It is clear that Evertonians currently fall into three groups:
a) those that vote YES to Kirkby and who won?t change their minds,
b) those that vote NO to Kirkby and have equally entrenched views, and
c) those that are somewhere in the middle and, to varying degrees, may be susceptible to persuasion to change / form their views.

Clearly we can all forget about the first two - it is the latter category that both sides need to work on.

For the record, I am strongly minded to vote NO, primarily because of the potential (no, likely) impact on our ability to grow Evertonians, not now but in fifteen years time when we would have vacated the city for 10 - 12 years to allow the other crowd to work their propaganda. Therefore I am intensely interested in anything that can wrestle the impetus back from the Board of Directors and their slick YES campaign. It is clear that in this particular game, given the impending vote, we are into the second half and the NO campaign are at least a couple of goals behind; the NO?s needs to strike quick and strike hard. The KEIOC presentation today seemed like the perfect opportunity to get at least one goal back. I popped along eager to experience at first hand this fightback.

The KEIOC campaign did indeed score - unfortunately though it was an OWN GOAL! The presentation:
- was pathetically lightweight,
- lacked any sort of detail,
- offered little coherent argument against the Kirkby site,
- offered no idea of cost,
- suggested no sources of finance,
- provided no evidence that planning would be forthcoming,
- and gave no indication of the value of future revenue streams to aid the club?s development.

Now I know that the proposals by the Board are also lightweight in detail but that is the position they have chosen to occupy. The NO campaign cannot also try to occupy the same ground, they must occupy somewhere different. (Don?t forget that 12 years ago Labour moved into ground previously occupied by the Conservatives and the Tories have spent the invervening period trying to find new ground as they can?t compete on the same ticket!)

The important difference between the YES and NO campaigns is that the YES?s have offered a vision that they maintain is fully costed, planned and financed. Therefore it is deliverable. Whether we believe that or not is not relevant; it is a statement that is in the public domain, so for the NO?s to ignore the importance of this is astounding.

If the Board had any concerns about the strength of the NO campaign before this presentation, then they will firmly feel on Easy Street now. I fear we are deep into injury time and we are further behind than we were at half time. Almost game over!

Man oh man, this topic is giving me tired-head. I think it is time to move on to Kirkby. It?s a money issue. If Bestway is so interested and the loop site so feasible, they should have been pushing the Plan B a year ago. (PS, I think with a site like that there would be gigantic cost overruns with tunnels, underground parking, and other infrastructure.)

The team needs to get itself out from under the current financial burdens. There may be interested suitors to invest in the team but it seems to me that BK is not interested. The Tesco plan is evidence of this. If there were white knights out there waiting to invest and BK were interested, wouldn?t the new investors want to have a major play in the development of the new stadium site? Of course they would!

No, like it or not BK is not planning on ceding ownership anytime soon. With that reality its time to move down the road. Yeah, new investment from some go-zillionaire would be great but it is not imminent or even in the foreseeable future. Our club is obviously on a shoestring budget and will stay that way under the current regime unless something changes. Stark, cold, maybe bitter reality.

There was so much talk about DM dithering in the transfer market in the last few weeks. But it is nothing in comparison to this stadium dithering ? holding out hope for any potential ray of hope, clinging to the rumored feasibility attached to any site that comes along. Admittedly, the club has fumbled its public relations by holding their cards too close and giving the appearance that only one option has been explored. But really, if Bestway or LCC or any other bright ideas came along that were just as attractive (or heaven forbid more attractive), do you really think the club hung up the phone? No, it?s time to move on.

Thing is Steve,have the club scored an own goal with the transfer policy?Moyes came out and said he needed a fair few players because the squad was to small.Kenwright,comes out and said he would back the manager and that there was money available for players.So far we have paid £4m for Jags,and got Pienaar on loan.If we go into the new season with no extra signings(FFS I hope not)could these un-decided not think to themselves,Kenwright bullshitting again,promising that there would be money available for players and then not delivering?A trust issue may creep into there minds.Just a thought.

Brian - don’t get me wrong - I don’t trust BK as far as I could throw him, and believe me that’s nowhere near far enough!

I wrote an article on TW some months ago ’Great Big Club’ which seriously questioned whether we could trust BK.

Anyway back to the ground issue, even we sceptics must accept that the YES vote has gathered momentum and the only way to stop it is to produce something of much more substance than the (well meaning, but credibly challenged) KEIOC lot can muster. Above all, those amongst us that can put a coherent argument together must keep sending out the question - how far can we trust BK?