First thing, start of the summer, Everton FC announce record season tickets sold, a new 10-year sponsorship with Kitbag (yet another record), David Moyes states that "We will be looking to bring in quality signings early doors"... then we get statements by directors that he is EXCITED by the possible transfers comming in this summer!! Sounds all great and rosey doesn't it?
We all know what happened next, don't we? Yes, we wait until the last few weeks, after we sell one of best defenders to one of our main rivals, before we make a purchase; we're left running about like headless chickens on the last day, trying to sign everyone any anyone.
I have learned a lot about Everton FC this summer; for one, David Moyes is not a ditherer; and Bill Kenwright for all his faults does NOT run this club, his fellow cronies DO! If Everton fans could call an EGM (which we can't anymore for some strange reason), these would be the questions that I and I'm sure nearly every Evertonian would like to hear the answers to.
1. Where is the Sky money, Bill? (or Rob ?or Phil? in other words...)
2. Where's the money from Kitbag, the FA Cup run, final league position, season tickets sales, merchandise etc?
3.Why do you and the directors tell blatant lies regarding all of the above?
4. Do you want to sell the club or just get investment and remain in charge of our club? And if so, is this a major stumbling block in finding a buyer?
5. Are we a selling club now?
6. If we are broke, why apply and get a work permit for a player we don't sign (Banega), therefore wasting money and time?
We would all love to get these questions answered but dont hold your breath: Everton FC don't do the truth, do they? ("Free Stadium" — need I say more?)
The fact is that we have missed the boat again after we finish fifth, we were FA Cup Finalists... so the next step has to be 4th and win the Cup — easier said than done, I know, but the Board and Chairman have to give Moyes the tools to do the job... and they haven't. AGAIN!
But who knows... Bily could turn out to a world beater, the Heit might get 10 goals this season, Distin could be the new Rio, Jo might wake up one morning and realize he is Brazilian and score a bucketload of goals, Yak could return and start banging them in for fun, the best little Spaniard we know might have the best season of his life and actually get into the Spanish squad, and finally Osman might get dropped (some chance!)
We the fans are still the same bunch of loyal supporters so I hope every Evertonian gets behind the team and with a bit of luck we might finish 6th in the league, win the Europa Cup, and find a buyer for the club...
Well, here's to the new season, optimism is a wonderful thing. COYB
Note: the following content is not moderated or vetted by the site owners at the time of submission. Comments are the responsibility of the poster. Disclaimer
1 Posted 02/09/2009 at 13:47:42
When Moyes says he hopes to bring in some players in "the next 48 hours", what does this mean?
Also, how does "4, maybe more" equate to 1? (He said this after he signed Distin).
For all those who seem think this has been a good transfer window, our manager must be fairly distraught because he didn’t get the numbers in he wanted. In which case these above quotes must have been directed at whoever is in charge of the purse strings.
I am happy with the players we brought in but they will only help us tread water.
2 Posted 02/09/2009 at 14:01:59
3 Posted 02/09/2009 at 13:59:46
4 Posted 02/09/2009 at 14:22:23
No, that is not how it works. Everton has employees to pay (other than the footballers), travel expenses, maintenance to the stadium, vendors to pay, investing in the form of a club shop in Liverpool One, loan payments to the banks, installment payments to make from past transfers, maintenance of the training facility, running the academy and reserves, and then we have the wages paid to the footballers on the pitch, and the list goes on. People are acting as if we have 25 million in profits just vanishing. That’s simply not true. But here’s an idea, raise ticket prices. This is what Chelsea and the like have done to offset some of their expenditures, while Everton have kept their ticket prices relatively stable for years now. If people want more money spent on transfers, start a petition calling for ticket prices to be doubled and all that revenue to be invested in player transfer fees. I’ll wait to see if that happens. No, it’s much easier just to expect somebody else to have millions upon millions to just throw into the team, while demanding the cost to the fan not go up.
5 Posted 02/09/2009 at 14:51:11
Raise ticket prices? Behave.
How about raising the quality of the product, then raising the prices.
6 Posted 02/09/2009 at 14:49:42
7 Posted 02/09/2009 at 15:29:06
Surely that’s the owners job.
8 Posted 02/09/2009 at 15:27:24
"Wow" "I’m still watching this space" from last year.
And this year’s quotes range from "We will get the players in early this year to get a proper pre season in"
"I’m excited by the prospect of the new players we’ll be getting"
"we have the funds to do business early this year"
we supposedly offered around 10 million for Naughton etc earlier on.
Are you now saying that nothing but the Lescott money was available so that was all a pack of lies like the 12 million for Manny "He’ll be signing in the morning"Fernandes that mysteriously disappeared.
There are not many sets of accounts that tell the absolute truth so if people are capable of telling lies to the masses they’re certainly capable of creative accounting.
9 Posted 02/09/2009 at 15:52:21
The club may have been trying to bring more players, but were unsuccessful. I really think it would be best for Mr. Kenwright to say nothing until a deal is done, because he has been an embarrassment to himself and the club with the ill-advised statements to the press.
10 Posted 02/09/2009 at 16:04:15
11 Posted 02/09/2009 at 16:25:44
I was quite happy yesterday but since then I have had time to reflect on whats gone on and its all very devious once more.All wehave spent is the
Lescott money so where are the funds
we pretended to spend early doors?
Was Spurs nipping in for Naughton a blessing in desguise for Kenwright because he was skint at the time?
Is Moyes party to all these shennanigans thus his bumper salary.,hush money if you like?
Can any one at the top at this club be trusted with so much as selling a meat pie?
Will the same scenario repeatr it self
groundhog da fashion for as long as BK and DM run the show?
It annoys the fuck out of me that all the goodie two shoe supporters we have these days are all now back on board
and everything is hunky fucking dory once more because we signed 3 players.
It would of been none but for Lescott going so I guess you can say Julian has saved the club for the time being so no more slagging him off eh lads???
12 Posted 02/09/2009 at 16:38:17
Alan Clarke - when you going to give me my cash?
Alan Clarke - what does humble p[ie taste like?
13 Posted 02/09/2009 at 16:32:32
14 Posted 02/09/2009 at 16:35:37
Blue Bill has been true to his word-all the Lescott money has been put at the manager’s disposal and -as ever-he has spent it well!
15 Posted 02/09/2009 at 16:33:27
And of course David is spot on about the wages issue. If a player is on £50K a week (and Bily and Heitinga certainly will be at the least) that’s over £5M we have to find a year. AvdM and Jacobsen were probably on less than half that. Everyone keeps going "Jo doesn’t count because he’s on loan". Aren’t we paying him then? We’ve also signed new higher contracts for a whole bunch of players in the last six months (Jagielka, Rodwell....).
The wage bill has gone up significantly this year over last. (Unlike say Portsmouth and West Ham.) Believe it or not, that is where a lot of the money goes...
16 Posted 02/09/2009 at 16:42:55
We spent about 10 mill of 24 mill.
Dont talk bollocks Dodd.
17 Posted 02/09/2009 at 16:29:59
Its pretty obvious where City, Sunderland, Chelsea and Spurs get their money from...they are all owned by overseas investors with deeper pockets....But even then spurs recouped over twenty million through players sales.
The bottom line is pretty simple...the money that comes in from Sky, sponsorships etc goes into the running of the club, primarily players astronomical wages ( and if the retort is that we dont pay top whack...well we clearly have several players on the better side of 35k a week...tot that up over a year.)
Premier leage economics are crazy and headinf for meltdown unless players wages are reigned in...that is a fact...but if you think Everton are the ’only’ club not spending money other than that which comes in from transfers the you have not been paying attention this summer.
18 Posted 02/09/2009 at 16:48:34
Nick, how I wish you were right. If Bill was a astute business man I would say yes, but with the best will in the world he isn’t. God only knows how his theatrical empire keeps going.
Keeping an eye on the finances is one thing, but the Mersey Millionaires are rapidly turning into the Mersey Misers
19 Posted 02/09/2009 at 16:56:41
20 Posted 02/09/2009 at 17:00:57
Face it EFC are a basket case and mersly signing 3 and bringing one on loan is papering over the cracks. The squad size has decreased by one each season and the clubs low turnover and comparitively high debts in relation to the turnover will mean that we are selling club for the forseeable future.
21 Posted 02/09/2009 at 17:03:44
Mr Kenwright was equally unequivocal – and somewhat surprised by Kranjcar’s apparent claim that he was actively courted by Everton.
“I couldn’t believe my eyes when I read what Kranjcar is alleged to have said," he said. “We made no approach either to Portsmouth or to the player’s respresentatives; maybe he was talking about Everton Chile."
22 Posted 02/09/2009 at 17:08:18
No Neil, we paid all the money up front - like we usually do.
Have an ounce of wit.
23 Posted 02/09/2009 at 17:14:10
10 + 6+ 5 = 10 ??????
Thank god transfer season is over i couldnt take much more of it
24 Posted 02/09/2009 at 17:09:16
If you’re right about the club having no money why did the club make noises about bringing players in early and funds were available.
And why place bids for Naughton,delph etc.
I’m still waiting for an answer as to where the 12 Million for Manny’he’ll be signing in the morning" fernandes went to.
Appy Arry came on Sky sports to deny the Bentley and Ferdinand rumours saying they were blatantly untrue and Darling Bill has stated EFC never made any approach for Krancjar.
25 Posted 02/09/2009 at 17:14:01
I thought it would’ve been at least the weekend before the club moved into destructive PR mode...
Absolutely priceless..Here we have a club who were screaming out for a playmaker - and we actually have Bill Kenwright boasting that we didn’t bother making an approach..for possibly the best value signing of the window!
Fuck me..has this man got any fucking brains whatsoever!
I am literally astounded...
26 Posted 02/09/2009 at 17:10:09
How much interest do you think there is on circa £80 million?
Some people need to get real."Where’s all the money gone?"
It goes on keeping the club operating that’s where it’s gone. If people think the board are squirreling cash away and getting rich they’re seriously deluded. Simply because, by the time all the cash we get has gone to pay for everything we owe and keeping the club running, there’s nowt left....end of! We’re skint, but don’t expect the board or anyone else to shout that from the rooftops, although there have been more than several instances of our lack of funds being admitted to by employees of the club, David Moyes most of all.
If we were getting gates of 60,000 every home game there’d be something to complain about, but last season we were only the tenth best attended club in the premiership......
27 Posted 02/09/2009 at 17:17:43
it’s like the £15 miilion we are reported to have spent on Fellaini when they were only asking 15 million Euros in the first place.
People still come on here as if we paid the 15 million up front last year.
The only milions we operate in are millions of Mars bars over the next 20 years.
28 Posted 02/09/2009 at 17:18:34
"Alan Hutton and Anton Ferdinand was something that was put about a bit, but it didn’t happen." That is quite different than "blatantly untrue".
29 Posted 02/09/2009 at 17:22:13
you just helped answer your question about the money with your Fellaini post. Installment payments for transfers done in previous years.
30 Posted 02/09/2009 at 17:21:17
I’m not suggesting the directors are stashing millions under their mattresses but something is blatantly wrong when we get a 5th place finish and a cup final appearance neither of which were planned for and we let VDM,Jacobsen,Valente,Lescott and Castillo go and now we cant even afford a cup of coffee over and above the Lescott fee.
That together with the last minute panic and the charade all close season says to me that something is fundamentally wrong at EFC.
31 Posted 02/09/2009 at 10:38:14
Or, are we again going to be told in December that we are looking to strengthen the squad for the final push? Time will only tell if the new recruits are better than what we had; let's hope so.
32 Posted 02/09/2009 at 17:27:34
He did not say it didnt happen.
He said there was never anything in it and bentley was training at Spurs training ground.
33 Posted 02/09/2009 at 17:25:34
Even if you do, do you think it is a good idea to pretend that we will never have to pay the extra installments on Bily, Distin and Heitinga, and so can blow all the money now? (Hopefully not.)
By the way, since I do criticism as well as praise (you might want to try it Ciaran), I think the PR of the club is thoroughly amateurish. I have no idea why they say stupid things like "we will buy early this year". Everyone knows that we can’t afford to do that.
34 Posted 02/09/2009 at 17:32:25
No idea what your second paragraph means.
35 Posted 02/09/2009 at 17:30:26
We get less revenues than other clubs (see Dan Brierley on other threads). Our wage bill has gone up significantly (see me and others). We are in significant debt (not the worst, but hardly trivial). The three we bought cost the same or more than Lescott anyway (taking away the Wolves money).
This kind of explains what’s going on.
36 Posted 02/09/2009 at 17:37:28
The blokes hilarious though - my kids give away less. Next time he gets asked a question if he looks down and a bit to the side, shakes his head, goes a little pink and goes "No... no... there was nothing in it... nothing at all..." he’s lying, simple as.
Great entertainment though.
37 Posted 02/09/2009 at 17:37:05
Tthe second para means that we now have a commitment to pay £20M+ for the three players we bought. Not a commitment to pay £10M. So we can’t just pretend that we have £10M Lescott money to spend. We don’t. If we did spend it now, how are we going to make the future payments? Sell Arteta then perhaps?
38 Posted 02/09/2009 at 17:36:57
ES, dosnt the clubs like fulham bolton Wigan west ham and so on have less average gate money than us YES, have they all spent more money than us this year, YES, did these teams spend more than us last season,YES, that’s right folks we havnt spent a penny in transfer fees in these last two years, and don’t forget we don’t buy in January like other clubs, too deer they say, so back to the question where the fucks the money??
Jay Harris spot on mate, if were broke why don’t them tossers just sAy look we are broke this so no signings, I could live with the truth, instead of comming out with bullshit every year and raising hopes, so pretending to be competitive. The whole thing sticks jay
39 Posted 02/09/2009 at 17:46:34
that is the nub of the problem.
Kenwright can bang on all he likes about seeking new investment 24/7 and needing billionaires but our main problem is our commercial income is second rate for a top premiership club.
Do we get the image rights for new high profile players?
Why dont we improve Everton TV and charge more?
Why dont we improve the merchandising effort?
Why are we missing out on the Aussie market that has been created by Tim cahill?
Spurs get around 40 million in commercial activities we get about 3 million.
Kenwright may go on about 24/7 but in truth it’s about 24 minutes a week running the club and about 7 hours a week milking the limelight and watching games.
Only Moyes and Elstone are putting effort into the club.There is no other leadership.
40 Posted 02/09/2009 at 17:48:47
Neil, bang on the money. Its just like cash converters, that is how it will be for the foreseeable future.
The squad is getting smaller and smaller; meaning that any serious injuries suffered by our players leaves the squad exposed.
The club is an absolute shambles, the turnover may be low, whose fault is that?
The stadium solution is unsuitable, whose fault is that?
Where’s the ambition, Neil, your realism is nothing more than explaining away the failures of the current regime and worst still defending a stadium move that even you consider risky.
Put a positive spin on it if you like but the club is in serious trouble and many supporters are sick of the lies and are no longer willing to listen to Bill, considering that he won’t listen to his own shareholders.
41 Posted 02/09/2009 at 17:59:43
He was asked at the shareholders forum about the clubs future if Kirkby fell through, his response: he shrugged his shoulders.
42 Posted 02/09/2009 at 18:00:32
David - I hardly think the club is "in serious trouble" (that would be Portsmouth and others, including Liverpool if they don’t make the CL). Also I don’t really see how the squad is smaller (Valente was finished and Moyes wouldn’t play Castillo or VdM).
I promised myself I wouldn’t use the K word today since we are talking about the transfer window. I think we all know all the arguments about that by now. Suffice to say that I think sitting in GP hoping for a sugardaddy is the riskiest strategy of all.
43 Posted 02/09/2009 at 18:11:21
For the record Neil waiting at GP for a sugar daddy to turn up is a far better option than kirkby.
Kirkby will be a millstone around the clubs neck for the next 25 years. There is no guarantee of a sugar daddy with that pile of shite stadium. If we stay at GP the sugar daddy will effectively have all options open to him. For the record Neil, the clubs former commercial director had some sugar daddies lined up, but they went to Notts County along with the said commercial director. There are buyers out their Neil, the only barrier is Bill Kennwright not the stadium.
44 Posted 02/09/2009 at 18:18:45
We need rather more money than is going into Notts County. Not really a relevant comparison.
45 Posted 02/09/2009 at 18:18:41
46 Posted 02/09/2009 at 18:22:48
47 Posted 02/09/2009 at 18:15:05
48 Posted 02/09/2009 at 18:27:59
And so what if the installments are spread? No odds. We still have a legal commitment to pay that money. (And that’s assuming all the Lescott money was instant.)
49 Posted 02/09/2009 at 18:46:04
Are we being bled dry by avaricious owners for personal gain or to pay for a new Stadium? I really don’t know but I also believe that the conspiracy theorists on here don’t neither. If the alternative is to stay financially solvent or become a debt ridden foreign franchised club like Liverpool I’ll stay as we are any day and get my kicks from seeing us perform well against them. As has been pointed out above don’t just look at transfer costs but total costs including wages. What we pay managers and players at around 3million a year each is fucking scandalous for what was once a working class pastime.
50 Posted 02/09/2009 at 19:15:15
totally agree with your last point but since Kenwright took over Everton have made continuous losses almost every year and have taken debt from 5 to over 75 million and sold off or mortgaged anything and everything.
Granted this is the crazy world of football right now but we are no better placed than anybody due to our particularly low income, seriously weak marketing and total lack of assets.
at least the Sky 4 have brand value so theoretically will not go bust anytime soon whereas the rest of us may see a casualty possibly Portsmouth or West ham doing a Leeds before some sense comes back into football.
51 Posted 02/09/2009 at 19:31:15
52 Posted 02/09/2009 at 19:38:31
"David, still not sure how 22-3 is more than (I’ll be conservative) 6+6+9 plus the wage hike. As I say, odd way to please your bank manager."
Dishonest and shameful, you know the situation very well.
53 Posted 02/09/2009 at 19:51:55
The reality is as clear as day. You either run the operation within one’s means and protect shareholder value, take a big gamble in the hope it will work out (therefore risking shareholder value) or go find a Sugardaddy who is oblivious to the term ’debt obligation’. Remember somebody always has to pay up. Question is only when and how. Makes me shudder (rather smile) to think how the Shite are gonna square their circle and you lot are looking to follow suit.
54 Posted 02/09/2009 at 20:04:03
55 Posted 02/09/2009 at 20:12:27
Yes that’s true and you want them to further struggle by buying players they can ill afford. The club obviously needs to develop a strategy to increase revenues, not risk its well-being. That, I understand, is what they are doing, although it took them long enough to get round to it. So, David what is this reality thing you are going on about?
56 Posted 02/09/2009 at 20:28:01
57 Posted 02/09/2009 at 20:25:21
58 Posted 02/09/2009 at 20:31:39
So you are not suggesting we should have bought more players? Whatever, let’s agree to differ.
By the way, would you call ManU, Arsenal and the Shite selling clubs too?
59 Posted 02/09/2009 at 20:34:13
60 Posted 02/09/2009 at 20:50:35
Well the Liverpool squad (62 paid professionals) could do with some trimming, the size of the man utd and arsenal squad is about the same, so no I wouldn’t call them selling clubs, their need to sell is not as stark as our own need to sell.
Not very good at this debating lark are you. Lame.
61 Posted 02/09/2009 at 21:18:43
Let’s say you win, if that’s the point. Don’t think Xavi Alonso would be happy with you calling him trimmings though.
62 Posted 02/09/2009 at 21:27:13
You get no sympathy from me, Vic, you falsly attributed to me an opinion I never expressed, moved the goalposts when called upon it and when I still caught you out... you start sulking.
63 Posted 02/09/2009 at 21:39:05
Before it turns farcical pls remind me what I said that pricked your sensibilities? I don’t remember saying anything other than the complete opposite of what you were saying - i.e that we are not in as serious shit as you would have your mates believe, and the club is run sensibly, albeit unspectacularly. You ordered me to get real. Presumably, that meant according to your interpretation of the real world. That’s too much to ask anyone without solid facts to back up the rhetoric. Go get some Horlicks.
64 Posted 02/09/2009 at 21:45:17
"We the fans are still the same bunch of loyal supporters so I hope every Evertonian gets behind the team and with a bit of luck we might finish 6th in the league, win the Europa Cup, and find a buyer for the club...
Well, here’s to the new season, optimism is a wonderful thing. COYB "
I think there are some reasons for optimism in the squad.
I grant defensively we are a bit short with only 6 ’established’ defenders (Neville being classed a midfielder) so the likes of Heitinga and Distin may have to cover other positions but a back 4 of Heitinga, Jags, Distin & Baines is as good as any back 4 we have had in a long time. Hibbert & Yobo, 2 reguar top 6 premiership defenders for most of the last 5 years on the bench.
In midfield we might have to get by with Pienaar, Arteta, Rodwell and Bily. I appreciate that is putting some faith in an 18 year old and a new signing but hey if that doesn’t work we have got Cahill, or Fellaini or Neville or Osman available, another set of top 5 premiership players.
And then we have our forwards to worry about where we will only have the Yak and Saha on the pitch with Jo, Vaughan, Anichebe to call on.
Oh and I forgot about giving some youngsters a chance, Gosling, Baxter, Wallace the 2 Americans.
Perhaps we should look back to those heady days under Smith and Johnson when we could look forward to seeing Pistone, Nyarko, Gemmil, Ginola, Gascoine gracing Goodison!!
Lets get real. We may all get frustrated about some of the expectation set by the club, but instead of moaning about only getting 3 players in instead of 4 and only spending £21m of the £22m we got for Lescott the team is moving forward so lets focus on that and look to be more constructive instead of moaning all the time
65 Posted 02/09/2009 at 22:09:38
I could continue this lame debate, but I must admit defeat some people just don’t want to face the truth.
So Vic, I will leave you with this thought as I go to get my Horlicks...PJ will always be a better chairman than BK.
66 Posted 02/09/2009 at 22:33:48
I think that is the fundamental reason why we have not spent money this year.
67 Posted 02/09/2009 at 22:35:01
68 Posted 02/09/2009 at 23:44:25
Now the Super League, obviously there’s no Europe so the propects of finishing anything other than 1st is irrelevant, and unless they have 2-3 divisions no teams going to get relegated. Realistically only 4-5 teams will have a chance of being champions, so who is going to watch a game between Athletico Madrid v Anderlect for instance that is a pre-season friendly in all but name. A super league would take the competitve edge out of 75% of games, and football would wither away and die
69 Posted 02/09/2009 at 23:53:22
70 Posted 03/09/2009 at 01:32:05
which part of your spectacular ability with Maths or Pseudo Accountabcy led you to conclude that an organisation that has made a loss in 7 of the 9 years it has operated,sold off and/or mortgaged all it’s assets and continuously ran it’s debts up from 5 to over 75 milllion could be described as "Being run sensibly".
You are obviously either a crank or a wind up merchant and I would thank you to note that there is nothing wrong with my mathematical ability whilst there is obviously something blatantly wrong with yours if you think EFC is "Being run sensibly".
Oh and I think you should look up the definition of "hothead" because your comprehension of English is not that great either.
71 Posted 03/09/2009 at 01:41:01
so you think the wage bill for Distin,Billy and Heitiga is more than the wages of Lescott,Jacobsen,VDM,Castillo and Valente.
Check it out you may be surprised.
72 Posted 03/09/2009 at 02:22:20
73 Posted 03/09/2009 at 05:54:44
Does that mean that when the inquest goes against Kirkby, that come January we will have the biggest transfer kitty going!!!!
Don’t think so!!!!
Also can anyone confirm that LFC have withdrawn building plans for Stanley Park from LCC????
74 Posted 03/09/2009 at 05:58:59
1. If Bily is a world beater how comes Hiddink didn’t tell Chelsea to go for him instead of Zirkov
2. Is Heitinga the defensive cover that Moyes was on about? How is cover goon score 10 goals?
3. Distin is older than Rio. How can he be the new?
4. The only way Jo with score is if he goes back to that second rate league in Russia.
5. The only Yak will start to score for fun is if he gets some support. CANNOT PLAY LONE STRIKER. How many more times do I have to say it!!!!
6. Alonso, Fabregas, Xavi, Inesta, Senna & Silva. Where is Arteta going to get in that midfield? The only way he is going to South Africa is if he buys a ticket and sits in the stands.
7. Osman should be renamed Jesus. Cos Jesus always sits on Gods ( Moyes ) rigth hand side!!!
Its going to be a long season me thinks!!!
75 Posted 03/09/2009 at 07:27:30
76 Posted 03/09/2009 at 07:30:10
77 Posted 03/09/2009 at 08:31:45
Neil, we have taken five wage earners off the books and replaced them with three, Jo was at the club last year, so not exactly a new signing. The wages of those five included those of VDM and Lescott on about £4 million a year combined factor in another couple of million for Castillo and Jacobsen and we have a substantial saving of perhaps seven to eignt milion pounds and considering that the top wage at EFC is £2.5 million we have distributed that saving amongst the three new siginings. The wage bill is about the same, the squad is smaller.
That is the reality-now please have another attempt at denying it.
78 Posted 03/09/2009 at 09:01:10
I think claiming I was fantasist and an idiot when I predicted to you that Lescott would be sold and we would get a couple forigners on the never, never and undiscloseded fee signings, was more like personal abuse, but its all part of the toffeeweb community that we enjoy I’m just pointing out that you seem to be going away from your stance. I think your silence speaks volumes.
79 Posted 03/09/2009 at 09:13:15
80 Posted 03/09/2009 at 09:18:24
Can you enlighten me on the ’assets’ we have stripped that have somehow damaged our chances of success..
81 Posted 03/09/2009 at 09:20:20
82 Posted 03/09/2009 at 09:22:53
83 Posted 03/09/2009 at 09:25:01
84 Posted 03/09/2009 at 09:37:44
1+1 = 1 Victor. I went to the Kenwright school of maths.
85 Posted 03/09/2009 at 09:45:02
are you suggesting you know more than Kenwright? and that the club isn’t ’struggling to make ends meet’?
86 Posted 03/09/2009 at 09:49:08
Can you try and answer the question I submitted. Feel free to do it in your inimitably witty way, but do answer it in such a manner that your facts are there for us to put to the test. If you do it well enough I will bow to your superiour wisdom and kiss your cyber arse. Go for it.
87 Posted 03/09/2009 at 10:15:33
If it involves maths, according to you - I’m already stumped!
88 Posted 03/09/2009 at 10:27:43
89 Posted 03/09/2009 at 10:30:05
90 Posted 03/09/2009 at 10:40:08
91 Posted 03/09/2009 at 10:42:44
92 Posted 03/09/2009 at 11:11:50
Outsourcing certainly lowers the value of the club..but that could be considered a good thing for a buyer - if you were looking to sell.
93 Posted 03/09/2009 at 11:35:04
94 Posted 03/09/2009 at 12:05:41
But the irony of this is that it’s made his positon less tenable...
95 Posted 03/09/2009 at 12:21:55
I see you’re at it again and you’re understanding of English has ’nt improved.
Nowhere did I say "asset strippng" and nowhere did I say it "had damaged our chance of success" although any fool can see it certainly doesnt help to put yourself in a position of such debt...
However it is common knowledge that GP has been mortgaged for 15 million, Season ticket sales for the next 22 years have been mortgaged, the Netherton training ground was sold off and we’re now leasing Finch Farm instead.
Jo was on the payroll last year and Moyes was on Sky Sports stating that reports of Heitinga’s wages were wildly exaggerated and he had no problem accommodating him into our wage structure.
96 Posted 03/09/2009 at 12:10:04
97 Posted 03/09/2009 at 12:51:33
"Granted this is the crazy world of football right now but we are no better placed than anybody due to our particularly low income, seriously weak marketing and total lack of assets".
Jay - I am I missing something here?
98 Posted 03/09/2009 at 12:53:52
99 Posted 03/09/2009 at 12:55:30
Open goal alert.
100 Posted 03/09/2009 at 13:00:55
101 Posted 03/09/2009 at 13:02:56
102 Posted 03/09/2009 at 13:07:33
Thanks for speaking up for Jay finally. By ’increasing revenues’ are you saying ’current streams by volume’ or ’new streams’ or both?
103 Posted 03/09/2009 at 13:09:37
Definition of "Asset stripping" from Collins dictionary:
"If a person or company is involved in asset-stripping, they buy companies cheaply, sell off their assets to make a profit, and then close the companies down."
David totally understands the point I am trying to make.
104 Posted 03/09/2009 at 13:15:50
105 Posted 03/09/2009 at 13:21:13
David, by saying raising revenues can I possibly understand that as increasing revenues, or not?
106 Posted 03/09/2009 at 13:24:04
Call it what you wish - mortgaging, sale-and-leaseback, selling - my challenge is this..
By freeing up capital (for whatever reason) on those assets you mention would you please demonstrate where it is damaging the club (and presumably its chances of success.
107 Posted 03/09/2009 at 13:25:52
108 Posted 03/09/2009 at 13:27:55
Because I think it’s ironic.
109 Posted 03/09/2009 at 13:28:46
The trouble with that strategy is that it gives us capital in the short term, but it restricts growth in the long term if there is no strategy to grow the business. The club has 13 loans to repay thats the problem — it's why there is no transfer budget.
110 Posted 03/09/2009 at 13:37:18
Regarding existing streams- In your view is this to be done by increasing supply (stocking up) or demand (finding new fans or asking existing ones to consume more, or maybe asking non-EFC fans to buy our goods and services)?
111 Posted 03/09/2009 at 13:42:29
Why does selling netherton and leasing back Finch Farm restrict future growth? I am intrigued. Please address the issue and stop spouting off the platitudes.
112 Posted 03/09/2009 at 13:43:44
113 Posted 03/09/2009 at 13:48:31
114 Posted 03/09/2009 at 13:28:54
I dont know if you get bored everyday but final point from me as I have a business to run and much as I would love to cant spend all day on here discussing semantics.
You should only keep borrowing/mortgaging things to increase revenues otherwise the result is you soon hit the point where your costs (Including the much increased interest bill) exceed your income to such an extent that you end up in a downward spiral.
My concern with BK’s regime is that they have no business plan to increase revenues substantially.They are hanging all their hopes on Kirkby which most of us recognise will be a white elephant.
The days when gate receipts fund a club are long gone and have been replaced by worldwide branding and marketing something we cant even get right at local level.
So instead of pushing for Kirkby IMO we should put another tier on the Park end for 20 million increasing capacity by 8000 and sell the restricted views cheaply or give them to local schools and put all our efforts into exploiting "The 4th most successful club in history" .
Have a good day.
115 Posted 03/09/2009 at 13:51:35
I smell fudge. Go get some rest.
116 Posted 03/09/2009 at 13:58:03
117 Posted 03/09/2009 at 17:53:46
Your argument and example would hold water if Everton were in the property game, and unless you know something different we are not. Spare me the metaphor and blanket statements and tell me again, why and how does selling Netherton and leasing back Finch Farm restrict future growth?
And saying we can increase revenue by simply ’putting the club in the marketplace’ is a fudge. What does that actually mean — increasing awareness among non-EFC supporters as to our existence and history in the hope they will buy merchandise?
118 Posted 03/09/2009 at 18:59:17
I have answered those questions, but if you want to stick your head in the sands and hysterically claim that BK’s critics want the club to do a Leeds, go ahead; just don’t expect to be treated with due consideration or respect.
119 Posted 03/09/2009 at 20:09:52
Rather than giving me your due consideration and respect why not answer the question? Is your marketing strategy aimed at (a) enlisting non-EFC supporters to the cause and have them buy merchandise, (b) asking existing EFC supporters to buy more and/or pay more, or (c) both? If you commit yourself to any of the three we can then look into how we go about that.
120 Posted 03/09/2009 at 20:51:09
121 Posted 03/09/2009 at 21:13:15
So don’t commit yourself. That’s your prerogative... but by doing so you are somehow undermining your stance on the club’s current marketing operation. Over and out.
122 Posted 03/09/2009 at 22:20:41
You have been challenged on that statement, found wanting and have resorted to the petulant whine of "I’d Like to see you do better".
If you can’t back up your original claim, then piss off and save yourself the embarrassment.
123 Posted 05/09/2009 at 00:06:04
Good for you, Victor, largely with you. Most of the stuff about ’owning physical assets’ is ignorant sentimental tosh. (Successful companies have been ’selling off their non-core assets’ for years. It’s become a business cliche. A company I used to work in didn’t own an office or a desk or a computer.)
Owning footballers — good. Owning fields — irrelevant. (Man City rent Eastlands — enough said.)
It nearly always makes sense to focus on your core business (in our case, playing football), and not tie up your capital in real estate and commercial ventures (e.g. catering) that others can do better.
Of course, if you then can’t make sufficient revenues from your core activity (playing football in our case) you are up shit creek. But retaining other non-core assets which prevent you e.g investing in Heitinga and Bily is arse about face. You have then simply revealed that your business model is fundamentally fucked. Hoping to make money out of real estate because your football business doesn’t work — that’s idiotic.
What we need to do is improve the fundamental attractiveness of our business model as a football club. That’s where having a new stadium and improving our related commercial activies comes in. But that’s of course another story....
124 Posted 05/09/2009 at 00:48:22
Well, Neil you're not an idiot, you're a blinkered idiot.
125 Posted 05/09/2009 at 06:57:11
126 Posted 05/09/2009 at 07:18:20
On the latter for what it’s worth I think it’s all a bit relative. Relative to e.g. Leeds, Newcastle, Portsmouth and West Ham we’ve been run very sensibly indeed. West Ham have been breaking their banking covenants which puts them in rather severe peril - if the banks wanted - of being shut down. Liverpool are also not so far from this position, and most observers believe could be in serious difficulties if they don’t qualify for the CL. Not very sensible, and we are nowhere near anything like that. Perhaps also in a different context relative to Chelsea and perhaps soon Man U we’re quite sensible - we’ve not been banned from buying players yet.
On the other hand, we have clearly not been maximising our potential commercial revenues, and that’s not very sensible in this day and age.
The point about the misleadingly called ’asset stripping’ is - and this is probably where I do agree with you David and Jay - it is covering over the deficiencies in our basic football business model. Obviously you should sell these assets if you can get good money for them (buy players instead), but what happens when you’ve no more assets to sell?
Jay then makes the point that the plan to ’fill the hole’ and increase revenues substantially is - Kirkby. I agree. (I think it’s also at that point to get a richer owner with deeper pockets.) So we end up back at the same place. If you think that, combined with getting our act into gear on the commercial side, Kirkby will in fact raise revenues, then it all looks reasonably sensible. If you don’t, then of course you don’t.
But ’selling the assets’ is a bit of a red herring, and has been a very sensible thing to do.
127 Posted 05/09/2009 at 08:12:59
What you predicted (and I called you a fantasist over) was that Lescott would be consciously and deliberately sold by Kenwright on the last day of the transfer window so that he could keep all the money (no doubt siphoning it off in your fevered and paranoid imagination into some personal Swiss bank account), and would not have to buy any replacements.
What happened? Lescott was NOT sold on the last day of the window. We bought Heitinga and Distin and Bily and at least spent all the Lescott money.
So, once more, your wild Kenwright hating led you to predict things which were just plain wrong. You might want to learn from this example, but I’m sure you won’t.
128 Posted 05/09/2009 at 08:19:06
I admitted to being ’mischievous’ in using a KEIOC number of £500M+ as what a new owner of our club would need to put in. It was mischievous of me to use a KEIOC number because I was using it to make the rather obvious point that — since we are talking such numbers — it’s not that surprising that billionaires are not queuing up outside Kenwright’s office to take the club off his hands.
Your insinuation seems to be that I was mischievously using some dodgy number. Maybe I was. But it was your friends at KEIOC who produced it, not me. (Actually I think the estimate is a little low but definitely in the right ballpark.)
129 Posted 05/09/2009 at 08:26:30
On the wages, I stand by my point. Let’s just say (not unlikely) Distin = Lescott. Then, comparing the likely out turns for last season and this, we have Valente, Castillo, Jacobsen, VdM gone, and Bily and Heitinga in, plus half a season more of Jo this time.
Now, I am sure you would accept that football wages have gone dramatically up over the last few years. Valente and VdM were never top earners at the club, and were on old contracts. Castillo and Jacobsen were one year loan signings, again likely to be at the lower end of our wage scale. None of the four can have got any big performance bonuses last year!
Heitinga and Bily on the other hand will be at the very top of our wage scale. And Jo not far off. Easy to image that all three are getting paid double if not more than the four who’ve gone. Add in substantial new contracts in the past year for Rodwell and Yobo (these are just the ones I can recall)... It’s very likely that the wage bill has gone up.
We were also clearly very willing to add Banega to the wage bill too — which even you guys would surely have to admit would have produced a total increase. So again the paranoid point that the club is deliberately lowering the total wages bill — it just flies in the face of the evidence.
Moyes's comment that Heitinga has not broken our wage structure? Well, first of all he HAS to say that if he wants to keep Arteta and Cahill from his door! And he didn’t say that Heitinga wasn’t right at the top of our wage structure.
130 Posted 05/09/2009 at 09:05:27
131 Posted 05/09/2009 at 09:08:00
Go on, you tell me what you think of him, I would be very interested. But everything you post suggests you don’t like him very much. Even on the Lescott thing you were attributing that he was going to do something rather underhand in selling him at the last minute and not replacing him.
By the way, any comments on your completely disproven prediction about Lescott?
Still think there’s something terrible about me using KEIOC numbers?
132 Posted 05/09/2009 at 10:46:50
133 Posted 05/09/2009 at 13:24:03
I think what the Lescott affair showed is that we are clearly financially tight (so we didn’t have another £10M to splash around after the Lescott money), but that we are not having to sell players or reduce the wage bill simply to keep the banks happy. The glass is half-full.
134 Posted 05/09/2009 at 14:11:21
David, You clearly acknowledge the need for EFC to increase revenues — for that I pat you on the back. The problem is that, when it comes to details, your approach starts getting fuzzy. You are not offering a position as to how this can or ought to be done.
A little more clarity from you would have helped this thread move into interesting and probably unchartered waters — ie, weighing up possible solutions to the problem and not just restating the same old party line.
I believe the "I’d Like to see you do better" approach is necessary here because you get no points for blowing the same old holes again and again. Why not try and take the intellectual plunge into the swirling currents of problem solving. Neil seems to be one of the few on this site who reside there comfortably.
135 Posted 05/09/2009 at 14:30:14
Another point I want to make is that EFC should be held to account by its supporters — not just those with Business degrees and finance experience.
First things first though: recognise the problems — that anyone can do. Solutions? We can but try. KEIOC have...
As for Neil's solution (correct me if I am wrong here, Neil): Move to Kirkby and wait for the new owner to move in? It's wishful thinking.
The solution I’m afraid resides with Bill or Phillip Green. The only thing the fans can do is voice their displeasure and make life as uncomfortable as possible for our Board of complacent liars.
Add Your Comments
In order to post a comment to Fan Articles, you need to be logged in as a registered user of the site.
Or Sign up as a ToffeeWeb Member — it's free, takes just a few minutes and will allow you to post your comments on articles and MailBag submissions across the site.