Whether this resgnation to leaving Liverpool has been brought about by the fall-out with the local council or the negative reaction of would-be suiters, we have no way of knowing, but it seems clear that one way or another, LFC will soon have the City to themseves. That's if Bill Kenwright has anything to do with it ? as he surely must.
So, if there is no possible way that a new site could be located or financed within the City boundaries and the redevelopment of Goodison Park would not result in the necessary increase in income, a rejection of the Destination Kirkby project might well see the Everton's "Premiere Franchise" being relocated much further afield.
In the same way that Pete Winkelman saw no future for Wimbledon in these parts but was able to reestablish the club in Milton Keynes, there would seem to be no barrier to a sell out to any rich Arab, Yank or Russian who does not view Merseyside as the centre of the universe.
Now don't get me wrong ? as a London-based supporter, I can think of a hundred locations which would be more convenient to me than the present one but it would not be Everton FC anymore than MK Dons has any resemblance to our neighbour`s Cup Final conquerors.
So am I being alarmist? I don't think so. American entrepreneurs have carted sports franchises all over the States and I am sure their ilk would have scant regard for the feelings of those of us whose blood runs blue. Arabs and Russians would be no more sensitive and, in any case, Blue Bill has opened a wedge for them already.
Until I watched that video, no one could have been more opposed to Kirkby ? now I begin to see it as the last hope for Everton as we know and love it. Am I alone with these thoughts?
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 09/09/2008 at 22:15:38
2 Posted 09/09/2008 at 22:30:57
3 Posted 09/09/2008 at 23:11:49
Hats off too for Steve Fearns for his enlightening analysis of how the transfer system works.
But back to EGM for a sec, the Mantra of its the only viable option was put again and again. Its not the only option but it is the only option the board want to consider. If we are in such a mess than the blame for that can only lie with the management and vision of the club. How in Gods name can anyone stand there and say that the facts as we now know them to be still validate the mandate.
It is interesting to note that did the club only considered sites that Tesco had an interest in? I was thinking of the Scotland rd site and Tesco dismissed it therefore giving Everton no choice?
So an absence of clarity, truth buried in half truths and lies, doom and gloom.. I bet you a fiver that if someone did come in for the club now they would come up with their own perspective of what is viable.
Its all in the eyes of the shareholder, whats best for me. Everything has its price as do BK shares, I can’t blame him for trying to make a buck out of them, absolutely not, but to do it and leave us in Kirkby? Bad taste time.
4 Posted 10/09/2008 at 00:18:58
5 Posted 10/09/2008 at 02:01:13
it?s very interesting that BK was reputed to be worth only £1 million when he bought Johnson out so I guess most of this increased wealth from his EFC shareholding.
6 Posted 10/09/2008 at 05:17:39
However ... that doesn't mean he KNOWS best. I think he is slightly over-reacting with the Kirkby situation... I beleive the amount of pressure and stick he?s had lately (even though he?s freely admitted he doesn't have the money to take us a step higher) has pushed him to a panic move ? just like managers panic buy? no difference ...
The same fans who are REAL ANTI-KIRKBY are the same fans who are giving Bill stick from all angles, pushing him ever closer to Kirkby...
I'm no expert and don't know what the soloution is, but I know it ISN'T KIRKBY and it ISN'T SELLING UP TO AMBROMOVICH?S COUSIN EITHER
REMEBER... NIL SATIS NISI OPTIMUM... BUT MORE IMPORTANTLY... PATIENCE!
7 Posted 10/09/2008 at 06:48:45
8 Posted 10/09/2008 at 08:08:38
9 Posted 10/09/2008 at 08:50:42
- Kirkby debt has shot up (now £78m, whereas previously who knows, but nowhere near this).
- The cost of borrowing has shot up
- The number of events for the stadium has shot down.
Yet despite all these negatives the manger will still have around about the same amount (about £11m or £15m according to the clown professor) of additional transfer kitty as we were originally promised...
Of course, the other way of looking at this is that they are just plucking figures out of the air. Lose a few million here & there, so put the seat prices up to compensate. No doubt a sound business practice to some people, but a way of attracting additional customers as well as replacing some of the long-standing customers ? I doubt it!
The point is Maurice, their grand plan is based on a shifting sand foundation and assumptions that just don?t stack-up:
- Bigger catchment areas (we are NOT a supermarket)
- People willing to queue for hours for buses.
- People willing to pay more for parking & also pay more for the match.
- Full executive boxes ? who knows, but I very much doubt it.
A final thought, what happens when these park & ride buses go on STRIKE? It?s inevitable, football supporters are not the most patient and will give the poor old bus driver a lot of grief. The police bill will also be horrendous and the chaos of tens of thousands of customers queuing orderly (yea!) for the buses ? well I leave that to your own imagination.
10 Posted 10/09/2008 at 09:04:06
Just be careful what you wish for!
11 Posted 10/09/2008 at 09:20:42
I?ve yet to hear a single person explain this shameless scaremongering... and I certainly didn?t see it explained at the EGM..
Obviously you?ll be more than willing to offer an explanation for this somewhat bizarre statement.
Thanks in anticipation.
12 Posted 10/09/2008 at 09:49:11
13 Posted 10/09/2008 at 09:49:04
Slick presentations are the forte of PR
EFC gave a slick presentation to show how Goodison was impossible to develop, facts, figures and costings, hastily assembled by their, repeat, their experts.
Questions regarding Kirkby were sometimes glossed over, ignored even though they’ve had long enough to get their act together.
Until EFC allow all interested parties to explore all avenues we will only get slick presentations.
Remember that this is the biggest decision in the history of EFC, Kenwright, me, you and others will pass. Moyes will go elsewhere at sometime and pass his allegiance to his next employer.
Everton Football Club is bigger than all of them.
We owe it to ourselves and our kids to take our time, explore all avenues and make the correct decision.
14 Posted 10/09/2008 at 09:31:30
Goodison has no chance of generating more income or improving our profile in the current football world so what we had this summer will be what we get in the future. The squad size we have now is our limit in terms of a compromise between quality and quantity AND there is another super power buying up the best players, pushing prices up. I think that the squad is decent enough to see us qualify for Uefa Cup and challenge for top 5-8 but a new manager could change that very quickly.
The old 5-year plan focussed on building gradually, buying fringe players from the big clubs, and developing youth. Unfortunately the Premier League has moved on much faster than we have (once again) and future 5-year plans will require much more money & much better facilities.
Any decent manager will not put up with standing still for long and Moyes is a lot better than that. He has now seen we are at our limits of who we can attract and pay for and that was before the Man City buyout. Would you sign a contract under those circumstances? Moyes is quite within his rights to hold off signing until he can see more clearly the direction the wind is blowing.
I think there is a very real sense (hope?) of a buyer coming in if Kirkby goes ahead and that is quite possibly what he is waiting for ? something to give us a decent chance of investment. It was a big blow when it didn?t happen in the summer.
Kenwright's admissions that he has ?had enough? and wants to sell are not those of a man trying to maximise his profit. His comments that it would ?take a billionaire? to push us up to compete are a measure of his ambition for the club. There has been no offer that would take us forward in 10 years, and now the amount of money required is far more than it was 5 years ago.
A move is the best we can do until a better offer comes in. If it never comes we will slowly sink as other clubs attract huge funds, as we have done since 1985. A new affordable stadium with plenty of room to develop & expand is the best we can offer to such an investor and would be in stark contrast to GP ? still no guarantees of a buyout but the board's job is to make it as likley as possible.
I hear the comment "let Moyes go, the club is bigger than him!" Take a look around at clubs that lose top class managers because they thought they were bigger than they were ? you will find a lot of them in the leagues below us.
15 Posted 10/09/2008 at 10:19:53
16 Posted 10/09/2008 at 10:43:45
What exactly is the additional attraction of paying more money for a football club on the basis of it renting a stadium, that a new owner will ultimately not own?
And has a hell of an increased debt on top of that..surely everton football club, in a buyers market is at its most attractive now?
Can anyone provide the reasoning that makes us so much more attractive after a move to Kirkby?
I certainly can’t figure it out!
17 Posted 10/09/2008 at 11:08:27
Probably, but so what?
18 Posted 10/09/2008 at 12:42:54
19 Posted 10/09/2008 at 14:29:45
If Kirkby is cleared we have a new stadium lined up at minimal price and with most of the groundwork complete. Aside from clubs that already have modern stadia in place that is a pretty attractive asset.
When I owned a flat it had to be leasehold as there had to be an overall authority to resolve common problems amongst the other flat owners (common hallways etc) - I imagine owning part of a large complex is the same as all tenants contribute to roads, parking, lighting etc.
Kirkby is quite explicitly an exit strategy - Kenwright doesn’t want to be here next year and Kirkby is his best hope to find a seller capable of taking us forward.
20 Posted 10/09/2008 at 15:05:41
I would argue that not only does it not make the club any more attractive ? in may in fact put an investor off as they will be restricted in terms of their own acquisition ? and would also be under the whim of Tesco.
Would anyone else like to have a go?
Why is moving to Kirkby represented as some kind of panacea to investment opportunities?
One go so far. Not very good.
21 Posted 10/09/2008 at 15:33:37
"Does Blue Bill ?support? Everton just to annoy us?"
Go and see a doctor, you talk nonesense!
22 Posted 10/09/2008 at 15:52:06
23 Posted 10/09/2008 at 16:37:06
24 Posted 10/09/2008 at 16:51:46
And please refrain from the erroneous comparisons of domestic leasehold properties with Everton's situation.
The stadium will not be a balance book asset. They cannot sell it.
That?s the bottom line.
25 Posted 10/09/2008 at 20:13:44
If I remember correctly, the lease on the stadium was for 199 years - please feel free to correct me if I’m wrong.
I’ve no crystal ball, so cannot foresee how long the stadium in Kirkby would last, but using GP as an example, this has been used for some 120 years (by the time we leave, if we do) and is generally recognised as being "knackered".
My point - if we have a 199 year lease on a stadium that has a useful life of that period, or less, then in effect, we own it. We get to use it for what we want it for i.e. a football stadium, for as long as it’s fit to be used. The fact that we cannot sell it is a red herring - its main purpose is as a stadium, not a potential source of income if we can sell it somewhere, which would merely necessitate another stadium.
Again, and my memory might be failing me, but I do not recall what the rent Everton would need to pay for this 199 year lease - does anyone else recall what this figure is? I also don’t recall who’s responsible for the upkeep of the stadium, to ensure it lasts the full term of the lease - again, does anyone else have this information?
26 Posted 10/09/2008 at 22:20:38
27 Posted 10/09/2008 at 23:04:27
28 Posted 11/09/2008 at 06:36:14
29 Posted 11/09/2008 at 08:09:55
So you’re telling me that the RS are going to spend £400m on a shiny new stadium that will last them for only 30 years?? How about the Emirates? Eastlands? The Reebok?
Wow, they’re in for a surprise around 2040 then, when the stadium falls down!
30 Posted 11/09/2008 at 09:22:16
I’m not sure a new owner would be too keen to buy into a new Stadium that had as many obstacles to revenue generation and growth as the Kirkby proposal has.
The Stadium cannot hold concerts; the Stadium can hold a maximum of 7 large none EFC events per annum; the Stadium must be available to be given over for free use by KMBC for 100 events per annum and at a discounted rate thereafter; catering facilities within the new Stadium must be available at a discounted rate to KMBC...
...seriously, I’m surprised they’re not insisting on a couple of executive boxes too.
So, faced with all that, do you think a Billionaire would prefer to
a) Forego any profit availble on a regeneration / development and take on anything up to an extra £100M debt for a Stadium with seriously stunted financial potential - a financial dead end, to all intents and purposes.
b) throw his initial cash at the team to try and establish european football while looking for his own development opportunity to give him an immediate profit.
Kirkby may not be the one thing that sells the club to an investor - in fact, it may be the one thing, when the potential new owner examines it closely, that puts them off.
31 Posted 11/09/2008 at 10:09:40
So what happens if an investor doesn?t want to have us sited in Kirkby under the control of Tesco?
What happens if they conclude that limits our revenue streams?
Where is the value in the stadium then?
There isn?t any.
32 Posted 11/09/2008 at 11:16:10
Or, if we’re still at GP, and still need to move stadium, the cost of investment, plus the stadium which then needs to be funded will be sigificantly higher, too.
33 Posted 11/09/2008 at 12:48:47
I'm still waiting on the logic, that so many people seem to be clinging on to for dear life - that indicates a leased stadium in Kirkby is a panacea to investment.
And no-one can answer it.
34 Posted 11/09/2008 at 18:32:08
So, by the same token, it is not for anyone here to prove to you that it is a panacea (cracking word, and one you obviously love, since you keep using it!) to investment - no matter how "nicely" you ask for it, that’s Bill Kenwright’s job.
Oh, and before you say that you’re not convinced about the strength of his argument for moving to Kirkby, I already got that. But then again, you don’t have access to ALL the information Everton have used to come to their decision.
And on the omissions, you do realise that borrowing £100m (interesting how that has crept up from £78m....) is significantly less expensive and risky than borrowing £400m, don’t you?
35 Posted 11/09/2008 at 19:53:13
36 Posted 11/09/2008 at 20:20:33
37 Posted 11/09/2008 at 20:39:38
An interesting lookup for you would be the documentary about life after humans which explains how long different structures last, admittedly people would still be about but the elements put pay to anything that people can build eventually and with little attention to finish and protection from the elements that lifespan shortens considerably.
38 Posted 11/09/2008 at 20:49:27
I assume that you’re then implying that moving to Kirkby will mean that in 30 years time we will need a new stadium - have I got that bit right?
39 Posted 11/09/2008 at 20:50:38
40 Posted 11/09/2008 at 21:04:32
41 Posted 12/09/2008 at 00:20:54
42 Posted 12/09/2008 at 06:17:45
43 Posted 12/09/2008 at 06:45:31
44 Posted 12/09/2008 at 09:09:40
When we are given reasoning for a move, we are entitled to disect that reasoning... and offering the disection of this reasoning is in no way dependent on providing alternatives...
Your suggestion that we accept Kirkby as a panacea for investment (oh my god, I?ve just used the same word 3 times, phone the police!) ? on the basis that no alternative is provided ? is a false dichotomy and logically stunted.
We are dealing in the facts here. The facts are we have a Destination Kirkby project, which has been suggested by the club Board (and the pro-Kirkby lobby) will bring in an investor. Using the lack of SPECULATIVE alternatives to avoid answering the question about the REALITY of where we are going ? is both disingenuous and ridiculous.
The answer I would guess, that you are actually trying to give, with little success, is that you cannot answer the question!
Perhaps you should just admit that, instead of wallowing in the pretence that the question can be avoided on the basis of the spurious reasoning you?ve provided.
And yes, £100 million is less than £400 million ? you get a gold star for maths... but absolutely zero for providing an accompanying point for that fine piece of irrelevance.
45 Posted 12/09/2008 at 09:46:29
And the buyer ain?t an Arab, Yank or Ruski ? he?s IRISH!
Chew on that one.
46 Posted 12/09/2008 at 10:59:55
Could you give us ONE, of those ?every reasons??
47 Posted 12/09/2008 at 12:04:08
48 Posted 12/09/2008 at 12:41:11
It makes absolutely no sense.
49 Posted 12/09/2008 at 13:30:24
I don’t think BB mentioned Ireland on his extensive list of international prospects...or did he??
50 Posted 12/09/2008 at 13:47:55
He does not appear on the Times Rich List but recently completed the lagrgest property deal in Irish history,so he’s not a pauper like Bill!!
51 Posted 12/09/2008 at 15:10:39
Things are indeed hotting up!
52 Posted 12/09/2008 at 16:09:48
The guys name is Anil Ambani and he is the sixth richest man in the world.
He has dropped interest in Newcastle bacause of the current situation. It is indeed being reported that he will switch his attention to Everton and will be a guest of BK at the Liege game on Weds night?
So who should we sign? Ronaldo or Messi??
53 Posted 12/09/2008 at 23:10:58
A startling revelation for you - I can?t answer the question.
Do you know why? For the same reason everything you state as fact concerning the future of Everton moving to Kirkby is, quite frankly, bollocks.
That reason is, and pardon the capital letters but I believe it is the only way this message is going to get through is....
..... wait for it........
WE DO NOT POSSESS ALL OF THE RELEVANT FACTS
Which means you can proffer opinions until you?re blue in the face, but it doesn?t make them any more valid than anyone who?s in favour of the move.
ps: Oh, and while you?re giving me your opinions, please don?t put words into my mouth, and pretend I said things I didn?t ?thanks for that in advance.
54 Posted 12/09/2008 at 23:42:25
55 Posted 13/09/2008 at 14:33:25
"the Everton’s "Premiere Franchise" being relocated much further afield"
That’s something that’s been in the back of my mind for some years, even before Kirkby came up, although we are looking at least 10 years into the future with such events.
But a move to Kirkby might in fact hasten such a development