I struggled at that point too. But I don't see it as bias. For example, Kings Dock failed, and I blame Bill Kenwright. Is that from bias or from an understanding of what went down?

It's a pity they used the word "apportion" in the question but allowed only one selection. They should have perhaps used checkboxes to allow you to at least spread the blame. I thought the survey was Okay apart from that, but I support it's motive ? to assess current feelings. On the other hand, I can see that, if you don't support that motive, you wil accuse the entire concept of bias. As with everything, it depends on your personal perspective going in...

The suggestion that a survey carried out by KEIOC , linked to their site, will do anything other than reinforce their own views is both disrespectful and naive to say the least. Does anyone think that people in any significant numbers will access the site if they do not share their particular viewpoint. All that will happen is that those who regularly read the site will tell the group exactly what they want to hear. If that is pedalled as being 'representative' of Everton fans then it is an even greater disservice than anything put out by Tesco, Everton or anyone else.

Before anyone says this is an opportunity for those who do not share their views to tell them so - GET REAL - if you don't share the views of KEIOC then you will be damned if you could be bothered to play into their hands and take part in a farce of a survey. Publish the results of the survey now because I can tell you what it will say - the vast majority of fans polled want to keep Everton in Liverpool - WOW what a surprise result from KEIOC.

I'm sure if you asked any independent research analyst whether this is a serious and proper survey they would laugh their socks off, its flawed and does nobody any favours.

Well, I guess we each proved each other’s piont there, Jim.

But I think you are being a bit unreasonable. This is the Internet, FFS. Everyone knows it is an internet survey, not a serious Gallup Poll.

It is also hard to really gauge the results as anyone can access the site (I assume) and therefore there could be Redshites going on there voting or the same person with different e-mail/IP addresses.

No matter what the results are there will still be the two camps, the No?s will probably say, "We told you so", whilst the Yes?s will possibly say, "What do you expect from a KEIOC site not visited by anyone els but No voters"

Fair play to them for the ballot but in essence it will not really prove anything as it would be safe to assume that not many Yes voters actually visit their site

I was disappointed with the choice of answers available too.For me the reason why I want us to redevelop is because Goodison has had problems for years with atmosphere.

Yet when asked why we must redevelop I clicked other, hoping for a comments box to appear elsewhere.

A question later on asks about what our major concerns were for the new stadium. I thought here will be the box to tick that it is not designed for singing. After all Street Enders have only been complaining about this for 45 years! But was it included in the options? No. Unbelievable, it is the worst aspect of the design! Executive boxes at the back of the new Gwladys Street. Defies belief.

Perhaps in the end Wyness and KEIOC deserve each other? Even as a Yes voter I do not deny that there was far too much spin in the way Wyness originally justified Kirkby.

But for KEIOC to talk about an ’independent’ survey is simply laughable! I could hardly answer half the questions because they were basically of the form - why exactly do you think that Kirkby is such a terrible idea? Therefore the results of the survey are utterly valueless.

I think now we will be going to Kirkby, with it seems the majority of the fanbase supportive or neutral, and a minority still furious. The leaders of the two sides locked in battle early on, both trading distortions, neither prepared to listen to the other, both using any weapon they could to bash the other. Thanks Keith, thanks KEIOC!

I would suggest, either at the game or amongst your Evertonian acquaintances, taking your own survey. Just ask people if they could vote NOW, knowing what has transpired since polling closed, would they back the ?continue to pursue" (or whatever phrase EFC used) the Kirkby move proposal.

At the onset, out of about 20 Evertonian friends, 4 were in favour of Kirkby, 1 based on a main-stand seat wiith a pillar nearby, 2 on car-parking and 1 ?cos it?ll be a world-class stadium?.

Now, Yes voters are as rare (in public admittance) as Tory voters in the early 90s. 1 of my gang-of-four says she regrets her vote and goes about muttering ?lying bastards?, the other 3 are doing a St Peter and denying they ever voted Yes.

Just ask around and gauge for yourselves what the current, popular reaction is to the Kirkby move. It?s not hard to do, so do it - unless you?re afraid to hear the answer?

Meanwhile, COYB on Sunday!

Have to agree with Neil Pearse on this one, the only genuine way to analyse this again with a poll would be one sent to the original lot given the vote, my vote hasn’t changed but it would be interesting to see if the non-voters bothered given a second chance or the yes voters maintained their original stance, many of them will but I’m not convinced they all would given what has been released post the vote.

Michael, come on, be honest: it is bias, and fair play to them for trying lots of ways to keep their view alive. The sad thing about all this KEIOC stuff, and I struggle with the concept of "our city" coming from Seaforth which is not in "our city", is that it takes debate away from the really mismanagement of Kenwright etc.

We should be dealing in hard facts around investment and too limited a sharebase and an under capitilsed in debt company. If someone could just ask the board to issue more shares then we could put real pressure on them when waiting for the answer.

Instead we get yet another batch of the same people saying the same old thing. I far as I can see KEIOC appears to have very limited support both on their site (499 members) and at the game apart from the local businesses and the plane. This doesn?t of course mean that the rest of us support the Everton Board.

I think the problem, Ian, is the word "bias", which is usually bandied about as a negative and derogatory condemnation of a position that is not "neutral".

Let?s back up here: this is KEIOC: are they even remotely neutral? Of course not. Only an idiot would expect them to be neutral. Does the "independent" tag mean the survey is "impartial"? Of course it doesn?t ? the questions have been composed by KEIOC and guess what ? they aren?t in favour of the Kirkby cowshed... No surprise there, surely!!!

I think it?s unfortunate Dick used the word "bias". Is everyone who has an opinion, position, stance, agenda, "biassed"? In a sense they are... But go down that path and you devalue all debate and any attempt for discussion or a frank exchange of views.

It?s one of those words I?d like to ban because it is simply unhelpful in the extreme.

"If someone could just ask the board to issue more shares then we could put real pressure on them when waiting for the answer."

Step up to the plate then Ian. Or sit back and do nothing.

On this internet survey - A strange twist has occured, whereby people are complaining they are unable to answer a question they feel is "loaded." Or that they "were disappointed with the choices." It struck me as being ironic. Or maybe the survey was aimed at being just slightly mischievious.

Anyway, the format is not flawless but there are a couple of ’straight down the line’ questions.

I suppose if you don’t want to take part - then don’t.



Or if you’re not happy - then maybe you should set up your own survey?

Irrespective of any arguments about a ground move or redevelopment, calling KEIOC’s questionnaire either a survey or "independent" is just a non-starter. Drop-in contributions and loaded questions - its GIGO - garbage in, garbage out. Write your conclusion and wait for the ’evidence’ to produce your statistics.

Criticising the EFC ballot is a different matter. It was set up by people who undoubtedly wanted their own result, and used whatever methods they could to get it - but the outcome wasn’t guaranteed from the start, and the result could have gone either way. And, of course, they didn’t have to do it anyway. EFC isn’t a democracy and unless we are shareholders we are, in the end, customers. KEIOC should be buying shares if they ever really want to have a voice.

And, of course, KEIOC might have gathered more potential support if they had called themselves KEITC - THE city, not OUR city. They would never have called themselves KEIL of course, as to mention Liverpool is simply taboo. I’ll stick with KEITH myself - Keep Everton in the Homeland.

Keith, the "Our" in the naming of KEIOC was, I am presuming, just an old-fashioned, natural thing to do if you were born and brought up within ear-shot of the one o?clock gun. I am proud to come from Liverpool and have no problem saying the name in the context of MY home city.

The fact that LFC took the my city?s name and usurped its badge makes me no less proud. By the way, didn?t our 1894 - 1903 ?branding? feature the Liver Bird? The Liver Bird and the red rose of Lancashire featured on our jersey as far back as 1885.

RTB, I say ? Reclaim The Bird!

More importantly, no one has aksed why KEIOC ask "If it transpired that Everton didn’t own the stadium outright but shared the ownership with Knowsley Council and a Stadium operating company, how would you feel?"

There has to be a reason they are asking that...

MIchael take your points, and if and it is an if KEIOC, publish the results of their survey and try to put it forward as a basis for a change in fans views you will be consistent in your arguement and make it clear that "Only an idiot would expect them to be neutral." I also cannot reconcile your views here with the link on the main site and how the survey is described there.

Toffeeweb is outstanding in its balanced reporting of all matters Everton,but I think in this matter you might be letting your standards drop. However, you run the site and your can do as you wish within the law but it does rather taint the discussion you want to have. I agree with you on the aims of the survey and have no issue with a group fighting its corner, and if you wrote on the link what you have said here that the "survey is "impartial"? Of course it doesn?t ? the questions have been composed by KEIOC and guess what ? they aren?t in favour of the Kirkby cowshed... No surprise there, surely!!!" It would be a better link.
I have no desire to launch my own survey, Neil, but if I did have the money to buy out Kenwright I would in a flash, but I don?t.

Ian, I think you?re overplaying this, and it all hinges on this word "independent". I think Neil got it dead right: think "mischievious".

As for our link to the survey, I get slammed if I do too much editorializing in the Homepae news links, which most people expect to be neutral. I disagree: I think it IS an opportunity for editorial comment; however, I generally restrain myself.

In this case, though, your request is unreasonable. There is nothing amiss with the body text of the link and there is no need for me to include my opninion of the survey there. I did however change the word "independent" to the more accurate "ground-move" in the link heading as I think it was confusing (see above).

The only thing "independent" about the survey seems to be it being hosted at a thrid-party website.

Phil - the One o?Clock Gun was fired from Morpeth Dock, Birkenhead, next door to the Lairidge. At least that?s what my grandad told me when I was about six or seven and he took me walks down towards Woodside from from my grannies house.

We always called my Aunt Elizabeth "Dixie" because William Ralph was born around the corner. But Birkenhead would never be part of ?our city? would it. Grandad walked from Birkenhead to Liverpool the day the tunnel opened. He called himself a scouser (as Birkenhead dockers did), and you lot over there he called "whackers" (see The Vernons Girls - You Know What I Mean - 1962)

KEIOC got it wrong.

Hi Keith
I thought W R Dean always called himself a ’Whacker’ and ’us lot’ on the proper side ’Scousers’, where my Grandad was a docker.
Wasn’t the gun fired from Bidston?
I’ve lost track of this thread, now. I think the point is Liverpool is MY city and Everton football club (1878) is MY team. If you’re an Evertonian, wherever you come from, welcome!

Any of you anti-Kirkbyites doing anything about it? Ignore the clubs lackeys and start getting angry about where the current board are taking our club. This move, if it happens, will kill our traditional support base for ever. What kid in Liverpool is going to want ot support the ?Knowsley club,? Everton Football Club, founder member of the football league and 4th most successful club in English league history, is going to disappear. Like AFC Wimbledon, we will be fighting in 10 years time to reclaim the history that is rightfully ours.

My reply to KEIOC was:
Got half way through the survey and found this question:

If Everton FC relocated to Kirkby and the move proved to be disastrous, to whom would you apportion blame?

This kind of question will lose you support and just sends a message that if you fail to get your own way you will pull our club apart. The question is too loaded.

So for that reason I won?t complete the survey and give you ammunition to start witch-hunts. Otherwise I still don?t want us to go to Kirkby.

At least KEIOC have waited until all the facts surrounding the move are there for all to read before having their survey. If only Everton had done the same then I really do believe the outcome would have been far different.

The easiest thing in the world is to blow holes in situations. Furthermore, those who blow holes seek to shout the loudest about the size of hole(s) they have blown. Conversely, the most difficult thing in the world is to provide solutions to close (or at least mend) such holes, as the said solution may open up new, unenvisaged holes. We can call such people hole-fillers.

KEIOC is a classic example of a hole-blowing organisation, screaming its findings from the rooftops. However, when it comes down to the nitty-gritty of closing those holes the organisation is left wanting. Why don’t they simply start providing well-thought-out solutions to difficult problems? We could then evaluate those solutions according on the basis of plausibility and cost, as well as the longer-term strategic implications. Alas, that is only a pipedream as KEIOC is merely interested in blowing holes.

So what is my point you may ask. Well it’s simple - instead of defecating the same old hole-blowing stew into our brains KEIOC should do something useful like finding intelligent solutions to really difficult problems.

What about a new pressure group...."Fans against KEIOC blowjobs" ?

Ah Jim- questions, questions
KEIOC - We know what their position is don?t we so why complain about the language of their survey either complete it or don?t Jim!
Takes my mind back to a little survey the club carried out
Either move to Kirkby or stay at Goodison ? eh we have no plan B
Also the information we will provide you to inform your decision with will be incomplete and misleading.
I’m sure if you asked any independent research analyst whether this is a serious and proper survey they would laugh their socks off; it is flawed and does nobody any favours. ? Jim simply apply your own logic to the ballot.

The Club like KEIOC wanted a particular outcome. It is neither reliable nor statistically valid. The only difference is that is perhaps is that KEIOC are demonstrate a higher degree of honesty than the club.

Victor, take your blinkers off. If it were not for the fact that KEIOC formed we would not have had the many reports you desire to come out. The proving reports on the viability of re-building Goodison. The reports from renowned architects proving that the loop site is viable. The reports on the transport infrastructure re-garding the move to Kirkby. The list is endless what this group of supporters have achieved.

If only Everton, Wyness and Kenwright could say the same..

Robert

If in fact there is any viability to the said reports then why is the club turning such a big blind eye to logic? Capitalist conspiracy no less! To have the only truly viable solution premised on relocating within the city is faulty at best, and suicidal at worst. If your main point is that the modern state of the game is rotten, corrupt, money orientated, etc, then how do you suggest we realistically go about returning to year zero? Kill all Sky subscribers? Kill the yes voters? Abandon the club? Set up the Real Everton FC? Let’s get real matey. The only way you (and the other ’viable report brigade’) will ever achieve anything is if you clearly elucidate how Everton move forward in what is a complicated, multi-faceted world. Let’s start by coming up with an alternative to Kirby (by alternative I mean a full, long-term strategic plan plus financing) for less than 78million. If you fail to deliver a strong enough case you ain’t got my ear. If you do I am yours.

Well, this to my mind is one of the best threads on the "K" topic for a while on this site. KEIOC is, I have no doubt, a sincere, commited bunch of Evertonians. That their sincerety and enthusiasm led them to phrase certain questions in their survey that some might find "leading", I do not attach anything sinister to, except that they have a certain mindset as to their view on the topic, which led them to phrase the questions in the way they did. Should they be accused of "pressure tactics"? No. Should they be accused of "Spin"? No. They are just trying to present their case as fairly as they think it deserves. Should the Everton Board not be entitled to the same (especially as their raison d?etre, and fulfilment of their duties, as THEY see it, depends upon it)?

Victor - see Tom Hughes, Trevor Skempton on the KEIOC site fo your answers.
There are alternatives - there always has been but according to Wyness - no plan B at the time of the vote !!!!
Very strange but with no alternative the vote had a far better chance of falling the way he wanted it to.

Re-develop Goodison -
see specialised reports saying it is viable. See St James Park - bigger footprint at GP.
Walton Hall Park -
Sainsburys expressed an interest
The Loop -
Bestway are not a small company and the site is big enough.
Shared stadium -
both clubs cannot afford new stadiums - As the oldest club in the city should we not have first choice over Stanley Park ? Both clubs or neither.
Massive worldwide marketing and financial opportunities.

Or you can simply put on the voting form which includes a glossy brochure;

Kirkby -
for nothing: Deal of the Century.
No plan B

The alternatives have and are there to be investigated further.
Why the rush ??????
The most important decision in our history.

More power to KEIOC and everyone else out-there who feels we are being rail-roaded.

We are pround of being ’The People’s Club’ and it looks as if people power is the only way we are going to be able to halt this decision and force the board to look at the alternatives.
Why do we have to force the board ???
You would think they would want to ensure they had done everything within their power to exhaust all possibilities before making such a historic decison.
I think we should anyway.

Paul
As mentioned earlier in the thread, hole blowers and hole fillers are a different breed. KEIOC is what its title suggests, a movement aimed at ensuring EFC remains inside the city boundary, and its cohorts will argue tooth and nail to that end. Logic dictates that any solution that falls outside that geo parameter will be shot at. Is this good for our club? I say no, because a self-elected, unrepresentative body, offering solutions under certain provisos can not hold a gun to the head of our club’s leaders and major shareholders. This is not the October Revolution guys - those days are over. As somebody has suggested, you should all put your money where your mouth is and become shareholders - then raise your issue in the appropriate arena.

So, how can we move the debate on in order to get all of us what we want? Simple, start by taking the gun away and offer a full and transparent strategy for future development. I feel the club has been quite upfront on most of this already. To say we have been cheated and mislead is a childish, overly-emotional reaction. FFS spare us all the Richard Attenborough antics. Again I challenge all you KEIOC followers to elucidate future plans for our club, that not only match but beat what Kenwright has thus far served up (please spare us the same old Loop, if/but, can/could, perhaps/maybe trash). Hard facts stating future revenues and incorporating a long-term, sustainable strategy for growth and investment - a list of the strategic partners you have in mind and their stated interest would be nice too.

Victor Johnson - You say "Hard facts stating future revenues and incorporating a long-term, sustainable strategy for growth and investment." Proceded by: "I feel the club has been quite upfront on most of this already."

I must have missed the board being "quite upront." Could you lay out the hard facts stating future revenues and incorporating a long-term, sustainable strategy for growth and investment for the Kirkby proposal?

What we would be getting is a low quality stadium set in a sub-standard retail park on the edge of a small town that would be served by a transport plan beset with real logistical problems.

Hopefully your hard facts on Kirkby can outweigh the above and help heal the Kirkby rift.