ToffeeWeb - Season 2009-10

The Mail Bag

Selling club

Whether we like it or not, this summer has shown us that unless something drastically changes, we need to be a selling club if we are to compete. There is general agreement amongst fans that we do not have an awful lot of money to spend in the transfer window. Youth players, loans and cheap deals have gotten us so far. Moyes has wheeled and dealed his way to a number of top six finishes. This summer we got nowhere as clubs with more money and no salary caps seemed far more attractive to potential targets.

All of a sudden we have £20M+ plus and there's talk of getting four senior players in before the window slams shut. We talked a great fight about keeping Lescott but once money came into it, he was gone, we somehow kept to the moral high ground and grabbed the cash.

At the start of the summer, we were all flabbergasted at the idea of selling Lescott. You have to wonder what the reaction of fans would have been if the club had taken the £15m at the start of the summer when it was offered. The club may have gotten away with it easily enough.

Buy two or three decent senior pros with that money at the start of the window, push the idea of the younger players being brought through, buy a couple of more players with the money we would usually have towards the end of the window and put it about that we have a squad much higher on quality going into the new season.

Fans would have been divided and new players or not, we would all have been talking about selling one of our best players. However, it still would have had the benefits of the money and the players. Now, we have still sold the player, high ground or not, it may be too late to buy anyone and I just have a bitter taste in my mouth.
Kieran Fitzgerald, Dublin Posted 25/08/2009 at 18:19:54

back Return to the Mail Bag

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

Dave Wilson
1 Posted 26/08/2009 at 06:14:55

Come on, Kieran, you can't be surprised. Moyes has played a blinder here. We got £7-8 million more than City first offered, we sold him late enough to have no chance of spending it all improving the squad. The terminology is important. We are not a selling club, our morals are far too high for that, we are "victims".

Under the current regime this has become the Everton way, Kenwright has robbed Peter and can now pay Paul. Lescott and City are the Villains of the piece and Davey has his injustice to rage against, a no-lose situation. Sound familiar?

Our season can now begin. Full Steam Ahead!

Michael Lynch
2 Posted 26/08/2009 at 08:13:35

I agree with your point Kieran about having to sell players to raise funds. But all through the summer weve been told we have funds to spend. I reckon it was around the £10-12 million mark. So with the sale of Lescott, assuming the board release all the funds, are we now talking around £35 million to spend on transfers? Or is it more likely Blue Bill has been telling us porkies again all summer? I suspect the latter.

One more thing, £24 million for our second best defender is awesome buisness. Good riddance Joleon.

Ciarán McGlone
3 Posted 26/08/2009 at 08:28:01

Didn’t Moyes say that if he’d got the £24 mill offer in June then it would’ve been over then?

Of course we are a selling club — so is every club at the right price... But I would dispute your suggestion we’ve kept any moral highground — the suggestion from Moyes above is that we were simply whoring ourselves out at the right price, and rightly so...

Pity we won’t see much more of the money getting pumped back where it belongs... I’d guess that the Russian is the ’big signing’ to soften the blow; anybody else who joins (apart from a centre half) will be merely peripheral...

Michael Coffey
4 Posted 26/08/2009 at 08:45:00

I may have not got the numbers quite right, but my guess is we have made as much from our transfer dealings in 2009 as Chelsea did from their European Cup run?

Isn’t it the case that (probably by default than design — Kenwright can’t be that intelligent, can he?) Everton have a different business model? Without the base capital available to buy quality to break into the European big time, the only logical strategy is to develop new talent and sell it on, when its value is proven, to the big boys.

The analogy is small Oil and Gas exploration companies, who do this all the time. The drawback is i) you run out of cash if you have a run of "dry holes" ii) you’ll never become a Shell or a BP — but you will make a nice earner for the owners.

Tony Williams
5 Posted 26/08/2009 at 09:02:37

I agree that Moyes probably had a figure in his head and would have sold straight away if that was matched but I disagree with your point saying that "but once money came into it, he was gone". That was not Everton’s fault, it was the player's when he handed in his transfer request. I do believe Moyes wanted him to stay but as soon as LeSulk started playing up, he was gone and it was a damage-limitation exercise.

I am sorry to see him go, he was a cracking player... but time moves on and he is now a Citteh player. No doubt he will get booed when we play them but I say thank you Lescott, I don’t blame you for going but you could have handled it better.

Mark Wynne
6 Posted 26/08/2009 at 09:24:45

"....this summer has shown us that unless something drastically changes, we need to be a selling club if we are to compete."

The fact is that selling clubs do not compete. The Sky money has been squirreled away for Kirkby and best we can hope for is a projected £5 mil a year, if we fill the Tescodome.

Nice one Bill!

Bradley Nolan
7 Posted 26/08/2009 at 09:43:06

£15 Million was the original offer (an offer accepted by Arsenal for Toure don’t forget) + by making Lescott hand in a request it saved a loyalty payment.

It would have been better if the transfer happened earlier but there was a very significant financial gain made by holding out (but we’ve shipped six points & you have to factor that in). In my opinion, Lescott is very much over-rated, remembering he was a left back this time last year and looked suspect in the big games.

Can’t say I agree with the ’selling club’ tag though. Are Man U a selling club because Ronaldo wanted to leave? Are Arsenal or Liverpool? If a player wants to leave, you get the best price you can. Hard to describe the whole affair as good business, more like making the best of a bad situation.

Alan Clarke
8 Posted 26/08/2009 at 09:57:21

Is anybody shocked by this with Kenwright at the helm? I actually applaud Moyes for getting that amount for Lescott. If you don’t have money then you have to do what a lot of managers do in the lower leagues and wheel and deal. That means selling to buy. We need strengthening in 4 or 5 positions and the money received from Lescott will help do that.

BUT this should not ditract from the fact Kenwright is an absolute shithouse who has invested less in the club than me this summer. Moyes has had to find his own money for transfers by selling one of the club's better players. Kenwright has failed to release any funds for his manager despite 4 players being released from the wage bill, and an estimated £60+ million in league placing and cup run money, Sky money and Kitbag money being received by the club. Just imagine the uproar had Moyes bought no-one this summer, which could easily have happened if City had given up on Lescott.

Steven Connor
9 Posted 26/08/2009 at 10:05:36

Mark Wynne, your contention that selling clubs do not compete is a little too simplistic.... That logic dictates that this season then United (Ronaldo), Liverpool (Alonso), Arsenal (Toure & Adebayor), Everton (Lescott), and Villa (Barry) will be unable to compete because each of them has sold key members of their first team for considerable fees.

Everton are by no means the only club who are currently having to sell before they can buy. Arsenal have bought Vermalean and Arshavin for over £20M in the last six months but recouped all of that through the £30M acquired from Man City this summer. Liverpool have spent £37M this summer on two players but recouped £30M of that by selling one of their most influential players.

United have not even come close to using the £80M they got from Madrid, possibly it is being used to cover their transfer outgoings for the last the three years. Even Spurs have funded some of their spending by offloading (the admittedly peripheral) Bent for £12M.

The fact is footballers come and go.... when we sold Rooney for £10M down we went on to achieve our highest placing in the league for the last 20 years. There is fundamentally nothing wrong with bringing on a player you bought for £5M and then selling him for £24M. Simply saying that selling players, whatever the circumstances and potential profit is wrong and means a club can’t compete is too simplistic.

The key is to ensure that the money is reinvested in strengthening the squad to compensate for the loss of the players you have sold. That of course is another matter and it is how that is done over the next week that will ultimately determine our ability to compete this season.

Dan Brierley
10 Posted 26/08/2009 at 09:48:41

To say we need to be a selling club to compete is a total contradiction! How can you sell your best players, then expect to compete?

Now if you sell players for £24 million, and replace with an equally capable player for less, then that shows a well run and effective football club that can sustain itself, without the need for huge debt.

The term ’selling club’ is known as a club that sells to survive and pay back loans. You can see two good examples in Portsmouth and West Ham this season. Everton are not a selling club, our debt is manageable. However we are at the limit of the envelope, meaning that we don't make a profit, which would give us the ability to buy new players.

Ciarán McGlone
11 Posted 26/08/2009 at 10:52:31

It’s not a contradiction Dan... it’s a fact.

If you have no money to compete and someone will offer you excessive money for a player — which then allows you to generally improve the team (as we did with Rooney) — then you are effectively selling club.

There is no contradiction if the team is at a higher standard after the sale and acquisitions from that sale revenue — than it was before the sale.

However, this may not be the case for us this time... I doubt we’ll spend anymore than £15mill... and we certainly won’t spend over £25mill.

Dan Brierley
12 Posted 26/08/2009 at 12:02:06

So Ciaran you think there is no contradiction, when replacing Wayne Rooney with Marcus Bent? How the fuck is that a higher standard?

For the record, EFC did not want to sell Rooney or Lescott. Nor did they need to in order to survive. Both players expressed a wish to move on, and were subsequently sold. Selling clubs WANT to sell players in order to get the money. Rooney and Lescott were both part of the managers future vision, neither were considered saleable assets to strengthen the squad.

Kieran Fitzgerald
13 Posted 26/08/2009 at 12:50:56

Dan, we are a selling club, get used to it. Does it mean we’re not ambitious, no. It means that we are financially in a corner at the moment and it is the most practical solution. To buy decent players and to have competed with Spurs, Villa et al this summer in the transfer window, we needed the money that the Lescott sale brought in.

At the start of the summer, the arguement about team spirit and Moyes slow but sure approach to team building was in favour. Us standing still over the summer, with a wafer thin squad and not a pot to piss in, while every single one of our rivals, including Fulham now as well, strengthening their squads have blown this arguement out of the water.

Unless we get serious investment, or until all of our promising youngsters mature into seasoned pros, we need to sell to raise cash. I don’t like it any more than you, but it’s a fact.

Alan Clarke
14 Posted 26/08/2009 at 13:14:30

What you have to ask Kieran is why we’re in that fucking corner in the first place? Years and years of mismanagement by that fat luvvie at the top.

Karl Saegaran
15 Posted 26/08/2009 at 10:24:47

Just caught on ESPN Asia flashed in bold leters while JLo was giving his interview. For real?? 40 million pounds?? That's a big kill! Can anyone confirm?

Michael Kenrick
Editorial Team
16 Posted 26/08/2009 at 13:31:44

Karl, I think if anything, they were saying 40 million dollars (US), which is approximately what the undisclosed fee of 24 million pounds Sterling would get you in greenbacks.

Ciarán McGlone
17 Posted 26/08/2009 at 13:35:38

No Dan, I don’t think there’s a contradiction in the scenario I’ve already explained.

Your example of Rooney and Bent is not an indication of whether the team improved overall... I’ve no idea why you’re singling out players when we’re clearly talking about the team...

Suzy Whitehead
18 Posted 26/08/2009 at 14:00:04

Alan Clarke,

When are you giving me my cash?

Suzy

Matt Traynor
19 Posted 26/08/2009 at 15:45:31

Kieran,

"we need to be a selling club if we are to compete"

Oxymoron.

Alan Clarke
20 Posted 26/08/2009 at 16:26:38

Suzy, I was holding out hope that Moyes might still pull the plug!

Read the banega post where Ciaran’s lost his rag, I’ve answered your call.

Kieran Fitzgerald
21 Posted 26/08/2009 at 16:55:00

Matt, unfortunately there is no other way of raising the cash that we need to compete. There is absolutely no sign of investors, we’re barely keeping our overdraft in place and our revenue streams and turnover aren’t producing vast profits. This thing of suddenly having 10m - 15m at the end of August is nonsense. All the better available players are gone and we end up in a scramble spending cash we can ill afford on over priced players.

Perhaps using the phrase selling club was ill conceived as I can see from the posts above that it can give the wrong impression when used in the context I used it in.

However, I think in ways that it does sum up the fact in some ways that we unfortunately do have to sell some players to raise cash. It was easier when there were fringe players that we could sell and not miss in terms of their quality. Unfortunately we were going to have to sell an Arteta or a Lescott this summer given the amount of cash other teams were spending.

Neil Humphrey
22 Posted 26/08/2009 at 16:30:13

Many recent posters have helpfully been able to translate transfer rumours from foreign websites thanks to the power of the Internet. Well, I recently found a site that translates Lescottese. Let's see what it makes of his comments at his unveiling for Citeh. Here's the original article:

Joleon Lescott has admitted that he joined Manchester City to challenge for a UEFA Champions League spot.

The England international completed a big-money move to Eastlands from Everton on Tuesday, bringing an end to a protracted transfer saga.

He joins a City revolution intended to help the club break into the Premier League's top four this season.

Lescott admits it is that ambition which drew him to Mark Hughes' side, and he feels he has made the right move in order to further his career.

"Everyone outside of the top four are aiming for the same thing and I just feel, at this moment in time, that Manchester City are better equipped to get there quicker than Everton," he said.

"It's been well documented that I wanted the move and I'm delighted it's been done now.

"It's been exciting. I wanted the change. I've moved to Manchester City and I'm glad it's over."

Lescott also responded to criticism from former boss David Moyes, who questioned his attitude, claiming the Toffees boss was wide of the mark.

"I was disappointed in the comments, I feel they're inaccurate," he said.

"I'd like to address them at a later date and talk more positively about my move here.

"I don't think I disrespected any of the players. If I did I apologise."

Now the translated version:

Joleon Lescott has admitted that he joined Manchester City to make sure he had enough £50 notes to wipe his arse with.

The England international completed a daylight robbery move to Eastlands from Everton on Tuesday, bringing an end to a long. boring and annoying transfer saga.

He joins a City gravy train intended to help rip the heart of English football.

Lescott admits it is the fucking massive wheelbarrows of money that drew him to Mark Hughes's side, and he feels he has made the right move in order to further his aim to own a fleet of gold cars.

"Everyone outside of the top four are aiming for the same thing and I just feel, at this moment in time, that Manchester City are much richer than Everton," he said.

"It's been well documented that I behaved like a complete cunt and I'm delighted to have joined a bunch of other cunts and mercenaries."

"It's been exciting. I wanted the change in my bank balance. I've moved to Manchester City and I'm glad it's over."

Lescott also responded to criticism from former boss David Moyes, who questioned his attitude, claiming the Toffees boss was wide of the mark.

"I was disappointed in the comments, but they're totally accurate," he said.

"I'm a chicken-shit so I won't say anything back - I just want to talk more positively about my move here."

"I think I disrespected all of the players. I apologise but they're still going to kick the fuck out of me when we play Everton."

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.

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.