Season 2011-12 Fan Articles

The Blue Union Tightrope

Risking Hurting the Club You Love

In recent months the attention of many fans has been focused as much on the Directors Box as on the field. Sitting up there, many fans believe, is the source of all our problems. Billy Liar. Kenwrong, Billy the Bullshitter... If only he would let go of his death-like grip on the club he loves, for the sake of the club he loves, the journey down the road to recovery could begin.

It is true that our chairman is like the leader of a nation who has been in the job too long. Hailed as a hero at the start, he has lost credibility and momentum as commitments, such as his two stadium projects and fresh capital injections. all come to nothing. We face stagnation and certainly need new leadership and fresh inspiration in the boardroom ? and on the field ? and, hand-in-hand with that, we need significant new investment. Most fans would agree on that.

But there is also a disturbing, vituperative aspect to the opposition to Bill Kenwright. The Blue Union has become so committed to Kenwright?s downfall that I wonder sometimes if there are those who would be disappointed if success on the field ? in the FA Cup for example ? took the pressure off him. This is the tightrope you walk when you fanatically love the club but fanatically despise its owners.

The Blue Union is popular because it embodies the fans' rage. We want change. The Blue Union calls for change. Demands change. But when you look beyond the slogans, it seems to me the policies are flawed.

Recently in a post I characterized the Blue Union?s policy as untenable and potentially detrimental to the club. I summarized it as follows:

'The BU proposal is for Kenwright to step aside and for a third party to be nominated to negotiate the sale of the club. This third party is then supposed to offer the club for sale at a price far lower than its true value? The buyer is then supposed to put the cost of a stadium in escrow for five years until a stadium is built.'

That summary was met with a barrage of shrill complaint. The Editor was sceptical and asked to know where that comes from. Another poster demanded that all future posts from me be sub-headed, 'This is Bullshit'

It was so fractious that I double checked. The Blue Union?s own updated newsletter says:

'The Blue Union has expressed concern over the suitability of the current chairman and the board to conduct the sale process?'

And Dave Kelly called in an interview for a 'fully autonomous group of professional individuals' (to be) 'brought in to expedite the sale of the club.'

Back to the newsletter which says, 'Controversially we will campaign for the club to be sold for the value of its debt.' This is, of course, far below the rumoured £150M valuation Kenwright has placed on the club and also far below the likely actual market value of the club based on its revenue, assets and secure position in the world?s most lucrative league.

The newsletter also says: 'We propose that a prospective owner deposit a sum of money into an escrow account, or trust, that will be sufficient to fund? the development of the stadium over a five-year period.'

Those are the proposals in BU's own words. First, when an outside entity is brought in to handle a sale it?s usually because a court has ordered it for a variety of reasons, none of which apply here. That doesn?t mean Kenwright couldn?t use some expert help, but my understanding is that Blue Union wants him to hand over the actual executive responsibility for the sale to a third party, with full powers, as expressed by Dave Kelly. There?s no reason why Kenwright would agree to watch Everton sold out from under him with no say in the result.

Secondly, I would love to know why any major shareholder would agree to sell the club?s shares at significantly less than their real market value. Sometimes, Sir Jack Hayward selling Wolves for a nominal ten quid is mentioned. He bought Wolves after its bankruptcy for less than Spurs paid us for Steve Pienaar and sank £70M of his own money ? and still could only manage a single season in the top flight in 17 years. His sale was altruistic, no question... but there was also open warfare going on in his family at the time and still is, and at 80, he was concerned about keeping Wolves out of the hands of his beneficiaries.

The reality is that Kenwright has a legal responsibility to Everton shareholders ? not fans ? not to do something like that. If he did, he could be sued by the other shareholders ? as indeed Hayward was by his relatives and the litigation is still going on. Further, if the valuation of Everton actually sank to the low level where Blue Union places it, creditors might be entitled to call in some if not all of their loans and put the club into administration.

Thirdly, the demand that a buyer put enough money to fund a stadium development within five years in escrow seems ludicrously onerous on a prospective buyer. We are talking £150M, £200M or more. Why would a buyer tie up that much liquidity for a significant period? Why would we want him to when that money should be used to invest in building the team. I can?t think of a single major building project, let alone something the size of a stadium, fully financed with cash up front like that.

A deal has to be good for all parties; the deal Blue Union proposes isn?t good for either the seller or the buyer.

The Blue Union states its commitment to take its campaign beyond the streets around Goodison ??to the FA and the government to focus on the questionable ownership structure at Everton. We?ll take the campaign to the sponsors and the partners, we?ll take the campaign to the club?s bank and? we?re even prepared to take the campaign to prospective owners.?

I cannot imagine anything more potentially damaging to the club or to the motivation of a prospective buyer than the spectre of an FA investigation, a government probe into ?questionable ownership?, unnerved creditors, and scared-away sponsors. I thought Kenwright was OTT when he talked of Blue Union?s ?betrayal? but perhaps that scenario is what he was thinking of...

The fact is that, while there is a real crisis on the field and a genuine and urgent need to find new investment, the constant drumbeat of imminent crisis, the insistence that we are close to administration, the implication that significant sums are unaccounted for and all the other accusations of financial mismanagement are very dangerous and have the ring of self-fulfilling prophesy. Not only could a potential signing be turned off, but one sponsor, one jittery creditor, could start a disastrous avalanche.

There may be straightforward answers to these issues, but one of the most disappointing aspects of Blue Union?s behavior is the total inability to discuss such matters without invective and rancour. It makes the Kirkby debate seem friendly. Anyone who dares to disagree with a Blue Union apparatchik ? or even asks fundamental questions ? is usually shouted down and vilified. The last time I disagreed with someone on a thread about Blue Union, there was a tsunami of abuse, name-calling, accusations and venom including one post suggesting that I should take a potentially fatal dose of an over-the-counter drug. Frankly, that?s not the level of argument I hope for from people who have, for better or worse, the power to have a significant impact on Everton FC.

If you love this club?.

Reader Comments (108)

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

About these ads