Skip to Main Content
Members:   Log In  |  Sign Up
FAN ARTICLES

Billy's Boots/Willy Ennui

By Peter Stone :  04/09/2008 :  Comments (42) :
I like ToffeeWeb. I feel I can sometimes justify the less tasteful comments by some posters ? by accepting that intellect has a cost. Where Blue Kipper is ?Sweet? BBC?s 606 anodyne, Follow Follow Everton lacking identity, Everton Banter ? who knows, ToffeeWeb has definitely two huge ?plates of meat? firmly rooted. Whichever way you look at it, if you want a good discussion/chat/argument this is where you come to.

For me it?s the only place to have a serious discussion with other Everton fans that share the same passion, affinity and (dare I say it) love for our team. A common denominator that provokes heartfelt disagreement, often anger, frequently humour but most worthy of all honesty ? indeed perhaps ToffeeWeb is the only form of catharsis that keeps us Evertonians sane ? especially after the last few weeks?!

After surviving the recent transfer window it now appears I?m falling into a ?new season comment? syndrome/pattern. I feel slightly uncomfortable too when I catch myself unable to resist the urge to repeat myself. However this time last year I wrote this article: http://www.toffeeweb.com/season/07-08/comment/mailbag/mailbagitem.asp?submissionID=1860 A quick synopsis - it highlighted the usual glass half-full/half-empty syndrome we all experience as Evertonians?. blah blah blah? the anachronism being it looked at the consequences of our attachment to either side of the proverbial coin.

This season, after the recent months of uncertainty, I thought I?d share my thoughts again. The slightly surprising (to myself) truth is, however, I feel sorry for BK! Don't get me wrong; I know he must be a pretty shrewd operator ? after all, he's successful right? So he must be able to play his hand well? However, tonight's EGM perhaps showed a side of him that I would suggest most of us Evertonians actually are aware of, though choose to selectively ignore?

Maybe many of us, in a strange way, wish we were in Billy's boots? If I succumb to fantasy, I know I'd just love to be in control of Everton, though the reality, in truth, is harshly different. I?m not a billionaire, though I desperately love the team I support. I have managed large teams of people, but been cosseted miles safer in a corporate ringfence, where the sands are far, far less shifting than the Premier League.

So I lack experience and would ultimately probably fail the club I?ve always endorsed. Sadly I don?t have the connections to be able to call on powerful International contacts to put together a viable finance package to take over at Goodison, though I know real and virtual fans by the thousands who profess undying passion for the team and back this up with vitriolic rhetoric that sometimes borders on vile and mephitic to further endorse their affection.

The thing is, I think there?s a bit of BK in all of us Evertonians? I know that?s going to put loads of people?s backs up but think about it for a moment... Imagine any of us were successful enough to invest in Everton FC ? what would we do? I?d love to read some posts that actually offered constructive alternatives to how to move Everton FC forward. Instead I mostly wade through a quagmire of accusations, hypothesis and an almost insatiable need to hold somebody culpable.

Before anybody starts quoting ?the buck stops at the top with BK? etc. I just wonder what anybody would do instead? If half of the energy of our (ToffeeWeb?s readers) combined intellect were invested in more proactive methods of developing EFC, then I would be a far happier person. As it is, I feel it is still we the fans, who can choose where and what the standards of our great club?s destiny lies.

I know there?s some really smart people who comment on this site, folks with different learnings and understandings, people from various backgrounds carrying diverse opinions, from across the globe ? unified by one Blue harmony. That is what I believe is the real ?Everton Way?. The ability to look discord in the eye and ascend above the distress it brings. To evolve protocols that transcends the conventional and laterally illuminates ways ahead.

If it?s true that Evertonians are chosen, then perhaps this is a time where our accountability should be called into question? We?ve all had a completely crap summer (as far as Everton are concerned) from Kirby to Cashless-Crisis. I?m not pardoning BK ? far from it. This is not a pro or neg comment about BK or DM post though. All I?m saying is if for one minute any of us thinks that what we do individually makes no difference anymore, then we really are in trouble.

In a strange way, we are all Chairman of EFC. So if I could make one request to some of my fellow Toffees then I?d ask you not to just wrap your disappointment and anger in negativity, but to genuinely try to suggest positives and options to improve us too. It?s been a tough few months, expectation levels disappointedly let down, so now really is the time to syncretise and get behind our team.

Remember, what the caterpillar calls the end of the world??? the master calls a butterfly. Best wishes to my fellow Blues.

Reader Comments

Note: the following content is not moderated or vetted by the site owners at the time of submission. Comments are the responsibility of the poster. Disclaimer


Jay Harris
1   Posted 04/09/2008 at 04:59:23

Report abuse

Peter a very thought provoking contribution.

I think all Evertonians know what they wouldnt do with EFC and that’s run it how it is now.

But you’re right to ask if we were chairman what would we do.

I would start by looking at the weaknesses.

Poor marketing

Poor merchandising

Poor organisation

Poor profile

Atrocious PR

Poorly managed corporate and commercial operations.

And I would look to immediately improve these and take back the control.

For example Spurs get 40 million from commercial activities we get 1 million.

Is it any wonder than that Spurs can afford better players.

The next area to look at is development of our own players though this is a long term solution and doesnt offer any instant fixes.

Once all this is set down into a plan I would engage a consultant to go and find a rich investor which is exactly what City did and SELL them the opportunity.

Does any Evertonian actually believe that Kenwright has even thought about this over the last 8 years while he has sold off or mortgaged all our assets and run up record debts without putting a penny of his own money into EFC.

There are still plenty of rich investors who are not out to make a quick killing and if we’re quick enough we might even get Somebody before the RS do.

As for the stadium debate can anybody name any LARGE capacity new premiership stadium, besides the Emirates, which has been successful?

Answers on a postcard or should that be postage stamp!
Philip Chappell
2   Posted 04/09/2008 at 07:52:38

Report abuse

Well with BK comments on the state of EFC which I think he’s always been honest about.Maybe it’s time to welcome the discontents to the real world.!!!And all the part time bookeepers.Sad but it’s true it all boils down to MONEY.BK says he shares have always been up for sale!!So if you know a billionaire or two,,,please let him know & get off his back!!...& Moyes’s too!!
colin potter
3   Posted 04/09/2008 at 08:39:31

Report abuse

Kenwrights shares been up for sale since the first day he acquired them??? Another LIE that has been spewed out his mouth!!! Doesn’t give up does he.
Phil Chappell
4   Posted 04/09/2008 at 08:54:13

Report abuse

Sorry forgot to add quite thoughtful,considerate article by Peter Stone
Derek Thomas
5   Posted 04/09/2008 at 08:56:41

Report abuse

Very well written, in fact much too well written, too clever by half (I think??).

And I thought I could do waffle and obscure.

Salaam’s away backwards, repeating ’ I’m not worthy, I’m not worthy ’.

There’s a bit of BK in all of us?? speak for your self mate, the only way there’ll be a bit of BK in me is if I was daft enough to drop em and play grab ankle, you know what these ’luvvies’ are like, hence the name.

Ennui (on wee) yep, got that,...mephitic...nah, well not since Robert Robinson, Frank Muir and Ppppatrick Ccccampbell etal.

BLUFF, no such word.

I hesitate to ask for your views on playing Jags, Yobo and Lescott as 3 at the back with 2 wingbacks, Baines on the L and Jacobsen on the R.

Yours,

Tongue firmly in cheek,

Derek Thomas
Les Smith
6   Posted 04/09/2008 at 09:16:02

Report abuse

What’s a physcopathic liar? A psychopathic liar with his hat on! Sounds like a description of Agent Billy K.
Alan Clarke
7   Posted 04/09/2008 at 09:38:04

Report abuse

I understand what you’re getting at here (although I wish you were more straight to the point in your article). My question is:

How do WE, as Evertonians, become more constructive with our comments or energy when we don’t have any clue about what the hell is going on inside our club?

Are we skint or are Earl and Green putting money into our club? Can they recall this money at any time plunging us into crisis? Should Kenwright be held accountable for the fact that we are in such a mess? If so, how?

Has Kenwright had offers for the club? Is he truly willing to listen to offers?

It’s these last 2 questions that would give answers as to whether it’s worth being "constructive". What’s the point if Kenwright has no intention to sell?
Trevor Skempton
8   Posted 04/09/2008 at 10:00:54

Report abuse

Jay has listed some relevant shortcomings which are independent of the issue of major investment.

The off-the-field performance needs to match the ’punching above its weight’ that has characterised the development of the team under David Moyes.

It is defeatism to say that the future of the People’s Club is dependant on finding a Sheikh or an Oligarch to act as a sugar-daddy. Be very careful what you wish for!

Appropriate civic/public sector and commercial partners [not shopping] for a city centre or inner-city development would provide an ongoing revenue-based and community-based relationship rather than a one-off quick-fix to attempt exploit planning loopholes with respect to initial capital development.

The apparent determination to pursue the unrealistic [in Planning terms] and unattractive option of Destination Kirkby through a lengthy public enquiry and its aftermath will see the club pouring good money after bad for at least another couple of years.
Kevin Gillen
9   Posted 04/09/2008 at 10:28:13

Report abuse

While I don’t feel sorry for BK I do see that he has enormous problems in keeping Everton fans happy. The recent Manchester City takeover shows just how difficult it is going to be in the future to keep ahead of your competitors. I do agree with him when he says in the past few years we have in footballing terms punched above our weight. I’m hoping we will now see a concerted effort to bring new investors to the club as his recent statements appear to have an air of raising the white flag.
Simon Skinner
10   Posted 04/09/2008 at 10:33:36

Report abuse

"For example Spurs get 40 million from commercial activities we get 1 million."

Jay, I’ve told you this before: that is totally incorrect.

To state that once can be seen as a mistake. To state it again, after somebody explains why it is wrong, could be seen as a deliberate attempt to mislead people.

Given this, why should anybody believe anything you say? You clearly have a complete disregard for facts as long as your story fits your anti-Kenwright position.

I would warn people against believing anything someone says (on either side of any argument) on this website unless it can be backed up. So much stuff just gets stated as fact here that is just patently untrue.

And be especially suspicious of anyone who continues to post things that have been shown to be 100% untrue.
Trevor Skempton
11   Posted 04/09/2008 at 10:21:15

Report abuse

I should add to the above that the potential for redeveloping Goodison to 50,000 and beyond, without any interim loss of capacity income, is there - and has been explained on many occasions.

Last night’s presentation didn’t take any account of the potential for non-retail enabling development as part of an expansion of the Park End.

Redeveloping Goodison would not be quick or simple, but it is possible step-by-step, with ingenuity, without any need for the club to move out or lose income in the process.

Alternatively, Commercial and Public-Sector partnerships could be put together for sites such as Scotland Road, Clarence Dock or the remaining land at the Kings Dock [in conjunction with the Arena].

These last three sites would also suit a shared stadium, which a smart developer should be able to provide free of capital cost to either club. Tenders could be sought, in the same way that they were for the privately-funded Liverpool One development.

Even Wembley would make money if it had two premier-league franchises! And Cardiff [75,000 seats on a land-locked city-centre site] survives on a dozen major events in a year!
Billy Dean
12   Posted 04/09/2008 at 10:53:17

Report abuse

Simon Skinner,

I didn’t catch your previous explanation as to why Jay’s figures are incorrect. Would you mind to clarify again?

Do you know the real figures?
David Foster
13   Posted 04/09/2008 at 11:38:30

Report abuse

Just a thought but if Bill Kenwright really wishes to sell up i wonder if he would let the fans buy him out and have the club owned by the fans like Barcelona is.
Simon Skinner
14   Posted 04/09/2008 at 11:32:03

Report abuse

Billy

Jay’s figure of £40m for Spurs is made up of sponsorship, corporate hospitality, merchandising and "other". I’m not sure what "other" is in Spurs accounts.

For Everton, Jay picks the figure of "other commercial activities", but specificly excludes :

sponsorship, advertising, merchandising, catering, programme sales and corporate hospitality.

The figures are further misleading by the fact that Jay is talking about INCOME, and not profit. Everton outsource merchandising and catering - as such, our income is £6.6m lower that it would otherwise have been, but our costs are reduced by an even bigger amount. Spurs don’t outsource, and hence suffer the costs as well as the obtain the income. To report one without reference to the other is just misleading. Indeed, Spurs’ costs are £15m higher than Everton, plus whatever the extra staffing costs (they is no seperation of players wages and support staff wages).



Finally, we are using figures for the 06/07 season (the most recent available). Spurs had eleven home cup ties that year, which caused a huge increase in corporate hospitality, as you would expect. Spurs made an extra £10m large on the back of this. You can’t expect that many cup games every year - it was an exceptionally good year for Spurs.

Yes, of course Spurs make more money than we do. They are a London club, charge £60 for a ticket, and have really expensive corporate facilities 3 miles from what, the third largest business district in the world?

Yet Jay for some reason needs to massage the figures to make Kenwright look worse. The gap isn’t 40:1, nor is it anything close to 40:1

It’s always Spurs he references too. He never compares them, for example, to Aston Villa, a club which has been run incredibly tighly under Doug Ellis and now Randy Lerner for years. You would think that it would be a more natural comparison, as they are both have similar crowds, are both non-London clubs.

You would also think that Jay would want to make that comparison - Villa have a slight advantage over Everton, in that they are in a larger, slightly economically richer city, and don’t have the most successful club in English football to compete with.

Given Villa have those advantages, and given how well Ellis and Lerner run the club, it may come as a bit of surprise to find out that Everton make more money than Villa from commercial operations.

Which is probably why Jay feels the need to resort to misstating Spurs figures.
terry brown
15   Posted 04/09/2008 at 11:56:33

Report abuse

First time poster (gets ready to duck behing flame-retardent material)...I too have been disappointed by the sumjmer and the start to the new season. But...
Essentially the same team that made 5th place plus quality signings (including a player that would have accepted no wages until fit, vs a player that would have preferred to go to Chelski but followed the money). And look around: would you rather be a West Ham supporter (manager left because of interference), Newcastle (ditto), Blackburn (good young manager seduced by obscene amounts of money). No, we’re not going to win the league this year. But we have an essentially stable squad, a good working relationship between manager and owners...and did I mention that we finished 5th? I am not blind to the problems of ongoing funding/investment/stadium move etc, but right now, there are a lot of fans of other teams who would like to be in our position.
Jay Harris
16   Posted 04/09/2008 at 11:45:17

Report abuse

Simon
I cannot remember any correction to my figure but here are the Spurs figures:-

Match day income 30.9 m
Broadcast income 33.7m
Commercial income 38.5m
TOTAL income 103.1m

Source Deloitte 2008.

Everton
Matchday + advertising 21.7m
Broadcasting 27.5m
Other income 2.2m
TOTAL income 51.4m

Source EFC report and accounts 2007

That is the latest accounts I have access to and these figures are from the sources I have mentioned.

They are not fictitious nor mischievous.
Simon Skinner
17   Posted 04/09/2008 at 12:07:45

Report abuse

Jay

OK, those figures are certainly true. They aren’t really comparable though, because the catogories don’t match, as I said in my last post. They also ignore costs, which are obviously just as important as gross income.

Spurs made around twice as much as us from commerical operation than us, not 40:1, in that specific year (which was exceptional for Spurs). The difference is mostly corporate hospitality, plus higher sponsorship (Spurs have the best sponsorship deal outside the big 4).

Neither of which, due to the differences in clubs locations, prove anything.

I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt when obtaining your figures that you accidently misstated 2.2m as 1m and you didn’t know advertising was commercial.
Jay Harris
18   Posted 04/09/2008 at 12:05:53

Report abuse

Simon
I dont have access to Villa’s figures as they are not reported on the Deloitte table but if you can provide them then all the better for comparison.

My point has nothing to do with costs.It was Kenwright’s man who decided to farm out the catering and merchandising and allegedly though I cant say categorically we got all the franchise fees paid up front which would have inflated the figures artificially for 1 year can you confirm this?

My point is there is a tremendous opportunity to increase our commercial income.



For example Arsenal get 43m amd even Newcastle get 28 million (same source Deloitte 2008).

It is well known how badly our merchandising,marketing,catering and ticketing operations are run never mind our infamous PR department.

We cannot continue to run at operating losses of 10 million a year which we have done for the past 2 years accounts because even despite the fact that BK has no money we NEED more income to cover our costs and giving control of our merchandising to third parties IMO is the wrong way to go about that.

If you have a lossmaking operation you dont give it to some third party with competitor’s interests to manage you put better management in to turn it around.

That was my point the figures are academic.
Alan Ross
19   Posted 04/09/2008 at 11:42:51

Report abuse

The Sainsbury’s/Walton Hall Park project has never been fully costed by Everton to the extent that Kirkby has. Apart from a few luddites who would die before leaving Goodison this project would have very few discenters. The possibility of loosing a considerable portion of the fanbase with the Kirkby move would simply not exist. So, as you ask, what would I do if I were Bill. Fully cost this project and make it puplic, and if that meant having to break the the exclusivety agreement with Tesco so be it. There would be no masking the truth. If unviable then I would revert to Kirkby. But I would also investigate the possibility of bringing Tesco in on the project. The size would not be a planning issue in that locality. Transport would not be an issue. Parking would not be an issue. So tell me again why the only alternatives are Kirkby or Goodison. I accept that Goodison is far less viable than people imagine. To elavate it as the only alternative to Kirkby, knowing the difficulties in relationship to footprint, finance and logitics is simply misleading the fanbase. But then again isn’t that the norm.
Peter Howard
20   Posted 04/09/2008 at 12:15:50

Report abuse

Jay :
Do Spurs buy better players than us or more expensive players than us ?
Jay Harris
21   Posted 04/09/2008 at 12:35:48

Report abuse

Peter
that wasnt my point but at least they can "afford" more expensive players and god knows where we would be if we didnt have Moyes who has operated on a transfer kitty that must rank with the bottom 10 not the top 10.

However even with the low wage bill and small comparable spend we still make operating losses of 10 million a year so unless we improve our income our squad will get even more decimated in the future..
Peter Howard
22   Posted 04/09/2008 at 12:43:49

Report abuse

Jay :
I appreciate it wasn’t your point but you have to admit it was Freudian.
Levy and/or Sugar would have sacked DM by now.
Ed Casey
23   Posted 04/09/2008 at 12:27:09

Report abuse

Nice to hear someone thinking about positive change rather than just bemoaning everything all the time.

A few suspect comments though!

Jay - marketing, merchandising, organisation, profile, PR and operations cost a lot of money. As all Evertonians know we haven’t got a pot to piss in! So how, as Peter suggested, can we make this better! For me I don’t know because I’m not a businessman of international repute! But I would hazard a guess at how BK sees it and how he plans to solve our current predicament!

If we want an Everton to be world-beaters on and off the pitch we need answers. Bill Ks answer is simple - move ground and make an attractive proposition to investors or sell the club!

I think it needs to be pointed out too that City’s new super rich owner has spotted a team that has a brand new stadium with a large fan base (similar to our own) and plenty of potential in terms of business growth. There are 20 clubs in the league and he could have chosen any of them. But even though he is incredibly rich I doubt his criteria for selection was based on ?who is the best team outside of the top four with the best history and fan base’ or ?I know lets stick 20 names in a hat and do a lucky dip’. Give the man a break - he would have had teams of lawyers and suits doing extensive research. And if they’d gone to him and said the most attractive business to take over is Chelsea he probably would have bought them, such is his riches that make Abramovich look like a bum! So, why pick a club that would need millions of £s of investment before any sort of return. It would make no sense. I know what Bill K thinks though - if I move to a new ground, package the club nicely we’ll get a similar type of investor.

Now I’m not a BK fan but not because I don’t think he love Everton every bit as much as the rest of us. If anything I think our current problems stem from the fact that he loves the club too much and can’t let it go. Personally, I just think he isn’t a very good businessman and has made some very bad decisions especially when it comes to his bloody mouth. He continually gets it wrong - quiet when he needs to speak and can’t shut up when he needs to be silent. From his point of view, which he has been at pains to tell us all over the last few weeks, he can’t compete in the market and Everton are suffering because we have no cash. I strongly suspect that most of the sure thing transfers we had lined up this summer collapsed because of the financial packages we offered. Ie Buy now pay later! This might have worked when we bought players over the last couple of years but now we have a global economic slow down and clubs need cash in the same we all do! They just aren’t going to go for instalment payments over 6 years. Why do you think so many players we buy are for undisclosed fees ? it is because they are on crazy payment plans. And why because Everton have NO money! So how does BK solve it - move ground, sell the club! I wouldn’t be surprised if EFC is bankrupting BK personally by the way because I am sure be bleeds blue like the rest of us. Like I said he?s just not capable of running the club at the level it needs to be at!

It has been a frustrating few months as an Evertonian. But if you are an anti-Destination Kirkby Evertonian (like me) then prepare for it to get worse because I think the writing is on the wall! I don’t want to see Everton leave Liverpool and the ’mid-scale’ Stadium plans make me weep - from one of the best grounds in the world to that! Truly saddening! But BK has ONE answer - MOVE GROUND, SELL UP and it is coming, regardless of the poor design, poor transport infrastructure and other obvious drawbacks. But if it does bring the investment we need then maybe we?ll just have to resign ourselves to it! But as far as BK is concerned it is his only way out ? the only affordable, deliverable option. Plan Bs and Cs are years and millions of pounds away. The comment about public sector partnerships mooted by Trevor are not viable ? at least as far as BK is concerned (apologies Trevor as I?m not disagreeing with you ? I just think from BK point of view it won?t happen).

So that?s my rant. A frustrated anti-Kirkby blue who worries about the club as much as anyone but has no real answers. This response to Peter?s great article is not a pro-BK statement or an apologist?s point of view but just a reflection on how I think he sees his own predicament and how he is going to get out of it ? with the help of Messrs Earl and Green.

But if you pushed me and I had to give an answer on what is the best way forward for Everton. What can we do to ensure a bright future of investment in the club and (most importantly) the playing staff and do it in the city of Liverpool? I?d have to respond with two words: GROUND SHARE!
Chris Stephenson
24   Posted 04/09/2008 at 12:46:47

Report abuse

I agree Alan. Should perhaps have been done at the start of the whole moving process, as many options as possible before deciding on the best one...I just dont believe it when people/the board say that they really have looked at every site and angle and that Kirkby is the best and only one...
Ed Casey
25   Posted 04/09/2008 at 12:52:21

Report abuse

Regarding outsourcing catering and other club resources. They have probably made the decsions to do this because the profit margin isn’t great enough to warrant the overheads needed to provide the services in the first place. It can be the only explanation.
Jay Harris
26   Posted 04/09/2008 at 12:52:21

Report abuse

Peter it wasnt Freudian at all.

My point had nothing to do with performances on the pitch where I feel Moyes has punched above his weight for years.

My point was we have an abysmal level of commercial income and the way we manage them is poor.

It is the off field activites at EFC that are poorly managed.
Simon Skinner
27   Posted 04/09/2008 at 12:21:16

Report abuse

"allegedly though I cant say categorically we got all the franchise fees paid up front which would have inflated the figures artificially for 1 year can you confirm this?"

Yes, because from an accountancy point of view, you spread the income over the life of the contract, no matter when it was received. If you get an amount in advance, you hold it on the balance sheet and release it to the P&L in future years.

That’s yet another statement (to add to the one about the "creative accounting" on Kirkby) where you strongly suggest that Kenwright is attempting dishonest accounting (without making a full accusation), without any proof or indeed without any plausible suggestion on how it possibly could be achieved.


"My point has nothing to do with costs."

That’s a ridiculous statement. You are argueing Spurs, Arsenal and Newcastle are superior solely because they have higher incomes. You don’t judge a business on turnover, you judge them on profit.

Costs are every bit as important as income.

"If you have a lossmaking operation you dont give it to some third party with competitor?s interests to manage you put better management in to turn it around."

Again, this is just midguided. So all outsourcing is bad? Sorry, that’s just wrong. Very often, outsourcing is the best thing to do. For example, catering: what does a football club know about catering? Very little, relative to a catering company.Now, we could hire catering experts, or we could get a catering company to do that for us. Because they have the advantage of economies of scale, they can afford to have far superior management staff than our tiny operation could afford. In such cases, outsourcing is beneficial to both parties.

Likewise, we don’t hire tax experts, because they are really expensive. Instead, we outsource to Deloitte. We don’t manufacture the kit ourselves, we get umbro to do it. It those cases, in Everton ran them themselves they would be loss making, but by outsourcing it is profitable for both parties.

Outsourcing isn’t always right either, but to make a judgement one way or the other you look at the figures. You can’t possibly make that statement without those facts.

"For example Arsenal get 43m amd even Newcastle get 28 million (same source Deloitte 2008)."



Everton get £6m in INCOME, so Newcastle get about £22m more than us.

That’s before costs though. Newcastle’s costs are £21m higher than ours. Again, as for Spurs, that excludes staff wages, because there’s no split between players and support staff.

But basically, Newcastle are no better than us. THAT’S why costs are important.

(by the way, the above does NOT include player wages - Newcastle’s player wages are another £24m higher than ours, which is why Newcastle are screwed at the moment).

Arsenal’s accounts are really hard to examine, because they are now into property development as well, plus the expenses of their stadium. But you’ve given me a figure very similar to Spurs, so the same arguments are likely to apply.

My point is that you are making blanket statements lie "it is well known that everything is run badly". The facts actually don’t indicate that. It’s true that Everton do some things badly, but it’s a common misconception that fixing these things would make millions. Most of the things mentioned at things that the club could do to make us happier (like better PR and stuff), but wouldn’t actually make any money at all.

Customer’s always underestimate the cost and overestimate the benefits of anything that they want. Fact of life.
Peter Stone
28   Posted 04/09/2008 at 13:12:38

Report abuse

Derek Thomas: Mephitic means foul smelling or noxious. It’s origin is from the 17th century Latin Mephiticus, mephitis meaning ’noxious exhalation’.... so TRUE! Thank you for the compliments and yes I’m sorry I waffle and beat around the bush. I laughed out loud at your ’BK ’grab ankle’ comment though perhaps after setting that scenario, you shouldn’t have finished your article "Tongue firmly in cheek"!

:-D

& don’t get me started about wing backs either!
Simon Skinner
29   Posted 04/09/2008 at 13:25:56

Report abuse

I wrote:
"Yes, because from an accountancy point of view, you spread the income over the life of the contract, no matter when it was received. If you get an amount in advance, you hold it on the balance sheet and release it to the P&L in future years."

which might be unclear.

I’m saying that there is no way Kenwright could possibly have received a larger amount in advance and used it to fiddle the accounts. i.e. Jay’s statement is impossible, not just unfounded.
Dan McKie
30   Posted 04/09/2008 at 13:56:40

Report abuse

The one thing I would love to know about the goings on in the background of EFC, is Robert Earl and Phillip Green’s roles! What do they put in? What do they get out? Why havent either of them taken over completely? Bill says we need a billionaire, but dont we alreay have 2 in these guys? Could their presence put off potential buyers?
Daniel McLoughlin
31   Posted 04/09/2008 at 14:46:17

Report abuse

No one can argue that we are not a badly run club. The transfer fiasco of this summer is not the only farce this board has put us through this summer. I work in the city centre and believe me you would think we were playing in Kirkby already, we are involved in nothing to do with the Capital of Culture. LFC are plastered all over the city and have two megastores plus there one at Anfield. We have one at Goodison and one in Birkenhead. JJB is supposed to be our ??Official retail partner??... what a joke that is you go in any JJB store an there is guaranteed more Liverpool posters up than Everton. Also our kit came out over a month late!! and two months after Liverpools had. It's been one let down after another and the amatuers running the club are dragging us down so much they need to go we are quickly turning into an embarrassment. Thank god for David Moyes, that's all I can say.
Peter Howard
32   Posted 04/09/2008 at 14:44:21

Report abuse

Jay :
You can’t divorce off-field activities from on-field ones. They go together and your comment was Freudian in the sense that you’re saying Spurs have more to spend and,ergo,are better off on the pitch. Are they?
I note you ignore the comment that DM would already have been sacked at Spurs.
The fact is you are very selective so that everything points to BK being the problem. Maybe he’s like Duff Beer- ie " the cause of and the solution to, all ( our ) problems !
Jay Harris
33   Posted 04/09/2008 at 15:06:26

Report abuse

Peter
I did not once say Spurs are better on the pitch although it is not hard to argue they have finished 5th and won a cup final in the last 2 years.

You are right you cant divorce Off field activities from on the pitch activities and if you dont believe that the shambolic way EFC is being run is hindering us on the pitch then I believe you’re severley misguided.

I guess we are totally divided as a fanbase those that are Pro Kenwright and those like myself that are anti.

As regards Moyes employment by Spurs the question is purely academic it could not be proven either way. Who is to say he would not have been a roaring success at Spurs with backing he can only dream about under Kenwright.
Jay Harris
34   Posted 04/09/2008 at 15:18:39

Report abuse

Simon you can disagree with me all you like but please dont claim I said things I didnt.

I did not once say Kenwright or anybody else fiddled the books I said it had been inferred (by a poster on this site I seem to remember)that the franchise fees had all been paid up front and were included in that years accounts and I asked you the question if that was true or not , but anyway according to my outdated accountancy knowledge there would be nothing to prevent Wyness from presenting that as a one off payment depending how it was dressed up.
Jay Harris
35   Posted 04/09/2008 at 15:25:36

Report abuse

Simon
I agree Spurs and Newcastles costs are higher but to me without a specific breakdown those higher costs are mainly to do with higher players wages and higher amotisation of the costs of purchasing players.

Without proof I dont think either of us could prove whether they are loss making or not but my point was their commercial income is SIGNIFICANTLY more than ours even if you "unfranchise" ours and therefore it is an area of the business that presents us with the opportunity to increase income.
Simon Skinner
36   Posted 04/09/2008 at 15:26:38

Report abuse

"Simon you can disagree with me all you like but please dont claim I said things I didnt."

I actually specifically said that you didn’t make a full accusation. However, on both counts you have suggested that creative accounting as a possible motive.

"I did not once say Kenwright or anybody else fiddled the books I said it had been inferred (by a poster on this site I seem to remember)that the franchise fees had all been paid up front and were included in that years accounts and I asked you the question if that was true or not ,"

Fair enough. It is not true. You can see the turnover figure for catering, so you can see for youself that there is no bulk payment in there.

"but anyway according to my outdated accountancy knowledge there would be nothing to prevent Wyness from presenting that as a one off payment depending how it was dressed up."

You cannot. A bulk payment is deferred income, in exactly the same way as the season ticket money paid in advance is. There is no way you can dress a multiple year income stream in a single year, and no way Deloitte would have signed off on that.
Peter Howard
37   Posted 04/09/2008 at 15:22:05

Report abuse

Moyes-employment-at Spurs point is academic but so is your answer to it but you know the point I was making.Jay:
You implied it by saying they can afford better players.One therefore assumes they have a better team. Do they ? For what they have spent, 5th place and a ( lucky ) CC is a poor return.
Are we " hindered on the pitch ". How so ? We’re on the coat-tails of the Sky four.
You like to factionalise. You assume everyone is either for something or aginst something- hence you assume I am " pro- Kenwright " Life and more particularly football, is not that simple.
Of course the
Simon Skinner
38   Posted 04/09/2008 at 15:32:40

Report abuse

Jay

"I agree Spurs and Newcastles costs are higher but to me without a specific breakdown those higher costs are mainly to do with higher players wages and higher amotisation of the costs of purchasing players."

No, that’s not it. I said I was specifically excluding player wages.

I didn’t state I was excluding amortisation of purchases; however, I was. I was looking at just the operating costs.

I was in fact being generous by not including staff costs on the corporate side at all. Newcastle’s accounts say they have 1400 staff members outside of the football team - that’s 1300 more than Everton. So once you add their wages into the equation, Everton make more profit from corporate activities than Newcastle.


Now, you can argue that you haven’t seen specific figures etc (you can get the Spurs ones off their website, and Newcastle for a quid off companies house if you want to look). But that’s the point. You have decided that Everton’s business is run poorly. You throw figures around to back this story up, but the truth is these numbers don’t prove anything. If you haven’t looked at the figures, you weren’t in a position to make those statements.

If you dig deeper, the numbers actually say Everton is doing quite well, for a Premier League football club outside London. Certainly better than Newcastle and Villa.

If your argument is solely that there is room for a little improvement, then fair enough. But if you think there is an extra £10m profit to be made...well, no other club outside the top four and Spurs has managed that, so why is it automatic that Everton would be able to? And given that Everton’s commercial PROFITS (not income) is comparable to that of all these clubs, on what do we base the idea that Everton are really poorly run?
Jay Harris
39   Posted 04/09/2008 at 15:49:11

Report abuse

Simon
I understand the point you are making but the way it was put by a previous poster was that there was a one off up front fee paid for the franchise which eliminated future revenue streams from that source.

On the point of what is commonly known as "creative accounting" are you saying that does not go on with or without the knowledge of audtitors?

And are you saying that there has not been any "creative accounting" at EFC.
Simon Skinner
40   Posted 04/09/2008 at 16:02:54

Report abuse

"It was put by a previous poster was that there was a one off up front fee paid for the franchise which eliminated future revenue streams from that source."

That may well have happened.

"On the point of what is commonly known as "creative accounting" are you saying that does not go on with or without the knowledge of audtitors?"

What goes on is in more complex situations, where the accounting treatment of something is unclear. In that case, someone might take what is politely called "an aggressive position".

What you are suggesting is an entirely blatent breach of accounting standards, on a major event in the year (the outsourcing) which is specifically mentioned in the director’s report and would have attracted in the auditor’s attention. There is quite literally no chance whatsoever of Deloitte letting that through. Really, none.<
EJ Ruane
41   Posted 04/09/2008 at 17:23:07

Report abuse

Very well written Peter. You obviously know that all good writing contains a logical, identifiable voice and makes the reader believe one person is talking to another, your writing has a sense of audience; makes contact with the reader and expects his or her needs. It uses detail; the reader is able to ?see? what you?re describing, it also has rhythm; it seems to flow effortlessly from beginning to end.

Needless profanity removed by moderator

EJ Ruane
42   Posted 05/09/2008 at 09:26:40

Report abuse

"Needless profanity removed by moderator"

ALL profanity is ’needless’.

Why be selective?

(Is there a list?)



© ToffeeWeb


Latest News

Subscribe to The Athletic, Get 40% off
Online Football Betting with Betway

Bet on Everton and get a deposit bonus with bet365 at TheFreeBetGuide.com



Recent Articles





Talking Points & General Forum

Pinned Links

OK

We use cookies to enhance your experience on ToffeeWeb and to enable certain features. By using the website you are consenting to our use of cookies in accordance with our cookie policy.