Skip to Main Content
Members:   Log In Sign Up
Text:  A  A  A

Deal or no deal?

By Patrick Hart :  13/05/2008 :  Comments (85) :
The deal of the century is fast becoming the lie of the century for Evertonians. Before the ballot to decide whether or not to accept the board?s Kirkby proposal, Everton chief executive Keith Wyness said: ?It is an amazing deal, the deal of the century ? we will be getting a very nice stadium for a small amount of money.?

Tesco chief executive Sir Terry Leahy, a self-declared lifelong Evertonian, went into the financials in a pre-vote open letter to supporters, when he wrote of ?a concrete proposal to own a £150m stadium for around £35m, delivered by 2010/11?.

Fast forward from August 2007 to May 2008 and Evertonians have a right to feel cheated by the ?deal of the century? and also by the hand played by heavyweight broker Sir Terry. The Tesco boss had brought credibility ? a certain business gravitas ? to the pro-Kirkby vote. He is, after all, a boyhood fan of the team and the chief executive of a massively successful British enterprise.

But his quote of £35m for a £150m stadium was, it has transpired, misleading. A report in the Liverpool Echo on 22 April revealed ?the true cost of Kirkby?. The report said that the deal would require at least £78m from Everton. (http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/everton-fc/everton-fc-news/2008/04/22/new-everton-fc-stadium-the-true-cost-100252-20800908/)

The ?very nice stadium? that the club were going to get for ?a small amount of money? was also going to be world-class. Beyond the bluster of conjecture about the venue?s ability to host UEFA finals and any future World Cup, was another promise from Sir Terry. Again in his open letter to Evertonians, published on evertonfc.com, he wrote: ?It is most definitely not a stadium on the cheap. It will be a fitting home for a club of Everton?s tradition and standing. It won?t have the memories of Goodison, but it will be a massive improvement in every other respect.? (http://www.evertonfc.com/news/archive/sir-terry-leahy-open-letter.html)

Such a vision has failed to materialise according to the design review of the ?Kirkby Masterplan? produced by respected government adviser, the Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment (CABE). The review, delivered on 13 March, said of the proposed stadium: ?We are concerned that the stadium design is being delivered by a design and build contractor. It is our view that design and built contracts can produce successful outcomes only when high-quality design is embedded in the process; we do not feel that this has been achieved in this case.?

CABE is quite damning of the entire project in its summary: ?We think the masterplan fails to translate this opportunity into a positive vision of transformation. We also think that both Everton and Kirkby deserve a stadium of first-class design quality, and we are not convinced that this has been realised by the current proposals.? More than that, the whole scheme is ?a lost opportunity? which ?will have a detrimental impact? ? ?we do not think it should receive planning permission?. (http://www.cabe.org.uk/default.aspx?contentitemid=2429&field=sitesearch&term=Tesco%20Kirkby&type=0)

Last summer Keith Wyness had urged Evertonians to vote ?yes?, saying ?we will never get an opportunity like this again?. Well, the opportunity put forward by Everton has already gone, if it ever existed. There is no £150m, world-class stadium costing a mere £30m; nor is there a fitting home for a club of Everton?s standing and tradition.

What CABE describes sounds more like more the dreaded ?cowshed in Kirkby? referred to by the Liverpool city council leader Warren Bradley.

Another argument for accepting the Kirkby move was that it would generate an extra £10m each year for transfers. Even Sir Terry wrote of funds being ?used instead to develop the playing squad?. Everton?s transfer budget and the Kirkby project are seemingly separate issues. What they have in common, though, is an often impecunious board of directors at Goodison Park. The back page of the Daily Post newspaper, on 6 May, told Evertonians an all-too familiar tale: that their manager, David Moyes, would again be working within tight constraints this summer. (http://www.liverpooldailypost.co.uk/everton-fc/everton-fc-news/2008/05/06/nuno-valente-set-to-sign-new-everton-contract-64375-20865793/)

So much for a show of ambition to a manager still to decide whether or not to sign a contract to extend his highly successful reign at the club.

Everton supporters could be forgiven for asking themselves the following question: how can a board of directors who have consistently scraped and borrowed to let the manager compete in the transfer market suddenly conjure £78m for a stadium the fans barely voted for?

The premise for voting ?yes? to Kirkby has already been shown to have been false. Indeed, considering Everton?s starting point in terms of a stadium move compared with most other clubs, it is almost morally reprehensible to relocate one of England?s famous teams from a home that is stately (if a little antiquated) to one that is ramshackle. Goodison is not Ayresome Park.

Some may have accepted the stadium switch 12 months ago because they wished for the club to continue its forward momentum under David Moyes. The board may well be debunking that particular logic too, if they are unwilling to fund the manager?s desire to keep Everton on the up in the months ahead.

So, at the time of writing, what can Evertonians expect? A stadium of puny mediocrity attached to a temple to materialism. In Kirkby. And restricted transfer activity. The common denominator is a chairman and board of directors who are seemingly incapable either of financing Everton properly or of securing the necessary investment to do so. Which can roughly translate as: they don?t have the money themselves but are unwilling to let anyone else have a go.

It was Tesco who made clear last month that the Everton directors have no current wish to dilute their shareholding. (http://www.keioc.net/index.php?mact=News,cntnt01,detail,0&cntnt01articleid=108&cntnt01returnid=15)

There also appears to be a stubbornness at play where the Kirkby scheme is concerned. The chairman and chief executive of Everton will do well not to confuse a grim determination to maintain face and power base, with the guardianship of a football club that is a sporting institution in Liverpool and far beyond.

One last question: would Bill Kenwright contemplate moving a West End theatre to a Croydon business park?

Reader Comments

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


Dave Whitwell
1   Posted 13/05/2008 at 07:54:08

Report abuse

Patrick I might be completely wrong about this, but it is my belief we are now being told that the stadium will cost £78M to Everton. They expect to achieve something in the region of £60M for the naming rights and always had proposed a sale value of Goodison for around £15M. So I don?t really see how we are all being fooled. With these figures in mind and the likelyhood of increase spend when it begins my guess would be that it would cost somewhere between £10M - £30M after the naming rights & sale of Goodison.

Now that doesn?t sound too bad does it?

Also don?t be too downbeat about the Daily Post saying it will be another tight summer as it appears that even Moyes doesn?t yet know how much he has so I don?t see how they know.

Having said all of that after going to the Emirates & then Goodison on Sunday, my major fear regarding the new stadium is that whereever it is or what it cost I want it to have the look & feel of a traditional football stadium with the potential of great atsmopheres.
Ron Leith
2   Posted 13/05/2008 at 08:11:10

Report abuse

I am flabbergasted that people are quoting CABE a Government Quango. Really come off it. For CABE read a bunch of people getting paid very well to do a bit of part time work on the side nwho have to justify their own existence. Ask yourself what would CABE have made of Goodison Park in 1900. What have they said about Liverpool?s ground that is to be built on an historic park will look like a carbuncle and will in years to come be regarded as a massive mistake for the City. Answer nout. Because design is a subjective matter any pillock can have an opinion. A football stadium is a football stadium it can not be made to look like anything else. I think the no vote is jumping on every negative and will destroy our clubs future.
Marc Williams
3   Posted 13/05/2008 at 08:49:09

Report abuse

Dave, I?m sorry but I think you are very wrong on this.
Given Kenwright & Wyness?s appalling record on negotiating deals i.e ;
signing away assets & rights at bargain prices. How on earth do you expect them to get £60 in naming rights? its a nonsense.
Also given the way the world economy is heading I think that there is also a ?perfect storm ? brewing regarding the funding proposals: capital raised from assets will fall, build costs (especially relating to steel costs) are rising & interest/costs on raising capital, loans re-structuring debt etc are soaring.
I just don?t see how a good deal can be acheived within these constraints.
Anthony Newell
4   Posted 13/05/2008 at 09:55:46

Report abuse

Great article Pat but the frightening thing is what the hell do we do about it? The ’intellectuals’ can slag off the likes of KEIOC but they’re all we’ve got. When Peter Johnson was getting out of hand grass roots Everton fans, en-masse made a concerted effort to voice their displeasure - thats what we need now
David Thompson
5   Posted 13/05/2008 at 10:11:01

Report abuse

Dave Whitwell...

£60M for naming rights? What next? Everton to sign Christiano Ronaldo?

Goodison is mortgaged to the hilt - there is no money from Goodison. Whatever amount is paid in naming rights will have to be borrowed - the sponsor pays the money over a period - probably 10-15 years but Everton need the money up fron to pay the builders. Borrowing costs money especially now.

Stop believing every line you are being spoon-fed by the club and take a look again at the excellent article written by Patrick.

Eric Myles
6   Posted 13/05/2008 at 10:21:36

Report abuse

One last question: would Bill Kenwright contemplate moving a West End theatre to a Croydon business park?

If it benefits him. YES
Tom Hughes
7   Posted 13/05/2008 at 10:07:11

Report abuse

Patrick,
Very well put. You have itemised the promises and referenced them for people to read the originals..... you can do very little more than that. This is not being negative for the sake of it, it’s a comprehensive illustration of what has happened.... no conjecture, no hearsay, just direct quotes from the people involved. Yet some will still try to bend the issues to fit their argument even with it laid out for them in black and white. I’m not sure if this is simply an attempt at saving-face by those still trying to justify the unjustifiable.

Dave, £60m for naming rights? What company would part with that amount in one go? Arsenal are only getting £3m per year, and they were in the European cup final not long ago, and are in the mega rich capital in a real state of the art stadium, also, GP is already re-mortgaged beyond its current value. Ron, CABE are respected and completely independent authorities on architecture/design issues..... name calling, and deriding of other’s opinions because it doesn’t agree with yours especially when they are the professionals in that field has been consistant throughout the pro-kirkby campaign. The club even attempted the same with HOK’s assessment of the Loop site, only for the "specialist" wheeled out at the AGM to admit that he hadn’t even read their report. Didn’t stop them making the Loop-bashing headlines previously though to quash the credibility of any other option.

One thing Patrick did miss was the promises regarding Transport..... that particular farce is ongoing, but has already prompted reactions from those involved in logistics/transport. This is a key element of any stadium project, and it falls at every hurdle..... yet it was supposed to be the most accessible stadium in the North (or was it the country?). Can anyone tell me of any other stadium that needs the biggest park and ride scheme in the UK just to be able to function? (A scheme that has been shown to be unviable and is on its umpteenth revision).

ANY of these individual issues would have been enough to kill this whole project if it had been known (admitted) at the time of the vote. Combined, they represent a catastrophic failure of the board to perform their duty in doing what is best for the club, and by not informing Evertonians of ALL the options instead of simply administering Tesco’s hardsell!
Paul Lally
8   Posted 13/05/2008 at 12:03:54

Report abuse

Video found on Youtube - put on a few days ago re Goodison.
Brings a tear to my eye.

We should start the campaign now - LOOK AT ALTERNATIVES - Is that too much too ask on the biggest decision in our history ?

All info is available if BK wants to look.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=oUgdK3C-2GY
Gerard Madden
9   Posted 13/05/2008 at 12:49:25

Report abuse

More holes in this article than swiss cheese! Good response to it though David. I think the Kirkby deal represents a fabulous deal for the club - just having to find £78m for a 50,000 (Extendable to 60,000) new stadium in a strong scouse heartland just 4 miles away! Much of that £78m will be found by naming rights and the sale of Goodison and Bellefield. These are the unavoidable ?facts? that some people choose to ignore - the Kirkby deal was and IS a fantastic deal for the club and I?m delighted.
Christine Foster
10   Posted 13/05/2008 at 12:36:33

Report abuse

Good article Paul and well referenced to. Nothing that can be contested by those who STILL believe that the proposed move to Kirkby is good for the club.
Paul Lally, oh goodness what a video, tell me again why we are moving because frankly I don’t get it and never will. Not when you have a home and a history so great.
I would say this as a peace offering to the board of Directors of Everton FC. I can understand you may have believed the hype you created in promoting the move to Kirkby. I can also imagine that you actually believed you could must the non existent funds that you thought would be required. But I have to ask you now, are you man enough as a board to realise that the deal you thought you had is not the deal that is on the table today? As such are you not morally bound with a duty to shareholders and supporters alike to review and reconsider other options? The viability of Kirkby as an option compared to other proposals, just how can you. continue to preach that you have a mandate for the move. Even if you think you had, you don’t anylonger. That deal is dead.

So, once more I ask that you end the period of exclusitivity in the interests of Everton FC and review all your options in the light of the recalculations, cost, issues, transportations, objections, low quality stadium, need we go on?

You have lost the heart and sould of too many fans, your credibility is lost somewhere in Kirkby.

Stand up and answer us if you can. how us you are worthy of a great club by listening to us and not listening to your own hype.

The season may have ended but we will not leave town.
Gerard Madden
11   Posted 13/05/2008 at 13:15:52

Report abuse

I couldnt disagree more Christine - we’ve just completed a full season - no chants, no protests (apart from the legendary couple o’ dozen after one game) - that is a remarkable achievement by the clubs and its fans considering the Kirkby move is sooo ’unpopular’ - getting back to the ’real world’ though the fans have proved by their actions/voices that most of us are delighted or at least ’content’ - with just a small remaining few of the same old same old names getting flustered on small messageboards ’n forums.
Chad Schofield
12   Posted 13/05/2008 at 13:15:15

Report abuse

Gerard Madden, seriously do you still actually beleive it will be a 50,000 stadium if Desperation Kirkby does actually happen?!

Eric Myles, I take it you haven’t been to Croydon.


Paul Lally, great link.
Dave Wilson
13   Posted 13/05/2008 at 13:05:46

Report abuse

I?m getting heartily sick of this, the claim that we will get anywhere near £60 million naming rights and the sale of GP is abject stupidity, we will never in a million years, get half of that, the gullible fools who who repeatedly claim we will, are fooling only themselves
Lets call a spade a spade here, there was no mistake there was no miscalculation, we were quite simply lied to.
The figures the board quoted in that work of fiction we recieved with our ballot papers has risen by 60% in a few months, the bar on thestandard of the stadium promised has significantly been lowered.
This isnt just £78 million, its £78 million rocketing out of control, were the final cost will be is anyones guess
Either Kirby goes belly up or EFC will.
Tom Hughes
14   Posted 13/05/2008 at 13:30:34

Report abuse

Gerard,
"More holes than a swiss cheese", yet as normal you failed to state an argument against one...... meanwhile Patrick gives you reference after reference.. ......

The "small remaining few" best describes those still backing Kirkby. I don’t need to reference anything to prove that, just check out EVERY fan website/forum, and all current polls. NONE show a majority support for Kirkby, nor anything like it! Most believe this scheme will bomb out before planning, hence some apathy!! There is NO fan website supporting the scheme as there was with Kings Dock.
Gareth Humphreys
15   Posted 13/05/2008 at 13:51:16

Report abuse

Dave Whitwell/Ron Leith/Gerrard Madden

Whilst I appreciate your faith in the board of directors there is no getting away from the following.

(1) In Mr Wyness’s Deal of the century speach from July last year we were told that everton’s contribution to the scheme following the sale of Goodison and naming rights would be circa £10m. Goodison we are led to beleive will raise £15m and for the naming rights Everton are looking at circa £5-6m. Sounds plausible until you realise Arsenal receive £3.3m per year - reality check anyone ?

(2) Sainsbury’s would be interested as an enabling partner if Walton Hall Park became available.

(3) HOK Sport have confirmed in their feasability study that a 55k seater stadium would fit in the loop.

(4) The vote had no alternative proposal (No plan B!) so exactly what were people voting for? This may be the reason that 11000 people never returned their voting slips.
Gerard Madden
16   Posted 13/05/2008 at 15:04:47

Report abuse

Gareth that is just nonesense! As I said we should easily find much of the seventy eight million pounds through naming rights, sale of Goodison and Bellefield - a fantastic deal! You peddle that HOK Sports line again - direct me to a single quote from ANYONE at HOK who has EVER mentioned anything about a ’Loop’, ’Trumpet’ or ’Scotland Road’ - point me to a pdf of any such report done by them - you wont be able to because it simply doesnt exist. As for the voting, well out of those fans who bothered to vote it was a decisive 60/40 in favour of the move and only 28% got off their backsides to vote no! In Kirkby the pro-stadium Labour Party got 60% of the vote and won ALL seats! - As a ’no’er you shouldnt be coming on here pontificating about votes. ;)
Gareth Humphreys
17   Posted 13/05/2008 at 15:13:41

Report abuse

Gerrard

(1) The plan for the new homes at bellfield was rejected on the 12th March and this money was to be used for th new ground. If there was going to be enough in the pot from the 3 sources of income that you states why did KW state in his original speech that we would only have long term debt to the tune of £10m.? Since then the cost of the project has gone up by circa £30M but Knowsley and Tesco’s contribution has not changed a bit. When you consider the £30m & £10m bill as outlined above and the ropey source of income that they were relying on in the first place it does not seem the deal of the centry to me.

(2) Link for the news on the 18 page report from HOK is as follows : http://icliverpool.icnetwork.co.uk/0400evertonfc/0150kingsdock/tm_headline=rival-stadium-plan-will-fit-in-the-city%26method=full%26objectid=19672607%26siteid=50061-name_page.html . The full report can be requested direct from HOK at www. hoksport.com

(3) With regards to the vote issue my point is that all the litereature from Everton didn’t really leave you with any other option - it was either go or stangnate. This, coupled with the rediculous exclsuvity agreement tells me that the board had pretty much decided what they wanted to do anyway. I’m all for a brand new stadium in Kirkby for £10m but unsurprisingly that’s not what we are getting.
(4) Finally, great word pontificating - hats off.
Gerard Madden
18   Posted 13/05/2008 at 15:45:06

Report abuse

Wrong again Gareth! Yes LCC rejected the application for homes to be built on Bellefield a month or two back - you’re not saying that scenario will be the case forever and ever and ever though are you? The club will get the monies from that site when they sell it. There is no link to any HOK report on the HOK site, the only ever mention EFC got on the HOK site in recent years was in relation to the Kings Dock NOT any ’Loop’. As for the ballot - there was a clear question - ’Are you in favour of Everton Football Club relocating to Kirkby? Yes/No’ - and thankfully out of those who got of their backsides to vote 60% voted ’yes’....
Paul Lally
19   Posted 13/05/2008 at 15:58:00

Report abuse

Mr Madden - most people I think have figured out that you some association with the Everton board or Everton FC.
If not they should offer you a job - your blind faith is truly outstanding.

The vote - 2 votes entitled for my household - ballot papers received - none.
Response from EFC when I complained - none

Hardcore fans travelling everywhere non season ticket holders - not allowed to vote

So even before we even get to the lies from Wyness, last years vote is non representitive.

Forget it Mr Madden - you are a mouth piece for Everton FC and nothing will ever change your mind until we are dead and buried in a retail Park.

Youtube link again anyone - http://youtube.com/watch?v=oUgdK3C-2GY

Pass it on via email to all Evertonians you know - I have.
David OKeefe
20   Posted 13/05/2008 at 16:11:48

Report abuse

Is it worth arguing with the Yes voters? especially the hardcore Yes voters who believe that they have not been misled despite all of the available evidence that Patrick has presented.

Its time for the board to answer some questions.

Kenwright’s declaration of David Moyes " as one of the greats" after the mini-revolt over the Spurs debacle in the 06/07 season is spot-on. If the team had not performed this season then the Kirkby issue would have reared its ugly head.

Across the park; the campaign against the yanks only took off when the RS were not performing.

The funny thing is its our club that needs new owners!

Adam Cunliffe
21   Posted 13/05/2008 at 16:05:21

Report abuse

The fact that Evertonians are arguing about it proves that it’s a bad move for the club to make.Usually if a stadium is to be a success then it will have at least 90% of it’s fans backing it but in this case there is probably more than half of the fans against it.

It won’t be a top quality stadium and come 50 years time when I will be 64 and will still be watching the blues we will have the same situation we have now at Goodison.That could all be avoided if we either did Goodison up over an extended period of time or we just hang on untill the REAL deal of the century comes along because it’s out there somewher but Wyness and co cant be arsed looking for it.

I want to be able, in 10 or 15 years or so, to take my kids to a stadium that is fiiting of a team like Everton.My Dad and older brothers first took me to an Everton match in 2002 when I was 8 and we sat in the Lower Glawdys.I was so proud when we came out to z cars and I had spent the whole of friday night memorising the words to "If you know your history" and I was quite suprised when I found out the real version (Shites not Sides and Fuck not Heck) but I joined in nonetheless.My kids won’t have that expirience because Kirby will be nothing like Goodison in any way what so ever.

The TescoDome will have no atmosphere, and won’t even be top-class.The Emirates has no atmosphere but at least it truly is world class not only in its design but in its fascilities, the new Everton stadium looks no different to Sunderlands stadium of of light in all honesty.

Goodison has a triple decker stand, a well renowned "home" end and it is the only stadium in the world to have a church in it’s grounds.It’s distinctive and traditional and FFS we go there every two weeks for a couple of hours we don’t need a palace.

The Yes voters might dismiss this as emotional tosh but Everton and Goodison mean a hell of alot to me as I like many, have so many great memories of the Grand old Lady.And I’m not prepared to give them up for nothing, which is effectively what the Kirby move is.It’s NOTHING compared to Goodison.

P.S Congratulations to KEIOC, you are doing a great job and the majority of Toffeeweb useres are right behind you.Keep it up.
Guy Hastings
22   Posted 13/05/2008 at 16:37:11

Report abuse

As I have stated before and doubtless will again, the move will not happen. There are too many political and financial obstacles. BK is looking for a deus ex machina to get him out of an ever-deepening PR hole. Short of the whole world boycotting Tesco overnight, we?ll just have to rely on the slow grinding process of planning appeals.
EJ Ruane
23   Posted 13/05/2008 at 16:27:49

Report abuse

I have mentioned Alexi Sayle’s ’idiot theory’ here before.

That an idiot, because he’s an idiot, has no idea he’s an idiot.

Not only that, but there’s also every chance, because he’s an idiot, he thinks he’s a genius.

I’m often reminded of this with certain pro-Kirkby posts.

NOT all of them, I hasten to add.

Some are obviously from people who have listened to all the debate and still genuinely believe a move to Kirkby is still the best option.

Whatever I think of their opinions, I have NO problem with them putting forward their opinions.

However when I feel..erm..suspicious of a poster, I DO have a problem.

Who am I talking about?

Those who, without countering arguments from ’no’ voters (and those who now see how the club have duped them) blindly tell us it’s a fantastic deal, loved by all, despite all contrary evidence and posts.

When I (and anyone else with half a brain) feels someone trying to dupe in a STAGGERINGLY OBVIOUS way, iI feel nstead of achieving their objective, their posts simply scream "I’M PART OF A BADLY THOUGHT-OUT OUT DAMAGE LIMITATION EXCERCISE AND I AM POSTING ON BEHALF OF EVERTON FC".

Because they’re idiots, I believe they think themselves clever, therefore can’t see how obvious their posts are.

I realise there are rules here and personal abuse isn’t tolerated etc

However I feel totally justified in calling these people idiots, as I feel that indirectly, their posts are indirectly accusing us of being idiots.

Gerard Madden for example obviously thinks we’re all absolute mugs.

Why?

Ask Alexi!

Gerard Madden
24   Posted 13/05/2008 at 17:24:03

Report abuse

What an odd post EJ! Your post is entirley about other posters and not the issues - you continue that whilst I will continue to note the tremendous advantages a brand new 50,000 (Extendable to 60,000) stadium just four miles away in a strong scouse heartland will bring to Everton Football Club. You continue to post about other posters while I continue to note at the lack of chants and protesting against the move (apart from a couple o’ dozen) over an ENTIRE season, you continue to post about other posters and I will continue to note that 60% out of those who bothered to vote voted for the move in the democratic ERS ballot (only 28% of eligable voters bothered to vote ’no’), you continue to post about other posters while I will continue to note how the people of Kirkby voted 60% for pro-stadium Labour and Labour won ALL the seats to boot! ;)
Jay Campbell
25   Posted 13/05/2008 at 17:34:19

Report abuse

Pick the bones out of that one Madden!!!

Nice one EJ
David OKeefe
26   Posted 13/05/2008 at 17:36:29

Report abuse

Madden is Keith Wyness!

The last post proves it, Gerrard can’t count and neither can Bully.

Lies, damn lies and statistics come to mind.
Colin Wordsworth
27   Posted 13/05/2008 at 17:49:09

Report abuse

So.....the no voters get their wish and we stay at Ye Olde Goodison Park....what next?

....well the shite build their new stadium that casts a dark shadow over ours.....the moneystream flows even more their way!....we redevelop what we can......

not a good scenario is it!

or....we move home....not far.... to a purpose built stadium, on a par with the stadium of light giving Everton the chance to compete on a greater footing than we do now!

....a chance!....potential!....hope!...

...and at a great price!.....

The crux of the argument is location....and who is to blame for that?.....i do not believe that the club have not exhausted all avenues....we need a partner fullstop.

and we have one......one of the biggest and most successful companies in the world, do you think they can afford for the build to fail?...

So it?s all down to location, if it was one metre within the city boundary we would all be saying how great the deal is!....but it is a great deal for the football club.

and We will not be going into huge debt(the rs will be paying 30 mill in interest each season alone!).

so a decent stadium, with huge capacity, at a great price.....or forever be under the shadow of the stadium on the park in our atmospheric but arthrytic old ground?.

It really is a no brainer, we have to move!...it has to be is a great opportunity.
David OKeefe
28   Posted 13/05/2008 at 18:16:11

Report abuse

Colin

We all want whats best for the club, But is kirkby the best we can get?

Your right the crux of the matter is location or more accurately how are we going to get there. The transport plan is ludricious, and unworkable the infastructure for a 50,000 seater stadium will not exist, how many fans want to wait for hours to be crushloaded onto buses and trains, in the wind and rain? Not many I would guess.

Gareth Humphreys
29   Posted 13/05/2008 at 18:02:14

Report abuse

Gerrard, I have no problem with a different point of view but for whatever reason you can’t seem to interperate the facts available to you. The board are portraying a "peoples club front" but then not telling the truth to the people of the club. this is both shameful and hypocritical.



With regards to Bellfield, and at the risk of sounding patronising, surely you can understand that the value of the land is largely dependant on what developers can do with it. At the moment that is drastically less than the board first envisaged. Maybe it can be downscaled to keep the planning committee happy?? Sound familiar???



With regards to the HOK report are you honestly saying that MR Carter and MR Bradley are publicly commenting on a document that doesn’t even exist ????

Concerning the move as a whole I feel it will die a natural death shortly. This will force the board to go back to square one and to, by their own admission, a plan B that doesn’t exist. Considering the importance of this issue that is shameful and their incompetence should not be tolerated any longer.
Colin Wordsworth
30   Posted 13/05/2008 at 18:24:17

Report abuse

Dave, I do think it is the best we can get!

We have a small amount of money to spend on a stadia, I know that Tesco and Everton have been scouring the city looking for a suitable site......nothing was suitable!.....that was offered!....

we need the partner re finance!

Yes it would be great to stay in the City but reality has top take hold and at the end of the day Liverpool is a small city and there aint that many sites big enough!

....and before you say it....the loop is a joke!





Steve Foster
31   Posted 13/05/2008 at 17:32:23

Report abuse

I feel a lot of the anti Kirby poster think the grass is always greener on the other side, there are better places for stadiums, better deals etc out there,

And yes, this ?may? be true, But at the end of the day Kirby does represent a real viable opportunity for a new stadium. This in today?s economic climate is not a common occurrence.

I am 24, and it feels like Everton have been talking about building a stadium for as long as I can remember.

Sometime you have to seize an opportunity when it presents itself; (even if it?s not the perfect option) there will always be a degree of risk with any major decision. But it is necessary to take these risks to enable progress.
Adam Cunliffe
32   Posted 13/05/2008 at 18:20:00

Report abuse

Colin, you?ve summed it up yourself.You?re right it is a decent stadium, and in 50 years time (two generations or so) it will be in the same boat as Goodison is in now.

United are on about increasing Old Trafford to 80,000, no doubt the other lot over the park will of moved to a 80,000 seater, Chelsea will probably have one in 15 years or so if the Russian gets his way and Arsenal?s will probably be at least 70,000.

By that time we will be stuck with a 50,000 seater that we won?t fill because Wyness will of alienated KEIOC members and they will not encourage their future generations to watch the blues.

This move is good for the shaort term, but when you look at it in the long term it?s not ther right thing for our future. Wyness won?t be around to see the dissasterous results of his "Deal of the century" but I and Evertonians of my age will.

I?ll follow Everton no matter were they play but by god I?d sooner it be anywere other than Kirby.
David OKeefe
33   Posted 13/05/2008 at 18:33:14

Report abuse

"The best we can get"

Is that it, no resounding endorsement, just a resounding sigh.

"I know that Tesco and Everton have been scouring the city looking for a suitable site......nothing was suitable!.....that was offered!...."

Care to back that up

Yes it would be great to stay in the City but reality has top take hold and at the end of the day Liverpool is a small city and there aint that many sites big enough!

....and before you say it....the loop is a joke!

Correction Colin your statement above is a joke.
There are sites big enough such as Gp,WHP and the loop, all of which would make more money than Kirkby not that the board would know.
Dave Whitwell
34   Posted 13/05/2008 at 18:15:33

Report abuse

Guys, whether the naming rights are worth £60K or not is irrelevant that is what the board are aiming for, of course if they declared they were aiming for £30m we would all say Arsenal got £60m and that the board were lacking in ambition.

Also it doesn’t matter if the rights would be paid out annually as we could securitise debt against the future revenue and use the cash for the stadium now. The increased revenue from the stadium would be more than sufficient to cover any interest payments. That’s what businesses do, utilise debt to create an asset that delivers further revenue. Also in the current economic climate it is more likely that the debt would be @ a favourable rate as the BOE are reducing rates on almost a bi-monthly basis.

Regardless though my point is generally that a 50,000 seater stadium costing anything less than £100m in the modern day represents fantastic value, no matter how its funded.

That is not to say that I am in agreement with the Kirby move in fact far from it. I just believe from a business and financial perspective it is a great deal and that shouldn’t be the argument against it. For me it is the type of Stadium and location that should be at the top of the agenda.

Also why does everybody presume that because Moyes has’t signed a new contract, the board are not backing him, this is the same board that were accused of messing about with the pinear deal and then suly delivered him at a price of £2.05m not bad in my book! We don’t know about these things because it is better dealt with behind the scenes.
Karl Masters
35   Posted 13/05/2008 at 18:25:17

Report abuse

Before Sunday’s match I took a trip up the M57 to Kirkby en route to Goodison Park.

There were 3 of us - myself a NO voter, a YES voter and a Chelsea fan.

I hadn’t ben there since last May and I was actually surprised that it was even more remote than I had remembered it. The Chelsea fan said he could not imagine Everton playing there. The Yes voter had never been there before and even he admitted that it was a) lacking in any character saying, ’ this could be anywhere’ and more tellingly realised that it is simply too far out of the city centre ( we are NOT talking whether in Liverpool or Knowsley here, but where it is in relation to important other factors such as support base and corporate expectations ) to be a good location.

It took about 20 minutes to get to Goodison in relatively light traffic.

It’s in the wrong place. It’s a poor design. It’s a backward step. Redevelop Goodison just like Villa, Newcastle eyc have done.
Gerard Madden
36   Posted 13/05/2008 at 19:06:49

Report abuse

Karl! What a coincidence! I’m surprised we didnt bump into one another on Sunday - I too took the journey to Kirkby in my car with a couple of others on the way to the match - a ’no’ voter and a supporter of Man Citeh. The ’no’ voter had never been to Kirkby before and remarked he was surprised at the location as he’d only been reading what some had been peddling on small messageboards and forums about it being on the ’soulless outskirts’ (or outer Mongolia!) when in fact it will be at the heart of an expanded vibrant town centre. The Man Citeh fan remarked "Which part of the city are we in now" when we reached Kirkby as there was no noticeable join between the boundaries with a big sign saying - ’YOU ARE NOW ENTERING WOOLYBACK LAND’ - you see the Citeh fan just viewed Kirkby as another part of the city, the Citeh fan also remarked he was jealous of our new ground as it will be a 50,000 (Extendable to 60,000) ground while they’re stuck with a mere unextendable 48,000 seater, anyway we stopped and had a pint at a local where the local people spoke a dialect of English that resembled scouse. After that we jumped back in the car and it only took us around 10 minutes to travel the four miles to Goodison - great day all round. ;)
EJ Ruane
37   Posted 13/05/2008 at 18:15:56

Report abuse

GOT IT!!!!!!

I’ve figured it out!!!

But...I’m going to need a LOT of help proving it to the authorities.

This is a bit like in one of those old flicks, where nobody believes the old drunk who knows what’s going on...until it’s too late.

So, I was just reading Colin Wordsworth’s post and..BANG!

Things became crystal clear.

Ok, some time in the not too distant past, we must (that’s MUST!) have been visited by ’inhabitants’ from Planet Bizzaro.

Heard of it?

Marvel Comics?

Superman etc?

The planet where everything is the opposite?

Anyway these inhabitants, I’M SURE, are here NOW and slowly changing us to be like them.

To accept up is down. black is white and logic is...um..illogic.

So, re-Kirkby.

Although we KNOW what’s on ’offer’ is a Reebok-style stadium, outside the city we’ve always been in, with no way to get there that won’t take fuucking hours AND there’ll be the possibility of losing, not gaining support.

Plus we know it’s a ground that people voted on coz they thought it would be free, but now know will cost 78 million.

And we know we’ll never make more on naming rights than Arsenal.

Of COUUUURSE to us, as yet, un-infected humans, this is insane.

But...BUT!! To these poor....’things’, it will be all perfectly logical.

That’s how you can identify them.

I’d just like to say they’ll.....OW!!!!

Something just hit me in the neck.

Feeling...drowsy....can’t...must....not...sleep........

...So to continue, we should easily find much of the seventy eight million pounds through naming rights, sale of Goodison and Bellefield - a fantastic deal! so a decent stadium, with huge capacity, at a great price.....or forever be under the shadow of the stadium on the park in our atmospheric but arthrytic old ground?. It really is a no brainer, we have to move!...it has to be is a great opportunity.

Cue: Twilight Zone theme.
Alan Clarke
38   Posted 13/05/2008 at 19:19:55

Report abuse

If Gerrard Madden is Wyness can I just voice my disapproval at your running of our club. I can see through your lies and it is obvious that you are in this whole project to line your own pockets. You are right, this is the deal of the century - for you!

If Madden is not Wyness, then I’m sorry because there is probably no worse insult than to be associated with that man.
Gareth Humphreys
39   Posted 13/05/2008 at 19:38:28

Report abuse

Gerrard, I have no problem with a different point of view but for whatever reason you can?t seem to interperate the facts available to you. The board are portraying a "People's club" front but then not telling the truth to the people of the club. this is both shameful and hypocritical.

With regards to Bellefield, and at the risk of sounding patronising, surely you can understand that the value of the land is largely dependant on what developers can do with it. At the moment that is drastically less than the board first envisaged. Maybe it can be downscaled to keep the planning committee happy?? Sound familiar???

With regards to the HOK report are you honestly saying that MR Carter and MR Bradley are publicly commenting on a document that doesn?t even exist????

Concerning the move as a whole I feel it will die a natural death shortly. This will force the board to go back to square one and to, by their own admission, a plan B that doesn?t exist. Considering the importance of this issue that is shameful and their incompetence should not be tolerated any longer.
Dave Wilson
40   Posted 13/05/2008 at 18:47:05

Report abuse

On the 24th of September, KW stated the final figure would be £50 million, Tesco Terry stated that material cost would be £25 million, when asked if his figure included TT??s £25 million, KW answered with a very definite Yes. The cost of this stadium has risen by an astonishing 60% in a few short months, at this rate the cost would have doubled before the year?s out, who do you suppose the club expects to pay for that?
Having realised how foolish they look for believing KW?S ridiculous boast about getting £60 million for the sale of GP and naming rights, the ever dwindling numbers of the yes men,who threw up such "facts" as very good reasons to trust the board, now claim " whether we get £60mill isnt relavent" Sorry but it is to me! As is all the other lies we have been told, people like Madden ? the same Madden who claims he attended a match when posting to this site from his Dovecot home minutes before kick off making it impossible for him to get there ? still makes me laugh out loud when I think of his face when he realised what a plonker he?d made of himself - Will spout nonesence about finding "much" of the now £78 million from the sale of GP and naming rights, He will not however, commit to how much, why? because like KW, he has no clue
That along with all KW?S other silly claims , such as we?ve secured a "very high price" for Bellefield is the reason Kirkby will go down the toilet.
Gerard Madden
41   Posted 13/05/2008 at 19:52:49

Report abuse

Oh what a surprise - ’Frustrated’ Dave Wilson dredging up that time I posted on here at approx. 1.40pm on the day of a home match and he thought it would be nigh on impossible for me to get to GP in one hour and a quarter....sheer bedraggledment!
Dave Wilson
42   Posted 13/05/2008 at 19:49:10

Report abuse

Gerrard

Sorry Sunshine, but your quite clearly telling porkies again
Ethier you were in the cabbage for 3/4 of an hour before you left for GP with your "six yes voting mates" ? or you spent the time driving to Kirkby with two more mates, one a no voter ?
You need a better memory than yours to tell so many porkies me old china
Gerard Madden
43   Posted 13/05/2008 at 20:07:38

Report abuse

How does one event mean another event didnt happen, I dont intend to give you a minute-by-minute account of my match day routine (although you seem the stalker-ish type!) but how does travelling for 10 minutes from Kirkby to the Cabbage for my pre-match pint to meet other mates mean that I didnt travel to Kirkby in the first place with two other mates - you’re clearly obsessed ’n bedraggled - sunshine! ;)
Jay Campbell
44   Posted 13/05/2008 at 20:19:21

Report abuse

Madden is Benitez!!!!

You talk utter codswollop and the club’s future is in tatters if we have the like’s ov you following us!!!

Where’s the protests blah blah blah. It’s the same garbage over and over again that come’s out ov that uneducated gob ov your’s.

I don’t know who i’d rather go out for a bevvy with, you or Avram Grant?? I’d av a whale ov time with you pair ov ribticklers!!!
Karl Masters
45   Posted 13/05/2008 at 20:22:34

Report abuse

How very convenient that Gerard Madden just happened to be doing the same thing as me with - would you beieve it - a car containing a Yes voter, No voter and a neutral just like me?

Of course, that’s if I choose to believe he really was there and is not just trying to shoot me down because he knows deep down that the cat is out of the bag now and Kirkby is just one big mess to add on to a long line of historical Boardroom balls ups at our Club.

Dave Wilson
46   Posted 13/05/2008 at 20:31:57

Report abuse

Touchy !
You come on here to wind people up everytime the stadium debate arises
Then you get all upset when you given a taste of your own medicine
Anyway gotta go to work now
Huge entertainment again though
Marc Williams
47   Posted 13/05/2008 at 20:26:13

Report abuse

E J Ruane

I think I see where you’re coming from on this. I’m pretty sure the films called : INVASION OF THE TOFFEE SNATCHERS, its terrifying & certainly had me hiding behind the sofa.
In it these three characters adopt ordinary identities : one is a shopkeeper, anothers a failed actor whilst the third is just a fat twat who sees a chance to make some cash. They pretend to be acting in the interests of Everton but are really just trying to acheive their personnal agendas which includes moving the club to a barren alien landscape and it being destroyed.
At first the contagion spreads but then ordinary people start fighting back to save the ’peoples club ’ & the film reaches a gripping finale. I won’t spoil it for those who hve’nt seen it but beware as its not for the fainthearted.
As the poster advertising it says ’ In Kirkby no one can hear you scream ! ’
Adam Cunliffe
48   Posted 13/05/2008 at 21:40:58

Report abuse

This is really pissing me off now. This whole Madden and Dave Wilson thing is another example of two Evertonians who have different opinions on the stadium project and have to resort to slagging each other off to get their opinions across..

TheNno voters are getting a bad rep because of people like Dave who, instead of pointing out the sheer facts and figures which provide enough evidence on their own to show everyone that the Kirkby move is a bad thing, he resorts to acusing Madden of being a pathological liar. It might be true but it is going to get us nowhere.

We need to listen to the Yes voters and point out their errors, not ask for a complete report on how they go to the match and what they do before it just to prove that they are wrong. That way we might just get a few of them on our side which is what we need if we are to halt the move to Kirkby.
Colin Wordsworth
49   Posted 13/05/2008 at 22:19:14

Report abuse

Dave

And there is me thinking we were having a sensible discussion!

Transport...standing in the rain.....blah blah....mmmm....let me think...possibly just like walking home to the railway station last Sunday!.....soaked!

There is plenty of time for any transport problems to be addressed!

the Loop....great let’s have the new stadium in the middle of what to all intents and purposes is a glorified roundabout!.....fantastic!

As I have said we cannot afford to do it alone...we need a partner...Tesco are a great partner...they are providing the club with many financial gains.......the only real complaint you have are with location....nothing more

Be realistic, be sensible, think about what is being offered.....it will be a great stadia and one to be proud of!

And before you have a go......have a good look around Goodison and then think of a monolith overlooking it on the park and realise how big a poor relation we will become!....and we will!

ps I am aware that many sites were looked at in the city but the sites offered were not suitable for both partners!....get real!
Jay Harris
50   Posted 13/05/2008 at 21:53:24

Report abuse

Its not Gerrard Madden and some of the other "head in the sand" people we have to convince.

There is enough compelling evidence that Kirkby is a definite non starter for EFC without repeating it ad nauseum on here.

I havent seen a word of justification for Kirkby from any yes voter nor the club.

and Dave Whitwell the reason a lot of people on here have no trust in the board is because of the constant stream of lies and incompetence coming out of their mouths.

And it?s still happening:

DM - "I dont know whats happening about my contract nor what will be available in xfer funds" "I find it strange that I have only 1 year on my contract and its not bben discussed yet"

KW - "DM and the chairman have been discussing his contract for months everythings fine and everybody?s happy"

BK - " I?m fuming, there is a 5 year contract worth £10 million waiting for DM"

Now which one of those 3 would you believe.

After

"The cheque will be in the bank in the morning"

"I wouldnt sell Rooney for £50 million"

"I am seeking investment 24/7"

"The £30 million for Kings Dock is ringfenced"

"The stadium will be world class"

"The stadium will be virtually free"

"There is no plan B"

"GP will only hold 37,000 even if developed"

I?m sure there?s also quite a few I?ve missed.
David O'Keefe
51   Posted 13/05/2008 at 22:55:00

Report abuse

Drop the sarcasm Colin.

Raising the spectre of a new Anfield is no reason to go to Kirkby. You make the decision on Kirkby on its own merits or failings.

Colin read the transport plan for Kirkby, before making facetious remarks. In fact do some basic research into Kirkby such as reading the planning and financial documents.

Finally, Colin I have no time for wind up merchants. If you want to participate in the debate do some research.
Neil Pearse
52   Posted 13/05/2008 at 23:03:28

Report abuse

Baffling! The ’BIG LIE’ is that we were told we were going to get a "very nice" (quote) stadium for £35M, and now it seems we will get said stadium for - well, £78M less whatever we get for naming rights, sales of assets etc..

Let’s be conservative (I agree the £60M for naming rights is silly). So maybe we will now get a very nice stadium for say £50M. My God! Sack the Board! I have been violated by vile lies!.

Sometimes I just can’t believe some of the stuff I read here. There are plenty of reasons to be against Kirkby (out of the city, too far away, transport issues, next to a Tescos, poor design etc. etc.). But as a financial deal it is still remarkably good in comparison to anything else that is realistically available. £50M for a brand new 50,000 football stadium is remarkably good by any standards. None of the repetitive ’shock horror’ protestations on here can alter this basic fact.

The problem with you NOs is that you are so against Kirkby you throw anything at it - even utter nonsense. You have some good arguments. The financial one is non-existent.
Jay Harris
53   Posted 13/05/2008 at 23:05:41

Report abuse

Colin

FYI the Loop footprint is the same as St James Park (a 60,000 seater).

There are construction problems with the loop which would require a plinth being built which was estimated by experts to cost less than the decontamination of the Kirkby Landfill site which will cost millions before construction of the stadium can commence.

The Kirkby Transport problems cant be addressed because you cannot put a transport and infrastructure plan for 50000 every 2 weeks in an area with a population of only 40,000!!

Read the transport report done by Everesco?s own experts.

It was changed from a park and ride to a park and walk at least 2 miles or get a bike.

Why do we have to have Tesco as partners there are thousands of large scale commercial organisations seeking large scale enabling development.

And any fool who thinks Kirkby will generate more income than a reveloped GP or stadium in Liverpool needs to check in to the local mental ward.

Kirkby will cost around £10 million a year in interest.

We will be lucky to get £2.5 to £3 million a year in naming rights.

We will be lucky to get additional gate receipts through increased prices of say around £1 to £1.5 million.

I cannot see any extra Corporate function income but lets even assume that's £1 million.



So we?re even struggling to pay our loan interest off let alone make an "extra £10 million" a year for players as claimed by a certain very honourable gentleman.
Colin Wordsworth
54   Posted 13/05/2008 at 23:23:24

Report abuse

Dave

Who is trying to wind who up here?

The deal as it stands is a great one for Everton Football Club.......even if it costs £78 mill....which you and I BOTH KNOW....IT WON?T!

It?s a Kirkby issue......no more no less!.... The transport issue is a red herring and a lame excuse for not moving!

Let me remind you it is not a mickey mouse partner we are with.... but a world-class company who are a great success and we will do well to hold on to their shirt tails!

BE HONEST IT?S ONLY THE LOCATION YOU DON?T LIKE........PATHETIC!.....

Neil Pearse
55   Posted 13/05/2008 at 23:27:25

Report abuse

Well, Jay, if you are right, then at least you can be happy about one thing. This is going to be such a financial disaster for the club that it will crater the value of Kenwright’s shares. So at least the man you hate so much is going to make nothing out of the Kirkby move. If he is taking us to Kirkby to make money for himself then he really is a complete halfwit. If you are right, he would be much better selling his shares right now before he inflicts this financial disaster on the club. I’m just trying to cheer you up!
Colin Wordsworth
56   Posted 13/05/2008 at 23:35:37

Report abuse

Jay

I’ll tell you what!.......let’s all put our heads in the sand and stay where we are, and not attempt to move forward and revitalise our beloved club!!

As I have said before we cannot do it on our own....we don’t have the cash!......the loop is round the bend!.......no good!

I walked from Bank Hall on Sunday......not exactly close!.........so don’t qoute rubbish!

LOCATION IS YOUR ONLY PROBLEM!

10 MILL INTEREST.....MY A##E!
Glen Naylor
57   Posted 13/05/2008 at 22:33:05

Report abuse

My first post.. I’ll keep it short, Other posters have spelled out how wrong Kirkby is ie transport links, poor design, high borrowing costs......On a personal note this season has been tainted for me by this impended move to disaster...sorry Kirkby,... Its like a black cloud overhead . To explain, I have been going to Goodison since 1974 then aged 9, its been a great journey,... ie Rotterdam, league titles and FA cups but also low times when only our belief that things will get better kept us going, Then we show the football world how big we are in Nurnberg ,Best support in the world and no trouble..
Everton is more than just 90 minutes on match day.... Its meeting friends/fellow fans before the game, Its the the craic...Its the history that surrounds the area...Then the main event Everton at Goodison.... The best feeling in the world when we win,not so good when we don’t but there is always the next game..
After the game.... straight home ,local pub or Town, the choice is ours

Everton the first team of our fine city.......

Bill Kenwright don’t you dare take this away from us...Everton will slowly die if this happens....
Give this money if it exists to David Moyes...
WE MUST NOT MOVE TO KIRKBY !!!!!!
COYB
Jay Harris
58   Posted 13/05/2008 at 23:31:38

Report abuse

Neil Pearse weve danced around this one before and I guess we will never agree so I dont know why I am wasting my time but here goes:

FACT 1. KW stated that the stadium would be virtually free, inferring that Tesco/KBC would be funding the majority of it.

THEY ARE NOT

FACT 2 KW stated it "Will be a world class stadium"

IT WILL NOT

FACT 3 KW stated it "will include a Transport system that will be the best in the country"

IT WONT BE

FYI the actual stadium cost will be £130 million and climbing not £78 million.

EFC have been charged with finding £52 million in retail enabling contribution.It is not quite clear who will pay this upfront or who will be responsible for any shortfall but the inference is it will be EFC responsibility.

It will cost millions to decontaminate the land which we are led to believe is in those costings.

GP is mortgaged to over 15 million and its estimated current land value subject to planning is only 13 million.

We have just been refused PP in West Derby so Even if we assumed we got 5 million that would just about cover the cost of setting up Finch Farm.

There are no other assets to speak of.

If you listen to most experts on naming rights they will say we will be lucky to get £3 million a year for 7 to 10 years and as regards any shirt sponsorship (which was included in Arsenal?s naming rights deal) that will be similar to what we would get wherever we play (in fact I dont know why we couldn't get naming rights for a redeveloped GP).

Now if we assume the interest costs to be around £10 miilion a year I cannot understand in my wildest imagination where the financial justification for KIrkby is let alone the location,transport and infrastructure problems created.
Jay Harris
59   Posted 13/05/2008 at 23:52:08

Report abuse

Colin
I?m not advocating burying our heads in the sand.

Thats where I think they currently are.

GP is not about to fall down or be closed down.

Yes there are restricted views and inadequate corporate facilities but dont let bullshit lead you to believe the panacea of extra corporate revenue and less obstructed views will significantly increase our income.

It wont especially not in Kirkby.

The only "new" premiership stadium with a significantly larger capacity than GP is The Emirates and of all the other grounds the only ones with a capacity of more than GP
is Man U,Newcastle and Man City all the rest are within a couple of thousand of GP going down to low 20000.
In fact White Hart Lane only has a capacity of 36000 but has double EFC?s income.

Because the main source of income other than gate receipts is broadcasting and marketing not corporate hospitality.

A number of experts have come on here laying out how GP can be developed over time on a similar budget to Kirkby.

That for me would be the lowest risk option and we would still own our own ground unlike leasing at Kirkby.
Neil Pearse
60   Posted 14/05/2008 at 00:12:30

Report abuse

Fine Jay. We disagree. But let me just point out that you VIOLENTLY disagree with most of your fellow No voters. Much more than you disagree with me.

You believe we are so miserably poor that we can do nothing other than moderately upgrade Goodison on a very measured and tentative basis. So I hope you will join me in future in posting against all the fantasists who persist in going on about how we might be able to afford some new world class stadium in the city. You and I at least agree that that is utter nonsense.

Personally I believe you are far too unambitious for our football club, and that we can do much better than the bleak future you project for us. Fortunately Kenwright is much less of a pessimist than you. Nil satis?
Glen Naylor
61   Posted 14/05/2008 at 00:06:17

Report abuse

re last post
I would rather play at at Anfield when it becomes empty and redevelop Goodison over a couple of seasons than move to Kirkby...It was ours first and we also won our 1st league title there.
I know its sounds bad but Kirkby is so much worse.

Desperation anything but Kirkby !!
Colin Wordsworth
62   Posted 14/05/2008 at 00:29:43

Report abuse

Jay

This is a huge emotive subject that has had bad pr from both sides.

I have no affiliation with the club other than being a season ticket holder!However, as much as I love Goodison, it is a poor stadium by modern standards. We have the potential to fill a 50,000-seater stadium! I just feel that it is time to move on in the hope ? yes, hope that we are rebranding and reshaping the club in the correct way!

I feel that if we do stay we will eventually end up like say Ipswich Town: great club.....but.... We need to progress.....and quickly! I believe the lease on the new stadium is 999 years... that?s almost as good as ownership... not a real argument!

Surely there will be greater income streams and potential in a new stadium away from the other new stadium!.... it gives us a better chance to grow and compete!
Neil Pearse
63   Posted 14/05/2008 at 00:45:52

Report abuse

Jay, finally to cross swords once more on an old topic between us - leasing or owning assets. Why are you so obsessed with owning physical assets? We are a football club not a property developer.

Here’s a proposal. I think we should sell any remaining physical assets that we have left as soon as we can get a good price for them. Let’s call the proceeds from this ’The Manuel Fernandes Transfer Fund’. Or would you rather own the playing fields and buildings instead?
Dave Wilson
64   Posted 14/05/2008 at 05:10:17

Report abuse

Colin Adam and of course Gerrard

Your all right of course, this is a serious issue and my attempts to ridicule and belittle fellow blues, by picking holes in their posts simply because the have opposing views to mine were juvenile and contribute nothing to the debate

Patricks article was terrific and I hope the debate is allowed to continue - without me
Sorry Guys, had an hour to kill and got carried away,
Derek Thomas
65   Posted 14/05/2008 at 07:39:10

Report abuse

In today?s New Zealand Herald business section was a half page article on the Liverpool One / Grosvenor development, Phase One, Billion pound etc etc.

Phase one ffs, there was a picture of the head honcho with the model and all these people in the back ground with their RED shirts with Liverpool One slogan on.

And we want to move.... WHERE !! ??
Adam Cunliffe
66   Posted 14/05/2008 at 07:45:17

Report abuse

Well in Dave. If we keep belittling the Yes voters, like I said before, we will get nowhere. The facts speak for themselves. If they choose to ignore them then it?s there mistake and they will be the ones to blame if we get carted of to Kirkby.
EJ Ruane
67   Posted 14/05/2008 at 09:25:00

Report abuse

Neil, you say..

"Let's be conservative (I agree the £60M for naming rights is silly). So maybe we will now get a very nice stadium for say £50M. My God! Sack the Board! I have been violated by vile lies!"

I realise "My God! Sack the Board! I have been violated by vile lies!" is supposed to be sarcastic... but it also happens to be true.

You HAVE been.

So have I and every other Evertonian.

Your ?trick? is an old and incredibly desperate one.

Add a sarcastic tone whilst telling the truth and hope that tone makes people think ?yeah I?m probably over-reacting?.

EG: "Oh yeah, we?re SOOOO awful, nailing that beardy prophet guy to the cross - boo hoo"

Doesn?t work.

The lies, whether ?vile? or otherwise, ARE lies and to accept and/or forgive them, makes you, in my opinion, part of the problem.

If in...ahem...?real life? somebody continually lied to you, you would call them spoofing, bullshitting nob-heads and take everything they said with a huge sack of Saxa.

Why with this shower of P-R-O-V-E-N liars, are things different?

I?m genuinely curious.

Harry Charles
68   Posted 14/05/2008 at 10:14:27

Report abuse

The true reason while 11,000 season ticket holders did not vote was the timeing of the vote, in AUGUST, when the majority of people have their holiday. There were three in my household who could not vote, times that by say four thousand households and there is your twelve thousand votes missing. I wrote to Everton [no reply]. Great time to have a vote [not] ? a farce. If Moyes leaves ypu will know why, The Board will have sacked him.
Ej Ruane
69   Posted 14/05/2008 at 11:02:48

Report abuse

’Valid’?

If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, looks like a duck...
Andy Duff
70   Posted 14/05/2008 at 11:13:58

Report abuse

Prior to the voting when this project was first announced I was all for the move. The whole Knowsley is not Liverpool argument did not wash with me as I come from Huyton. I challenge anyone to go to Huyton and not call the people living there scousers. The same is true for Kirkby

So when I eventually got my ballot having had to call Everton 3 times for some ?reason? I did not get mine through the post. I read all the glossy brochures promises etc

I then changed my vote to NO. Reason being? The survey was produced on behalf of Everton The arguments presented were totally one sided. I would have liked to have seen a totally independent survey sent out with balanced arguments from both sides. What we got to me looked like a blatant attempt to steam roller people into voting yes I simply asked myself why are they so desperate..

No business would go into a project of this scale without a plan B or a contingency. What would they have done if the vote turned out a NO or were Everton really that confident of YES vote.. Maybe Kirkby is the best option but I would have least like to have had all the cards on the table to allow me to make an informed decision .Do I think any less of people who voted YES after reading it? Not at all it is their choice their vote.

What annoys me more about this whole debate is how it is turning Evertonians against each other. Some of the personal insults aimed at people are ridiculous and serve no purpose. The more this whole debate rages on the more it is starting to seriously worry me. Both sides seem to be further from each other than ever. Anything that divides a fan base as such can only have a detrimental effect on the club. What will out future hold a splinter group of fans breaking off forming their own club and starting again like Wimbledon, Man Utd fans etc have done?

It is time for the club to act before the damage is irreversible. We need an open public debate with representatives from both sides allowed to give their arguments. All argument must also be backed up. No puling of figures from thin air. Minutes of the meeting should be produced independently and be published on the official site along with all the fan sites.

Then I would like to see one final vote on this. The club will in due course be mailing thousands of fans their new season tickets. Why not have one last vote contained within without all the hype and balanced arguments no spin. Given a balanced argument we may find that Kirkby is our best option. I truly believe a lot of this fighting is caused by not knowing all the facts. Rumours and counter rumours being spread. If the vote is returned as YES we must stand together and back the move. End all this debate once and for all. If the vote is returned NO it is back to the drawing board.

Us toffees must stcik together
Tony Williams
71   Posted 14/05/2008 at 11:23:22

Report abuse

EJ, you are very fond off those little quips aren’t you?

If it looks like a person who will not accept anyones elses point of view and starts to try and belittle the other poster with silly quips and sounds like a person who will not accept.......you get my drift, I am just not as good at it as you perhaps? ;-)
Ej Ruane
72   Posted 14/05/2008 at 11:53:03

Report abuse

Tony - it’s not about me not accepting anyone else’s ’point of view’.

If you think Spain is a lousy holiday destination and I think it’s great, I’m more than happy to accept your point of view.

However if you tell me it’s a lousy holiday destination because it’s freezing cold most of the time, I’m NOT going to accept it because it’s bollocks.

As are the views of those who tell me that the (again...sigh) P-R-O-V-E-N lies of Mr Beef and Mr Darling, are acceptable.

They’re not.

I hope this ’quip free’ post is more to your liking.
Tony Williams
73   Posted 14/05/2008 at 12:15:51

Report abuse

EJ is makes no difference whether your post is to my liking or not and I would not expect nor want you to alter any of posts just to appease me or any other poster for that matter, that is the beauty of a forum with the mixed bag of posters.

I just have an issue with people who try to belittle another poster and it seems that it is ok, as his views are different to the majority of posters on these types of threads, however, one of our other well known posters get protection from others and even some in higher positions on this board.

jayharris
74   Posted 14/05/2008 at 12:27:50

Report abuse

Colin
I agree with your sentinent but not the location.
Kirkby will NOT IMO generate more net income.
For a start there will be a massive interest bill to pay before we break even.
Secondly and more importantly it has been proven that a "Regenerated" GP will hold 55,000 including hospitality seats and I believe will generate far more income than Kirkby.

Now as regards Kirkby I have 2 main problems :

firstly the Transport and infrastructure thats only designed for 40000 residents.I will say no more just read the transport plan and reports on it for yourself there are plent of links to it.

Secondly the design. It looks like an extension to Tesco and IMO is not even a patch on current GP.
Christine Foster
75   Posted 14/05/2008 at 12:11:02

Report abuse

Andy Duff. Well said. For the past few months I have repeatedly posted the same belief, that the club has a responsibility to the fans and need to answer some of our questions.

There is no point in point scoring in a debate that no longer has credibility or justification for a move to Kirkby.

Not one Yes voter posting has agreed that the board has acted impropery, lied or made false statements. Instead they now turn around and say what a great deal Kirkby still is. Not one Yes poster has answered the facts except by putting down ANY other option.

The fact is that ths stated $78m will be no such thing. Try adding the retail footprint shortfall, the spiralling cost of build adn that $78m will look more like $150m by the time the first supporter would enter.

Still a great move? ok.. add the cost of trnasportation subsidies, oh bugger..whats the point guys? If you can’t see this deal stinks for ANY reason then you need to lie in a dark room for a long time.

Kirkby is not an ideal location. Even IF it was well constructed, world class transportation etc The whole ethos of association in a retail park is wrong. If its not good enough (even?) for Kirkby how can it be good enough for Everton?

As Andy rightly states the ONLY facts that we can base a vote on were supplied by the club. EVERY fact supplied by the club has now been shown to be false, unfounded, disputed, incorrect or baseless on fact.EVERY point.

Stop the shouting match and point scoring guys and ask why the club is silent?

There is no need to bait each other or wind each other up. The deal of the century needs justifying. Let the club answer its critics.
jayharris
76   Posted 14/05/2008 at 12:45:46

Report abuse

Neil
the reason I prefer Tangible assets (GP) to Intangible assets(Players) is totally logical and is the reason most financial institutions will lend on Tangible assets but not on intangible assets.
So you can borrow against GP to buy players whilst still retaining ownership.

If EFC had just bought players in 1900 instead of buying GP the club would not now own a 40000 seater stadium that will cost 130 million to replace.

It s exactly the same argument as buying your own house rather than renting it.
Ed Fitzgerald
77   Posted 14/05/2008 at 13:50:12

Report abuse

Andy/Christine

The reason why people are engaged in slanging matches on here and other forums is that it is the only place to conduct a debate/argument etc. The club won’t entertain one as they know what the outcome will be?

Andy - I can only agree with you about the ballot it was a shambles

Neil - Your point about Kirkby still being a relatively cheap alternative is probably true, but the real question is, is it good value for money in the long run?

I would rather wait and save money to buy a pair of good shoes than rush out and buy a pair of cheap tacky shoes that go out of fashion quickly and fall to bits. Its likely the old classic shoes will still look better than the cheap new ones and will last longer with a bit of mending etc!!

Thats enough shoe analogies for now!!
Ej Ruane
78   Posted 14/05/2008 at 13:57:09

Report abuse

Tony you (I think deliberately) miss the point, but I’m running out of ways to express myself, (nb: the blindlngly bleeding obvious, can only be written so many ways).

You complain..

"I just have an issue with people who try to belittle another poster and it seems that it is ok, as his views are different to the majority of posters on these types of threads, however, one of our other well known posters get protection from others and even some in higher positions on this board"

(what’s this, 5th form at St Bunty’s? Put a name!

Let’s get this straight, if one poster states facts - undeniable, undisputed facts - and these are ’countered’ in a post that ignores those facts (and argues in spite of them) then it is THAT poster who is belittling himself AND the debate and can’t complain if ridicule is his reward.

If you can’t see or understand the difference between an argument containing facts and a counter-argument containing none, that is your problem.

Oh and it’s not enough to irately say "Yes of course I do" (followed by some accusation of ’snottyness’).

If you honestly CAN see the difference, let’s have counter-arguments based on what you KNOW rather than what you think.

Opinions on this issue that are not based on fact, are pointless and annoying.

I’ll give you one example, then I ’m done with this.

I say Everton told us the stadium would be free.

Now it turns out it will cost (at least) 78 million.<

This is fact.

As a counter ’argument’ (on this thread) we get Colin Wordsworth arguing.

"The deal as it stands is a great one for Everton Football Club.......even if it costs £78 mill....which you and I BOTH KNOW....IT WON?T!"

See the difference?

It’s a ’great’ deal because.......Colin says so.

It won’t cost 78 million because.....Colin says so.

NO facts.

If you (or Gerard or Colin or anyone else) can’t see the difference, don’t blame ME if you end up looking stupid
Andy Duff
79   Posted 14/05/2008 at 14:43:34

Report abuse

Ed, I agree debate is needed. However, some posts are not constructive debate but petty insults. I think Yes and No voters should join forces and petition the club for answers and an open public discussion. Until this happens the petty in fighting will simply continue. Any club officials reading this please act before the gulf deepens.
Andy Loyden
80   Posted 14/05/2008 at 15:19:10

Report abuse

One thing I thing we could all agree on.
An EGM needs to be called to discuss all the relevent issues which have been raised over the past months.
The board have kept us in the dark for too long.
Jay Harris
81   Posted 14/05/2008 at 16:35:35

Report abuse

Andy
the real problem is the board have been in the dark for too long.
Chad Schofield
82   Posted 14/05/2008 at 18:03:27

Report abuse

Well Jay iff they were the it bodes the question who has been at the helm - Mr Magoo?! He certainly doesn’t seem to have done very well in the PR dept so far.



Andy Duff, agree with your sentiments, but I also find it infuriating when people do not actually read links or indeed what someone has posted. Gerard Madden to Gareth Humphreys.

Anyway I for one am loving the shoe analogy Ed Fitzgerald.
Alan Willo
83   Posted 15/05/2008 at 13:28:35

Report abuse

Let?s all get real, the no?s have tried hard to post their view and some are interesting but what they all lack is another deliverable option. The majority of EFC fans are not bothered about the move hence not one single protest of any note over the season. When next season starts then it will probably be too late. As usual you have been driven down the typical scouse route of being a victim and throwing abuse rather having debate with LCC, Tesco and EFC.

KEIOC whilst having an honest objection have never contributed any weight behind their view and allowed themselves to be the patsy of LCC and the few militants that love to fight the establishment. I don?t live in the City any longer but spent 28 years just close to GP and at times people are far too insular to understand that life does go on outside County Road ? even though we all love County Road.

Stop attacking EFC and direct your abuse at LCC ? they have (or had) the ability to solve this situation but the have chosen to support LFC not EFC!!! They are the enemy not our own board.

David OKeefe
84   Posted 15/05/2008 at 14:12:38

Report abuse

Another get real from a yes voter.

Have you actuallly been following the debate? there have been plans for a redeveloped GP, WHP and the Loop theses alternatives came from the fans.

Also Alan 10000 voted against the move to Kirkby.

LCC offered the Kings Dock so stop attacking the shadow and aim your ire at those responsible for this farce.
Michael Kenrick
85   Posted 15/05/2008 at 15:46:26

Report abuse

Alan, just on your last point, the Kings Dock fiasco had a massive souring effect on any working relationship between LCC and the Everton Board/Bill Kenwright. If Kenwright had not acted as he did, surely the relationship would be a thousand times better? But in that case, we’d be in the Kings Dock now and all this would be moot!

Does this falling out not go a very long way to explain the huge contrast in the way requests from and cooperation with EFC and LFC have been handled by LCC since that time? Stanley Park to name but one...

Personally, I think the boat sailed form Kings Dock (pardon the pun!), and our fate was sealed. Ranting at either party is now fruitless. And it explains perhaps why the only option BK could then pursue was outside the City. Burnt bridges and all that...

Add Your Comments

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

Log in now

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



© ToffeeWeb
Menu
OK

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