Skip to Main Content
Members:   Log In Sign Up
Text:  A  A  A

Could Bill flog 'the franchise'?

By Maurice Hardman :  09/09/2008 :  Comments (55) :
I have just watched the video of last week`s EGM and then waded through the Q & A document. I have to conclude that the message being conveyed by those at the top bears out what Bill Kenwright told us in here in London a few weeks ago... `Move or we die!`

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?

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

Rich Jones
1   Posted 09/09/2008 at 22:15:38

Report abuse

Blue Bill "look into my eyes, look into my eyes,not round the eyes in the eyes you will see the benefits of moving to a small town away from the city and without me giving any logic or figures and totally ignoring the planning application, you will also see no good reason why we should end our excluseivity agreement with tescos and explore other avenues, 321 your back in the room".
John Sreet
2   Posted 09/09/2008 at 22:30:57

Report abuse

If the UK was geographically the same size as the USA there might, just might be a little merit in your argument. For instance the Houston Oilers moved state to Nashville Tennessee into the arms of an adoring fan base........Nashville had never enjoyed a football team, and the city welcomed this franchise with open arms. Where in the UK do you suppose a team of Everton?s magnitude might find an adoring fan base in the tens of thousands.......the nearest American Footbal team to Nashville was a six hour drive away in Atlanta.........or Memphis, in six hours you could drive from Newcastle to Portsmouth........Sorry Maurice, this is no reason to suddenlt declare yourself in favour of Kirkby.
Christine Foster
3   Posted 09/09/2008 at 23:11:49

Report abuse

I too went through the transcript and I have to say what a gerat job the lads did in trying to get some answers from BK. In truth no one really expected to get anything other than what we got, which was Bills version of the truth or the world as he sees it.

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.
Rich Jones
4   Posted 10/09/2008 at 00:18:58

Report abuse

I would just like to point out to those who think BK isn?t a business man that according to footballs rich list in December?s addition of four four two he was worth 23 million, so he knows a thing or two about business. I just wish it would rub off on what he does with Everton, however he doesn't take any wages, he doesn't take any dividends as there is no profit but he does own the asset thats grown in value and as we know will be further enhanced by moving us to Kirkby which will further enhance BK's wealth and spending power but leaves us in my opinion in a worse position long term. He mentioned that he was a relative pauper compared with the other owners but this irrelevant as other than by his shares which have gone up in value he hasn't put anything in so it may as well be you or I. I'm sorry I still feel that this is an exit strategy; whether BK is a blue or not he's thinking of his finances before our future as a club.
Jay Harris
5   Posted 10/09/2008 at 02:01:13

Report abuse

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.
Adam FItzsimmons
6   Posted 10/09/2008 at 05:17:39

Report abuse

Ha! Rich Jones, that first comment was a beauty mate. I have to say, I do feel sorry for bill ? he did after all add stability and rescue us from Johnson... he may of fooled us from time to time and maybe even fooled himself, but i think he REALLY does want the best for Everton

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

Paul Gladwell
7   Posted 10/09/2008 at 06:48:45

Report abuse

Can someone tell me where the story for the myth about him never taking money out of the club came from because I think it is bullshit, not that I would begrudge him it, it is just that I am sick of these stories of him being some saintly hero, he is a business man first and an Evertonian second, why do you think he threw £250,000 to the labour party?
Rich Jones
8   Posted 10/09/2008 at 08:08:38

Report abuse

Paul i?m sure he doesn?t take a wage and I think the only year there could have been profit for a dividend would have been the year Rooney was sold, so the only the other way of recieving income would be through expenses.
Brian Donnelly
9   Posted 10/09/2008 at 08:50:42

Report abuse

I think we should praise our board for their financial acumen. This is based on the following:
- 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.
Peter Yarnold
10   Posted 10/09/2008 at 09:04:06

Report abuse

What?s to stop a mega-rich owner taking the franchise to say Leeds where a 30,000 audience is virtually guaranteed? I am sure in the next few years we shall see a lot of ?consolidation? of league clubs up and down the country. Once it?s established you can take the club out of its city, why not further afield?
Just be careful what you wish for!
Ciarán McGlone
11   Posted 10/09/2008 at 09:20:42

Report abuse

Could the author please explain his passive capitulation to the opinion of ?move or die?..

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.
Matt Byrne
12   Posted 10/09/2008 at 09:49:11

Report abuse

Just to clarify, it was the Norwegians that moved WImbledon, then they sold it to Pete Winkelmen who happens to live in MK. I personally think DK will be a big white elephant, we will have the same crowd numbers as Goodison, and have the same commercial prospects ie none, no concerts, exhibitions etc, and a bigger slice of the pie will be given to outside parties such as the council. But we are all arguing over this and doing nothing, even the RS are forming a group to take over from their board, no-one has even mentioned it here? Why can?t we start something, put in our own money, run it as a co operative, and rebuild Goodison bit by bit.
John Milligan
13   Posted 10/09/2008 at 09:49:04

Report abuse

Maurice do not lose faith.
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.
Graham Atherton
14   Posted 10/09/2008 at 09:31:30

Report abuse

I would have thought that this summer was a major warning to the aspirations of the club. We are not about to be plunged into the Championship regardless of moving or not BUT (and it is a very big BUT) we appear to have met the limits of our affordable ambition in our present circumstances.

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.

Matt Kassell
15   Posted 10/09/2008 at 10:19:53

Report abuse

I think that the Wimbledon case was the first and last of its kind. The owners exploited a loophole enabling them to move the club. As a result the FA tightened up regulations on the movement of football clubs. I’m not sure of the exact wording but clubs have to remain within their local boundaries.
Ciarán McGlone
16   Posted 10/09/2008 at 10:43:45

Report abuse

Why are people under the illusion that KIrkby is a panacea to attracting an investor?

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!
Ged Alexander
17   Posted 10/09/2008 at 11:08:27

Report abuse

" 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...."

Probably, but so what?
Robbie Muldoon
18   Posted 10/09/2008 at 12:42:54

Report abuse

It is so obviously an exit strategy... he keeps saying I don’t want this job. I think it does bother him the thought of many evertonians disliking him. He wants out and he wants a profit.
Graham Atherton
19   Posted 10/09/2008 at 14:29:45

Report abuse


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.
Ciarán McGlone
20   Posted 10/09/2008 at 15:05:41

Report abuse

That doesn?t answer my question... as the stadium will not be an Everton asset...

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.

Jay Mullarkey
21   Posted 10/09/2008 at 15:33:37

Report abuse

Maurice Hardman,

"Does Blue Bill ?support? Everton just to annoy us?"
Go and see a doctor, you talk nonesense!
Graham Atherton
22   Posted 10/09/2008 at 15:52:06

Report abuse

A stadium owned by Everton isn’t an asset? Please explain.
Phillip Martin
23   Posted 10/09/2008 at 16:37:06

Report abuse

If Bill just came out and said "Nobody wants to invest in EFC because GP requires serious renovation/replacement" and "Kirkby was the best solution to this problem" I?d at least understand his reasons. I still wouldn't believe Kirkby was the right long term move for the club but I could at least see where he was coming from... All this speculation from EFC fans that no-one wants to buy us because of the Stadium situation is just... speculation. Clubs like Pompey, Spurs and West Ham have all been bought out yet they all require new stadia...
Ciarán McGlone
24   Posted 10/09/2008 at 16:51:46

Report abuse

Please explain what you mean by ownership?

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.
Bob Turner
25   Posted 10/09/2008 at 20:13:44

Report abuse


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?
Callum Wilson
26   Posted 10/09/2008 at 22:20:38

Report abuse

"Watch this space" lol... my arse, Billy Bullocks!!!
Rich Jones
27   Posted 10/09/2008 at 23:04:27

Report abuse

My god... after what "Blue Bill" said at the EGM about openess, by changing the goal posts about what percentage is needed to now call one, anyone who still trusts this guy is either on the gravy train or seriously gullible. Is there no end to what he can get away with? I'm fucking dumbfounded, the man thinks he can get away with anything.
Gavin Ramejkis
28   Posted 11/09/2008 at 06:36:14

Report abuse

Bob Turner I can’t remember of it was Tom Hughes or Trevor Skempton who has pointed out in the past that the majority of modern stadia structures have a shelf life of approximately 30 years due to the modern construction methods. I’m not an engineer but both of those are and used various stadia in USA as examples. GP was engineered in a completely different fashion and as such didn’t have a design lifespan engineered into it of such a short time. In that case a leasehold length is irrelevant as the building the lease is for won’t last as long as the lease itself.
Bob Turner
29   Posted 11/09/2008 at 08:09:55

Report abuse


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!
Gordon Blair
30   Posted 11/09/2008 at 09:22:16

Report abuse

There is another facet to the New Stadium begets new owner argument, and that is the long term financial suitability of the Stadium.

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.
Ciarán McGlone
31   Posted 11/09/2008 at 10:09:40

Report abuse

The fact that we do not own our stadium is a red herring is it?


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.
Bob Turner
32   Posted 11/09/2008 at 11:16:10

Report abuse

What you’re omitting is that, in order for us to be in that position, will have cost us significantly less than if we’d borrowed hundreds of millions to build the stadium that does have all the right revenue streams - in which case, the price an investor will pay will also increase significantly.

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.
Ciarán McGlone
33   Posted 11/09/2008 at 12:48:47

Report abuse

And what you are omitting - is that we will be likely borrowing a hundred million anyway, to get to a position that may make us a less attractive investment!

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.
Bob Turner
34   Posted 11/09/2008 at 18:32:08

Report abuse

The common answer anyone who is anti-Kirkby gives when asked "what is the alternative to Kirkby" is "it is not our job to do that, ask Bill Kenwright" (yeah, I agree it’s easy to pull apart someone’s suggestion i.e. Kirkby, without having an alternative solution, but that’s obviously the "logic" which prevails on here!).

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?
Rich Jones
35   Posted 11/09/2008 at 19:53:13

Report abuse

Fucking hell, my 95-year-old slightly senile grandmother can see that this Kirkby plan is a joke of a business model.
Bob Turner
36   Posted 11/09/2008 at 20:20:33

Report abuse

Has she seen it then, Rich? If so, I don’t suppose she’s got a copy we could all see, then we might have some real information to work on, rather than innuendo, rumour and supposition.
Gavin Ramejkis
37   Posted 11/09/2008 at 20:39:38

Report abuse

Bob if you build a cheap stadium that’s what you get, if you pay £400m or so that’s what you get, a designed structure. The Kirkby stadium is the equivalent of a flat pack bolt together shot. Expect bare concrete and plenty of it to reduce fit and finish costs, exposed concrete has a lifespan which is surprising short in comparison to covered or brick structures.

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.
Bob Turner
38   Posted 11/09/2008 at 20:49:27

Report abuse

Gavin, you said "the majority of modern stadia structures have a shelf life of approximately 30 years due to the modern construction methods" - presumably what you’re now saying is that it’s only the cheap ones which will fall down within 30 years, the really expensive ones will last longer (how much longer exactly??).

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?
Rich Jones
39   Posted 11/09/2008 at 20:50:38

Report abuse

It's called common-sense, Bob.
Bob Turner
40   Posted 11/09/2008 at 21:04:32

Report abuse

Rich, could you please explain the common sense in representing as fact opinions (which is all anyone of us has without sight of ALL relevant information) as to the state of the business model for moving to Kirkby, without actually seeing it?
Rich Jones
41   Posted 12/09/2008 at 00:20:54

Report abuse

Fuck me, Bob... I?ve read that over and over ? do you mean how can we all come to any conclusion without knowing all the facts.
Bob Turner
42   Posted 12/09/2008 at 06:17:45

Report abuse

Yes, Rich, that’s exactly what I mean
Rich Jones
43   Posted 12/09/2008 at 06:45:31

Report abuse

Oh, I was saying you don't need to tear DK's business model apart to come to the conclusion its a joke, you just need some good old common-sense like my dear old nanny.
Ciarán McGlone
44   Posted 12/09/2008 at 09:09:40

Report abuse


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.
Cal Doherty
45   Posted 12/09/2008 at 09:46:29

Report abuse

I have every reason to believe that BB already has a buyer for his shares PROVIDED HE CAN DELIVER DK.
And the buyer ain?t an Arab, Yank or Ruski ? he?s IRISH!
Chew on that one.
Ciarán McGlone
46   Posted 12/09/2008 at 10:59:55

Report abuse


Could you give us ONE, of those ?every reasons??
Cal Doherty
47   Posted 12/09/2008 at 12:04:08

Report abuse

Ciaran,you will have heard of Peter White,no doubt.He’s best buddies with Robert Earl and has sewn up a great number of deals in recent months.One of his guys has a very loose tongue around Dublin!
Ciarán McGlone
48   Posted 12/09/2008 at 12:41:11

Report abuse

I dont believe that for a second..why would he only buy if Kirkby succeeded?

It makes absolutely no sense.
Cornie O`Donnell
49   Posted 12/09/2008 at 13:30:24

Report abuse

White is a major shareholder in Tesco and has a wide portfolio of retail freeholds.As such,he may well have an interest in aquiring some of the Kikby properties but whether that interest extends to buying up Everton is an entirely different matter.
I don’t think BB mentioned Ireland on his extensive list of international prospects...or did he??
Tony Senter
50   Posted 12/09/2008 at 13:47:55

Report abuse

I think I’m right in saying that White was a partner of Robert Earl in the original (failed)Planet Hollywood.As such he is also a member of the Phil Green Rat Pack and people may just be putting two and two together and coming up with £50M!
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!!
Trevor Sinclair
51   Posted 12/09/2008 at 15:10:39

Report abuse

Sky Sports News reporting this afternoon that one of India?s richest men, (Bhandani?) has pulled out of talks with Newcastle to switch his interest in acquiring a Prem club to Everton. Apparently, he plans to hold talks with Kenwright before the Standard Liege game.
Things are indeed hotting up!
Iain Latchford
52   Posted 12/09/2008 at 16:09:48

Report abuse


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??
Bob Turner
53   Posted 12/09/2008 at 23:10:58

Report abuse


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........


Got that?

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.
Rich Jones
54   Posted 12/09/2008 at 23:42:25

Report abuse

Like I said Bob, it?s called common-sense
Mike Owen
55   Posted 13/09/2008 at 14:33:25

Report abuse

Maurice, you said you fear

"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

© ToffeeWeb

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.