It's now being hailed as the panacea to a lack of interest in investment, although if we look at Mr Elstone?s comments one has to ask: who is kidding who here? ?Everton is one of a very small, elite family of big, substantial, sought-after Premier League clubs," said Elstone.
Well, that?s strange... because no-one appears to be beating down the doors with offers that BK wants to accept are they? Or is it just that there is more to be made from Kirkby for those with vested interests?
If we are so attractive already where is the stumbling block? Does anyone really think moving to Kirkby will make us more attractive to an investor? If a Saudi or a Russian Billionaire wanted the club, do you think Kirkby would make the difference to the deal? As opposed to any other location that is... ANY other location?
"We have a great heritage but we also have a very big, loyal fanbase. Most of the value any investor will seek is within that fanbase, and Everton is right up there among some of the biggest clubs in the Premier League.?
By taking a decision to go to Kirkby, the club are alienating that very same fan base, you know, the thing they are promoting as being a hugely attractive selling point to any new investor... funny strategy that.
?The alternative to the Kirkby project would be for Everton and Liverpool to embark on a joint development and subsequently share the new stadium. But Elstone said any ground-sharing scheme would be less financially viable than Kirkby.?
Given the current and medium term economic climate, the cost of the WHOLE project including the Tesco development has to be placed in doubt. With high unemployment, bankruptcies and low retail sales, where will the return be for the retailer be in all of this? What impact is it likely to have over the retail footprint and cross subsidy and are Tesco footing the extra cost? Right at this minute, Kirkby needs this development like a hole in the head. Right now, the retail sector is shrinking, with deflation being threatened by the PM.
Ok, there is a train of counter thought that says if you can afford it, now is the time to buy things cheap and prosper later, but let's face it, Tesco is now needing EFC much more than EFC needs Tesco. Without the stadium, the development has no chance of being remotely successful in Tesco?s eyes. How are they going to attract the retailers without the lure of the stadium and the fans?
The rationale for Kirkby gets worse every passing day, yet all hopes for ANY future we are told are only to be found in Tesco?s. It's staggeringly stupid. It's incredibly arrogant and totally irrational. But then we are talking about Everton.
"The next six or seven weeks will go a long way to deciding where Everton is in five, 10, 20 years' time," said acting chief executive Robert Elstone. "A new stadium would definitely help us attract a new buyer,"
The end game here is not about the development of a club. It?s the development of the sale of the club. It?s about maximising its financial potential return to investors. In five years time where will BK be? In fact, where will any of the Board be? Sitting in the Director?s Box in Kirkby? I doubt it.
IF the inquiry goes against the development, will we see another vision of the future? Whose I wonder? If the club is forced to rethink its options, where is the credibility of those club officials who have condemned both the alternatives and those supporters who have just as passionately believed that Kirkby wasn?t the right way forward?
They have tried not to make a business case but hide behind one. So the next seven weeks will make or break someone?s vision. Either the club's or a significant body of the supporters.
Where is a White Knight when you need one?
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
1 Posted 19/11/2008 at 14:29:57
I am suprised that somebody with obviously so much intelligence cannot see why having a new stadium is not attractive to an investor. Bascially, if Kirkby goes to shit, that new investor would have to fund a new stadium by his/herself. It's really not rocket science.
But yes, it's another conspiracy by the board to fuck over the fans so they can make more money out of their overall strategy which is.... destroying the club they spent the last god knows how long building from the rubble of the Johnson era. Of course, why didn't we think of that.
It's very clear your feelings on the Board and Kirkby Christine. But you don't need to portray yourself as a ?white knight? who believes she knows the real truth of every comment that comes out of Goodison Management.
But it does keep people like me entertained, so feel free to keep spinning these elegantly worded tales. After all, everybody is entitled to their opinion. In the same way I am entitled to mine, I think the majority of what you write is a load of bollocks.
2 Posted 19/11/2008 at 14:48:43
Quite frankly I don't care anymore ? it's boring and the average fan doesn?t get a say anyway!
GROUNDSHARE WITH LFC ? THAT'S THE WAY FOR BOTH CLUBS.
3 Posted 19/11/2008 at 15:04:30
And will this new stadium be provided to any potential investor free of charge?
Or is that too much of an obvious counter argument to digest? The fact is a new investor will pay for a stadium no matter what!
Whether a potential investor will be put of by being tied to a problematic stadium ? which has major opposition from the fans, and which is in a less than attractive area... is the question you, and many like you fail to even consider!
ps: If you really think people like Earl really give a shít about this club, perhaps you should take a look at his commercial track record...
4 Posted 19/11/2008 at 15:11:44
Breaks my heart to see what happened to Kings Dock only £30m needed to see that proceed. Don?t understand why the club weren?t open and honest about the funding, surely they could?ve launched a share issue with the fans which I believe if everyone knew the situation could have raised the shortfall.
5 Posted 19/11/2008 at 15:14:37
If an investor has the forward vision of financing this team to break the top four, then which stadium do you think they would prefer to do it in? GP or Kirkby? Which would generate the most profit for his/her investment? And yes, there is no guarantee that we would consistently be top 4, even with a big investment. But I cannot for the life of me see why an investor would see GP as a more attractive option than Kirkby.
I dont really want to get into the debate, as I see your reasoning and I understand why you believe it. I just dislike the way that some contributors to this site seem to state things so ’matter of factly’, like everyone else to too stupid to see whats going on. Some people just want to pick holes in everything that is said by Everton, and take pleasure in finding fault. The feeling I get is that people like that will never be satisfied, nothing will quench the hunger to point out they are more clever than others.
Its not about the club, but more about satisfying their own ego’s about being ’clever’. thats the big difference.
6 Posted 19/11/2008 at 15:41:45
7 Posted 19/11/2008 at 16:00:03
Surely the third option of funding their own stadium without the problems that Kirkby brings is sensible alternative!
After all, you admit that they will pay for the Kirkby stadium anyway in the price of the club... so the deficit in the price of a non-attached club could provide an equally, if not more attractive proposition.
Surely the prudent investor would want to make their own decisions of the future of the club!
ps: You ask the question...?which would provide more revenue - Kirkby of Goodison??....as if it?s an obvious answer. Neither you nor anyone involved in this whole sorry saga has even tried to explain why Kirkby is being touted as ?mana from heaven? in terms of revenue beyond the cost of development ...
and I doubt they ever will... and you know why, because the figures simply don?t stack up.
8 Posted 19/11/2008 at 16:26:09
That?s why the crowd are so silent at home when there?s no excitement on the pitch to distract them. They are all listening for the sounds of a creaking old building so that they have an early warning before it falls down on their heads :0)
9 Posted 19/11/2008 at 15:49:00
At this time, Everton has several long diagonals exposed to Black’s rampaging Bishops.
Such was the lay of the battlefield with the emergence from obscurity of GM Otto Von Kruppschlitzenaut with his surprising win at the 23rd German Championship in 1876.
Early exposure of materiale has left many of our pieces vulnerable to "freezing", a lesson learned at some cost to Eustace Winthrop-Smythe at the 1851 Imperial Open Championship. Grandmasters of that period noted Wintrop-Smythe’s midgame play was usually as dazzling as the venue’s environs, the Crystal Palace, but not that fateful day.
Self appointed Chess impresario, William Kenwright, who already caused much consternation, even among novices it must be noted, by bafflingly eschewing the King’s Dock Endgame Stratagem at the Henry Berry Invitational in 2003, now is leading White into potential peril with his latest machinations, or unconventional Destination Kirky Convention. Currently, BK’s precipitous queen development is at best hazardous, and without incisive play, something heretofore nary demonstrated, can be suicidal. In more vulgar circles, this is sometimes referred to as a "Loose Madame."
10 Posted 19/11/2008 at 17:02:26
11 Posted 19/11/2008 at 17:38:34
FFS, Do we really want to give everything up ? history, lads!!! ? to go outside the boundaries and slide away from the spotlight. Options are available, believe me.
12 Posted 19/11/2008 at 17:37:08
13 Posted 19/11/2008 at 17:31:55
I would like to ask you 2 questions.
1. How is Kirkby going to make more money than GP with around a £10 million a year handicap in interest and lower gates with little corporate income?
2. Would the potential investor be paying £78 million for the new stadium (it?s only attraction) or £150 million after Bill and his buddies divvy out the proceeds?
You say the anti-Kirkby brigade does not credit anyone else with intelligence and maybe you?re right but it is difficult to believe the board have anything but their own interests in mind when we see how much bullshit comes out of GP.
For example do you honestly believe it would cost £230 million to redevelop GP? Do you really believe that with commercial support we could not find a better "cost/benefit" site than Kirkby?
Sorry, that?s 4 questions.
14 Posted 19/11/2008 at 17:51:46
It is really depressing how easily people get sucked in by the spin from the club. All the information is available on the Knowsley website spelling out the numerous lies we have been told by the club - yet you still get people on here saying it is the only option and a good deal.
Let me spell it out to you in simple financial terms. If Everton do not increase crowds by 13,000 people every game we will lose money.
If you believe our average will rise that much in a recession, with increased prices and an average 40 minute walk from the car parks (all undisputed facts from the planning inquiry) then I think you are staggeringly naive.
15 Posted 19/11/2008 at 18:40:29
Tesco will be one of the few who could still push ahead with a project such as this.
Other retail developments will and already are falling by the wayside.
Tesco have a fairly recession proof business model and will make a good return over the longterm.
The idea that the retail relies upon the fans being there for one day in seven for 9 months of the year, really lets the article down.
The thought that the Government or planner would turn down a private funded major construction project in the current climate, is so bizarre its beyond fantasy. They will be asking for more and more DK?s, trust me.
All the transport plans, and talk of longterm development strategies, forget about it. The rules have changed all past plans can be binned. This is going to happen, just get used to now.
Very sad but true.
16 Posted 19/11/2008 at 19:36:51
Christine, your articles are always superbly crafted but you see things that I really don?t. Is BK really fattening up the club for a sale so that he can make a killing?
I can accept that he / the Board are / have been incompetent but I can?t see the conspiracy theory ? really I can?t!
Anyway, what do you think about Moyes?s tactics, the team?s recent run of form despite poor style of play, the prospects for a win at Wigan on Monday etc etc? You seem obsessed with boardroom machinations .....!
17 Posted 19/11/2008 at 20:11:45
What bothers me is, when BK scarpers with the dosh and Everton are dead or dying, the people who voted for this will shrug there shoulders and walk away
18 Posted 19/11/2008 at 21:50:11
I know poeple who voted yes and have kept a season ticket for years even when they lived in other country and got to a handful of games. One guy when we played Liverpool in the series of cup replays kept coming over from Germany for every game.
Let me bring a simple fact home to you Dave: I voted No but that doesn?t mean I know or care more than a Yes voter.
What will it take you to stop you being such a fuckwit, Dave?
19 Posted 19/11/2008 at 20:35:49
But the city council have made it clear that they don?t want to help out Everton. Fine! If they don?t want us then lets go. And let?s be honest here. I love Everton but what?s a better arguement ? 18 leagues and 5 european cups or having the fans of the city. I hate to say it but The Shite win there.
Roots don?t mean squat in football nowadays, or locality. Football has sold its soul so we have to keep up with the times no matter how much we may disagree with it. Id love Everton to be successful at Goodison Park but i just can?t see it happening.
Sadly Goodison is falling apart. It?s not fit for modern football, so we need to move new grounds.
Also I think we will become a more attractive proposition if we move to a new stadium. Hopefully Tesco do need Everton. However, I just can?t trust Everton. I?ll believe it when I see it. If we have to sell our soul for success then I'm afraid it will have to be that way. Don?t get me wrong I'm proud of our history but unfortunately I haven?t experienced a great Everton side, so I can only enjoy this on DVD. I love all our great players, Dixie Dean, Tommy Lawton, Alex Young, Alan Ball, Kevin Sheedy, Neville Southall and so on but that was in the past tense. I care about Everton in the present and future tense.
So as far as I'm concerned it?s going to have to be selling a soul for success. It will be horrible the day we finally leave Everton but if fate played its part and we walked out as Champions then it would be worth it.
20 Posted 19/11/2008 at 22:35:19
How much will it cost to redevelop Goodison?
Ahhhh....... it will cost more....with a bigger interest payment and reduced income over the seasons needed to do it piecemeal... if allowed at all by the wonderful council!
Sorry, poor argument!
Or do you want to put your head in the sand, stay as we are, and fall further behind our peers?
21 Posted 19/11/2008 at 22:19:23
I have been doing some research into the distance the Premier League club grounds are from the centre of there town. I have used town halls as the starting point, and although the figures do not prove anything in particular, I do think they highlight the great risk the club is taking with the DK experiment. I think they also show that the KEIOC focus on the city boundary is missleading and has in some ways diverted the focus away from what I think is the main issue, which is proximity to the city centre, with its superior public transport and possible superior demand for corporate hospitality. I have not included the London clubs because of the distinctive nature of that city.The distances of the premier league grounds from the centre of town is as follows.
Newcastle 1 Mile
Portsmouth 1.3 Miles
Middlesbrough 1.8 Miles
Sunderland 1.8 Miles
Wigan 1.9 Miles
Blackburn 2.1 Miles
Man Utd 2.4 Miles
Man City 2.4 Miles
Stoke 2.4 Miles
West Brom 2.5 Miles
Hull 3.1 Miles
Liverpool 3.3 Miles
Aston Villa 3.3 Miles
Everton 3.35 Miles
Bolton 6.1 Miles
Valley Road Kirkby 8.2 Miles.
This may mean nothing but I am willing to bet that it is hugely significant.
22 Posted 19/11/2008 at 22:34:42
1. For the past two years we have heard nothing from the club except to say we are not an attractive buy to any investor. Our ernstwhile CEO states we are much sought after. So which is it? If we have been much sought after then why are we STILL in the mess we are?
2. Major selling point to any new investor is the fan base. Yes, the same ones who they tried to gag or belittle. The same set of shareholders they gagged through changing the clubs constitution. The same set they have lied to about all things regarding Kirkby.
3. Should any new billionaire arise from somewhere its now patently obvious that if the club is sold for the £200m as stated, several directors will benefit significantly because of their shareholding. With or without Kirkby!
4. As I have said before, any fee paid for the shareholding will not benefit the club directly. Further funds would have to be made available for team etc..
Lastly, my feelings on the way the club have been stated and I have changed some of those views as inuendo is replaced by fact. But, one cannot square a circle, gild the lily, etc as the club have done without someone questioning motive. For me the motive behind Tesco and Kirkby has always been primarily self interest of the board. Thats my belief but I understand thats not others. Thats why we debate.
What I would like to see is that White Knight of the business world who comes in with cash and a determination and skills to give the club facilities and a team that can match Europe?s finest. But I respect too that it may be a bridge too far, but I can never see us as European Champions at the Kirkby Tesco Dome, thats stretching credibility.
Finally some balance to the clubs propoganda is required, because we don?t share the same vision. When a new investor buys the club they will bring their own view of the world, their vision for the club. One can?t say with any certainty that it will be better than what we have been given, but one can say it won?t be much worse.
23 Posted 20/11/2008 at 04:22:31
it has been posted many times on here by at least 2 great Evertonians Trevor Skempton (a hugely experienced stadium architect who was responsible for the St james Park development from 28,000 to 55,000) and Tom Hughes (a highly capable construction engineer) that GP can be redeveloped to a 55,000 seat stadium (not 50,401) with more corporate facilities than Kirkby and no restrictions on use (unlike DK).
The costs were roughly comparable with Kirkby and the maximum disruption (I think) was a reduction in capacity to 29,000 for 3 months of one season.
In fact they had a recent meeting with Elstone to outline their thoughts on redeveloping GP.
I haven't heard any feedback from them but it certainly looks like it was just lip service and Elstone has been told it?s full steam to Kirkby.
I actually reprinted a copy of some construction engineers proposals a few months ago from 2001 when the cost was stated to be around £40 million. (Now if only we?d done it then but that seems to be a recurring theme with Kenwright).
24 Posted 20/11/2008 at 06:05:22
I really respect brave soldiers like you who come on name calling, from behind there PC’s
At no stage have I said they didnt care - you made that bit up - what I said was the will shrug their shoulders
Am I wrong ? what is it YOU think they will do ?
You tell me how they will react ?
25 Posted 20/11/2008 at 08:31:24
If it is truly feasable then surely the current board would all go for it? I don't see why they wouldn't, as the site would be worth more, and there would be no, or very little objections.
So if it is feasable for the same money being touted for Kirkby, what possible reason could the Board have for not wanting it?
Is it just they are hell bent on destroying Everton?
26 Posted 20/11/2008 at 08:55:00
27 Posted 20/11/2008 at 09:35:38
I have yet to get an answer to this puzzling connundrum.
28 Posted 20/11/2008 at 10:26:32
How many billionaires owned PL clubs when BK bought out Johnson ?
How many now own PL clubs ?
29 Posted 20/11/2008 at 12:17:46
Highbury was a far better stadium than ours and they moved... please be realistic and do not talk about re-developing GP, which is not an option. Yes I don't want to move to Kirkby but, unless some land appears in the city for free, with another supermarket offering to pay half the cost, we're stuck!
30 Posted 20/11/2008 at 12:17:51
31 Posted 20/11/2008 at 12:33:11
"So if it is feasable for the same money being touted for Kirkby, what possible reason could the Board have for not wanting it?"
Well taking ?on board? the past performance of the board/Chairman/CEO/directors of Everton FC, i?ll answer your question...with a question.
Why is it that (in all walks of life) fucking useless idiots do what fucking useless idiots do?
(Clue: fucking useless idiots)
32 Posted 20/11/2008 at 13:24:07
The board are not perfect by any stretch. However, If BK is such a "fucking useless idiot". Why is he a multi-millionaire who runs a very successful theatre production company?
Why does everyone think they are far cleverer and would be able to do such a better job than the board if they were in charge? My bet would be you would not know your arse from your elbow. And we would be in a worse state than we are now.
They are not perfect and they have made mistakes. But I don't think they are this big evil being that is trying to suck the life out of our club. If they were doing this, would it surely not make more sense for DK to be a success, than for it to fail like everyone seems to think it should?
33 Posted 20/11/2008 at 13:27:14
One thing is for sure, if the Minister gives the go-ahead for the development, finances permitting, the project will go ahead.
These comments re developing Goodison and finding another site are pointless. If DK is given the green light, it will go ahead.
I fail to see why it has to be so close to the city centre. It's on the borders of the city now and in a very depressing area. Those supporters who live within walking distance are incredibly lucky. I would like to know how many of today's supporters travel to Goodison from outside the city boundaries.
Some rabbit on endlessly about the ?great history? of the club. Nobody has ever spelt it out. Is it so much greater than so many Premier League and even Championship clubs? Please, someone, spell it out for me.
For me, the greatest objection to Kirby as it is proposed is the proximity of the new Stadium to the Tesco super duper market. Could it not be sited rather further away? I can visualise crowds of noisy, obscene chanting supporters mingling with Tesco?s Saturday afternoon shoppers. That will result in much upset amongst many Kirkby residents.
34 Posted 20/11/2008 at 14:08:21
the answer is simple ? the Championship-standard stadium on decontaminated land at Kirkby costs BK and his buddies £80 to 100 million and new investor gets charged £150 million.
If we have no money to redevelop GP, why are we fucking about with Kirkby? Nobody is giving us the £80 to 100 million that DK will cost.
The contaminated land at Kirkby is reputed to be costing millions to decontaminate before we even lay a brick (or piece of corrugated iron).
35 Posted 20/11/2008 at 13:37:06
"However, If BK is such a "fucking useless idiot", Why is he a multi-millionaire who runs a very successful Theatre production company?"
First of all (like a Hello reader) you make the mistake of equating money with brains.
Fact: Intelligence does not equal wealth and vice versa, or maybe you think Jade Goody is not a fucking useless idiot, but a towering intellect. Or maybe you?re one of those who, while making the international hand gesture for ?got a few bob?, says "Hey she?s not that soft yer know". Fact: She fucking well is - a cabbage more or less and no amount of cash will change that.
Secondly, being successful in one business does not guarantee success in another. "Yeah me pickle business is going well so thinking of opening me own fashion house"... Ok, so I exaggerate and I?m sure YOU can find similarities (ie: "They?re both forms of entertainment blah...") but the reality is, there is a world of difference between ?running? Everton football Club for and on behalf of Evertonians and trying to persuade old ladies from Kent to go and see two of the fellers from E17 in Blood brothers at the Croydon Pexageganhagonal.
(BTW, the reason Bill is ?successful? in theatre, is because he?s a bullshitter and it?s a bullshitter's business.)
Thirdly, where the fuck do I say I think he/they?re being ?evil?? Go on - point it out! Evil is YOUR word (I said they were fucking idiots, there?s a big difference).
You also accuse me of suggesting I could do better? Where did I say I could do better? (I mean I could... but I didn?t say so above.)
The fact that I think Kenwright is a hopeless bullshitting ponce, means.... JUST that. I suggest next time you want to defend Bill from a ?nasty Bill? post like mine, you read the bleedin? post first. Otherwise any response you post will be just... pointless?
36 Posted 20/11/2008 at 14:35:48
1. If we?ve got no money then where the hell are we getting the £80m for Kirkby??
2. Gladwys Street school is closing in 2010 ? so there?ll be plenty of land behind the Bullens Road and there is plenty off land behind the Park End.
3. Why do the pro-Kirkby people keep saying Goodison can not be redeveloped when 2 different architects have proved that it can??
37 Posted 20/11/2008 at 14:24:16
38 Posted 20/11/2008 at 14:37:39
39 Posted 20/11/2008 at 14:59:10
I can see it now..."yes Mr Kenwright, here is the balance of the Goodison sale minus what the bank is owed on it - Now go buy yourself a nice big packet of sweets"
40 Posted 20/11/2008 at 15:06:12
When did I say you said the board were evil?
Also, bit of a difference between Jade Goody and Bill Kenwright. Whatever you think of the man, he has a very successful business. That has what made him his millions. Sorry I don't believe it was just down to luck or being a bullshitter.
Granted, that just because he is successful in one field does not mean he is successful in another. However, that is why he has the board to supposedly help him.
I agree the board are far from perfect. but just coming on here and saying they are all fucking useless idiots in my eyes is a waste of time. We have had releative success with them over the past few years... not as much as we would have hoped but things have been better. They have found money for players.
ps: The comment about people thinking they can run the board better was more a general statement not specifically aimed at you. Sorry it hurt your feelings.
41 Posted 20/11/2008 at 17:42:53
Just wondering where Terry Holland says that you called BK evil....
42 Posted 20/11/2008 at 18:22:53
I’d just like to point out that many who oppose then move to Kirkby state that moving to this dump of an area will be off putting to any would be invester. What people are fialing to grasp is this is the biggest major re-development outside of the city boundary for as long as I can remember. This is the reason it is opposed by just about every neihbouring borough. It could just be that this development could be massively beneficial to both the club and Kirkby.
43 Posted 20/11/2008 at 18:36:36
Obviously this will indeed improve the area thus removing the dump tag.
44 Posted 20/11/2008 at 19:03:20
Knights in shining armour tend to come along when their is something attractive on offer, this is were most Evertonians get it all wrong.
We are not attractive, we are not a high profile club we dont have annoying celebrity hangers on parading around Goodison at every home game, we are not and have never been a club that buys a player or appoints a manager for any other reason other than our belief he can do the job.
Some clubs and I am not knocking them for it because it has worked for them will buy profile players and appoint profile managers that have a global or wider recognition than say the premier league or just English football, Newcastle, Chelsea, Tottenham are prime examples of this and it has created wider interest and higher brand identity despite compared to us their relative lack of success ( none at all when it comes to Newcastle)
Add to all of the above we are low profile from a suburb of Liverpool and also the fact that we have no real revenue potential in my opinion ,maybe maximum 300k extra per game which would be wiped out the minute we bought one or two more players at the level required to push for a fourth spot.
So to summarise and I would use this analagy.
Night out with boys, try all night to pull the best bird and they are all taken by others, when it gets to ten to two and in despair you head for the toilets, see the least attractive one stood outside the toilet, so you can at least try one last shot and if rejected because any one will do at this stage, you can run into the toilet and hide until she has gone away. Thats the measure of what any knight in shining armour sees when he looks at our club, the best ones based on their criteria (not ours) have all gone.
So what is the option.
1, Go with the Kirkby fllow and watch over the course of season one the struggle to fill the stadium.
2, Shared option -have a cost proportionately higher and relatively higher of the share due to their ability to fill it and ours to max at 60% of it.
3, Stay at Goodison and wait for the sining knight ( wont happen).
4, Or just sit tight on it all and watch those whos responsibilty and right it is ( because they own it) to get on with the job in hand. We support them by being at every game we financially can afford to attend and leave it at that.
We dont have a 25,000 waiting list for season tickets (Spurs) and we never will or at least in the next 20 years unless we change the philosophy of this club from a traditional football club to something far more wide reaching than just what we all know and love.
Knight in shining armour- I would be happy at the moment with 40,200 Knights in shining armour or so at every home game paying £10 a ticket more than we all do today and so would Everton
45 Posted 20/11/2008 at 19:08:19
I?m not sure what your mate coming over from Germany to watch a hole series of replays - I assume you mean both of them - 20 years ago, has to do with Kirkby. I?m far more concerned with the views of the people who watch EFC now, You Know, today's paying customer
You're at pains to tell us you voted no whilst going to great lengths to extol the virtues of Tesco ? Regular little PR starlet are?nt you
You must think we were all born yesterday, trust me it's clear enough who the fuckwit is here.
46 Posted 20/11/2008 at 19:56:26
Facile, moronic & bigotted post. Your use of language is as distasteful as the argument you attempt to make.
The previous criticism against you was totally valid based on the rampantly dismissive tone of your post. You clearly believe that you know better than not just Kenwright, but the many highly qualified & successful business people who support him. Based on what? What is it that you know or have done that allows you to make such obnoxious criticisms of others?
This club was heavily in debt when Kenwright took over. He has never professed or suggested that he has millions to give to Everton. So no lie there. He has done all within his power to facilitate growth of the club as far as finances will allow. This has entailed advice and guarantees from hugely successful friends in the business world. So what? This is a bad thing is it? Moyes has been supported in transfers beyond what I imagined was possible. Where did you think the money came from?
The sale of Johnson was down to Moyes, and specifically to his misuse of Johnson in his tedious hoof-ball style that has reappeared. Selling McFadden & Johnson and only making the one purchase this season (Fellaini) is also down to Moyes. He tossed his toys out the pram and behaved like an idiot from May to August, partly because of his aims & exectations (Moutinho) and partly because of not signing his contract. That not only cost us a good pre-season but it also cast confusion & uncertainty within the whole squad, which in turn cost us a potentially better start to the season.
I don’t have blind faith in anybody in any walk of life. I know too much and tend towards mild scrutiny (where it matters). However I have little doubt that Bill Kenwright has the best interests of Everton in mind at all times. If it were to happen that the club is sold and Kenwright made a profit then, erm, so what? He stepped up to the pulpit to rescue the club from Peter Johnson and did you see the length of the queue to buy the club? Yes, so did I, it was one person long.
There will never be agreement on this forum with regards to Kirkby or Kenwright. I have great sympathy and all the time in the world for those who offer considered and informative criticisms of Kirkby (or anything else). For example the apparent transport/parking issues, or how much the actual net cost will be to Everton. That’s all healthy debate. But like many, I have zero time for the ill considered rantings of people like yourself who purport to know it all (christ only knows how) and shower your detractors with ill mannered & obnoxious drivel.
Terry Holland does not equate money with brains. He makes a partial link (as every intelligent person would acknowledge is the case) but is actually equating money with accomplishment, i.e. establishing and running an internationally successful company that has prospered for many years and won awards. However you use your misreading of this to launch an utterly wasteful trail of facile, obnoxious & content-free drivel.
Take your own advice in reading the post next time. But also think about it too and count to 10 before you fire your next hand grenade.
47 Posted 20/11/2008 at 19:41:07
Look at the figures we have not filled GP once this season and since we have already played the poo and manure we are unlikely to.
Last season we filled the ground once.
The last time we had over 55,000 in the Old Lady was 1977, OK I know that for the last 10 years she’s only held just over 40,000 but you can count on your fingers the number of capacity crowds we have had in that time.
In 1985, the season after we won the Championship our first home game attracted just 26,000. Even the much vaunted Bayern Munich semi was 5,000 shy of capacity. The last time we had 4 50,000+ attendances was 1970/71.
We are no longer a wonderfully well supported team, the doldrum years of the 70s and early 80s saw to that. I don’t see how moving to a new stadium - however inexpensive - is going to add 20,000 to our gates - no matter how good the prawn sandwiches are.
My preference, build the best and most atmospheric 45,000 seater stadium we can on the existing site, somewhere that is so hostile that it is genuinely worth a goal a game. A benign 60% full bowl is neither use nor ornament.
48 Posted 20/11/2008 at 21:10:25
Can we please stop the myth that the sale of GP will contribute towards DK.
GP is mortgaged for £15 million and was reputedly valued at £13 million before the economy collapsed so there is absolutely zero to be gained from selling GP except to pay off the mortgage and leave us with a smaller debt, which to me backs up the argument of redeveloping GP.
49 Posted 20/11/2008 at 21:18:40
I accept that Goodison can be developed, but to produce a 10-year-old drawing and say it will probably cost x amount is not real.
A proper independent feasability study needs to be made to work out the true cost. It hasn?t been done!.... Why, I don?t know. But surely the argument from KEIOC has been weakened because of this. I cannot understand why, because it could blow any argument from the club out of the water.
So, talking of conspiracy theories ...
50 Posted 20/11/2008 at 21:27:49
I would disagree totally with you about the club being heavily in debt when Kenwright took over.
And this quote from a financial analyst/auditor 2 years after Kenwright took over seems to endorse that.
"When taking these figures into consideration, it becomes apparent that the financial loss would have been significantly higher than the previous year without these player disposals. In fact, if the loss on player sales had been similar to the year before, EFC would have approached a staggering £13M loss for the year!!! The overdraft would be correspondingly bigger... or worse, the club would have gone bankrupt.
Similarly, the overall debt of £29M does not take into consideration the transfers of Messrs Jeffers, Ball and Radzinski (which occurred after 31 May 2001). These three transactions should bring the overall current debt figure down to nearer £20M ? barring any "devil in the detail" of the bargains entered into.
And there is one overall convenient and perpetual myth that should be smashed: this is peddled lately by no less a figure than a former glorious centre forward now on the company?s payroll. It is that any financial fault lies with the previous administration. These figures, after two years of Kenwright?s TBH in control, are clearly the direct responsibility of the present regime.
One important point is that the debt (one year on) has increased from ~£15M to £29M during their time. How can this have any bearing on the previous regime? Particularly when the present regime would have had every opportunity to undertake the due diligence with which they appear to approach other matters with such regularity? Or is it a telling reminder of the spending spree that preceded the failed media deal?" (Paul Holmes)
51 Posted 20/11/2008 at 21:45:16
"The sale of Johnson was down to Moyes"
How do you know? You are doing exactly what you have accused others of doing on her and that is using conjecture to make a point. There is much speculation surrounding the sale of Johnson including that the player himself wanted to go. However I believe, and its only conjecture on my part, that Johnson was only sold because we couldnt raise finance for new players any other way.
On the subject of Moyes delaying the signing of new players during the close season that was not his job until Wyness left. It was clearly stated bby the club that Wyness was responsible for and working 24/7 on bringing in new players.We now know he wasn?t and IMO that?s why Moyes was refusing to sign his new contract.
Moyes may be an average manager limited in tactics but the one thing he has got is principle, dignity and respect and its a shame you care to cast aspersions on him to defend a known liar.
52 Posted 20/11/2008 at 21:53:29
I agree but the engineers detailed report and drawings were done in 2001 (only 7 years ago) and Tom Hughes has printed recent drawing and outlines on this site.
There are more detailed costings for developing GP than there are for DK whose costs seem to change weekly.
What we really need is a concerted effort by EFC to explore a plan B (and preferrably a C and D) but it doesn't seem to be on their agenda.
53 Posted 20/11/2008 at 22:09:05
I agree that a plan B would be a good idea, however, nobody has been able to provide a viable alternative to DK.
I saw your entry re the drawings and to be honest they weren?t that great, to have a full and proper argument a new costing needs to be done and then the discussion re redevelopment and DK would be more than just guesswork.
In all fairness, I do not feel this should be down to the club.
54 Posted 20/11/2008 at 22:17:36
What are you talking about mate ?
"He never professed or suggested he has millions to give to Everton, so no lie there" . . . . WHAT ?? ? ? ? ?
Do the words "Kings Dock" and "ring-fenced" ring any bells? When he uttered those words, that's exactly what he said.
55 Posted 20/11/2008 at 23:16:45
I share the frustration about Kings Dock (understatement). I also regard Kenwright as having some culpability. However, and despite the claims of ring-fenced funding etc, I don’t believe Kenwright ever stated or believed that he was funding this. I thought Greg’s involvement, entertainment background & financing connections was for that very reason. It was a debacle, but I don’t think anyone apart from those involved knows the full story. My 2nd biggest regret as an Evertonian (after selling Alan Ball).
Re Johnson; Moyes, when pushed on the subject, mumbled that "Andrew himself wanted to go". Johnson, when interviewed at length, stated unambiguously that he was not enjoying his football at all and it had everything to do with the way in which he was being employed and the team set-up.
Re Finances: I didn’t suggest at any point that our borrowings hadn’t increased under Kenwright’s stewardship. Everybody knows that to be the case. Our loans were about to be called in under Johnson (Ferguson sale etc). The only thing that Kenwright has done, apart from oversee our most successful period for 2 decades, is to present a more agreeable face of chairmanship than Johnson (in my opinion, and many others despite the anti everything presence on these threads).
To blame Kenwright for everything, as many do on TW, is facile and ridiculous. Faults aplenty, but don’t we all? Rather him than Johnson for me. Self-evidently with some people (you, Ciaran, etc) the guy can do nothing right whatsoever. Irrespective of my views, so many people who really do know what they’re talking about support Kenwright and what he’s done, and plans to do, at EFC. On balance I am on his side.
56 Posted 21/11/2008 at 02:48:28
But Bill is not stupid. He is a shrewd business man in his field, the theatre and I guess he has approached running the club in the same way. Little credence is given for many hopeful talk ups of possibilities in the theatre, but they are in business and running a football club is big business.
But at what point does hopeful expressions of what will be turn into falsehoods? Football supporters are realistic people not used to being told one thing and then not delivering, so are companies. Its not theatre but we risk becoming a pantomine. We risk that no longer will anyone take us seriously as a club.
Bill has done what he can in his eyes, he probably will make a good profit out of any sale, no real problem with that. Except of course what the money is made by doing. Kirkby as the be all and only solution to Everton's ailments is an appalling legacy. I for one would suffer a shared stadium with RS rather than Kirkby any day of the week.
Which begs the question why?
Why not let a third party come in and buy the club and build a stadium where one should be? Of course I hear you say, that would cost hundreds of millions..
But wait a sec.. lets just say, for a moment.. BK and others took out what they put in, plus a 100% mark up as a thank you for what they have done and let a new owner put the £200m into the club not the Directors, we suddenly find we have enough to cover our share of a stadium.. But of course, thats no going to happen is it?
A White Knight has to come with large pockets. Should Kirkby not proceed don;t be at all surprised if we suddenly find new owners and BK and fellow major shareholders cutting a deal, maybe not as personally lucrative as a Kirkby deal but none the less, we know and they do too (stated they are happy to sell) that no matter what happens with Kirkby it will probably not be the same board in 12 months time
I think the time for sentiment passed long ago and we need some sound leadership to pull the club and its supporters together once more.
BK and his supporters can?t have it both ways, in taking credit for where we are on the pitch they must also take the criticism for the communication, the leadership, direction, marketing and choice of relocation. Up to last season the team had hidden many of the ills off the pitch with good performances. With a dreadful summer, poor performances the acceptance of any more bullshitting has disappeared.
Financial reality has hit home to us all. Give Kirkby a miss and let someone else with a better vision have a go.
57 Posted 21/11/2008 at 07:12:29
58 Posted 21/11/2008 at 06:55:21
You know when BK came galloping up to rescue us from the clutches of Johnson, many people believed him to be the white Knight Christine is calling for now.
I understand your loyalty, I felt a lot of it myself, after all BK was one of us. I and many Evertonian could have forgiven him anything, well nearly anything. Folding Everton and setting up a cheap imposter outside this city is a step too far, to attempt to break the hearts of thousands of Evertonians for his own gain will always meet with genuine resistance. Okay he?s a business man and he?s entitled to do what he wants, but I?m at a loss as to why you think the people he threatens won't attack him for it
I have supported this club all my life, when I get up on the day of a game, I still feel like I did when I was 7-8, there has to be something really big to stop me being there.
I thought I would spend the rest of my days watching the blues. My team, the team that represented my community. BK represents a very real threat, to what I love. You trust him if you want to, that's your prerogative
59 Posted 21/11/2008 at 07:42:24
Danny, the reason why lads who live around Goodison say they won't go to Kirkby is not about travel, it's because it's not in the City to them and I am quite sure, if it was the shite moving, it would not be in the City to everyone else too.
My concern is replacing these lads, where will they come from? Have the club looked at this? They should be going out guns blazing trying to keep the fanbase in the city as it is eroding even now and their big white flag will only help to speed the process.
And then there is the Wirral and beyond, places which add to half our season ticket sales, I live over the other side and I am seeing it now, the cold weather, shit football and silly kick off times are coaxing people to watch it in the pub. A large majority from North Wales and Wirral also take the train option to Kirkdale, so what option will they have too?
We also have a large majority over this side who actually stay in their local till 40 minutes before kick off then hop a taxi or get their car... Kirkby will stop that. Add the lads who are running late and more and more will take the cosy pub option, the only thing we can hope for is quality football to prevent this and it is no good people saying "well we don't want these type if they cannot be arsed".
It is not a question we need these types ? beggars cannot be chooses, we are going to turn a large portion of season ticket blues into part time blues and that is a worry the club don't seem to realise.
60 Posted 21/11/2008 at 07:58:50
It's just moving debt from one place to somewhere else, I agree that their is no equity in the Goodison deal.
61 Posted 21/11/2008 at 09:09:55
Why does our chairman ? who claims to love the club ? not sell the club with only 100% (only eh!) profit, with the caveat that the new owner use the reduction in price to build a new stadium?
Then he could leave on a high....hardly brain surgery.
Does he love the club enough to only take a 100% profit...? Not as far as I can see.
62 Posted 21/11/2008 at 09:37:16
They will have paid interest on that loan albeit I guess the club will have done if they had any sense.
Therefore in my opinion 100% profit for all three would equate to approx £20 million each.
Take on the reported £50 million of debt and add the multiple of trading profit and some goodwill, I would estimate £150 to 180 million tops for the club up to a third of that going to three directors.
63 Posted 21/11/2008 at 10:42:06
"That?s all healthy debate. But like many, I have zero time for the ill-considered rantings of people like yourself who purport to know it all (christ only knows how) and shower your detractors with ill mannered & obnoxious drivel."
Naaaah, not buying it (EVER!).
Sorry but...heard it all before
You see it?s obvious that you (and others) believe that your Richard Briers stance gives you some moral high-ground.It doesn?t. In fact, I see it as waffling - a smokescreen if you like.
You can ?argue? aaaaaaaaaaaall the ?in my views? and ?I thinks? and GUESSWORK you want, the reality (nb: that?s stuff that HAS happened) is you are attempting to defend a PROVEN liar and someone attempting to take Everton FC out of the City of Liverpool.
You think I?m going to give it "yes, I hear what you?re saying but..." Not a fucking hope!
If it suits you to say my post is a rant - fine, fill your boots. In my view, the only people you?re fooling are the easily fooled.
64 Posted 21/11/2008 at 11:34:10
How do you come to the conclusion that 100% profit from £6 million is £20 million?
And why are you adding the price of the debt to the cost of the club?
If anything it should be subtracted... but we?ll make the grand assumption that acceptance of debt is a given for any new investor.
100% profit on BK?s original £8mill is £16mill... for 33% of the club which works out at £50mill tops...and that probably includes a fairly sizeable chunk fo his 18% business tax being paid!
How exactly are you getting this £180mill figure?
65 Posted 21/11/2008 at 10:54:43
66 Posted 21/11/2008 at 13:18:23
Didn’t understand a word. What?
67 Posted 20/11/2008 at 13:39:22
He is allowing his dreamy litle head to be carried along with TESCO'S push for dominating retail in the Northwest, without even a care for the past or the future of Everton Football Club and the supporters. We have become just another club who allow the owners to do as they wish on and off the field. I cannot think of another club with our proud history whose supporters would allow this to happen.
Don't worry though, i will be there for the first game if it goes ahead and i will find my way to where our great leader BK has his seat and well, I will never be allowed back in after this.
I can just picture us struggling at home as we are right now against Wigan or Bolton with the away support almost equalling our own. Truly a Theatre of nightmares for us all. I suggest we call for his head in every remaining game this season.
68 Posted 21/11/2008 at 14:40:43
You and Bill?
I’d buy that for a dollar.
69 Posted 21/11/2008 at 14:16:45
"Didn?t understand a word" (sigh.."oooh touché Oscar!")
Actually It doesn’t surprise me at all - having read your posts on this thread, I imagine there’s ooooooodles you don’t understand.
Your defense of Mr L Darling proves you DEFINITELY don’t understand the meaning of words like ’ring-fenced’ ’bullshitter’, ’liar’ ’’proof’ ’free’ etc
However I DO understand what your response was trying to achieve.
Like many others who (despite all the evidence), rush to defend BK, I believe you were attempting to bring into play, the famous ’blur-blur’ counter-argument.
However I should warn you, It’s one that those of us totally against the move are already VERY familiar with (it’s also popular with 6 year-olds being told "Go to bed, you’re not watching The Wire")
It’s an argument that involves fingers being placed into ears followed by the vocals "...weeooooweeeeee-blur blur-blur -weeeoooooo"
I’ll be honest -I’m VERY impressed.
70 Posted 21/11/2008 at 19:33:01
71 Posted 21/11/2008 at 21:04:43
All in all, I would say his outlay was around £10 million with interest and and I would say that would be very much the case with his two other main shareholders so £30 milion outlay doubled turning to £60 million for the three main shareholders.
New investor taking on the £50 million debt approx. plus a multiple of Evertons Trading profit of about £5 million multiplied by say 4 giving £20 million of value and a goodwill figure based on Sky money gauranteed and the value of the players of about £50 million including in this figure a profit for other main shareholders to the tune of about £10 to £15 million.
Who would be made to sell.
True value of the club about £120/130 million plus £50 million of debt.
That's the price an investor would be paying for and taking on in relation to the debt.
72 Posted 21/11/2008 at 23:02:15
For god?s sake get a life.
Most of us get a real laugh out of EJ?s posts, most of which are tongue in cheek but absolute gems.
You have been really irritable since your Uncle Bill had his nice little earner called in.
73 Posted 22/11/2008 at 03:21:27
"All 4 stands want replacing." No they don?t!
"There is no land to make it bigger!" Yes there is!
And ya boo sucks to such similar [ill-]considered arguments.
74 Posted 22/11/2008 at 09:24:05
I remember reading some of EJ?s posts on TW in the past and they are consistently either very amusing or very confusing ? often both. On this occassion I agree with Neil that the last post was going a little too far. The concept of these blogs are to give ALL Evertonians a right to express their opinion about Everton, not about each other.
I sort of agree with Alan about BK, I don?t blame him for losing Kings Dock (although there is painful irony about the fact that the amount now needed to raise our end of Kirkby is double the amount we failed to raise for Kings Dock).
I do think, however, that the way the board sold the Kirkby project to us at the time of the vote was a little below the belt. I am certain that BK had a lot to do with that (at the very least in terms of approving the material). For what Bill has done for the club in the last 6-8 years, I am grateful and certain he deserves to make a profit, but I think that the supporters should get another chance to vote on Kirkby, now we all know so much more.
75 Posted 22/11/2008 at 16:20:54
The Kings dock was becoming too expensive, £35 million for 49% of the project.
Seven years ago that was a huge amount of money and would equate to more than the DK money in today's terms!
76 Posted 23/11/2008 at 01:40:12
Should Goodison be razed to the ground and Everton FC die in the wilderness of Kirkby, I will hear those words ringing around my head and think of how easily some people can be taken in.
77 Posted 23/11/2008 at 06:58:29
78 Posted 23/11/2008 at 08:56:32
The point is what then? Who do we believe, what do we have to go forward with?
Everton FC aren?t going to die because Kirkby dies, the real question we should have been asking since Day One was "Where is our fall back position?"
According to the club, its a slow death at Goodison because no one will have us. I don't believe that. The real point is that if something can be made (money or prestige etc) someone will buy. The difference is what they are willing to pay for it.
Just like your house, you ask for a price but the market finds its level and the price a buyer puts on the club will be directly proportional to what they feel they can do or what it can do for them.
So what should our PLan B and C actually be? Any takers?
79 Posted 23/11/2008 at 09:43:13
Eh!?"Never to offer a shred of an argument"!?
[Sound FX: Family Fortunes wrong answer effect...]
The fact is, Neil, if you don?t like someone else?s point and/or you don?t like how they put it, for you it?s simply not a point.
Well I?m sorry...?mate?, but as poor Hungarian Peasant-girl Magna Carta said, when she was forced to sign the pledge at Runnymede to close the boozers early -"grow the fuck up!"
However if you?re right and I?m wrong, give me one (not 12 or 18, just 1!) example of where I have just responded to any poster with just abuse and not a shred of an argument.
NB: Before you do, remember - just because you don?t like my arguments - doesn?t mean they?re NOT arguments.
(anyway, I have a feeling? just abuse? isn?t tolerated here, but I could be wrong).
80 Posted 23/11/2008 at 10:09:03
Rid us of our very worst obstucted views.
Generate a lot more corporate revenue
increase capacity, to around 44k offering many more top seats.
This would generate more revenue than Kirkby ever could and buy us some time.
Alienating half the fans by gambling with an out-of-town "experiment", which would cost an awful lot more than we can afford, just doesn't add up.
Then again, we weren?t present when Kenwright entered into this pact with Sir Terry, were we?
81 Posted 23/11/2008 at 17:46:33
Unlike for example Christine, Jay, Tony and Tom - all of whom I regularly disagree with - I have never learnt anything from you except how to deliver clever ridculing putdowns. In the end it doesn’t get us very far, and seems inappropriate to me in something directed at a fellow Evertonian.
In Alan’s case, he has recently put on Toffeeweb what I think all will agree are a whole series of intelligent and interesting posts. Even if you disagree with them (many of the responses have been very good too). I fear that people like Alan will stop posting here if they are simply subjected to ridicule and abuse. But I don’t believe in censorship, so it’s up to you what you post. And it’s up to me to point out that I think you are cheapening an outstanding site.
82 Posted 23/11/2008 at 18:25:16
And I would ask all of you to refrain from attacking other posters and (mis-)characterising their responses. Instead, please focus on countering the issues they raise if you have a differing viewpoint. I know this is an emotive subject and it has created an almighty split in the fanbase. But let?s try and keep it unabusive and on topic, please.
83 Posted 23/11/2008 at 18:21:45
It's pathetic the way you support anything you feel will show anti-Kirkby posters in a bad light.
I would suggest you read Alan's post again, you're right he is obviously an intelligent man ? except when he?s defending BK ? but he seems to have lost the plot here, it was his choice to launch a fierce and UNPROVOKED attack on EJ.
Only in your one eyed view could that get to be the anti-Kirkby mans fault
84 Posted 23/11/2008 at 23:18:18
My objections ? supported by Michael ? were on the grounds of tone and style, not substance. I am not even that sqeamish about tone and style (I?ve even defended Tony Marsh on a a few occasions!). But I thought EJ went too far on this particular occasion.
85 Posted 24/11/2008 at 10:00:11
Let?s see who else can.
Here is a fact.
Neil Pearse states - "My objections ? supported by Michael ? were on the grounds of tone and style, not substance"
Fact - this is NOT true.
He objects on the grounds of tone and style AND substance.
Fact: I initially responded to a post from Dan Brierley who asked the question - "So if it is feasable for the same money being touted for Kirkby, what possible reason could the Board have for not wanting it?"
I answered with the answer I believed/believe to be true (is that allowed?)
I said -"Well taking ?on board? the past performance of the board/Chairman/CEO/directors of Everton FC, i?ll answer your question...with a question - Why is it that (in all walks of life) fucking useless idiots do what fucking useless idiots do? (Clue: fucking useless idiots)"
This was not and IS not ?having a go? at Dan Brierly, or Alan Kirwan or Neil Pearse or anyone else.
It is an entirely legitimate answer to the question and states CLEARLY that I think the reason that bad/illogical decisions are/were made by those in charge at Goodison, because of idiocy and stupidity (ie: ?because those in charge at Goodison are fucking idiots?)
Are you denying the existence of idiots in the world?
Good......then what?s the problem with me (In answer to a poster?s question) saying I think that is the answer?
Now if Neil Pearse or Alan Kirwan or anyone else has have a problem with my honest opinion - absolutely fine with me.
But don?t try and dress it up as though it?s just ?abuse?.
I will state for the record that I believe that the entire issue of Kirkby is ultimately born from a combination of greed and incredible stupidity.
NB: But I will not cry or whine if anyone disagrees with my opinion and will (despite accusations) counter specific arguments with a combination of facts and opinions.
Believe it or not, regarding ?personal abuse? I am very rarely, if at all, the initial aggressor.
It?s just that when I DO respond to it, I give it loads (well... if a job?s worth doing etc).