ToffeeWeb - Season 2007-08

The Mail Bag

New Statesman Wanted

Having just read Keith Wyness? open letter on the Official Site I felt rather disappointed.

A number of his questions are entirely valid and fair. However, it was his tone that (for me) so badly let him down. I would question why it has taken so long for him to reply if The Loop is so immediately infeasible unless he has noted a groundswell over this last fortnight or so.

I have found some of the basic propaganda employed by the club rather distasteful, such as using players? and management?s commitment to reinforce their case ? was that a pre-requisite of people signing, to have the new stadium guaranteed? Why were their opinions held back until convenient times in the ballot? Also, a number of the ?facts? in the ballot leaflet are extremely fuzzy as others have already pointed out on this site.

Most remiss of all, he conveniently offers the relevant parties no opportunity to reply, thus rendering his questions entirely redundant in that format and altering them to presumptuous statements. Many of the OW?s articles offer the right to comment. Not this one. They all offer the right to use the ?thumbs up? button, including this one but where is the thumbs down button?

I found the final paragraph most laughable of all opening by stating that he did not question the integrity of parties involved but in the same sentence going on to mock them with ?rabbit out of hitherto cunningly concealed hats?. Ask questions Keith, sew seeds of doubt by all means but don?t reduce yourself, and our club, to amateurish jibes and one-sided arguments any further. Admittedly, the other suggestion may be too late but at least have the cojones to discuss, or even rubbish, it in an honourable fashion.

Please don?t read this posting as pro- or anti-Kirkby (although I know most of you will draw a predictable conclusion). Quite simply, I found it unprofessional and not in the least bit statesmanlike, as one would have every right to expect of a company?s Chief Executive Officer. He should be above such playground antics, however frustrating he may find it.
Lee Mandaracas, Peterborough Posted 09/08/2007 at 12:33:14

back Return to the Mail Bag

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

Karl Jones
1 Posted 09/08/2007 at 19:42:42

I have heard/read a number of interviews over the last few weeks with KW where he has been asked his opinion on the Liverpool loop, and has brought forward similarly valid points. Thats his job. Pretending they’re not there wont make the problems go away.
Why is it when players are asked about the club moving forward and anticipating a new stadium propaganda?..what do you want them to say? "Lets stay at Goodison with our 11 exec boxes and tent on the car park while all our rivals move to new grounds and increase their investment"? Assuming we’re not happy to stay with the way things are: Where is the money coming from? With all the talk about redeveloping Goodison, The loop etc., no-one has yet even touched on the financial aspects. Thats what fans really need to know, whether Yes or No potential voters.

Eric Myles
2 Posted 09/08/2007 at 20:53:51

So Karl, using your same argument but directed at Kirkby "Where is the money coming from....no-one has yet even touched on the financial aspects. Thats what fans really need to know?

Karl Jones
3 Posted 09/08/2007 at 21:40:01

Right Eric,the last part is only relevant if you trust Keith Wyness of course (I know a lot of Blues dont).Land is free(this is beyond doubt via Knowsley council),Stadium structure built by Tesco(also beyond doubt), we would have a 999 year lease effectively owning it(It would have all future safety regs built in (such as wider concourses which Goodison just doesnt have and would be World Cup standard).Basically we are left with a 50 Million debt for the furbishment of the stadium, which will be aided by:i)The sale of Goodison (15 Million or thereabouts..ii)Naming rights for stadium via a worldwide agency(20-25 Million)....Leaving a shortfall of 10-15 Million (pending rising cost)which will be a mortgage or other long term finance deal.The benefit is, that unlike other clubs who have relocated (outside the top four), this would not impact on the clubs spending power during relocation and subsequent seasons (as happened at Sunderland for instance).The benefit of increased revenue (said to be 10 Million per season) would be felt immediately. These are the only costs confirmed for moving the club forward at this stage.

Gavin Ramejkis
4 Posted 10/08/2007 at 11:25:35

Karl it has already been pointed out by far more knowledgeable people than I that the land values in Walton would expect a more conservative £7-10m for Goodison and the naming rights figures banded about are fanciful given those that Arsenal have managed for the Emirates Stadium which is larger and far more commercially attractive given that club’s successful media profile and it’s location. Why does KW avoid the questions of rising costs and such like, the fitting out of the stadia as with all major construction sites is where the original budgets go amiss.

Karl Jones
5 Posted 10/08/2007 at 16:47:10

Gavin, Arsenal, I believe have a contract worth 100 Million from The Emirates for the naming of their stadium. I’m no expert either, but I would suggest that 20-25 Million is a conservative estimate even allowing for the fact that Arsenal are a bigger attraction at the moment.
The key issue I believe give or take 5-10 million over the ground sale (and it depends who we sell the ground site to (market forces),is that this would be well within the means of our club financially without hamstringing the manager for signing quality players. We would have a massive long term mortgage facility for a stadium we only paid, say 60 Million for.
If this was within the Liverpool boundary it would be just like KW says, a once in a lifetime opportunity.