The Mail Bag
Murder at the AGM
Comments (35)
I did not expect the media to single out my comments on the murder of Everton's soul at last night's AGM. Nonetheless, it has provided some much needed publicity for the anti-Kirkby lobby. Even at this stage there is still hope, particularly if the costs escalate or there is a blip in the planning process.
I favour a part redevelopment/part refurbishment of Goodison. This would basically consist of a second tier on the Park End, an extension/refurb of the Bullens Road stand and the removal of the pillars at the front of the Main Stand [they are obstructing my view].
I am convinced that this would create a unique blend of old and new with an ample capacity of 50 -55,000. More importantly it couldn't cost more than the figures being bandied about for Kirkby.
Tony Dove, Posted 05/12/2007 at 16:58:38
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
2 Posted 05/12/2007 at 17:54:57
As emphatic as yes and no voters are still, nothing has been confirmed and a 75,000 seater stadium in Kirkby certainly won’t be without Kirkby suddenly getting unheard of money spent on transport and infrastructure.
3 Posted 05/12/2007 at 17:54:05
4 Posted 05/12/2007 at 18:00:11
Note also Bill’s words on plan C: "I suppose that the Scotland Road site would have to become a plan C". This sounds a bit like saying that, if I lost my job in the UK and couldn’t get another one, I suppose I would have to try to emigrate somewhere. This is no admission that there is a good plan C (or indeed plan B).
The reality that Keith and Bill don’t seem brave enough to tell us is that Kirkby is the only option currently available that it seems we can afford. We do not have the finances for anything else, and may not even have the finances for Kirkby if its costs keep escalating.
5 Posted 05/12/2007 at 18:06:59
There is nothing to stop any rich billionaire from bidding to buy Everton. We are not a secret. There is no way Bill could stop anyone from going public and bidding for Everton - as usually happens when someone bids for a club or a business. There just haven’t been any bidders.
Explain to me how it is Bill’s fault that no-one has come forward to put a couple of hundred million into Everton?
6 Posted 05/12/2007 at 18:08:59
Gavin, please tell me where we will find 200m+??
7 Posted 05/12/2007 at 18:23:35
8 Posted 05/12/2007 at 18:37:26
9 Posted 05/12/2007 at 18:43:24
10 Posted 05/12/2007 at 18:56:44
11 Posted 05/12/2007 at 19:17:46
Editorial Team
12 Posted 05/12/2007 at 19:10:58
This is true but the question has to be asked, then (although I already know the answer), why was this not made clear on the ballot instead of Keith Wyness explicitly saying that "if the vote is no, then there is no plan B"?
Almost everyone knows that there is always a Plan B even if it isn?t as financially viable as Plan A but Wyness chose his words very carefully because the brochure and rhetoric that accompanied the ballot were designed to secure a "yes" vote. Of course, you can argue that that was the CEOs roundabout way of having his cake and eating it ("OK, have your vote but we?re going to do everything to ensure it?s a ?yes?") and then you can argue whether the decision (i.e. Kirkby) is in the club?s best long-term interests.
Plans B and C on a no-brainer vote on the Kings Dock five years were two redevelopment options for Goodison Park, so why not this time as well? Because KW didn't really want to have to take the risk that the fans might opt for redeveloping over a tidily packaged (from his perspective) project in Kirkby?
We didn?t have the money for any of those choices (KD included) as it turned out and it doesn?t look like we have the money for anything on the table now (Kirkby included) but the more this rumbles on and the more the Kirkby costs escalate, the more a phased redevelopment of Goodison looks to be the most realistic option. And I say that knowing how fraught with logistical problems that would be.
13 Posted 05/12/2007 at 20:38:32
Presumably we should change our names to Liverpool FC and redesign our badge to incorporate the Liver bird again then should we ?
What the hell is your point ?
14 Posted 05/12/2007 at 21:47:33
Can someone please enlighten me but please leave to one side any personal hatreds.
15 Posted 05/12/2007 at 21:58:20
That?s ignoring any deal-sweetners that I feel sure have been passing around under the table. On the one hand, call it good stewardship. On the other, call it making a killing while killing off the heart and soul of the club. It?s all down to individual perception, as every stadium thread on here demonstrates.
Either way, he stands to make one helluvalot of mullah!
16 Posted 05/12/2007 at 22:02:46
The fact is that the Loop is too small and would be a nightmare to build on. Re-developing GP would also be a nightmare as the whole thing would have to be pulled down to start again as the infrastructure is well past its sell by date. The council wont give us the area around it so there is no extra room and in a sence we would be swapping like for like.
As for the cost, if you re-develop Gp you lose revenue as the capacity is smaller or taken away totaly if the ground is flattend. And we lose the help from TESCO.
If you have an extra 250,000,000 lying around then by all means buy the club and close GP and re-develop it. If you dont and you are an armchair logistical, financial and architectural wizard - shut the F**K UP cos we are all sick and tired of hearing it!
17 Posted 05/12/2007 at 22:05:05
Just where do you get your inside information?
Do you really believe this is all a covert plot by Kenwright then just to ensure he has enough funds for his eventual retirement whenever that may be?
Talk about responsible comments by the editorial team without a single shred of evidence!
18 Posted 05/12/2007 at 22:33:00
19 Posted 05/12/2007 at 22:36:46
Frankly, your ?deal sweeteners? comment is outrageous to dsay the least.
Unless you can back up that kind of inflammatory accusation and your "I feel sure..." add-on suggests that you genuinely can?t, then really you?d be better not to say anything at all.
As Editor of this mailbag, that kind of thing shows you in a very poor light and is, in my opinion, utterly and incredibly irresponsible. A really poor show, mate.
20 Posted 05/12/2007 at 22:45:16
Aren?t you the ones who are so quick to tell us "romantics" that football is now a "business", run for the money? Isn?t it also corrupt at every level? Of course I don?t have any evidence but it is really them (Kenmwright and Wyness) who should be required to state to the fans and the shareholders exactly what they will gain financially from this deal, for I have no doubt whatsoever that they will both gain substantially, one way or another.
I already cited one mechanism (Kenwright?s share value) and I see no-one has challenged that.
21 Posted 05/12/2007 at 22:46:48
22 Posted 05/12/2007 at 23:00:04
The ’deal-sweeteners’ comment is hower an unsupported, disgraceful slander for which you have absolutely no evidence. You should be throughly ashamed of yourself for not only making it but then repeating it. You should put up the evidence or withdraw it immediately.
And on a night when the boys have done us proud again and we are through as the top of our group. You don’t think that this might have anything to do with the stewardship of our club of our club over the last few years? Oh, forget it! I give up.
23 Posted 05/12/2007 at 23:16:37
24 Posted 05/12/2007 at 23:19:50
25 Posted 05/12/2007 at 23:29:40
Why would it cost £200m to redevelop Goodison. Has Wyness been reading you some bedtime stories?
That?s Trevor Skempton who redesigned St. James? Park. He knows rather more than the ill-informed fool who was there last night as this year?s sacrificial lamb.
We might not be moving there yet. I looks like BK is feeling the strain a bit. Time to turn up the pressure and we may get this huge mistake stopped yet.
26 Posted 06/12/2007 at 06:49:58
27 Posted 06/12/2007 at 09:11:38
28 Posted 06/12/2007 at 09:39:38
Bill has secured the majority with his mate Earl and the reality is they wont sell.
Neither man has the will or the financial clout to take this club forward, indeed Earls own aspirations are to market the Global rights to Everton and make a packet out of doing so. He see,s a lot of potential at Everton, too fucking right he does !!!
He is no Everton fan and he has no interest in the ordinary supporter he said as much at the AGM. Tonys comments were bang on and shook Kenwright to the core, the man will go down in infamy if we go to Kirkby and lose our core support over the years, better to sell Bill and walk away with your head held high.
To those who voted Earl in, what do you know about the man ?
29 Posted 06/12/2007 at 12:17:56
Could you Nos sort your story out please? Which is to be?
Or is it: we have become so fanatically ant-Bill that we will just hit him with anything shit that we can sling at him?
30 Posted 06/12/2007 at 12:52:31
Given the financial plight we are in I cant see it happening anytime soon tho and he certainly is not looking to water down his share holding during the interim.
31 Posted 06/12/2007 at 13:05:52
stick another tier on the park end, give the bullens road a lick of paint, and get rid of those posts in the main stand.
i’ve heard it all now.
FFS
32 Posted 06/12/2007 at 13:06:18
33 Posted 06/12/2007 at 14:13:21
The question was asked, "by moving the club to Kirkby, how will BK personally benefit?" Firstly there is the FACT of a huge increase in club value and in the share price he can command. That is going to be worth many millions of pounds to Bill Kenwright. It?s a dispassionate assessment I figured out by looking at past history and projecting forward. Nothing whatsoever to do wiith whether I love or hate Bill Kenwright
Then there is the SUSPICION of additional deal sweetners, (would it help if they were called ?bonuses??) if not for him then certainly for Wyness, who incidentally has secured the most amazing non-Conflict of Interest waiver for his side dealings at Everton. You can?t simply dismss stuff as being hatred or being "anti-Bill" just because you find it unpaletable or want to close your eyes and pretend it doesn?t exist.
34 Posted 06/12/2007 at 17:14:38
35 Posted 06/12/2007 at 22:41:32
As Neil so eloquently states in his responses, show me fact and remove where possible assumptions. No slanging matches just facts please, the development of Goodison I believe is around the £230m mark but surely that is the complete finished cost and the plan would be phased giving increased capacity during that project’s life cycle thus generating income streams in itself and payment towards further stages. As a project manager I can see this approach within the realms of feasibility.


1 Posted 05/12/2007 at 17:51:13
We do not have the funds to redevelop GP!!
I think we need to focus on the design and standard of the new stadium, not the location.