Many of the articles on here, although all very well written, really rile me as I read them. Far too many people present opinions as facts and far too many people attempt to interpret information, quotes and rumours to suit their own purposes. I'm not going to implore others to vote one way or another; I'm not going to quote spurious facts; I'm not going to predict what will happen if the vote goes one way or another... I'm just going to say things as I see them, issue by issue.
Before that, however, I will nail my colours to the mast and state that I will be voting to move to Kirkby and have not found it a difficult decision to come to.
Issue One: Moving out of Liverpool
To me,this argument is nonsense. For all intents and purposes, Kirkby is in Liverpool. So is Bootle, Huyton, Aintree and Maghull. As far as I'm concerned, suggesting otherwise is petty. I work in Kirkby and have many friends there and have never once heard anyone say they live in Knowlsey as opposed to Liverpool. Knowsley, Sefton and the City of Liverpool are merely glorified council wards and mean nothing to anyone other than politicians. Indeed, the three councils are to merge to form the Liverpool City Region in the next couple of years.
Some people have commented that moving out of Liverpool is the equaivalent 'doing a Wimbledon'. Comments like this make me want to bang my head against a wall in sheer disgust. To me, the area into which Everton could realistically move is common sensical, not political. Kirkby is within that area, whereas somewhere like Speke (which is in the City of Liverpool) is not. To suggest that if we move to Kirkby we may as well move to somewhere like St Helens is just ignorant and patronising.
A City Centre stadium is what I would want in an ideal world but this looks inceasingly unlikely to come into fruition. Kirkby makes sense to me and to the Board and gets a thumbs up as it ticks every box other than the bonus box of being in the city centre.
Issue Two: There is no alternative / Plan B
Of course there are alternatives. Dozens of them I would suggest. It's just that we don't have the money to explore these options at present. Keith Wyness was wrong to suggest that there is no plan B, surely the plan B is to stay at Goodison as it is? The ground is not imminently going to collapse and the Club will not wither and die if we stay. It will however be inconvenient in terms of trying to generate much-needed increased revenue and for that reason I think it is essential that we do build a new stadium.
Liverpool City Council have been incredibly unhelpful in our search for a new ground and have only acted when a public backlash was threatened. The Loop site is interesting and it is a shame that the mini-proposal has come so late in the day. I don't think, however, that the Club should be criticised for not having other options on the ballot. At the moment there is one solid, deliverable proposal. How can the Club put a possibly undeliverable option on the ballot?
If LCC had acted faster, things may have been different... but we've known for a while when the ballot was going to be and they've still done very little to sway fans or the Club. At present we only have the funds to deliver the Kirkby option. We cannot just hope that a mystery billionnaire comes and buys us and builds a floating stadium on the Mersey. We have to plan for the here and now. We all want to be a big Club this year not in ten years time. At least the Club have put forward a proposal to take the Club forward, though I would suggest that the same people criticising the Kirkby proposals would be the same people accusing the Board of sitting on their hands doing nothing if we did not have a proposal in place.
Issue Three: The ballot is a vote of confidence in the current Board.
Surely people who say this are having a laugh? The question reads 'Do you want EFC to relocate to Kirkby?' ? How has that been interpreted as 'Do you have faith in the ability of the current Board to manage our Club?' Too many people's views on the Kirkby proposal are clouded by their dislike/distrust/jealousy of Bill Kenwright and this should not be the case. This is a vote on the future of our Club, not a popularity contest. I would suggest that these people question how they would vote if a Bill Kenwright led proposal was put forward for The Loop site.
Issue Four: Redeveloping Goodison
The least desirable option of all for me. It pains me to see the heinous images of a redeveloped Goodison produced by KEIOC. I cannot believe people are still questioning 'why move when Goodison can be redeveloped?'. Of course it can be redeveloped, that is not open to question. I just really don't see the point in doing it. It would cost too much in comparison to getting a nice new home in nicer surroundings. Let's face it, Goodison is not a very nice ground. Poor facilties, obstructed views, etc. I refuse outright to believe that given its current state it could be redeveloped to a standard close to what I would consider acceptable. I would rather stay at Goodison as it is than stay at a redeveloped Goodison. At least then we could say the stadium is poor because it's old and not have to excuse the stadium being poor despite being redeveloped.
Several people have suggested that we merely need to add another tier to the Park End stand but it is not just about attendances. That would not fix the obstructed views, the rotten brickwork, the rusted metal, the lack of corporate facilities, etc.
A modern stadium cannot be used only on a matchday. I know of companies in Liverpool that hold conference events at the Reebok, I doubt this would happen if we had a new stadium in Kirkby or wherever.
I would also take issue with Goodison being dwarfed in size and class by the new Anfield and will refuse to entertain any proposal to redevelop Goodison. The space, the money and the enthusiasm just isn't there. I wish the Board would just come out and say, 'yes it can be redeveloped, but we're not going to do it because it's not worth it and we don't want to'.
Overall I think the Kirkby proposal is a good one and one that we cannot afford to ignore. I do not like being told that I am jeopardising the future of our Club by voting Yes to Kirkby. As far as I'm concered the opposite is true. I will vote Yes knowing that I feel I'm doing what is right for the Club at the present time. If the stadium is not going to be in the City Centre then Kirkby is as good a place as any is and better than Walton.
I would be extremely content for the outcome of the vote to be a Yes to Kirkby and for LCC to then produce a detailed proposal for The Loop or any other City Centre site that forces a Club to do a re-vote on the two deliverable sites. In reality, however, I can't see The Loop as more than smoke and mirrors at the moment and I think the Kirkby proposal is too good to ignore on the basis of a couple of soundbites from a dodgy politician and an even dodgier splinter group of Evertonians.
I would just like to conclude by suggesting that we should not forget that, first and foremost, we are supporters of the team ? not the stadium in which it plays.
Note: the following content is not moderated or vetted by the site owners at the time of submission. Comments are the responsibility of the poster. Disclaimer
1 Posted 07/08/2007 at 05:34:13
The Kings Dock, the NTL fiasco, the current debt, suspected impediments to investment opportunities... all down to the current Board.
I’d rather not be railroaded into a move miles away from the club’s roots for questionable revenue projections just because those in charge of the club can’t get their act together.
I don’t doubt for a minute that running a football club is a difficult and complex business but how a club of Everton’s stature and support can be out-spent by Sheffield United, a relegated team, and Sunderland, a newly-promoted team, is cause for real concern. I’d rather not risk condemning our club to the status of a provincial also-ran for the next century simply for a quick fix.
2 Posted 07/08/2007 at 06:37:16
WHilst I disagreed with most of your comments, I respected your views, at least up until you described the no voters as a "dodgy splinter group of Evertonians "
You conclude your first point by saying "ticks all the boxes except the bonus box" are you not guilty of the very thing that riles you so much ? just because this time the opinion is yours , it is still only that, your opinion, please dont portray it as fact, because a large number of us believe it ticks hardly any boxes.
your bonus box comment was like saying, I’ve met a bird, she’s fit, she’s good fun, brilliant cook, so what if you dont love her - thats only the bonus box - she ticks some of the other boxes, I’ll marry her anyway
Not only will Kirby never be loved, to some its too unsavory to even tolerate, thats fact
You say the loop would cost too much money to explore, how much would it cost BK to take the blinkers ear plugs off and listen ?I’m guessing zilch opinion or fact ?
Finally sean you state that you believe there are alternatives but we cant afford to explore them. Sean mate, with the future of our club at stake, we cant afford not to ! ! !
3 Posted 07/08/2007 at 05:49:57
this is a geat article. It might be that i have lways lived overseas and have tried my best to get to a game when in england but what nonsense is this "must not move out of Liverpool" Unless Kirkby is part of manchester all of a sudden, it will be Liverpool in no time with population growth. Not only will the majority of Evertonians still follow the club and go to games (i dont count people who claim to no longer want to follow the club as true blue, your cuting your nose off to spite your face) plus think of the new fans that will be encouraged to go!
Please look to the future, we did it when booted out of anfield, it didnt break us then, it shouldnt break us now...
Personally, i think there is allot of rubbish being thrown around
4 Posted 07/08/2007 at 08:06:04
This ’greater potential’ is just a myth perpertrated to try and bring some credence to moving to a backwater.
5 Posted 07/08/2007 at 08:13:07
6 Posted 07/08/2007 at 08:39:29
Put the deal on the table boys before it is too late.
7 Posted 07/08/2007 at 08:35:29
"Far too many people present opinions as facts and far too many people attempt to interpret information, quotes and rumours to suit their own purposes."
"I would suggest that the same people criticising the Kirkby proposals would be the same people accusing the Board of sitting on their hands doing nothing if we did not have a proposal in place."
"I can’t see The Loop as more than smoke and mirrors at the moment and I think the Kirkby proposal is too good to ignore on the basis of a couple of soundbites from a dodgy politician and an even dodgier splinter group of Evertonians."
I would have just said what I wanted to say without the undermining intro.
8 Posted 07/08/2007 at 08:51:19
9 Posted 07/08/2007 at 08:22:04
I am not eligible to vote, but if I was I would probably be inclined to vote yes. Although I am not 100% in favour of moving out of the ’City’, I am in favour of moving away from Goodison - no matter how much it hurts me to say that. Plus I certainly do not want to wallow in nostalgia, I just want to be realistic.
The club and the new fans need a new, modern stadium. Lets face it, the only way we are going to generate the type income required to compete on a higher level is through having adequate & modern corporate facilites. Is redeveloping going to provide this? I dont think so. Being honest, if I had the cash, Id have a box so that friends and family could go and watch the home games, enjoying a few drinks!
Goodison is normally filled to around 88% of capacity for home PL games, why is the remaining 12% never filled? - Obstructed views! In the past, how often have we gone to away games and started singing ’Shitty ground’, because we’ve just paid full price, to be stuck behind a post? Therefore one isn’t going to subject themselves to that at home either? Is re-developing Goodison going to solve this?
Do you remember the cartoon strip in WSAG - ’Laugh along with those loveable Reds? The way both the Club, Fans and LCC are acting at the moment...lets take a look at ourselves.
10 Posted 07/08/2007 at 08:59:08
11 Posted 07/08/2007 at 08:29:20
For example, it seems to have completely escaped you that many of those who object to the ground move, on the basis of Kirkby?s geography, don?t casually do so because of the existence of a boundary, arbitrary of otherwise.
No. For so, so many of the anti-Kirkby Evertonian electorate, we simply believe that Kirkby is just the wrong location. It?s out of the way. It?s off the beaten track. It?s all too easily bypassed by every one of the major transport arteries that it boasts proximity to. It?s low profile. It?s low on visibility. And it?s a town of some 40,000 population which is an entirely wrong 21st century choice as a base for a Premier League football club like Everton which so clearly needs to be at the heart of the city.
And the only reason Everton are headed there is that Tesco wants to go there. Take Tesco out of the equation and would you really think Everton had made a sound business decision to voluntarily move to Kirkby? That argument, though, doesn?t suit ?yes? voters, especially ?riled? ones like you, because, similar to the tired old refrain that the ?no? campaign can only think with its heart and not its head, or that we just like our pre-match pints in the ?Myboozer Arms?, it suits the pro-Kirkby lobby to present the naysayers as luddites or dimwits who are hung-up about ?conceding the city to Kopites?.
Like many ?yes? voters, you fail, in my opinion, to present a really cogent argument as to why we should move to Kirkby. Again, this is a trait I?ve seen at large amongst the ?yes? campaign. Rather than present its reasons ?for? moving, all it seems to do is denigrate the ?no? campaign as a dysfunctional generality. The difference between the ?no? campaign and the ?yes? is this: the former channels most of its energy into criticism of the club and its short-sightedness; while the latter just resorts to belittling its ?fellow? Evertonians.
This fan base has been rent-asunder this summer by as spectacular an own goal as you could dread to see, for while the premise of a fans? vote is indeed a laudable one, the flow of accurate information from the club has fuelled the acrimony that now prevails across Evertonia. And I would suggest that the majority of the invective arrows have been fired from the ?yes? towards the ?no? camps. Sure there?s been a fight-back but for the most part the latter camp has been too busy racing against time to disprove the club?s propaganda rather than waste valuable time name-calling those who are prepared to vote ?yes?.
You also seem unable to understand that not all in the ?no? campaign have an affiliation to KEIOC. I have no connection with KEIOC. I don?t need to. I came to my own own ?head? based conclusions. However, I?ll willingly leap to their defence when you describe the result of their efforts as ?heinous?. You mean as in utterly ?odious? or ?wicked?? You mean as in ?atrocious, monstrous, abominable, contemptible, horrific or iniquitous?? Either you need a new thesaurus or you don?t know the meaning of ?heinous?.
Let me tell you, Sean, what Hitler, Stalin and Pol Pot got up to was ?heinous? not what the KEIOC lads produced as imagery for a reworked Goodison. Of all the rhetoric that has volleyed back and forth this summer, that ?heinous? accusation of yours is perhaps the most crass yet. To then dismiss the KEIOC lads as ?an even dodgier splinter group of Evertonians? is as unacceptable as the lazy thinking that riddles your presentation; such as your assertion that Liverpool City Council has been ?incredibly unhelpful? towards Everton.
Have you forgotten about King?s Dock? Since 2003? Get this right, Sean, Everton embarrassed itself big time, before the city and the nation, concerning King?s Dock. As it did concerning the Fortress Sports Fund. Your frustration about Liverpool City Council could have been presented better if you had a greater grasp of realities relating to how much or how little (and it?s debatable) EFC has interacted with the council over the last decade, however you indicate just how tenuous your handle on matters is by your early assertion that the three councils of Liverpool, Sefton and Knowsley are to ?merge? in the next ?couple of years?. Really? Do tell. Or have you confused political reality with the, admittedly promising, strategic marketing and tourism initiatives forwarded by the likes of The Mersey Partnership and other related quangos?
And you say you?re ?riled? and you?re not going to quote ?spurious? facts! Rich. Sean, I can barely believe that you?ve presented such a poorly framed submission so late in the debating day, especially when you could have put your ?yes? leaning convictions to much greater use by testing the veracity of some of Wyness? quoted figures, such as the £15m real estate value he attaches to Goodison Park. But why bother, hey, when it?s easier to attack KEIOC and the likes, especially when you?ve got the likes of the entire EFC lobby including Moyes, Arteta, Stubbs, Carsley, Cahill and Johnson doing your own ?pro move? bidding?
The key to your piece lay in your opening gambit. You really just were spouting off for the sake of it because efryone else has. And because you were ?riled?. And you?ve successfully managed to drive an even firmer wedge between a fan base which, as I say, I fear is already so rent-asunder that I?m actually dreading the Wigan game and the whole alcohol-fuelled nonsense that will surely come with it.
12 Posted 07/08/2007 at 09:46:11
13 Posted 07/08/2007 at 09:39:20
14 Posted 07/08/2007 at 09:51:57
Fantastic retort leaving me with little to add. I congratulate you. I have a firm opinion as to which way I wish to vote but that is not the point of my posting. I simply wish people would stick to facts and respect that an oposing opinion is no less valid simply because it comes from a different viewpoint. Hence my amazement that Blue in Bolton considers this balanced...?
Sean, you clearly have thought long and hard about your decision and I respect you for your conclusions. However, I (and I can only presume quite a number of others reading your post) would have liked it to have been as factual and unbiased as it promised. Instead, I found items stated as fact that I could have countered and far too much emotion. In spite of that there were some fair points to be taken such as the admission of other sites but that the obstacle is not the location but the funding. If only our club could be as honest as to say that outright.
Let’s stop all playing petty politics. We all want the same thing, however disappionted we may be with the route we have to take to get there, be it pro or con Kirkby. COYB
15 Posted 07/08/2007 at 10:16:04
16 Posted 07/08/2007 at 10:32:06
It’s so sad and pathetic that we actually have to have a ballot, but here we are.
17 Posted 07/08/2007 at 10:38:59
Bill Kenwright is mislead, he needs to be shown the right way, he can still be a hero. Wyness however is a discrace he only wants to fund his own pocket like most in football now do!
18 Posted 07/08/2007 at 10:32:34
19 Posted 07/08/2007 at 10:33:12
What a fantastic reassoned article to a person so ill-informed. I was preparing a response to the ’heinious jibe’ but you have eloquently saved me the bother. The yes vote is now getting desparate as we NO VOTERS are gaining and probably leading the charge.
20 Posted 07/08/2007 at 10:45:29
21 Posted 07/08/2007 at 10:46:36
22 Posted 07/08/2007 at 10:55:50
23 Posted 07/08/2007 at 10:58:34
24 Posted 07/08/2007 at 09:58:24
25 Posted 07/08/2007 at 10:49:38
26 Posted 07/08/2007 at 11:02:36
We are skint (amazing but true) Tesco have offered us a brand new stadium for (relative) peanuts.
Snap their hands off and lets move on, I support Everton not Goodison.
27 Posted 07/08/2007 at 11:27:47
28 Posted 07/08/2007 at 11:41:31
You could have saved us all the cringeful "keep Everton in ’our’ city" parochial bullshit.
29 Posted 07/08/2007 at 11:51:51
30 Posted 07/08/2007 at 11:55:08
31 Posted 07/08/2007 at 11:47:36
VOTE NO TO SELLING OUR SOUL!!! COYB!!!
32 Posted 07/08/2007 at 11:41:38
33 Posted 07/08/2007 at 11:55:36
34 Posted 07/08/2007 at 12:08:48
The only mention of the issue is about Kirkby’s transport connections. Maybe Kirkby is easily bipassed at the minute - but I certainly wont be bipassing it when I’m going to watch Everton play there. This is the 21st century. In a global media age kids across the world are supporting premiership clubs - do we honestly believe that if a Kirkby-based Everton were succesful that kids on Merseyside will say "Dad, I’m not gonna follow in your footsteps and support the Blues - thanks for all the games you took me to but I’m afraid the journey to Kirkby just took too long so I’m gonna support Liverpool instead."
I say vote yes and spend 3 years celebrating Goodison and our memories there - all the while knowing that we actually have a future to look forward to
35 Posted 07/08/2007 at 12:16:57
Our principle benefit would be that of their construction company being able to take off 33% of the cost as it is ’in house’ from £150m to £100m approximately. The land would be donated by the local council so there would be massive savings, to that there is no argument.
However, Bestway’s offer is to donate their land in a swap deal with the council for equable property. Bestway own one Swiss and two Pakistani Banks. Their are the UK’s second largest cash and carry operator. They own the Pakistan’s largest cement producer. As such, surely they too will have excellent construction contacts to offer great savings on the build. Is Tesco realy the only partner?
To be fair, I doubt the ’No’ vote would have such impetus if the board were actually prepared to qualify their insistance that there is ’no plan B’. Tell us why something that appears feasible is such a resounding "NO" and we may face the reality of accepting the move, warts and all. Without that, you force many of your own voters to procrastinate or vote against whilst we wait for the information we need to make a balanced judgement . . . or maybe that is just what LCC want, in which case our board of directors are playing right into their hands.
36 Posted 07/08/2007 at 10:27:27
I’ve seen little genuine debate on this, but that theses of yours has swayed me! I just wish there were more tangible facts to help opinion-forming.
I think the givens for those in favour of Kirkby are primarily "The distance isn?t a problem for me" and "It’s so cheap that we won’t get anywhere near as good a deal in time for when we would need it".
The first is individually subjective and the second is an understandable assumption given what our board is saying - that this is indeed the deal of the century.
I know we’re not rich, and we might well need a partner to get any new stadium (an assumption), so resenting Tesco’s existence in the Kirkby proposal might well be moot, as any new proposal would have to have the prerequisite of a partner of some kind.
Given for the sake of argument that there is the need for a partner for any new stadium plan and the obvious limitations that presents, I would like the board to tell us what else has been considered, then rejected and why. If this is not possible due to confidentiality agreements (eg with Tesco/Knowsley council/rejected partners/partners that pulled out) then the board could atleast say as much.
The board?s output or ’propaganda’ thus far has forced people to form differing views and levels of trust in their understandably skewed output ? they have an agenda which for me is forgivable. Assuming for a moment the figures are realistic, the stadium as an asset would make total sense. So cheap, it could be said, that we could even deem it a temporary situation.
Assuming on the other hand that the board?s figures are massively optimistic and the stadium would in reality cost significantly more and / or gets delayed, in addition the touted increase in attendance and revenue never materialize, we would then have a very different more worrying scenario.
Any leap that we make will be supported or countered using projections of cost and income. Projections which will doubless transpire to be inaccurtate in some way, that’s just business.
I have no clue who is right and have changed my mind twice on this debate already, I?m currently on the fence and that could change again if more facts emerge or for that matter if the debate is as good as Greg?s post.
37 Posted 07/08/2007 at 12:06:15
Wise men say only fools rush in, you are indeed a fool, not because you voted yes, but because you havent taken the whole of your allocated time to get all of the facts before deadline, rest assured more will come out, you display a childish stupidity casting your vote almost before the envelope has hit the mat just so you can come and gloat, no doubt you’ll be calling for unity in the comming weeks
38 Posted 07/08/2007 at 12:52:04
39 Posted 07/08/2007 at 12:58:47
40 Posted 07/08/2007 at 12:47:11
What I do agree with you is the dread I also fear for this weekends match.
From gate opening to gate close, Saturday inside Goodison should only be reserved as place to shout, scream, sing, laugh, cry for the exploits of the 11 or so players that pull on that beloved Royal Blue shirt for 1 team - EVERTON.
At no time should Inside Goodison be a place for 1 set of supporters, supporting 1 club and 1 team to vent their difference of opinions on the Stadium issue. That also includes those who may feel it necessary to aim critism towards the board. Leave that to outside.
Any supporter even contemplating using Saturdays match inside Goodison as a soapbox, should be ashamed of themselves and steer clear.
C’mon lads be sensible and ensure the media reports only on the footballing and not the non-footballing issues!
41 Posted 07/08/2007 at 13:10:54
Thanks for that.
What possible more information do I need?
3 weeks of LCC trying to find funding for us? More Lego structures being made for the Loop site.
So I’m foolish, irresponsible and stupid apparently.
Well I’ll take that from you two. I don’t know you and I have no wish to know you.
I can hardly have rushed in after 9 MONTHS of knowing what was coming.
It appears that LCC didn’t know it was coming which is why they pulled The Loop site out of their bag at the last minute. To give Evertonians something to cling to.
I believe Kirkby is right for us.
42 Posted 07/08/2007 at 13:11:19
I’m also pleased that, despite the obvious NO bias on this site, you have been able to voice the opininon that I’m sure is shared by the vast majority of level-headed and forward-thinking Evertonians.
43 Posted 07/08/2007 at 13:34:35
The no voters are note a splinter group we are the majority in this city and I havent spoken to one match going Evertonian fron Liverpool who wants this move.
Sean you are a traitor who has no idea what this move will do to us
new ground in Kirkby doesnt gaurantee fuck all but more heartache and misery.
44 Posted 07/08/2007 at 13:54:09
What right have you got to call me a traitor? Who are you to tell me what’s right and wrong?
Just note the difference between the reasoned way in which my article was written and the way the pathetic response from Tony ’the self appointed patron saint of Everton’ Marsh was written. Says a lot as far as I’m concerned.
45 Posted 07/08/2007 at 13:50:55
46 Posted 07/08/2007 at 14:06:13
47 Posted 07/08/2007 at 13:52:40
"Q: How much will this move cost Everton FC? I’ve seen the number ï¿½10m. Is that accurate?
A: It’s still too early to say. The club’s total contribution will be around ï¿½50m. Out of that ï¿½15m there will be the proceeds from the sale of Goodison and the stadium naming rights. Dependent on how successful we are in those areas, we would top up to that ï¿½50m figure."
Also, I resent being described as part of "an even dodgier splinter group of Evertonians."
48 Posted 07/08/2007 at 14:20:23
49 Posted 07/08/2007 at 14:01:19
50 Posted 07/08/2007 at 13:57:16
Once again the ’No’ voters rubbish anyone who both dare consider a ’Yes’ vote and more meaningfully dare support Everton from outside the city boundary.
Now when Greg tells us ’Yes’ voters who care just as much as anyone about EFC that we should not refer to the ’No’ contingent as luddites he should spend five minutes reading contributions from mien fuehrer Tony Marsh who seems to own the rights to being an Everton supporter.
We have no money, Goodison is falling-down, the Loop may well be an option but not for today and anything other than a ’Yes’ vote commits us to further purgatory.
51 Posted 07/08/2007 at 13:58:55
52 Posted 07/08/2007 at 14:30:33
53 Posted 07/08/2007 at 14:46:51
Knowsley, Sefton and the city of Liverpool are to merge to form ’Liverpool City Region’. Is that fact or speculation? If it is definite, that would influence my decision.
There are many issues being discussed here and some people object to Kirkby regardless. I, and many others, am not one of them.
My only objection is being outside the city boundaries - not because I don’t consider Kirkby part of Liverpool, but because of other people’s perceptions. If the councils were to merge and Kirkby was soon to be part of the Liverpool City Region, surely tha solves the main hurdle in what is otherwise a reasonable, if not good proposal. I know I am way down at the bottom so many might not get this far, but please please, can anyone give more facts about this merge?
54 Posted 07/08/2007 at 14:48:24
55 Posted 07/08/2007 at 15:13:16
56 Posted 07/08/2007 at 15:25:28
"What possible more information do I need? 3 weeks of LCC trying to find funding for us? More Lego structures being made for the Loop site." More derisory comments based entirely on presumption with no evidence. Why would The Loop be any more Lego than Kirkby?
"So I?m foolish, irresponsible and stupid apparently." I did not say stupid or even foolish, I simply stated my belief that there was no reason to cast a vote before being in posession of all of the FACTS - even if one of those facts happens to confirm your original belief. For that reason I called your action irresponsible.
"Well I?ll take that from you two. I don?t know you and I have no wish to know you." Why not? Simply because we disagree about your haste?
"I can hardly have rushed in after 9 MONTHS of knowing what was coming." You did not know what was coming as it has not been completely unveiled. I don’t disagree it is shady timing, hence my point the board could be handing the ace to the LCC with their elusiveness making people hope for a salvation that could be false.
"It appears that LCC didn?t know it was coming which is why they pulled The Loop site out of their bag at the last minute. To give Evertonians something to cling to." Everyone knew it was coming but Everton FC chose to enter an exclusivity agreement, making other proposals redundant during that period.
"I believe Kirkby is right for us." You perfectly are entitled to your beliefs and I never disagreed with that. I found the celebration of your having cast such a prompt vote a little confrontational and, as such, was bound to court a reaction. What I wanted most of all (and still do) is for us to have a debate based upon all of the information, most of which we still await. Please let’s not disintergrate into the sort of base slanging match offerred by Tony Marsh and the original poster - who still believes his piece to have been written in a reasoned way...?!!! Comparatively with Tony’s comments, perhaps. Factually, fairly and impartially, no.
57 Posted 07/08/2007 at 14:25:46
We have been given (much to my surprise and to the clubs credit) a democratic right to exercise a vote on a very simple question ? to go or to stay?. In such a democratic arrangement the will of the majority will dictate the outcome and those that backed the other side of the argument will either have to put up with the outcome or make other plans for their Saturdays.
While I am happy for everyone to express their views as passionately as they like lets try and keep it civilized. The bottom line is that we are all in this together and what should have been the most optimistic time of the season (a clean slate and all to play for) is turning into some kind of self-destructive madness that we would laugh at if it were any other club.
All Blues together regardless of the outcome - please?
For the record?.
1. I am eligible to vote.
2. I prefer Tesco as a sponsor to many of the oil oligarchs, South East Asian ?businessmen? and other colonial investors currently washing around the Premiership
3. I am affiliated to no special interest group
4. I think financially it makes great sense to move
5. I have no problem getting to and from Kirkby and have reason to like or dislike the place
6. I have visited the proposed location
7. I will be voting ?No? because I don?t feel it is the right location for my club.
And that is my democratic right.
Good luck in the ballot to all those with the good fortune to be able to vote.
And most importantly Good Luck to the Blue Boys on Saturday
58 Posted 07/08/2007 at 14:56:55
- EFC has extremely limited funds as evidenced by our pre-season transfer business
- tesco/knowsley council are funding the majority of the project with us coming up with around £20-30m (those numbers are NOT plucked from thin air)
- other clubs with new stadiums already are or will be in massive debt which has to be repaid; redshi*e air terminal money will have to be paid back one day
- knowsley is part of Liverpool unless you’re desparate to find an excuse to vote no
- pretty amazing the board is letting the fans decide which has shocked me (as hate Bully as he has no idea of winning people round)
- finally I’m a Blue till I die wherever they run out
59 Posted 07/08/2007 at 15:24:34
Where are these people from who are constantly tryin to describe kirkby as ’backwater’ and ’provincial’? Its laughable.
Secondly, what is it greg murphy you want? A complete sale of the club to an unknown foreigner? There is no such thing as investment, only a complete take over.
60 Posted 07/08/2007 at 15:39:00
Well done sir
61 Posted 07/08/2007 at 15:55:39
4 a start I have never thought of or even said that Kirby was not in Liverpool, the people from down ther r as scouse as any one from the city itself (just listen to Stubbs spk lol), but as greg ses Kirby is the wrong location for a new modern football stadium. It is a small town ? FACT. We are a team with roots, traditions and history in the city of Liverpool and have a massive fan base ? many of whom live within walking distance of Walton ? FACT. Kirby is out of the way for a gud number of are fans. Its 2 far to relocate to as it would mean uprooting are fanbase.
For those fans who think that moving stadiums will bring back the glory yrs ? WAKE UP. What have Man City, M?boro, Bolton, Sunderland, Leister, Southampton, Coventry or even Arsenal won since they moved stadiums?? 5 of them have been relegated since moving, Arsenal went backwards, City still needed an investor, Wow Boro Won The League Cup(and that still took tem sum 9yrs after oving)! And Coventry don?t seem to be going anywer. As for the extra 10mil (which isn?t garanteed) ? what will that get us in a few years time? Still No wer near enuf to compete with the best ? would it really be worth selling r selves to tesco 4 that? Would it be worth leaving r heritage, roots, traditions and most of all the city of Liverpool ? especially to r rivals( who?s new stadium wud attract more fans, tourism and investment than r?s as it would b located inside the city of Liverpool ? a city that is improving & developing more n more every yr)
62 Posted 07/08/2007 at 15:53:03
63 Posted 07/08/2007 at 16:11:05
As far as I am concerned and from what I you hear & see around Liverpool, Football is about Pride, Tradition and values. We Take Pride in the numbers of Local Support that we have ? we take great pride in are history ? on its day goodison can be the worst ground in the league for an away team to come to ? especially with the crowd in full voice (United 05?!). Move the club to a new stadium in Kirby whilst any fans r against the move and I doubt u will get to recreate games like that ? especially if wer at a stadium that many of us don?t wanna b at.
We will become a laffin stok if we move to Kirby. The Red Sh**e will always have some sort of put down to us. Do u really wna have to go thru the chants of ?just a small club from kirby? ? ?one city, one team, one name ? Liverpool?? (maybe the out of town blues don?t mind this?) These chants will hurt 10 times more when wer goals dwn to the Sh**e at home. For some reason the line ?On the banks of the ROYAL BLUE MERSEY? will sound abit out of place wen wer playing in a town that doesn?t even lie on the banks of the Mersey. (its nerli 8 ½ miles frm Kirby to the Mersey ? In front of the pier head) We are a team that is very proud of r roots in the city, r history and r traditions. We are one half of one of the greatest derbies in the world (the 2 teams being so close is one of the things that make it so special.) Why would we want to change or even possibly harm this?
64 Posted 07/08/2007 at 16:18:54
65 Posted 07/08/2007 at 16:17:40
66 Posted 07/08/2007 at 16:14:45
67 Posted 07/08/2007 at 17:00:34
a big YES tick from me!
68 Posted 07/08/2007 at 15:59:52
Those cautioning delay, the doubters and those intent on voting no have worked hard to persuade the electorate that there might be possible alternatives to Kirkby. By doing this, we have allowed the authors of the glossy brochure (which incidentally is the only literature accompanying the ballot paper as I understand it) to escape from questioning about the contents of their leaflet.
I have looked at parts of the leaflet again today and I could see many words, phrases and statements that need to be amplified or further explained before votes are cast. Here are several examples of statements in the leaflet that are meaningless without suitable explanation;
2. The new stadium COULD produce a SIGNIFICANT amount of NEW profit that CAN go towards squad building.
(my words....for a move of such importance I would expect/demand that COULD would be replaced by WILL.......SIGNIFICANT would be quantified.....NEW would be explained in some detail......and CAN would be replaced by WILL).
3. COMPREHENSIVE BUS and RAIL PUBLIC transport services.
(my words....please describe all of these services in detail as it does matter how people are actually going to arrive at and depart from the stadium. If it is just a vote catching, hollow claim then it is dishonest and the fans deserve further details).
5. LARGE AREAS of CAR PARKING will be available.
(my words....The least that those proposing the move to Kirkby can do is answer the following questions.....what car capacity are you talking about?.....and more importantly....where is the car parking going to be located?)
10. 326 METRES of counter space and catering facilities - TWICE MORE than that at Goodison.
(my words.....you do realize that TWICE MORE is different from TWICE AS MUCH to the extent that TWICE MORE means THREE TIMES AS MUCH....so what is it? 2x or 3x and even if you answer that satisfactorily, the increased length of counters is meaningless unless there is a commensurate increase in staff who have been better trained.....is that going to be the case?).
What I am trying to point out is that Wyness has been given a very easy ride over the leaflet and I have deliberately left aside searching questions that should be asked about funding, predictions of cost inflation, liability for overspend, etc.
I am flabbergasted that people are prepared to buy into a scheme without asking the sort of basic questions that you might ask if you were buying a car or a house, etc. Have we not learned the lessons of the past when it comes to the honesty of this particular Company? Unless answers are forthcoming relating to the items I have mentioned (and no doubt others) then we could be buying into a seriously flawed scheme that will have dire consequences for generations of Evertonians.
Finally, one cannot but be amazed at the stupidity of the person who is bragging that he returned his yes-vote almost within moments of it arriving on his mat. Why is he not more questioning about the contents of the leaflet? Why is he not curious as to what Bestways might have to reveal? Quite frankly, people acting with such untold haste are to be pitied. Such lack of critical faculties bodes ill not just for the ballot result but also for the quality of football that they are willing to watch in the future.
69 Posted 07/08/2007 at 17:25:59
70 Posted 07/08/2007 at 17:49:02
I was pro-move before reading it and back on the fence following the sporadically erudite debate that followed.
To not give credit to both sides of the debate seems utterly absurd to me. We?re all Evertonians, we all love our club, we all want what?s best, we just might disagree about the one stadium plan that?s on the table ? that?s it. No vitriol or ranting necessary. Those against the move don?t want the club to stagnate and die any more than those in favour of it want to grab the first chance to drag everyone kicking and screaming out of the city to the sound of laughter coming from the Red Terminal.
Debating when we?ve got about 2 ½ established facts is pretty difficult, angry ranting is mystifying.
71 Posted 07/08/2007 at 18:00:09
I hope you and your friends aren’t legion enough to carry the day, or we’re all facing a future in the wilderness.
72 Posted 07/08/2007 at 18:20:12
73 Posted 07/08/2007 at 18:26:23
Can someone please confirm and tell me the actual amount. Only then can we work out if it is a good move.
15 mill then lets move, if its more then is it worth it. Christ we cant pay our debts at the moment, if we go 50 million in debt then only god can help us.
74 Posted 07/08/2007 at 18:24:44
I will also be voting no because the people of Kirby itself don’t want the club moving there. I think we have to respect there right more than anything else as it is there community, there lives and there families that will be affected. Many people in Kirby have lived there 4 years - they have grew up there and have families there. For them people to lose a college, school and houses just for a football stadium is out of order. It is the people of Kirby who will have to live with the results of this stadium debate & it is them who have to pay to live in that community.
The people of Kirby deserve that right to say No to the club moving there. If they don’t want it (and by the sounds of things they definitely don?t) then it should be a simple No. Add that to the large numbers of true blues who don’t wanna move and my vote becomes a Definite NO
75 Posted 07/08/2007 at 18:34:46
The main issue that bothers me (and many others judging by the posts) is this ’take it or leave it’ proposal. I do not feel that boundaries or geography is an issue (well a few miles from GP anyway), as a supporter of EFC for the past 25 years who lives in Leeds then I admit I am less likely to be so provincial. However, if at all possible I would like the club to remain in the city, but since the Kings Dock debacle I have seen nothing to give me hope that there is a viable option.
I would like to hear more about other sites in the city boundary, but we need facts. How much will it cost? Who will be our partner(s)? (It is clear that we cannot afford it on our own). This is why I am uncomfortable with this urgency to accept the only offer of Kirkby.
I have no problem with Kirkby as it would add a very small amount of time to my journey to watch the blues, but I don’t like being backed into a corner. I think there are a lot of fans on here who are offering petty reasons for their decision, whether it be YES or NO to Kirkby, and I would like to offer my opinion of the key questions. (please note these are only my thoughts shared for you and I am still undecided on the issue)
1. Do we need to move ground?
I think yes. GP is a shed let’s face it. Great history but not much else to offer at the moment and I think any redevelopment would be very costly and like putting make-up on an ugly woman.
2. If so, Must we move now?
Well if someone can convince me that there are absolutely no other options in the city then it has to be considered. The key is finance and at some point we will have to ’sell our souls’ (as one post put it) to someone because that is the nature of the game these days. Without major investment eventually we will fall away and, god forbid, be relegated. It’s no good getting scared of Tesco and what they might get out of the deal, because any large investment will bring the same fears and I think we are all agreed that we need investment. The move would not gaurantee success for the club. Of course not, it is no good looking at other examples of clubs who have moved grounds and trying to use it as a crystal ball, but it would make us a more attractive proposition for investment. Let’s face it GP is hardly the iconic stadium it may have once been. New stadiums bring new revenue streams but success will depend on the team and how it performs. How ever hard you look, you will not find a pattern of success related to moving grounds, but in the Premiership money, whilst it does not gaurantee success, is imperative if you want to compete. Currently we are struggling for cash, so making the club as attractive as possible to investors must be a step in the right direction. Surely it’s not about pro move or anti move, it’s about pro EFC. What’s best for the club in the future? If we don’t move now, are we likely to be able to attract anyone in the next 10 years? How long can we survive in the Premiership without investment, considering tin pot outfits like West Ham and Portsmouth etc suddenly have massive spending power. Of course I would love to be able to predict the future, it would make this decision easy!
It’s not about being right! Posts for both arguments have raised valid questions and points but it all brings me back to my original statement. Fans are not informed enough to make an accurate decision. Whatever the vote results I will continue to support the blues, as I am sure you all will (despite the negative rants of some). I do not appreciate the ’civil war’ that has evolved over the issue and I think it is counter productive. Normally, the debate would be confined to the chat rooms, but due to this vote it has now become like an election campaign. Certain fans seem to have radicalised to one side or the other and rubbish any counter arguments. This further convinces me that many votes will be cast with hearts and not heads.
I do not have the vote and feel somewhat relieved that I will not be directly culpable for any consequences. However, I will echo the sentiments of another post, if you do have a vote, whichever way you go make sure you have thought it through as much as possible and please don’t base it on some frivolous reason. Us non-voters are at your mercy.
Here’s hoping for a successful campaign starting on Saturday and let’s get behind the team and stop slagging each other off!
Come on the Toffees!!
76 Posted 07/08/2007 at 18:45:22
77 Posted 07/08/2007 at 19:01:43
Being realistic, huge investment looks like a remote possibility. The only thing we have going for us is a good history, relatively recent good league form and a loyal fanbase. These criteria alone will not be enough to attract new investment on the scale we need it I would suggest.
I work in investments, and the single biggest underlying principle of investment is that any investor will want to see potential long-term gains on their investment, it’s all about risk and return - our current ground and infrastructure do not really allow for much potential growth in cash flow. Ergo, we need a new stadium.
But how do you afford a new stadium without significant investment? It’s a bit like the chicken and the egg, isn’t it?
And that’s when - BANG !! It hits you like a bolt from the blue (very apt).
We’re actually being offered a new stadium FOR FREE (to all intents and purposes). Tesco are offering us what we could only dream of affording ourselves.
And still there’s objections.
As simple as I can make it...
Everton need investment. We’re unlikely to get SIGNIFICANT new investment without a new stadium. To build a new stadium, you need money. Everton have none. Tesco and Knowsley Council are offering to finance almost all of it for us. I am yet to see a single other proposal which categorically outlines where the funding would come from.
Basically - I’m voting for what I see as being best for the future of my club. If anyone can come up with another viable suggestion - with GUARANTEED funding, then I may be tempted to vote "No". In the absence of that, that "Yes" box is calling out to me.
78 Posted 07/08/2007 at 19:26:46
79 Posted 07/08/2007 at 19:24:05
YOU ARE THE NEW OSCAR WILDE.
ABSOLUTLY BOSS ARTICLE,
VOTE NO TO KIRBY,
WE DO NEED A NEW STADIUM BUT KIRKBY IS NOT THE ANSWER,
SAVE OUR HISTORY AND OUR HERITAGE.
80 Posted 07/08/2007 at 20:12:12
81 Posted 07/08/2007 at 19:51:52
The time to get involved in debate is before you vote,
Your X,regardless of which box, constitutes your final say, when the dust settles on this bitter war of words, the divisions will take a long time - if ever - to heal, foolish gloating about your vote will only widen and prolong these divisions
82 Posted 07/08/2007 at 21:02:25
what a farce!!
as it happens three big fat NO crosses went into the relevant boxes, so shove that up yer hoop billy boy..!!
any ground which equates to £1000 per seat to build would be absolute dogdirt.!! end of chat!
83 Posted 07/08/2007 at 21:10:33
84 Posted 07/08/2007 at 21:28:33
them shower of sh*** are spending £4000 per seat on their new ground, (£240 million... £4000 x 60, 000 seats) where as tesco are gonna spend a measly £1000 per seat (£50 million total)
do you want to sit in a bigger version of the Deva stadium..??
85 Posted 07/08/2007 at 21:11:31
Unlike many on here, I can see some merit in both sides of the argument. I agree with Sean that Kirkby is practically Liverpool, that most of the Plan B proposals are delusional. etc.
And yet, on balance, I will vote ’No’. Why? Because ultimately this IS a vote of no confidence in the Board. They have misled us for years, the failed to share information on options in the lead-up to the Kirkby deal, they issued a deeply misleading prospectus to accompany the ballot paper.
They have not earned our support and should not get it.
86 Posted 07/08/2007 at 20:54:16
Very nicely presented argument.
I’m not as eloquent as you but as I am one of the "No" brigade for whom the city boundary is not an issue I thought I’d have a go at letting you know where I at least am coming from.
For me Kirkby has a number of pitfalls that prevent me voting yes:
1. The stadium design is unimpressive and it’s in a retail park - it’s going to be like an uglier Reebok stadium! or at best the Helliwell Jones in Warrington
2. The financial’s around it are too woolly, too many presumptions, too many ifs, coulds and mays
3. I resent being told that there is no plan B. It is Wyness’s fault that there in no plan B, if I were him I’d be embarrassed to admit it. We had a great option at Kings Dock and Kenwright blew it - there will be other more palatable options out there in future even if the loop is not a goer. To say that there is no option B is a dereliction of his duty. At the very least tell us the other options researched and explain why they are not ’deliverable’.
4. I don’t believe what you say about a Fairy Godmother being impossible. No one will invest that kind of money and let Bill get on with it, but they will buy the club off him and control it themselves. How do I know? Because quite a few similar clubs without a brand-new ground have changed hands in this way in the last few years - Chelsea, Liverpool, Portsmouth, Villa, West Ham, Birmingham. In particular I can’t see how Portsmouth and Birmingham were more attractive that ourselves??
I guess the 2nd & 3rd of these throw up a point someone else mentioned earlier - we are making this decision with imperfect knowledge.
On the Kirkby side - none of us really know enough about any of the financials. There is enough doubt around construction costs, overspend responsibility, projected attendances, projected non-football income etc. to worry me.
On the non-Kirkby side - none of us really know how viable the other options are? We don’t know how deeply Wyness & Kenwright have looked into these other options, how sure they can be that Kirkby is the only "deliverable" option.
I guess it comes down to whether you trust the board or not, and it saddens me greatly to say that I do not.
87 Posted 07/08/2007 at 21:39:12
read that and you’lkl se it all clear as day, now let’s get on with the season - I for one am worried that Moyes is still gonna play Neville in midfield.. I know it’s early in the season, but I’d like to see him on the bench when fit, please not in midfield!
88 Posted 07/08/2007 at 21:14:00
For me ’Ze war iz over’ I have cast my vote.
Some but not all of the facts which helped me make up my mind where as follows.
Working within the Construction Industry in Liverpool City Centre, and the surrounding areas for many years now, I am aware that every commercially viable plot of land within the area has either been developed or is in the process of being devoloped.
Grosvenor have Invested ’ One Billion Dollars! (sic)’ into the Liverpool 1 Development.
To make any stadium development viable, it must have a certain amount of enablement works, commercial development, private apartments etc.
It is clear should any application for a new stadium be submitted within the proximity of the city , it would get bogged down in the quagmire that is the planning system today. Facing massive opposition from the developments already underway within the city.
So for me the loop will NEVER see the light of day.
It’s been said before but re-devoloping Goodison is not an option.
Other sites within the City Boundary? As I mentioned above any thing that is viable will be owned and primed for devolopment (or in the case of Peel Holdings just sat on.)
I don’t feel that we will find any site which we could afford, even with a number of commercial partners.
This leaves Kirkby, ’ Deal of the Century ’ I think not! I do have concerns on how someone can build a 75 million pound stadium for 50 million, and I’m sure the amounts quoted that EFC will end up paying will probably be nearer 70 million, but I still feel this is the best option we have to enable us to play at a new stadium, within the near future, with a minimum of debt. ( Any other development would undoubtably mean more debt than this. )
Which I feel the vast majority agree we need to achieve ( location excepted ).
As I said for me the debate is over, remember it’s your vote, do what you feel is right for our club.
89 Posted 07/08/2007 at 20:57:36
I love goodison but accept we do need to move soon. I belive we need to be in the city, without moving too far from our home. We where first here etc and " I " have strong feelings on this. I would except Kirby, Bootle etc as a second choice. However in " MY " opionion the Quality of the stadium on offer is simply not good enough. I dont care what shape the stadium takes but It "MUST" be world class not ok this will do as we need a new one.
this will be our home for many years. Over the years we have been leaders with the quality of our stadium , first with 4 stands, first with undersoil heating etc.
While the teams efforts on the pitch take priority we must remeber to accept " nothing but the best". And while the players, manager, board ond over many years even ourselves as individual suporters come and go our " Class and stature for the footballing world must stay." we are one of the most sucsesful sides ever. just because of a few barron years we should not lower our standards.
what ever we choose it will be a compromise as deep down we all... " I " belive would love Goodison to be the perfect stadium.
I just think the stadium should be one the world would envy not just the Wimbledons of the world.
ok so how do we aford it. That i am afraid i have no answer to. I accept "MY" opinions are not perfect and are full of holes in this aspect but "I" do belive more can be done than is being done by the board, Knowsley and Tesco.
ALL 3 should realise the magnatude of what can and SHOULD be. A world class stadium will bring in the Money. A Rebock style wont. Why would a music concert for example show peice at the new ground, when they have the grounds of city, united and the S..ts new ground all within 30 miles. and that is just one example.
If The board, Knowsly and Tesco are genuinly wanting to bring in the money other than football they need to back it because again in "MY" opinion the new ground on offer is no better the Goodison. Newer yes, cleaner facillitys, yes.
World class like Goodison was No. and as such never will be.
90 Posted 07/08/2007 at 21:22:09
1) Look at the images of the new stadium. Do the quality of images look anywhere near as good as the ones posted several years ago for the Kings Dock?
2) Therefore, do you think we are NOW getting a cheap, low-budget facility?
3) Do you think Liverpool Football Club (and fans) were jealous of our Kings Dock blueprints? Alternatively, do you think they are jealous of our new ’blueprints’? Why?
4)Do you actually trust a man who failed to find the 30 miliion required (fact) to build a 250 million stadium on the banks of the Mersey (fact)? Furthermore, how much would that stadium cost to build now? 4 maybe 5 million?
How much is our new super stadium going to cost to build again?
Finally, some opinion. I take exception to the comment that most fans want success next year. I may be wrong here (opinion), but I feel the majority of supporters against the move are thinking about the long term future of the club for future generations (not just the next few years). I have real doubts as to the financial projections suggested by the board. Initially, I have reservations about filling the stadium unless we are challenging for the league. All the corporate benefits often highlighted is also of concern. Do you not think lots of Liverpool businesses would choose the new Anfield or the Echo arena ahead of our new ’World Class’ (Wyness) stadium? Especially considering the almost certain PR performance anticipated from LFC and LCC come 2010. How about entering Lime Street to a banner ’One City, One Club’? Buses and buildings plasterd with images of LFC players (Newcstle of the North-West). Could you live in this city under those circumstances? Do you think these predictions are far-fetched? I know I could not bear to live in this city without Everton and all the LFC bile that we will have to listen to. I suggest a vote to move will follow with a vote to move homes out of the city for many fans. And who says we are not losing our heritage? One final point, is the extra 10 million a year proposed really worth it? I dont think I will chance it somehow.
91 Posted 07/08/2007 at 22:02:41
92 Posted 07/08/2007 at 22:12:13
93 Posted 07/08/2007 at 22:23:29
94 Posted 07/08/2007 at 22:20:31
You’re right about the trust issue. I don’t trust our board on a number of issues, I don’t even believe them when they say "There’s no Plan B". What I do at least trust Bill over, if nothing else, is for him to act in what he BELIEVES to be the best interests of the club. From a purely financial standpoint (and again, trust comes into this over the figures), what has been proposed is quite frankly an incredible deal - it really is, I struggle to imagine how we could ever find another deal as financially appealing as this one is, and I could easily be accused of looking at this from a purely economical POV, and I make no apologies for that because I think that’s what the board need to do to safeguard the future of the club, especially in light of the heavy investment going on all around us.
In an ideal world, I wouldn’t want to move to Kirkby. In an ideal world, the Kings Dock would have happened, and I’d be watching the new season from my new seat on Saturday, after walking 5 mins from Rigby’s where I’d enjoyed a pre-match pint of whatever their guest ale is. Sadly, there’s not much point in apportioning blame on that score anymore (tempting though, isn’t it?). If I just address your points though...
1) I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree on that point. I quite liked the stadium "vision", especially the idea of staying away from the bowl shape. The retail park issue is one I think the majority of clubs will have to put up with though.
2) The financials are always likely to be estimates at this stage, there could be over-runs on construction costs etc, and any "exact" figures released now would only be a rod to beat Bill and KW around the head with when costs went up.
3) I agree, but as I alluded to above, I don’t believe for a minute that there is no plan b - I just think that this is far and away the most financially viable, and to offer a plan b, which could potentially be years more in the offing, would only result in an almost definite "no" vote across the board, something which from a financial POV, BK and KW want to avoid.
4) On a tangent slightly I guess, but there are fairly clear advantages to the majority of the clubs you mentioned:
Liverpool - Huge worldwide fanbase, and if they got it right easily as big a brand worldwide as Man Utd (sad but true).
Chelsea - large footprint in one of the most expensive real estate areas in the world. London-based, which helps.
West Ham - Prime Olympic territory, should they decide to sell any of their east end property, they’ll make a killing in the next 5 years. Again, London-based.
Villa and Brum are basically "next best" options outside of the top flight London clubs and Utd and Liverpool. Huge catchment areas, in Brum’s case an easily expandable stadium and in Villa’s case a very, very prudently run business pre-Lerner, with little or no debts despite match day revenue being absolutely nowhere near its potential.
Portsmoth - I’ll give you that one. I still can’t fathom the appeal. May be related to the new stadium they’re building, but catchment area is relatively small and little brand recognition etc. Puzzle. You’re doing yourself an injustice by the way - that was really very eloquent indeed.Trust is at the very heart of it. I trust the board up to a point, some people wouldn’t trust them as far as they could throw them (and Keith would take some throwing). The mud-slinging that’s been going on upsets me a bit - I know I’ll go into The Elm before the game on Saturday and I’ll have to watch what I say on this issue because it’s become that emotive. At the end of the day, we all want what’s best for the club, it’s just the detail we might not see eye-to-eye on.I won’t get my ballot paper til Friday (I live just outside London, but use my parents address for all EFC correspondance), and if I haven’t seen something to convince me otherwise by then I’ll be sticking a cross in that yes box.I’m reluctant to do it, because I can’t help thinking what could have been, but deals like this don’t come along very often, and it would take a miracle for a better one to land on the table by this weekend !!
95 Posted 07/08/2007 at 22:17:06
Then i do hope the 75per centers do not in the future complain about the lack of progress on the pitch, about the increasingly poor condition of Goodison Park.
Whinge about being mis led by Mr Bradley, express surprise and fury when the Loop fails to materialise. Weep and gnash teeth when David Moyes decides to ’do one’ because he can no longer work with his hands tied, when we decline once again to be relegation candidates..and finally but not least..we begin to tumble down the Divisions.
Trust me..The Reds will really be having a laugh then.
Remember..i don’t want to hear you complaining about it..for you will have been the reason for it.
that.. i exit the debate
Good luck to the lads on Saturday.
96 Posted 07/08/2007 at 17:10:02
As much as I’ve loved Goodison for the atmosphere and history over the years and would be sad to see it go, this is the 21st century, folks. And we’re living in a ground built over 100 years ago. We can’t stay there forever. Times change. Deal with it. Crap seats (I had to laugh at the "cowshed" comment - try sitting in Lower Bullens, mate)... obstructed views... tiny toilets and food stands...
To those saying we’d be "giving" the city to Liverpool, consider this: If we vote NO, do you really trust LCC to come up with anything viable in less than 5 years? Even worse... if you think the Reds would stick it to us for leaving the city, what the hell do you think they’ll say when they’re sat in their brand-new, flashy stadium while we’re still stuck at Goodison, waiting for the politicians to get their thumbs out their arses? Holy crap... talk about being in their shadow then - we’d LITERALLY be in it, given their own new stadium plans. Plus, considering they’re building it in Stanley Park, where are Evertonians going to park on Goodison matchdays?
The trouble is... for all BK’s true Blue roots, he and KW simply haven’t pitched the Kirkby idea very well. Their PR efforts are poor. The "take it or leave it, no Plan B" stuff was stupid. But it’s not like the plan they have now is that poor. A new stadium for 10-15 mill is a steal. Where else are we gonna get a deal like that? And it’s not like BK (a diehard Blue) and Everton fan Leahy (Tesco CEO) are intent on running the thing into the ground - one project will feed the other.
And if anyone seriously trusts the LCC band of idiots to come up with anything better - and more to the point, viable and something that’s not going to leave us swimming in debt for the next 50 years (since it’s obvious we have no cash), then remember that they POLITICIANS. When was the last time you trusted one of them? It’s a desperate, last-ditch attempt to save face. Think about it: While they COULD produce a viable plan, you have to ask why these so-called plans haven’t surfaced in the last few years and months, when they’ve known all about our intent to have a new ground. The KEIOC "plans" are a joke - a 4-year old could have drawn the new stadium images they came up with.
And to those crying about Kirkby not being in Liverpool, sorry... that’s just nonsense. We’re talking about a measly 4-MILE move here, across an ARBITRARY boundary line drawn by... yep, you guessed it... POLITICIANS! I live in America and have to travel 4 miles to the pub that shows Premier League games, for God’s sake. But I willingly do it so I can watch the boys play.
We simply ain’t gonna attract and retain top talent if we don’t have the facilities and the money that will help us grow. It’s embarrassing to be outspent by Fulham, Man City, Sunderland, etc. But we don’t have a rich, sugar-daddy to help us. So while you might not like it, football is now as much a business as it is a sport and you have to adapt or die. Whining about it isn’t going to achieve anything.
Even if other plans do surface, it’s all rather late in the day now and I very much doubt if anything will provide the same cost benefits and timeframe as the Kirkby one. I think the Board has considered the options and this is truly the one that represents the best move forward for EFC.
97 Posted 07/08/2007 at 23:58:06
At the risk of being shouted down, can I just say I suspect enough has already been said about the whole shooting match. People ought by now to have enough information in front of them to make a decision.
I think those who have been enfranchised should get on with casting their votes and stop ranting about it on here. Likewise, once people have cast their votes, I see no need for them to come back on here and tell the rest of the electorate how to vote.
If I went into a polling station and cast my vote, and then on exiting started to scream at people going in, telling them how to cast THEIR vote (yes, it?s THEIR vote, not mine, not yours) I?d expect the boys in blue to move me along.
One thing that is certain, I’d like to see an end to all the abuse that’s flying around. While I am disappointed in the people running the club not giving the fans the widest choice of options, I am equally disappointed with some in the ?no? camp who have resorted to insult and slander in a desperate attempt to derail the board?s plans. When I read phrases like ?Wyness however is a discrace (sic) he only wants to fund his own pocket? and ?lazy fat shite who couldnt get off his arse?, I cringe. That is not how one debates. Such language merely betrays paucity of argument. I can only imagine such statements emanate from the same ?calibre of Evertonian? who attacked Howard Kendal (and his home) prior to 1984.
Finally, those of you who are enfranchised and have yet to cast your votes, can I suggest you each find a calm quiet moment in which to make your decision. Put out of your mind the emotive language and insults that have been deployed, and decide with your head as well as your heart, and whichever way you do cast your vote, please keep it to yourself. Thank you.
98 Posted 08/08/2007 at 09:21:36
All I want is for Everton to win more matches FULL STOP.
99% of us are attached to Goodison, but I’d rather we were in a new ground (in Kirkby or anywhere near Liverpool) if it meant we could bring in another quality player each season. It just gives us more chance on the pitch.
In my humble opinion RESULTS on the field is the only thing that matters.
99 Posted 08/08/2007 at 11:44:44
No thank you! I’d rather sit in the Elm Tree or Royal Oak on match day talking about the "good old days" than vote Yes.
100 Posted 08/08/2007 at 12:21:35
101 Posted 08/08/2007 at 13:18:12
At least, I hope he was!
102 Posted 08/08/2007 at 15:51:29
Calm Down, Calm Down! - Civil War is not the answer (let’s have none of that nonsense on Saturday!). I think there is solid arguments on both sides, but also a lot of unnecessary rhetoric as well. I’ve been down the various YES and NO submissions and gone "Yep, I agree with that", or "NO, that’s not right..." on all of them. This is our problem - there is no correct answer on this one! Both sides have flaws - Kirby doesn’t feel right, but then again what’s the viable alternative. But if there is no Plan B, does that justify Plan A? etc....etc...
Whatever happens lads, can we try to abide by the ballot decision. I won’t tell you how I’ll vote, but if the majority is YES, I’ll take a deep breath and take a tentative step into that unknown. If it’s NO, then I’ll ponder where that leaves us for the next 5-10 years in a rapidly changing Premiership. I don’t think I’ll be happy with either result, actually, but at least we can get on with doing what we all do best - cheering on the lads and defying the odds against the so called big boys! COYB!!!!!!!!
103 Posted 08/08/2007 at 20:22:34
Saying that kirby is not in liverpool is like saying stubbs isnt a scouser. He comes from kirby. also kirby is still part of merseyside.
plus man utd do not play in manchester and look how successful they are.
this move to kirby will only make Everton a better team.
104 Posted 09/08/2007 at 09:37:04
We don’t even all want a new stadium!
My views, I admit, are based on nostalgia and history. I don’t want the club to move to Kirby regardless of whether its in or out of an invisible boundary its just too far away from where it is now. I believe LCC need more pressure put on them. Its amazing how They who should not be named were granted permission for the Vernon Sangster site!
This ’move’ is being touted as a make or break decision.
FACT is we all deserve our standpoint and some respect for it.
If we vote yes we will all still be supporters. If we vote no we will all still be supporters.
That said, I’m with the pupils of Grange Hill ’JUST SAY NO’.
105 Posted 09/08/2007 at 12:28:23
The description of their plans for Goodison as being heinous is a little bit over the top. Heinous is a word best associated with people like the Gestapo and the likes of Himmler & Co. The plans that KEIOC have drawn up may not be to everyone’s taste.However thay should be given great credit for at least exploring in depth the possibility of redeveloping Goodison.
I keep hearing from people like our CEO that to redevelop Goodison is out of the question.I would merely ask " What investigations have you carried out into the feasiblity of reveloping Goodison ?" What evidence do we have of such investigations ?
At least we can look at the work that KEIOC have done. In an ideal world I would love to see Goodison redeveloped .If we are to move I would accept it more if I was convinced we had looked into the possibility of staying at Goodison and found that a move was the best option.
All I am saying is lets look at ALL the options - and all includes the redevlopment of Goodison.Let’s not forget Newcatle United decided against moving and have completely redevloped St James Park - which is just as land locked as Goodison.
106 Posted 09/08/2007 at 14:36:38
My ’no’ vote is in the post.
See you all at Goodison on Saturday...
107 Posted 09/08/2007 at 15:05:01
That teen/ text speak is very annoying.
108 Posted 09/08/2007 at 16:14:27
As you can clearly see above I state that I will go through the issues AS I SEE THEM.
What I did say is that I will not present my opinions AS facts, which is something a lot of the ’No’ voters do freely, i.e. we will lose fans if we move to Kirkby. How do these people know these things?
109 Posted 09/08/2007 at 17:30:00
110 Posted 10/08/2007 at 09:06:06
I’m not going to go off on one but I just want to say that I think your article is spot on - yes there are other options apart from the Kirkby move, but the don’t come nowhere near in comparison.
Spot on article mate.
Vote YES to Kirkby.
Come on you blues.
111 Posted 16/08/2007 at 23:13:46
the loop feels so right..
say no to Kirkby
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.
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.