Skip to Main Content
Members:   Log In  |  Sign Up
NewsRumoursReportsVideoTalking PointsArticles
Text Size:  A  A  A
Season 2011-12

The People vs Bill Kenwright and his Board

By Colin Fitzpatrick   ::  13/07/2011
 146 Comments (Last)

Last week, like many, I ignored the insidious drivel that masqueraded as an original piece in the local press; the journalist in question was rightly taken to task by what I interpret as Evertonians holding the general consensus against this all-too-predictable propaganda. It got me thinking, with regard to what?s happening in the Everton Boardroom ? just what exactly is the consensus? Is it, as I believe, the majority have had enough? Or am I wrong and in a very small minority, whilst the majority are happy with the performance of the present custodians?

Let?s have none of this Cleggesque ?the truth is somewhere in between? or ?be careful what you wish for?; the facts, in my opinion, are undeniable and bring me to the inevitable conclusion that, whilst Liverpool-supporting chairman Peter Johnson may well have been a nightmare, Evertonian Bill Kenwright and his entourage, having emasculated our great club over their tenure, are undeniably worse and, as a matter of urgency, need to vacate the Boardroom at the earliest convenient moment.

Here are a few indisputable facts regarding the Kenwright years; you decide, for the good of Everton, if the Board should be replaced with an interim one charged with selling the club.

Few would want to defend Johnson ? he was undoubtedly a liability, yet he put money into the club by organising a £15m rights issue and developed the club commercially through building and opening the megastore and developing the lounges. Nobody is denying that the team on the pitch, and the club off it, were in dire straits on his watch; yet when he sold his 68% shareholding for £20M, Everton had a turnover of £28M, a positive balance sheet of £18M and total debt of £20M. The 2010 accounts reveal turnover of £79M, a £30M negative balance sheet and total debt of £85M ? in other words, no assets and debt greater than turnover; and we were apparently in dire straits under Johnson???

It?s a fact that none of the current Board has invested a single penny into the club beyond their initial personal investment of buying shares from the previous owner. I?m all for entrepreneurialism in any business but this form of share ownership in football clubs is nothing short of parasitic capitalism at its worst. Suggestions that current Everton directors have mortgaged homes, funded player acquisitions or anything else are delusional; they?ve done absolutely nothing. Bill Kenwright didn?t even have all of his £7M share of the £20M stake; he had to borrow it from the wife of fellow director Paul Gregg.

The largest investors in the club are the same people they?ve always been: the fans. Last year they invested £20M of their hard earned money, an investment they have repeated year after year and equal, every year, in contrast to the one-off personal investment made by the former members of True Blue Holdings.

Despite huge increases in TV revenue, Everton have reported financial loss after loss under Kenwright?s custodianship; additional funding has been sought through the disposal of tangible [property] and intangible [players] assets. All tangible assets are now exhausted, the last, Bellefield, raised £8M which went straight to the bank to reduce the overdraft and clear two of the sixteen outstanding mortgage charges.

Whilst all Premier League clubs have witnessed a phenomenal increase in turnover during the Kenwright years, as a direct result of massive increases in broadcasting revenues, Everton has demonstrated very little additional commercial growth, that is growth directly attributed to the actions of the Board and management team as opposed to simply benefiting from the collective Premier League negotiations with Sky, BBC and other broadcasters.

At Everton, broadcasting revenue has increased by 400%, over the past decade, yet, in the same period, commercial income, the club?s responsibility, has increased by just 30%. A decade ago commercial income represented 21% of total income; today it represents just 11% ?  we?ve not only stagnated, we?re actually going backwards off the pitch and it?s only a matter of time before we follow this on the pitch.

To help develop this commercial income stream, almost all Premier League clubs have seen some form of investment in their infrastructure; sadly, Everton have seen none. There have been attempts of course: the Kings Dock stadium, the Kirkby Stadium and, the latest, a commercial development behind the Park End stand at Goodison.

The Kings Dock represented a truly world class solution to Everton?s stadium problem. The proposed £250M, multi-purpose, 55,000-capacity stadium featured a sliding pitch and roof which thereby offered the opportunity to hold lucrative non-football events throughout the year in the heart of the city centre. In short, the proposal was essentially a Joint Venture between Everton [49%], Liverpool City Council [13%], English Partnerships [25%] and The North West Development Agency (NWDA) [13%]. Everton were required to deliver a contribution of just £30M ? which would have seen them keep all matchday revenue and 49% of any net profit from the non-matchday activities.

Through their inability to deliver their contribution, at the required date, Everton caused delays to the project which in turn increased the costs and ultimately led to its cancellation. The city council placed the failure to proceed firmly at Everton?s door, the Board having misled everybody concerned by claiming their £30M contribution was in place ? they claimed it was "ringfenced" when in fact it wasn?t. The site, since developed by Bovis, houses a successful arena and conference complex operated by the previously mentioned group in their various guises, new and old ? less Everton, of course. The site will soon be expanded to include a new exhibition hall.

Following this fiasco, former director Paul Gregg, who at least offered the club a solution that provided the £30M but required control, decided to sell his shares. They were eventually taken by Robert Earl but paid for by Sir Philip Green and deposited in the ownership of BCR Sports, an offshore company registered in the British Virgin Islands. At this time, the Greggs ended their association with Everton; presumably Bill Kenwright found a source to repay Anita in full. He?s since claimed on many occasions that he?s not a wealthy man but takes expert advice from one...

If the Kings Dock represented a golden opportunity, the next attempt at a stadium solution, for me, represents possibly the darkest hour in Everton?s history, when the chairman ? a supposed blue, one of our own ? stood by whilst the club was sold down the river for the sake of a grubby property deal that favoured a supermarket and retail park development over the interests of Everton Football Club.

What was on offer appeared too good to be true and, as it transpired, that?s exactly what it was. The club informed Evertonians that it was the deal of the century, that it was effectively free, that the developer was contributing £52M towards the cost, that the stadium would generate £10M per annum for the manager?s transfer budget ? all lies, all exposed as lies and admitted in a government inquiry at which Everton were heavily criticised for not providing any tangible supporting evidence.

The reason for this non-disclosure is that they?d have had to tell the truth, and the truth is Bill Kenwright?s Board allowed Everton to be used as an excuse to build a retail development that contravened planning regulations... in return for what? A cheap stadium, that they couldn?t fund, that wasn?t fit for the purpose and offered nothing save a solution to their decimated balance sheet. It?s remarkable that some Everton fans still can?t understand that there never was any £52M cross-subsidy from Tesco 1 they trusted the Board to tell them the truth and they didn?t.

Unforgiveable in my book ? they sold the club down the river but were found out. Bill Kenwright thinks he got away with wasting millions of pounds on a ridiculous scam which has put the club back years... yet he hasn?t; the truth will always out. Avoiding probing questions by hiding behind hollow claims of shareholder and fan engagement through highly selective meetings won?t wash; they?ve been caught out, it?s not their choice ? it?s a UEFA licensing requirement.

The latest attempt to deliver an increase in commercial revenue is a building on the Park End car park, the so called Everton Place development. Suspicions were immediately raised when it was heralded, at last seasons Shareholders Forum, as being ?self-funding? ? another version of ?effectively free?? Construction was planned to commence after the December West Brom game and completed in time for the following season.

KEIOC had learnt from the council that the development was in trouble in January and in March they broke the story on their site. This required a response from the club, but they had a problem, they had banned the Echo for daring to question the regime at Goodison. On lifting the ban, the club issued a statement that proved they?d learnt nothing from the lies told over Kirkby; they claimed the delay was due to issues moving IT equipment and relocating offices during the season, that the timeline being followed was the one agreed all along and that all the partners were happy!

News to the CEO ? at least he had the decency, bizarrely in the same article, to hint that the real problem surrounded mortgage charges on the land now held by lenders. Today, anyone passing Goodison will see further evidence of the ineffectiveness of the Board, Dixie?s statue gone, there?s a large hole in the wall and shabby looking cladding mirroring the shabby Board and, of course, there?s still no sign of the development from a Board that promises much but delivers nothing.

I could go on but we all know about the embarrassing episodes surrounding NTL, FSF, the treatment of shareholders, transfer fiascos aplenty and their inability to support the manager. Some claim that the appointment of David Moyes was inspirational, that it has improved the standing of the club; I?d say that the improvement in the team?s position is despite the actions of the Board and not because of them.

During the Kirkby inquiry, I publicly asked the CEO if their business plan was sustainable and if its failure lead to an inability to provide funds to the manager? With his usual honesty, he agreed it was unsustainable but that they had an expert team in place which wouldn?t allow the latter to happen... Well, it has happened; I?m not certain what David Moyes?s feelings are at the moment but I despair every time I switch on Sky Sports News hoping but failing to see a positive news story about Everton.

Last week, I was fortunate enough to meet the guys who?ve formed ?The People?s Group?. Intelligent, articulate and tenacious, they have a plan to get the real story of what?s been going on at Goodison across to the media. The media has been reluctant up to now as it?s a complicated story ? not one that can be easily explained as Big Bad Yanks loading a club with debt ? but these guys are committed and I?d implore all Evertonians to support them.

I?ll reiterate again, the people on Board of Everton FC are ineffective, insincere and simply can?t be trusted with the future of our club. Are all the aforementioned problems the responsibility of the Board? In my opinion, Yes; some directly, others due to the amateurs they happily continue to employ. All the other shareholders, the fans and the manager simply deserve better.

Reader Comments

Note: the following content is not moderated or vetted by the site owners at the time of submission. Comments are the responsibility of the poster. Disclaimer


Dan Brierley
1   Posted 13/07/2011 at 18:19:58

Report abuse

Colin, when you say 'the people' vs Bill Kenwright and his board, who exactly do you mean by 'the people'? Do you mean your view represents all of the people in the world, apart from the board? I'll have my own view if you don't mind, thank you very much.

I find your article quite frankly boring. I fail to remember how many articles or columns you have wrote, which have been entirely of the same content, but put out in different way. You are the 'anti doddy' of this website. Never seen you discuss football or tactics, only pipe up about your hatred for the board. Which is fine, your entitled to your views.

My problem is there is no balance to your view, it highlights facts without looking at the mitgating circumstances. Debt has indeed increased, but do you know why? We have had to increase the debt, to stop ourselves getting relegated and try to keep playing in the top half of the table. I hate to break it to you, but every club in the Premier League has record debt levels. Should all the boards be sacked?

The only thing we agree on, is that Kenwright needs to leave. My question is who takes over, that is going to take us to the promised land. Without a new owner showing the colour of his money, nothing is going to be able to change for the better. Torches and pitchforks are not going to improve this situation at all in my view.
David O'Keefe
2   Posted 13/07/2011 at 18:51:19

Report abuse

Good summation, Colin, and I think we're approaching a tipping point within the near future. The response to that "journalists" article was astonishing.
David O'Keefe
3   Posted 13/07/2011 at 18:53:32

Report abuse

"My problem is there is no balance to your view, it highlights facts without looking at the mitgating circumstances. Debt has indeed increased, but do you know why? We have had to increase the debt, to stop ourselves getting relegated and try to keep playing in the top half of the table. I hate to break it to you, but every club in the Premier League has record debt levels. Should all the boards be sacked?"

Is th debt sustainable? Thats the question that should be asked.
Gavin Ramejkis
4   Posted 13/07/2011 at 19:12:42

Report abuse

Dan, if you don't like Colin's articles then why bother your arse to read and respond?

Another fine piece Colin, the growing unrest is palpable, season ticket sales down and a growing number of groups concerned about the state of the club. BK has had 12 years to make his mark and it's a disgraceful state he has left the club in, a change is needed. Not a billionaire as the dreamers would argue but someone with a plan, someone with the ability to run a bleeding business; no more lies, no more empty promises, no more failures ? Kenwright OUT
Dave Wilson
5   Posted 13/07/2011 at 19:30:28

Report abuse

Wooah, Gavin!

Let's hear the responses from all sides of the house.
Brendan O'Doherty
6   Posted 13/07/2011 at 19:32:59

Report abuse

Great article, following on from the People's Group one. Surely people can see that an interim board is the way forward out of this impasse. There is no elusive billionaire out there, at least not one who is willing to do business with the present board. The problem remains though that BK seems intent on retaining a controlling interest unfortunately.

Andy Crooks
7   Posted 13/07/2011 at 20:03:33

Report abuse

Dan Brierly, put up an equally comprehensive opposition. I will look forward to reading it.

Kenwright is beyond defence. He has hung on so long and lied so much that he has no legacy left.

Sean Patton
8   Posted 13/07/2011 at 21:50:27

Report abuse

I know Kenwright is a clueless blagger and deserves all the stick he gets, but he has got no money so cant be asked to give what he does not have this does not excuse his financial inpetitude though.

The thing that grates my gears is if you look at the board members of Everton and see the Times Rich List every year there is one name that sticks out like a sore thumb.

What the hell does Lord Grantchester do? Ably sits twiddling his thumbs whilst the club struggles.

We hear he doesnt want to work with Kenwright but why should the club suffer from a petty row between them?




I am not asking for him to pour in unlimited millions or build a stadium but the interest alone on his fortune would pay for a player a year thats hardly going to bankrupt him.
Rob Sawyer
9   Posted 13/07/2011 at 23:19:24

Report abuse

I question the phrasing of the survey next to the article as it seems rather leading; I would not agree strictly with either statement. Who would be on this interim board? Where would new funds come from - a rights issue, a sugar daddy, more borrowing/debt?

The failure of Kings Dock and other embarrassing things such as the Fortress Fund to still pain me, but I am cautious about what we are demanding.

For me I don't want a mega-rich owner that will fund the club out of his/her pocket for a while. We need a board that balances revenue and costs and looks to grow the former sustainably - not an easy ask in this impatient industry where short-term on-field results are seen as paramount.

So - for me "Yes" to new owners if (and it is big if) they are the right people for the club's long-term future and not people with shady or short-term motives.
Ciarán McGlone
10   Posted 13/07/2011 at 23:35:57

Report abuse

A superb article and one that people who know nothing about Everton or the malevolent actions of the current board ? like Beecroft ? could do with reading.

Sadly, they probably won't bother arming themselves with even the most basic of knowledge before proclaiming themselves able to comment on the issue.
Gavin Ramejkis
11   Posted 13/07/2011 at 23:40:25

Report abuse

Rob, many have argued the case on these pages that realistically we aren't looking at a billionaire to appear out of nowhere, a share rights issue could have raised several million pounds if only to clear some of the debts leaving revenue clear to be reinvested. Any businessman or woman with more vision than the current incumbents is what I'd appreciate and look for, new ideas and some vision, short, medium and long term strategies, look at what makes money and try to do just that, review the outsourcing and work out what needs bringing back in house and what needs better negotiation. Market what we have here and abroad, some may say it's whoring the club but times have changed and on these pages themselves you'll see contributors from all over the world, why aren't we tapping into these markets?
Russell Buckley
12   Posted 13/07/2011 at 23:45:38

Report abuse

Dan (1) Agree largely a boring post. We have all heard about failures like Kings Dock before.

Reading these articles can be a bit like banging your head against a wall but for fuck sake, people are posting them because its largely their only way of standing up for the club.

Content wise I've heard it before but I completely support the post.
John Maxwell
13   Posted 13/07/2011 at 23:57:54

Report abuse

So just another "Sack the Board" post?

Ok then lets just "Sack the Board", then what?

Kenwright does need to go but realistically I can see him being there for another 10 years, would any of you seriously invest your millions in EFC?

Colin, maybe Kenwright should knock on your door and ask you why your Mrs isn't better looking, why you don't live in a better house, why your kids aren't getting a better education, why your dog doesn't win Crufts? Maybe it's all about money which you don't have?

All this shouting is no better than shop floor workers moaning about the people running their organisation because a) they will never run it and b) they aren't good enough to run it.
Colin Fitzpatrick
14   Posted 14/07/2011 at 00:57:58

Report abuse

Dan #1
Have you been asleep for the past week? You seriously don?t know what the reference to ?The People? means?

I hate to break it to you Dan, but every club in the Premier League do not have record debt levels, nor have they simply sold all their assets in preference to increasing their ability to generate revenue, they don?t have crumbling stadia and, most importantly, aren?t in the situation of having no solution to their problems. Having said all that Dan I?m not really interested in the situations at other clubs, I?m an Evertonian, I?m interested in my club and the root cause of my clubs problems appear to originate from the deficiencies of the current board.

You?re right that I don?t comment about football or tactics; I do that where I?ve always done it, before, during and after the match with my friends.

Hatred of the board? That?s a very strong word Dan, I would never say I hate Bill Kenwright and the board, I prefer to reserve hatred for something important; I hate poverty, racism, violence not a football chairman, no matter how ineffective he appears.

I?m sorry you appear to have a problem that there is no balance to my view; I assume you wrote to Keith Wyness and the rest of the board when they produced their balanced view of Destination Kirkby in 2007? I offer no balance because there is none, for example, when somebody tells you Tesco are giving Everton a £52m irrevocable cheque, or that the cheque, that?s another cheque, will be in the bank by Friday or that over 50% of the seats at Goodison are obscured there can be no balance, they?re all outright lies, I could go on but I haven?t got all night.

There aren?t any torches or pitch forks Dan, the board has had more than enough time, people are just tired of being lied to and let down; yet there is a solution, install an interim board, the current board do nothing, the evidence for that is staring everybody in the face.

The reason I go on and on about this issue is that some people sit behind keyboards and do nothing, at least the guys mentioned are attempting to make a change. What has happened isn?t going to simply go away by not mentioning it; it might just stop it happening again if the media pick up on the story that we all know.
Chris Bannantyne
15   Posted 14/07/2011 at 00:50:06

Report abuse

Nice post, Colin.

I think you should send it to every newspaper in Liverpool.
Doug Nestor
16   Posted 14/07/2011 at 01:59:41

Report abuse

Dan, Colin speaks for me and every Evertonian I know..............Are you really that happy with what is going on??.............I'm 48 and can remember the good times, we are a massive Club who should not accept second best..............I'ts people like you that allows Kenwright to remain where he is..........if He is such an Evertonian sell his shares for what He bought them for...........and give someone the room to invest in our great club and really make a difference before its to late....
Matt Traynor
17   Posted 14/07/2011 at 06:21:39

Report abuse

A good post, and as Andy Crooks (#7) says, a comprehensive rebuttal will add to the debate - let's face it, these pages would be quiet otherwise.

I would add two points that are constantly being raised.
1) Lord Granchester may be a man of means, but it's his choice where he invests his money. Just because you're rich, a shareholder and an Evertonian does not obligate you to throw vast sums of money into players pockets. There are people out there who believe they can get a return on their investment in football through media value. If your business isn't geared for that, you won't invest unless you really are benevolent/stupid/hate your kids.
2) PJ had a rights issue, taking the number of shares up to the current 35,000. Everton's need for money in what is a very different financial environment is such that a meaningful rights issue, I believe, is no longer an answer. It will not deliver the funds, and the devaluation of shares for existing large shareholders makes it unpalatable.
Paul Gladwell
18   Posted 14/07/2011 at 06:39:01

Report abuse

Colin, You must feel like giving up when you write these letters of Facts only to still be met with a defence of a compulsive lying board.
As you say the truth will out, do you remember all those clowns who used to come on here in stance of Kirkby, Mr Chomdley Warner (or whatever he called himself) and co, where are they now?
If these people cannot see something has to be done now they never will.
We are at a cross roads and a bad start by the team will plunge the whole club into a crisis that could prove fatal.
James I'Anson
19   Posted 14/07/2011 at 08:08:59

Report abuse

Sean (8)

I'm sure Grantchester would be more likely to part with his cash if Bill was willing to dilute his shares.

Paul Gregg was in the same situation.

What's wrong with a share issue? He simply does not want to lose control.
Gavin Ramejkis
20   Posted 14/07/2011 at 08:24:19

Report abuse

I'm pretty sure I read in some financial articles some time ago that the Granchester money is controlled overall by the family matriarch and as outdated as it seems she has reputedly told Lord Grantchester not to blow his money with BK due to the way the KD went.

It sickens me to think of a comparison that Man City were reletaive minnows, got a new stadium (not a flat pack in arse end of nowhere) and have had multiple owners since spending more cash than Everton have seen in the last decade. I was there for a concert recently and to think that should be Everton's ground having concerts but for BK.
Shaun Sparke
21   Posted 14/07/2011 at 08:23:21

Report abuse

Colin, most of what you have listed in your article has been debated many times on this website. But I admire you for your tenacity in keeping this argument at the forefront of Evertoninan minds.

To those of you who claim that this is becoming boring. How can you possibly justify such a stand point? I have just read that Liverpool have agreed a fee for Stuart Downing - and that news cut like a knife through this Evertonians heart. It's got nothing to do with whether I rate Downing or not, but the cold facts are that those across the park are strengthening their squad whilst we are wallowing and floundering in a cesspit of abject financial misery- And you know what - It bloody well hurts.
Alan Williams
22   Posted 14/07/2011 at 08:38:07

Report abuse

All so very, very boring and predictable. What a complete load of rubbish this article is. Plan B is what we need and we or the board don?t have one due to the poor cash revenues!!

If you sit back and look at us as a business, it's very clear we pass on too much to the players whist charging very little to watch the performance, it's so simple everybody is missing why we are where we are.

The fabric of the club is sound especially at youth level and work in the community, even finishing seventh isn?t a disaster, so just maybe some people need to accept that History means nothing and sadly we get what we pay for. COYB

Kieran Fitzgerald
23   Posted 14/07/2011 at 09:03:03

Report abuse

Gavin @ 20. I read a couple of months ago that City are only paying 3m a year in rent for the stadium to the local council or who ever owns it. At that rate, it would take them thirty or forty years to pay in rent what it would cost to build a new one. Unfortunately for the likes of Everton, that made them a lot more attractive to an investor as it saves the investor the cost of a fancy new stadium. As the stadium was built, I think, for the commonwealth games, you would presume it would have state of the art press boxes and fancy corporate boxes built in to it. Even more attractive for any investor as this meant better P.R and revenue generating facilities.

Also, and I appreciate that this makes me sound like a bitter Evertonian, guess who would get first refusal on a new stadium like the one in Manchester if it was built in Liverpool. Yep, the council would be falling over themselves to enter into a partnership with the RS. In fairness though, in the context of the article above, it would probably be as much to do with how the Liverpool Board manage things compared to our lot as it would be to do with the R.S being the media darlings of the country.
John Keating
24   Posted 14/07/2011 at 08:38:10

Report abuse

Dan. Just waiting for you - or someone else - to write an article refuting Colins' facts and balancing his arguement.
It's easy saying the article is boring make it less boring by answering his points.
By the way what are the mitigating circumstances to outright lies !!
Michael Evans
25   Posted 14/07/2011 at 09:05:45

Report abuse

Colin - very well written and informative.
David Thomas
26   Posted 14/07/2011 at 08:56:47

Report abuse

Hi Colin,

Good article you obviously have a lot of knowledge on the subject.

However, you mention an interim board should be installed to sell the club. In your opinion if this interim board was to come in do you think a multi millionaire / billionaire will come out of the shadows and suddenly buy the club or do you think one of the following two options is likely to happen:-

1) The interim board will run into the same problems as the current board as no individual / group with vast amounts of money, eg, like Chelsea's or Man City's owners, will come in and show any interest in the club, and we will end up with an interim board for the forseeable future.

2) We will end up with a conman who comes in and tells us all about their massive investment plans and then nothing ever materialises, eg, like the Birmingham or Blackburn owners.

I, like many others, am not happy with our current financial restrictions but, if I was a betting man, I would imagine one of the above two options is likely to occur rather than a rich benefactor coming in.
Tommy Coleman
27   Posted 14/07/2011 at 09:09:22

Report abuse

Kenwright's worst crime is his constant lying and his trying to pull the wool over Everton fan's eyes. I think he puts more effort into covering up than he does trying to improve the club. We all know he's useless, he should just hold his hands up to us and admit his mistakes.

These are not the acts of a fellow Evertonian with the fans at heart, these are the actions you'd expect from a lying politician who is about to lose an election.
Steve Sweeney
28   Posted 14/07/2011 at 08:38:57

Report abuse

Colin,
the truth will eventually out.
Bill Kenwright is what can only be described as a
charleton.

I have been castigated many times on this forum
because of my utter disgust at the way he has
managed his custodianship of our great football club.
However it still amazes me that some can still
come on and defend him.
My own view is that Philip Green has bankrolled him
in the hope that DK would go through and has now
discovered what a liar and fantasist he really is.
The result being that he wants his money back and I believe that this is the real reason why the club cannot
be sold.
I reiterate this is only a theory so PLEASE all the BK fans don't come on asking for proof.
But there has got to be a reason why one of the most successful teams in English football cannot be sold.
Oh I forgot something has to be for sale before it can be sold.
For Ian Ross to go onto Talksport, Kenwright must be
beginning to take all the unrest a little more seriously.
I just wish some of our ex players would start to
show some metal and tell it as it really is.
And no this topic isn't boring great article Colin
we must maintain this pressure on this failure of a board.
Look at what is happening to Murdock's empire
when the worm turns anything can happen.

Gareth Prytherch
29   Posted 14/07/2011 at 09:32:04

Report abuse

I have, in the past, asked for more balance from people posting on this site. I have looked for mitigation on behalf of Bill Kenwiright, and I still think there may well be some out there in the ether.

However, David Prentice's article helped me to clarify something that had been sitting in the back of my mind.

Interestingly, and paradoxically, at the very time that News Int were being rightly torn apart by all and sundry for their outrageous slimeball tactics to bring us NEWS? I realised that what I really want isn't balance it's honest answers.

The role of a free media is to uncover truth that is in the public interest, expose it and allow The People to make up their own minds.

We haven't had that for a long time. Why? I don't know but I don't think that Bill Kenwright has the power to silence the media as has been suggested. I do think it's possible that the media 'just don't care'.

I normally have my season ticket in my hand this time of year, I am normally looking forward to the start of the season but at this time I haven't renewed yet. At this time, I am gutted that I won't definitely be sitting in MY seat (I've had this one for 10 years) for the first game of the season but I don't see any other way of protesting other than not giving over my money in advance.

I will keep asking questions of Mr Prentice when he raises his lazy head. I will keep asking questions of people on here who purport to know 'The Truth'

Chris Matheson
30   Posted 14/07/2011 at 09:58:50

Report abuse

Colin this is a fantastic article. You have taken your time to analyse and codify the problems we face with our board.

Yes, we have heard much of it before, but the problem remains. That means we have to restate the objections yet again. And every time we do, a new failing occurs, the latest being the Park End fiasco.



No similar forensic exercise has ever been done in favour of Kenwright's tenure. I am not sure that any defence has ever been offered other than "he's a blue like us" and "he manages the club prudently" - which of course he does not, as our myriad of loans and mortgages proves.

Colin why not photocopy this article and distribute at Goodison before the match? I am sure there would be many volunteers to assist. I would.
Trevor Mackie
31   Posted 14/07/2011 at 09:36:27

Report abuse

dan @ 1

Appears to be putting the boot in about the OP's writing record with more than a whiff of personal vendetta - timewasting stuff that offers nothing.

Scales from peoples eyes are falling over Kenwright and co because outside the confines of this and similar sites there's a great swathe who have no idea about Billy and his incompetence - he's an Evertonian who came to the rescue and that's enough.

My dear old dad in his mid 70s is one such fan. I had to pick my words carefully when explaining the reasons why i don't support what's going on at Everton - it's just not in him to criticize people in charge of the club. We have loads of fans like him and Billy survives because of them - that's why we need the press reporting on what's going on - the more people find out, the less Billy's support.
Steve Sweeney
32   Posted 14/07/2011 at 10:22:44

Report abuse

Colin,
Would you mind if I bombarded the media with a copy of this article,
I will post on Blue Bills facebook page (how long will it stay ther?
Love em or hate em the gobshites would not put up with this situation.
SOMETHING SOMETIME MUST GIVE IF THE PRESSURE IS KEPT UP.
Gavin Ramejkis
33   Posted 14/07/2011 at 10:18:49

Report abuse

Shaun #21 the repercussions of the RS signing Downing are an even bigger slice mate, if for some bizarre reason Everton were able to find some money somewhere it's likely that N'Zogbia will now go to Villa to replace him and we'll be left with fuck all - I predict we'll sign nobody anyway.
Bob Skelton
34   Posted 14/07/2011 at 10:57:49

Report abuse

Gavin, I have to agree. I believe the only signings we will make will be Yakubu and Yobo, (like having a new players.....haha) neither of whom were wanted by Moyes or wanted to come back from their respected loan clubs.

Roll on the start of the new season....full of hope and optimism and the same old raggedy arsed Team
Robbie Riddal
35   Posted 14/07/2011 at 11:11:17

Report abuse

Dan Brierley #1 may as well have just replied: "Yeh, but you can prove anything with facts, can't you?"

One for any Stewart Lee fans there.
Tom Hughes
36   Posted 14/07/2011 at 11:15:23

Report abuse

Colin,
Another excellent article that sums up the indisputable facts, clearly and concisely. The ever-decreasing number of supporters of the board that post on here, have been skirting around all the issues for years, answering only with declarations of blind or misplaced faith........ It would seem your (as ever) well-researched summary has left them speechless..... is it any wonder? Has the penny finally dropped or have they just took their ball home?
Brian Waring
37   Posted 14/07/2011 at 11:27:17

Report abuse

I find it amazing that we have fans who still back BK to the hilt, even when the failings of the man are in front of them in black and white.



Anthony Jones
38   Posted 14/07/2011 at 11:13:26

Report abuse

Good article Colin, it could just do with a bit of tweaking and it would be really good.

"A decade ago commercial income represented 21% of total income; today it represents just 11%".

It represents 11% now surely because broadcasting revenue has increased dramatically?

I know certain other clubs do generate more of their revenue via commercial avenues (Deloitte), but I am sceptical about what is considered a commercial revenue stream at some clubs. As an aside, the OS seems pretty commercially aware to me, with its irritating movie ads and considerable charges for watching streamed friendlies.

With resepect to the balance sheet and current debt, does this situation not merely reflect all Premier League clubs that lack rich benefactors or a position as one of the Champions' League usual suspects?

I agree with the sentiment of the article, I just think some of these facts, as others have referred to them, lack context.





Steve Higham
39   Posted 14/07/2011 at 11:46:35

Report abuse

A great article which articulates what I and a lot more Evertonians are thinking. I think we are at a crossroads as a club at the moment. Within the last month there appears to be an awakening to what Kenwright has done to our once great club.

I take heart that what has happened to News Corp/Murdoch can happen to the likes of Kenwright/Green /Earle. This was the power of the people or rather in our case will be the power of the fans.

If we can keep the pressure on Kenwright via the media we might be on to something. Its good to see that the various groups appear to be gaining the ear of the media. What has been discussed on various Everton fan sites for some time is at last getting some national attention.
If we care about our club and want to build on our illustrious history I cannot understand why anyone can defend Kenwright and his board any longer.
It is now time for us fans to make our feelings known and this can only be done by voicing our discontent at Everton games and keeping the pressure on him via media outlets .
Tom Owen
40   Posted 14/07/2011 at 12:02:28

Report abuse

Great article colin and I think you will find that apart from a few detractors the majority of fans will imo agree with you whole heartedly, as do I!
Gavin Ramejkis
41   Posted 14/07/2011 at 12:33:54

Report abuse

Anthony I'm not sure how long ago but on another recent article certainly the last few months a link was posted about a broadsheet article (maybe Guardian or Telepgraph) showing each EPL teams income streams and debt levels, without that to hand I can't put exact figures to it but am pretty sure Everton's off field income generation was extremely poor in comparison with it's peers.
Gavin Ramejkis
42   Posted 14/07/2011 at 12:37:48

Report abuse

It was the Guardian. I think the figures must be from Deloitte:-

http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2011/may/19/football-club-accounts-debt

Pity there isn't a comparison table over last few years to trend it; some teams don't appear to show figures in many of the columns.

Peter Laing
43   Posted 14/07/2011 at 12:27:18

Report abuse

Fine article, Colin.

With the fact that the local media is running scared of the PR department at EFC, and the Liverpool Echo currently showing about as much teeth as a neutered poodle, the internet seems to be the only platform available for fans to mobilise. It reminds me of the tactics employed in a totalitarian states such as Iran; they are also seemingly scared of sources of information being shared that cannot be controlled. Bill Kenwright, Ian Ross and the Eveton PR machine displays Orwellian techniques of the grandest order.

Gavin Ramejkis
44   Posted 14/07/2011 at 12:45:12

Report abuse

Not sure where the Guardian got those figures as Cheslea must make more than £5m commercially
Dave Wilson
45   Posted 14/07/2011 at 13:39:51

Report abuse

Brian (#36):

I find it AMAZING that people are posting to say how AMAZED they are that people a still backing Kenwright to the hilt . . . . even though nobody on the entire thread appears to be backing him.

Enough of the hysteria; whilst not everybody dislikes Kenwright, support for him seems pretty thin on the ground.

David Thomas (#25) poses a couple of interesting questions though, I dont have any decent answers for him.

Anyone fancy having a go?
Gavin Ramejkis
46   Posted 14/07/2011 at 14:10:21

Report abuse

The million-dollar question, Dave(s), I think its very much dependent on the price for the club and what the true state of the books and debts truly are. Not changing won't add any value to the club, though, as the last 12 years has shown.

The old Lao Tzu quote of a thousand mile journey begins with a single step, Everton just need to take that first step in a different direction than the one they are stuck in now.
Dave Brooks
47   Posted 14/07/2011 at 14:14:32

Report abuse

No answers for David?s (#25) post, I?m afraid. Questions for Dan and Colin though?

Interesting article Colin, thank you. Not much, if anything that you haven?t posted before, but I always find your posts informative and thought provoking. You write well. You should have helped The People?s Group with their letter.

I can not agree with your sentiment when you say (#14) that you don?t care what is happening at other clubs. If Everton were in the shit but every other Premier League club?s shit was deeper, I ? personally ? would be relieved. It wouldn?t stop me wanting things to improve, but I don?t think comparing us to other clubs is a completely pointless exercise.

Dan (#1) cites record debt levels for all EPL clubs; you (#14) say that?s not the case.

Dan ? do you know that for a fact, or is it just a hunch?
Colin ? can you tell us which clubs don?t have record debt?

There?s so much opinion dressed up as fact on these forums?
James I'Anson
48   Posted 14/07/2011 at 14:12:37

Report abuse

Dave, with regard to the post from Dave thomas (25).

1- If the interim board was in place to find new owners I would imagine they would need to start with a selling price.
That in itself would be progress.

2- He could easily be talking about Bill Kenwright.
Jim Hourigan
49   Posted 14/07/2011 at 14:14:19

Report abuse

Before I comment I almost feel the need to state my blue alliegence before the bricks come hurling. I do not disagree with any of Colin's comments or indeed that of most of the other repondents; however, I think we are shying away from one very unpalatable truth ? we are just not big enough as a club to be of interest in the eyes of most of the media. Yes, our history is a fact and should afford us a degree of respect, but in reality, unless we are in the Champions League or winning trophies, we are a nobody for most of the media, a mere local issue that local press can deal with.

However wrong that might seem, it's how we are perceived. Our disgraceful performances at the start of the Premiership have left a residue of a small struggling club failing to achieve. For too many lazy journalists the glamour of the Champions League, their glitzy trips abroad, their reporting from the Camp Nou or the San Siro is of far greater personal interest than exposing the wrongdoings of a Chairman and a Board from a 'second rate' club ? not my belief but their views.

Colin and others, rightly point to the failures and lies of BK and the board but to expect the 'media' to take this issue on is sadly naive. I've been reading the Guardian for years about the phone hacking but were others interested? No, because it was seen as a 'local Guardian' issue with some jounos on their high horses ? nothing of interest until something happened

To have an impact, something has to happen to raise the media's interest. Moyes might have to come out and slate BK publically (likelihood?), the club might have to default on a loan, or a group of players come together to speak out; whatever it is, it has to be significant. One rebel reporter will not work and, when the Echo appears to be working glove in hand with BK, we don't even have that option.

So yes I want BK out, but do I think it likely and do I think writing to the press will work? No. By all means do something rather than nothing but perhaps we need to be more creative or subversive!!!
Dave Brooks
50   Posted 14/07/2011 at 15:00:39

Report abuse

Gavin (#43) -
The Swiss Rambler has Chelsea's commercial revenue at £56.3M for 2010.

http://swissramble.blogspot.com/search/label/Chelsea
Brendan McLaughlin
51   Posted 14/07/2011 at 14:57:49

Report abuse

Good to see the movers behind The Peoples Group who believe David Moyes "is doing an excellent job of keeping Everton in the top half of the table" described as "intelligent, articulate and tenacious." Almost makes being labelled an "apologist" something of a badge of honour.
Gavin Ramejkis
52   Posted 14/07/2011 at 15:26:28

Report abuse

Brendan he can infuriate the hell out you at times too surely?
Jay Harris
53   Posted 14/07/2011 at 17:35:30

Report abuse

Colin,
as always your statement is truthful and factful.

You clearly do speak for me and every other Evertonian I know and judging from the responses here the majority of posters too.

Dan# 1 The only thing that's boring is the continuous stream of lies out of Goodison, the lack of any new players every season despite a number of outgoing and the lack of any plan to take the club forward.
Ray Said
54   Posted 14/07/2011 at 17:52:28

Report abuse

As usual, a good article Colin.

You state that the' board of Everton FC are ineffective, insincere and simply can?t be trusted with the future of our club' and i for one agree.
The problem seems to me to to be 'how to identify a point where pressure can be exerted to bring about change'? I suggest that the other lot over the park had a clear point on which to exert this pressure-the banks that held the debt. Locating a similar point is the key step that needs to be taken. The problem is how to do this?
Using social media sites can be effective but its most effective when used against those who have something to lose. Identify those who stand to lose something by being associated with the shambles that can be demonstrated and that's where to put the pressure.
Andy Crooks
55   Posted 14/07/2011 at 18:50:29

Report abuse

Brendan, "intelligent, articulate and tenacious" qualities which have been attributed to the Reverend Ian Paisley. He's still alive and. as far as I'm aware, not employed. If Moyes were to go, well, he seems to have what you admire.
Dennis Stevens
56   Posted 14/07/2011 at 19:08:44

Report abuse

Incredible that the only defence offered so far is that our record levels of debt are necessary to secure top flight survival - I'd like to see that theory explained at Elland Road or Fratton Park!

The only argument against the departure of the current Board seems to be fear of the unknown - tbh I'm now more afraid of what we already know of the current Board's ability to run the club (perhaps that should be 'ruin'!). My only expectation of our Board is that they will hang on grimly in hope of DK Mk II, offering them the chance to attempt the exit strategy that failed them previously.
David Thomas
57   Posted 14/07/2011 at 19:11:43

Report abuse

James 48,

that does not really answer my questions though.

The board could say themsleves they want 50p, £10 million or £100 million etc that does not mean this rich benefactor is going to come in and move us forward simply because there is a value on the club. It could lead us to having an interim board for the next 10 years and that certainly is not going to help the club in any way.

Also,
some people may refer to Kenwright as a conman, thats their choice but as i said earlier we could be open to anyone investing in us if the interim boards agenda is simply to sell the club. Do you want Carson Yeung or the like in charge of everton?

I am all for moving the club forward and replacing the board if we had any inkling that there was someone out there showing a genuine interest, but unless they are invisible or Kenwright is holding a gun to their head stopping them from talking then it does not appear we would have many genuine people knocking down the clubs doors.
Ciarán McGlone
58   Posted 14/07/2011 at 19:54:52

Report abuse

Mr Wilson,

Support for the dark one is very much alive. Try some of the less, er, articulate sites.

The Everton struggle has become somewhat of a zombie flick.
Mike Gwyer
59   Posted 14/07/2011 at 20:53:27

Report abuse



Sean #8.

The Everton money issue is producing more propaganda than you can shake a stick at. So I, like everyone else, knows full well that we can't take what BK does not have.

But what I would like to know is, what BK takes, is it his?


Brendan McLaughlin
60   Posted 14/07/2011 at 21:00:03

Report abuse

Andy #55
Not to mention a pretty good record in Europe as well!!!
Nick Armitage
61   Posted 14/07/2011 at 21:39:50

Report abuse

Colin, I think just about every fan is sick of Kenwright. Perhaps your statement in response to Dan that, "people are just tired of being lied to and let down" is what will resonate most with the largest cross section of fans.

I am sick to the back teeth of the impasse this club has reached under Kenwright & Co, but unfortunately there is precisely jack shit that you or I can do about it.

An interim board is pure fantasy, why would someone who has retained control for so long allow a third party to run off and play with his train set. Peter Johnson has been lambasted for what he did to Everton, but Everton were in a far better position financially with him at the helm, and at least that man put money into Everton.

All I see from Kenwright is a man running on empty. He has spunked every opportunity that has been presented to him, asset stripped to improve cash flow and then lied to cover his ineptitude. His time will come, his tenure is becoming untenable.

People say be careful what you wish for, but I wish Kenwright would just fuck off and never come back.
Elaine Riding
62   Posted 14/07/2011 at 21:49:25

Report abuse

Right then, Im ready to be shot down here..
Johnson was a businessman who wanted to make money and on the whole didnt do too badly out of it all. Certainly no mega losses..
Kenwright is a self confessed fan who is relying on others investment and not personal capital.
If Johnson had a Moyes, where would we be ?
Playing in Europe at the Kings Dock by now.
Anyway, Im sick of the lot of it at the moment...
David Thomas
63   Posted 14/07/2011 at 21:57:46

Report abuse

Nick,

"Peter Johnson has been lambasted for what he did to Everton, but Everton were in a far better position financially with him at the helm, and at least that man put money into Everton."

It's just a shame it was not his own money and instead it was the banks.

Gavin Ramejkis
64   Posted 14/07/2011 at 21:57:28

Report abuse

BK would see the playing squad turn to shite by selling off what little we have left before risking defaulting on the banks so we probably won't be lucky enough to get a similar but smaller version of what happened to the RS.

David #57 it's been mentioned on this site before that the complex nature of the share allocation and requiring agreement from all the major shareholders before major sales of them can take place. The removal of AGMs puts another layer of smoke and mirrors on that process. It's highly likely that the shares Earl is labelled as holding which are held by BCR Sports were financed by Green so a large proportion of shares would need consent of BCR to be sold, any hidden debts will need to be resolved which may tie in to other shares (BK recently increased his shareholding - who paid for those?)

A catch 22 it may be but is doing nothing as complicit to the club's downfall as the current board's lack of action of the last decade and beyond?
Andy Crooks
65   Posted 14/07/2011 at 22:36:33

Report abuse

Brendan, excellent!!!.
David Thomas
66   Posted 14/07/2011 at 22:23:25

Report abuse

Gavin,

So in essence, are you suggesting that we do what Colin hints at ie get in an interim board and hope for the best that there is someone out there who has not shown his face yet but has a load of cash and the best interests of the club at heart?

I am not criticising you, obviously that is your view, but it is one all mighty risk to take.

In the last few years we have had fans saying why did we not get Lerner he would have been a great chairman for us. Yet this is the man that lost his manager because he would not invest in the playing staff and has sold Barry, Milner, Young and Downing and in return brought in Bent mainly.

If Kenwright was to have sanctioned the sales of Fellaini, Arteta, Jagielka and Baines and brought in Darren Bent he would be getting slated on this site. However, i have read many people praising Randy Lerner on this site.

Also, look at the likes of Yeung at Birmingham telling the world how they were going to give Mcleish £X to spend on players. How much have they spent? Where are they know and more importantly were is he now?

Look at the Blackburn owners saying we are after Ronaldinho and Beckham, who have they got and how much are they spending this summer they have just sold their best prospect for years.

Whilst i have stated that like many others are current predicament frustrates me i think this stance from many of anyone is better could lead us down a very slippery path.
Sean Patton
67   Posted 14/07/2011 at 22:31:11

Report abuse

Mike #58

As far as we are led to believe Kenwright takes no salary at least according to the latest club accounts anyhow. God knows what the truth is though as the information from the club heirarchy is non existant.

He just lives in his own dream world gawping at pictures of Dave Hickson in his office thinking the next phone call will be some investor who will write a cheque for 50M and want no say in how it is spent.

Everybody now sees through the soundbites and the rhetoric but he strikes me as a Swales/Ellis type of chairman clinging on to the bitter end he isnt going anywhere anytime soon.

At least there is a game on Friday a chance to watch some football again.

Oh and Gavin I didnt have you down as a Take That fan and before you ask I was working at Eastlands not watching.
Andy Crooks
68   Posted 14/07/2011 at 22:38:03

Report abuse

I have a strong feeling that the tide is turning. Thursday is my day off and I normally meet a few mates for a beer. Today. Paddy, a Celtic supporter, greeted me with the words"what the fucks happening at Everton?" A few other guys made similar comments. These are guys who have for years talked about how lucky we are to have Kenwright and Moyes.
Dennis Stevens
69   Posted 14/07/2011 at 22:41:03

Report abuse

David, I think we're already on that very slippery path. You don't seem to think it's worth trying to get off it, just in case it instead becomes more slippery. Isn't that a bit like having an incurable disease & deciding you won't risk some new cure just in case it instead hastens your demise, & you'd prefer just to hang on until the bitter end in the vain hope that a guaranteed cure emerges in time to save you? Board level changes would involve risk, but the current Board remaining in place also carries risks, there is no risk free way forward - such is life. However, with change we may at least see some renewed hope.
Colin Malone
70   Posted 14/07/2011 at 22:37:50

Report abuse

Colin.
Pardon my ignorance, can you tell me, do the board take a wage from the club?
Dennis Stevens
71   Posted 14/07/2011 at 22:52:47

Report abuse

Sean, I think you flatter Kenwright a tad with those comparisons. Didn't Ellis leave Aston Villa debt free & with Villa Park much redeveloped? I think the club may even have collected a couple of bits of silverware in his time as well.
Colin Fitzpatrick
72   Posted 14/07/2011 at 23:19:53

Report abuse

Colin #69,
No salary Colin, expenses yes, you'll find the details in the accounts under "other operating costs"

Steve #32
Bombard away fella!
Gavin Ramejkis
73   Posted 14/07/2011 at 23:37:03

Report abuse

David it is my view that doing nothing is the wrong direction to take, the board have had long enough to try to develop the business even if it meant speculative investment of their own money on things like ground development but in all instances the board appear to all intents and purposes to have done very little. THE DK hearings were pretty uncomfortable for the major shareholders having to admit via Elstone that they hadn't made any investment beyond their shares and that they are unwilling to dilute their shareholdings or spend any money to the benefit of it.

They are well within their rights as major shareholders to do as they please but when it's detrimental to the club then something should be done, would an interim board be any worse than what we currently have? It's hard to say and I've said before that change only guarantees change, the club can't continue as it is with an unsustainable business plan as I believe that would lead to an eventual drop down this league and exit from it, at that point the business would go to the wall as it can barely meet it's debt repayments with EPL membership.
Gavin Ramejkis
74   Posted 14/07/2011 at 23:44:12

Report abuse

Sean I went with the wife but did enjoy The Pet Shop Boys and Take That, I'll hold my hand up and say I was at their Circus concert at Old Trafford before that and saw Robbie in Dublin years ago and to show my age and invite some stick I was also at the Neil Diamond concert at the MEN Arena recently.
Colin Fitzpatrick
75   Posted 14/07/2011 at 23:19:53

Report abuse

Colin #69,
No salary Colin, expenses yes, you'll find the details in the accounts under "other operating costs"

Steve #32
Bombard away fella!
James Stewart
76   Posted 15/07/2011 at 00:07:48

Report abuse

Great article.

I have always said Kenwright is the only thing about the club that makes me embarrassed to be an Evertonian. I cringe everytime I see him speaking in the media. The board are a bunch of cronies and care nothing about the state of the club's plight.

Sadly many of the fans seem content for the status quo to continue. The failings of "Blue bill" et al in any other business would have been fatal and he would have been run out of town by his coat tails!

On a side note my sister is an actress and knows many people who have been in Kenwright's productions. None had a good word to say about him. He is known for trying to pay below equity minimum and has been for close to being equity blacklisted. Says it all about the man!
James Stewart
77   Posted 15/07/2011 at 00:07:48

Report abuse

Great article.

I have always said Kenwright is the only thing about the club that makes me embarrassed to be an Evertonian. I cringe everytime I see him speaking in the media. The board are a bunch of cronies and care nothing about the state of the club's plight.

Sadly many of the fans seem content for the status quo to continue. The failings of "Blue bill" et al in any other business would have been fatal and he would have been run out of town by his coat tails!

On a side note my sister is an actress and knows many people who have been in Kenwright's productions. None had a good word to say about him. He is known for trying to pay below equity minimum and has been for close to being equity blacklisted. Says it all about the man!
Colin Fitzpatrick
78   Posted 15/07/2011 at 00:08:23

Report abuse

Dave #47

You want two clubs that aren't in debt? Try Manchester City and Chelsea!!!
Colin Fitzpatrick
79   Posted 14/07/2011 at 23:19:53

Report abuse

Colin #69,
No salary Colin, expenses yes, you'll find the details in the accounts under "other operating costs".

Steve #32
Bombard away fella!
Thomas Williams
80   Posted 15/07/2011 at 00:37:32

Report abuse

Great article, couldn't fault any of it.
Paul Gladwell
81   Posted 15/07/2011 at 06:40:47

Report abuse

What these people defending Kenwrighr don't get is its not just about the lack of cash at the club, it is absolutley everything this board do they make a complete has of it.
I am off to the club shop today and will cringe at the sight of the hole in that wall just like I cringed when I saw that pink kit and many other shambloic decisions this baord has made, we are run like the dog and duck.
I am not after a rich Arab just someone who has some vision and can help us more forward slowly not backwards.
Gareth Humphreys
82   Posted 15/07/2011 at 07:04:57

Report abuse

Dave 47 - Try Stoke as well.
Steve Pugh
83   Posted 15/07/2011 at 08:08:54

Report abuse

The only thing needed for evil to triumph is for good men to sit back and do nothing.
Brian Waring
84   Posted 15/07/2011 at 09:24:18

Report abuse

Dave, why can't I be amazed that people are still backing him? Just because we hadn't had the usual suspects ( Up to my post ) telling us how lucky we are, does that mean I'm not entitled to say what I think on this thread ?
Paul Norman
85   Posted 15/07/2011 at 10:52:15

Report abuse

Lord Grantchester's parliamentary e-mail address is grantchesterj@parliament.uk. Perhaps someone should e-mail him to ask whether he has ever made a bid to buy out Kenwright and his chums, and if not, why he doesn't make a public bid to do so. Perhaps he (and his Mum) doesn't want to throw his family fortune at a football club where he is unlikely to see a financial return?
Dave Brooks
86   Posted 15/07/2011 at 11:16:11

Report abuse

Colin (#78) ? Thanks, but (and do correct me if I?m wrong) Chelsea appear to be, or are, debt free solely because their owner converted £710M debt to equity. To my mind that?s an exception and not the rule. As an aside, this could have been driven by fears of how financial fair play regulations might impact the club?s future in Europe.

Man City ? according to sources I trust ? had a net debt of £41M in October last year and owed an additional £81M to other clubs. Perhaps things have changed since. I don?t know.

Gareth (#82) ? Stoke is, I think, a better example (there seem to be a few others with shrinking debt) which proves Dan (#1)?s ?everyone has record debt? assertion wrong. Must have been a hunch after all, Dan.

On another point, while finance is not my subject, if people are going to criticise the EFC board and administration for not growing ? for example ? commercial revenue enough, it might be helpful to remember that some EPL clubs are seeing commercial revenue shrinking. Just to put the accusation in its real context.

I?m not disagreeing with you Colin. Just saying that ? in order for what you say to influence people outside this forum ? you have to have those kinds of facts at your fingertips. Citing Chelsea and City?s situations doesn?t necessarily make me feel outrage at how Everton is being run.

Still a good article though.
Gavin Ramejkis
87   Posted 15/07/2011 at 11:49:58

Report abuse

Dave the revenue may be shrinking now but hasn't been since 1992.
Dave Brooks
88   Posted 15/07/2011 at 11:57:19

Report abuse

Gavin - I took a look yesterday at account summaries for about a dozen EPL clubs (not the ones which I think are exceptional cases). I noticed that some have falling commercial revenues in the period 2005-10.

I just wanted to point out that while Everton's commercial revenue may have only risen by 30% in a decade, some other Premier League clubs have seen theirs actually fall (commercial revenue).

I don't know how you judge things, but this is the kind of point that helps me personally put Colin's argument into perspective (not discount it like Dan (#1) did - just understand it better). Also, when someone posts and includes information like that in their piece to provide balance, I trust them more in the future.

I mainly visit the site to learn so I need to ask these questions to know how much I can learn from Colin's posts. Makes sense?
James Greem
89   Posted 15/07/2011 at 12:10:22

Report abuse

Dave (88)

Nice bit of critique on the original article. This is what we need, people asking questions, looking at things from different angles and just generally polishing an already good piece of writing.

I'd just like to ask a question about the other clubs falling commercial revenue...where do we stand against similar 'sized' clubs to ourselves?
I havn't seen the figures so this could be way off mark, (maybe you could post them/a link?) but you say ours has risen 30% in a decade, what was the original figure and how does this compare again with the chosen clubs figures? My point is, if for example; in 2001 Villa had a commercal revenue of £100million and we 'only' had £10million, ours had scope for increase, however Villa's was already realised and therefore more likely to decrease than increase...

Keep up the good work people, remember this is OUR club no matter who owns it, as without them we are still Evertonians, but without us they are nothing!
Dave Brooks
90   Posted 15/07/2011 at 12:27:02

Report abuse

Thanks James. I can't speak for Colin, but I imagine if he wants to make a difference, criticism (constructive) is as helpful as support. I hope so, anyway.

I can't really provide you with the figures, unfortunately. But there is information out there. I think the Swiss Rambler has a good reputation and does a good job of unwrapping accounts in his various posts. I'd recommend anyone who wants a better understanding of football finance to visit his blog.

He's also one of the rare sources that provides figures over time... something that newspapers seem to find too complicated / unnecessary / ...

Having said all that, I've seen some very clear financial analysis in the past on toffeeweb. It's articles like Colin's that - to be honest - keep me coming back.
David Thomas
91   Posted 15/07/2011 at 12:47:47

Report abuse

With regards the interim board, can someone explain the following:-

Who sits on the board? I presume it is none of the current board as according to the majority on this site they are the reason for our current failures.

Who pays these peoples salaries, as i would be surprised if they would do the job for free?

Is there a set period that the interim board are in place for, or could they still be in place 10 years later if the club is not sold? Or do we replace them after a certain period of time with another interim board? This could be a very costly exercise.
Dennis Stevens
92   Posted 15/07/2011 at 12:36:01

Report abuse

Some interesting points there, Dave. With regard to commercial activities, as I recall we had a commercial operation that the club was apparently losing money on, incredibly. If memory serves, this was way back - maybe something that came to light in the wake of the Johnson take-over in the mid-nineties (?) However, it would possibly explain the appeal of all the out-sourcing under the current regime - it guarantees income & doesn't require the Board to divert their attention from their core business interests to try & run the club properly.

As a member of ESSCA, I was at one of the much maligned supporters club forum type evenings back in the spring, unfortunately Elstone couldn't be there, but the panel were open to any & all questions - even if they had to advise us that we might not like all the answers we received. When it came to the subject of the Kitbag deal, it was quite clear that the club feel they've done a good deal, one that others will be looking to copy. Whether that's the commercial reality or not I couldn't say, but there was no doubt about it being considered a landmark deal for the club. Of course, even if that perception is accurate, continually looking for the next, better deal or new untapped markets is essential to grow commercial income, rather like Moyes being judged on results, the commercial team are only as good as their last deal.
Steve Jones
93   Posted 15/07/2011 at 13:11:30

Report abuse

Its all very interesting and its great to see the litany of crimes foisted on us brought out for another airing... after all its been days since we saw all that rehashed and there must be at least one Evertonian somewhere that didn't know it all who's now fully clued up!. So well done on that score...

The problem, bottom line, isn't the board ? though they are all frigging clueless and wouldn't be missed if they all had nasty accidents ? the problem is that we are paying a near £60M wage bill off £78M annual turnover.

Short of dismissing the quality players in the side a new 'Interim' board will also have to fund a near £60M wage bill on the same sort of turnover. They will therefore have exactly the same problems as the current Muppet Show. Still, at least it will be different names on the repeated missives from Colin et al about how nothing and no-one is good enough.

Have fun shifting the deckchairs on the Titanic though, lads.
Dave Brooks
94   Posted 15/07/2011 at 14:00:16

Report abuse

Dennis ? I too know businesses that have loss making commercial activities, but only when those activities positively influence others which are profit making. I can see your point about outsourcing. Somebody smarter than me should tell us though if deals like Kitbag should see the payroll (non playing staff) falling and not rising as I think it currently is.

Steve Jones (#93) ? for what it?s worth I think you?re probably right about the wages being a big (if not ?the? big) problem.

Colin, and others ? is Steve wrong? What do you think new owners should do (and why (by that I mean why should they do it ? I?ve never understood posts that read ?one of the shareholders is rich, so he should buy us a striker?) to turn this situation around?
James Greem
95   Posted 15/07/2011 at 13:53:14

Report abuse

Cheers for that Steve (93)!

I guess, lets all do nothing and let our once great club fall apart piece by piece.

Infact one day I'll die, so I might as well get it over with now, save all the present hassle and be damned with the possible future success!

James Greem
96   Posted 15/07/2011 at 14:05:50

Report abuse

Although I'll give you some credit for bringing up the excessive wage issue- though surely thats a problem because of the board for letting it happen?
Steve Jones
97   Posted 15/07/2011 at 14:08:05

Report abuse

Let me say this before the usual pitchforks get brought out - the board could be catapulted into the Mersey for all I care.

Blaming them for the insane increase in player salaries in the Prem though is a touch unfair. Thats Sky's fault when they turned a sport into primetime TV entertainment.

The board can, of course, control the wage bill by getting rid of the high earning playing staff. You would suspect disquiet in the fanbase if they did that though. Especially given the massed whining over fringe players being loaned out last season!.

James Greem as I said pal be happy shifting the deckchairs. If you think you are achieving something well good for you mate. You just keep at it.
James Greem
98   Posted 15/07/2011 at 14:07:53

Report abuse

Dave (94),

I'd be happy with some form of business plan to start with, stopping this hand to mouth exsistance which has no place in the business world.

It seems as if all the directors seem to be doing is act as guarantors for more debt, surely it would be in the clubs best interests (do they care??) for them to actually loan them the money to pay off the existing debt at a lower rate of interest to what the banks are giving us...anyone have any reasons why this couldn't work?
Anthony Jones
99   Posted 15/07/2011 at 14:15:14

Report abuse

For anyone who wants a fairly balanced view of the situation, I would strongly recommend this...

http://swissramble.blogspot.com/search/label/Everton

Personally, I would conclude that

a. Kenwright is out of his depth
b. We have to pray for a looney to buy the club!
Dave Brooks
100   Posted 15/07/2011 at 14:24:42

Report abuse

James (#98) ? so would I.
Anthony ? that?s a good article imo. He does say, if I remember rightly, that Everton deserve someone more financially savvy than BK. He also says the business model?s bust. But that is BK?s business model I suppose?
Gavin Ramejkis
101   Posted 15/07/2011 at 14:24:46

Report abuse

Dave #88 a good response and would love someone with the time and energy to perhaps league table these sort of stats, as I replied to Anthony the other day it needs to be in context and most certainly over a good few years for some trend analysis to be visible. The swissrambler pieces certainly have more data on than the Guardian which had Chelsea's commercial activity as £5m when it was over considerably higher.

Dave #91 very key points, also who would be empowered to select them and what exactly would be their remit and mandated timeline to do so? As fans we aren't privvy to what goes on or have anything to do with this but the fans are voting with their feet already which is most definitely going to impact on gate receipts and cash flow.
Tom Hughes
102   Posted 15/07/2011 at 14:05:36

Report abuse

Steve Jones,
Cynical about the cynics eh? What a comfortable position that must be.

The point is.... there are still those who are oblivious to some of the facts (especially outside Evertonia), and even a few die-hards still pedelling a propagandist party-line that even the club wouldn't put their name to openly. Only after a concerted campaign as the mud begun to stick for some. Given the fact that so many have been able to blissfully sweep any of the individual misdemeanors under the carpet over the years, then perhaps it is only right to repeatedly reveal the full list of mishaps if only for maximum impact for those "hard of understanding". It's funny how any remnant of a pro-board stance was reduced to a whimper by the shear depth of Colin's article. As with any problem-solving process, ideas and solutions are often found via sifting through previous mistakes.... so it's not a bad starting point to make all stakeholders fully aware of where we are, and how we got here.

The set-up of the current board and ownership, and any internal politics that ties them together may in itself be the greatest hindrance to progress and change (as happened with Kings Dock for instance). Therefore an independent interim board that is not subservient to any individuals might be a good device to overcome that inertia, as happened over the park.
Steve Jones
103   Posted 15/07/2011 at 14:55:43

Report abuse

Tom,

You wonder whether it will be as equally valuable when someone else rattles out the same indictments tomorrow or....woe betide....the day after. Can you imagine going a day, an entire 24hrs, without someone trotting out the slights and ills inflicted upon us by the board....surely what true blue Everton supporter could imagine such a thing.

When was the last time you heard any genuine Everton fan say that the club is in a good position and that the board has done a fantastic job. Truth is that NO-ONE thinks we are in a good state of affairs because you would have to be missing opposable thumbs and a few necessary chromosomes to think that!.

The term preaching to the choir doesnt even come bloody close.

Great for a problem solving process needing to be informed by past mistakes. I agree absolutely with your statement there...but a problem solving process ends with a proposed solution. Colins piece doesn't....so its just one more whine against the background of pointless whining isnt it.

As to the Interim Board you talk of politics hindering us and holding us back. That new faces changed the score next door. Nuts. New money changed the score for the RS and they had to come within a whisker of bank forclosure to get that.

The simple fact is that we are at the extent of our present facilities in terms of revenue generation. Nothing short of new facilities or a benefactor will change things for us.

We are as open to takeover, friendly or hostile, as any Prem club has ever been. We dont need anyone advertising or touting the club for us. We are on TV screens globally every weekend of the English football season. Its blatantly, starkly obvious that the current board could not fight a takeover bid from a party with a plan to take the club forwards. That there has been no move by anyone to do so is simple proof that the new facilities we need represent too big a an investment risk for a commercial enterprise to undertake lightly.

Like I said though at least a interim board would give new institutional targets for Colin and the boys to take potshots at. Change is as good a a rest eh?.
Ciarán McGlone
104   Posted 15/07/2011 at 15:27:35

Report abuse

"I am not criticising you, obviously that is your view, but it is one all mighty risk to take."
--------------

No it's not. We are currently in the shit. The worst that can happen if we jettison the Board is that we, er... end up in the shit.

No risk. nada, zilch...

The 'Is that what you want, cos THAT'S WHAT'LL HAPPEN!' argument against changing the current regime ? is regressive, circular and infantile.

Try using your imagination and coming up with a defence that's a little more erudite.
David Thomas
105   Posted 15/07/2011 at 15:28:46

Report abuse

Tom,

So how does this interim board work:-

Who appoints / selects them?
Who pays for them?
How long do they have to sell the club?

Tom Hughes
106   Posted 15/07/2011 at 15:39:40

Report abuse

Steve,
I think you'll find that Colin and KEIOC and several other interested parties have been looking at solutions ever since they successfully argued against all the issues regarding DK, and even before that, but perhaps this particular horse won't be led. Unless you didn't notice there has been a recent increase in traffic on the whole subject area... not all from Colin's keyboard. You call it whining, I call it genuine and substantiated concern.
Dave Brooks
107   Posted 15/07/2011 at 15:52:12

Report abuse

Sorry to jump in here David (#104) and Tom?

Steve (#103) ? what you?re saying makes a lot of sense to me, but I think you?re being a little unfair on one or two points.

I don?t believe everyone knows the points that Colin outlined in the OP. I?ve visited this site pretty much on a daily basis for a little while now, and I?m regularly struck by how many times the same questions get asked, the same points raised, etc. even when they?ve been comprehensively covered in previous threads and no-one has anything new to add. Maybe someone?s actually learned something from this post and from the ?discussion? that follows it.

Also, you never know, maybe someone?s just about to come up with a plan (in this or a subsequent article), inspired by Colin?s post. OK ? that seems unlikely, but?

Finally, I think that with (hopefully) an update on Trust Everton imminent, the more we all discuss and know about Everton?s finances and current and potential future business models the better. If things are as hopeless as you say, I wouldn?t either want in, or to ?encourage them?.

Do any of the more regular contributors out there have ?a plan? that Steve could critique in more detail?

I know it?s lazy to ask but I?ve just got back on my bike, the Orvietto Classico?s getting cold, and the Alps need staring at?
Tom Hughes
108   Posted 15/07/2011 at 15:52:15

Report abuse

Dave,
I've not spoken to Colin about the idea.... so I'm not sure how it's all supposed to work. I assume it is something similar to that which broke LFC's stalemate.
David Thomas
109   Posted 15/07/2011 at 15:57:04

Report abuse

Fair enough, Tom.

Colin ? How does it work?
Anthony Jones
110   Posted 15/07/2011 at 15:43:35

Report abuse

Steve Jones ? well said. There are too many fans who seem to think that anyone who questions the practicalities/usefulness of forcing the board out are pro-Kenwright.

I'm sorry to say it but I think we may have missed the boat; i.e. the club had to be sold pre-financial crisis, when rich entrepreneurs were happy to take a punt on a Premier League club.

It wasn't sold. As the critics of the board are clearly aware, EFC's financial model isn't sustainable, and any buyer would have to plow a ton of money into the club to turn it around financially.

My only wish is for Kenwright to put the club up for sale for no more than the value of the majority shares (not a lot). If he were to do this and be willing to prove it in some way, I would be happy enough.

If not, then the answer is clearly for fans to stop going the game. Not bitching and whining. Just don't go. I don't, yet I have previously been labelled an apologist. Strange that.

Steve Jones
111   Posted 15/07/2011 at 16:39:27

Report abuse

"The worst that can happen if we jettison the Board is that we, er... end up in the shit"

Shit comes in different depths though doesn't it?

Ditch the board without a good replacement at least somewhere nearby being willing to take over and you create an opportunity for someone to move in and captialise on weakness.

Gaydamak
Shinawatra
Ridsdale
Ali Al-Faraj


....even someone like Randy Lerner who is the usual name that is trotted out by the 'change at any cost' brigade has just shown how concerned he is by the views of the fanbase at his club.

Change has to happen but it has to happen in a controlled manner, because, replacing a clueless board that has us in a shallow decline with a Wallter Mitty board that sees us facing a winding-up order is hardly taking us to the next level up is it? Going by the recent personalities involved with Prem clubs I think anyone suggesting that a power vacuum at the top levels of the club being a good thing isn't paying close enough attention.
David Thomas
112   Posted 15/07/2011 at 18:57:48

Report abuse

Steve Jones 111,

100% agree
Tom Hughes
113   Posted 15/07/2011 at 18:18:15

Report abuse

Steve Jones, I don't believe Colin is suggesting change for the sake of it at all. I also think that he has given the future "options" far more thought over the past few yrs than that suggested in your contribution of a few paragraphs here. Anyone who saw the depth and qualty of evidence that he brought together for the inquiry, that quite frankly swamped the clubs/tesco/knowsleys joint submission will know that he is very thorough and not content with merely whining. I'm afraid you are confusing an article put together in response to current media interest, to help illustrate the issues and promote further investigation as opposed to a full masterplan for the future. I can assure you that colin has done significantly more groundwork to try to find solutions to some of the issues that have hindered our club than. Merely placing a few articles on here. Using your Titanic analogy.....he spottedthe iceberg yrs ago and has been telling everyone.... it would seem some are listening now!
Dave Brooks
114   Posted 15/07/2011 at 19:00:30

Report abuse

Steve Jones (#111) -
Valid point.

I don't know about the rest of you, but when David Thomas (#109) asked Colin Fitzpatrick "How does it work", I had an hour of SQL problems with the site (multiple browsers).
Maybe that was - as they say around here - the killer question.

Maybe it doesn't.

Colin?

Have a nice evening everyone.
Tom Hughes
115   Posted 15/07/2011 at 18:18:15

Report abuse

Steve Jones, I don't believe Colin is suggesting change for the sake of it at all. I also think that he has given the future "options" far more thought over the past few yrs than that suggested in your contribution of a few paragraphs here. Anyone who saw the depth and qualty of evidence that he brought together for the inquiry, that quite frankly swamped the clubs/tesco/knowsleys joint submission will know that he is very thorough and not content with merely whining. I'm afraid you are confusing an article put together in response to current media interest, to help illustrate the issues and promote further investigation as opposed to a full masterplan for the future. I can assure you that colin has done significantly more groundwork to try to find solutions to some of the issues that have hindered our club than. Merely placing a few articles on here. Using your Titanic analogy.....he spottedthe iceberg yrs ago and has been telling everyone.... it would seem some are listening now!
Andy Crooks
116   Posted 15/07/2011 at 19:16:54

Report abuse

The posters on this thread know what they are talking about. The view of the club from the outside is still entirely different. We are seen as a prudently run club with a brilliant manager coping under difficult circumstances. These circumstances are not, and I was told by pals today, the fault of Mr Kenwright but are down to our chairman's prudence and careful custodianship.

The tide is turning but to the outside world Kenwright and Moyes are how it should be done.

Dave Brooks
117   Posted 15/07/2011 at 19:26:17

Report abuse

Andy (#116) - I'm sure you're right, and that's more than valid too. Perception is highly important.

Tom (#115) - I'm new around here and, as I've said, have always appreciated Colin's posts. But still, I'd like to know what the alternative is. If the alternative is - "I don't have one", I'd respect that. But I think, to answer Colin's more tenacious detractors, even that would be good to know.
Tom Hughes
118   Posted 15/07/2011 at 19:42:26

Report abuse

Dave,
I can't speak for colin....but IMO the basic alternative is to have a proper strategy to try to address some of the key issues that the current board havefor one reason or another failed to resolv time and time again. Before that can happen there are probably several other important hurdles to cross..... not least being clarification of share ownership and cost of purchase of a controlling stake etc. Perhaps when this is revealed interested parties will be more conspicuous. We have been told repeatedly (even by the club) that there have been interested parties in the past..... why have we never heard from any of these? And what has stopped progress of a sale? The recent request for better media investigation, for which this article forms a part is to gain access to this important information
Tom Hughes
119   Posted 15/07/2011 at 21:28:44

Report abuse

Colin won't thank me for telling you that the reason why he hasn't responded is he's in hospital having heart op..... he quite literally fits his ops in between meeting city planners and developers interested in EFC and stadia etc. The rest of the KEIOC lads are in the Directors Box at Bury with Elstone et al..... make of that what you will.
Brendan O'Doherty
120   Posted 16/07/2011 at 01:58:41

Report abuse

Elstone:

"The squeeze on money is harder than ever (this summer).

"Despite that, there isn't a day that goes by without the manager and chairman discussing players coming and, yes, players going."

He added: "Everybody is 'flat to the floor' looking for improvements, looking for money, looking for players."

FFS our worst fears confirmed; we'll have to sell to buy. And they are crawling around the floor looking for a few spare coppers. Has it really come to this ? Utterly disgraceful stuff.





Brendan O'Doherty
121   Posted 16/07/2011 at 02:41:43

Report abuse

Seems that the People's Group letter has begun to strike home..

http://www.mirrorfootball.co.uk/opinion/columnists/brian-reade/Brian-Reade-Everton-Bill-Kenwright-Frank-Lampard-groin-Christine-Bleakley-QPR-West-Ham-Neil-Warnock-Keiron-Dyer-article768944.html
Steve Jones
122   Posted 16/07/2011 at 08:54:18

Report abuse

Well that represents the last of the dirty linen being washed in public then. Least we'll know why we get derisory and disrespectful offers for our players going forwards.

Dave Brooks
123   Posted 16/07/2011 at 09:07:08

Report abuse

Colin - good luck with the op. I hope everything turns out OK for you.

Dave.
Gavin Ramejkis
124   Posted 15/07/2011 at 17:57:20

Report abuse

Steve, pointing out something a little obvious here but your "shallow decline" is a little rich. Did you by ancy chance go to the Bury game last night? Everton took four subs and played them, Beckford pulled up with a thigh injury and we had to play to the end of the game with ten men, Bury had more subs and continued to make them through to the end of the game. When a premier league team can't even take a decent sized squad to play a game is the time you have to realise how small it really is.
Dave Brooks
125   Posted 16/07/2011 at 10:12:26

Report abuse

A bit off-topic now, but since I?ve always be fascinated by people using ?Titanic? analogies?

Tom (#113) ?
It?s probably worth remembering that Titanic didn?t sink because it saw, or didn?t see, the iceberg.
It sank because of the manner in which it tried to avoid the berg.
Tom Hughes
126   Posted 16/07/2011 at 10:25:56

Report abuse

Dave,
I think heeding the signs and seeing the iceberg earlier renders avoiding it a formality. The club themselves admitted at the DK inquiry that their model was unsustainable...... they have been admitting it since long before that even..... yet there is still to be a discernable change of course. They have ploughed on regardless
Steve Jones
127   Posted 16/07/2011 at 09:57:41

Report abuse

Gavin,

No team with a lower wage bill finished above us last season. By any, objective, standard we are still punching above our weight and have young, quality, players in key positions all over the park. On the pitch then we are hardly relegation fodder are we?.

We can always flog off some of the top talent and draft in half a dozen castoffs from other clubs, like Sunderland are doing, that impress you would it?. Give us a few more subs and squad players?!. Certainly doesn't look very bright to me mate.

Simple fact that, like most of the Prem, we cant afford quality AND depth in the squad. Of the two I choose quality. I'd be astounded if anyone who knows a bit about the game would choose otherwise!.

Dave Brooks
128   Posted 16/07/2011 at 10:50:10

Report abuse

Tom -
Seems so, yes. I suppose I'm really just trying to say - with my analogy - that 'BK-out-at-any-price' (and I know that this is not necessarily what you're saying) might not be the best solution.
David Thomas
129   Posted 16/07/2011 at 12:09:46

Report abuse

"The rest of the KEIOC lads are in the Directors Box at Bury with Elstone et al..... make of that what you will."

Tom,

I presume they were not invited into the directors box by anybody acting on behalf of Everton? Because we have been told in the past that the club have dismissed groups such as KEIOC and not listened to them.
Tom Hughes
130   Posted 16/07/2011 at 12:10:38

Report abuse

Steve ? you are confusing Moyes's achievements with those of the Board.... The point is Sunderland's board can sanction several millions worth of transfers and we can't. This, and they have addressed all their stadium issues too. There are numerous others who have done similar.

Your postings so far suggest you are content with the status quo.

Dave Brooks
131   Posted 16/07/2011 at 12:37:48

Report abuse

Sunderland = Ellis Short = £95M cash injection. Might explain how they do it.
David Thomas
132   Posted 16/07/2011 at 12:55:37

Report abuse

Darren Bent sold for £24 million might have something to do with it as well.

Steve Jones
133   Posted 16/07/2011 at 14:18:56

Report abuse

As David Thomas says, Sunderland's buying spree is nothing to do with Ellis Short ? they have sold their young midfield prospect and one of their two best strikers for £44M combined.

They have sold to buy ? the thing that most of those here present are up in arms about should we do it!

Story is that they needed to pull down the wage bill as well... seems like some of the £44M is going in that direction. Little different to our situation ? except we are trying to keep our best talent and develop youth to back it up. I don't know about you... but I like our way better.

Tom,

No, I'm not. Moyes can only get results with the team he has. That team, dearth of substitutes and all, finished with the best position-to-wages ratio of any in the Prem last season... despite starting in January! No trophies for it... but it does show that the team is at least competetive.

If we sold Fellaini and Saha, our board would likely be able to collect a few unwanted defenders from Utd and pick up a couple of players jumping clear of relegated teams. Would they take us to the next level or even replace what we lost in terms of quality? In my opinion... no chance.

Content? Tom, when we have a new stadium, with decent event/hospitality facilities in a location where we can compete for non-football business, then I'll be content ? not before.

I'll be content then because we will have a steady, reliable, revenue stream that will let us keep in touch with the richer clubs and assure our future at the top of the game. All of these half-arsed witch-hunts and blame-games, theoretical Interim Boards and vitriolic protests do absolutely NOTHING to take us anywhere near a point where I would be content, so you'll forgive me if I take a pass on your little bandwagon!
Dave Brooks
134   Posted 16/07/2011 at 16:50:47

Report abuse

Steve ? Tom (#130) wasn't talking exclusively about a 'spending spree'. He said, "the point is Sunderland's board can sanction several millions worth of transfers and we can't... this, and they have addressed all their stadium issues too."

If £95M has nothing to do with the general positive aspects of Sunderland's position (assuming you agree that there are some), then it must have been a great party the day they drank it.
Tom Hughes
135   Posted 16/07/2011 at 17:06:02

Report abuse

Steve........ check out the net spends of clubs over the past 10yrs and the efforts made by tyhis board to bridge the gaps..... not to mention the complete failures to address..... it seems to me your not content but your more angry at the peoplewho are trying to protest than you are at the source of that discontent
Michael Kenrick
136   Posted 16/07/2011 at 17:15:15

Report abuse

David Thomas (#129) ? As I recall, soon after the demise of Destination Kirkby, it was KEIOC (working with the red bastards) who developed the Football Quarter concept and had a number of meetings with club staff.

I know you're trying to do your usual trick of casting doubt but conflating the poor relationship between KEIOC and the club pre-DK, with a somewhat improved relationship post-DK (at least regarding stadium issues), is a mistake, I believe.
David Thomas
137   Posted 16/07/2011 at 17:23:05

Report abuse

Michael,

I don't think that you could argue that on this website alone that Everton's board have been criticised for there apparent poor communication skills with fans representative bodies (whoever they maybe) before and after DK. Colin a member of KEIOC even states that the poor communication lines etc are still in place see below

"Avoiding probing questions by hiding behind hollow claims of shareholder and fan engagement through highly selective meetings won?t wash"

On this evidence i would be very surprised to hear that it was the everton board who invited KEIOC into the directors box? Hence my presumtion that it was another individual / group that invited them into the Directors box. Maybe Tom could clarify?

Michael, you state

"with a somewhat improved relationship post-DK (at least regarding stadium issues)". Maybe then they were in fact invited into the directors box by everton officials but on the strict basis that the only issues that could be discussed were stadium issue? Maybe Tom could clarify?
Dave Wilson
138   Posted 16/07/2011 at 17:25:03

Report abuse

I`m not sure thats what he`s doing Michael.

Many of us will have raised an eyebrow when reading Toms #119 statement.

Given Colins work I would be surprised to hear that he and BB had been chatting together over a few Kronenburgs. It would be terrific to think that is where we are now.

I`m not saying I think Colin would shirk the opportunity . .but I think Bill might

Steve Jones
139   Posted 16/07/2011 at 18:50:36

Report abuse

Dave Brooks134

"If £95M has nothing to do with the general positive aspects of Sunderland's position (assuming you agree that there are some), then it must have been a great party the day they drank it."

It seems £95mn isnt enough to stop you having to sell off one of your first choice strikers and one of your best hopes for building your future midfield around if you are Sunderland. Pray dear god we dont emulate them anytime soon!.


Tom Hughes 135

"Steve........ check out the net spends of clubs over the past 10yrs and the efforts made by tyhis board to bridge the gaps..... not to mention the complete failures to address..... it seems to me your not content but your more angry at the peoplewho are trying to protest than you are at the source of that discontent"

Tom net spend is useful if you are playing Top Trumps and thats about it. How can you have a big positive net spend when you have a hard limit on your wage bill and you are already at it?. Recently promoted and smaller teams can have big net spends because they are getting Sky money like they've barely dreamed of and a largely championship squad so they are starting from a lower point with their wage bill. Rich clubs can have a big positive net spend bcause they can pay to keep up big squads. Those of us with developed Premiership level squads, with the wage bill to go with it, dont quite have the same freedom to manouevre do we?.

I wouldn't say I was MORE angry with those who are trying to protest. What I really cant stand though is the laziness that seems to have settled in on a percentage of the fanbase - too many are bleating, about really easy to understand stuff like Stoke outspending us, without any clue of what is going on. Too many are brainlessly repeating the 'board out' mantra as if throwing them out, without guaranteed better replacements, is going to achieve anything at all. Too many are quite happy to sit on their arses and fling blame about as if that is going to move us an inch further forward. The board are witless wonders, have been for years, do we need to prove to them that the fans can be just as dense?.
Steve Jones
140   Posted 17/07/2011 at 00:15:37

Report abuse

Tom we've sold two significant players in the Moyes era (maybe 3 if you count Tommy Gravesen - I dont??) Rooney and Lescott..

Rooney had a snake of an agent whispering in his ear and Lescott saw petrodollars in front of his eyes. Rooney was sold in 2004 Lescott just a couple of seasons back. Two players who wanted to leave seperated by 5 years isnt the same as Sunderland flogging off a key striker and midfielder in consecutive windows to raise cash is it?.

Absolutely the Everton board would be poor on the boardroom achievement stakes. Then again though I dont think anyone is arguing otherwise.
Christine Foster
141   Posted 17/07/2011 at 01:07:57

Report abuse

Steve, I partly agree with you regarding the lack of thought going into a bland off-the-cuff comment that we should get rid of them, whoever 'them' are at that particular moment.

The problem is that what I believe has happened / is happening to our club is that we are turning INTO a selling club where it is acknowledged that the ONLY way we can fund our bank payments AND any new incoming transfers, is through selling other players. It's short-termism. Why? because to attract enough funds we have to sell what other clubs want, the good players we have, the ones we probably should be building around.

The result would be that David Moyes ends up with a revolving door, focused on each season rather than on building a team for the next 5 years.
Tom Hughes
142   Posted 16/07/2011 at 22:16:52

Report abuse

Steve, I'm on a stag do with occasional views of this on my phone. It's a trivial point but are you saying we are not a selling club who have had to sell players they should've been building teams around? If there was a top trumps category for footy club boardroom achievement... we would be bottom of the pile. No witch-hunt required... just fact!
Dave Brooks
143   Posted 17/07/2011 at 11:00:55

Report abuse

Steve (#139) -
While what is ostensibly a £95M gift to Sunderland doesn't guarantee success, I think it's been more than a nice-to-have for that club. That was the only point I was trying to make with my Ellis Short reference.

I agree more with your last paragraph, and you, and others, are doing a fair job of explaining really-easy-to-understand-stuff to those who don't. That - in itself - is useful.
Andrew Earlam
144   Posted 18/07/2011 at 12:02:24

Report abuse

Has anybody ever seen the London Evening Standard article that this This Is Money article referes to.

Quizzed on the part he played in the £27m sale of Rooney two seasons ago when the club was in dire financial straits, Green replied: 'I have no comment to make on that. That is none of your business.'

Green's involvement at Everton was first revealed by the Standard in the summer, but the retailer, who yesterday reported a slump in profits at his Arcadia High Street empire, has previously denied any interest, even telling the Daily Telegraph this week: 'It's nothing to do with me.'

Read more: http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/markets/article-1603795/Green-at-heart-of-Everton-battle.html#ixzz1SSCjpyMk
Ted Wardell
145   Posted 19/07/2011 at 06:12:32

Report abuse

Our Great Club are already in a financial mess and on the pitch we have a lot of players in the twilight of their careers with no money to be invested. We do have a good academy system but, as we all know, very few will come through; without investment, the long-term future for this Great Club is indeed very bleak & very worrying.
Ray Burns
146   Posted 19/07/2011 at 17:14:16

Report abuse

Colin,
Please can you advise me what your groups plan of actions are for the future?
KEIOC seem to be going around in circles, instead of going forward.
Dont you feel the way of many Everton supporters that trying to boycott either, anything to do with Phillip Green or Kenwright & co is the way forward, or even at these friendlies forthcoming locally to drum up support rather than doing it during the season.
Something needs to be done now!!! i can only appreciate your groups work, but do you not feel its now going stale.
And would it not be benefitial to join forces with the Peoples Group, and help them ?

Add Your Comments

In order to post a comment to Column articles, you need to be logged in as a registered user of the site.

Log in now

Or Sign up as a ToffeeWeb Member — it's free, takes just a few minutes and will allow you to post your comments on articles and MailBag submissions across the site.



© ToffeeWeb

ToffeeWeb Site Survey

We're looking for your honest thoughts on the website in a brief survey – the good, the bad and everything in between. As an incentive, we're putting all respondents into a draw to win £100.
Go here to take part


Latest News

Online Football Betting with Betway

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



Recent Articles





Talking Points & General Forum

Pinned Links

OK

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