The club have sold one player and allowed four players to go out on loan during this transfer window. The manager is not happy and I find it hard to share his belief that there were no players of quality that he wanted to bring in to the club.
I do not want to accuse Moyes of lying; he isn?t; he has to abide the rules regarding data protection and confidentiality, the position at the club is the worst of them all. He knows what?s going on, but he can?t reveal it, lest it harms his career in football management.
Many supporters are rightly asking why the smallest squad in the league has allowed five players to leave and replaced them with no-one of any note. The answer is one that will shock, but not necessarily surprise you.
The club's credit rating has fallen from 30 to 12 out of 100. Cash transactions are preferred and a rating of 1-20 is labelled ?caution ? credit at your discretion?. The club is now unable to get any credit.
Before Christmas, the club took out another loan from Barclays to cover the Investec loan. This should be of great concern to all of us. The Investec loan, for those that do not know, was borrowed against next year?s revenues.
Why this is happening is immediately obvious: the club has run a tight ship for many years, but the business plan of the Kenwright regime (asset utilisation) has hit the wall. The debt repayments from the 14 existing mortgages, in combination with declining revenues, are responsible for the current difficulties...
?This asset utilization and disposal plan that has been adopted by the board, it can?t be sustained forever can it??
?No? came the reply.
?It?s inherently unsustainable, won?t the assets run out and the loan repayments overwhelm the clubs ability to provide sufficient funds to obtain better players??
?We have a highly qualified finance team and a good relationship with the bank. That wouldn't be allowed to happen,? replied Robert Elstone.
That good relationship with the banks appears to be at an end. Sadly, it gets worse, according to my source. This is the ?murder? that a certain Echo journalist should know all about; if he doesn?t....
The club has spent the past month trying to prove to the auditors that they have sufficient funds to continue as a going concern; that is why the accounts have been delayed. The wage bill has increased and match-day revenues are down (attendances are down to around 34,000). Phillip Green is no longer acting as guarantor for the loans that the club has taken on; he has switched his interests to West Ham for obvious reasons. The banks want a reduction in the unsecured overdraft; to achieve this, Elstone has been told to take £6-8 million off the wage bill and raise £10 million net in cash.
Moyes is unhappy with this? and with good reason, his squad is going to be smaller and a key player will be sold to raise the £10 million in the summer. Chairman, CEO and Manager have been at each other?s throats? there very nearly was a murder at Goodison this January.
It can?t continue anymore ? the club is close to administration, there are two options open to the board: rebuild or sell up.
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 05/02/2011 at 02:59:10
Also, having looked at the attached documents, which are as you described, there are also positive elements not mentioned in this piece. Have I read them wrong?
2 Posted 05/02/2011 at 03:08:37
Things will only get worse if we don't excel on the pitch. Should we not beat Chelsea in the replay, there won't be much reason for the day trippers to attend anymore this season.
The board need to take a good look at themselves. They are killing us.
3 Posted 05/02/2011 at 03:34:11
Naturally, some will continue their ostrich approach, others will demand sources etc which a lot of us for reasons that should be bleedin' obvious are not able to divulge.
It does seem that the recent "investment" in the contracts of the existing playing staff is starting to bite. The publication of the accounts will be interesting in terms of how much of this is hidden in non-defined expenses, although future liabilities should be identifiable. Look forward to the analysis of that.
4 Posted 05/02/2011 at 03:38:14
Can you briefly summarize the positive aspects of the report? Reading financial statements, prospectus, reports, et al is just torture for some of us...
Seems worrying. At a bare minimum the drop in credit rating is alarming and concerning.
5 Posted 05/02/2011 at 03:46:21
The second one, about the Barclays mortgage doesn't seem to tell very much (obviously not criticising, just that it seems vague, although I didn't study it too closely).
I agree that it looks like the financial situation is pretty dire, although I guess one thing that should be noted is the historic change in the credit rating. From April 03 to April 04, the credit rating falls from 82 down to 0. Then by December 05 it is back up to 72, and then plummets again to 0 by March 07.
I apologise if there is a very simple explanation to this that I am overlooking, it just appears that the credit rating has fluctuated so wildly in the recent past, that maybe it isn't as good an indicator as first thought?
Either way, the obvious reluctance to spend anything is testament enough to the lack of funds.
6 Posted 05/02/2011 at 04:28:58
Someone must know what the actual total amount owed is and what the annual Interest payable is.
This is what being a limited company is all about, well the 'when it turns to shit' portion.
It's the debt that is limited.
Bill's Shares, or who ever he is fronting for, might only be at the end of it all worth the paper they are printed on, or as curiosities on ebay. That's the bad news.
But the good news (relatively speaking) is that, Hey, I'm not liable for the £80mill or what ever.
Tony l'Anson's TrustEverton.com takes one meaning of the word.
If you take the other meaning, add a ? then the answer is I'm afraid.
NOT FUCKING LIKELY!
7 Posted 05/02/2011 at 08:07:07
David, you might be right, but I think we should wait for the official accounts before perpetuating this rumour, we need some cold hard facts about the 2010 accounts.
8 Posted 05/02/2011 at 08:18:08
9 Posted 05/02/2011 at 08:49:45
10 Posted 05/02/2011 at 08:53:09
11 Posted 05/02/2011 at 08:55:07
Where is your rebuttal evidence to back up the 'nonsense' claim?
12 Posted 05/02/2011 at 09:15:09
It doesn't take rocket science to work out that something is drastically wrong with the club financially.
13 Posted 05/02/2011 at 09:23:28
I am only telling you what he told me yesterday but, if any of you know these suppliers, then I am sure you can check. Possibly the beginning of the end if we can't get credit even on these items...
14 Posted 05/02/2011 at 09:40:33
15 Posted 05/02/2011 at 09:42:39
Just one question: Why did we have such a wild fluctuation between credit scoring in the mid-2000s? I know there were the rumours that the sale of Rooney stopped us going under but as I remember we had been skint for years prior to that?
16 Posted 05/02/2011 at 10:01:02
17 Posted 05/02/2011 at 10:07:42
Wages cut by firesale
Another annual loss
Another appearance of the unknown operating cost
Debt greater than worth
Do I win a coconut?
18 Posted 05/02/2011 at 10:22:28
I thought you have "every confidence" in the superb leadership, planning and business acumen of Uncle Bill. What could you possibly be worried about?
Me, I'm worried about getting 15 more points ? let's hope we can start by overcoming the superstars of Bloomfield Road.
19 Posted 05/02/2011 at 10:30:18
It's worth noting a lot of other clubs actually have a worse credit rating than ours but the significant factor is we have no guarantor for all our debt except the club's own income. The accounts will show expenditure is far more than income and that is why we are staring into the abyss. What David's article shows is the only way we can pay off debt is by taking on more debt. This is a truly awful downward spiral that Kenwright cannot stop.
What an absolute bastard Kenwright is. If he wasn't an Evertonian you'd understand that he'd just be a businessman in it to make money but he's supposed to be a blue and he's used the club to make himself rich. The pavements to Kirkby were paved in gold for him. On a personal note, I'm delighted his shares are now worthless. Any buyout now would only be for the value of the debt, there is no way Kenwright will make any money and it serves him right.
20 Posted 05/02/2011 at 10:25:01
Obviously this is not what people would want but, if the club were that desperate for cash, surely they would have had to cash in on Baines, Fellaini or Rodwell for a reduced price in the transfer window that has just ended.
21 Posted 05/02/2011 at 10:43:06
What would be great would be to stave off relegation, be at least 10 points clear, go into admiistration (thereby the board gets kicked out) but not be relegated with the 9pt deduction (assuming it would be this season and not next that it hits).
Board out, most debts cleared, new owners, implement a business plan that is actually realistic and then start the rebuilding process.
First thing though, get 3 points and start getting clear of the relegation zone.
The accounts need to be published latest 28th Feb I think, so not long left to find out to state of the club ? 9 months ago!
22 Posted 05/02/2011 at 10:50:33
The loan also buys Kenwright time to try and find an 'investor'. There will be no plan beyond this season and all those players you mention will be sold in the summer.
23 Posted 05/02/2011 at 10:45:21
24 Posted 05/02/2011 at 11:02:28
25 Posted 05/02/2011 at 11:12:09
However anyone with even half an understanding of finance would be insane to pay that for equity in a company with no assets and no ability to generate any form of capital which is not already earmarked to an array of creditors.
If the team can get 9 points above the relegation zone (which on current form, looks unlikely) they should go into administration.
26 Posted 05/02/2011 at 11:20:10
27 Posted 05/02/2011 at 11:52:29
28 Posted 05/02/2011 at 11:53:41
Never mind these accounts and the overwhelming mismanagement of Everton FC, he is a "Blue" so he strangles the life out of the club with one hand because his love for Everton won't see him use both hands and finish the job swiftly.
This once great club is on its knees through his stewardship. Wake up, people...
29 Posted 05/02/2011 at 11:44:33
@ Tony When can we expect an update on the trust (how it will be set up and how to join etc). Any chance of a new article?
30 Posted 05/02/2011 at 12:22:24
31 Posted 05/02/2011 at 12:24:38
Moyes also hinted at a breakthrough in the chairman Bill Kenwright's search for new investment. "I would hope that a solution to what we need to do is not too far away. I can't guarantee it, but I would hope that's the case."Probably nothing, but we can but hope!!!
32 Posted 05/02/2011 at 12:29:30
Plus that utter bore Mickey Blue Eyes makes my eyes want to vomit. He talks some proper plop.
33 Posted 05/02/2011 at 12:25:57
Tony I'Anson ? I'm 100 % behind what you are doing with one reservation, the name, I'm not sure Trust Everton is quite right. Maybe The Evertonian Trust or something similar, my concern is that Tust Everton can be undermined very easily by events, god forbid the club did actually go into administration then people may ask themselves, "Trust Everton? not bloody likely, they went under and lost all sorts of money!" I think the current name suggests too much of a direct link with the current setup; just my thoughts.
34 Posted 05/02/2011 at 12:37:05
35 Posted 05/02/2011 at 13:04:54
By the way, when you go back to Blue kipper, look out for some of their merchandise, I believe they do a great deal on blue-tinted specs.
36 Posted 05/02/2011 at 12:58:31
37 Posted 05/02/2011 at 13:11:17
Stephen Kenny, the info in those documents is widely available, and doctoring the documents would only make room for naysayers.
38 Posted 05/02/2011 at 13:11:05
39 Posted 05/02/2011 at 13:25:20
I mean are they rated simply on what they spend and what they bring in (giving them a rating of minus fuck all) or is the Russian's personal wealth taken into consideration (giving them a rating of 100).
As I know minus fuck-all about finance (makes my brain melt), I'll be more than happy with responses along the lines of "It doesn't mean THAT you prick" followed by an explanation (preferably one that a child of four could understand).
NB: I have explained before I am a dyscalculiac (it fucking IS a real... erm... thing).
40 Posted 05/02/2011 at 13:28:19
The most vital thing to any club is your wages-to-turnover ratio. Ours is pretty damn high at the moment, and seems to have been addressed in January with some players getting loaned out or leaving.
The debt has increased, which is unsurprising. We have not had a positive cashflow, so we need to borrow to bring in players. Salaries have also increased proportionally with the increased turnover from Sky.
Talks of administration are complete rubbish. Administration happens when creditors ask for their money back. This is not the case.
41 Posted 05/02/2011 at 13:46:39
?There is not a chance of it,? he said yesterday. ?I am too big a football man [to walk away]."
Yeah that and the fact that you earn £65 grand a week and have no pressure from your employer on where you finish.
42 Posted 05/02/2011 at 13:37:24
In the last year, we have given new improved contracts to five players and had two rejected. We have brought in new players and only shipped out players who are not good enough or don't want to play for the club. We turned down a bid of £6 mill for one player because we thought he was worth more than that; that to me is not the dealings of a club going under.
I'm not a big fan of Kenwright by the way.
43 Posted 05/02/2011 at 13:54:33
This is Kenwright's problem ? his asking price is too high for a club in such a perilous position such as EFC.
44 Posted 05/02/2011 at 13:43:08
1. The amount of times you've defaulted on a payment or overdrawn an OD. (If you don't default for a while, the credit rating slowly increases.)
2. The amount of assets of you have: money, property etc.
Of course there are all sorts of rational and highly technical calculations involved. But those are the two pillars on which credit ratings are built.
So, debt is a like that escalator thing at the end of the TV show 'gladiators'... In the end, you run out of steam and fall on your arse. It's planned that way!
45 Posted 05/02/2011 at 14:14:30
He said our stadium is a big obstacle in terms of revenue from attendances etc. He said there are 2 or 3 serious interests in the near future and whilst he is too long in the tooth and has been burnt before, he cannot put a time limit on it.
I did not catch all the interview, and whilst there was some lip service, he seemed quite hopeful.
Coupled with the Guardian article maybe there is a little hope, although I won't hold my breath.
46 Posted 05/02/2011 at 14:07:18
The deadwood, hangers on and all the nobs will be flushed out and I for one would support a real Everton even if we do a Leeds.
47 Posted 05/02/2011 at 14:28:29
What I have gathered from all comments is that we are in a perilous position and it now makes complete sense on why DM has had his hands tied in the recent transfer markets. I am dreading the scenario of relegation (not happened yet, I know) but, with a bit of luck and some players finding their form, we can survive and then hopefully get BK moved on as he is killing us and he needs to go asap.
I'm off to find a link for the game and hopefully see us take 3 much needed points otherwise the R word will be getting ever closer and then we will become a LEEDS/PORTSMOUTH and that does not even bear thinking about!!
48 Posted 05/02/2011 at 15:21:56
49 Posted 05/02/2011 at 15:15:48
50 Posted 05/02/2011 at 15:14:50
You may be right, and Everton may be in a neagtive financial spiral, but a dodgy looking loan form and a snapshot credit rating are not adequate to draw the conclusions of this article.
I would like to request that a fan with banking/financial expertise describe the apparent situation in Dragons Den language once the accounts are available so that myself and other non-experts can make a judgement for ourselves.
51 Posted 05/02/2011 at 15:24:42
52 Posted 05/02/2011 at 16:28:39
I won't criticise Bill for being poor compared to other chairman, but ffs why is he taking out loans on other loans!
53 Posted 05/02/2011 at 18:19:29
If ever the shit hit the fan at Goodison and ? God forbid ? administration or whatever was mooted, do you think our vastly underpaid galaxy of superstars would forgo a month's salary to help out the club? Would those supporters who could afford it dig deep in their pockets and fill buckets and bins with money to help out?
Forget Bill and his cronies, recriminations can come later. What would you do?
54 Posted 05/02/2011 at 19:26:05
If Kenwright has "used the club to make himself rich" ? you are directly accusing him of taking money out of the club. If not, please explain.
Also, the shares are not worthless. However, for them to have real worth (beyond Blankstone Sington's machinations), Everton need a buyer. Only then could a value be established. If the value/price really is between £0 and £1, I think Kenwright would be mobbed by potential buyers.
Obviously, he's asking far more (and that is how he may "get rich" eventually). The implication is that he is asking too much ? just as PJ did for nearly a year before BK wore him down...
55 Posted 05/02/2011 at 20:09:56
56 Posted 05/02/2011 at 21:00:26
57 Posted 05/02/2011 at 21:01:41
Call me an old cynic but does anyone think the news of a potential buyer just about the time season ticket renewals are due smell a little of previous smoke and mirrors tricks?
58 Posted 05/02/2011 at 22:35:22
I saw the Moyes comments about a "potential buyer" in several papers and in some the comments were presented as being about a potential buyer whilst in others the same comments were shown in a context that suggest they were about the current team's performance and not about investment. So who knows.
59 Posted 05/02/2011 at 23:34:39
60 Posted 05/02/2011 at 23:34:45
61 Posted 06/02/2011 at 02:48:45
This article has been written with supporting documents that seem to back up what it says. (Although I'll be the first to admit that I might be misunderstanding the documents.)
There's too many people moaning saying that this is scaremongering, and then coming out with unfounded comments like that.
62 Posted 06/02/2011 at 03:19:00
63 Posted 06/02/2011 at 08:34:03
A £500,000 offer for Phil Neville was rejected by Everton on deadline day. Neville is 34 I think now, and contracted for a year and a half more with Everton and it's unlikely (frankly) that a better offer for him would come in for him. I'm not sure what exactly he is on but for arguments sake say £30k p/w... that's £2.25 million saved over the remaining life of his contract if he was to be let go, plus the £0.5 million transfer cash, so thats £2.75 million potentially saved. If he is on £40k p/w then it is £3.5 million saved ? this potentially on an aging player for which we have ample cover in the form of Hibbert, Coleman, Jagielka and Heitinga. If the club is in dire straits, why not accept the offer and save the £3-odd million (or more)?
Secondly, a big contract offer was on the table for Pienaar ? but he walked... he wasn't pushed in any way... this dosen't stack up at all with the emergency lightening of the wage load theory that's doing the rounds. A £50k-a-week contract for say 4 years costs £10 million in wages over that period of time.
Thirdly, the ink is barely dry on a bunch of contract extensions ? Arteta and Cahill most prominent amongst them. If the club don't have money why would they be signing lucrative contract extensions with players whom we won't be able to recoup major money on?
64 Posted 06/02/2011 at 11:33:43
Agree 100%. As per my post 20.
65 Posted 06/02/2011 at 12:12:43
The club have off-loaded five players, three of them are part of the first team squad. That is a substantial saving on wages, with a transfer fee on top of that.
Joe, David Thomas, those figures don't lie. The club has £90 million worth of liabilities and a net asset value of minus £26 million. The negative asset value is a major source of concern.
I'm amazed that the pair of you can ignore a balance sheet in favour of your own prejudices, bias and conjecture.
66 Posted 06/02/2011 at 13:14:40
Our own credit rating recently fell from 84 to 20 because of a stupid payment mix up which saw us get a CCJ, that has since been wiped off within two weeks and our credit rating is now back up to 80. You will find most companies' credit ratings these days are up and down so I would not be too concerned on that issue.
67 Posted 06/02/2011 at 12:13:17
This is what a lot of posters seem to be doing on this thread.
For God's sake I'm no fan of Bill Kenwright but some of the comments about him on here are totally uncalled for and are patently ridiculous.
Somebody said he had made himself rich by drawing money from the club when as I understand it he mortgaged his house to save the club from Johnson and he does not take a salary. Others blame him for not being rich enough to do an Abramovich and develop and finance the club from his own pocket. FFS you can't have it both ways.
On another thread about this same issue the other day somebody said the current problem was down to his inability to formulate a business plan. But the stadium does not allow the full evolution of a worthwhile business plan. FFS until recently we had a bleeding tent in the car park to offer hospitality and make up for the shortfall of such facilities in the stadium itself. The stadium is the biggest single impediment to Everton's future development as at this moment in time we do not have the revenue streams that arise from being a 'world brand' like the shite or to make us more desirable to buy or invest in.
Criticize Kenwright if you must for being a stubborn Evertonian or for disappearing when times are tough but don't hold him responsible for not being able to make a silk purse out of a cow's ear or not being as personally rich as Croesus. Everton FC is a cow's ear in Premiership terms, almost entirely due to the totally inadequate stadium and the resposibility for that transcends decades and cannot solely be laid at his door. Whatever we thought of Kirkby, that was the club's attempt to remedy the situation and to make the likelihood of investment as great as possible. Not a perfect remedy by any stretch of the imagination but it was all we had.
The opposition to Kirkby was vociferous and (shall we say) not always accurate from certain quarters and that opposition played some part in the refusal of the scheme. Now we are left with a stadium which may be where we want it to be but which is a huge hinderance to the club. Maybe it is now time for all those smart arses who came up with all those brilliant reasons why Kirkby would be a disaster (including hooliganism for Kirkby residents and intended only to make Bully and BK rich...remember?) to tell us all where we go from here. Or do smart arses only have good negative ideas and not good positive ones?
Let's hear a little more too from LCC and KEIOC who, during their opposition to DK had all those wonderful ideas and offers of assistance in finding the club a new home. Where are all those fucking offers now? They got their way in the end but now 'it's all gone quiet over there' hasn't it?
Everton FC has been a part of my life for 60 years and I didn't want to go to Kirkby. But it was more important for me to save the club I love and to give it the best chance possible of a fruitful future in a changing football world for which we were not well equipped.
If the rumours of a possible purchase of the club turn out to be true and those new owners decide to build a new stadium, they will put it where the bloody hell they want it. You won't get a vote from a Sheikh of Araby, a Russian oligarch or an American consortium. You got a vote from Kenwright and if you can't give him credit for anything else at least give him credit for that.
68 Posted 06/02/2011 at 13:44:01
Last line, Kenwright sanctioned a vote for something that was never gonna happen.
That was noble of him wasn't it!?
69 Posted 06/02/2011 at 13:25:09
70 Posted 06/02/2011 at 15:27:08
An administrator can be appointed by a company of by its directors. Creditors other than holders of "floating charges" (I won't go into the details of explaining what this is, as I don't think it applies to our case) have to petition a court if they want the company to go into administration.
Most of the clubs that have been served with winding-up orders and gone into administration as a result (administration is also a form of protection against creditors) were in arrears with their tax payments and the orders were served by HMRC.
Now, the question is: are we in any sort of trouble with HMRC? If not, have we defaulted on any debt servicing to our several creditors?
The above questions are important to determine whether there is a real risk of us going into administration. In the absence of any of those two circumstances, and in spite of our obviously fragile financial situation, I don't see why we should be in any imminent danger of that, unless the directors themselves wish to go along that path, which I find extremely unlikely. Whatever shortfall there may be can be plugged by the sale of players in the summer, so I don't think our capacity to carry on as a going concern is in any immediate danger.
All things considered, I think Keith Harris' statement over the weekend on the likelihood of an early sale of the club should be taken seriously. Bill Kenwright, associates & "private" creditors may well have thrown in the towel and decided to let go for the sake of the club. I'll therefore stick my neck out and venture that Everton FC will change ownership by the summer.
71 Posted 06/02/2011 at 16:17:17
72 Posted 06/02/2011 at 17:07:29
73 Posted 06/02/2011 at 18:07:51
74 Posted 06/02/2011 at 18:04:46
John(53) I can see STIRLING Albion ground from my house. Cracking place to live and visit. Club very poorly supported by locals as in catchment area of Glasgow. See www.STIRLING.co.uk
75 Posted 06/02/2011 at 18:48:22
As the link says, Mr Harris is almost certain we will be sold in the near future, with three suitors waiting in the wings. Is this another PR stunt by the club to take the pressure off Kenwright, or is it the reason that we didn't sign anyone this window, so Kenwright could make more profit from the sale of the club by saving himself a few quid on wages?
76 Posted 06/02/2011 at 18:52:44
If we had sold Yak for £11 million it would count.
Surely, if everton or any club for that matter were so close to administration as is being suggested they would have off loaded one of if not more than one of their assets that would give them the biggest transfer fee. If the club was on the brink of administration there is no way they would have gone through a transfer window and not off loaded any player for more than £4 million when they have at least 3 players in the squad that they would generate at least £10 million plus for.
77 Posted 06/02/2011 at 19:04:12
78 Posted 06/02/2011 at 19:04:02
79 Posted 06/02/2011 at 19:14:18
Were have i stated in my post that a loan does not count as an off-load?
Or is your post aimed at someone else?
80 Posted 06/02/2011 at 19:20:08
81 Posted 06/02/2011 at 19:26:19
I will try and make this post as clear as possible because i think you seem to have misunderstood my previous posts.
If someone was running a company and they were close to administration in my opinion they would look at what assets they have in that company and would have to off load at least one if not more of the assets that would generate them the most money in order for them to avoid administration and carry on trading.
In everton's case, if they were so close to administration surely in the January transfer window they would have looked at the situation and seen that for example Fellaini, Rodwell or Baines for example are individually going to raise them £10 million plus if they were to sell them. The fact that none of these players were off loaded and Pienaar and a few loans left the club would suggest to me that the club are not on the brink of administration.
Also, if the club was on the brink of administration surely they could not afford to turn down Spurs offer for Neville. I don't think many companies on the brink of administration turn down offers for their assets when they have no other offers on the table for that said asset.
82 Posted 06/02/2011 at 19:36:30
I think it is quite telling that the accounts only got signed off on 31st January, after the loan was put in place and the transfer window closed!!
83 Posted 06/02/2011 at 19:57:26
For your argument to hold any water you must ignore the new mortgage the club took out. That a player hasn't been sold to raise the £10 million, I fear is down to Moyes.
What you can't dispute is the accounts and they are bad, and 2010-11 will be worse. As for the current state of play, well another mortgage to cover a mortgage and declining revenues, small squad reduced further, it's a vicious cycle of decline. It can't continue.
84 Posted 06/02/2011 at 21:58:31
I agree that the accounts will most likely not be what we would all wish them to be and we need a better long term strategy. I think every man and his dog would agree with that. However, that does not mean that we are almost in administration as the title of your article states. If we were there would have been a much bigger fire scale in January.
85 Posted 06/02/2011 at 21:50:53
The club's record in paying its debts on time is better in the last three months than the previous twelve, and the recommended credit limit is £170,000k, even for a tiny company such as the one I work for.
86 Posted 06/02/2011 at 22:29:07
87 Posted 06/02/2011 at 22:38:14
88 Posted 06/02/2011 at 22:48:26
The fact that a company is considered to be a going concern means that it is not under the threat of liquidation for at least the next 12 months (the account being issued annually).
So, I would advise all my fellow Evertonians not to worry unduly over the matter, without losing sight of the fact that, as the December loan shows, the situation is far from brilliant (as also witnessed by our lack of transfer acitivity over the past three windows).
89 Posted 06/02/2011 at 22:27:21
I think you should've stopped at the bit about being an ostrich.....
"The stadium is the biggest single impediment to Everton's future development"
"... as personally rich as Croesus. Everton FC is a cow's ear in Premier League terms, almost entirely due to the totally inadequate stadium and the responsibility for that transcends decades and cannot solely be laid at his door."
BK has been chairman for over a decade, and on the board for several years before that. A total of 20+ years involvement. During that time, practically EVERY club has modernised their facilities to the point were they are unrecogniseable from only a few years ago. Most have been far lesser clubs than us, yet they all achieved what you claim BK can't. Even mighty Brighton and Hove Albion have completely eclipsed this board's stadium achievements......!!
The difference is they all had a business plan to achieve this. We had the Kings Dock practically gift wrapped..... who presided over this debacle? And then, not content with that howler, then followed up with the woefull Destination Kirkby? You can't sweep it all under the carpet, there is just to much of it!!
"Whatever we thought of Kirkby, that was the club's attempt to remedy the situation and to make the likelihood of investment as great as possible. Not a perfect remedy by any stretch of the imagination but it was all we had."
Whatever YOU thought of Kirkby, it was a complete non-solution from start to finish, and was only ever in the interest of everyone BUT EFC! Let's face it, they dropped it as soon as the Inquiry finished, despite the fact that the only real financial loss was approx £12M enabling. EVERYTHING about the proposals were a non-starter, and even the club knew that by the end of the inquiry.
Kirkby was going to cost the club at least £78M.... so how can it ever have been "all we had"? The magical enabling funding, stadium for nothing, great transport ? all vanished at the public Inquiry. Even half of that £78M could go a long way to resolving the stadium's current problems!
"Opposition to Kirkby was vociferous and (shall we say) not always accurate from certain quarters."
Given the horrendous littany of lies that represented the hardsell we were fed by the Club & Tesco, I'd say that was more than a "bit rich" wouldn't you? But feel free to elaborate on ANY inaccuracies....... I bet you can't! The body of evidence submitted by KEIOC at the inquiry dwarfed anything submitted by the mighty Tesco/EFC/Knowsley, and their convictions were fully vindicated. Put it this way, the first people the club invited in afterwards were KEIOC.
"It is now time for all those smart arses who came up with all those brilliant reasons why Kirkby would be a disaster..." ?You didn't have to be much of a smart arse to realise that.
"Or do smart arses only have good negative ideas and not good positive ones?" ? Again, was the Kings Dock's demise a positive idea do you think? It seems to me you want to blame everyone except the people who've been in charge. The people who have presided over these decisions.
KEIOC presented several options to the club, including well researched redevelopment and relocation schemes that all had the full backing of the council and city planners and stadium architects. They really can't do anymore than that, nor should they be expected to. The club has spent a small fortune and wasted over a decade chasing their tails... is it any wonder that they can repeat mistakes time and time again when they've the blind backing of people like you?
90 Posted 07/02/2011 at 09:27:53
When is the delayed AGM now scheduled for?
The new stadium argument is surely rather redundant in these dire economic times, and if the team are under-performing and we cannot even fill Goodison now for most matches?
91 Posted 07/02/2011 at 11:47:23
92 Posted 07/02/2011 at 14:21:30
You can count on all of these events.
And one other: when bad news is about to be emerge from Everton, the Goodison Park spin machine goes into overdrive; right on cue, somebody like David Maddock will pen an article extolling the benefits of having an Evertonian at the helm, the Echo will make a lot of noise without actually saying anything; that deformed twat on TalkSport will attempt to climb further up the southern section of our chairman's alimentary canal, and Keith Harris will speak about "bids" for Everton Football Club.
The difference is that Christmas, summer holidays and Easter actually appear.
Cynical? Probably... Accurate? Definitely.
93 Posted 07/02/2011 at 16:05:30
94 Posted 07/02/2011 at 20:02:36
95 Posted 07/02/2011 at 20:55:51
I've heard the story about us being close to being bought all too often so I don't really believe it, but on the other hand, I check ToffeeWeb every 15 minutes to see if there's any news about it... The same as in last transfer window basically and the outcome will probably be the same: nothing.
96 Posted 07/02/2011 at 22:06:55
We do pull revenue forward through the "Early Bird" promotion. It appears to be getting earlier every year, the bird will be that early soon it will be an egg!!!
97 Posted 07/02/2011 at 22:34:25
98 Posted 08/02/2011 at 09:48:06
So it seems Everton's financial head is above water! Nearly all football clubs are in a perilious financial game ? I give you both that. It doesn't mean that Everton's version of that game will lead them to certain administration.
I think as long as there are 35,000 fans going through the gates most weeks for over 20 games a season, there is a solid income base... and, as long as Everton don't overexpose themselves ridiculously, there is the financial base for a re-structuring of the club and its continuing existence.
The fans aren't the controlling owners so really we have to believe Kenwright et all will do financially right in a general sense for the club just for peace of mind. I mean WTF can we do about it anyway if they don't? Stop beng fans maybe? If lots of people do this, Everton will suffer.
And what's the point to all this fear and worry anyhow? Perhaps you are taking your interest and concern a bit too far, lads?
99 Posted 08/02/2011 at 19:40:16
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.
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.