You're making the mistake of assuming that his public inquiry is mostly about Everton, Kevin, when in fact the biggest reason why Destination Kirkby was called in in the first place is because of the massive scale of the retail element of the scheme. If it were a foregone conclusion, it wouldn't have even been called in for inquiry.

Secondly, the inquiry isn't a "debate" being staged by Everton. They are being required to state their case to the inquiry but, again, the stadium aspect while crucial to justifying the scale of the project as a whole is not the reason for the inquiry and it's expected that from here on out the retail part will be the main focus.

After hearing the comments from the public enquiry yesterday, it gave me final confirmation of the total ineptitude of our Board of Directors, namely Bill Kenwright, John Woods, Robert Earl and Sir Phillip Carter. It was confirmed when Robert Elstone was asked directly, "had any members of the current board invested any money into the club ?" to which the reply was NO! So there you have it, officially. No-one has put a bloody penny into Everton.

So, if someone in future writes an anti-Kenwright article, there can be no defence from anybody with regard to the usual retorts of "we broke our transfer record 3 times because of Bill, Robert Earl got us Yakubu, etc..."

For all the good the current board members have done us, you and I might as well have been board members! (At least we support Everton.)

The whole Kirkby debacle is a bloody pantomine and it gets more embarrassing every day, as Elstone seems to revel in telling all and sundry how shit Goodison is. You couldn't make it up!

Is there any other kind of theatre than the "staged" kind? Telephone theatre, perhaps? Or bathtime theatre?

It has to be said, Everton?s team of Robert Elstone, Chris Potts and David Keirle delivered a credible performance. Theatrical? Yes it is theatre, the barristers, and both sides have QCs and associated barristers that are masters of their craft, do deliver quite a bit of stage-managed material, it?s simply the game.

The past two weeks or so, many felt that that the opponents had won the day, the pendulum, inevitably, swung back the other way in the last couple of days as the barristers found it difficult questioning Everton?s team on their own territory ? that?s not to say that they didn?t score a few points to add to their tally. But, at the end of the day, Everton were never going to admit that there are viable alternatives or that the new stadium wouldn?t deliver increased revenue.

So in some respects, yes, it?s a foregone conclusion but there?s a long way to go. Next week they?ll be back on firmer ground when the CEO of Knowsley presents her evidence, think there?ll be one or two revelations that they?d rather not emerge.

Bill
’Operating theatre’? ’Theatre of War’? A song by the Pet Shop Boys? Are we playing ’Catchphrase’? if so, you lose!

Colin - chin up - remember, the inquiry is about the retail! And the ’not invested a single penny’ quote is worth its weight in gold.

I work as a planner, if a project gets called in for public inquiry, it is generally screwed.

Everton PR department are working overtime to try and sell the concept to whoever is listening. Having read the details of most days, I?d have to say Everton has done a good job in arguing for the development.

THOUGHT THIS WAS A GEM TOO:

Mr Lancaster then referred to a document presented as evidence suggesting the major shareholders had no intention of selling their interest in the Club.

Mr Elstone pointed out that selling shares would not raise funds to build a new stadium. Mr Lancaster then cited a comment from Bill Kenwright at the recent EGM suggesting he would be willing to sell his shares to a billionaire.

Mr Lancaster suggested corporate finance house Seymour-Pierce have been instructed by Mr Kenwright to sell the Club. Mr Elstone pointed out that wasn?t the case and nor was it the case they had been instructed by the Club.

Who gives a flying monkey? You crashing bores....

Everton will be Everton always wherever they play. Goodison has served us well but the old lady needs to be seeing out her final days in a retirement home.

I just can?t help, as with most things regarding Everton, that I?m going to be devastated in the end with regard to this sorry saga. It seems someone somewhere is in to make a fat load of cash... but I'll tell you what, guys, Everton will end up no better off for it. Brian, you have been fooled by Neil Pearse and all the other Kenwright mugs.

ALL - For the record. The only reason this was pulled in for a public inquiry was beacause of corruption and back-handers. I can confirm if needed.

I know where you?re coming from Kevin ? and I am every bit as bleak as you in my outlook right now ? but I am grateful that the events of the Kirkby Inquiry, whether theatrical or not, are being faithfully and diligently recorded. The full historical significance of these records will only truly emerge in, say, a decade or so once the effects of the move to Kirkby ? or the failure to (laugh) ? have been played out.

For instance, one of the best pieces ever on TW was David Kennedy?s and Michael Collins? academic paper "Community Politics in Liverpool and the Governance of Professional Football in the Late 19th Century", which drew heavily on source material from the age to record the finer details of aspects of Everton?s split from Anfield. It?s only thanks to the faithful recorders of the time that David and Michael were able to script their study.

I expect in a decade or two there may well be similar analyses detailing how one of Britain?s greatest sporting institutions either lost its soul or saved itself from oblivion by moving to Kirkby or avoiding the move to Kirkby (flip the coin and take your pick) and it will be thanks to contemporary records like those on TW that tomorrow?s scrutineers will be able to deliver their historical verdict.

Generally, though, I share your view that I can barely cope with reading another word about the Kirkby Inquiry because it?s just all too real (maybe I just thought it would never get this far) and I?m having to restrain myself on a daily basis from taking a hammer to my laptop.

But read it all I do. Because when it comes to it, I?d sooner know what?s going on ? however angry it makes me ? than not.

Try and stay positive Kev (who am I trying to convince, me or you?), there may yet be a miracle and we may yet escape what you correctly describe as an "unimaginative, uninspiring, generic and anonymous looking stadium, in an instantly forgettable backwater."

Theatre or not, KEIOC placed a lot of their chips on ?proving? that Everton had other options besides Kirkby. In this, they have failed miserably. Even Colin Fitzpatrick acknowledges this.

It is now down to Tesco and Knowlsey to win their sides of the argument, and the deal is as good as done.

I was at Anfield cemetry on Wednesday for my cousin's funeral. I got out of the car and looked across Stanley Park at Goodison and Anfield. What a massive mistake it will be to move from our home and our proximity to LFC. The two club's histories and fans are inter-twined in a way that is unique in world football.

No to Kirkby.

Perry Paul Jamieson - Rest in Peace. See you on the other side.

?Brian Wolf? - You begin your post by calling... well... everyone ?crashing bores? for giving their opinion.

Then you give your... um... opinion (?)

Which is the illuminating... "Everton will be Everton always wherever they play. Goodison has served us well but the old lady needs to be seeing out her final days in a retirement home."

Fact: Everton will NOT be Everton ?wherever they play?, just as Wimbledon and the Brooklyn Dodgers stopped being themselves when they moved to other towns. Yes, I know, there?s a difference in distance, blah blah - but the key word (YOURS!) is ?wherever?.

By the way, could I ask Michael for a ruling ? is ?crashing prick? (crashing nob-head/crashing idiot etc) acceptable?

I?m just trying to figure out if placing the word ?crashing? before an insult, is some sort of accepted TW posters get-out that I wasn?t aware of.

A kind of ?Simon-Says? type... thing.

Whilst Wyness was still intimating that the Club were bound by the exclusivity agreement right up to the time of his ?resignation?, the Inquiry has now established that it ended in July 2007. The ACEO has also confirmed that NONE of the conrtrolling Directors has ever put a penny into the Club, neither have they instructed Seymour Pearce to dispose of their shares.

Just three more pieces of evidence that Billy Blue & Co dissemble about everything they tell us species. In that respect, the Inquiry has done us a favour in getting near to the truth of what a mess the Club is in.

Does anyone really believe that the Government will turn down the opportunity of outside investment in a rundown backwater of Liverpool with regeneration and millions to boot on offer? It's a forgone conclususion. Kirkby may not be ideal, but there will be many clubs who would love to be in bed with Tescos investment in their new ground.

Once the inquiry is over, I think the majority of fans will be licking their lips over the thought of a new ground, as the focus changes. The majority of fans wanted it as per voting, the Manager wants it, the Chairman wants it, so you'd better get used to it, its gonna happen.

Steve McWhortle,

In your excitement you?ve gotten all confused; at this stage of the Inquiry, it is not upto KEIOC or any other objector to ?prove? anything. That falls only on the applicant.

In order for the Inspector to give significant weight to any of the club?s claims, Everton FC will have been expected to submit substantiated evidence.

It is after the Xmas/New Year break when the objectors will put their own proof of evidence forward.

But the objectors really do have to come up with a viable alternative ? and we know that redeveloping Goodison is a non-starter. Any suggestion must include something of added value such as retail development.

Brian, would it be the same Everton on the banks of the Royal Blue Mersey in Dixie's hotbed blue town?

Why is redeloping Goodison a non-starter? What would £78M buy us? Money incidentally that BK has no intention of paying back. He's put as much money into Everton as you and I and like you and I will pay back only with what he spends on match days. What's wrong with staged redevelopment? I ask you again what would £78M buy?

The only advantage that Kirkby has over Goodison is in The Stranded effect, ie, in the middle of nowhere with nowhere to park your car other than in Blue Bill's car parks... Blue Bill?s Chang, Blue Bill?s pies, etc etc. And by the time you're all fed up with it, he will have cut and run. This, after him investing no more than you and I. Bet he leaves with a bigger return on the price of his seat than I do.

Dave, I think you need to get your terms right: you’re confusing ’investment’ with ’donation’. I know for a fact that Bill Kenwright has invested millions in Everton Football Club. He purchased shares in the club, partly with the expectation that, when the time comes to sell those shares, he will get some additional return ? that is an investment. It could have been in any business, but in this instance it is in Everton FC.

What you ? and what many fans ? seem to look for is a donation of money from the owner into the club, to pay for new players especially. But even Abramovich does not do that. Interest-free loans might be considered some sort of donation, but they are not investments. What the owners of Everton have to do instead is obtain loans and hope to pay the interest on the back of increased revenues. They simply don’t have the ready cash you think they do.... and if they did, the last thing they would do with it is donate it to EFC.

EJ asks:
By the way, could I ask Michael for a ruling ? is ?crashing prick? (crashing nob-head/crashing idiot etc) acceptable?

The insidious and veiled insults, the snidey put-downs have been creeping back in from some of our regulars, Dave Wilson and Cairan McGlone seemingly unable to discuss anything without invoking their particular brand... Pack it in, folks, please.

Rich, you again call me a "Kenwright mug". Why? I have supported Kirkby as the best of what I see as a number of basically poor options (given our financial position), and I have repeatedly stated that Kenwright needs to go and be replaced by a richer owner. For God?s sakes, part of my support for Kirkby is in the hope that this will enable Kenwright to be replaced by a richer and more commercially capable owner.

One of the real shames of the Kirkby debate is that the issues always get completely personalised. It seems you can?t support Kirkby without being some sort of Kenwright luvvie. But this is not about Bill Kenwright, it is about what is best for the future of the club.

And by the way, Rich, if you can explain who and how is going to make a lot of money out of Kirkby, that really would be great. I?ve probably asked you a dozen times, but I am still waiting. Terry Leahy perhaps?

Please don?t say: Bill will, because his shares would be worth more. That?s too boring. The only reason his shares would be worth more would be that some buyer thought that Kirkby made the club more financially valuable ? i.e. that would make Kirkby a ?good thing? for the club. You are insinuating that Bill and others will somehow be siphoning money off the Kirkby deal. Care to explain?

Neil, your support for Kirkby as an enabler for EFC is admirable, I fully understand your perspectives as you should fully understand others. The fact is we are dealing with two real issues.

1. Is moving to Kirkby a good move for the club?
2. Is moving to Kirkby the prime motivation for the directors of the club over and above any answer to question 1?

You (once again) state the question as to who will benefit from a move to kirkby. Again, refer to questions above.

If the present Directors made a commitment to stay at the club, not sell their shares for let's say, 5 years... one could not question their motives for the move as being financially beneficial to them personally ? other than an investment being as part of the success of the club.

However, if the Directors have made it clear they want to sell on the back of a new ground in Kirkby asap, either before it's built or immediately after, then they are choosing to take any money that's on offer, irrespective of the fact that its success as a location would be in doubt.

The value of the club would (as has been stated in the inquiry) be increased with the £52M "subsidy". We have already seen in the press the figures of £200M plus as a sale price for the club. So, before you ask again, who is going to buy at that price, look at Man City: who would think they were worth the money?

It is therefore REASONABLE to assume that such a ballpark figure would result for any sale of EFC. In doing so, the personal value of shares held accordingly would rise, way beyond the level paid.

I am not against anyone including Bill making a good return on an investment, but if that investment means we are consigned to an out-of-town site, loss of tradition etc, then one has to question the motive of those selling because it will be the supporters for a lifetime that will pick up the true tab.

The Directors of EFC are not doing anything illegal and are in fact making the best decisions as they see fit. But to whom does it benefit most? The club or the Directors?

Whether or not Kirkby is viable, successful, or commercially sensible, is actually another debate. The fact is it's not wanted or not the best choice for so many, and the motives (drivers behind the push to make it happen) are therefore questionable and open to debate.

You make a good point, Christine. I wonder if we asked Neil this question, could he answer it directly?

Neil, if the club would be valued at ~£200M when sold with a positive decision on Destination Kirkby, would it not be unreasonable to assume that the value of the club without such a decision (and therefore without the £52M "subsidy") would be considerably less than £150M?? Probably a lot closer to the £80M / £120M figure bandied around in the press?

I hope your answer is "Yes", but I?m sure I?m missing something. But carrying this to the next logical step, if you were a major shareholder in Everton FC Co Ltd, under which of those two scenarios would you prefer to cash in your shares? And why?

Fair point Michael but I think he will do ok out of his investment though I?m not sure Everton will. What's more, I think Bill knows this. I?m not so clever but then again I?m not sure you need to be in order to see just how wrong this move will be.

To Neil Adderley,

No excitement here, just the view that the cross-examination of Messrs Elstone, Potts and Kierle did NOT go as well as KEIOC would have liked.

And you are quite correct. KEIOC LCC etc will be on the stand in the New Year to present their evidence ? and if any new points/evidence are raised, Tesco?s, Everton FC?s and Knowsley?s representatives are empowered with the right of reply. The club will have possession of the ?proof of evidence? documents submitted; they will be in the hands of the club and Tesco etc on the 18th of December.

So no rabbits can be pulled out of hats!

Spot on. Any fool who voted for Kirkby is like a turkey voting for christmas.
If this suicide goes ahead, Kenwright will go down in history as the absentee landlord who killed Everton FC. Does it matter where we play? The clues in the fucking name for anyone who issues this hogwash.