Skip to Main Content
Members:   Log In  |  Sign Up

Kenwright Timeline

By Phil Martin :  02/07/2009 :  Comments (74) :
There's been a lot of debating recently over Bill Kenwright and his pros and cons. I have compiled a list of events, facts and quotes from his 10 year reign as Chairman of this club. People can make up their own minds up on what they choose to believe. But below are the major events BK has influenced while in charge of our club;

1999: Takes over as Chairman of Everton FC.

2000: Everton sell Richard Dunne to Manchester City.

2001: Everton sell Francis Jeffers and Michael Ball .

2001: Everton announce exciting plans to build a 55,000 capacity stadium on the Kings Dock site.

2002 NTL investment deal in Everton falls through, leaving huge problems with Walter Smith having already spent money allocated from this deal.

2002: After a string of terrible performances, Walter Smith is sacked. David Moyes is hired as new Manager.

2003: Kings Dock Stadium plans are put to bed after Everton are unable to find the required £30M shortfall.

2004 Paul Gregg allegedly falls out with Kenwright over the £40M debt levels of the club, and offered to cover the cash needs of the club while re-finance was agreed, subject to Kenwright and his supporter Jon Wood resigning. Kenwright refuses to resign.

2004: Everton make a “substantial” bid for Alan Smith (from Leeds). However it appears Smith had already agreed to join Man Utd. Leeds director Lorimer later states “we have yet to receive any bid from Everton”.

2004: Everton appoint Trevor Birch as Chief Exec. with the brief of overhauling the club's finances and long-term position. Birch resigns 6 weeks later rumoured to be due to a lack of boardroom support for some of his proposals, one of which may have been to look for new owners.

2004: Wayne Rooney — Kenwright declares “I wouldn’t sell him for £50M” ...technically he didn’t lie: he sold him for £20M to Man Utd.

2004: Fortress Sports Fund. Christopher Samuleson is touted as a new investor. However a “last-minute hitch” kills the deal. And FSF is never mentioned again....

2004: Kenwright appoints Keith Wyness as new CEO.

2005: Everton amazingly qualify for the Champions League. The only two major signings made in the subsequent summer are Per Krøldrup and Simon Davies. Everton bomb out of Europe the following season with a humiliating 5-1 defeat in Romania. Everton go on to finish 11th in the league.

2006: Rumours that American billionaire Randy Lerner (with bankers Seymour Price) are looking at Everton and Villa with a view to a takeover. Lerner finalises a deal with Villa as Ellis steps aside.

2006: Everton announce plans to move to a 50,000 capacity stadium in Kirkby. This will be a “world class” stadium and cost “nothing”. It is later revealed that an exclusivity deal with Tesco is signed, barring EFC from entering into any kind of discussions with any other proposals. Further details declare the Kirkby stadium will be “mid-range” and cost “approx £80M”. We are also informed Goodison will be condemned in the near future due to its age and state of repair.

2007: Everton complete their state-of-the-art training facility at Finch Farm. Then immediately sell it and lease it back from a third party.

2008: Wyness resigns as Kirkby Project is “called in” by the government.

2008: Moyes Stalls on new contract. Kenwright declares “Watch this Space”, and “Wow” to describe the players Everton are targeting. Everton sell McFadden, Johnson and release Carsley. Fellaini arrives on deadline day to join Carlo Nash, Jacobsen, and Castillo. No further money is spent.

2008: Kenwright claims he would “sell EFC tomorrow” to the right person. And that he has been working “24/7” for years to find an investor. He also states “I don’t want to be the chairman that takes this club to Kirkby and I didn’t want to sell Wayne Rooney. But I am and I probably will be.”

2009: Kenwright following Everton’s Cup Semi final victory “'There just isn't any money around, and we haven't seen any major investment for a year" ...except Newcastle, Portsmouth, West Ham, Man City, and Sunderland have had recent takeovers.

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

Ralph Basnett
1   Posted 02/07/2009 at 14:55:58

Report abuse

Provided finance for:

Yet another 'have a go at Kenwright' story. Here’s another thread we can start — Knowsley commencing compulsory purchase orders (read the Echo)... whoa is me. Does anyone ever have anything positive to say??

Marcus Dawson
2   Posted 02/07/2009 at 15:47:54

Report abuse

I’m not Kenwright’s biggest fan, but this has to be one of the most subjective posts ever. Why not just call it a list of reasons why you hate Bill, instead of trying to dress it up as a timeline. Embarrassing.
Anthony Newell
3   Posted 02/07/2009 at 15:38:04

Report abuse

Surprised you missed the FSF quote: "the cheque will be in the bank tommorow morning"

On the prospect of new players: "Definitely Maybe" — fucking contradiction in terms.

But the guy will always stay in mind for promising to deliver on the Kings Docks project (I remember him reassuring us of this on Radio Merseyside). Even Tony Blair wrote a letter to EFC congratulating them on their future move!

At the time, an approx investment of £30mill was required. The Echo Arena will always be a monument to what could have been...

Add to this, him being asked at an AGM about critical issues in regard to Kikrby and him turning around and saying he didn’t know anything, you’d better ask someone else!!

So whatever comes out of his gob is either lies or has a tendency to make you wince: "Timmy", "Arteta is the new Golden Vision", "Moyes is the best manager in the world" ...

Everton have advanced in spite of Kenwright, not because of him.
James Stewart
4   Posted 02/07/2009 at 15:47:14

Report abuse

Cahill and Arteta Both cost £2M — hardly great financial backing. Just be grateful Moyes has a good success ratio with picking up bargains.

And the moneies for the other transfers were generated through player sales so i’m not sure what your point is.

Yes, Kenwright is an Evertonian but he has not ever been able to provide competitive transfer funds.
Phil Martin
5   Posted 02/07/2009 at 15:42:03

Report abuse

Ralph, allow me to refresh your memory;

Provided finance for:

Arteta, Cahill.
The £5M needed to buy these was funded by the £20M Rooney, and £3M Gravesen sales.

AJ: £8.5M from our prize money of the previous year PLUS the £9M recouped by selling Krøldrup, Kilbane and Bent.

Fellaini was clealry bought with this season's Sky TV money. Hence DM not being able to sign anyone for money until a few days before the transfer deadline.

Your rent at the end of your post only serves to show your complete idiocy... NOT because you have a differing opinion BUT because it's incoherent bullshit.
James Stewart
6   Posted 02/07/2009 at 15:50:53

Report abuse

"Everton have advanced in spite of Kenwright, not because of him. "

I could not agree more!
Phil Martin
7   Posted 02/07/2009 at 15:51:17

Report abuse

Marcus — Please correct me if any of the above statement/quotes are incorrect.

Subjective? I’m stating facts... but please clarify if you feel I’ve missed something out.
Ciarán McGlone
8   Posted 02/07/2009 at 15:49:13

Report abuse

Bill Kenwright provided cash for all those players! Wow... and there’s me thinking it came from club revenue streams which comes directly or indirectly from the fans!

Silly me.


What about banning EGM’s?
Ciarán McGlone
9   Posted 02/07/2009 at 15:57:55

Report abuse

’Everton have advanced in spite of Kenwright, not because of him’

Nail hit squarely on head, Anthony.
Lee Hind
10   Posted 02/07/2009 at 16:00:43

Report abuse

Phil, it’s subjective because it’s incomplete.

If it contained everything BK had done/sanctioned etc it’d be easier to accept as a timeline.

Ciaran - regardless of the original source of the money, BK still has to sanction the use of the club’s money so yes, he provided the money.
Phil Martin
11   Posted 02/07/2009 at 16:03:34

Report abuse

Lee, then tell me, what exactly has Bill done/sanctioned that has been good for the club? I’m not being arsey or sarcastic, I’m just asking for examples! You can’t say things like "well, we bought Arteta" though. Because it was Moyes who scouted him and wanted him.

Seriously, give me some examples....

Ciaran, I forgot that. Some would argue that was a big event in itself.
Ciarán McGlone
12   Posted 02/07/2009 at 16:03:11

Report abuse

Lee, My bank manager has to sanction any mortgages I take out. To say he provides the finance would be a gross inaccuracy.

Let's not get into pointless semantics. You are fully aware of the point Ralph was trying to make.
Phil Bellis
13   Posted 02/07/2009 at 16:13:57

Report abuse

This gem takes some beating for sheer dumbness.

Why are we not represented with a bigger presence in the City? (questioner brought up the Liverpool store in L1) — Answer: "Only Newcastle fans spend vast amount of sums on merchandising, and out-of-town Liverpool supporters, if we had a store in the city we would only make a couple of £1000s a year through that channel, so I don’t think its worth it. That said I’m only the chairman of the club and a fan like you, I don’t know anything about merchandising, but I do love the club."

Contrast the above with Elstone’s comments on Everton 1, today:
"The City Centre shop is important for a number of reasons. Fundamentally it is right that the Club has a city centre presence; it says something about our ambition and our status in the city."

How two-faced Bobby... best way to enhance our status in the City is to leave it, yeah right!

Gareth Humphreys
14   Posted 02/07/2009 at 16:24:52

Report abuse

I’m 100% with Marcus Dawson on this - you can’t dress it up as something it is not.

Also how on earth can you know that one player was funder by the sale of another when you don’t know the structure of the payments. Guess work at best,

The only thing we all know is that Everton and its chairman are skint.

Ciarán McGlone
15   Posted 02/07/2009 at 16:29:29

Report abuse

Gareth, No-one is being pedantic and saying its the same money -- checking the serial numbers..

The general point is that the money spent on purchases was no more than the money made from sales. It’s a simple point of equivalence -- and one which tell us a lot about this club’s financial structure.
Lee Hind
16   Posted 02/07/2009 at 16:41:36

Report abuse

Phil, I meant that your article would be taken more seriously if it included everything rather than just selected negative elements. Arteta - Moyes may have scouted him and wanted him. BK gave him the money

which leads me to...

Ciaran - pointless semantics or not, the fact is once the club has its hands on money (from wherever) it is the clubs money. It is the board who have the control over that money and the Chairman who has the deciding vote on any use of that money. So yes, perhaps it is more relevant to say the board have provided the money but as the figure head of that board, it’s not beyond the realms of possibility to say BK provided it.

Thats the same as the bank - the bank manager is the one who you see and who provides the money - the club/bank/institution is actually the provider of that money but it’s an accepted term to say the bank manager gave me the mortgage I applied for...
Lee Hind
17   Posted 02/07/2009 at 16:49:36

Report abuse

P.S. I happen to believe BK should clear out asap.

I’m no fan of his but I am grateful it’s him who's skint and in charge as opposed to that clown in charge of Pompey for example who’s skint and in charge — that club is going to the wall!
Phil Martin
18   Posted 02/07/2009 at 16:40:50

Report abuse


Why are you being pedantic? Most deals are structured in the same way. Pay some money upfront and the rest over a period of time. Some fees may include bonus payments too. The fact is IF you sell a player for £5m then on your balance sheet you have £5M of incoming cash. IF you then buy a player for £5M you have an outgoing of £5M irrelevant of how you structure the deal.

Let's stop spliting hairs and get back to point. I’m still awaiting some reasoned argument that isn't based on semantics.
Marc Williams
19   Posted 02/07/2009 at 16:47:28

Report abuse

Ralph Basnett - "until we get a new stadium, wherever that may be"

With all our discount vouchers from our ’Bargain Basement’ / ’Discount’ buying, I’ve heard Lidl & Netto are offering Billy boy a ’Virtually Free’ stadium in Croydon!
Andy Burke
20   Posted 02/07/2009 at 16:50:50

Report abuse

Phil, I do sometimes think that the Kenwright bashers shoot from the hip a bit sometimes and as such, I normally ignore it. Your article does make quite damning reading and has at least made me stop to think a little.

However, I have still I yet to be convinced that Kenwright is guilty of anything more than:

1. Having no money;
2. Having no money;
3. Getting a bit carried away in interviews and saying things he thinks people want to hear;
4. Having no money.
Phil Martin
21   Posted 02/07/2009 at 16:57:56

Report abuse

Lee, I take your point but are you suggesting I credit BK with every signing EFC have made in the last 10 years? Simply because he at some point would’ve given Moyes the thumbs up? If that’s the case, do you then blame him for not stopping Moyes from signing Krøldrup or Van der Meyde? Quite simply, the Chairman rubber stamps the deal. A chairman shouldn't be involved in any other way

Would you seriously expect any Chairman to remain in charge for even a few years if he wouldn't release ANY funds at all?

I made reference to the fact he sacked Smith and hired Moyes. But once again (I ask) — give me an example when he did something great for the club?
Andy Burke
22   Posted 02/07/2009 at 17:03:04

Report abuse

Sorry, I forgot to point out that bringing in Moyes and helping provide a stable club are very very positive points that should not be overlooked by the Kenwright naysayers.

If the answer is just money.... Newcastle anybody? Or Spurs? Thought not.

I am glad that some of the posters on this site are not in a position to be Everton Chairman ’cause we would be in a lot of bother.
Phil Martin
23   Posted 02/07/2009 at 17:05:55

Report abuse


Thanks and I agree he has always been honest about his level of wealth. But does that (and his over enthusiasm) excuse some of the things over the years?

Kings Dock was a cock-up bigtime. Rooney saga was painful for us all. Fortress Sport Fund, NTL, false bids they are all major things AND more importantly not one-offs.
Dave Williams
24   Posted 02/07/2009 at 17:31:12

Report abuse

Used to think being Prime Minister was the worst job in Britain... Who would want to be Everton Chairman during close season? Defo not me — and I bet Gordon Brown wouldn’t fancy it either.
Gareth Humphreys
25   Posted 02/07/2009 at 17:26:36

Report abuse

Phil, First off I don’t like Bill Kenwright as a chairman. I don’t really like him as an Evertonian either but that's a different topic altogether.

My point is that your article is dressed up as a timeline of his chairmanship but then just goes on to slag him off for various cock-ups he has done over the years. I’m sure some pro-BKer could write something along the lines of:

  • Broke transfer record for Beattie/AJ/Yak/Fellaini
  • Oversaw period of stability of club following turbulent period of x number of managers in x years.
  • Oversaw return to European football.
And that is just off the top of my head.

Now me and you probably both think alike on this in that these things happened despite BK and not because of him.

My point is that your article is hardly a FULL timeline of his period in the big chair.
Phil Martin
26   Posted 02/07/2009 at 17:49:12

Report abuse

Thanks Gareth. It isn't just slagging off the guy, it's a history of some of the events that have passed us during his helm.

With regards the transfer records: Well, until Beattie in 2005 (6 years into his reign), our transfer record lagged behind Wimbledon and Coventry City. So hardly a feat to break that! Until we signed Fellaini we lagged behind Sunderland. Again (if £15M is correct) not a lot of money compared to the net spend of clubs around us — even disregarding the Top4.

Your next point regarding the stability is true. He hasn't hired and fired like other chairman. However, beyond stabilising, has he progessed the club, or just been in charge while it progressed off the back of Moyes’s teams' good finishes? Does the kit manager take some credit for us getting into Europe (he is part of the team)? How exactly did BK help us qualify for Europe? Surely the recognition should go to DM, his coaches and players.

I’ve probably missed a few points out from the timeline (both good and bad). But isn't it obvious there are very few clear moments over that time when you can really say "Bill did a good job there"?

Jason Byrne
27   Posted 02/07/2009 at 18:37:31

Report abuse

Kenwright has and will continue to be a great chairman of the club, the progress made under his stewardship has been fantastic — appointing Moyes, the new training ground, I believe the new stadium has got the go ahead and we’ve broken our transfer record year on year, what's more the Moyesiah loves him to bits. Happy days!
Gavin Ramejkis
28   Posted 02/07/2009 at 19:58:25

Report abuse

Ralph et al — the DK hearings and documentation posted emphatically quote that not one of the directors or major shareholders of Everton FC have invested a single penny of their own money into the club. Player purchases have always been and always will be via Sky monies, player sales and any additional revenue generated along the way such as successful cup runs with their television rights. BK and his cronies merely sign the cheques, it’s never been from their own money, never will be.
Gavin Ramejkis
29   Posted 02/07/2009 at 20:00:59

Report abuse

To be honest, you could easily go back further still and add the yes man years on Agent Johnson’s board too, the signing of Alex Nyarko on a contract longer than his permit to work in the country and many many more fuck-ups.
Chris Jones
30   Posted 02/07/2009 at 20:41:27

Report abuse

Bill should go, but only if the right man comes along.

Trouble is, we’ll never know who or when that person comes along. Must admit I do believe he cares but I’m fuckin sick of being lied to.

We should have £20M net to spend this summer but I reckon we’ll end up flogging someone to fund new players.

Without three quality signings, we’ll be midtable at best — if we lose Moyes, we are fucked.
Nathan Ward
31   Posted 02/07/2009 at 20:54:55

Report abuse

Timeline of Bills faults would be a better title.

Whilst I’m no Kenwright apologist, it is a poor article when you fail to mention any of the decent things that have happened during his reign.

By simply picking on his failing (albeit a lot of them) you are being closed-minded. Imagine a United fan doing a timeline of Sir Alex Ferguson and only mentioning that he bought Tabilsi and sold Jaap Stam??

Kenwright is a chairman for a different era — when local men (or fans) took charge and put a little of their money in.

Sadly we are so far behind at least 7 other clubs in the League financially we are always going to be fighting an uphill battle and complaining about our chairman.

I am not convinced that he is refusing to sell but do wonder why we can’t find some backing. However, likewise do we really want to change the club that much and have the mercenaries in??

The Lerner/Villa model is ok but, given Chelski, Citeh & Real’s money these days, even that isn't good enough.
Alan Clarke
32   Posted 02/07/2009 at 21:03:58

Report abuse

Jason Byrne, are you taking the piss?

I just can’t understand this Lerner admiration though. I’ll have a bet with anyone that we finish above them next season.

Chris Jones is spot on, we sell but only to the right person. I still don’t believe Kenwright, for all his bullshit, is refusing to sell.
Nathan Ward
33   Posted 02/07/2009 at 21:10:02

Report abuse

The Lerner admiration is that he bought the club, gave them money, kept out of the way and hasn’t sadled them with the debt for it.

If we finish above them it will be that Moyes has worked his magic again rather than Lerners fault.
Bradley Nolan
34   Posted 02/07/2009 at 21:27:46

Report abuse

So, when Everton sell players, That’s Kenwright?
When Everton buy players, it’s Moyes & the Board??

Hardly balanced reasoning.

Ismael Bondarenko
35   Posted 02/07/2009 at 21:29:57

Report abuse

Jason Byrne, what are you smoking?

1. We no longer own that training ground but have sold it off and leased it back!

2. Moyes was a recommendation of the man BK was loathe to sack, Walter Smith — hardly a result of Bill scouring for potential, and given 5 mins with the man I’m sure even old Stevie Wonder could have seen Moyes destined for good things.

3. Please don't get me started on what looks like being a cardboard box cut-out of a stadium somewhere in the middle of a supermarket in the back alley of a car park in the corner of a dogging orgy in Kirkby.

4. Broken our transfer record multiple times through selling our most saleable assets at higher prices than the records we are credited with braking (Rooney out £30 million at most does not equate to Beattie in £6mill, Johnson in £9 million, both of whom have now gone. Oh and have a guess what? The later was to fund that other record transfer... Fellaini!!!! (Along with the sale of McFadden.) So, if you count giving us back what we earn through player sales, thanks Bill, really fucking generous.

5. Moyes loves him because he kisses his arse and worships the ground he walks on, just as I and every other Evertonian does and should. What's more, DM knows that some Chairman constantly interfere, would sack him at the drop of a hat during a string of bad results, and have no passion for the clubs they run... but, for all his faults, Bill can' be accused of that. However it does seem to make a lot of people blind to the fact that he is a total fuck-up of a chairman with the tongue of a convulsive liar and the spin machine of a present-day Tory MP.

Please take off those blue-tinted specs and take the time to critique the man properly because we all want the very best for our club and unfortunately Bill has fallen way short of the standards that we demand.

Shaun Sparke
36   Posted 02/07/2009 at 21:50:23

Report abuse

Oh dear, Phil, this is poor... in fact, I digress — this is very poor. Whilst you have written some truths and half-truths, you cannot expect to be taken seriously by listing in an ad hoc manner your perceived negative facts regarding our much maligned chairman. If you are going to make such statements and present them as a timeline then you do have to add a little balance. You are of course fully entitled to your opinion but to present your timeline as statements of fact is very crass indeed.
Jay Harris
37   Posted 02/07/2009 at 21:41:54

Report abuse

I am a well known opponent to BK’s reign but do feel we are flogging this one to death.

Bill’s failing as a man and chairman of EFC are legend and well documented but my dislike for the man is I see him as a liar and a cheat.

Funnily enough I NOW don't blame him for the lack of a sale of the club because as I understand it Earl and Green are in total control of that process for whatever deal BK has done with them.
Jackie Barry
38   Posted 02/07/2009 at 22:54:19

Report abuse

Many people forget that Bill Kenwright was on the Everton Board back in 1984. Now I am not going to start a "who’s a bigger fan?" argument, but would it not be a dream for many a fan to actually run the club they support? He obviously had a dream and managed to succeed in that dream — how many of us would like to do that!

I am certainly not his biggest fan and of course want Moyes to be given more money... can you imagine what he would do given what he has achieved with small change! What I am trying to say is that I am far happier now than back in the Johnson days and I know that BK wants Everton to do well. The problem, however, is that he has no money.
Jimmy Hacking
39   Posted 03/07/2009 at 00:19:46

Report abuse

People have raised the point many thousands of times that nobody who comments on this site is genuinely in an insider position, and therefore all "facts" regarding Billy K are merely empty speculation, but I believe at least a few points are irrefutable based on the evidence blatant for all to see:

1)In his 10 years in charge, Bill has done a spectacularly poor job of raising finance for Everton Football Club.

2) Bill loves Everton Football Club and always does his best by it, for better or worse (usually the latter).

3) Bill has ummed and erred and back-tracked like a politician facing the wrath of Paxman.

4) I would rather this man be in charge of my club than 80% of the other Premier League chairmen/owners (OK so maybe this last one isnt a ’fact’...)
Dan Brierley
40   Posted 03/07/2009 at 02:30:14

Report abuse

I fully agree that Kenwright’s tenure has been littered with mistakes. He has made some shocking statements that have not come to fruition. But to suggest he deliberately lied, knowing full well that he would get found out later, is absurd. No man in their right mind would make a promise to media, if they already knew it would fail. Bill’s problem seems to be that he actually used to speak with the media, whereas other chairman don't say a fucking word, so all their shortcomings and failed business cases are not reported through the media.

But since the days of FSF and other such deals, I think Kenwright has learned, and improved. Whether people like it or not, he is part of the reason why our club has moved forward. Nobody can deny that. Moyes has not done EVERYTHING by himself. It takes all the departments of Everton to perform, to see the club advance.

I think over the last couple of years, Bill has really improved as a Chairman. The club has certainly evolved under his leadership. It does appear that the club is now more streamlined and showing signs of some good business dealings going on in the background.

Of course, Bill will never have the funds needed to push us on much further than this level. But he has undoubtedly been an active part of the Management team that provided us with a stable platform, on which to build the next layer on. For all his faults, I believe he has done a decent job as Everton Football Club’s Chairman.

And for those who believe he refuses to relinquish control, even when the club is offered to be bought out by someone with an astute business model and the necessary AFFORDABLE capital to finance it, I think your talking a complete load of bollocks.

Keep doing what you're doing, Bill, and ensure that our football club only goes to someone who shares the passion for our club’s future. For those who think somebody is going to come in and pour millions into our team for fuck all in return, you live in a dream world.
John Maxwell
41   Posted 03/07/2009 at 04:28:43

Report abuse

Reading between the lines at the time, the Fortress Sports Fund was just smokescreen to get Paul Gregg off the Board... This money never existed and the whole thing was at the centre of a battle for power of EFC.
Ciarán McGlone
42   Posted 03/07/2009 at 08:24:36

Report abuse

"If the answer is just money.... Newcastle anybody? Or Spurs? Thought not. "

Bit quick to answer that question there...

If the question is - ’would you want the finances of Spurs or Newcastle at Everton’... then the question is obviously a resounding ’yes’.
Ciarán McGlone
43   Posted 03/07/2009 at 08:26:17

Report abuse

Diesel was 99p a litre two weeks ago.... it’s now 103p a litre.

Wow. I’ve broken my diesel paying record — lucky enough my Sky money went up last month — so I can pay for this record-breaking price out of that!

Bill Kenwright. The man who invented inflation.
Ciarán McGlone
44   Posted 03/07/2009 at 08:42:44

Report abuse

But to suggest he deliberately lied, knowing full well that he would get found out later, is absurd.

How do you know he thought he would get found out later? Don’t be absurd.

Like many fantasists, I would suggest the man may have a certain detachment from reality.
Ralph Basnett
45   Posted 03/07/2009 at 09:05:15

Report abuse


A lot of you are getting quite steamed up here, you need to take a step back.

Love him or loathe him, BK is what we have got. If you are in a position to do anything about how the club is run then do it; if not, enjoy your summer holidays and roll on August when we can carry on moaning properly, when bad boy BK has used HIS Sky money to get a record transfer and not spent it on himself.

ps: Phil and Martin, are you a tag team?
Phil Martin
46   Posted 03/07/2009 at 10:41:01

Report abuse


WTF are you talking about -"half truthes". Please tell me from what I stated above is only half true???

C’mon please tell me exactly which quote and event is only half truthful?

I guess some just want to believe all is right with the world and that everything will work out just fine.

Dan, credit to you for at least explaining why you disagree. However you say BK has improved. What about how the Kirkby Proposal has been handled? After all, Wyness and the board are part of his team.

"World Class Stadium for nothing", exclusivity deal, then leaked reports detailing a "midrange standard" stadium costing £80M. Even if this Kirkby proposal was great for the club (IMO, it isn't) it looks like it will fall through anyway.

"Beatiie can be the new Dixie Dean"... it’s just embarrassing.

Phil Martin
47   Posted 03/07/2009 at 10:47:31

Report abuse

Ralph, I’m not a tag team, and yes, perhaps I need a holiday or just a life. Rather than ranting on internet forums, but for the time being I’m stuck here.

"BK has used HIS sky money to get a record transfer and not spent it on himself."

Sorry, I thought EFC was a business with a balance sheet. BK may own the club, but the club owns the cash that it generates. The Sky TV money is Everton’s — not his. As for breaking transfer records, as Ciaran says above, that’s inflation for you. Just like when you buy a house today it costs more than it did 10 years ago.
Tom Hutton
48   Posted 03/07/2009 at 11:43:11

Report abuse

BK is the chairman whether some like it or not as has been quite apparent through the comments passed on this article.

I, like all of those blessed with being born an Evertonian would love to see BK suddenly have multi billions from some dodgy oil deals, have a loan that would pay off the debt of a Third-World country, be looking to sell for less than half what he paid for it (Barcodes).

He has his faults but how many of us would re-mortgage our house to pay it into the club? I am not a fan of how some of the things have been done but we as a club know where we stand.

BK is a fan, he has no money, the board seem to have no money, we are not apparently at the whim of some American / Russian who may get bored and decide they want their money back NOW.

I would love to see us competing with the likes of Real, Barca and Co but it seems we will continue as we are and wait for all these clubs in debt to the tune of figures that would have crippled some of the banks to finally go under.

Now back to the important use of spare time... purveying the internet, Ceefax, ToffeeWeb, papers for some summer signings which, despite the lack of money, I still look for every day.

Adam Bennett
49   Posted 03/07/2009 at 12:04:40

Report abuse

BK has consistently told us supporters that the club is for sale, and that he’d gladly step aside if the right person came along.

In the application documents that were submitted by the club for the public inquiry into DK, a passage clearly states that all board members will not be selling any of their stakes in the club.

Therefore, he (or the club) has either lied to us fans, or lied to the planning inspector, and I want to know which one.
Alan Kirwin
50   Posted 03/07/2009 at 12:28:29

Report abuse

Adam Bennett, when making such applications it is common practice for directors/major shareholders to make such commitments. It is reassurance that the application is made in good faith and for the intentions as specified, i.e. that they are not planning to jump ship or use the planning application as a ruse.

Most people are aware of this, not least because it has appeared on TW countless times before amongst the 762,395 articles & comments that have been posted by people who’s life revolves around nothing more than slagging off Kenwright.

Don’t worry, be happy.
Adam Bennett
51   Posted 03/07/2009 at 12:50:36

Report abuse

Alan, I note what you say and I do realise that, but what would have happened if, the day after that passage was read out, Elstone turned up at the inquiry and told the planning inspector that the man with the biggest stake in the club has sold it?!

Or better still, the planning application is approved, BK sells his stake, and the new man wants nothing to do with DK?!
Tom Hughes
52   Posted 03/07/2009 at 13:31:39

Report abuse

"Most people are aware of this, not least because it has appeared on TW countless times before amongst the 762,395 articles & comments that have been posted by people who’s life revolves around nothing more than slagging off Kenwright."

Could similar be said about people who’s lives revolve around nothing more than supporting BK even when faced with lists of numerous misdemeanours for which they have have no response?

Unfortunately some are missing the point... BK is only a figurehead, his whole chairmanship has been underpinned by the various characters who helped put him at the top of the pile. He is the friendly Evertonian face to sell you things you wouldn’t even consider otherwise.

None of the oft-called BK apologists can explain the listed debacles and can only continually spout Moyesie’s miracles as pointers for BK’s great contribution.... I ask all of you who would you rather lose: BK or DM? Who really has created the stability?

BK was the one responsible for Kings Dock missed opportunity and has never explained this failure once. He is now totally beholden to the retail men who put him where he is and now need us to make their ambitions work. He has put his name to the multiple deceptions that soil that whole process.

A process that is not Everton-led and therefore not in our best interests. Hence the total lack of any studies by the club regarding all the options for redevelopment/relocation. As an Everton season ticket holder and shareholder I find that a complete disgrace and dereliction of duty — as did the vast majority who attended the last AGM/EGM (remember them?).

These aren’t naysaying rebels without a cause. Just genuine blues concerned about real issues that will affect the club’s whole future.

Chris Walmsley
53   Posted 03/07/2009 at 13:54:33

Report abuse

I totally agree, Phil.

Thing is, we were so brilliant in the ten years before BK turned up

- Always up near the top of the league
- In Europe most years
- Playing great football many weeks of the season
- Our manager winning awards most years
- A club respected up and down the land
- Great youth players coming through
- Loads of youth and full internationals in the team
- Optimism...

Plus, the top division in the 90s was so much tougher than it is in now — 2009

Phil it is easy to put a very one-sided case against anybody to a group of people who don’t know what they are talking about... but we all know and love our club and recognise when somebody has done a lot more good than bad. BK ain’t been a perfect Chairman — show me one who is, or will be in the future...
Brian Waring
54   Posted 03/07/2009 at 14:46:24

Report abuse

When the shit hits the fan, and questions need to be answered, BK does a dissapearing act; when we are doing well, he is falling over himself to get in front of the cameras and tell us how great everything is. For me, the man’s a shithouse.
Chris Keher
55   Posted 03/07/2009 at 15:53:53

Report abuse

I cannot stand crap posts like this.

How can anyone make an informed decision on the subject when the argument is portrayed in such a one-sided manner? This one doesn’t even put the boot in well. The whole point of this website is to improve the fans’ understanding of what is happening.

For the record Bill is skint, we would all love someone else with loads of cash pouring money in but for me I like the idea that we have a skint football romantic with a fantastic manager leading the way we are. And don’t forget 80 odd per cent of the posts on this website 2 or 3 years ago centred around sacking Moyes and Blue Bill stood by him.
Ralph Basnett
56   Posted 03/07/2009 at 16:25:31

Report abuse

Phil... Chill, the money is his, he is the company!!

Now can we please pull the plug on this one — it's going nowhere.
Shaun Sparke
57   Posted 03/07/2009 at 17:51:07

Report abuse

Phil, do you really need me to point out the half-truths? Well for starters if you include words such as “rumoured” as in-

2004: Everton appoint Trevor Birch as Chief Exec. with the brief of overhauling the club’s finances and long-term position. Birch resigns 6 weeks later rumoured to be due to a lack of boardroom support for some of his proposals, one of which may have been to look for new owners.

How can you possibly represent a rumour as a statement of fact?

Similarly you state:

2006: Rumours that American billionaire Randy Lerner (with bankers Seymour Price) are looking at Everton and Villa with a view to a takeover. Lerner finalises a deal with Villa as Ellis steps aside. Another statement of fact Phil?

You also use the word 'allegedly' as in-

2004: Paul Gregg allegedly falls out with Kenwright over the £40M debt levels of the club, and offered to cover the cash needs of the club while re-finance was agreed, subject to Kenwright and his supporter Jon Wood resigning. Kenwright refuses to resign.
Is this an absolute fact? If so why do you cover yourself with the protection of the word allegedly? Is this because you are not totally sure of your facts? In that case I would say that this could be a half-truth.

I am in no way trying to defend Kenwright, what I am merely pointing out to you as that you cannot present a timeline in the way that you did and expect it to be accepted as an accurate representation of factual history.
Frank Nolan
58   Posted 03/07/2009 at 22:39:59

Report abuse

This is the sort of thread that drives me bonkers. There are people out there who seem to put their own agenda way above the interests of the club.

Reminds me of a game towards the end of the season, I think Wigan, when the guy next to me in the Park End spent the whole of the first half abusing Fellaini. Three minutes into the second half and MF glided it into the net and guess what? The guy upped and left.
Tom Hughes
59   Posted 04/07/2009 at 00:01:15

Report abuse


"There are people out there who seem to put their own agenda way above the interests of the club."

Is that a sideways swipe at Green, Earl, Leahy or BK? Who has the bigger "agenda" do you think..... any of them or the Fellaini-hater next to you?
Rob Hollis
60   Posted 03/07/2009 at 23:57:09

Report abuse

Has Everton ever been a co-operative?

Is investing zillions in any football club a worthwhile venture on many levels?

Any team should be self financing. If it is not then it is over-borrowed.

City and Chelsea are now identified by their owners, not their team or fans. To a lesser extent, that is also the case with Liverpool and United stopped giving a toss about Mancunians some years ago.

The more cash somebody pumps in, the less you and your tickets matter. The club becomes a toy of its owner. Better to borrow from a bank than an individual.

Rather than disuss our owner, the debate should centre around the Premier League and Sky turning our game into an international product to be flogged to the highest bidder. We will even change the rules and use a ball that diverts itself away from a goalkeeper to make the game more televisual, stop the ability of defenders to make a fair tackle and laud cheating sods like Ronaldo for 'winning' free kicks.

Getting a billionaire owner is not going to give us our game back.

Chad Schofield
61   Posted 04/07/2009 at 09:01:40

Report abuse

Let me try to answer your questions:

Has Everton ever been a co-operative?
No, but there is a strong link with another super market giant

Is investing zillions in any football club a worthwhile venture on many levels?
Real Madrid and AC Milan are prime examples of what can be done... Oh and who were that team who beat us in the FA Cup Final? It really depends on which level you’re looking.

Any team should be self-financing. If it is not then it is over-borrowed.
True, but this is simple economics. If Oxford United payout more on transfers and wages etc than they receive through various revenue streams then they are in breach of this. Obviously most clubs do not live like this as their longer term survival/competitiveness/dominance directly correlating to what they can invest, so they borrow all they can to maximise this. Whether Real have gone too far time will tell, or indeed if Arsenal got the timing right in building their fantastic stadium to the short-term detriment of their ability to spend on players.

City and Chelsea are now identified by their owners, not their team or fans. To a lesser extent, that is also the case with Liverpool and United stopped giving a toss about Mancunians some years ago.
I agree to a point, but this is again a short-term thing in regards to a club’s history — we were the "Mersey Millionaires" in the 1970s... alas we haven’t moved on to being billionaires. Do businesses look out for their customers? — yes, the good ones do within reason... but again to what degree is subjective, and perhaps the reason Manure don’t care about mancs says more about the makeup of their supporters/customers.

The more cash somebody pumps in, the less you and your tickets matter. The club becomes a toy of its owner. Better to borrow from a bank than an individual.
Are you seriously trying to suggest that BK does not see us as his trainset? Regardless of the amount of money injected, this really depends more on the individual themselves who is providing the money. It’s also arguable to how much influence those with tickets have. When things are going very badly then it is apparent but the investor(s) is seeing their investment rapidly falling in value anyway and, once the club looks like going down, the investor has to make the decision on whether they quick sell for the same value as a relegated side and remove themselves from the fans’ wrath, or hold on, hope they ride through and then make a business decision of whether to invest more or sell under potentially less pressure. Investing of course does not necessarily mean that the owner has to dip their hands into their own pockets, they can mortgage/sell other assets.

Rather than discuss our owner, the debate should centre around the Premier League and Sky turning our game into an international product to be flogged to the highest bidder. We will even change the rules and use a ball that diverts itself away from a goalkeeper to make the game more televisual, stop the ability of defenders to make a fair tackle and laud cheating sods like Ronaldo for ’winning’ free kicks.
I don’t necessarily see why we can’t talk about our owner, but you do raise some interesting points. If the PL wasn’t what it is then we would not have the stars that littler the league. If you look at less "competitive leagues" such as the SPL where it’s generally Celtic/Rangers then you’ll see less money pumped in, so they do not attract the Ronaldos of this world. Equally clubs like Ajax suffer from being in a less attractive league which hardly helps their self-sufficiency, and they are a shadow of their former selves.

Obviously we now have the super-hyped Champions League, but it is those from the more attractive and heavily sponsored leagues that have a chance of competing — the others become best of the rest, but at least they get to play accross Europe. Just being able to offer CL football is not the be-all though, because if you’re knocked out early and are then going to spend the rest of the season playing against Levadiakos and such in The Greek Super League, you’re unlikely to get that next big money move, or actually be pushing yourself in the window of opportunity which is your playing career.

Sky etc have invested heavily into the PL, but they expect a return. If there return dwindles then so does their input. Obviously deals are tied up ahead, rather than year by year, which is what fucked Setanta.

The tinkering of the game is demanded to get bums on seats — generally in front of widescreen TVs. Worldwide viewing figures are what get the sponsorship money in, they couldn’t give a shit if you’re watching CL, PL, Serie A, or child porn so long as they can shove their product in the faces of their target market. They pay dependent on how many they can reach out to.

Those conspiracy theorists may look at the recent Confederations Cup whereby the Americans came so, so close against the mighty Brazil and our South African hosts being given the opportunity to iron out any last minute car jacking shenanigans — oh, and narrowly being pipped by the current European Champions, Spain.

It saddens me that we have bent over to alter the game... and you’re right about the "gamesmanship" that is rewarded — but people will point to the Germans who are masters of this and how they’ve faired in tournaments over recent years in comparison to our blundering attempts on the international stage.

Getting a billionaire owner is not going to give us our game back.
No, but the game’s evolved and a billionaire would give us a chance at competing.

Rob Hollis
62   Posted 05/07/2009 at 01:12:35

Report abuse

Love the first answer!
You are right about the gamesmanship, but what I mean is that it is now obvious and pathetic. I use Ronaldo as an example because he behaved like the wrestlers used to on Saturday afternoons and more worryingly referees accept it like they used to during that show. Slowly but surely we are getting more show and less sport.

The point about United is that I work in Manchester and so know a suprisingly large number of fans who have given up because the ticket prices and way they are allocated has made ’their’ team the property of the supporters of football fashion and not the Mancunians. Although I have no love for their team I do think this is a genuinely sad situation. When we beat them I want to see real Mancunians suffer.
Tony Dooves
63   Posted 05/07/2009 at 22:16:22

Report abuse

Here’s a question: If we were relegated or finish in the bottom third of the table next season, would it be Kenwrights fault?

If we finished 3rd and got into CL would it be because of BK?

There was once a study done by psychologists and they told a story about a decision made by a big company boss — when the story ended in which environmental damage was done due to this decision the majority of people said it was the bosses fault — no doubt about it. But when the story ended with positive environmental effects, the majority of people did not contribute this to the boss — even though everything else about the story was the same.

It is always easier to see the problems and give blame to someone than to give them credit.

So I guess no matter where we finish BK will always be a poor penniless twat who is the reason if we fail but never the reason if we succeed.
Chad Schofield
64   Posted 05/07/2009 at 22:43:56

Report abuse

Rob, nice wrestler analogy... it is true, but unless FIFA, UEFA, The FA make examples by using video technology to punish players in the same way as they do in terms of other fouls, then I’m afraid that it will not only continue but increase. In fairness, Arteta gets praised for "drawing fouls", and obviously we had AJ who couldn’t get a penalty if he was hacked in half in the area after Wenger’s comments. Anyway, I won’t let this response become a monster!!!

However, Tony, let me point to a quote from The Departed that perhaps David Moyes could use at Bill should things go awry:
"I’m the guy who does his job. You must be the other guy."
Tom Hughes
65   Posted 05/07/2009 at 23:11:46

Report abuse

Conversely, football chairmen always take the plaudits when there is success, and simply sack the manager when the team fails.

Ultimately, who would you most attribute the current team’s performance to? Or put it another way who’s loss would affect that the most?

I’ve said before, this attempt to personalise the issues just muddies the water. If key decisions are attributable to certain individuals we should feel able to criticise or question them...... I’ve lost count of the number of whole threads that itemise a whole series that do need addressing!

Tony Dooves
66   Posted 06/07/2009 at 05:41:15

Report abuse


I agree with you, for most other teams but not for BK and Everton.

I can’t recall BK ever being the kind of chairman who takes all the credit (but I’m sure there is many examples where he did) but my overall impression isnt one of the classic chairman profile lapping up the power. Also I disagree about sacking the manager and I guess thats the single most important contribution he has made hiring and keeping Moyes — despite the baying for Moyesie's blood on here many many times.

I put the success down to a determined manager who is a true leader taking the best out of the squad his chairman can afford. I also put the success down to a chairman with not much money but with the confidence to stand behind his manager and allow him the time to grow.

Of course money is the key for the future, so BK probably isn't but I personally don't want to watch Everton change manager and squad every few months at the behest of a trillionaire somewhere — I prefer the team we have now and the romance and passion we go about trying to make our dreams.

I am not a BK apologist or even supporter just a stupid old romantic who enjoys the ups and downs of the best team in the world. And the team isnt just the 11 men on the pitch — it's all the EFC staff.
Phil Martin
67   Posted 06/07/2009 at 09:30:37

Report abuse


You mentioned two quotes above you class as half truthes because the words "alleged" and "rumoured" featured. That is because these statements were taken word for word from several different local news sources. Now if you dont believe me and just think I made these up, then I’m happy to publish the web links.

Tony, "a chairman with not much money but with the confidence to stand behind his manager and allow him the time to grow"... I don't really believe Moyes has given Kenwright any reason to do otherwise. DM had his wobbly moments as any manager has over 7 years. But it doesn't take a genius to realise knee-jerk sackings of the manager wouldn't be a smart move.

I’m happy not to post another comment or article on this site until September 1st (after the transfer window closes) if in that time BK backs Moyes and gives him the cash to take us on. I’ll send in a full and unreserved apology. However, if there’s another cashless summer — with maybe a single last minute signature. Then I’ll want to know what happened this summer. We can't blame "Dithering Dave" stalling on a contract this year. As this could be the summer DM and some of our top players start to look elsewhere, to further ambitions.

I’ll leave you with his last quote, wherein Bill Kenwright states “I don’t want to be the chairman that takes this club to Kirkby and I didn’t want to sell Wayne Rooney. But I am and I probably will be."

Does that sound like a man in control of his club/business?
Shaun Sparke
68   Posted 06/07/2009 at 11:18:57

Report abuse

Phil, It matters not if they were published in the Holy Bible, Encylopedia Britannica or the Shoot magazine. You still cannot present them as accurate facts if they are only rumoured or alleged.
Chad Schofield
69   Posted 06/07/2009 at 12:35:36

Report abuse

By stating they’re "rumoured or alleged" means that Phil did not try and label these events as facts... merely the fact that they were alledged or rumoured at those times.
Shaun Sparke
70   Posted 06/07/2009 at 12:44:38

Report abuse

Phil presented his article as a timeline. This by definition means a series of factual events. If the factual events are articles in publications then I stand corrected. But I suspect that is not what was intended.
Chad Schofield
71   Posted 06/07/2009 at 13:13:50

Report abuse

Shaun, Semantics ... A rumour can form part of a timeline. Last season, we were rumoured to be linked with Moutinho. The event is the rumour and therefore can form part of the fact. Why we did not sign him can only be guessed at unless you know all parties' reasons, and even then they might be toeing the line e.g. David Moyes may say what Everton would like him to say and Moutinho what Sporting Lisbon would like.

So, as to exactly why Trevor Birch resigned in 2004 after only 6 weeks, can only be guessed at unless you know him personally and well enough for him to be completely open and honest with you.

So again, by using the words "rumoured or alleged" Shaun is not presenting what was rumoured or alledged as an actual fact, simply pointing to the fact that was rumoured/alledged/best guess/supposed reason. There’s nothing overly far-fetched — he’s not claiming that Bill Kenwright is a reptilian humanoid or that David Moyes is the son of God — so perhaps if you’ve heard other explanations of these events then perhaps you could present them rather than making further allegations that Shaun is somehow trying to mislead everyone.
Tom Hughes
72   Posted 06/07/2009 at 13:35:14

Report abuse

" Also I disagree about sacking the manager and I guess thats the single most important contribution he has made hiring and keeping Moyes — despite the baying for Moyesie’s blood on here many many times."

The club’s/BK’s perseverance with Moyes was a very wise choice, but it was hardly a choice tested by a "baying for blood" -type campaign. I don’t recall a single anti-Moyes chant, and let’s face it, he set down a pretty good marker in his first season, certainly enough to buy him more time than the few blips he subsequently had, especially given the scale of transition he was trying to perform with zero funds, hardly the inspired leap of faith you suggest. The patience shown to Smith was far greater and longer-lived, was that so wise? Hardly indicative of a hire-and-fire type chairman with lots of options.

I agree that I too would much prefer to see an Evertonian in charge and our progress to be affordable and incremental if possible. Not sure how possible that is beyond the point we’re at, but that would be the ideal since there are serious pitfalls with the alternative.

The point is, however, I do not believe that BK is driving this ship at all. He is merely the Evertonian frontman for people with a whole host of other priorities. These advisers/friends as BK calls them have pretty much underwrote his whole chairmanship.

This has been demonstrated clearly by the whole power-struggle at the time of Kings Dock and the appallingly skewed process regarding the Kirkby Stadium issue whereby the retail factor was given total precedence despite yielding so little.

BK has put his name to both these debacles to camouflage the ulterior motives that prompted them, and has somehow managed to avoid direct criticism from many for whom these decisions could have a long lasting and detrimental effect. Evertonian or not, 5th in the league or not..... that is a disgrace.... these issues are fundamental and will affect our club’s whole future long after Moysie tests whether the grass may be greener elsewhere.

Shaun Sparke
73   Posted 06/07/2009 at 16:35:42

Report abuse

Chad, you need read through your reply, it seems a little confusing. I won't patronise you by sending you a link for the word patronise, it's not a very adult thing to do in a discussion is it?
Chad Schofield
74   Posted 06/07/2009 at 21:53:21

Report abuse

You’re right Shaun, it isn’t very adult and thanks to MK for tidying my response, as it was actually worse!

The point is that had Phil (not Shaun), not used the words "rumoured" or "alleged" then he would have been presenting the rumour as fact. He didn’t.

He presented an event, that happend. Then he pointed to what was alleged or rumoured to be the reason that the event happened. So if you know another reason as to why the event took place then please bring that up.

Add Your Comments

In order to post a comment to Fan Articles, you need to be logged in as a registered user of the site.

Log in now

Or Sign up as a ToffeeWeb Member — it's free, takes just a few minutes and will allow you to post your comments on articles and MailBag submissions across the site.

© 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

Recent Articles

Talking Points & General Forum

Pinned Links


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.