Essentially, the norm is to highlight a piece of good news and sandwich between it the message you actually want to get across (usually not so good or laying the ground for expected bad news). In effect you dress up the bad news with a piece of good news! Here in this piece the headlines are good news! We won?t sacrifice funding player purchases on account of the new stadium. Wonderful! Thank goodness for that, we are all relieved aren?t we? That?s all we care about so any other comments are just padding aren?t they? Well actually no they're not.
Read on: we have the leverage on the politicians to call in a few favours from labour politicians, hmm doesn?t that smack a little of desperation? Then an admission that a public inquiry could kill the project from the club's perspective; That?s a threat, short and sweet to Knowsley, Tesco and the government.
Then there is the ADMISSION that Plan B is to redevelop Goodison Park.. Well, Halleluiah suddenly it?s an option? After all that has been said and the reasons why it can?t be an option??
Me thinks My Ross was being very clever in announcing quietly in an obscure and limited edition periodical what may well come to pass. He effectively laid down the foundations for an excuse to bail out of the Kirkby Stadium and for the announcement of redevelopment of Goodison Park. Leak it out to lessen the impact and the flak at a later date by saying, ?This has always been our stated position? and pointing at the article.
Cute, very cute. But not cute enough. It also highlighted the less than spectacular ambition of the board in stating that; The Kings Dock project was "perhaps too spectacular" and that this time around Everton, Tesco and Knowsley Council clearly know what they must provide financially. I think perhaps the Kings Dock in its overall concept frightened the board and took it far beyond its comfort zone. Kirkby is something they can handle better. Well guess what, if they had the vision and leadership (courage) we would have had something to be proud of. Something Spectacular... instead of ........??
I fear Mr Ross may well regret those words for it speaks volumes of the board and how they have rationalised their decision not to go ahead with Kings Dock.
It also shows a crack in the silent resolve. Otherwise unheard of admissions and alternatives suddenly raised as possibilities. I think there was more to this than met the eye. Interesting times ahead, I wonder how the spin will go? Mr Ross may well have to work overtime in the months ahead....
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 26/06/2008 at 21:48:35
The ground move does not rest easy on any Evertonians shoulders and we are all frustrated at largely being kept in the dark. This has left a sickening taste at a time when we should be enthused and positive about progress on the pitch. However when the parties take cheap swipes at each other we are just devaluing our proud history. I know I will be roundly critisized for saying it but I feel there is an element of the anti kirby group who are almost waiting for the club to sink to its knees so the can savagely put the boot in on the board
A lack of dialogue and trust has led to this situation of mistrust between the club and the fans, please don’t fuel the fire with petty outbursts at the board for trivial articles. Let’s stick to facts and not let cloud the issues with non stories dreamt up from tenous links.
2 Posted 26/06/2008 at 22:18:36
Them imcompetant oaf’s are to blame for everything. If they are not then who is?? Moyes?? don’t think so. The players??? Again million miles away, The fan’s who turn up in their thousands year after year?? Bollock’s.
They are solely responsible.
3 Posted 26/06/2008 at 22:11:44
4 Posted 26/06/2008 at 22:22:28
Please take a couple of weeks off from this, nothing can be done either way now until the Government makes its decision. Please don’t think that they will consider the narrow interests of us Blues against the wider regeneration of the North West, regardless of which side they come down on.
I doubt your mind was drawn but rather you spend hour after hour looking for the evidence of what you want to see until you see it.
Have a holiday from it, then you can work out your strategy for whatever happens next. This stage of your "war" is over for now.
It really really will do you and the some of the rest of us some good.
5 Posted 26/06/2008 at 22:39:24
Won’t kirkby still be regenerated without a stadium ? Tesco’s still have plans without the Everton input . It’s called a contingency plan . Without the stadium it just means the size of the development will be reduced to a more managable and acceptable size for the area
6 Posted 26/06/2008 at 23:00:48
I know, my point is that sometimes, just sometimes it worth giving a subject a rest for a bit. Do you think all the comments on this board might have at this point become a "white noise" to all but the most ardent either way.
When something happens fine but to start to have headlines on some accountancy magazine making what is of course a lazy journo mistake and Christine spending her time looking for a smoking gun, just looks well a little anal.
I’m bored with it all for now, and I know i don’t have to read but I cannot ignore anything to do with Everton. Sad but true
7 Posted 26/06/2008 at 23:07:35
So I think your asnwer is not quite right in so much that if it was not for the large retail then the ground would go through. If only we had some money !
One final point I am confused about how can moving to Kirkby be the death of Everton yet still make Kenwright and the board lots and lots of money. In particular as the public element will draw the attention of the audit commision. In fact don’t answer that as I need a holiday from all this.
8 Posted 26/06/2008 at 22:56:30
Remember that famous quote : WE WILL BE THE MOST TRANSPARENT CLUB IN THE COUNTRY !!!!!!!!
9 Posted 27/06/2008 at 01:21:03
10 Posted 27/06/2008 at 03:57:48
Redeveloping GP is now plan B - gasp, gasp. Of course it is plan B. BK has stated that in the past that if Kirkby fell through, that redeveloping GP is only other option. He also said that it would be more expensive, take longer and there is no guarantee that we’d get planning permission, agreement to expand etc.
Similarly, if the Govt calls in the project then EFC’s involvement with Kirkby project would probably be stuffed. Again, no big surprise. They also haven’t hidden the fact that financially the deal is finely balanced. They have been banging on about that for ages and are obviously trying to put as much pressure on the Govt as possible. You may call it desperation, others would say that it shows how important this decision is to the board and the club.
11 Posted 27/06/2008 at 07:46:28
12 Posted 27/06/2008 at 09:08:02
I read the article but regarding the redevelopment issue Ian Ross was not actually quoted as making any comment.....
As Ciaran Duff aluded to, redeveloping GP would be very expensive and we would get no additional help from anyone. Plus alot of hopes then get pinned on LCC to provide support..... don’t then get me started on LCC and there continued lack of support for the blues.
P.S. I’m a Wirral blue and will follow them at GP or Kirkby.
13 Posted 27/06/2008 at 09:13:26
Alan Wilo, Since when did you agree with ANY post I have written? I have not responded in like because I see no point. You have one take on life I have another. End of story.
Carl / Kev appreciate you tired of it and whilst it would really be blessing if there was a REAL STATEMENT from the club one can only view Mr Ross’s comments as stating realityas we know it but not previously the position of the club. Thats all.. nothing more.
My war is over? I didn’t know I was at war. All I ever wanted was some honesty and integrity. I’ll stop asking for it when I see the club acting in such a way. Nothing more, but certainly no war.
Enjoy the holiday
14 Posted 27/06/2008 at 09:35:29
What, like Everton admitting there is (therefore always was!)) a plan B?
That is ’innocuous’?
I’ll tell you what stage we HAVE reached.
The stage where, no matter what lies, bullshit and shiftiness is exposed.
No matter how much incometence the board demonstrates.
No matter how many experts say the move is dumb/wrong/bady thought-out/cheap etc
Those who have promoted this move, will still be accusing those who disagree, of doing so because of ’sentimentalism’ (or some such non-argument).
It’s truly desperate bollocks and leads me to believe very few of them are who they say they are.
15 Posted 27/06/2008 at 10:24:37
Perhaps you don’t understand the concept of PR or political spin. By it’s very nature every piece of information needs to be dissected in order to attempt to understand the nuances of the information being imparted.
Abrogation of this approach merely serves the alternative descendency into a double bind of naivety! But then again, why digress from the approach you’ve championed all along.
You’ll excuse me if I choose to read between the lines, because that’s where the truth hides.
16 Posted 27/06/2008 at 11:22:13
Looking at the design, and location, it seems 100 times more grand than DK.
So just so I understand, can somebody explain to me where the funding for that project was coming from? I didn't hear anything about potential partners etc. Wouldn't that project crippled the club had it gone ahead? I haven't seen vast volumes of money being spent since the project was cancelled. I?d be happy if someone could explain.
17 Posted 27/06/2008 at 12:21:44
18 Posted 27/06/2008 at 13:17:55
The ’war’ will not be over until Destination Cowshed is finally put to bed.
This ’battle’ is still there to be fought until the ’call in’.
Nil Satis Nisi Optimum
19 Posted 27/06/2008 at 13:30:58
95 miilion in grants were organised by LCC and together with LCC and other commercial sweeteners the cost of a then 250 miilion pound stadium to EFC was only 30 million.
LCC were assured by BK that EFC had the 30 million ringfenced and spent close to 2 years putting this project together but when it was required for BK to show the colour of his money he couldnt.
They then extended the deadline and he asked his then pal and fellow investor Paul Gregg for the 30 million.
Gregg agreed on condition his 30 million could be secured on the project or on BK’s shareholding.
BK declined the deadline came and went and quite a few members of LCC allegedly stated they would never work with Kenwright again.
That is why I get fed up with some people on this site who constantly criticise LCC.
The fact is EFC have never asked LCC about Stanley Park, redeveloping GP or pushed for any site in Liverpool.
They have lived behind this shroud of "The longest running exclusivity agreement" in history and therefore closed the door on everything but the Tescodome in Kirkby.
20 Posted 27/06/2008 at 14:35:22
If BK let LCC down regarding the Kings Dock situation that is news to me. But I’ll take your word for it.
That being the case I still believe that LCC have allowed EFC to walk away from the City and have not offered alternative sites. They are letting down 40,000 other Evertonian’s. They are allowing this to happen without fighting for them to stay.
21 Posted 27/06/2008 at 14:49:57
LCC may well have given token interest in keeping the club in the city but EFC have slammed the door firmly in the faces.
Fingers in ears and all sing "Exclusitivity Agreement" its gone on so long it will become a nursery ryhme.
22 Posted 27/06/2008 at 15:48:57
That being the case, Everton were being given £220million in grants and BK knocked it back on the basis he had to give 30million?
But in this instance, EFC have to stump up £80million and BK is happy to do so? Something doesnt make sense here.
I dont care what anybody says, BK is a true Evertonian just like the rest of us, why would he give us a poisoned apple and destroy the club he loves? Again, it makes no sense. I am rational and will listen to both sides of the argument. But it seems that both sides dont have any explanations to anything. I do find it very amusing though reading people’s articles who clearly dont know what they are talking about, and live in a conspiracy dream world. Keep up the good work, and keep me smiling. All I can say, is that I am glad it is these people running the club, and not those who think using big words etc. means you know more than those in charge.
23 Posted 27/06/2008 at 15:27:53
EJ I used the word innocuous because BK has already stated that redeveloping Goodison is plan B.
Jay like you I was gutted that Kings Dock did not go ahead but we have to remember that at the time £30 million was still a lot for a football club. The sky money was just starting to trickle through and the economic climate was far worse than it is today (the country was probably still in recession). I don’t know where you heard what part BK had to play but I always put the fact we could not afford the money down to poor management from the previous board who did truly leave us in the shit.
I will concede that there are gaps in my knowledge but no Everton fan can say they are possession of all the facts. I welcome posting on feesibility studies of developing goodison or possible partners for developing within the city. However we are becoming destructive and personal in our criticism and at this will only have a negative effect in the end and may end up damaging our club more in the long run.
24 Posted 27/06/2008 at 16:45:46
I think it is very easy to say that LCC would have come up with the sites if Everton did not have an exclusivity agreement. LCC shouted very loudly about a sham of a site in the Loop/Trumpet site. It’s a joke of a site to build a stadium that would work or function. But LCC never the less offered it and pubicly made a song and dance about it. So okay, they were prepared to do something for us. Why not come out and give us say, Wavertree Park or the Garden Festival site??? Why not publically offer them? Then Evertonian’s would have said... hang on - what about that. Because the Loop site was being offered at around the time of the vote. So a really good site would have also acted as a positive reminder to supporters that there is another option available to Everton.
Like Dan Brierley I don’t have all of the facts but find it hard to believe that BK was getting £220mil in grants and had to stump up £30mil and didn’t do it. And now we have to find £78mil and get £120mil in grants/other???
I guess it’s irrelavent now. But most people liked the Kings Dock plan. But there is a big chunk that hate the Kirkby idea. I just want the club to move forward. That means that whatever we do it HAS to contain a business partner. I think that is why LCC can’t/won’t accomodate us.
25 Posted 27/06/2008 at 17:16:58
"EJ I used the word innocuous because BK has already stated that redeveloping Goodison is plan B"
I will not contest this, argue it, or slag you.
I simply want people to see it again, as I believe nothing I could think of to counter your ?argument?, could be more effective than simply reprinting this sentence.
I appreciate you conceded there are ?gaps? in your knowledge.
However, given everything that has been written (not least here) re ?NO PLAN B!, saying there?s a gap in your knowledge, is like Mugabe saying "Ok, the election might not be perfect, but.."
26 Posted 27/06/2008 at 18:09:23
27 Posted 27/06/2008 at 19:16:28
KEIOC are not radicals. They are just honest hard-working Evertonians. None have any ulterior motives for keeping EFC in Walton. What is "radical" about exposing fabrications and/or blatant inaccuracies? As far as not having support, to get over 10,000 to vote for their stance at a point when the vast majority had only the club?s literature to go on is not indicative of "no support". If you attended the last AGM you would also be left with little doubt about who the majority supported on that night. Likewise EVERY forum poll since. A ballot now would certainly yield a different result IMO. A ballot after an independent study of all options would barely register ANY vote for Kirkby IMO.
28 Posted 27/06/2008 at 19:07:06
The truth is that Liverpool were offered Kings Dock before Everton and knocked it back. Then they contacted Everton.
We did enquire about Stanley Park, the strip that runs down Priory Road, and it was to build a school to replace the Gwladys St school that we were hoping to buy and knock down to extend the ground.
Now it's rumoured that the school is closing soon any way... that's one to keep an eye on .
I do agree with Christine when she says Everton slammed the door in LCC's faces. but I also agree that the LCC have bent over backwards to help the football tourists from across the park with pound signs in their eyes with full hotels, bars and extra visitors every other week .
There are still sites available ? for instance Heyworth Street and Everton Road. It's wether Everton are really interested in staying in the city or not. In my opinion, they're not; that's probably why there are no Everton shops in the city centre when the tourists now have two shops to buy their bags full of shite.
I think it's time to call for a public debate with all parties EFC, LCC and the fans, pro-Kirkby and anti-Kirkby, let's get everything out in the open and let all parties have their say. And let's get our great club back on track and heading in the right direction. It saddens me to hear that DM's transfer kitty is affected by the ground move. If it falls through, so what? They will have a bigger transfer kitty cos they won't have to shell out £78mil. Dreams do sometimes come true.
Come on you mighty blues
29 Posted 27/06/2008 at 19:54:46
30 Posted 27/06/2008 at 20:25:48
Who do you think you are telling Evertonians to stop going to the match now, these guys are not prepared to skulk away to Kirkby with their tales between their legs.
31 Posted 27/06/2008 at 20:46:48
You asked a perfectly legitimate question when you asked "how can moving to Kirkby be the death of Everton yet still make Kenwright and the board lots and lots of money"?
I asked pretty much the same question a couple of weeks ago, and the best answer I got from the "No" voters was something along the lines of a stupid multi-millionaire who somehow overlooks the fact that the club is not worth that much in Kirkby.
Actually, the best answer I got was that BK believed in the existence of this stupid multi-millionaire who etc etc.
So I gave up expecting an answer to this question, and am glad that you?ve taken a holiday from it all, because I guarantee you that when you come back, this question will still remain unanswered.
And that would be because there is no logical answer to it, something you and I (and others who don?t automatically disbelieve anything that comes out of BK?s mouth) have already twigged.
32 Posted 27/06/2008 at 22:17:30
33 Posted 28/06/2008 at 00:20:56
you asked the question then dispute the facts.
Just check out any archive and you will see what happened.
Kenwright is the one telling streams of lies not genuine supporters who come on here.
Answer me this:
IF KENWRIGHT IS SO BLUE WHY WONT HE DILUTE SOME OF HIS SHAREHOLDING TO ATTRACT INVESTMENT AFTER TELLING FANS HE WAS SEEKING INVESTMENT 24/7??
34 Posted 28/06/2008 at 00:34:36
Please don?t confuse my message with being ignorant of the facts. I only stated that I was not in possesion of all the information because I don?t believe anyone who posts on this website is privvy to it. Like everyone else I have a gripe with the board about this but I feel we will not get any closer to the facts if we herald articles like this as the opinion of the masses.
35 Posted 28/06/2008 at 08:40:46
Well, I can?t argue with the logic behind that.
As for the decrease in turnover, this is down to the fact that given the outsourcing of merchandising and catering, Everton?s accounts only report the net income and not the total income and corresponding profits.
If you read the accounts, you will see that in 2007, turnover would have been the earth shattering sum of £67, 000 less than 2006.
In fact, if you did read the accounts, you would see that the revenue from the merchandising and catering increased from £7.623m to £7.726m.
Other commercial activities revenue increased from £783k to £1.178m.
Yes, that?s right, on both counts, turnover actually increased.
So please remind me of the evidence to back up your claim that KW is not performing (I won?t use the actual words of your previous claims against KW because I?d probably get into trouble for repeating them) - it would appear that those pesky things called facts contradict your claim....
PS For everyone who has moaned about the lack of availability of Everton merchandise, have you never considered the possibility that they had actually sold out of everything they had? Or would you rather we had masses of unsold merchandise clogging up the shelves of JJB and costing us money? Again, if you worked for the club and had access to the actual facts, you might see the commercial reasons for ensuring that a JJB in Eastbourne does not have £10k worth of stock sitting around when there is minimal demand for it.
Until we are as commercially attractive as the Top 3 and the RS, what is the point of investing thousands (millions?) in merchandising without the demand? You don?t create demand merely by increasing supply, certainly not in the football world. You do this by success on the pitch.
36 Posted 28/06/2008 at 13:29:29
Thats a great question. But again, I don't know of anyone who has made a solid offer to BK for shares in Everton. Can someone enlighten me as to who has made a firm offer and been refused?
37 Posted 29/06/2008 at 16:50:54
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.