It?s never easy being an Evertonian, on the pitch, whilst not exactly snatching defeat from the jaws of victory against Villa on Sunday, it would have only been a draw at best, the mercurial team performances continue to frustrate the hard core of supporters currently attending Goodison Park. Off the pitch the situation is even more mystifying. The public face of Everton would appear to be pursuing a policy of relocating the club to a town nine miles from the city centre. This is despite knowing that at least 40% of their supporters are against the move, having no evidence that their supporters will attend Kirkby at the higher levels required to generate increased revenue, not having a penny of the £78M contribution required and now knowing that the vast majority of new stadia simply fail to deliver.
Why are members of KEIOC and others so vehemently opposed to Kirkby? Amongst other reasons it simply doesn?t have the all important wow factor; if Everton are going to move it should be to a stadium in a location that will readily attract additional Everton supporters and provide the maximum opportunity to generate much needed non-matchday revenue. We already know that 37,000 supporters will flock to Goodison, 40,000 if the conditions are right. Will moving to a run of the mill stadium on a retail park nine miles from the city centre, departing from which will be dictated by the infrastructure needs of a town of 42,000 inhabitants, be conducive to Everton?s immediate needs? Will all these factors conspire to ensure the guaranteed failure of ?Destination Kirkby?? No site is perfect, Goodison is far from perfect yet 32,000 were there on Sunday; however would this figure increase by 70% if we were in Kirkby? The simple answer is I don?t know but more important is does Everton know?
When you understand the reality that Everton need to grow their current attendances by 70% in the face all these problems you begin to comprehend the enormity of the challenge they have undertaken.
But never underestimate the power of marketing and the so-called new stadium effect. However this doesn?t last forever, as can be seen above, these are all the new stadia built over the past twenty years compared with traditional or redeveloped EPL stadia capacities, taken from the 2008 Deloitte report, it demonstrates graphically that new stadia simply don?t live up to their expectations. The exceptions are Arsenal and Reading. Arsenal could demonstrate a significant demand prior to their move and Reading constructed a small stadium that clearly reflected their requirements. Deloitte warn of the need to get things right, a warning that should be well heeded. Everton are unable to demonstrate demand in either general or corporate capacity but can comfortably demonstrate significant opposition to a move to Kirkby.
The challenge to fill the stadium is a difficult one, a very difficult one. It?s a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma, get it right and Everton will develop the platform that should enable them to press on in arguably the most competitive league in the world, get it wrong and the stadium will become a millstone of perhaps epic proportions.
Is the location of the site a contributory factor to the overall success of any possible future relocation? I would say yes but others may disagree. As you can see above, according to the RAC, the average distance from a city or major centre is less than three miles, Everton propose taking the club nine miles from the city centre of Liverpool, will this work? Does it work for Bolton, they?re only 5.5 miles from Bolton.
Finding the perfect location is extremely difficult. Look at these plans for the Clarence Dock, when Everton originally looked at these they were advised, according to Paul Gregg, that they?d be unlikely to obtain planning consent and they moved on to consider the Kings Dock. The owners, Peel Holdings, were said to be unreceptive to the idea of having a football stadium on this particular tract of land, later favouring their Liverpool Waters concept. But circumstances change, whilst any significant retail, this close to the city centre, wouldn?t have a hope in hell of being granted planning permission with a will to meet this challenge such a stadium could be constructed and financed for the benefit of the landowners, the club and its supporters.
Even a stadium similar to that originally conceived for the Kings dock could fit on the Clarence dock site, supported by non-retail based enabling developments in the hotel, leisure, commercial and residential sectors, such a site would offer improved opportunities from stadium naming rights deals and better exploitation of the banqueting, conferencing and concert industry.
Even a shared stadium, with all its problems of acceptability to both sets of fans could fit on that site and provide footfalls of up to 200,000 per week during the season coupled with immense opportunities for non-match day revenue during and outside the season. Through the utilisation of innovative products such as Equity Seat Right, phenomenal stadium naming rights opportunities and the aforementioned commercial possibilities offered by a true destination, possibly the most unique football stadia in the world, the construction costs could be raised at no cost and importantly no debt to either club, meaning increased funds for on pitch activity. The disparity between differing requirements in the attendance capacity and apparent cultural difference could be accommodated through the utilization of novel architectural design, engineering and technology.
The above business model could also be applied to a single use stadium located close to the city centre, even a redeveloped Goodison could utilise some of the elements although the loss of the stadium naming rights funding and the potential loss of capacity during construction could be challenging but hardly insurmountable. A redeveloped Goodison would represent the preservation of a historic stadium and it should never be forgotten that once its gone it?s gone forever.
Of course a change in ownership would change everything. With sufficient available wealth the right owner could fund the clear shortfall in the capability of Everton?s plan to raise £78M for Kirkby, it was noted that Everton have already added equity funding to their funding option list since last year.
Amanda Staveley has stated that Arab businesses are being attracted to English football clubs because they represent 'the key provider of digital content on media platforms worldwide'. How many people around the world would pay $1 to watch a single match on the Internet or another media platform? Ten, twenty, thirty million? Miss Staveley represents powerful cash rich organisations such as DIC and QIA. DIC has expressed their interest in acquiring Liverpool, although this has waned at the moment, once the pressure of their financing methods has taken its inevitable toll on Messrs Hicks and Gillette they?ll be back in for the bargain basement sale. The Qatari Royal family are behind QIA, Sheikh Tamim Bin Hamad Al Thani, a sports mad Qatari Royal prince, heads this investment vehicle.Will Peel Holdings change their mind over the Clarence Dock, will Tesco obtain planning permission for their massive retail park, will Everton?s current custodians sell their shareholding for the benefit of the future well-being of the club, will a new owner propel Everton into the stratosphere of the EPL, and more than anything are we going to beat City and Chelsea over the next couple of weeks? Who knows, maybe one day we?ll fulfil our destiny, we already play in ROYAL blue after all.
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 10/12/2008 at 04:51:18
I suspect the water levels will have to be about chin high before some of the people who voted for this nightmare realise the danger.
A big thanks for your continuing efforts.
2 Posted 10/12/2008 at 05:25:40
Or even a stand (maybe even a NEW stand in a redeveloped GP) sponsored / named like our neighbours have?
3 Posted 10/12/2008 at 07:03:26
Many good points but most have been mentioned a million times. Unfortunately, the present board will not listen to anything other than DK, regardless, of any opinion, statement, proof which is contrary to DK. Any question that is put to the DK enthusiasts which goes against party lines remains unanswered or is met by a shrug of the shoulders.
The most important decision made by the club in our lifetimes is being made on half-truths and down-right lies and yet still those for DK say they have a mandate for the move. If the club really are The People's Club, they will re-ballot after the inquiry is complete and everyone can assess what we have heard and know ? NOT what we were lead to believe.
4 Posted 10/12/2008 at 08:36:04
I know people will cite the fact that ’Boro are a lesser team than us, etc, but the main thrust of my argument is that moving away from your catchement area is not a good thing. I realise my argument is a little simplistic but it is too early in the morning to go deeper!
5 Posted 10/12/2008 at 08:22:40
There are so many many reasons why DK is a bad idea, and a potentially fatal one. The board are being so short-sighted, just because the DK is the most affordable option at the moment, it doesn?t make it the right one. A ¾-full mediocre Stadium in a run-down town, away from its fan base... Bloody hell! It?s not like spending millions on a striker, if this doesn?t work out you can?t just sell it. The new home (if GP really can?t be re-developed) has to be in the right place.
I fear that the enquiry will come back and confirm that the area of Kirkby does need investment, so what?! Don?t ruin my beloved club!
6 Posted 10/12/2008 at 09:01:55
7 Posted 10/12/2008 at 09:16:10
Absolutely spot on. Even the greatest stadium in the world, costing nowt would be a complete white elephant in this location. This stadium will have easily the smallest public transport capacity of all major stadia in the UK.... all in the city with the lowest car-ownership, at a site served by only a few traffic lanes, and with next to no car-parking on site. There are no boxes ticked by DK other than Tesco’s, and BK’s other retail chums.
Keep up the fight.... Your cross examination of Robert Elstone should make sobering reading for any one still harbouring pro-DK feelings, and by any measure was an excellent piece of work. Well done, and thanks for your great efforts!!!
8 Posted 10/12/2008 at 09:26:08
If we haven’t got £78m why even consider Kirkby.... ? especially given the major issues raised in Colin’s article, and many more before.
Another point being GP’s renovation doesn’t need £78m up front. Incremental changes can be affected to respond to the clubs needs for a fraction of this cost. New boxes and capacity if required needn’t cost anything like that amount. The sale of Bellefield being able to benefit GP’s redevelopment just as readily as DK. That sale incidentally was held up as much due to a local protest that was officially registered as anything prompted by LCC who have continually stated that they are receptive to any planning applications for revelopment of GP, not to mention their co-operation with regards to the loop, and the debacle of the King’s Dock which EFC have never seriously been taken to task over. How disastrous that charade seems now!!!
9 Posted 10/12/2008 at 09:23:53
10 Posted 10/12/2008 at 09:32:28
(Did it get a laugh or did you get a dirty look from madam chair-person?)
11 Posted 10/12/2008 at 09:50:18
After having a good few drinks around town, I take the train from Central to Kirkdale normally. And then work my way up from the Elm to the ground. So for me, the only downside would be adding 8 minutes to the train time. The new ground would have similar walking distance as Kirkdale to Goodison.
12 Posted 10/12/2008 at 10:02:55
Suggesting that Elstone acquitted himself well, was a little mischevious was it not..
That certainly wasn’t the impression I got from reading the verbatim exchanges.
13 Posted 10/12/2008 at 10:32:31
Geoff Blair - the city weren’t against Everton selling Bellefield, they were against the size of the scheme, Everton will probably win on appeal but they’ve lost their developer and any new one will offer less, the bottom has fallen out of the housing market so expect nearer £4M not the £8M they were expecting, does that answer your question?
Dan Brierley - it won’t be so much the getting to the stadium it’s the getting away that will effect people the most, I think someone’s put the transcript on toffeeweb, not the official version, the one that describes the treatment awaiting Everton supporters as stated in the planning application.
14 Posted 10/12/2008 at 11:50:46
And there is no way they can get the access as good as the ?benchmark? which is GP, right?
15 Posted 10/12/2008 at 12:14:26
I wonder if this project would have got off the ground if Elstone was CEO at the time it was suggested? It seemed from several of his answers that he was saying what he had to, rather than what he really thinks. I am 100% behind Colin and KEIOC. United we stand, divided we fall.
16 Posted 10/12/2008 at 12:10:26
Thanks for all the hard work, to you and everyone from KEIOC.
I pray the PI will bring this nightmare to an end and be the catalyst for change at boardroom level.
We all deserve so much better than BK and DK... and JJB while we?re at it!
17 Posted 10/12/2008 at 12:47:51
That ?distance from major centre? graph really brings home how far out Kirkby really is. I was looking at a map the other day and realised that if DK was about another 3 miles further East, it would be equidistant between Wigan main line station & Lime St ? a frightening thought (I didn?t even know where Wigan was until they got into the Premier League!).
As for the DK argument, I wish that some of those pushing it would explain how the average attendance will go from about 36,000 last year to 47-48,000 at Kirkby. Especially as I suspect there are a lot of season ticket holders, like myself, who will not renew if DK ever happens. Thus games like Fulham which was on TV, could struggle to get even as many fans as the paltry 30,000 that packed Goodison.
You only need 2 games with about 30,000 gates and then to average 48,000 you need every one of the other games to be sold out. IMO it?s criminal that EFC are thinking of relocating so far out, with apparently so little assessment of how many of the existing support will regularly attend and where the new support is coming from. This catchment area which Wyness spouted is just a nonsense ? we are not a supermarket with new ?customers? travelling miles because we have a new ground, especially given the lack of parking & roads in & out of Kirkby.
Keep up the good work!
18 Posted 10/12/2008 at 12:42:28
The time you and others have put into opposing this ill-conceived and desperate plan is incredible. It makes me feel quite proud that we have fans who care so much and won’t accept the propaganda and bull from the club and local press.
Keep up the fight!
19 Posted 10/12/2008 at 13:06:48
Goodison is full of obstructed views (this has been a blessing with some of the crap we have had to endure over the years) but surely it can be modified in stages whilst the team make some progress. Kirkby is such a bad idea that I keep getting visions of Liverpool supporters laughing about it and I have never been one to let them bother me. On that thought, how many of us would be laughing if it was them moving out there?
20 Posted 10/12/2008 at 13:52:12
21 Posted 10/12/2008 at 15:03:15
I?m not the first and I certainly wont be the last but I would like to compliment you and say a really big thank you for your efforts on behalf of all real Evertonians even those who don't yet realise what DK may mean for the club.
How anyone can imagine us in a town populated with less residents than the stadium?s capacity compared to a city with an infrastructure for a million people is beyond me.
Anyhow, please keep up the great work you have the support of a great many Evertonians.
22 Posted 10/12/2008 at 15:34:53
I don?t yet realise what it will mean for the club? We should all bow down to the mighty, knowledgeable Jay Harris. Try to be a bit less condescending.
23 Posted 10/12/2008 at 15:10:55
Surely the motorway access will make a big improvement compared with access to GP? Or am I missing something? Looking at the locations on maps, I cant see how Kirkby can be more restrictive. there are three or four routes from Kirkby to the town centre, as opposed to the heavily congested Scotty Road. I am not saying you are wrong, just looking for some rational explanation.
24 Posted 10/12/2008 at 15:29:51
All this great work from Colin and KEIOC is going to be wasted if we don't get behind them. Let's get our feelings known on match days. Maybe let's start singing, "We shall not be moved, THE TEAM THAT'S STANDING BY THE WATER SIDE, WE SHALL NOT BE MOVED."
Many thanks Colin on your great work.
25 Posted 10/12/2008 at 16:24:21
26 Posted 10/12/2008 at 16:42:18
27 Posted 10/12/2008 at 16:56:46
I was also impressed by your generosity & objectivity with your appraisal of Robert Elstone. I too have been impressed by his apparent candour and desire to span the obvious divide between club and fans. No doubt many on here will disagree, simply because he works for the club.
Most particulary though, I totally endorse your observations regarding a joint stadium and the unique opportunity that might present to both clubs. It is, to me, the only solution that ticks all the boxes, financially, practically and morally. It is infuriating to consider that both clubs are still (seemingly) opposed to this as way forward. If we could only channel half as much energy towards the possibilities of a new Merseyside stadium, rather than the impossibilities of Kirkby or the new Anfield then we’d be a long way forward.
Excellent work Colin.
28 Posted 10/12/2008 at 17:53:26
29 Posted 10/12/2008 at 18:13:55
Does anyone know why the daily inquiry reports are missing from the keioc website ? Anywhere else I can read them?
Colin thanks mate. Keep up the good work and thank God we have guys who are prepared to put so much time and effort trying to save our great club.
30 Posted 10/12/2008 at 19:04:04
31 Posted 10/12/2008 at 18:54:08
However, what I don’t know is the credentials you or KEIOC bring in proposing alternative locations or development at Goodison. Clearly, this is a highly technical, multi multi million pound scheme and it would be useful to hear why you feel you / KEIOC are able to put alternative proposals on these matters. It seems there are a lot of assertions made, some of them seem to get dismissed out of hand when recognised experts comment and I find it hard as an outside observer to know how much weight to put on them.
32 Posted 10/12/2008 at 19:33:30
I would like to add my thanks to your continueing efforts.
A couple of points:- you mention Peel Holdings and a possible non-retail-enabled development at Clarence Docks... sure there must be Euro funding available for this type of development?
You also mention internet rights. This is the next big driver of football club acquisition as the first club to ?unbundle? their rights from the Sky contract and sell content directly to their fans will become awash with so much cash that the will be swimming in the stuff.
33 Posted 10/12/2008 at 21:32:59
Focussing on potential new customers at the expense of the current ones , seems to me a business plan doomed to failure. Buying into something because it is cheap rather than for its suitability also seems to enhance the view that the club is run by rank amateurs.
34 Posted 10/12/2008 at 22:23:05
The best anti-DK article I have read. This location issue is far more important than the the city boundary or the quality of the stadium. It is up to the club to show how this location will encourage the extra support that they need. I am sure that they have done no work on this, which is why I am desperately against DK.
35 Posted 11/12/2008 at 06:51:34
Won't the Club benefit from a CPZ parking restriction? I?d assume that there is a lot more money to be made with a CPZ than without. I read the report by KEIOC regarding the transportation many times. And I fully agree that there is a need for improvements. However, there is money to be made from people willing to pay for transport. I would not be surprised to see much more trains or buses put on at the end of the match. Its not going to be perfect from Day 1, thats for sure. But to less accessible than Goodison? I am not convinced.
I can still see no logical reason why the board would sanction a move of this nature, if there were closer and more profitable sites that had the same level of enablement attached. If someone can demonstrate a real, viable alternative then I am sure all fans would untie behind it.
My gut feeling at the moment is that KEIOC truly believes in what they are doing, and believes they are doing it for the right reasons. The exact same thing applied to the United fans who truly believed that the Glazier?s takeover would destroy their club:
12th May 2005
"The news that Manchester United could soon be under the control of Malcolm Glazer, the American tycoon, is a devastating blow to the club?s supporters who have fiercely opposed the takeover bid and formed a shareholders? association to buy club shares to thwart Glazer?s ambitions.
"This is a bad, bad day for United and a bad, bad day for football," said Nick Towle, of Shareholders United.
Towle also claimed that up to 20,000 season ticket holders will boycott the club as a protest over the takeover. "It is not my club anymore," he said when asked how it felt to be ripping up his season ticket he had held for 20 years."
I am pretty sure those guys also felt as passionate, and were sure they were not wrong. They were convinced 20,000 would cancel their Season Tickets.
Is it really not possible that DK could improve the club?s position? Or attract a big money investor?
36 Posted 11/12/2008 at 08:15:26
Moving the club away from its spiritual home and surrendering the city to its main support rivals is a hell of a gamble just to get an investor.
I don?t live in Liverpool, so the only way I can guage the true feelings of the supporters is on ToffeeWeb. Can anyone give me an honest opinion on the percentage of people for and against DK? Reading the many posts on the subject it seems about 90% against, I know this isn?t going to be correct but what?s your best guess? Thanks.
37 Posted 11/12/2008 at 08:22:21
"What I don?t know is the credentials you or KEIOC bring in proposing alternative locations or development at Goodison. Clearly, this is a highly technical, multi multi million pound scheme and it would be useful to hear why you feel you / KEIOC are able to put alternative proposals on these matters".
In asking only for the ?credentials? of KEIOC, one must assume you know and are happy with, the credentials of Everton FC to deliver their ?vision?.
It would be useful (to me) if you could explain what they are.
(Surely KEIOC?s only real ?obligation? is to try and... well... KEIOC.)
38 Posted 11/12/2008 at 09:06:04
On one hand EFC says it has looked at all possible sites and cannot find a fundable solution apart from DK. On the other hand you have a group of Evertonian?s who believe there are alternatives, but can provide no concrete evidence.
DK does have flaws, as with any other building project of this scale, on a similar budget. Neither side can say for sure that they are 100% correct about the prophecy for the future. But there is one thing that is very clear. If we stand still for another 5-10 years, we will be worse off than now.
39 Posted 11/12/2008 at 09:18:47
I won't dispute the amount of United fans who stopped going to Old Trafford because their idea of what Man U stood for was dead, I guess the average FC United attendance would give some indication. What I do know is that for every thousand who stopped going, there was several thousand waiting to take their season tickets. That simply isn't the case with us.
If anything like the same amount of people stop watching Everton because they feel the club is dead, there will be no one to replace them. We have no waiting list. A move to Kirkby will not only kill the Everton, but would be catastrophic for the plans of BK?s impostor.
40 Posted 11/12/2008 at 10:04:23
Dan, of course you?re entitled to your opinion that Kirkby represents the best option, in fact the club claim it?s the only option, however the view of many people is that it has been engineered to be that and is for the benefit of a very small group of people to the detriment of a very large group of people.
Just because it appears to be the only option doesn?t make it right. You?re polishing a turd here; the DTZ making money? It will cost the club a significant amount each season, others may wish to be more specific, I can?t be bothered looking up the figure tbh. They?ll be more buses and trains? They can?t even find enough buses for this scheme and as for the trains have you never been to Kirkby? It?s a single track which means that the maximum frequency is one six car train every fifteen minutes hence the need for the holding pens and the crush loading.
This isn?t some KEIOC inspired propaganda based on the hatred of the board making a few quid, it?s all in the planning application if you dare look; I personally congratulate anyone that can turn a profit in these difficult times but in doing so to leave the club and its supporters in a precarious state is repugnant which is, incidentally, how I feel over subjecting Everton supporters, from this city of all places, to the indignity of being placed in pens, there?s a historic precedent here, and as for crush loading words fail me.
I?ve been to the inquiry a couple of times and its sad to see some decent people having to attempt to defend what is increasingly becoming the indefensible. You started off with trains, and then moved to cars, then buses and back to trains; do you want to cover the hoards of Evertonians going to the game on their bikes just to be safe? I?m not having a go at you personally but I long for someone to offer me a unique tangible benefit of Kirkby over another site. Not the £52M enabling funding, nobody associated with the applicants at the inquiry seems able to explain where the money is actually coming from; perhaps this is because it?s not really there? Smoke and mirrors? What?s the old saying; you get what you pay for?
41 Posted 11/12/2008 at 11:15:04
But I wonder how many.... how can I say it.... ?not so diehard? fans don't go to the match, as the ground is a shithole? Or how many friends/partners won't accompany someone, as unless your a real blue, you have no feel for what is essentially a very poor, old and tatty building?
I really love eating steak, but I won't eat it in a shitty old restaurant that is falling apart.
It's really impossible to know if the number of people who would not go, would be less or more than people who now WOULD go due to the facilities being 100 times better.
I just imagine the first game there, it would surely be a full house. That's the only time you would really know if it is was right or wrong. But I do accept, by that time it is too late if it is wrong. But my head and heart tells me that we won't get a better offer than this.
42 Posted 11/12/2008 at 11:33:37
The bottom line for Dan and for Neil P, is that you believe Kirkby and BK are not necessarily linked in what is good or bad for the club and therefore Kirkby should stand alone as the best alternative for the club.
The probable truth is it's the only option that's been seriously considered that will deliver an excellent return to the directors, who, most likely, will not be shareholders when the last brick is laid. The second part of any move to Kirkby will be the sale of the shares in the club, I have no doubt the marketing executives will be praising the opportunity to the heavens, selling the sizzle and ignoring the reality.
The directors will most likely therefore sell before the stadium is complete and yes someone will buy it, but probably not a fan, maybe an oil billionaire with more money than sense, but the point is the risk that is being taken with our club has far too many negatives than positives in many peoples view.
These are not the same people who have the £200m though, they will buy the club on speculation of income based more than likely on the highly speculative numbers we have already seen at the Inquiry.
I am tired of hearing the same arguments for and against. Each time an argument for Kirkby falls by the wayside or is deemed unsubstantiated then you would think that somewhere along the line someone would say this project is no longer sustainable (if it ever was).
The real options other than DK will only ever be disclosed / discussed should the inquiry find against Tesco.
As Colin said, because it's the only option doesn't make it right.
43 Posted 11/12/2008 at 11:39:50
Thanks for your condescending response. I am fully aware of the state of GP. I don?t won?t to jump down the neck of anyone who is pro DK, as I would love to be reassured that this is the right thing for EFC (as unfortunately I believe it will happen regardless), but once again your main argument is that GP isn?t up to scratch. I have not once heard anywhere in the last year anyone who is against DK say that GP is fine let's just stay as we are.
If you honestly believe EFC have looked into any other site in as much depth as the ?free? Tesco?s one, then good luck to you.
44 Posted 11/12/2008 at 11:50:20
Because it will only be immediately AFTER the first game that many supporters will experience the real horror involved in getting home.
ie: for some (probably older blues) the possibility of an hour and a half waiting in a pen, then being crush-loaded onto a train.
I would be MUCH more interested in the attendance of the second game........then the third...
By the way even if the first game didn’t sell out, I don’t think we’d be able to tell, because I think BK would make sure we couldn’t.
Even if it meant giving 10,000 freebies away to pensioners, schoolkids, tramps, crack-addicts, etc - nobody and nothing would be allowed to spoil ’opening night’.
(I say ’opening night’ as every drawing of The Tescodome has been a night-game indicating new Everton won’t be playing any daytime games at home.....or...hold on, do you think that could just be an attempt to dupe the gullible into thinking it’ll be more exciting?)
45 Posted 11/12/2008 at 12:38:28
Such delicious cyinicism. Wonderful.
46 Posted 11/12/2008 at 12:49:33
How can you be so cynical?
Next you’ll be claiming that the images of the new stadium shoved on a Tesco carpark were only released after the ballot!
I’m off to the officaial website to buy me some magic beans.
47 Posted 11/12/2008 at 12:41:53
90% against Kirkby? I think you?re probably right... 90% of people on this site. Though a lot of people would have you believe every other Evertonian has the same views ?all me mates down the boozer, everyone I meet at the match, the cab driver ,are all against it, blah, blah, blah?.
Outside of TW, I?d say it?s probably 50/50. No doubt I?ll get pulled up on that with screams of ?I?ve never met anyone who is in favour, blah, blah, blah?.
Dave Wilson, you seriously think (your thought, not fact as you like to put across) if we move to Kirkby Everton will soon be gone, dead, cease to exist, etc.? I think it?s you who is catastrophising.
I?ve lost count of the amount of times people have been asked to come up with the viable alternative but talk their way around it. No doubt they?ll talk there way around this.
There is far too much egocentrism on this site regarding DK.
48 Posted 11/12/2008 at 14:12:08
I'm sure I'm not alone in only receiving the mis-information the Echo is churning out, as other than a few select sights there is very little from the side opposed to the move. It would be great to get a leaflet or something on matchday or even in the local weekly newspapers Crosby Herald, Maghull Star etc. I know its a costly exercise but it might reach a few people who aren't savvy to what's going on.
Keep up the good work.
49 Posted 11/12/2008 at 14:30:33
I have come close to a few beatings watching Everton, lost a few women in my life because of them, and watched us get hammered 5-0 by our neighbours whilst sat in the Park End with them and I still carried on watching them cos I luv the name EVERTON.
Unfortunately, this cheap attempt at a new stadium will maybe cut the cord because the bitterness inside me is raging as it steamrolls all of us out of the way. IT IS A SCANDAL OF HISTORIC PROPORTIONS WHAT BK AND CO ARE TRYING TO DO TO MAKE A BIT OF CASH WHILST THOSE OF US WHO ARE SURROUNDED BY RS HAVE TO PUT UP WITH THE LAUGHTER.
Accepting second best is one thing but to accept it nine miles from home is too much......
50 Posted 11/12/2008 at 15:33:09
Well, Mr Kenwright would be well used to employing this strategy ? I remember a few years ago, a group of us were given freebies to the opening night of a BK production of The Female Odd Couple as the sales were so bad (as ESCLA members ? one of the head ESCLA people works/worked for BK?s theatre company) ? and even with us the theatre was half-empty!
Seeing that his beloved Jenny was playing the lead, and being a big fan of the original, my wife and I didn?t have high hopes, and so it proved ? by the time the interval had finished, we were already looking at the menu in a Chinese restaurant in Chinatown!
That gives me a chilling premonition of what the opening night at Kirkby could well be like ? in fact, from everything I?ve seen so far, most people will probably need to leave at half-time on a regular basis just in order to get home!
51 Posted 11/12/2008 at 14:35:29
And there are thousands of people in the same boat as me, who would love nothing more than a viable alternative, and put this issue to bed once and for all.
If there is something out there and the club are hiding it, I would be the first person to join KEIOC and would put my own time and money into it for sure. I dont doubt for one second that we all love our club with all our hearts.
But the difference I see, is the damage to the club by doing nothing. It seems we cant keep punching above our weight forever. Especially when you see the finance behind other similar clubs now.
52 Posted 11/12/2008 at 16:11:57
53 Posted 11/12/2008 at 16:15:09
When Wimbledon moved to Milton Keynes, the new impostor may have stolen the name The Dons, they may even have stolen their league status, but to thousands of True Wimbledon fans, the club was dead ? that's why they started another...
Ignore Evertonians like Pete Clark at your peril; his kind cannot / will not be replaced.
54 Posted 11/12/2008 at 16:51:57
55 Posted 11/12/2008 at 22:03:16
I met a fellow Evertonian on a train recently and this fella goes to loads of games all over travelling up from down South and he really had no idea where Kirkby was or how difficult he would find it getting there by train and buses etc.
He used to be a season ticket holder but gave it up due to all the silly kick off times and days as he cannot afford all the time off work. I reckon being crush loaded on a train at 7pm on a cold Saturday night at the start of a 5-hour journey home would just about finish him off.
Don?t get me wrong, he was a lovely bloke but somehow is oblivious to what is on the horizon. I ?d urge any Evertonian to drive from Lime Street out past Goodison to Kirkby on a matchday. Take a look around. You are nearly in the countryside and the area is pretty soulless ? no offence but it is. Could you really imagine playing here. Then drive back to Goodison ? see how long it takes, and you?ll realise just how far out of town it really is.
Wrong place, poor design, not good enough ? a bit like the people running EFC.
56 Posted 12/12/2008 at 02:23:46
And just maybe, in the meantime, someone out there who loves Everton may come into a bit of money and we can look forward to a revitalised Goodison or a move to a new ground nearby. It?s not that bad boys, given the fact that we are unlikely to win many trophies with the system we have and we can avoid the regular beatings from the the top four (and Blackburn). ps: This is not all BK?s fault but he is delivering the final blow....
57 Posted 12/12/2008 at 10:10:15
58 Posted 12/12/2008 at 12:37:04
Okay some people wouldn?t be happy with that, but to say Everton would be dead when they would not be and to stop going; maybe you don?t love the Blues that much. It?s you guys who?ll miss out. You?d just be cutting your nose off to spite your face and end up bitter (no wonder we sometimes get called the bitter blues). If you are a loyal fan, you?ll be there, whether it be Speke, Kirkby, wherever. Dave Wilson, enjoy your FC Everton.
You can just imagine if some of us had been the match and we?d done the RS with a last minute winner (celebrating widly in the pubs); you lot would be squirming behind your couch muttering ?who are Everton, don?t support them anymore, bastards, blah, blah, blah. No offence but I find it all a bit distorted and pathetic. Things change in life, often we don?t like the change, but if nothing can be done (after trying everything) you just have to roll with it. If not, you?re left behind and see ya later.
I don?t believe the huge numbers would stop going anyway. Yea, some people on this site who moan for a living would maybe stop going (and continue to moan), but I think we?ll cope. I think all this propaganda nonsense should stop.
PS Pete Clark, Hereford are playing Hartlepool tomorrow, you going? It?s a League 1 fixture, sounds fantastic. Sounds better than going to the City of Manc. stadium to watch Man City v Everton, hey? You never know, they might even have a Johnstone?s Paint Trophy fixture midweek at Leyton Orient. Dear me...
59 Posted 12/12/2008 at 12:55:23
As a born and bred scouser with a mixed family of blue and red, the thought of leaving the city, especially as we are the first team of the city, is sickening. I can give and take the banter with the red side but watching them lick their lips in anticipation of getting the city to themselves is unbearable.
I have said this before on TW but my red uncles, cousins and other family members are more passionate about keeping the 2 clubs together, where they belong, than a lot of Evertonians. The rivalry is deep rooted.
I attended my cousins funeral last Wednesday and discussed Kirkby with the family at the wake. Once we got past the initial Kirkby jokes and into the nitty gritty of both clubs, they do not want to see us move to Kirkby. They do not want to see us win anything either but that goes without saying. They understand our joint history but, if we move, so be it and they will take every advantage.
Does the fact that LFC have tried to brand the Liver Bird as their own and the implications of such a move not ring alarms bells with the pro-Kirkby Evertonians? Thankfully it was a non-starter but it was a warning shot across our bows re DK. I appreciate Bill Kenwright is an Evertonian, but his main driver could be money ? hence the reason he is a millionaire.
I do not believe he is man of true vision or we would be in the Kings Dock by now. As David Dein, then Vice-Chairman of Arsenal stated at the time: ?If I could get the same financial deal and excellent location for Arsenal I would give both my arms and legs.? Does Bill Kenwright truly know what is best for the club or is he being very shortsighted ?
Also, to say there is no alternative is ridiculous. It all depends whether you have the motivation, intelligence and determination to find one and make it work. The Loop ? disgracefully dismissed out of hand by EFC with lies about capacity etc when the world?s most renowned stadia construction company, HOK, have publicly stated a 55,000 seater stadium is achievable and provided the plans.
We know we cannot afford it without an enabler so go out and find one. Put an experienced, professional team together and find a way. I know it is not that easy but who is saying it should be?Being railroaded into a one horse town, away from the city of our birth is not the way forward and is tantamount to sacrilege.
60 Posted 12/12/2008 at 13:53:43
I have seen those who say its the only option, they are right it is the only option we have been given but it's not the only option that could be found.
Your history shapes your future, if you care not for your past then you care not for the future, sadly that's how some view Kirkby.
You're right about leaving Liverpool to LFC ? it IS disgraceful. We need a better deal broker to find a better solution because Tesco is not where we should be. I dearly hope the inquiry finds against the development and ends this farce once and for all.
To all of you out there who think it's just a few miles, I walked from Walton Hall to Cherry field, it took me over an hour, along the East Lancs, it's virtually rural. On a cold winters night in January, the club is expecting thousands to walk back to the city. It's hazardous to traffic on a main road, dangerous, inhospitable. Queue in a pen? Crush load on a train after waiting an hour and a half? WITH opposing supporters? I am surprised the police haven't stated any objections.
It's all not just a bridge to far ? it's an East Lancs to far.
61 Posted 12/12/2008 at 14:54:12
I was reminded of this quote from a Tigers fan (Detroit) during the battle to save their old baseball stadium: "Places of the heart, even impure ones, are worth the effort. Your home, your neighborhood, your city ? you have to stand and defend your piece of ground. Manufactured, mediated experience is ubiquitous. Battling to preserve a special place is not quaint provincialism. It is defiance against the relentless obliteration of memory and community." ? Michael Betzold, Tiger Stadium Fan Club.
The current Board are hell bent on destroying that community and once it?s gone, it?s gone forever. It?s not about the current manager, the team, corporate boxes or who we?ll be able to buy with the alleged additional £5 million (wow). Everton FC has always been a community and if Kirkby comes about it?s over.
62 Posted 12/12/2008 at 15:02:19
63 Posted 12/12/2008 at 16:05:32
When the club starts to pay me £30k a week to turn up, then I?ll support them wherever they go ? just like the players....
64 Posted 12/12/2008 at 18:03:46
even if the land was free it?s apparently going to cost about 3 million to decontaminate it and it wont even be ours to own.
When you compare that with the sale of GP which we?ll be lucky to get £10 million for which has got an existing 40,000 seat stadium on it it makes you realise how desperate certain people are to make money out of DK.
65 Posted 12/12/2008 at 17:50:06
And I can't understand why the Council seems to be bending over backwards for the reds! Can anyone please explain that one? They get to stay in the park. I am dumfounded. Please, someone explain that one clearly coz all I can presume is they want EFC out ...
66 Posted 12/12/2008 at 19:00:47
There is no conspiracy. LCC offered EFC a £150 million stadium for £30 million on a UNESCO World Heritage site; a deal of the century you will agree. That fell through after EFC failed to provide their £30 million contribution; LCC waited two years for that contribution, it was not forthcoming, so they pulled the plug on the project.
LFC should not have been given a park to build on; but that does not mean that they (LCC) favour them over us ? if anything it's the reverse.
It's time to lay this Ludendorff-esque stab in the back conspiracy theory to rest; it's not true and it allows the true villians of the Kings Dock fiasco to get off the hook. LCC have done more than enough for EFC, it's a pity we can?t say the same about the Everton Board of Directors.
67 Posted 12/12/2008 at 21:17:02
68 Posted 13/12/2008 at 08:17:58
On the anti-Kirkby side there is the endless repetition that Kenwright and Co are going to make out like bandits from the new stadium. I have asked repeatedly for any vaguely sensible explanation of how this is going to come about. Apart from ?some idiot investor will come along? ? nothing. No explanation of why Kenwright will make more money from Kirkby than any of your more favoured alternatives (whatever they are). No explanation of why some investor will pay a fortune for what you all think is an obvious financial disaster. Nothing. Just the endlessly repeated unsupported allegation that this is all being done to make a killing for Kenwright.
Then there are ?the alternatives?. What the hell are they? Let?s start here: WE HAVE VERY LITTLE MONEY. Do any of you actually accept this? Do any of you actually not understand that the reason we are going to Kirkby is because it is all we can afford? Where are we going to get the £200M+ to build the new stadium in the city that we would all love??
And to say ? at the height of the worst recession for seventy years ? that there are other partners like Tesco if you look a bit harder. Right! Tesco are one of the only businesses in the UK that have enough cash right now to do anything very much.
Fine. It is completely reasonable to say we are very poor and shouldn?t take a gamble on Kirkby, and should just sit where we are in GP and pray that we are rescued by a rich new owner. It might even happen. I very much hope it does.
But stop kidding yourself that there are much better alternatives in the city that we can afford. And that we are only not going to them because the Board is too lazy, incompetent and corrupt. You are simply deluding yourselves and living in a fantasy world. WE REALLY ARE POOR.
69 Posted 13/12/2008 at 08:48:27
70 Posted 13/12/2008 at 09:26:41
71 Posted 13/12/2008 at 10:02:32
You constantly assert that Kenwright is corrupt and that there are viable and affordable alternatives to Kirkby. You have never produced a shred of evidence for either propostion. You are simply full of hatred and abuse and it is sad.
72 Posted 13/12/2008 at 10:13:33
73 Posted 13/12/2008 at 10:14:38
My support for Kirkby is qualified ? behind my support for a groundshare ? only because we cannot afford better, in the strong hope of new investment. I do not understand what alternative you are actually supporting Rich? Do you think we should try for a groundshare? Stay at GP and hope for a new investor? What?
It is simply not good enough for the future of our club to be against something without having any other positive idea about what else we might do to get ourselves out of our current predicament.
What do YOU think we should do Rich? I am yet to hear.
74 Posted 13/12/2008 at 10:25:53
For example: Do you think we won’t get more corporate revenues at Kirkby? Do you think we won’t get higher prices per seat? Do you think we won’t make more from bars and shops and restaurants? I assume that you simply think that there will be a catastrophic fall in attendances in Kirkby. Is that it? This isn’t a crazy position, but I have no idea if it is what you think Rich, because you never respond to my arguments with anything other than saying such things as I am wearing blinkers.
So Rich, your chance now to answer a few questions: Why do you think revenues will be lower Kirkby? How will Kenwright make more money for himself out of going to Kirkby than other alternatives? How will we afford a more expensive alternative stadium in the city?
We have exchanged post after post, and I have no idea what you think about any of these things Rich. Please enlighten me.
75 Posted 13/12/2008 at 10:46:55
76 Posted 13/12/2008 at 11:11:12
I posted on another thread which you did not answer to mine, or ML comments. In case you missed it ( A staged theatre) I repeat it here. My apologies for doing so but In straightforward terms it attempts to differentiate some of the issues.
"Neil, your support for Kirkby as an enabler for EFC is admirable, I fully understand your perspectives as you should fully understand others. The fact is we are dealing with two real issues.
1. Is moving to Kirkby a good move for the club?
2. Is moving to Kirkby the prime motivation for the directors of the club over and above any answer to question 1?
You (once again) state the question as to who will benefit from a move to kirkby. Again, refer to questions above.
If the present Directors made a commitment to stay at the club, not sell their shares for let’s say, 5 years... one could not question their motives for the move as being financially beneficial to them personally ? other than an investment being as part of the success of the club.
However, if the Directors have made it clear they want to sell on the back of a new ground in Kirkby asap, either before it’s built or immediately after, then they are choosing to take any money that’s on offer, irrespective of the fact that its success as a location would be in doubt.
The value of the club would (as has been stated in the inquiry) be increased with the £52M "subsidy". We have already seen in the press the figures of £200M plus as a sale price for the club. So, before you ask again, who is going to buy at that price, look at Man City: who would think they were worth the money?
It is therefore REASONABLE to assume that such a ballpark figure would result for any sale of EFC. In doing so, the personal value of shares held accordingly would rise, way beyond the level paid.
I am not against anyone including Bill making a good return on an investment, but if that investment means we are consigned to an out-of-town site, loss of tradition etc, then one has to question the motive of those selling because it will be the supporters for a lifetime that will pick up the true tab.
The Directors of EFC are not doing anything illegal and are in fact making the best decisions as they see fit. But to whom does it benefit most? The club or the Directors?
Whether or not Kirkby is viable, successful, or commercially sensible, is actually another debate. The fact is it’s not wanted or not the best choice for so many, and the motives (drivers behind the push to make it happen) are therefore questionable and open to debate"
Thats why I devate the issues Neil..
77 Posted 13/12/2008 at 12:05:22
That seems a pretty reasonable set of assumptions to me. The big doubt I would say is on the average attendances (I haven’t seen anyone seriously questioning the other variables). Given transportation and access concerns (which I take very seriously), there is an argument that average attendances might actually fall. I personally doubt this, especially if Everton are playing reasonably well in the Premiership. Obviously all bets are off if for some reason we get relegated.
A few points. This comparison is versus GP. It is not versus, say, a brand new super stadium in the city (let’s call it ’King’s Dock’), or indeed a shared stadium on Stanley Park. In both these cases I would expect higher numbers on all my variables. My problem with the first is manifestly that we can’t afford it. I have no problem at all with the second other than my frustration at the lack of collective will to achieve it.
Also, this says that it is likely that Kirkby would generate higher total revenues than GP. It does not say that Kirkby would generate sufficiently high additional revenues to pay back the additional Kirkby investment. The argument for the latter would be that, since the cost of Kirkby (at least at the moment), is so low (nowhere else we are going to get a new stadium from for around £50M net new investment), we don’t need massive upticks on all the variables to make it work.
Of course I also believe that there is a good chance that securing Kirkby will anyway unleash major new investment into the club in the shape of a new owner. And that we can be very much less sure of that happening if we stick at GP. And that this is new investment is absolutely essential for our future viability as a senior football club.
So the way I see the options are: (1) Groundshare: great prestige, affordable if worked out right, big uptick in revenues, increases attractiveness to new owner; (2) KIrkby: not great prestige wise, affordable, uptick in revenues, increases attractiveness to new owner; (3) Stick at GP: no potential revenue uptick, not attractive to new owner; (4) New stadium in the city: nice but unaffordable by us without a new owner.
78 Posted 13/12/2008 at 12:25:12
Let’s clear some ground first. Almost whatever he now does, Kenwright will make a very good return on his shares relative to what he originally paid for them. That is simply because, in the current market, Premiership clubs are seen as more attractive investments than they were ten or more years ago (not least because of globalisation, the internet, merchandising etc. etc.).
So let’s be clear that the issue here is not whether Kenwright makes a good return on his shares when he sells. It is the impact that going or not going to Kirkby makes to the size of his return.
The claim that a major motivation for Kenwright going to Kirkby is to make a higher return on his shares has to (a) have a story to tell as to why some real person or persons will pay more for Kenwright’s shares because Everton FC has secured Kirkby; and also (b) explain why Kirkby secures Kenwright a higher return on his shares than other options potentially available to him (such as selling up now, groundsharing with Liverpool FC, or securing a new ground in the city of Liverpool).
Let’s take (a) first. Why might the value of Kenwright’s shares go up because of securing Kirkby? We need a little bit of financial theory here, unfortunately. It is generally accepted in the financial community that the value of a business is calculated as the net present value (NPV) of its future cash flows. In other words: in the end, the only thing you can spend is cash, and the value of a business is the cashflows it returns you into the future minus your initial investment.
So for someone rationally to pay more for EFC+Kirkby versus EFC-KIrkby, they would have to believe that the former generates greater cashflows in the future than the latter (net of the investment in Kirkby that they would have to make if they bought the club before Kirkby was constructed).
Now, those against Kirkby are in rather a severe bind now. Because you believe that cashflows will be WORSE at Kirkby than at GP and especially at other potential options (attendances will decline etc. etc.). This means that a rational investor would only be prepared to pay LESS if we go to Kirkby than they would if we took other potential options.
All the stuff about the enabling investment is neither here nor there unless it enables the club to increase its cashflows. If I ran a restaurant and you simply gave me £50,000 to move my premises ten miles away, my restaurant would not automatically be worth more money. Indeed, if the new location generated substantially less cash than the former (perhaps my loyal customers don’t come anymore), then my business would be worth LESS. I would have been better off refusing your gift and staying where I was.
It’s really not complicated. Somebody will rationally pay more for EFC+Kirkby only if it makes the club worth more in cash terms. That is - if it is good for the club as well as for Kenwright.
To clear away another confusion: rises in real estate asset values (we got the ground for less than it is worth) are simply irrelevant here. The ground is essentially an illiquid asset that the new owner would not be able realise (he can’t decide to sell it and build houses on it, for example).
Now, might an ’irrational’ investor pay more for EFC+Kirkby than for EFC-KIrkby? I suppose you could assume that they won’t even bother to run the most basic of NPV calculations, and so won’t discover (as at least you believe) that Kirkby destroys value for the club. I simply can’t believe this.
I suppose you could assume that they will be attracted by the ’prestige’ of owning a club with a ground in Kirkby. But I think we can safely dismiss this.
You could assume that they will see the future cashflows from Kirkby more positively than you do. But then of course: maybe they are right? Maybe Kirkby WILL be good for the club financially?
I think Kenwright may do well out of Kirkby because it still remains such a good financial deal for a brand new stadium, and as I argued above, unless attendances fall (possible but I think unlikely), it will generate more cash for the club.
However, if I were advising Kenwright to make the maximum personal gain on his Everton shares, I certainly would not advise him to do Kirkby. It’s not particularly prestigious and has some clear uncertainties (will the customers still go?). That may put off some potential new owners. I would probably try to hike up the debt as far as I possibly could, and try to secure a prestigious new stadium in the city. This would leave the club in a potentially parlous financial state, but it would be more attractive to more of the hobbyist new investor who may then pay over the odds. At Kirkby the most he can realistically get is what a rational investor will pay.
I would actually advise him to selfishly try to secure a groundshare with Liverpool. That may really get a Russian or Arab billionaire to pay over the odds for something so exciting.
79 Posted 13/12/2008 at 14:36:20
I have a choice: I can bow to your superior analysis of other financial factors... or I can call ’bullshit’ on this particular assertion, which defies all logic, and defies the Man City experience. Hmmm... I wonder.
80 Posted 13/12/2008 at 15:59:12
Your whole argument for DK is linked to increased attendences, and hospitality leading to raised revenues. I think the cross examination of the of the CE shows that the club have done no research whatsoever regarding were the new fans will come from. It seems that the CO may not have been aware that kirkby was 9 miles from the city centre and that this is nearly three times further than all of our rivals accept the pathetically supported Bolton. Our issue is that it is a dangerous experiment that could end in disaster. You seem to be prepared to take that risk.
81 Posted 13/12/2008 at 20:12:23
The answer is no. Because Kenwright who I have a lot of respect for, is playing the grim reaper.
82 Posted 13/12/2008 at 22:52:02
There?s a lot of use of the word ?if? in your statement don?t you think? Here?s another assumption, I think you?ll also agree with this. If I win the lottery tonight I?ll be a millionaire next week. It?s an assumption, you?ll agree, but it?s highly unlikely to succeed, as the odds against this happening are phenomenal. Nevertheless you?ll agree that it could happen, it could happen if I?d bought a ticket!
I?m not dismissing what you?re saying out of hand, I?m just saying my contention, using the balance of evidence available, is that it would appear that Kirkby would become a Stadium of Light rather than an Emirates. Apologies if you can?t read the bar chart in the above article, if you want to receive a copy email firstname.lastname@example.org
I base what I?m saying on the following, the location is nine miles from the city centre, considerably further than any other premiership club, the location has apparent and significant transport issues created by the current infrastructure, this is not being improved. In addition, Everton already know that 40% of the 2007 ballot were against this move, every survey, and I do mean every survey, since has indicated increasing opposition.
There is no demonstrable demand for additional capacity, save a desire by the club, no sell outs, no season ticket waiting list and the award winning hospitality services at Goodison, offering the best unobstructed seats in the house, are under-subscribed in 80% of the lounges. Looking at other new stadia the average attendance levels are 77% of their capacity, with the vast majority performing significantly under those stadia that have undergone phased redevelopment. I?m not sure if you?ve managed to get to the public inquiry but if you had you?ll have heard that Everton have failed to conduct any type of survey to determine the requirements of their customers. Therefore, as a logical person, I think you?ll agree that, on the balance of available evidence, all indications at the moment point to a much lower attendance than forecast, 47,000. This is what the £6M contribution is based on. What firm evidence can you offer to counter this?
Moving on to affordability, I?ll agree that Goodison is difficult, but not impossible, it?s just impossible with the club?s current advisors as let?s just say there?s a vested interest operating. Who is telling you that Everton can?t afford another stadium? The same people who are putting forward a list of finance options that simply don?t add up?
Apologies but it?s too late and I?m too tired to go through the in and outs of what KEIOC proposed at their recent public meeting, it?ll be in their proof of evidence and its just as credible as the clubs, probably more so as it contains actual figures, it?s also outlined in the above article; lets just say another option could be made to work if there was a will; the only will at the moment however is the will to sell.
There?s a lot of confusion about cost and value surrounding this stadium. Barr construct low value, cost effective stadia. Everton are simply getting what they?re paying for, nothing more nothing less. Some very clever people, QC?s, lawyers, planning inspectors have asked Tesco?s representatives and the CEO of KMBC, this week, to provide evidence of where the alleged £52M cross-subsidy is coming from, guess what they couldn?t explain. For many where it?s going to is an even greater mystery.
Christine has touched on the age-old test when searching for the truth, who benefits? I?m no expert, but I think I can work that one out.
I?m knackered mate; I?m off to bed; as you like the word ?If? I?ll leave you with a verse from the famous poem, very apt under the circumstances:
If you can dream, and not make dreams your master;
If you can think, and not make thoughts your aim;
If you can meet with Triumph and Disaster
And treat those two impostors just the same;
If you can bear to hear the truth you?ve spoken
Twisted by knaves to make a trap for fools,
Or watch the things you gave your life to, broken,
And stoop and build ?em up with worn-out tools:
83 Posted 14/12/2008 at 10:51:00
Even the most optimistic in the pro-Kirkby camp don't seem to expect the place sell out, so even if Neil's right ? though all evidence would suggest he?s not ? do you really see anyone committing to paying increased prices for season tickets at an undersubscribed stadium?
Even the keenest of "new supporters" would take up the option of not paying for games they can't be sure they can attend. If by some miracle Kirkby can generate more revenue, at best it will be a small amount spread over the whole season. Justification for an £80 million outlay?
Would you purchase a season ticket for Kirkby, Neil?
84 Posted 15/12/2008 at 12:35:49
85 Posted 15/12/2008 at 13:04:43
You cheeky twat! I will gladly explain my credentials as an Evertonian to you or anyone over a pint of beer and I will even do it in the Kingfisher or any other pub in Kirkby just to make you feel at home.
I will stand and watch a game of footy at any level anywhere and can enjoy it. If Everton are involved then it becomes an emotional issue and the thought of defeat hurts. The thought of relegation hurt and we came close to that quite a few times and never once did I think of giving it up because of the fact that we would be playing so-called lesser teams in less glorious surroundings.
Some things DO HURT too much though and that is the current board who stand by for years watching Goodison fade and not put a penny into it and then all of a sudden they try to play superheroes by jumping aboard some phoney retail scheme with the promise of a brand new super stadia that they just thought we would all fall for.
So, Damien, I will see you in the Kingy or any pub you like and you can bring BK with you for good measure. After our introduction I will tell you all about what Everton mean to me and why I hate this stupid idea of moving to Kirkby and then we can arrange to go and watch a game of football down in Hereford or somewhere and I will tell you what football means to me.
PS: I will buy the ale but if your sick after 12 pints then I want my money back!
86 Posted 15/12/2008 at 13:50:59
sorry to burst your bubble but when will you let go of that "Kirkby is good for us" tag?
I have been involved in the sale/purchase of a number of businesses including quite a few PLCs and never once was NPV a method used to calculate the value of a business. The 2 main ingredients were "Net asset value" and the indefinable "Goodwill".
Future revenues are dictated by the interested purchaser?s strategy for the business and not by the current owner?s plans which may be totally different.
I have said this before, GP is not about to fall down or be closed down. It still has a higher capacity than the majority of other Prem grounds so why the rush to a mausoleum in the middle of nowhere?
If something?s good it?s worth waiting for. Kirkby is not the answer.
87 Posted 15/12/2008 at 14:18:43
Why waste your time with someone sooooo ignorant? You don't have to prove your credentials to anyone.
Blues everywhere are saying they will never go to Kirkby, THERE ARE DOZENS ON THESE PAGES ALONE! If Damien Wilde wants to accuse them all of being liars, or disloyal, then let him make a fool of himself
I wonder if he?ll be the first to "claim" he?ll buy a season ticket for Kirkby ? mind you, I noticed he was looking for tickets for the game on Saturday... coz he forgot to buy one!
Kinda says it all really.
88 Posted 15/12/2008 at 15:46:07
I have had a season ticket for years and would get one if we moved. No question. I?m not assuming anything about anyonne else. I would get one because I?m an Everton fan, that?s my reason. I also know dozens of blues everywhere that say they will get their season tickets at Kirkby. We?ll just have to wait and see. We might not end up there anyway.
Cheers for the offer of the beers!!! I too love any footy game, it?s good to see people who enjoy all levels and not just the Premier League.
It?s nice to exchance views with a fellow blue who doesn?t stoop to making things up and having a go about my support (I?ve missed 2 games this season despite having financial restrictions, having moved miles away, and participating in many races for my athletics club at weekends, often close to when the football is kicking off. I have an extremely busy job and forgot to get a ticket in time for City, am I a shit fan for missing one away game??).
It?s also good to exchange views with someone who isn?t egocentric. All the best Pete, enjoy the Kingy!!
Ignorant? I think some people don?t understand the meaning of the word.
89 Posted 15/12/2008 at 21:00:54
90 Posted 15/12/2008 at 21:46:24
Personally I think Spurs new stadium looks excellent, others will think it?s terrible, that?s how architecture is.
The real eye-opener is the statement on the Spurs website from the chairman of KSS David Keirle, that?s the gentleman from the Kirkby inquiry who represented Everton; we had to sit there and listen to him extolling the nice design and elegant simplicity descriptions of the Kirkby stadium when we all know we?re simply getting a scaled up version of what Barr are known for, budget stadia.
Now compare what David Keirle said about Kirkby to the description of the new Spurs stadium: ?The key driver has been to deliver the best possible fan experience on all levels. The visuals of the new stadium show that it’s really seen as a building, which responds to the brand, which we see as representing style and flowing lines of football.
You can?t blame David Keirle for telling the inquiry that it will be £240M to redevelop Goodison and that the Loop is impossible, he?s the chairman of a company with a vested interest in delivering Kirkby, that?s how his company earns a living.
We?re meant to be competing with Spurs, yeah right.
91 Posted 16/12/2008 at 09:16:47
to use all your own words: "maybe you dont love the blues so much": After 45 years of watching them home and away, I don't think you are in any position to tell me ? or anyone else ? what the club means to us.
"If you are loyal you?ll be there": so the many many people on here who say they wont go to DK are disloyal are they?
"I dont believe huge numbers will stop going": so they?re liars too?
"No offence but I find it distorted and pathetic": NO OFFENCE? The only thing pathetic is some johnny come lately telling life-long blues that they are disloyal and liars.
"I?ll go coz I?M AN EVERTON FAN": trust me every Evertonian who has come on here who says he will not go is "AN EVERTONIAN" ? they're are just not prepared to go skulking out of the city, leaving it to the RS.
When you come on here to swing them and declare "I?M AN EVERTON FAN" and then tell life long Evertonians that they are "disloyal" or "don't love the blues " remember this... it's more than just a hobby for many of the people you slag off you know.
92 Posted 16/12/2008 at 12:27:45
Dave, in many of your posts, you talk like you?re the biggest, most loyal fan ever. You always bang on about how you?ve been to the match or that you?re going to the match, etc, etc. Try to be a bit more humble.
You talk about lifelong Evertonians that go to most matches, but make out I am not one of these, well I am one of these, my Dad is, my Grandad was, etc, etc.
The RS? I?m not really bothered about them, I like to concentrate on my own club and not worry about them.
Do I think people who say they won?t go, will? I think some will, yes. I think it?s part of their propaganda. Some people think it will scare people, kind of ?shit, we better not move, loads won?t go, etc.?
I am sure some people won?t go. These people, I feel, are being very stubborn and have dug themselves a hole now. Don?t get me wrong, I can understand why they hate the idea, but to stop going when we?re moving 4 miles seems strange. Okay, they might think, ?don?t like the design, pissed off it?s a bit further out, missing GP, etc, etc.? ? but to stop supporting the club they love? That?s what I see as distorted.
There?s plenty of other really important things in my life. If part of that changes, do I just abandon it/them? No I don?t. Things change in life, you have to be flexible. Do you guys abandon everything in your life where someone dares to change something you don?t like?
Fair enough if we moved 70 miles and changed names (MK Dons), but we?re moving from a ground that is magical, but nonetheless crap, to a new ground 4 miles away. That doesn?t seem such a big change that would warrant people to stop going. As I said in a previous post these people, are just cutting off their nose to spite their face.
Do I think they would be being disloyal if they didn?t go? Yes I do. If someone stopped going because of time/financial restrictions, fair enough, but because they?re not happy and have thrown the toys out of the pram, no.
So there you have it; yes, I think they would be being disloyal. I also think it does question their deep down love for the club because, if they are so in love with the club, they would swallow their pride and go and SUPPORT EVERTON. As I love watching Everton and they are a huge part of my life, I would watch them wherever. They?re not asking you to travel an extra 70 miles and sit in the mud. They?re asking you to travel a few extra miles to sit in a modern stadium, hardly torture, is it? A certain amount of moaning is healthy, but not a huge amount.
But, at the end of the day, if people stop going (if we move) then that?s their decision. But the majority will continue and continue to enjoy the beautiful game of football.
Dave, enjoy your FC Toffees.
Here?s looking forward to the Chelsea game, COYB.
93 Posted 16/12/2008 at 14:00:02
94 Posted 16/12/2008 at 15:37:07
"The RS ? I?m not bothered about them": So fuck all the Evertonians who live in the city and whose lives are being made a misery by these twats...
"I think a lot of people who say they won't go, well, it's all part of their propaganda": Well, I think thousands who say they will go, won't; they?ll realise how gullible they?ve been to allow themselves to be taken in by the clubs deception.
"Dont get me wrong, I can understand why they hate the idea": no, pal, you don't understand; they don't just "hate it" ? they find it totally unacceptable.
"Do I think they are being disloyal for not going? Yes I do": Did you ever realise that when voting for this shithole many blues felt this was a total act of betrayal and you are the disloyal one?
"I also think it questions their deep down love for the club": I would suggest to the contrary, how could anyone claiming to love this club even contemplate voting for this public humiliation? How could anyone who has even the slightest regard for this club want us to be a laughing stock? Do you have no pride?
Then the final insult... "moving to a ground 4 miles away doesn't warrant people to stop going": this one makes me sick... do you really think people who regularly do 400-mile round trips to watch the blues care about 4 poxy miles ?
Go to Kirkby if you wan't, but stop questioning top Evertonians' feelings for this club, stop calling them disloyal, and above all stop claiming you "understand" ? you clearly don't!
95 Posted 17/12/2008 at 03:35:09
I have a pride for a club that was the first in the city and we belong there. We don?t belong in Kirkby, we have no links to talk of, goodness we have more links to Anfield than Kirkby.
The displeasure that this potential move is vast. Why? Scousers have a but in morality of what's right and what's wrong. Many just feel in their bones that this move is wrong for so many reasons, all now well documented. Many have seen the lies and deceptions laid bare as the truth comes out. Still, we are told that it's the best deal. It's not, it's the only deal the club want to consider. People should be asking why that is.
But to call us disloyal because we don?t share the same distorted reality as the directors or some supporters? That's crap. I would never consider any supporter disloyal with respect to Kirkby or whether they should go IF a stadium is ever built there.
It's disloyal to abandon the city, it's disloyal to accept as truth the lies we are told, it's disloyal to roll over and take it again from people who are responsible for the mess we are in, without asking the questions.
I have a loyalty to the club as well as the team. Players change, managers change but the club is family.
96 Posted 17/12/2008 at 10:14:32
Fair enough. I can see a lot of it stinks and there is a huge amount at stake. We might not even end up there anyway. Wherever we end up, I might not like it for various reasons and there may be things I am highly pissed off with, but I would still go. I just couldn’t not go. That’s just me. Each to their own.
One last thing (I asked this in my last post). I mentioned how things can change in life that we are not happy with, but how you stick with it/them because you love them, have had good times with. Have you/or would you abandon other things in your life that have changed because you are not happy with the change?
97 Posted 17/12/2008 at 16:01:25
Therein lies the problem, you see this as merely change, but to many of us, moving to Kirkby and out of the city will spell the end of Everton as we know it. To many of us, A team based in Kirkby could never amount to anything more than a pale imposter of the club we love.
I would watch Everton even if they were playing in the conference, but a club based in Kirkby?Don't try to understand, you won't. If BK starts a new club in Kirkby and you can feel an affinity with that club, go ahead.
But expect us to fight this all the way.
98 Posted 18/12/2008 at 15:22:05
Unfortunately, I think some of you guys will become very bitter.
99 Posted 19/12/2008 at 09:10:52
1) M/Keynes stole their name ? the Dons;
2) Instead of taking the honourable route through the pyramid, they stole their league status, along with their players, and their staff;
3) They even tried to steal their history, but the threat of legal action forced them to give back the FA Cup winning memorabilia .... and forgo any claims to the clubs history;
4) They moved against the express wishes of thousands of people who had always supported them.
The moves are not just comparable, they are identical. Trains run from London to Milton Keynes about every 10-15 minutes, it's about a 40 minute journey... You?d be lucky to get to town within 3 hours from Kirkby after a game - but strangley enough no one travels to MK for the Dons games; however, there are thousands of Wimbledon fans living in Milton Keynes, many of whom still travel down regularly to watch AFC Wimbledon.
Anyway, I think you?ll end up the bitter one, coz I think the campaign to KEIOC will prevail.
100 Posted 22/12/2008 at 12:23:57
- Wimbledon, move 70 miles and change names.
- Everton move 4 miles and stay as Everton.
Ye, that sounds identical Dave, ye. Have you forgotten to take your medication Fella? Kirkby to town 3 hours? Just more propeganda. You lot said 1.5 hours the other week, it?ll be 5 hours next week. What do you base this on? Guesswork, catastrophised guesswork at that. I waited 50 minutes just to get into Upton Park tube station the other week, was I arsed? No. As I said, propaganda.
As for me being bitter. I won?t be, as I?ll SUPPORT my team wherever they play, unconditional love see.
Please don?t quote the MK Dons example again because it smacks of desperation, it REALLY DOES.
101 Posted 22/12/2008 at 16:01:04
You love the club so unconditionaly your prepared to sell out and crawl out of the city, strange notion of love you have there lad.
The proposed moved is identical on many levels . . . .exept Wimbledon didnt have traitors who actually voted for their move
102 Posted 23/12/2008 at 20:52:51
Right, so the ’yes’ voters are now ’traitors’? Traitors because we want to see our club move on and not rot. Pathetic, plain pathetic.
’I bet you any money, blah, blah, blah.’ Fucking hell, you sound like some dickhead kid, how old are you? So they have faster, more frequent trains there, it’s still in a completely different place, 70 MILES, did you get that? Not 4 miles. Who’s the silly one now? See ya later moaner.
103 Posted 24/12/2008 at 11:11:25
So not being prepared to crawl out of the city on my belly makes me negative?? Hmmm.... Here?s me thinking that people who want to raise the white flag and surrender the city to RS are the negative ones.
Argue about distance all you want ? funny how it doesn't matter when it suits you ? but selling out is selling out.
Merry Christmas to blues everywhere.