I found this article on KEIOC. With the Decision about DK about to be released, It gives a fair interpretation I think, of the consequences of the move, and being from KEIOC an analysis of Blue Bill and his position as Chaiman. Viewed through Keioc eyes of course, it is never the less a good read.
Sean Joyce, Posted 12/10/2009 at 07:45:56
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 12/10/2009 at 21:01:27
I wish Bill would just come out and say his hands are tied by Green if it's true and then us fans could do something about it. Imagine banners all round Goodison with "Go Home, Green" on? Or "We Want Green Out"?
The media would then be forced to look into the activities of the club and Green himself could be forced to speak... GET GREENY GONE!
2 Posted 12/10/2009 at 21:41:40
Even if Kirkby went ahead, it wouldn’t be ready by 2011 would it?!
3 Posted 12/10/2009 at 22:36:07
4 Posted 12/10/2009 at 22:40:34
5 Posted 13/10/2009 at 08:08:48
6 Posted 13/10/2009 at 08:35:17
In case anyone is unaware, emails are extremely easy to ’falsify’ (I hesitate to call it falsifying as it is so childishly easy to do) and virtually impossible for a third party to verify (lack of personal key notwithstanding).
While I would agree most emails are poorly guarded, interception is unlikely which leaves either access to one or other parties email account, or direct access to a filing cabinet in one or other’s office.
These ’emails’ are unlikely to be worth a second thought.
7 Posted 13/10/2009 at 09:35:06
Wyness tried it with his "Goodison will be denied health and safety certificates" argument. This has since been looked into by several different well informed fans and totally disproved. And this has been reported on in several mailbag threads. If Bullens Road is not safe in 2011, why is it safe now? It’s a ridiculous argument probably started by Bill and Robert in anticiaption of the Kirkby decision.
8 Posted 13/10/2009 at 09:52:47
Do you think some expert has poked around the stadium, and predicted that it’ll last another season, but absolutely no longer?
9 Posted 13/10/2009 at 09:45:50
Wooden stands? These are not Wooden stands! The upper Gwlady’s street has similar wooden content, was that not mentioned too? If not, why not? Most Victorian/Edwardian theatres have even greater wooden content, will they all be going?
The fact is, the Upper Bullens's and Upper Gwladys’s wooden content is not structural and can be replaced with steel or composite decking with little re-enforcement required, or the wood specially treated for fire protection and/or sprinkler systems incorporated... none of which would be prohibitively expensive in comparison to complete replacement.
I would be interested to see this legislation or hear who the people in London are, or just even an actual time to do a playback of the radio show.
10 Posted 13/10/2009 at 10:11:59
If the club had not got any loans for new playing staff in the past 6 years, would there be articles in praise of the good management of the club, although we might be still relegation perennials or even a Championship side? It's all very well saying we shouldn’t move. But nobody can give any insight on how we are meant to achieve success by staying at GP.
11 Posted 13/10/2009 at 10:37:12
Surely Everton would know about this? Surely the studies they carried out on Goodison highlighted this? Why leave it till the week of the decision for this to be aired!
I only hope Blue Bill has a Plan B secretly hidden away in a copy of an old match programme featuring the Cannonball Kid that no-one knows about, or else we're even more fucked if DK doesn't go through!!
12 Posted 13/10/2009 at 10:39:55
13 Posted 13/10/2009 at 10:37:22
We’re missing the point somewhat though. I was at the KC Stadium to watch Hull get hammered by Everton the other week. The views of the game were superb. When I go across to Everton, whilst the atmosphere is superb, the experience is not, all Evertonians are being sold short and have been for a long time.
Getting a ticket at the arse end of the Bullens Road is a less than gratifying experience. It's like being in the Boys Pen all over again. I would prefer to see Everton stay in a redeveloped Goodison but a move to Kirkby will almost certainly be better than current facilities.
It’s wrong to call KEIOC luddites though. They have argued their case with dignity and with the best interests of the club at heart. They have some serious supporters (eg, Ann Adlington) and have asked some searching questions of local politicians and the club’s management. Their scrutiny will I believe provide a better outcome for the supporters.
14 Posted 13/10/2009 at 10:51:18
Typical fucked-up spelling of luddites from a poltroon.
Wait, don’t tell me, you were in a rush and you hit the wrong key — can happen to anyone... right?
(Tip - If you’re going to be a smart-arse, be smart as well as an arse.)
15 Posted 13/10/2009 at 11:14:48
16 Posted 13/10/2009 at 11:08:18
I seem to recall a lenghty article from the man himself...
17 Posted 13/10/2009 at 11:36:12
18 Posted 13/10/2009 at 11:43:20
When you next go to Goodison, ask around, get your fellow-fans' views on whether they’ll ever go to Kirkby, renew their season ticket there, pick & choose selected games, etc...
19 Posted 13/10/2009 at 11:49:54
Or did you actually mean to type; "To be fair, the board are not using the GP falling down as the reason for moving.......ANYMORE?."
Have no doubt - the ’Goodison Park is falling down’ myth, used not only by the board as one of the main propaganda thrusts pre-ballot, but also by the CEO of Tesco, a well known ’Professor’ and the leader of KMBC, was nothing more than a cynical ’means-to-an-end.’
One that sadly it seems, too many Evertonians fell for - hook, line and sinker.
20 Posted 13/10/2009 at 11:51:02
"Yet the reason why we are accruing debt, is that Goodison Park simply doesn't support a club trying to play Champions League football."
Proof? Or just your opinion? Are we playing Championship footy now? What club has the least years outside the top flight? Is it really all GP’s fault? If so, who’s responsible, the Taylor Report was over 17 years ago?
"Its all very well saying we shouldn’t move."
No-one is saying we shouldn’t move (so where does that come from?), especially not KEIOC who even promoted an alternative site... one of several they identified.
What they did say, however, is that there is great value in what we have already, and this should not be underestimated; it is the whole history and dare I say branding of our club. This is not always so readily transferable meaning that the redevelopment option, and any proposed new sites, need serious consideration, not secondary status in an outsider-led project which DK always will be for EFC!
"But nobody can give any insight on how we are meant to achieve success by staying at GP."
Funny how you fail to mention that the club and all its experts have been continuously unable to give any insight into how a stadium at the edge of a city can possibly be more accessible/convenient as a more central one! This alone will have as big an effect of attracting or deterring fans and therefore the success of any venue as any other factor...
Or question how a stadium with just 20 boxes represents such a massive departure from what we have now? It is readily demonstrated that GP can be all and far more than Kirkby can ever be for similar outlay. The club have never demonstrated otherwise — even after a massively expensive public inquiry and years of working on it!
21 Posted 13/10/2009 at 12:15:23
"Yet the reason why we are accruing debt, is that Goodison Park simply doesnt support a club trying to play Champions League football."
Apologies, misread Champion’s League...
However, I still fail to see how/why DK’s facilities (which are nothing remarkable) and location (which contradicts all modern stadium planning philosophy) deserve your plaudits... especially when even the very best-case scenario yields little more than a few £m per year.
22 Posted 13/10/2009 at 12:17:16
Whatever the view on Kirkby, can we please resist the notion that Goodison is OK. It’s not. Quite where the money would come from to change Goodison is another matter.
I revert to my long held position. The only viable, financially & morally acceptable solution is a Merseyside stadium, shared, co-funded & attracting orders of magnitude more investment, marketing rights, cultural & sporting cachet than either of two not-quite stadiums.
The lack of any progress on that front is the real affront.
23 Posted 13/10/2009 at 12:42:50
I agree it is vastly outdated but it will do until a proper viable alternative can be found. Quite where the money comes from for Merseyside United’s stadium is another matter.
Ciaran, that was my inital point. Your memory is better than mine. Can the editors find that thread?
24 Posted 13/10/2009 at 12:47:11
25 Posted 13/10/2009 at 12:33:06
"Whether Goodison is actually about to collapse into dust or not is irrelevant."
Well, why has the tactic been used? Why even mention "collapse"? More dramatic effect in the absence of substance perhaps?
"What is relevant is that it is a shit hole, out of date & unfit for modern day purpose. It’s a fire hazard (wooden tiers), over 20% of its capacity is restricted view."
Is Shithole a genuine technical term in stadium design parlance? Can the issues you outline be remedied rendering the shithole factoring to zero? Would 1 or 2 new upper tiers and new roofs do precisely that? Could that possibly be more expensive than 50,000 new seats in Kirkby? Do you actually know how these old upper tiers fare in a sightline/viewing-distance/ viewing- angle analysis? Fact is, it would appear you haven’t really thought this through....
"I revert to my long held position. The only viable, financially & morally acceptable solution is a Merseyside stadium, shared, co-funded & attracting orders of magnitude more investment, marketing rights, cultural & sporting cachet than either of two not-quite stadiums."
Was that your long-held view at the time of the ballot? Or just the one that you acquired after KEIOC unconveniently dismantled your previously rashly held view that you voted for.... ie, the one the club thrust on you!
I agree, the lack of progress is the real affront... perhaps that has something to do with the intentionally limited and myopic process adopted in the first place.
26 Posted 13/10/2009 at 12:57:47
What is being brought into question, with regard to good or poor management, is the decision to opt for a plan, at the expense of any other, which appeared, even in March 2007, to be highly questionable in relation to its deliverability — the size of the associated development conflicted with planning policy on such a massive scale that it would clearly attract major opposition and a government inquiry.
The management (the board) considered no alternatives as it was stated time and time again that nobody else was offering the vital £50m cross-subsidy that Tesco were providing.
Some people questioned the costings, the finances, the suitability of the location, the reality of the £50m cross-subsidy and the financial benefit of the proposed stadium to EFC; all were dismissed. Calls to develop a serious alternative were ignored.
Here we are in the last quarter of 2009, we have seen the opposition to this scheme, we have had the inevitable public inquiry, it has been confirmed that there is no £50m cross-subsidy and we await the decision from the government to see if Everton can have a stadium that they will have to fill with 47,000 per game to deliver an additional £6m per annum.
The only people responsible for delivering additional revenue to enable us to compete at the highest level are the management and board; if they’ve backed a loser with Kirkby, that’s their responsibility and theirs alone — to suggest unpaid fans should do their job for them is unreasonable.
27 Posted 13/10/2009 at 12:43:14
Naar sorry, not letting that go.
I’ll tell you what I WILL resist, the idea of allowing Goodison to be criticised and DK to escape with a "..Whatever the view on Kirkby"
And here’s why.
Coz everything I’ve read about the ’design’ and location of DK, suggests IT will be a shit hole (nb: all shit-holes aren’t old!)
Plus everything I’ve read about the travel says total chaos.
Also, whether Goodison is about to collapse is absolutely NOT ’irrelevant’.
If it’s not about to collapse (and it’s not!) we don’t have to move anywhere RIGHT THIS MINUTE
As for it being wooden, therefore a ’fire hazard’, talk about scaremongering!
Funny, I never heard about it being a fire-hazard when people were flinging fag-ends all over it for a hundred years, but now there’s no smoking it IS!?
(bet you LOVE the nanny state!)
Anyway, YOU might think Goodison is a shit hole, I don’t and am more than happy to stay.
You use the word ’progress’ but the fact is, there is NO way to guarantee it.
Goodison, Kirkby or a shared-ground?
Fact: All three options could bring us just as much failure as success.
28 Posted 13/10/2009 at 12:58:51
How does, amongst other things, promoting a whole different site equate to being scared of change? Honestly, the pro-Kirkby argument has long since evaporated and their only inputs now have descended to playground quality, with absolutely no substance whatsoever! Hopefully, these are just the death knell of a fundamentally flawed project that lost any "credibility" years ago.
29 Posted 13/10/2009 at 13:19:02
30 Posted 13/10/2009 at 13:28:29
So wouldn’t moving be a big risk to our finances? Only if we can increase external finance can we make a real difference, and going further away from the centre of our city is surly not the way to go.
31 Posted 13/10/2009 at 13:20:16
There; not nice is it?
You can’t have ever travelled in the cattle trucks known as football specials, been to Old Wembley, stood on the Kop in the 60s or on the Elland Road cinder ’terracing’... You’d have wet yourself.
All the above nasty things have been addressed and alleviated in the intervening years.
And, if GP is a shithole, who takes the responsibility for its degeneration from the best club ground in England? — Me? You? All Evertonians? Or, perhaps, successive short-sighted, self-interested, unambitious Boards of Directors?
32 Posted 13/10/2009 at 13:27:58
"I know you are, but what am I?"
I pointed out your ’ludite’ post was smart-arse without the smart and you respond with...er...the same.
Still, good to see you spelled latter with two T’s.
33 Posted 13/10/2009 at 13:43:36
34 Posted 13/10/2009 at 14:09:13
One thing I don’t understand, is that why the Board are going to Kirkby, if there are other viable opportunities in areas that would generate more revenue and keep the fans happy? Some people have suggested it is because the board want to make money out of a subsequent sale of the club. This contradicts the point, by suggesting they will make more money by moving to a less profitable area where most of the fans won't go.
35 Posted 13/10/2009 at 15:37:16
The vote — A SHAM! Supporters who go home and away, but could not afford a season ticket, did not get a vote, which was bent anyway. I have arguments with pro-Kirkby Evertonians but not one of them go the match.
IF YOU DON'T GO, DON'T BLOW.
ps. BK, lets hear from you; BUYER not INVESTOR!
36 Posted 13/10/2009 at 15:57:54
But having a stadium with a big capacity is different to getting bigger crowds. If we move to a KC Stadium/Reebok/JJB Stadium bowl we will lose at lot of atmosphere. I went to Bolton v Everton last year and it was like a cemetery. This will put off fans from coming (comfy seats or not).
We get good attendances now even despite the x-thousands of obstructed views in GP. However we NEED a solution which allows greater commercial returns WITHOUT sacrificing the soul of the club. Kirkby, from my understanding, does neither.
37 Posted 13/10/2009 at 16:11:38
"Clarence Dock (reprise)
Posted by Coakley on October 13, 2009, 1:04 pm
A few things:
What I posted last night came out of a conversation my brother had with Peel’s development director during a time when Peel were putting through planning documents for Wirral Waters.
For those that are unaware, Peel are the people who built the Trafford Centre and they own the dock estate in Liverpool (the old MDHC).
They have a 50-year masterplan for Liverpool’s Central and North Docks called Liverpool Waters.
They need something down there to drive investment and have been trying to get a 60-storey tower developed with Chinese money.
What’s changed regarding development down there is they have been speaking to LCC about a stadium down there and they have been examining the effect a stadium has had on Melbourne's Docklands.
What my brother was told....
1. Kirkby knockback is expected by the council and club are totally resigned to it in November.
2. Council will get the club and all parties (publicly) round the table ASAP. Multiple agencies will be involved including the NWDA.
3. Initial planning docs will go into LCC planning dept for Liverpool Waters with initial proposition for a waterfront stadium in late Dec, based partly on previous feasibility study by MDHC.
4. NWDA will pay grants for rail station at Vauxhall and surrounding works. Peel will construct the stadium, the terms will be identical to Kirkby in terms of EFC paying a peppercorn rent for 999 years (we effectively own the site). Grants will be triggered to go towards construction of stadium based on it being a brownfield site in Vauxhall that qualifies.
5. Everton’s end of the deal will be no more than the outlay for Kirkby, possibly less, due to the multiple enablers that would be on board and grant money. There's room for retail and hotels. Most interestingly, the Shanghai Expo next year was mentioned as a possible source of investment in this.
That’s what our kid was told... take it how you want. I’m taking it with a pinch of salt until I see a spade hit ground."
Make of that what you will....
38 Posted 13/10/2009 at 16:32:08
Tom Hughes/KEIOC, It's great to know you are there, THANKS, GREAT STUFF.
39 Posted 13/10/2009 at 16:29:32
I'm a builder and all this scare-mongering about safety certs is bollocks, put out by the propaganda machine that is all things bad about our club.
Kirkby is the biggest fucking mistake we will ever make, we need to flush Greeny out and hopefully the truth will follow... why there are some idiots still trying to defend our chairman and DK beggars belief; get real, Blues, and let's demand the answers and get Green out of the closet. Kirkby, my fucking arse!
Green is known as an asset stripper and renowned for making a quick buck out of someone else's struggling business, he will flog Everton after DK, if we ever go there, which I won't and don't believe Everton will, and him and him alone will make a fortune and we will be fucked.
Mark my words, Green is the one.
40 Posted 13/10/2009 at 16:49:32
41 Posted 13/10/2009 at 16:51:33
One thing I don’t understand, is that why the Board are going to Kirkby...
Neil has been telling you the answer for months (seems like years): "It’s all we can afford" ©Neil Pearse 2009
He might be right but I believe it’s because the Board dropped their collective knickers for the first company to offer them a way out of their own incompetence.
42 Posted 13/10/2009 at 17:15:03
43 Posted 13/10/2009 at 17:32:12
My gut feeling is they were blinded by the possibility of an easy (they thought) ’virtually free’ short-term fix for their own shortcomings and neglect, without regard for the long-term welfare and progress of the club.
They (Kenwright, Green, whoever) have refused via the ’exclusivity’ agreement to CONSIDER any other option. Jesus, the only project I’ve ever heard of with no Plan B.
Perhaps the real answer to your question is they gain an escape route, that’s all.
44 Posted 13/10/2009 at 17:40:26
So, that ends the discussion?
No, didn’t think so...
45 Posted 13/10/2009 at 17:46:23
If not, then these documents are unverifiable. If they did, then fair enough, but we should know about it.
46 Posted 13/10/2009 at 17:31:10
Might it be that one of the major shareholders, ie, the one that has underwritten all their continued existence on the Board, cannot get his shops if we don’t go to Kirkby? Or could it just be the same level of incompetence that allowed the King’s Dock debacle?
Those that think big business is immune from absolute cock-ups are deluding themselves, especially given what has happened in the world of banking for instance...
However, the question you pose cannot and should not detract from the main issue that Kirkby is of no real merit (both in terms of the stadium and the location), is therefore potentially damaging to the club’s whole future, and in real terms is no better than what we could have at GP for the same outlay or perhaps even less at a central and more attractive investment area which could generate far greater enabling and other funding.
All Kirkby could have in its favour is that it is new... hardly an argument for going there!
47 Posted 13/10/2009 at 18:04:50
Anyway I am not here to criticise other people’s views. My opinion has been voiced many times on here. It doesn't need to be repeated on each thread. As said before, people have established their opinions, and nothing will change that now.
We have to wait for the decision. And then, I am sure there will be plenty to discuss.
48 Posted 13/10/2009 at 18:22:01
Goodison is a dump and falls further behind with each passing year. The view in the back rows of the Lower Gwladys Street or Lower Bullens must be the worst in the Premier League and amongst the worst in any of Europe's top leagues.
I wasn't there but I'm told by others that the section given to visiting fans going to Fiorentina was poor. That may be so but ask yourselves are we really best placed to complain??? Look at what we offer to our visitors.
Bottom line in my view is we HAVE to move and move soon. Whether it's to Kirkby or onto Peel owned land at the docks or elsewhere, it has to be better than what we have all allowed Goodison to become.
As for Harry’s statements about how his brother or someone managed to illicit all this information about Peel Holdings and NWDA coming on board to ’assist’ with a new stadium on the Docks, if I'm not mistaken, the Tories are going to do away with the NWDA if (when) the win the next election. In which case they'd best start building pretty quickly!!!! If it's true, it's another good reason not to vote for the Tories!!!! Not everything Blue is good!!!
49 Posted 13/10/2009 at 18:32:28
I never suggested who passed them to KEIOC, only that they’re in their possession and have been for quite a time; genuine, I assure you — do you doubt KEIOC’s word?
I’ll just remind you who stated that the plan was undeliverable due to massive planning regulation departures? Who stated that the finances didn’t add up? Who stated that the £50m cross-subsidy didn’t exist? Who stated it was far from the Deal of the Century and that it wasn’t effectively free, nor would it be served by the best transport plan in the northwest, and who told you that it would be called in?
Finally who told you the complete opposite? I don’t think you need to questions KEIOC’s integrity do you?
50 Posted 13/10/2009 at 18:39:27
Sean what you call a moanfest is actually a debate. The debate is not just about the stadium, but the club’s future. We all want a solution to the stadium problem, but we want the right solution. The past two years have seen the club's supporters analyse the possible solution of Kirkby and they found it to be wanting in many areas.
We don’t necessarily have to move, we could stay at GP and improve it, but we must make the right decision. If we get it wrong, the club will suffer a terminal decline.
51 Posted 13/10/2009 at 18:54:20
I'm not saying Kirkby is going to be paradise but a decision has to be made one way or the other and SOON. The usual suspects on here moan about every ’thread’ and they are the ones my ’moanfest’ comment is aimed at. They know who they are!!!!
52 Posted 13/10/2009 at 18:59:25
53 Posted 13/10/2009 at 19:13:46
I could give you a hand and say the worst seats are at the back of the Main Stand near the church... again, these probably number in the few hundreds, say another 800 at most... but what would be the point?
You’ve already made your mind up: Goodison is a dump, we’re all moaners. Not Goodison is the historic and iconic home of Everton Football Club that has had the least spent on it of ALL major stadia, with the richest history of ANY, something solid that we can build on, and that we can get to...!
Add a tier behind and above the upper Bullens and the same at the Park End, joining at the corner, and we can eclipse the maximum capacity at Kirkby by several thousand.....
Suspend an executive tier beneath the top Balcony to easily beat the meagre 20 boxes at Kirkby, and renew all roofs to get rid of practically all obstructed views by losing the rear 3 rows of the Lower Gwladys Street and the rear 7 rows of the Lower Bullens which will be reprofilled to a form a steeper single-terrace stand with the paddock. Any remaining obstructions to be sold at nominal price or given away as freebies to kids...
Can it be done for £78m? Easily!
54 Posted 13/10/2009 at 19:54:20
55 Posted 13/10/2009 at 20:04:24
56 Posted 13/10/2009 at 20:23:12
The fact is, Kirkby is wrong and Goodison is perfectly adequate for us to stay in while the club makes the RIGHT decision.
57 Posted 13/10/2009 at 21:11:00
58 Posted 13/10/2009 at 22:05:01
59 Posted 13/10/2009 at 22:25:29
Attendance?? St James Park got (gets?) 55k every week for years, how much have they had?
In broad terms, the only thing that does support it is the fact of the money you get from actually doing it on a long-term basis, that and pots of debt.
Short(ish) version: whatever the question is, the answer IS NOT Kirkby (on any number of levels).
The fact that, Re Green et al, there are, as they say, "more questions than answers"... and that is part of the problem.
IF(!) the money is there/can be found to do DK, THEN WHY NOT ANY OTHER OF THE MANY SOLUTIONS??... There is a fair list, some more palatable than others, and, no doubt, some more practical in almost any combination.
Without the money, NONE are do-able. The real kicker is the actual WILL to do them and the vested interests that drive that will down the direction it goes.
Hypothetically (big ask), money questions aside, again NOT a blank cheque wish-list, but what given the will to do it and an assumption that there will / is some money out there... make two lists.
1) what you would prefer?
a) DK... as it seems to be;
b) DK... but done properly, like it said on the original packet.
c) Walton Hall Park.
d) The Loop.
e) Another City site.
f) Gradual redevelopment of GP.
h) WE get a bite of Stanley Park, flip the basic footprint corner over corner from the Church, the back of the Park End becomes ’New Gwladys St’. The other three sides of the redevelopment can be built, while we still use GP. We move into the three sides while the last quarter is finished, GP donated or whatever for whatever. (Yes, I know it is maybe a bit wish list, but what is needed is men of daring and vision and the will to do it... a la 1892... and
2) what is practical... find a match and away you go.
Cue Martin Luther King.
60 Posted 14/10/2009 at 14:20:15
61 Posted 14/10/2009 at 14:21:10
62 Posted 14/10/2009 at 17:07:12
63 Posted 15/10/2009 at 10:38:02
Holmfirth 1 - 0 Tesco
Good on ya!
Add Your Comments
In order to post a comment to the MailBag, you need to be logged in as a registered user of the site.
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.