The Mail Bag
YES Voters - Realisation!
Comments (54)
I sent this email to KEIOC earlier today (no response as yet), was just wanting some general feedback, ideas and input from the cultured ToffeeWeb followers. Go easy guys... this is my first post, in the words of the awful but tasty Natasha Beddingfield, "I bruise easily!"...
Hi KEIOC,
My name is John McKie and I am a season ticket holder in the Lower Gwladys. I was entitled to a vote in the 07' ballot. My vote was 'YES' to the move.
I felt the move was sold in a positive manner (i.e. no or minimal debt, large high quality and modern stadium, developed transport links and corporate facilities, etc) to the supporters and the intrigued media. However, I am not normally a gullible person but regrettably, I feel I was on this occasion.
It now transpires that the move will cost the club in the region of the £75m mark and on the evidence of the more recent pictures, the ground would simply be of a mediocre standard (which is not good enough for a club of Evertons stature).
In a nutshell, I am unhappy with the inconsistencies (aka - LIES) that have been sold to the loyal supporters and I wish it was possible to retract my YES vote. Now I know that is not possible, therefore, I was wondering if there is any sort of KEIOC vote or petition that relates solely to YES voters retracting and/or changing their votes? If so, how do I access it? If not, can you please, please, please create such a vote/petition which can then be used to then block the move to Kirkby which is now sadly gathering pace. I feel there are many, many more loyal and avid fans like me that given the opportunity, would like to retract/amend their previous vote.
Thank you very much for your time and on behalf of all Everton fans I would like to offer appreciation for the efforts made on your part in preserving the history and tradition of our fantastic club.
Regards,
John McKie
John McKie, Posted 22/04/2008 at 21:16:49
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 23/04/2008 at 07:41:33
3 Posted 23/04/2008 at 08:27:36
4 Posted 23/04/2008 at 08:50:51
You may "bruise easily" but you have started a thread with one of, if not THE most contraversial topic on here.
The phrase "Reap what you sow" springs to mind and methinks that you will be getting lots of praise from the No camp and lots of lambasting from the Yes camp.
All I can say is that you seem like a poster that will fit in well with this site.
Enjoy
5 Posted 23/04/2008 at 09:10:53
You naiveity is astounding. Did you not learn about propaganda in school? Did you not sense the danger when destination Kirkby was announced? What about no plan B? How about deal of the fucking century?
Its not as if you were’nt given enough warning signs lad!
You voted Yes, as someone else said reap what you sow.
6 Posted 23/04/2008 at 09:23:52
7 Posted 23/04/2008 at 09:32:23
Except ... all the YES voters should challenge the club to deliver the project that THEY had bought into. Otherwise, they arre merely saying, ’we’ve been conned, screwed, shafted etc ... but I don’t care’.
Don’t forget:
- World class arena,
- top class facilities
- little or no debt,
- £10m+ per season extra for players,
- 50,000 attendances
I look forward to the YES voters keeping the club honest and true to their word.
8 Posted 23/04/2008 at 09:36:29
9 Posted 23/04/2008 at 09:27:50
10 Posted 23/04/2008 at 09:34:53
I don?t want rose tinted, safe and boring discussion either but I have a right to put my opinion across as much as yours so why should I be quiet if I feel (my opinion) a poster has simply started a thread to get a response.
Not really a suspicious person but anyone can come on here and say there were a yes voter now want it changed to no because of the.. (include any vitrolic rant you want).
Most of these same rants were out there when the vote was ongoing so why all of a sudden has this posters realised that he was possibly fooled? Why now start a thread when it has been how many months?
Am I not allowed to put questions forward or make comments anymore?
11 Posted 23/04/2008 at 10:19:41
12 Posted 23/04/2008 at 10:09:08
13 Posted 23/04/2008 at 10:01:19
14 Posted 23/04/2008 at 10:43:53
Do ye think a stadium any where inside outside the city or even where Goodison stands was going to be free?!!!!
KEIOC can't now compain that we will have a debt of £78 mill when their ideas would have plunged us into debt of a similar in not larger amount as building in a city is far more expensive!
£78 mill is nothing for a new stadium.
15 Posted 23/04/2008 at 11:13:26
16 Posted 23/04/2008 at 11:06:47
17 Posted 23/04/2008 at 11:20:15
Given all the news that is now in the public domain you would now vote NO!!
You're laughable and it's people like you who will end up at that stadium if it comes off........ think about it.
18 Posted 23/04/2008 at 11:36:45
19 Posted 23/04/2008 at 11:46:05
20 Posted 23/04/2008 at 11:48:48
21 Posted 23/04/2008 at 11:52:14
22 Posted 23/04/2008 at 12:02:52
23 Posted 23/04/2008 at 12:00:33
Its a shame that ultimately it will bring about the demise of a once proud and great football club.
Ah well guess we will have to console ourselves with the David France collection in the not to distant future, all due to those that believe money grows on trees. The club owns very little and the assets you speak of are mortgaged to the hilt. Do a little research before making such outlandish claims.
24 Posted 23/04/2008 at 12:10:22
Finding it increasingly difficult to laugh when it concerns our club at the mo mate
25 Posted 23/04/2008 at 12:25:58
The sale of Bellefield and Goodison to developers will pay of over half of that, plus the sale of the naming rights will pay off a sizeable chuck too. I would expect us to have at very worst £20M debts.
More scaremongering bollocks.
26 Posted 23/04/2008 at 12:34:27
Also, I know of season ticket holders who didn?t receive a ballot paper and Liverpool fans who did (as they are Evertonia members so that they can get tickets for the Goodison Derby) which cannot be right.
For me, the whole vote was? erm? well? - in fact I?d rather not say the word as I?m a bit skint a the minute thanks to the 10p income tax change so could do without Keith Wyness using the club's solicitors to try and sue me!
27 Posted 23/04/2008 at 12:37:10
They are payable over the term of the contract - in Arsenal’s case, 15 years.
Everton have to have that money UP FRONT. They therefore have to borrow it - they use the term ’securitisation’ in the same way that our £30M loan from Bear Sterns against future season ticket income is also called ’securitisation’ but does anyone think it’s not a loan?
OK - they know where the money will be coming from for 15 years, but in borrowing it, at a time when borrowing is expensive, don’t forget, the total value of naming rights is reduced by the interest payable.
Given that Goodison is already mortgaged, the only assets likely to raise cash up front are Bellefield and players.
In addition, the £52M ’enabling money’ is to come from rental income on the retail units, according to the DTZ statement. But that money is going to have to be found up front too, to pay the builders. Where is it coming from? Are Everton borrowing it?
You can read the DTZ statement on this in a couple of ways, but it appears to come under Everton’s brief. It should, however, be made completely clear.
£20M debts? You’re joking, surely....
28 Posted 23/04/2008 at 12:44:50
29 Posted 23/04/2008 at 12:56:39
I am a no voter, who is going to pretend i voted yes. Then say that i have now made a mistake and want to change my vote.
This will then make everyone think that all the yes voters are slowly starting to change their minds and everything will be ok......
Masterplan!
30 Posted 23/04/2008 at 13:05:30
I was expecting some criticism and to be honest it is deserved, but hindsight is a wonderful thing. I am my own biggest critic, particularly in relation to this vote but I am still entitled to my opinion.
Just remember, the fact that I vote YES or NO, or the fact that I want to retract/change my vote doesnt alter the fact that I, like all of you, only want the best for my football club.
It was interesting to see that some of the ’NO’ voters were also doubting their stance now so I definitely think that some sort of re-vote should be cast. Of course, the club will never carry such out, as it would be detrimental to their plans but is their any scope in an unoffical vote based on the information we now have today? Perhaps this would alter the 60/40 (approx) percentage and perhaps it could be submitted not only to the board but also to Knowsley Council, who are currently reviewing the planning application.
Anyway, as I said... thanks for all your comments, glad the subject was actually discussed/debated.
31 Posted 23/04/2008 at 13:13:12
Of course I can?t be sure... but once you go down that slippery path, you completely undermine the whole basis of this place as a discussion forum. And THAT is what I object to most strenuously in what you are saying here.
So I'd really appreciate it if you guys would back off from this nonsense. The level of trust in a free forum like this is, I believe, an important thing to maintain. If you wish to sacrifce that for a little bit of point-scoring against a position you despise, so be it. But I think you will find you are opening a very problematic can of worms. Hopefully this response from John will help convince you that you are wrong in this case.
32 Posted 23/04/2008 at 13:17:23
Why should the club do this when they already have an independent company run the last ballot and already have a result?
I still hold fast to the idea of making us vote was a disgusting idea where BK and Wyness could easily avoid angry fans saying, "Well you voted for it"
The further info coming to light is just like a political party when they say they will bring in a certain policy to get votes then bung out completely or change it drastically when they are in power, however they aren?t requested to have a "re-vote"
Terry Howard, spot on
33 Posted 23/04/2008 at 13:27:00
If you and he are not going to treat posts in good faith, you destroy the entire spirit of this discussion, and in my view, as Editor, you are abrogating any valid participation in this forum.
34 Posted 23/04/2008 at 13:24:38
My posts are not meant to be one up kind of posts, I just like asking why certain posters have certain views. For instance why did John feel the need to post that article now when this issue has been ongoing for so long previously, there have been many posts he could have entered.
Possibly he has only just found this site, which I find it hard to believe as it is one of the most popluar amongst us fans.
35 Posted 23/04/2008 at 13:36:29
Please re-read what I have challenged you over, which is the issue of whether or not such posts are genuine.
To question the timing of this post is irrelevant. People post whenever they post. Why even question that?
36 Posted 23/04/2008 at 13:47:47
To be fair thats the only way I see it.
Imagine trying to overthrow a goverement over "lies".
It?s not going to happen. No-one is entitled to a re-vote.
37 Posted 23/04/2008 at 13:44:22
I honestly don?t believe what the author of the initial post says, it?s not a nice answer but it is my view.
My initial post was a bit OTT but you have to admit that of late there seems to a dark cloud over this website and all it?s posters.
Yes I know we are playing shite on the field and could be throwing away a great 2/3?s of our season but I am an optimist and hope we don?t and therefore like to question fans who are so, angry, depressed, bitter etc etc to find out why.
I read in a post recently something that stuck. He said that complaining is the easiest thing to do and I completely agree with him.
I suppose it goes back to my footballing days, I was a defender and I like defending, be it Everton FC, the players, or Moyes and I ask people's reasons for their pessimistic views to try and understand them.
Everyone's views are different and it would be a boring site if it wasn?t but it shouldn?t mean that I can?t question people?s view or in this instance motive.
I think this is a great site but, as stated above, of late it seems to be filled with more doom mongerers than ever.
38 Posted 23/04/2008 at 13:43:41
My post is very genuine and I have just received a response back from KEIOC which basically stated that by the end of the week, they intend to open some sort of forum or collate information in relation to supporters changing/amending votes.
Now, you clearly disagree with my opinion, thats fair enough, but dont question my integrity.
As for Terry, well, need I say anything, your comment is utter rubbish and is not constructive in any way. Your a theorist and there is no foundation to your comment, your basically gossiping, so I suggest you go read OK Magazine or something.
I posted my post now, because to me it was the right time and I wanted to get more involved in the site. Instead of just passing comments here and there, I thought it would be better to create a discussion rather than join in for a change. This particular topic is one I have recently been discussing with friends quite a bit following the renewal of my season ticket (last week), hence the post.
I once again thank people for their genuine comments, whether they agree or not.
Hope that clears things up.
39 Posted 23/04/2008 at 13:55:23
I'm well aware the club wouldn't carry such out
40 Posted 23/04/2008 at 14:00:41
Now I can deal with one or the other but to confuse the two is, to my mind, totally unhelpful.
If there is a commomality between these things, it?s the reaction I commonly have to your posts, which is that they convey an intolerance of the other point of view, often calling into question the rights or motives of the person posting (just as in this case).
Again, it?s back to questioning the whole basis of this forum. The forum is for an EXCHANGE of views, not for people like you to stamp all over those you disagree with. I will not have the integrity of this forum highjacked by that kind of attitude.
If you are going to continue to post here, you need to figure out another way of addressing this underlying disrespect you have for the posters you disagree with.
41 Posted 23/04/2008 at 14:19:32
Michael I know eactly where you are coming from but as an Editor I would feel that you should apply the same rules for everyone.
I hate returning to him but look at the utter disrespect you get from Tony Marsh and his followers when posters disagree with his comments on one of his articles.
I do not want to come across as disrespectful at all but that is the problem with forums as you cannot show any inflection in text.
A level playing ground would be nice but when dealing with irrational footy fans I suppose that is just wishful thinking.
It seems that you and I have locked horns a fair bit of late and I do not wish to, as I don’t want to be banned from this site that I enjoy visiting.
42 Posted 23/04/2008 at 14:38:42
As for the "doom-mongers" and Tony Marsh, yes, of course people are going to have different views. Personally, I don’t see Tony as being directly abusive to other posters in the way you have been ? it’s more a broader condemnation from Tony that those who don’t see things as he does are actually contributing to the problems he sees with the club, manager, team, etc. I think what happens is people like you take those generalizations personally, and react accordingly.
Surely it’s a no-brainer that when we play poor football, as we have been doing recently in the most painful fashion, we are going to get more people commenting on it. Rather than fighting that (which you can’t), why not be more accepting that, yes, this is a valid view: we are playing like shite.
Sure, you can come up with all these mitigating factors that half the posters are repeating ad nauseam but nothing can take away from the fact that we are playing shite, and people have every right to voice their opinions on that without being called "negative" or "doom-mongers".
43 Posted 23/04/2008 at 15:08:55
I also agree with Tony over Tony Marsh and the like. Tony Marsh posted an article the other week and some one disagreed with him and every post they enter was editored and called childish. Surely all psoters should be treated equally.
44 Posted 23/04/2008 at 15:18:57
45 Posted 23/04/2008 at 16:39:32
46 Posted 23/04/2008 at 16:51:49
47 Posted 23/04/2008 at 16:47:57
"Would you be in favour of Everton FC continuing to look at the possibility of moving to Kirkby in a deal with Tesco, where Everton FC after naming rights and sale of GP would effectivly provide a free stadium, Yes or No"
Not, Do you want Everton FC to move to Kirkby? Yes or No.
Not, If we move to Kirkby the stadium WILL be free (looking at the POSSIBILITY it will be free)
They never said if you vote yes (to continuing to look at Kirkby as a possibility) we wont look elsewhere (also never said they would!) The only thing I took from it would be that if No was the overwelming vote, then they would stop looking at Kirkby and go back to the drawing board.
48 Posted 23/04/2008 at 17:01:45
Apology accepted mate.
As I said, all opinions appreciated, just dont question my morales or integrity, I am an Evertonian at the end of the day and want the same as you mate...
The BEST for OUR club.
49 Posted 23/04/2008 at 18:51:21
50 Posted 23/04/2008 at 21:53:55
However if i had the chance i would have voted YES. I honestly feel our ground is a pile of cack compared to others. I went to Wigan this year and although its smaller its still a better ground , yes WIGAN!!! for gods sake.
Its time people just get on with it that we are movin and lets get behind the team, something like this could drive us into a new level.
51 Posted 23/04/2008 at 22:35:47
The only thing I have seen, represents a concerted and very professional alternative to the no pland B shit offered by Everton. Trevor Skempton, Ton Hughes and is like come across , as being more honest than anything I have heard coming from the official line.
Maybe we read / hear what we want to.
I was obeying orders comes to mind, lesser known as a full brown nose even better. After all they are my bosses.
52 Posted 23/04/2008 at 23:39:51
Jimmy Mc - the JJB is a pile of cack that makes the Lower Gwladys appear palatial. If that’s to be acknowledged as progress, we’re doomed!
53 Posted 24/04/2008 at 09:01:42
They had deffinite numbers from season ticket holders and share holder, granted there are many fans that probably spend more than season tickets holders, as they choose their games but in the end go to more games than not and spend more money. They pehaps should have more right to vote however how is EFC supposed to know about him and get a vote to them.
Some suggested that EFC should have picked a game and passed out voting slips, what?s to say that particular crowd not being infiltrated by "imposters" to give a false outcome, possibly they could keep which game a secret but unlikely.
As I have said many times before, I feel that giving us the vote was a disgusting idea by BK but I can?t see how they could have picked the numbers any fairer than they did. Yes they sent the ballot out with their propaganda but would you expect anything less?
54 Posted 24/04/2008 at 09:57:45


1 Posted 23/04/2008 at 07:16:38