elstone need to be driven out but BK would never let that happen whilst he can still draw breath. He’ll be around for many years still.

Tony Abrahams
51 Posted 04/11/2017 at 09:27:26
Best just to watch the programme, before coming to any conclusions, who knows Phillip Green’s name, might be mentioned during this investigation?

My biggest hope is that this is about people trying to get rid of Usmanov, out of Arsenal, but as I said, it’s best to watch before trying to make any sensible comments.

Derek Knox
53 Posted 04/11/2017 at 09:40:39
Don't normally watch a lot of TV, unless there is football or quizzes or news on, but I will definitely be watching this one.

Best possible outcome; BPB gets sent to Fat Farm, before doing a stretch in nick; sharing a cell with Raymond the Bastard who loves Blood Brothers.

Koeman follows him, having been proved a fraud, then he and Martinez, are forced to pay every penny of their compensation back.

Steve Walsh is given every issue of Pannini Collections to enable him to spot some real talent!

Michael Lynch
54 Posted 04/11/2017 at 09:45:45
As others have already said - it's Panorama, it's the BBC ffs. It will be about as "revealing" as a Gogglebox Celebrity Special. Nobody is going to give a shit about what Panorama has to say about Everton, it will be forgotten in a couple of days.
Jon Withey
55 Posted 04/11/2017 at 09:46:24
Well, they are business partners so expect some sort of mutual strategic alliance - only question is legality and from our perspective whether that strategy benefits or hinders the club.

Colin Glassar
56 Posted 04/11/2017 at 09:48:38
Like the yanks say, this is just a big nothing burger.

As a few have already stated, football is corrupt from top to bottom so wtf is going to get all upset about a “gift”? UEFA? Fifa? Scudamore? Have they ever taken actions against dodgy owners? Bernard Tapia of Marseille in the early 90’s(?) might have been the last one.

Moshiri is an international accountant who knows where to bury the money (and bodies) and I’m sure, apart from some embarrassment, he has this covered. Now if the rs toffs at the bbc (and it’s swarming with them) have something it had better be rock solid as you don’t want to mess with the Iranian/Russian mob. Beware you pimply faced fuckers!

Mark Wilson
57 Posted 04/11/2017 at 09:50:09
Neil,#35 spoilsport ! Facts ? What’s got into you ! This is Everton, here are some facts.

Fact, we thought Mr Moshiri was going to pump a hundred million into the team this year. Fact, he has barely spent £40m and would have spent zero had Ross gone.

Fact, we thought Koeman was the real deal. Fact, he wasn’t and has merely added to the decline under Martinez.

Fact, we thought Steve Walsh would unearth some low cost bargains who would go on to make their name in a successful side. Fact, he hasn’t unless you count Sandro which you probably won’t

Fact, we thought that after a lifetime wait it was here, the moment we kicked on, the moment we smashed the glass ceiling, captured top four finishes on a regular basis, played attractive football and secured ownership that actually seemed to think you didn’t demonstrate your amazing professionalism by playing schoolyard games with the anchor on a dodgy sky tv programme. Fact, we’ve lost another decade and are witnessing the worst and quickest decline in our history, mismanagement on a scale never ever thought possible even at this club.

Fact, many of us will be Goodison on Sunday bellowing our hearts out in a display of utter desperate loyalty because it’s what we do and who we are. Fact, we deserve so much better but in our world that will never be the reason we actually get it. Instead we have to hope we touch lucky in all sorts of ways and personally I’m holding my breath but you never know, strangers things have happened elsewhere, Trump runs America, May is still PM, people voted for Brexit cos they believed the NHS would get a £350m windfall and Boris and Farage spoke the truth, Craig Shakespeare would keep his job at Leicester and people thought we should sell Lukaku as he was too rude and we’d replace his 20/25 goals a season with a collective scoring storm and not need to worry about failing to replace him oh, and stranger than anything above, some folk on ToffeeWeb thought the last two transfer windows were “fantastic” because we got rid of deadwood.

Yep stranger things have happened than Everton FC getting lucky and giving a brilliant fan base a team it deserves. Now would be a very good time for a Kevin Brock moment.

Barry McNally
58 Posted 04/11/2017 at 09:54:44
Bottom line is that Mosh hasn't got a pot to piss in!
Michael Neely
59 Posted 04/11/2017 at 09:58:00
James #5 I see it exactly the same. Usminov's gift to Moshiri was his to do with as he pleased, and I suspect the sale was to make Usminov's hand stronger if he chose ever to challenge Kronke. As for the gift itself, that Lyndon #14, was in the form of shares, not money which I presume would have incurred some form of taxation, and we all know what rich people think of tax.
I've known Panorama to end up on the wrong side of a court room, so they don't get everything right. The only fly in the ointment as far as I can see is the Finch Farm sponsorship deal which always seemed a bit funny to me.
Colin Glassar
60 Posted 04/11/2017 at 09:58:47
I wonder if it’s a certain member of the board who’s been feeding his mateys at the Beeb this info? He gets a barrowload of cash, keeps control over day to day activities at the club and now with a scandal, of epic proportions, he can force Moshiri out “to save the honour and reputation of the club”. I wouldn’t put it past him.
Tony Hill
61 Posted 04/11/2017 at 10:04:50
Tony Abrahams is right that we'll have to see what is said in this programme, but it is extremely unlikely that anything truly damaging will be unearthed. People like Usmanov (and, by extension, Moshiri) deal with stuff like this on a daily basis. It's the dirt of high stakes business.

There will be some initial noise and some press bollocks before it's all brushed away. The Premier league will certainly not want to be investigating their own incompetence, if there is anything shady.

This is what modern football is about, of course, and puts the hilarious denunciations of Allardyce on here into perspective.

Dave Williams
62 Posted 04/11/2017 at 10:06:04
A gift is just that with no tax liability.
I can't see that anyone would have any side agreement that the EFC shares really belonged to Usmanov as that would be naive in the extreme. The USM sponsorship has already been investigated and cleared and it is working in that I had never heard of USM before but I sure as hell have done now!
Panorama tends to sling a bit of mud around without reaching any conclusion. These guys have been Mates and business partners for years and if indeed Usmanov gifted money to Moshiri to buy into Red and White holdings that predates involvement in EFC by a long way.
Ultimately if the investigation indicated that Usmanov has a financial stake in the club then he would have to either get rid or sell his Arsenal shares. From Everton's point of view an investor has acquired shares registered in his name and he owns the club. We can't be expected to be aware of anything agreed between individuals.
Expect a deliberate attempt to make things murky with interviews in darkened rooms and nothing other than speculation.
I bet the lawyers will be watching very closely!!
Tony Abrahams
63 Posted 04/11/2017 at 10:06:26
Colin, your hatred for Kenwright holds no bounds, He couldn’t survive even with all of his acting skills!
Neil Copeland
65 Posted 04/11/2017 at 10:10:24
Colin, and welcome back Ginger and is forgiven!

Mark 57, Derek 53 may be right about BK doing a stretch based on your facts! Nah, this is Everton where nothing good happens.

Tony Hill
66 Posted 04/11/2017 at 10:10:42
The only "problem" I do see is that it will now be very difficult for Usmanov ever formally to come into Everton. I have my doubts that he was ever going to do so given recent events, but the door may well now be closed regardless. Which could, in turn, affect Moshiri's commitment - all speculation, of course.

Only us.

Micky Norman
67 Posted 04/11/2017 at 10:11:14
Didn't our legal guy jump ship last week? mmmmm
Kevin Tully
68 Posted 04/11/2017 at 10:11:47
From Philip Green, off-shore loans, Robert Earl, CEO's walking after 6 weeks because they couldn't believe their eyes, Bill continues wth one of his 'productions.'

I am convinced the truth will come out one day about this chancer, and the fact he wouldn't even speak to City's owners when they were looking for a club. This thread will soon be polluted by his 'supporters' who will point to Villa as some sort of warped defence for his incompetence. I look at Arsenal and City myself, and believe that's what we could have been.

Look at the mess we're in, smirking much now, Bill?

Mark Cooper
69 Posted 04/11/2017 at 10:20:53
Agree with what Dave #62 says. Moshiri sold his shares to Usmanov simple as, then bought into Everton simple as. Sponsorship deal was cleared so who would be at fault? Any investigation may quicken Usmanovs departure from Arsenal though as a couple of months back his people stated that he would not be selling his shares to Kroenke but may be willing to sell to another party, which in itself was quite a shift of stance from previously.
This though is another example of the BBCs attempts to discredit misrepresent Everton, Colin #56 is correct, the BBC is rife with reds(a relative of mine worked there).
Lawrence Green
70 Posted 04/11/2017 at 10:22:48
Pity the BBC and Panorama couldn't do the same in-depth investigation into every Premier League club, this whole thing smells of a witch hunt by Auntie Beeb for and on behalf of who they consider the nations favourite club. Little doubt that Everton FC will come out of this holding the dirty end of the stick and god knows how that will impinge on it financially in the next few months and years.

Assuming this programme has been some time in the making it might explain the sudden end to our spending well before the window closed. If all of the other 'top' clubs are squeaky clean I have no issue with Everton FC being punished if there is wrong doing by the club or its partners if not then two-fingers to the BBC.

Ian McPherson
71 Posted 04/11/2017 at 10:28:30
It's a Panorama investigation not Watergate! The FA signed off on the deal, if their is a legal investigation generated from it the FA has to support us. Look at the Chelsea and Man City funding and sponsorship deals, nothing will come of this and would take years to prove if there was. gulp.
John Otway
72 Posted 04/11/2017 at 10:28:52
#58. Barry, don't be silly. According to Forbes, Farhad Moshiri's net worth as 11/4/17 is $2.4 billion.
Stan Schofield
73 Posted 04/11/2017 at 10:29:31
I'm a bit confused. Is Panorama implying that Usmanov effectively owns 49.9% of Everton in addition to his 30% stake in Arsenal, in contravention of the rules? If this is so, and it were subsequently confirmed officially, then presumably Usmanov would then have to offload either Everton or Arsenal?

On the other hand, although some BBC investigations are very good, many are a load of nonesense, and this could be in the latter category.

Neil Copeland
74 Posted 04/11/2017 at 10:31:43
Anytime that I have seen or heard about a Panorama investigation results in all sorts of comments the next day about how awful it all is, and they cant be allowed to get away that, and what a bunch of crooks etc. The day after that it has all been forgotten.

The more I think about it the more it sounds like the usual bollocks but will be watching all the same.

Darren Hind
75 Posted 04/11/2017 at 10:32:42
Could somebody with a decent grasp of the world of financing dumb this down and explain exactly what it means ?

I'm worried here and I don't even know what I'm worried about

Kevin Tully
76 Posted 04/11/2017 at 10:33:08
The main concern here is the Bramley-Moore stadium project. The council have committed to act as guarantor, they could quite easily remove their support is any sniff of impropriety is exposed in this programme.

Fucks sake.

Dennis Stevens
77 Posted 04/11/2017 at 10:35:12
I suspect it's all less about Moshiri & Everton & much more about Usmanov. In all probability part of the concerted efforts to get him to part with his Arsenal shares. If that should come to pass, maybe Everton might prove to be the main beneficiaries.
Oliver Brunel
78 Posted 04/11/2017 at 10:35:16
Charles (39) hits the nail on the head. I wouldnt be too concerned, anything that comes out of the BBC is usually driven by some agenda; PC nonsense, racism, interest groups . BBC journalists live in an ivory tower of state privilege whilst normal people have to work for a living. Should have been dismantled years ago and the employees sent to a work camp. But the UK is one big gravy train for lazy state employees and NGOs. Do you think Usmanov will be quaking in his boots? If I was a BBC journalist I would be more than concerned going after someone like that. However going back to a previous post Everton is a nepotistic organisation employing people by virtue of contacts rather than ability. I have been saying it for years- a badly run organisation under Kenwright. Would need radical change. 'The urge to destroy is a constructive urge' Bakunin.
Phil Walling
79 Posted 04/11/2017 at 10:36:45
I heard a whisper that Big Sam discovered these shenanigans whilst doing his due diligence on Everton.

Little Sam advised him to take care when negotiating with them Blue bastards !

Paul Smith
80 Posted 04/11/2017 at 10:38:23
Bill Kenwright is a scally

Seems to me there are plenty of moody goings on at my club.

Mark Cooper
82 Posted 04/11/2017 at 10:42:24
Note to the BBC, I would rather Everton was run by a dozen dodgy businessmen than a hiding place for peado's. Sort your own house out!
Colin Glassar
84 Posted 04/11/2017 at 10:48:11
Pity the bbc doesn’t investigate itself. It went from being one of the most highly rated news outlets in the world to a modern day Sodom and Gomorrah.

The place is rife with misogyny, nepotism, perverts, rs, liars and grotesquely overpaid wankers. The latest perv to be exposed is Chris Evans but the Beeb, apparently, is refusing to investigate (yet again) one of “their own”.

These shitheads are the last one who should be throwing rocks in glasshouses. The entire corporation needs pulling apart and rebuilding. I have a family member who works within the beast and the story she tells .well,

Tony Hill
85 Posted 04/11/2017 at 10:49:44
Darren (#75), the allegation or implication of the programme must be that there was a gift of shares in Arsenal to Moshiri, effectively by Usmanov, precisely in order that Moshiri could sell them to generate finances to purchase his stake in Everton. It is presumably going to be alleged that Moshiri was, therefore, a puppet of, or an instrument for, Usmanov to hold stakes beyond the permitted 10% in more than one Premier League club.

As I've suggested above, I will be astonished if any of this leads anywhere, save to damage prospects of Usmanov ever now investing officially in Everton which would be damaging enough of course.

Steve Carse
86 Posted 04/11/2017 at 10:51:57
A different issue altogether but its a pity that Panorama didn't do a programme on why the RS weren't put into administration with points docked when the club was taken away from Hicks and Gillette and hawked around to potential buyers.
Tony Hill
87 Posted 04/11/2017 at 10:53:40
The point being, sorry, that Usmanov bought back the gifted shares.
Colin Glassar
88 Posted 04/11/2017 at 10:54:47
Any company that has employed the likes of Jimmy Saville, Jeremy Clarkson, Chris Evans and Mark Lawrenson deserves to be flushed down the bog imo.

Great post Phil 79, made me laugh.

Chad Schofield
89 Posted 04/11/2017 at 10:57:25
Ok, so from what I can see if it was given as a gift it would have been tax free, but HMRC would likely go after the lost capital gains. Although that's a very loose understanding - I'm not a tax expert.

Can't see the EPL docking points, although they may be asked to review their Anti Money Laundering procedures (which you'd think would be pretty tight).

I was going to make a joke that perhaps Pat Van Den Hauwe was studying for his LPC and he'd carried out the Due Dilligence... But see he's already involved at the club.

The only person who's likely to get stung from this is Moshiri, with potential Capital Gains from the sale of
Red & White Holdings and maybe a fine. As to amounts, well it'd only be whatever the £80M equates to as percent growth over around ten years RED and WHITE SECURITIES LTD/
Red and White Holdings Ltd was going, I think.

Moshiri's no fool though, so I'm surprised he'd have chance his arm... But guess we'll hear more on the Panorama programme.

Oliver Brunel
90 Posted 04/11/2017 at 11:04:10
Mark(82) yes indeed. Surely an organisation harbouring so many paedophiles should be abolished?
Mark Morrissey
91 Posted 04/11/2017 at 11:07:31
I'll wait for the programme. It might just be the straw that breaks the camels back in respect of the relationship between Kroenke and Usmanov. He might just come away from this with the plan " I'm an Everton Investor from now on. He has to be either our downfall or our saviour. I'm ever the optimist and whilst I'm here " Get Rafa in"
Mark Cooper
92 Posted 04/11/2017 at 11:09:44
Definitely Oliver!
Oliver Brunel
93 Posted 04/11/2017 at 11:20:59
It could work out well for Everton actually. I suspect that Usmanov does plan to invest more in Everton.
Neil Humphreys
94 Posted 04/11/2017 at 11:33:49
Laughing at the speculation that Kenwright was involved in due dilligence. After the debacle of the Man City owners being refused dialogue all those years ago!
He was demanding a letter of credit from a sovereign wealth fund before entering talks- a sovereign wealth fund FFS...
And that is why when City rolled out the red carpet- we weren’t at the races

This could force Usmanov’s hand of course- if he came out as our owner that would be a good thing

Colin Glassar
95 Posted 04/11/2017 at 11:35:58
What time and channel is it on? I can’t find it on my sky planner. And a two part series? Must be serious then. Who’s narrating it? Lawro, Hansen, Murphy, Owen, Carra, Redknapp, Souness, Gerrard, Macca, Beglin? Who? Who? Who? You know, the Beeb are always so neutral when it comes to footy.
Iain Johnston
96 Posted 04/11/2017 at 11:48:45
I don't really see what the story is here. Anyone can gift any funds, shares or property to anyone they choose without HMRC entitled to anything. It's more likely that Kenwright is liable for Capital Gains as it's he who has seen such a huge return on investment.

Again though , how has the Arsenal share sale and subsequent EFC 49.9% share purchase benefitted either club or Moshiri's pocket, the latter was gained with the funds raised by the sale of the former?

There is no advantage from his investment in Everton as there's been none, Every penny spent so far since Feb 2016 has been Club generated either by turnover or player sales plus there is the 60m line of credit from the Chinese bank.

Bramley Moore isn't affected as that is to be funded by outside investment, not Moshiri's pocket or our turnover.

Moshiri has spent nothing of his personal wealth to be liable for anything, in fact many could argue that as his interests in Arsenal were of greater status, the club is worth a lot more, he's actually lost out rather than gained anything whether legitimate or otherwise.

Ray Said
97 Posted 04/11/2017 at 11:52:01
Colin (95) its a 30 min episode on BBC1 on Sunday and a 1 hr show on Monday
Phil Walling
98 Posted 04/11/2017 at 11:54:22
It may come as a surprise, Colin but Panorama is on BBC not Sky ! Episode one is listed as 21.00 Monday 6/11/18.
Phil Walling
99 Posted 04/11/2017 at 11:55:16
Episode 2, that is.
John Harrop
100 Posted 04/11/2017 at 12:00:03
Don't forget that USM Holdings is not just 'Usmanov's company'. The 'M' in the company name is Moshiri, and he's the chairman.
Chris Gordon
101 Posted 04/11/2017 at 12:01:37
On the face of it, panorama are asking a legitimate question.
However
If moshiri did in fact receive his stake in arsenal as a gift from usmanov, and then sold that gift some time later, then reinvested the monies from that gift, then that is his prerogative, and as such on the information given, then this should not be an issue.
The question that troubles me, is why would usmanov give a third party a 15 % stake in his asset?
Business people do not give anything away for free.
The moshiri s purchase of the club seems fairly bullet proof from the standpoint of the club abiding by all current rules, as such I am unconcerned about any financial or Pl point penalties comming our way.
My concern from the limited information available is the obvious links and the potential that moshiri is now vulnerable to the whims of usmanov. The man who essentially bankrolled moshiri s takeover.
NOBODY receives a gift worth £150 million without some sort of indebitidness or condition attached. Anybody who thinks otherwise is being massively naive.
The BBC have for a long time had usmanov in their sights. He is undoubtedly a shady, shadowy and secretive character of reportedly dubious means. And as such quite rightly the BBC have had their eye on him for some time. However Abramovic is his undoubted equal in many people's eyes, yet Abramovic seems to be given carte blanche in much of the media.
This story together with past and I'm sure future stories of the like, are a direct result of the PL and it's leaders continually chasing the £££££££. The PL has become an unmanageable monster. Attracting some of the most unscrupulous, shadowy, secretive characters from across the world looking for a place to invest/launder monies from equally shadowy sources. This problem is that in its rush for untold riches the pl has opened Pandoras box, it is far to late to close the box now, the culture of greed and power within the Pl hierarchy is too entrenched. The Pl is a runaway train with no driver, football is currently financially unsustainable without the global TV income.
A vast majority of clubs make peanuts if any profit at all. The whole thing is financed through these shady overseas characters who by definition are not transparent in their business dealings.
As for the sponsorship of finch farm. This raised a number of eyebrows, this to me is the truely concerning link between usmanov and Everton. Why did usm choose Everton to invest in via this sponsorship? This is where the usmanov / moshiri link begins to rear it's ugly head in the public domain. This sponsorship is I fear the very tip of the usmanov / moshiri partnership.
Craig Walker
102 Posted 04/11/2017 at 12:05:54
Can it get any worse? I’ll wake up in a minute and it’ll all be a dream. I can’t see a time when i’ll ever be optimistic about the Blues again. We just need the announcement now that Bramley Moore is a sham as well. Farcical and demoralising.
Tony Marsh
103 Posted 04/11/2017 at 12:07:55
Isn't wierd how there was only 49.9% shares for sale when Moshiri bought in to the Kenwright rennaisance? Just under the amount required so as Moshiri didn't have a majority holding .I wonder who came up with that plan?

The BBC should investigate Bill Kenwright for being a bullshitter..Give Bill his due though his smoke and mirrors act has gone longer than Paul Daniels did.

Chris Gordon
104 Posted 04/11/2017 at 12:08:42
On the face of it, panorama are asking a legitimate question.
However
If moshiri did in fact receive his stake in arsenal as a gift from usmanov, and then sold that gift some time later, then reinvested the monies from that gift, then that is his prerogative, and as such on the information given, then this should not be an issue.
The question that troubles me, is why would usmanov give a third party a 15 % stake in his asset?
Business people do not give anything away for free.
The moshiri s purchase of the club seems fairly bullet proof from the standpoint of the club abiding by all current rules, as such I am unconcerned about any financial or Pl point penalties comming our way.
My concern from the limited information available is the obvious links and the potential that moshiri is now vulnerable to the whims of usmanov. The man who essentially bankrolled moshiri s takeover.
NOBODY receives a gift worth £150 million without some sort of indebitidness or condition attached. Anybody who thinks otherwise is being massively naive.
The BBC have for a long time had usmanov in their sights. He is undoubtedly a shady, shadowy and secretive character of reportedly dubious means. And as such quite rightly the BBC have had their eye on him for some time. However Abramovic is his undoubted equal in many people's eyes, yet Abramovic seems to be given carte blanche in much of the media.
This story together with past and I'm sure future stories of the like, are a direct result of the PL and it's leaders continually chasing the £££££££. The PL has become an unmanageable monster. Attracting some of the most unscrupulous, shadowy, secretive characters from across the world looking for a place to invest/launder monies from equally shadowy sources. This problem is that in its rush for untold riches the pl has opened Pandoras box, it is far to late to close the box now, the culture of greed and power within the Pl hierarchy is too entrenched. The Pl is a runaway train with no driver, football is currently financially unsustainable without the global TV income.
A vast majority of clubs make peanuts if any profit at all. The whole thing is financed through these shady overseas characters who by definition are not transparent in their business dealings.
As for the sponsorship of finch farm. This raised a number of eyebrows, this to me is the truely concerning link between usmanov and Everton. Why did usm choose Everton to invest in via this sponsorship? This is where the usmanov / moshiri link begins to rear it's ugly head in the public domain. This sponsorship is I fear the very tip of the usmanov / moshiri partnership.
Stephen Jones
105 Posted 04/11/2017 at 12:11:05
Polonium tea anyone?
Tony Dove
106 Posted 04/11/2017 at 12:11:14
The only thing that really troubles me is the prospect of Allardyce. He must have had his hand on someones knee at some point. If you know that person please come forward now.
Raymond Fox
107 Posted 04/11/2017 at 12:14:32
Really it comes down to, did Moshiri buy his Arsenal shares with his own money or Usmanov's.
If it was Moshiri's own money and he sells his Arsenal shares to Usmanov and buys a 49.9% of us, hunky dory.
On the other hand if all the shares belonged to Usmanov all along, he has part ownership in two clubs at the same time which breaks the rules.

The Finch Farm sponsorship also looks dodgy, but the best excuse would be that its an advertisement vehicle. Not a very believable excuse, but plausible enough to get away with it.

I don't see where there are any positives for the club through the programs, indeed it might hinder any future investment by the two of them, but then again who knows, time will tell.

Tony Hill
108 Posted 04/11/2017 at 12:18:04
Chris (#104), Usmanov bought back the Moshiri shares which he had given to him - on the version of events now being put forward. That's the point.
Mark Cooper
109 Posted 04/11/2017 at 12:20:41
Tony Dove #106, I contacted Panorama to enquire wether they would be running an expose on Allardyces' alleged touching up of peoples knees.
They responded by informing me that they would not be persuing the "dirty perve" as he was not yet manager of Everton but may possibly re-consider after the international break.
Raymond Fox
110 Posted 04/11/2017 at 12:27:00
Tony 106, Allardyce is 4/6 favourite now.

I think though this potential scandal for want of a better word, makes it less likely that he now gets the job.
He does come with history and our owners wont now fancy being associated with someone with past dodgy dealings on top of their own, I would imagine!

Neil Copeland
111 Posted 04/11/2017 at 12:35:28
It may be that Usmanov is getting involved with Everton across a much broader scale than is apparent at the moment. Like most on here I cannot believe he would make a gift of £150 million to anyone. Perhaps he is looking for an alternative to Arsenal should Kroenke refuse to budge (as is the case currently).

So he says to Fahrad, time to repay the loan my friend, go and find me another club that provides me with prospect to grow it and invest my money. Moshiri comes to us and buys the shares and clears our debts with a loan.

Next he starts to push through the stadium plans and buys the land. An outside investor is required to fund the stadium let’s assume this is sorted as seems likely.

Then the investment in Finch Farm. Next is perhaps Moshiri buying the additional shares required for full ownership.

Now, the club is fully owned by Moshiri but really ownership is with Usmanov. Once the stadium is completed and assuming our antics on the pitch improve, the share value will increase significantly at which point Usmanov may decide we are a better prospect than Arsenal or alternatively cash in and make a tidy sum into the bargain.

All conjecture of course but if true or even partly true I think EFC will gain.

Iain Johnston
112 Posted 04/11/2017 at 12:36:45
Sheik Mansour sits on the Dubai Petroleum Council which also acts as the board of directors of the Emirates National Oil company amongst others. This is owned by the Investment Corp' of Dubai which owns Emirates Airlines.

No one seems to care that Emirates have huge sponsorship deals with City & Arsenal so why should the USM sponsorship of FF be dodgy?

Neil Copeland
114 Posted 04/11/2017 at 12:39:52
Type or paste your comment here. PLEASE capitalise initial letters of proper names and use proper grammar. No txt-speak; all-lowercase posts are likely to be deleted
David Barks
116 Posted 04/11/2017 at 12:49:26
Iain

Because nobody has said that Mansour was gifted his shares and sold them to invest in another club. With Moshiri the accusation is that it was always Usmanov’s money and that he has tried to circumvent the laws by using Moshiri to own two clubs at once. Not the same as Mansour.

Paul Tran
117 Posted 04/11/2017 at 12:53:04
Haven't taken Panorama seriously since their 'exposure' of horse racing. It'll be forgotten by the end of the week.

The real issue, of course, is whether it will affect Moshiri's efforts in turning us into a professional, ambitious business, rather than the sentimental, sepia-eyed boys' club preferred by Kenwright et al.

Jason Wilkinson
118 Posted 04/11/2017 at 12:54:06
I stated on another post a power struggle would be very possible in January. Could this be the start?

Scenario; Kenwright and Moshiri have a public fallout over Panorama programme. Moshiri resigns from the board citing irreparable diferences. Kenwright loses the backing of the board. Usmanov sails in and brokers a majority solution at a cut price deal.

Moshiri gets Usmanov what he has always craved, total control of a premier club.

Andrew Heffernan
119 Posted 04/11/2017 at 12:54:36
USM being the 'source of funds'... is neither illegal or evasion in itself; the concealment of, or an attempt to conceal is, if it was 'legally' required to disclose at any point during FM's purchase of EFC shares.

After spending the past 20 years working in three offshore centres in industry, at a regulator, including a time at a government treasury unit and law firm, I have rarely found a UK journalist who is capable of demonstrating the most basic understanding of how offshore centres work, not least how to report correctly on them.

I will not be watching either part, which will no doubt adopt a tabloid and soundbite approach to complex financial transactions under laws and regulations they have no meaningful understanding of.

No doubt the doom and gloom brigade on here will be out in force to act as cheerleader for ill informed journalism and connect a transaction several years ago to Rooney's return. Sorry, my time on this planet is worth more... and so should yours!

COYB

Colin Glassar
120 Posted 04/11/2017 at 12:56:31
Thanks Ray and Phil for the info. Seeing that it’s the bbc that are doing the “investigating” I can see us being deducted 500 points, being demoted to the northern conference with a lifelong ban from ever playing in the prem again. That would be so typically Everton.
Colin Glassar
121 Posted 04/11/2017 at 13:02:33
Fingers crossed Jason. I’ve been hearing rumours for a while now that all’s not well between the “What an investor!!!” and Old Mother Hubbard. Bill will absolutely shit himself if Moshiri says, “I’m off. Give me back my money”.

My only hope is that Kenwright is forced out and Usmanov (dodgy or not) takes over.

Iain Johnston
122 Posted 04/11/2017 at 13:03:34
Jason,

Moshiri isn't a board member.

David... Ah yes, there's that small inconsequential obstacle but doesn't Moshiri own part of USM too which gives it the degree of legitimacy it needs to be allowable?

Neil Copeland
123 Posted 04/11/2017 at 13:08:47
Colin 120, I think you are being overly optimistic - we will end up in the Huyton and District Sunday league.
Jason Wilkinson
124 Posted 04/11/2017 at 13:13:34
Iain, Stop meddling with the positive outcome by stating the facts please.
Jason Wilkinson
125 Posted 04/11/2017 at 13:16:59
OK then Moshiri and Bill fallout over parking space at FF.
Please don't tell me they don't have one.
Phil Walling
126 Posted 04/11/2017 at 13:18:52
Amazing how so many Evertonians ( and others ) can write hundreds of words in mitigation of the revered Usmanov and Moshiri BEFORE they see the programme or hear the suspicions and allegations ( if any ) !

Have BBC ran a trailer somewhere ?

Steven Jones
127 Posted 04/11/2017 at 13:19:38
Andrew 119 - Spot On.

The Trailer BBC are running does not mention EFC, nor does it mention Premier League or such their emphasis was on offshore wealth and how it is treated as a generic.

We shall see what it actually does uncover - it seemed to be targeting the Green type situation and perhaps those that come the other way - but did not seem to be specific EFC or football or premier league.

Neil Copeland
128 Posted 04/11/2017 at 13:19:44
Jason, that must be why they visited FF a few weeks ago.
Colin Glassar
129 Posted 04/11/2017 at 13:21:13
We’d struggle in that league right now Neil. Iain, I bet he’s (Moshiri) a bored member though. Get it? Bored? Oh, forget it.
Mike Berry
130 Posted 04/11/2017 at 13:36:13
I think the clubs we bought from will be rifling through their draws to see if they kept a receipt !
But seriously, best to watch Panarama first before all this paranoia nonsense
Colin Glassar
131 Posted 04/11/2017 at 13:36:37
Phil, we all love a conspiracy (we’ll, I do. Aliens, JFK, rs domination of the media etc...), so please let us speculate in peace.

I’ve tried to contact my niece (bbc brainwashed robot) but they’ve all signed a non-disclosure form in blood. I knew the Beeb were evil but this confirms it.

Stephen Davies
132 Posted 04/11/2017 at 13:38:39
Jason 118.
For that to happen Usmanov must get rid of those £millions worth of shares and sell those £millions worth of shares to someone who will have no say or influence whatsoever on the running of Arsenal FC.
Who would do that?
Nicholas Ryan
133 Posted 04/11/2017 at 13:46:52
First of all, the Everton aspect, is only one small part, of a much wider programme. Secondly, the 'evil' at which the Rules are directed, is substantial shareholding in 2 PL clubs at the same time.

If that is what Usmanov is about, it would be based on an assumption, that Everton was an attractive investment.

Arsenal are renowned as [financially] the best-run club in the PL [very possibly in the world]. It is an absolute cash machine. Everton on the other hand, are renowned as a financial basket-case. Why would an owner of the former, be desperate to become an owner of the latter?
Answer: he wouldn't... and indeed, he hasn't!

Colin Glassar
134 Posted 04/11/2017 at 13:47:11
Stephen, there’s an gooner fans group (very rich) who are more than willing to buy Usmanov’s shares. They believe by getting a foot in the door they can exert pressure on Kroenke to sell, or at least block him.

Another alternative (which has also been mentioned in the press) is that Usmanov gives/sells his shares to his Arsenal mad sons.

If he really wants out of Arsenal there are ways and means.

Ray Roche
135 Posted 04/11/2017 at 13:54:32
Nicholas Ryan#133

"Why would an owner of the former, be desperate to become an owner of the latter? "
Maybe he would see it as a (yet to be milked) cash cow due to the clown party that have been running it for years.

John Keating
136 Posted 04/11/2017 at 14:02:49
Well personally speaking I hope we get thrown out of the PL - hopefully Tuesday morning after both parts have been aired.
It will save the embarrassment of being relegated.
Quite a good excuse really.
Jason Wilkinson
137 Posted 04/11/2017 at 14:12:23
Stephen #132 Stan Kroenke would gladly buy Usmanov's shares.
Lawrence Green
138 Posted 04/11/2017 at 14:12:38
It's just like the good old days, an investor/partner in the club deemed unworthy, Bill gets his hands on 'his' shares again, the stadium has to be put on the back-burner in the long-term interests of the club and to top it all David Moyes would say yes if the job was offered. I jest but is it so far from the truth?

Moyes would say yes

http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/david-moyes-would-says-yes-13858005

Ciarán McGlone
139 Posted 04/11/2017 at 14:20:05
Greedy men doing greedy things.. I'll be switching off after Blue Planet II is over.
Derek Knox
140 Posted 04/11/2017 at 14:20:29
Colin G, look on the bright side mate, if Bill was to go, it would save you at least one Christmas Card on your list.

Talking of lists, where was mine last year? Good job I've converted to Seventh Latterday Happy Clapping Gospel singing Buddhist Witnesses (twice removed, for tax purposes) so I'll let you off. :-)

Stan Schofield
141 Posted 04/11/2017 at 14:29:19
Andrew@119: Good post. I don't know much about offshore financial investment, but it doesn't surprise me that journalists are useless at getting it correct. In the industries in which I have worked (oil, and civil and defence nuclear) most reporting I see in the media, including the BBC, is misleading and/or plain incorrect. But most folks don't know, because they don't know the details, and are easily misled. I stopped reading newspapers around 1980, and stopped watching the likes of Panorama a long time ago. Even Horizon became cringe-worthy. I don't even view journalism as a profession as such. Most involved in it seem to be dopes, a lot with 'uni degrees'.
Gavin Johnson
142 Posted 04/11/2017 at 14:57:57
I can't see how this is different to the scenario we had with Philip Green and Robert Earl. So now Usmanov is the new friend of the club, except he has much deeper pockets than Philip Green and actually wants to move the club forward instead of being a parasite. There can be as many investigations as the BBC want. True, that you aren't allowed to have large stakes in 2 clubs but proving something is another matter.

We seem to have a history of this kind of thing. Didn't Peter Johnson still effectively own Tranmere when he bought the main stake in Everton?! I seem to remember it causing a problem when we bought Steve Simonsen for a British goalkeeper transfer record that raised a few eyebrows for such a bang average keeper.

Roger Helm
143 Posted 04/11/2017 at 15:03:00
“Love of money is the source of all evil”. Things were better, or at least less murky, when clubs were bankrolled as a sort of hobby by rich local businessmen like Bob Lord, Jack Walker and Sir John Moores.
John Wilson
144 Posted 04/11/2017 at 15:14:37
Once money goes into a bank and mixes with other money, or changes from cash to something else, it is still possible to follow the money and paper trail it's called the 'law of tracing' (it's easier to call it that).
Julian Wait
145 Posted 04/11/2017 at 15:17:12
Wouldn't be surprised if Kroenke was behind this, or some devious Spurs fan in the Medja trying to get Kroenke to be 100% owner of Arsenal. OK, back to the Flat Earth project .
Dan Davies
146 Posted 04/11/2017 at 15:24:18
I'd guess there could be some skulduggery going on here on Kroenke's behalf. Might have friends in high places with the BBC?

A rich man's world. Seriously though Usmanov must be like a boil on Stan's ass! Might be trying to lance it.

Stephen Davies
147 Posted 04/11/2017 at 15:34:07
Jason 137
Apologies. I should have done some research first.
Kronke offered Usmanov 525m for his 30% share but Usmanov knocked him back.
Kim Vivian
150 Posted 04/11/2017 at 15:56:52
I haven't trawled through this thread yet so just throwing my initial reaction into the mix. Apologies if I am repeating other comments or plagiarising other posts. I shall read through after posting this and see.

"Moshiri's Arsenal stake was a gift from Usmanov which, by extension, could mean that the tycoon was the original source of the funds the Iranian-born businessman used for his investment in Everton".

If this is the crux of the problem, I see no problem.

If Moshiri had used the money to buy a yacht would that mean by extension, the yacht is Usamov's? If your Nan gives you £100 for passing your A levels and you buy a watch does that make it her watch?

Bollocks shit stirring this unless it is being used as a vehicle to get at Usimov for some reason. These Russian billionaires hardly seem to give off the smell of Roses so maybe there is an alternative agenda but I don't think Everton FC have any major problem. However, I have never really understood the mechanics of the Finch Farm finances so if any of you accounting or legal whizzs out there fancy explaining (if you haven't already) that would be dandy.

Len Hawkins
151 Posted 04/11/2017 at 15:57:17
I don't know what all the fuss is about;

Umanov "Mosh me owd pal me owd beauty my Judy wants a new couch do you want the old one, Only one mark on it when I had that bad cough and I was sat in my skiddies watching Gogglebox when I coughed and followed through"

Mr Mosh " Thank you yes I'd be delighted can I have them floral fitted covers you got from Plumbs too"

Usmanov " Good my mate knows that Bishop fella he has a van I'll get em to drop it off"

Two Weeks later;

Mr Mosh " Usy I found something of yours I lost the remote and stuck my hand down the back and pulled out a wad of £50's I went down again and in all I pulled out £80 million do you want me to drop it off"

Usmanov " No I wondered where that had gone I drew it out so my Mrs could get a few early Chrissy Presents for her ow'l lady. You keep it buy yourself a football club or summat"

Mr Mosh " Cheers mate I'll get you a bevvy next time I see you in Yates's"

Alan J Thompson
152 Posted 04/11/2017 at 16:02:15
G'donya Panorama and when will you look into something worthwhile? Does anyone seriously think clubs in England throw games because some of the shareholders might have an interest in another club.

Altho' hang on, is this our problem??? Blimey, couldn't really see it meslf, they may have summat here, or summat my arse!

John Wilson
154 Posted 04/11/2017 at 16:48:27
Kim, if I have dirty money and launder it - does that make it clean money that it's now legal?
Thomas Lennon
156 Posted 04/11/2017 at 17:00:41
Martin #36 in the UK my understanding is that you can't gift large amounts of money to anyone without risking being liable to inheritance tax at 40%. Of course that is paid by the giver, not the receiver.
Robin Cannon
157 Posted 04/11/2017 at 17:06:10
I like how this thread took around 80 comments to go from "oh, I wonder what that is" to "fucking BBC, they hate us, it's a conspiracy, it's all bullshit anyway, and they're full of paedos and should be abolished".

...not that we're over defensive or anything.

Alan J Thompson
158 Posted 04/11/2017 at 17:06:24
Just as an after-thought; didn't John Moores also have a 70% holding in that team across the Park?
Derek Knox
160 Posted 04/11/2017 at 17:15:24
Len, nice one mate, you have just confirmed something, I thought I saw Moshi and Usy in Yates's or was it Weatherspoons?

Ten pints with Aussie chasers does tend to induce amnesia these days. :-)

Oliver Brunel
161 Posted 04/11/2017 at 17:19:49
The person behind all this is Kenwright. It's a set-up and hes leaked info to the BBC. Cue the calamity and Bill gets all the shares back dirt cheap, then sells them to another ship of fools.

Moyes is in. Elstone happy. Billy has also made a massive wedge on the transfers (the stooge probably Walsh, possibly Koeman as well).

The Three Stooges. The same crew are back on board the Marie Celeste. The Cruel Sea.

Colin Glassar
162 Posted 04/11/2017 at 17:32:20
Spot on Oliver. Machiavelli wants his toy back so the good ‘ol boys can put their feet up and forget about all this top 4 nonsense. Nils satis What?
Phil Gardner
163 Posted 04/11/2017 at 17:43:23
The timing of this 'exposé' is insipid. This is old news and has been in the public domain for ages, but...hello...Everton are struggling and looking for a new manager this week? All the filth and corruption going on in this and other countries, on a much bigger scale and these weapons waste licence fee payers forced contributions to fund this rubbish?

Sorry but it absolutely reeks of a hidden agenda. The BBC is on borrowed time because of such nonesense, amongst many other things that can be added to their rap sheet.
Dave Williams
164 Posted 04/11/2017 at 17:49:18
Oliver and Colin- you are joking I assume?
Colin Glassar
165 Posted 04/11/2017 at 17:52:20
Sadly not, Dave.
Dave Williams
166 Posted 04/11/2017 at 17:56:26
An interesting view then Colin. It's a bit sad when Panorama causes more interest than the game itself!
Bad times indeed- just looked at the table and we are second bottom with seven scored and 20 conceded.
Whoever Panorama thinks owns the shares they must be regretting it now!
Tony McNulty
167 Posted 04/11/2017 at 17:59:32
I've been watching too many "accentuate the positive" post match managerial interviews lately.

So here goes.

This programme ends up being short on facts and long on Panorama. However, there are some embers there, which smoke out Usmanov. He sells his shares in Arsenal and gets fully behind Everton, with wodges of cash.

Cups galore and European success follow. In years to come what happened to Everton between August and November 2017 will be seen as equivalent to the short and momentarily unsuccesful transition phase Manchester City underwent after they were taken over.

Oliver Brunel
168 Posted 04/11/2017 at 17:59:55
Dave. Kenwright is a Sith. He's controlling every puppet move in this tragi-comedy.
Dave Williams
169 Posted 04/11/2017 at 18:03:11
Sorry Oliver- I find that too far fetched but respect your view.
It will make for an intriguing watch!
Colin Glassar
170 Posted 04/11/2017 at 18:09:12
Watching WHU play has convinced there is at least one team in the prem worse than us.

Dave, I honestly believe that Kenwright is in a power struggle for control of the club. I have no proof, just a feeling.

Stan Schofield
171 Posted 04/11/2017 at 18:11:40
Tony@167: You might be right. Both Kroenke and Usmanov at the same club seems like this town ain't big enough for the both of them. Whether someone with Usmanov's wealth would be content with being a minority shareholder when he could fully control another club, a la Abramovic, is something to ponder. Anyway, here's hoping you're right.
Oliver Brunel
172 Posted 04/11/2017 at 18:18:21
I wish it was far fetched David, I really do. But this theory is the only one which stacks up. Moshiri seriously underrated Billy. So he comes in with a gift loan of £80m then we're suddenly buyin' shoite players. Something odd?

Where's the money goin'? To Billy's pockets and Koeman is the stooge who plays his part like a typecast whore. Then he exposes Moshiri in BBCgate, and can't you see it, David?

Michael Coffey
173 Posted 04/11/2017 at 18:18:30
Oliver 161- from the Flying Dutchman to the Marie Celeste?
John Pickles
174 Posted 04/11/2017 at 18:24:05
It will be embarrassing for Usmanov if he is found to have links with Everton.

It's embarrassing for anyone at the moment to be found to have links with Everton.

Tony McNulty
175 Posted 04/11/2017 at 18:31:56
Stan (171) As I am sure you are aware, there have been rumours around for a while about Usmanov becoming more involved in Everton. I had heard from one source that it was supposed to be happening during last summer. So much for that.

When I was a student in London I worked in a betting shop one summer. There was a guy who kept coming in with tips on horses: I used to try and question him and track these tips to the source (there were hints about his contacts with some jockeys). The shop manager would always bollock me: "Tony ain't learned yet that you never follow up on a tip. Yeh takes it or yeh leaves it."

Similarly I have never been able to substantiate these Everton rumours. People currently living in Liverpool might have more of an idea.

On another topic, Moyes apparently wouldn't rule out a return if approached. I'll bet.

Dave Williams
176 Posted 04/11/2017 at 18:32:16
Sorry Oliver,I can't.

Are you really suggesting that the disastrous buying of players has been deliberately orchestrated ? Are you saying that Bill then exposes Usmanov and Moshiri to Panorama so that Moshiri sells his shares back to Bill at a knockdown price?

Really??

Oliver Brunel
177 Posted 04/11/2017 at 18:37:19
Dave, as Plato said, sometimes people need to be dragged out of the dark cave to see...
Eddie Dunn
178 Posted 04/11/2017 at 18:42:02
With all of this in mind, it is interesting to recall that our season could be going a little better, if we had signed Ollivier Giraud. Oh his wife decided that they would stay in London...or did someone at Arse decide that we would get shafted?
Dave Williams
179 Posted 04/11/2017 at 18:43:20
I can't even begin to buy into that theory Oliver but if you are right then more power to you!
Oliver Brunel
180 Posted 04/11/2017 at 18:45:46
Well, Eddie, you know me. I'm not one for conspiracy theories, but aren't things just hunky dory for Bill as all these pieces fall into place... including Giroud?
Jack Convery
181 Posted 04/11/2017 at 18:48:47
Everton r crap, I have insomnia and now this. Great times indeed.

Always thought Usmanov was up to something. I reckoned it was the stadium which his company / mates would build. BK is the most naive person on the planet when it comes to business or so he tells us. Filty rich - can't stand them. If it stinks and all is illegal, relegation to NPL - at least we will have a chance of winning games - won't we ?

Oliver Brunel
182 Posted 04/11/2017 at 19:15:38
Michael (173) yes.' From the Flying Dutchman to the Marie Celeste.' Via Bleak House, The Dispossessed and The Trial.
Phil Walling
183 Posted 04/11/2017 at 19:26:32
I never saw Moshiri as much more than Usmanov's bagman. The whole saga is about Arsenal, really with Everton a convenient diversion.

Kronke will do anything to frustrate the Russian's scheming so a quick word in the BBC's shell like sets the ball rolling.

How's that for a tip off, Colin ?

Oliver Brunel
184 Posted 04/11/2017 at 19:30:04
Phil, and who do you think gave Kroenke the idea? None other than the man from the Black Lagoon: Billy Kenwright. He's now put a spanner in USM and climbs Icarus like to the ascendancy. Again.
Ernie Baywood
185 Posted 04/11/2017 at 19:51:29
I'm sure there's some muck to rake here otherwise there wouldn't be a show. As a minimum, it won't look good.

But if the end of it is Usmanov gifted the Arsenal shares to Mosh, who then sold them before he bought Everton then I don't see the issue.

He's a man of wealth. Those shares became part of his overall wealth. If he had instead just sold a few ivory back scratchers the same question wouldn't come up.

Colin Glassar
186 Posted 04/11/2017 at 20:01:40
Good tip Phil, can I put some money on it?
Paul Holmes
188 Posted 04/11/2017 at 20:19:46
Fucing typical BBC the corporation that has been serving the elite since the 1920s,lets investigate the arabs in charge of City,the yanks in charge of Liverpool,you fucking arsehole corporation !.What goes on at Everton is no different than any of the big clubs,just that Usmanov being Russian is the bbc's favourite topic .Maybe the Yank at Arsenal has put the knife in because Usmanov wanted to buy him out.By all means lets have a panorama programme on Everton but in the name of fairness lets have one on the other fucking elite clubs starting with arab money for City and the Glazers money for Utd,you fucking shit propaganda brainwashing corrupt news organisation !.Thats my rant,but I cant stand the bbc.
Michael Neely
189 Posted 04/11/2017 at 21:11:57
The theme of the programme is how the rich use offshore accounts to hide their money and evade tax, it's not about Everton. If they pursue the Usmanov- Moshiri shares deal, they may think it's underhand they may even hint at it, but, I doubt they'll come out and say it. As I said earlier no money changed hands when Usmanov bought the Arsenal shares and gave some to Moshiri, it was a gift.
That gift was Moshiri's to do with as he pleased and he chose to sell them, the fact that he sold them to Usmanov, no matter how convenient for both of them, is irrevelent.
Raymond Fox
190 Posted 04/11/2017 at 21:30:11
Some gift, as they say if you believe that you'll believe anything!
Steve Ferns
191 Posted 04/11/2017 at 21:38:38
I doubt it will be more than uncomfortable viewing for EFC and Moshiri. I wouldn't be unduly worried fellas. It might even force Usmanov to commit to us and give up on Arsenal. The fella is not getting any younger, and it's now or never to get behind Everton.

That said, I wouldn't feel too comfortable with him owning us as he is another one who obtained his money through dubious means to say the least, and there's those in Russia who say he has blood on his hands.

Paul Holmes
192 Posted 04/11/2017 at 21:38:52
Listen Usmanov is Russian,Moshiri is Iranian do you really think the BBC will give them a fair and balanced portrayal ?.Anything or anyone associated with these countries will be given the usual propaganda ,brainwashing treatment by the brussels broadcasting corporation !.Now the yanks at liverpool and Arsenal and the glazers and the arabs of City,well they are beyond reproach by the bias bbc.Everton have got enough problems without the corrupt bbc getting involved and making things far worse than they actually are for our loyal fans.It will be a witch hunt by the yank at Arsenal with his elite bbc mates to do a number on Usmanov and Moshiri.
Nick Armitage
193 Posted 04/11/2017 at 21:55:21
I suspect this is a storm in a teacup, however this is interesting Link
David Barks
194 Posted 04/11/2017 at 21:56:54
Paul,

That was one of the most pathetic posts I can remember on here. The ridiculous assertion that the BBC would actually strategize to create this out of nothing simply because of the Russian and Iranian citizenship of those involved is enough to make you look a fool. I guess you’re ignoring the fact that there are other Russians involved in the premier league *cough* Chelsea.

And you say Arsenal is beyond reproach yet Usmanov is a major shareholder at, drumroll please, Arsenal. Did you miss all those stories years ago about the Glazers leveraging United with debt? And you live in a world where the BBC is bias in favor of the Arab world? Really? The corrupt BBC, OK. Why don’t you try actually waiting to see what is presented and not be a cultist.

Steve Ferns
195 Posted 04/11/2017 at 21:57:40
That’s the stuff I was referring to Nick. Wouldn’t sit well with me him owning Everton.
Keith Meakin
196 Posted 04/11/2017 at 22:03:38
After 4 pints of Guinness & 5 spiced rum and cokes this doesn't worry me, I might feel different about this in the morning.
But you know what, we are Everton and what ever happens I'll still support them because I love them. So frig off Panarama.
Nick Armitage
197 Posted 04/11/2017 at 22:05:25
I read Murder in Samarkand, the account of Craig Murray's time in Uzbekistan. I have very mixed feelings any the type of people involved at Everton currently.
Dave Evans
198 Posted 04/11/2017 at 22:05:53
Bringing things back to basics. The team on the field will only improve with a good confidence building coaching team. Many on here making informed comments on the hierarchy motivations and structures are the same people who dismissed Dyche as 'not good enough for us'.
Dyche now has a choice to make. Stay with his battling high flying team or come and try to sort out our shambles.
At the moment it is this sort of decision that will improve results and the status of EFC.
Kim Vivian
199 Posted 04/11/2017 at 22:08:40
I think we should calm down until we've seen the prog.

Usimov/Moshiri/Everton is an element in an investigation into "Offshore secrets of the rich" as Lyndon says above. It's not, I think, about us so much.

Neil Carter
200 Posted 04/11/2017 at 22:53:23
Said it before-What has Moshiri brought to us so far?
Hopefully not more trouble.
Paul Holmes
201 Posted 04/11/2017 at 23:02:31
David Barks unfortunately I am alot more sceptical of the bbc reporting the facts than you are .I think you are pathetic to think that the bbc wont do a stitch up job on Moshiri and Everton as they do with alot of subjects they cover.We will have to agree to disagree,you think my post is pathetic on this subject I think your pathetic for not seeing the bbc reporting as bias towards their own agenda on most subjects they cover.Example,elections,brexit,Trump,climate change,why not Moshiri and Everton.
Nick Armitage
202 Posted 04/11/2017 at 23:20:13
How is the BBC biased in the reporting of climate change?
Si Cooper
204 Posted 04/11/2017 at 23:31:44
Where do people get the idea that any gift is tax free?£3000 is the annual limit before inheritance tax becomes liable.
That’s why accountants, who know the loopholes, are useful for moving large amounts of money around. Possible that Mr Moshiri earned his ‘gift’ but didn’t want it presented as formal income?
Paul Holmes
205 Posted 04/11/2017 at 23:32:33
Nick Armitage they are biased because the news on the bbc is not balanced,they never give any air time to thousands of scientists who disagree with global warming.People want to hear both sides of an argument and then make our own decision,not have our decisions made for us by a bullshit broadcasting corporation.Fuck me I know Russia aint great but they get blamed for me burning my toast on the bbc.
Si Cooper
206 Posted 04/11/2017 at 23:35:47
Or Trump and ‘Brexit’, Nick?
Brent Stephens
207 Posted 04/11/2017 at 23:39:01
"they are biased because the news on the bbc is not balanced,they never give any air time to thousands of scientists who disagree with global warming".

Bollocks. And the source for those thousands?

Actually, the BBC was reprimanded recently about climate change - for not challenging a falsehood from climate-change denier Nigel Lawson.

Si Cooper
208 Posted 04/11/2017 at 23:41:33
Nobody disagrees with global warming Paul; it’s a simple measurable fact. Where opinions differ are in the causes, outcomes (climate change) and potential efficacy of whatever we may do to address it.
David Barks
209 Posted 04/11/2017 at 23:42:16
Paul,

The thousands of scientists who disagree with climate change. Sorry, simply not true. The scientific community is overwhelmingly in agreement on the subject. On Trump? Do you mean they quote the man? How dare they.

They aren’t biased. They simply report on things and present evidence you don’t want to agree with. This is the difference between real news and Fox News, which I assume you must be a big fan of. As for Russia, I guess it’s a lovely country as long as you are not gay, do not try to challenge Putin in an election and don’t try to be an independent news agency. Brilliant country Russia, quite a democracy.

Nick Armitage
210 Posted 04/11/2017 at 23:58:11
The BBC are quite correct in not validating these contrarians and broadcasting this bollocks to viewers who aren't capable of understanding the science. The overwhelming consensus of data supports that climate change is man made. It is a complete misunderstanding that this is still open to debate or argument.

The BBC aren't perfect and they do show bias, but they accurately reflect the mass of evidence on this issue.

There are people who still think the earth is flat. Do you expect the BBC to give airtime to these when we see a spherical planet so you can make your mind up on that one?

Jackie Barry
211 Posted 04/11/2017 at 23:58:27
David Barks, the BBC, is not so fondly known as the British Bullshitting Corporation nowadays.
Jackie Barry
212 Posted 04/11/2017 at 00:02:06
Do your part and become a vegetarian, less cows and therefore less cow farts, meaning less harm on the environment.
David Barks
213 Posted 04/11/2017 at 00:06:41
Jackie,

That has much more to do with every single media outlet coming under fire and the rise of opinion over facts than anything BBC has done. They, like everyone else, have made mistakes. There is always the ability to go back and look at reporting with hindsight and find fault. And that is a good thing to do in my opinion since that is how you learn and improve.

No doubt they failed miserably during the Iraq war build up, failing to challenge Blair enough. Just as the US media started banging he war drums.

But what is the alternative that has done so much better than BBC? I continue to view it as a decent outlet of reporting, along with the Guardian, the Intercept and a few others.

What I do not want is the BS of “presenting both sides”. No, that is not what news and reporting should be or was ever supposed to be. The news is supposed to gather facts and present reporting based on those facts, period. They have fallen victim to this side of reporting like so many others. But they are still a decent outlet.

Steve Ferns
214 Posted 05/11/2017 at 00:16:11
You just need to watch ITN to see the alternative! Sensationalist shite masquerading as news.

Anyway back to the football ...

Stan Schofield
215 Posted 05/11/2017 at 00:17:00
A thread that has gone from Usmanov to climate change. I won't be watching Pamormana, I've got better things to do. Whether it's climate change or some other subject. Fodder for the masses.
Jackie Barry
216 Posted 05/11/2017 at 00:20:10
Well news reporting is supposed to be unbiased reporting, at least it used to be. Reporting another viewpoint is fine and asking questions of that viewpoint is also fine. For me a balanced viewpoint is great it allows us to make our own minds up based on facts, which we should also go out and research for ourselves. In the end what we think is precisely that, and one day what we think could be, you’ve guessed it, wrong. I’ve fallen out of love with the bbc over the later years of my life for many reasons, but to me they are very legitimate reasons.
Jackie Barry
217 Posted 05/11/2017 at 00:23:53
ITN, used to be a powerhouse, surprised it is still around. In all honesty news is not about news nowadays, it’s about whatever will attract most attention, maybe it has more to do with where we have fallen as a society than anything else. Any ways back to football.
Stan Schofield
218 Posted 05/11/2017 at 00:34:56
Jackie, well said. 'News' is largely not news, it's sensationalist soap opera. Let's hope our team start winning on the pitch sooner rather than later.
David Israel
219 Posted 04/11/2017 at 00:50:50
I'm not unduly worried about this story. And I'll just say this: some of you seem to welcome this controversy on the grounds that it may lead to Usmanov selling his Arsenal shares and investing in Everton. The problem is, Kroenke doesn't need to buy Usmanov's shares, and anybody else would have the same problem Usmanov wrestles with: no influence on the running of the club. Therefore, the only way for Usmanov to invest 'elsewhere' in football is to have a front man do it for him. Come to think of it, that may have already happened.
Don Alexander
220 Posted 05/11/2017 at 00:53:13
I'm 62. In the course of my lifetime this country, on the back of its "master-of-the-universe" concept off two World War "victories", each of which bled us white for decades in stark contrast to those we allegedly defeated, has become the equivalent of what we dismissively used to call "Banana Republics".

The reason why folk like Usmanov, Kroenke, Abramovic and other mega-billionaires find the UK so attractive is that they can do pretty much whatever they want because successive governments ever since Thatcher took the reigns in 1979 have pandered to them, cultivated them, and turned a blind eye to whatever they do in the pursuit of further wealth, usually at the expense of our own population and those of other countries.

Moving on, the BBC is in the pocket of whichever government's in power as a consequence of the Licence Fee. That said, the alternative is CNN, Fox and the like, all dependent on viewing figures to sell advertising. Companies advertising their goods have huge control on what is therefore televised.

Every now and then the Beeb will broadcast a Panorama "special" that may generate legitimate accountability. By doing so it further promotes the veneer of the independent respectability that was its central purpose when the Beeb was established nearly one hundred years ago but I suspect the forthcoming Panorama programs will be, in our odious real-world, as impactive as the "shock" revelations that the current government have no idea at all on how to achieve a Brexit that doesn't end up crucifying the futures of our children and grand-children.

Here endeth the lesson!

David Israel
221 Posted 05/11/2017 at 01:03:04
Didn't Peter Johnson have a similar problem with Tranmere Rovers and ourselves? What happened, in the end? I can't remember anymore.
Nicholas Ryan
222 Posted 05/11/2017 at 01:04:59
Is it just coincidence, that we've gone down the pan, since Gareth Barry left?!
David Israel
223 Posted 05/11/2017 at 01:08:02
Perhaps, then, we'll finally find out from Panorama who hired Koeman and failed to sign a striker! I smell a rat! It stinks of Usmanov all over!
David Israel
224 Posted 05/11/2017 at 01:44:19
Tony #85, the problem with your reasoning is that Red & White Holdings (Usmanov and Moshiri) bought David Dein's shares in Arsenal in 2007! Surely they wouldn't wait nine years to complete their scheme, would they?
Will Mabon
225 Posted 05/11/2017 at 01:47:33
Whilst I appreciate the need to explore and discuss these potentially unsavoury issues here, can we please not lower ourselves to including mention of the biggest con perpetrated on humanity; "Man-made" Global Warming... er, sorry... Climate Change.
James Watts
226 Posted 05/11/2017 at 01:49:33
NIcholas #222.

Is it just coincidence, that we've gone down the pan, since Gareth Barry left?!

Yes, it is. WBA are hardly doing well, are they?! Imagine the outcry on here if he was still being picked in our midfield! It'd be similar to what it was when he was still here and being picked when we were going through our pre-Christmas patch under Koeman last year.

Nick Armitage
227 Posted 05/11/2017 at 03:06:30
Will Mabon - the biggest con perpetrated on humanity is religion - by a long distance.

The reason people think anthropogenic climate change is a con is because it has been politicised and framed so as to appear as a legitimate debate to introduce doubt where there is none. If the overwhelming majority of climate scientists are telling you that your grandchildren could starve, I'd be more inclined to listen to them than listen to the pricks who got us into this mess in the first place.

Paul Columb
228 Posted 05/11/2017 at 03:50:19
Nick (227) .
The most sensible, rational and fact-based comment I’ve seen in a while. Thanks.
Here’s to a turn around in our club’s fortunes starting tomorrow.
Will Mabon
229 Posted 05/11/2017 at 04:04:30
Nick, I wouldn't attempt to tell you what to think, so can only suggest you have a detailed look into the whole history of how the concept of Global Warming, er, I mean, "Climate Change", came into being. It's not hard to find and is quite revealing.

You won't find much in mainstream media of course, but it's all available online - a bit like the dodgy emails that came out of East Anglia a time back. Now there are some corrupt pricks I wouldn't want affecting my future.

Will Mabon
230 Posted 05/11/2017 at 04:06:46
"The most sensible, rational and fact-based comment I’ve seen in a while."

Paul, if I may - how do you know that? Where did you get your facts?

Paul Columb
231 Posted 05/11/2017 at 04:19:56
Will (230). Where to start. I'll presume for start you're referring to the climate change issue (the nomenclature has, by necessity changed as 'global warming' seemed a tad easy to refute by those who've noted a little more rain and less tanning weather and frankly, oversimplified the matter). We could likely trade references for weeks, but maybe a simple primer might be http://www.wnyc.org/story/birth-climate-change-denial/.
If you were referring to my support of Nick's comment w.r.t. religion well let's just hope that you weren't. As a construct, it falls at the first hurdle and ToffeeWeb is not the pace for us to start a lengthy debate on the history involved.
Ultimately, I'm more concerned by the failings of the Club right now as ridiculous as such a preoccupation might be. I'm guessing we share that in common.
Will Mabon
232 Posted 05/11/2017 at 05:04:36
Paul, I guessed you didn't mean the religion!

I consider it prudent to question a movement that heralds its arrival into public consciousness by setting out to frighten the crap out of everyone with its (sadly successful) "All starving and underwater" stories based on us all boiling to death, and then waters down its hyperbole to a nondescript, indistinct and amorphous, Climate Change.

Prudent, before even considering the facts and elements.

Truth is, that pesky warming hasn't shown up. This should be of more concern than to imply that people are simpletons for not seeing more sun and less rain, when a whole global system of communication has been hammering the concept of global warming.

If it's so inevitable, the science so "Settled", then where is it? It should be irrefutable, surely, if we're to change our whole way of life? Not advisable to bow to some assumed superiority and trustworthiness of the globalists, and just swallow their meme without question. The whole future of how we and our descendants will live, across all aspects of their lives, is under serious threat from this enormous planned engineering of our existence and societal structures, under the blanket concept of "Sustainability".

You're right, we could trade references ad infinitum, so all I can do in support of my views, is to repeat what I suggested above; that people properly research what brought this whole show into being. There is very little truth on the gogglebox. The real story is very different than "Carbon Credit Al" and his cabal will tell you.

I'm not more concerned about the club, it's merely a different concern - hopefully that one will be improved later today...

David Barks
233 Posted 05/11/2017 at 05:23:33
Climate change doesn’t mean it doesn’t rain anymore morons. The temperature has been rising year over year.
https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-change-global-temperature

In fact, as temperatures rise that means more moisture’s evaporates into the air. That moisture comes back down. As oceans warm more moisture evaporates and it alters weather patterns. Just like everything else on this planet, it’s a delicate ecosystem. Small changes have cascading effects. Storms become bigger. Patterns shift. There is no hoax.

Laurie Hartley
234 Posted 05/11/2017 at 06:46:55
Nick # 227 - you wrote:

"the biggest con perpetrated on humanity is religion - by a long distance"

I couldn't let that go without challenging it. I think the biggest con is:

The Great Money Trick

Coincidentally the passage referred to above alludes to the source and the reason for riches of the planet on which we live and how they are meant to be used.

Time to re assess my views concerning the ownership of our great football club.

Up the Blues

Michael Penley
235 Posted 05/11/2017 at 08:13:08
Will, you ask where people get their "facts" from while you state you get them from the internet? I had to laugh at that part. Even TV is probably a better source than the internet. There are hundreds of sites with misleading information.

Personally, I got my "facts" (long before Al Gore) from university courses where they teach you how they got those facts without simply feeding them to you. That's why you won't find any academic courses anywhere teaching that climate change isn't happening - except maybe at bible school.

Don Alexander
236 Posted 05/11/2017 at 08:53:18
Is it just me or do others think that it's a bit rich of the Beeb to be taking the moral high ground by Panorama investigating allegedly dodgy doings touching football and us whilst at the same time welcoming the corrupt Allardyce to join "the lads" on MOTD this weekend?
John Wilson
238 Posted 05/11/2017 at 09:55:26
Global warming... before it was Cooling. The problem with global warming - caused by man - is that is geo-political. It's the reason why the UK has lost its industries. You never see a fair critique of global warming, allegedly caused by man; you just see one side of the argument. Jeremy Paxman tried to question global warming once on the Beeb, only for his views to disappear into oblivion.
Ian Hollingworth
239 Posted 05/11/2017 at 10:18:29
Can’t wait to hear what bullshit billy has to say about this.
What a mess, thanks Bill, the worlds greatest Evertonian.

The only good that can come out of this is Usmanov ditches the Arse and throws everything into Everton FC, getting rid of BK and the rest of the jokers.
Any other outcome will just be more ridicule heading towards Everton FC

Brent Stephens
240 Posted 05/11/2017 at 10:29:17
Looking forward to the game today and tonight's Panorama. Let's see what they say.

Global warming, causes and consequences - I'm no expert (is there any expert on here?) so I leave it to those who will know what they're talking about - the world's scientific community. And they (almost unanimously) tell me global warming is fact, and tell me about the role of carbon emissions in that.

Laurie Hartley
241 Posted 05/11/2017 at 10:34:32
Mike # 235 - "except maybe at bible school."

Another questionable statement.

Are you suggesting that religious leaders are saying global warming isn't happening? If so you are mistaken.

Shane Corcoran
242 Posted 05/11/2017 at 10:40:48
Don #236, I did find it odd that Allardyce was on but then he's been hired by Sunderland and linked with us so it seems such behaviour is quickly brushed under the carpet.
Nick Armitage
243 Posted 05/11/2017 at 10:53:15
John Wilson - there is no argument, the scientific consensus is utterly emphatic. People who think there's a 2 sided debate are so misinformed it's untrue. If 99 out of 100 geographers said the earth was round would you still listen to the one with vested interests who said it was flat?

Laurie Hartley - good point. That's the other superb big con trick.

The fact that we're discussing issues others than Everton shows what a mess we're in on the pitch.

COYB.

Jim Lloyd
244 Posted 05/11/2017 at 11:05:26
Laurie, Thanks for putting "The Money Trick" on. Excellent explanation of the way Capitalism works.

I think it was Rothschilde who said "I don't care who's elected to run the Country; as long as I control the money.! not word for word but I think it is near.

As for Panorama! The BBC have been guilty of losing impartiality years ago and a major example is the way the were blatantly trumpeting the argument to remain in the EU.

The question of how the "investigation" affects EFC should be interesting indeed and I'm sure we won't have heard the last.

From what I understand, the BBC have "documents" which show that Usmanov "gave" Moshiri "a gift" of £200 million, or so.

It's only assumptions by us I suppose, until we see what they come up with but my conjecture is that if it has been a gift, then Farhad can do what he likes with it. and I assume, when he was a shareholder of Arsenal, he'd get the share of any profits Arsenal made.

I also think that Farhad Moshiri is a Billionaire in his own right and has been a long time partner of Mr Usmanov.

Once Kroenke (hope the spelling's right) and other members of the Board refused to sell, to Red and White Holdings, then eventually, for whatever reason, Farhad decided to buy into EFC (Here Monsieur Kenwright comes into the picture and sells "the dream" to Farhad Moshiri, who sells his shares to Mr Usmanov for £200 million or so, and buys into EFC. leaving Usmanov with around 30% of Arsenal shares.

Now these two blokes have world wide interests in some massive firms and I think Usmanov is one of the richest men in Russia and its regions.

I'm not sure; but it would seem to me that to do such a daft trick for what is to them. a very small sum, would be chancing something they didn't have to chance.

I think that the part that Mr Usmanov played in the Finch Farm Training Ground, has been investigated and found to be within the rules. And I'm chuffed he's got involved to some degree, just hope it'll be more!

As for the outcome of all this, who knows but what I HOPE will happen is that when he finds out who has "leaked" and supposed "proof" and it's found tro be inconclusive. Then Mr Usmanov, flogs his shares in Arsenal and takes over at EFC. First thing if that hapopens is he thanks Kenwright for his wonderfuil service and sends him into retirement...along with our Chief Executive and the others on the Board.

We might then see the back of a crew that seem to want to be in charge for life!

Stan Schofield
245 Posted 05/11/2017 at 11:07:49
Brent@240: One of the great things about ToffeeWeb is that we go off onto other subjects from discussing Everton. My main concern at the moment is beating Watford, but since global warming is being discussed I might as well mention that contrary to popular belief, there is not a 'scientific consensus' about the issue. Most scientists are not specialists in this area, and are not particularly qualified to comment.

The whole debate in the media is polarised, as many debates become polarised. In this case, between 'believers' and 'deniers'. The issues are actually more subtle than that, and more complex.

The matter is actually divided into two aspects: (A) record of previous climate details, and (B) predictions of future climate details. Data on (A) appears to be robust, and there appears a strong consensus amongst many qualified to comment. However, part (B) is not like this, and there is an absence of consensus.

Part (B) is dependent on complex mathematical modelling of non-linear turbulent and multi-phase flows in the atmosphere over long periods of time, and uses computational fluid dynamics to make its predictions. Those predictions are heavily dependent on assumptions going into the model, and the non-linear nature of the latter makes uncertainties in predictions very large. To assess such models requires specific expertise. Most people are not in a position to do it, including most scientists.

Michael Penley
246 Posted 05/11/2017 at 11:17:48
Laurie - 241
Those who believe in a higher power have been led to believe that humans are put on this earth for some special purpose, so it makes sense that they would refuse to accept that we are in any danger. I would surmise that a lot of the opposition to environmental science comes from a religious basis.
Brent Stephens
247 Posted 05/11/2017 at 11:21:26
Stan I agree about the difficulties of prediction in chaotic systems. My comment was really about what has happened to date and why. And I should have said (as I meant) "climate scientists" not "scientists" (in general) - a minor perturbation?
Brent Stephens
248 Posted 05/11/2017 at 11:24:31
Laurie, re Tressell's great money trick - he's actually buried in Liverpool. Died, I think, of TB on his way to America?
Stan Schofield
249 Posted 05/11/2017 at 11:28:47
Brent, yes, but most climate scientists are not in a position to assess part (B) of the problem.
Jim Lloyd
250 Posted 05/11/2017 at 11:29:25
That's right Brent. He was buried in a paupers grave, right opposite Walton Prison. The Trade Union movement honoured him with a remembrance and he's now got a headstone.
Brent Stephens
251 Posted 05/11/2017 at 11:34:27
Stan, my point is just that climate scientists at least have a better understanding of the complexities of (actual) chaotic systems than laymen like me so I'm taking more notice of them than somebody who doesn't even have an understanding of the science involved in that chaotic system.

Anyway, I pray for that early bit of luck in the game today, and "sensitivity to initial conditions" - lots of goals!

Brent Stephens
252 Posted 05/11/2017 at 11:35:47
Thanks, Jim. That rings a bell now. I can almost see it from my cell.
Dave Abrahams
253 Posted 05/11/2017 at 11:45:51
Jim (250), yes you are correct, Robert Tressell is buried in a large grave along with about twenty other people, it has a huge gravestone with all the names of those buried on the stone, paid, as you say by Liverpool Trade Unions.
John Wilson
254 Posted 05/11/2017 at 11:46:04
As for science... is it always reliable. Science cannot explain how the Big Bang happened. In short, from something out of nothing created the universe from apparently, nothing to golf size ball to then earth size and then...bigger and bigger, all in millionth's or billionth's of a second. Why would all of a sudden the universe just by circumstance decide to form out of nothing, ie charged particles, into gases, then into solids, all by chance. Scientists also suggest that the oceans we have came from asteroids hitting out planet. Where is the evidence?

As for the Christianity being relegated to religion. If one goes back in time in Parliament Hansard records, Members of Parliament mentioned God quite openly for several years. Then over the course of time, Christianity turned to 'religion.' So, invariably we were born into already existing systems, including the developed state and the once Christianity -recognised by the state, and by science, into 'religion.' Knowledge is therefore subjective.

As for university, lectures just regurgitate what is in those books (academic text). All our education comes from European perspectives, this is why have neo liberalism taught by our universities. It's quite ingenious actually - we equate intelligence with knowledge even though knowledge is subjective.

Stan Schofield
255 Posted 05/11/2017 at 12:27:42
Brent@251: Amongst those who are in a position to assess part (B) of the problem, there is no consensus. The popular perception of a consensus that you originally mentioned is simply a distortion of the reality. Of course, that's a problem with the media and politics, they often produce perceptions that are distortions of reality, either deliberately or unwittingly.
David Israel
256 Posted 05/11/2017 at 12:33:57
Nick #243, Galileo was in a minority of one.

As for those on here claiming that 'global warming' is still taking place, well, temperatures have remained steady for close on twenty years, while carbon dioxide has doubled. Even the warmist crowd acknowledges this, and have chosen to call it a 'hiatus'.

According to the modern-day Jeremiah, Al Gore, Lower Manhattan should have been submerged by now.

Paul Holmes
257 Posted 05/11/2017 at 12:35:20
Fuck me my post got plenty of reaction about the bbc,thats great,i call them the brussels broadcasting corporation,or the bollocks broadcasting corporation,but thats my opinion,everybody on here can think and say what you want,hopefully free speech and not that political correctness shit is just a way of shutting everybody up so you think and act like them prick journalists who work for the bbc.
Listen if the bbc spent the last 12 months blaming Russia for everything (i burnt my toast it must be the russians) then do you honestly think they will give Russian Usmanov and Iranian Moshiri a fair,balanced investigation on their Panorama programme,no fucking chance it will be a one sided hatchet job that will reflect badly on our club,and it will then be reported in all the tabloids the next day making Everton look bad.If Panorama covered all the big owners at the big clubs,the yanks at liverpool,utd and Arsenal and the arabs at city then I have no problem with fair and balanced reporting but to just single out Usmanov and Moshiri and Everton tells you that my earlier statement is right,bullshit broadcasting corporation !.Hey but as I said earlier everybody has their own opinion and that is mine.
Jim Lloyd
258 Posted 05/11/2017 at 12:49:28
Spot on Paul...on a number of points, Brussels included! I think the BBC have an establishment orientated agenda, and to them, no shadow should be cast on LFC, Man U, etc. Mind you LFC is one big shadow anyway...Mordor, I call it.
David Israel
259 Posted 05/11/2017 at 12:55:15
But anyway, we should re-focus on the crisis at Everton. And no, there is no scientific consensus on that one.
Colin Glassar
260 Posted 05/11/2017 at 12:57:05
The bbc are only interested in London and what goes on in London. Being sent to their Salford studios is looked upon as being akin to being sent to a salt mine in Siberia.

Remember when their morning breakfast show was moved ‘up north’ half of the fuckers resigned due to ‘family reasons and/or personal reasons’ like there was a fucking plague in Manchester!

From being one of the most respected broadcasters ever they are now taken with a pinch of salt. Sad.

Jay Wood
261 Posted 05/11/2017 at 13:02:01
Wow! This thread took an interesting change of direction.

On the beeb and the (still yet to be aired) Panorama special, it might be worth waiting to view it (if really so inclined) before making a call on its content.

Panorama from memory used to include quality investigative journalism on interesting issues. From the very few viewings of it that I've seen in recent years, it's become very tabloid-like.

As to the side issue on global warming/climate change, here's a link which shows you how a genuine statistically representative climate change debate should look.

For those lacking the patience to get the punchline, fast forward the 4m 30s video to around the 3 minute mark.

Scientists? Phttt! What do they know?

Link

I hope the Goodison Roar is in full voice today in support of Unsworth and the team. We need a win.

Oliver Brunel
262 Posted 05/11/2017 at 13:03:37
The BBC contempt and hatred for Everton goes back to the 60s. In those days, the BBC was 'London' and the chirpy cockneys disliked our cultural hegemony: Merseybeat , The Beatles etc, our two footie teams.

Then, in the 70s and 80s saw the rhetoric being ratcheted up as lots of other teams had 'ethnic' players whilst we didn't (in general). Then Thatcher and the demonisation of the working class people of the city.

"Everton are white" was their secret agenda and obviously that was anathema to the PC Paedophile Corporation. I'm amazed the BBC is still in existence, it has absolutely no news or academic value. Unelected Quango. Smash it up!!

Winston Williamson
264 Posted 05/11/2017 at 13:17:05
Personally, I tend to avoid mainstream media. All reporting seems to have some sort of basis in bias.

On climate change, global warming etc..after undertaking my own research, my opinion is that you can trace the numbers in correlation to increases, in increases in global population.

Restricting population growth thirty years ago probably would of avoided such a dramatic change in warming and climate change.

On to Everton, the BBC and their panorama investigation...for years we've had fans telling us our board are above such criminalities, so it will be interesting to see what they've uncovered in terms of offshore entities.

I don't think they will be fair, as I've previously stated, all reporting seems based in some sort of bias.

Will Mabon
265 Posted 05/11/2017 at 13:22:47
"Will, you ask where people get their "facts" from while you state you get them from the internet? I had to laugh at that part. Even TV is probably a better source than the internet."

Ah, the old internet-is-full-of-loonies angle.

"There are hundreds of sites with misleading information."

Does that include all the sites supporting climate change... UN and governmental information, government-funded scientific studies, or do they get a pass? How about those sites specifically designed to attack "Deniers"? Are they exceptions?

Do you simply assume everyone that disagrees with a prevailing idea or wishes to research it, blindly goes out and seeks unsubstantiated garbage, without thoroughly double and triple checking it? Why, that would be akin to watching a TV documentary, and then repeating it to everyone at work the following day - surely not.

To repeat, I only suggest people avail themselves of some detailed background as to where we find ourselves; it's important. I imagine most people with the motivation to do that, probably have the sense to understand how to do it.

Meanwhile, Michael, be very wary of ToffeeWeb - there's a lot of garbage posted online. Or do you feel able to discern?

Jim Lloyd
266 Posted 05/11/2017 at 13:24:38
I think there's an inbuilt contempt for the working class in the Beeb..."alright in their place. We can make lots of documentaries about this social species and how they live; but theyre getting above themselves!" "there even going to Universites now, but at least we've kicked most of them out of our House of Commons!"

"The Political Class"

is way they describe themselves, especially on the Today programme. As if we should have a Roley, or Woody (wills woodbine for the those who haven't smoked) in the corner of their gob, weear a flat cap and only have an interest in Football, racing, "the telly" watching some contestents bake bloody cakes during the peak hou, or Britains got bloody talent. Keep plonking loads of dumb stuff that'll keep em happy, while we get on with the Politics.

Political Class? Bastards!

PS, sorry. I should have said Pompous Bastards!

Julian Exshaw
267 Posted 05/11/2017 at 13:25:05
Whether all of this is true or not, it shows once again that the soul of football is dead. Money rules. Over-paid players, Sky, BT, dodgy foreign investment, sponsorship by betting companies, even the sport's governing body FIFA is up to its eyes in corruption if we are to believe reports. Squeeze every penny out of the poor fans, whether it be through the turnstiles, club shops or the exorbitant fees charged by tv companies to watch at home. If this Panorama story is true, it may lead to fines, or even worse, points reduction.
Dennis Stevens
268 Posted 05/11/2017 at 13:30:32
All very true & very sad, Julian. However, football is merely a reflection of the world we live in - & what's that world for if not for those who have to squeeze ever more out of those who don't?
Brent Stephens
269 Posted 05/11/2017 at 13:33:24
Will "I only suggest people avail themselves of some detailed background as to where we find ourselves; it's important. I imagine most people with the motivation to do that, probably have the sense to understand how to do it".

I guess we can't solve this biggie on TW! I've done as you say, availing myself of some detailed background... My conclusion is to go with the IPCC. But, as I say, too big an issue for TW to solve!

Stan Schofield
270 Posted 05/11/2017 at 13:34:15
David@256: Good post. Just one point though, Galileo wasn't a minority of one, he was part of a school of thought that had its roots in classical Greece, where Aristarchus of Samos constructed a model (theory) where the earth revolved around the Sun, and where later on Eratosthenes calculated the radius of a 'spherical Earth' to within a few percent of the modern 'average'.

The opposition of the Church to Galileo et al mirrors the stance of the BBC to the likes of LFC and Utd.

Ron Sear
271 Posted 05/11/2017 at 13:34:52
This thread on a TV investigation has taken an astonishing turn for a fans website. Attacks on the impartiality of a lawyer sanctioned BBC program, The general abusing of the BBC a la The Daily Mail and every other well funded right wing rag, the rubbishing of years of scientific data collected by scientists and oceanographers and their reasoned extrapolation of the potential consequences, the tabloid style blathering about 'political correctness' (you know that set of human interactions that used to be called common courtesy or good manners), The general descent into a staggering wealth of logical fallacies. On the whole a neutral observer might and quite reasonably come to the conclusion that an entire army of Russian troll farms has been let loose on ToffeeWeb given that one of Putin's tame plutocrats has swung into the spotlight. Can't help wondering if ToffeeWeb has had a host of of new joiners whose email addresses end with .ru.
Kevin Tully
281 Posted 05/11/2017 at 13:54:27
Made me chuckle that, Ron - nice one.

Wherever there's money, there's corruption. Or 'bent bastards' in Scouse parlance. The F.B.I. can't get access to the actual beneficiaries of these off-shore accounts (which all the players in the boardroom at EFC have connections) so we won't learn anything new tonight.

As Bill would say; "That's showbiz!"

Brent Stephens
298 Posted 05/11/2017 at 14:24:27
Stan, I was having a go at the rs who think the world revolves around them.

"we're going through some disarray". Stanley, I couldn't under-state it better myself.

Right, off to the game after watching a few minutes of the MC / Arse game. Fluid and dynamics all in one in that game.

Tony Abrahams
304 Posted 05/11/2017 at 14:39:51
I don’t think I could describe that Kevin De Bruyna, any better than that Brent. Fluid, and dynamic, because he does everything so early! We miss Lukaku’s goals, but I honestly miss the calmness of John Stones, even more!
Brent Stephens
305 Posted 05/11/2017 at 14:48:23
Tony, I'd have Stones back in a shot at the moment.
Colin Glassar
306 Posted 05/11/2017 at 14:54:30
John Stones, Tony? One of the most disliked players ever on TW? Oh, how I rue the days of arrogant Stones, headless chicken Ross, and lazy lump Lukaku. But hey, we got no nonsense Williams, runs all day Gana and (______________) .
Stan Schofield
307 Posted 05/11/2017 at 15:05:33
Colin, I remember the vote on TW, 80% voting to sell Stones. I was one of the other 20%.
Brent Stephens
308 Posted 05/11/2017 at 15:07:58
I’d have Stones back. And wld love an Alan Ball type. And somebody like Reid to moan at the ref. Stones Ginger Whine?
John Wilson
309 Posted 05/11/2017 at 15:10:44
Stan - that was then. if we knew how much of a mess we'd be in in the near future, then we would not have wanted Stones to go, or Gareth to go, and other person who were viewed as 'dead wood.' We just didn't realise how bang average we were without Lukaku and Barkley etc.

Our spine has basically been ripped out of us. We no longer have an Everton team; we have individual players in various leagues who cannot play together.

Colin Glassar
310 Posted 05/11/2017 at 15:15:21
So was I Stan.
Will Mabon
311 Posted 05/11/2017 at 15:23:56
Did I miss something? Seems the more divergent posts of the thread befell the editor's axe...

Add Your Comments

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.