Skip to Main Content
Members:   Log In Sign Up

Get Broughton!

By Peter Laing :  28/03/2011 :  Comments (57) :
I have read with interest in recent weeks the notion put forward by Colin Fitzpatrick and others regarding the need to replace the current board with an interim arrangement of competent high-calibre professionals with the experience and wherewithal of finding a long-term solution to Everton's financial predicament.

For all of Bill Kenwright's pointless posturing concerning his 24/7 search for investment, the involvement of Christopher Samuelson, Keith Harris and the appointment of numerous CEOs charged with holding the poisoned chalice, we remain no further forward in terms of financial stability.

Colin Fitzpatrick has posed the question of interim stewardship yet there remains a lack of support or significant groundswell from within the fanbase for such a concept to become reality. If Bill Kenwright truly wants to find a consortium or wealthy individual then this is surely the only arrangement that can work without prejudice, meddling, or self-serving interest.

Martin Broughton had this remit at Liverpool and within six months was able to deliver upon this objective. Like selling a house, car, business or commercial enterprise what we need to know is (a) what is the market value of Everton FC? and (b) like an estate agent, advertise the business for sale based upon this valuation.

I am certainly not holding my breath on such a strategy being played out but, with the current situation, do we have anything better in Kenwright and Co than the other lot across the Park had in Hicks and Gillette?

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

Martin Handley
1   Posted 28/03/2011 at 21:15:23

Report abuse

Short answer... NO!
Chris Bannantyne
2   Posted 28/03/2011 at 21:07:20

Report abuse

Hey, if it can be arranged then sure, I'm for it! But how do you convince BK to step aside from his train set?
Peter Laing
3   Posted 28/03/2011 at 21:21:43

Report abuse

Exactly Martin, the whole charade of smoke and mirrors, hidden agenda's, PR soundbites regarding futile enquiries without any substance. My hope is that David Moyes forces the hand of the charlatan during the summer regarding his apparent lack of strategy and vision for Everton. Since collapse of DK and Kenwright's wealthy friends Green and Earl walked away from the table we have been left to endure total stagnation.
Alan Rodgers
4   Posted 28/03/2011 at 22:28:19

Report abuse

If the threat of losing Moyes doesn't get Kenwright motivated..... nothing will.
Eugene Ruane
5   Posted 28/03/2011 at 23:25:24

Report abuse


But there's more chance of seeing Gerry Adams leading a lodge march, than there is of fat-head letting anyone else play with his train-set.
Jimmy Hacking
6   Posted 28/03/2011 at 23:23:47

Report abuse

Martin Broughton sold Liverpool because they were a globally-recognised brand who were suddenly available at a bargain price. If I'd have had a spare £300 million, I'd have put in a bid.

No-one in their right mind would buy Everton, since we are never ever going to be profitable, face it.
Phil Bellis
7   Posted 29/03/2011 at 00:11:36

Report abuse

I'd buy Everton, Jimmy.

Mind you, I've never been the same since a mishap years ago which stopped my chances of a professional career just weeks after I'd started play at Everton on schoolboy forms. I was practising with a tennis ball down the jigger before making my way to Goodison when, out of nowhere, this pushbike comes hurtling into me. My legs were never the same again.

Ironically, the cyclist was on his way to the match but couldn't see me as he was carrying his nephew on the handlebars. I swear this little lump of a kid had the biggest mop of white hair I'd ever seen. I can still see his fat, stupid face.
James Flynn
8   Posted 29/03/2011 at 00:14:36

Report abuse

Jimmy (6) - We can be massively profitable. The EPL is global beyond all other European leagues combined. It's not even close. We can't just say, small local fan base, Goodison in disrepair, etc. That's what bothers.

Believe me (and any other Americans in here can confirm) the NFL has franchises in tiny communities (Green Bay foremost) and in other communties where the fans don't turn out for the games. But every owner makes a killing on the TV contract and their cut of the merchandising.

Again, that's the part that hurts. EPL generates Gozillions of dollars worldwide. The main reason I got nervous seeing the Boston Red Sox group purchase LFC. That group knows how to generate the money.

Plenty of people in their right mind understand the money to be made buying into the EPL and Everton is actually priced pretty low; debt included.

Ste Traverse
9   Posted 29/03/2011 at 00:38:15

Report abuse

I'd to see someone like Broughton acquired to find a buyer......but it's never going to happen as Kenwright ain't going to give up his 'toy' anytime soon.
Eric Myles
10   Posted 29/03/2011 at 03:08:33

Report abuse

If the club can't afford the paltry sums to pay player wages then where will they get the money from to pay for someone like Broughton. Unless he takes a percentage?
Joe Green
11   Posted 29/03/2011 at 03:09:28

Report abuse

James (9)

If the EPL was run as well and as firmly as the NFL, I'd agree with you. But, sadly, it isn't. Green Bay and other smaller city teams thrive because the NFL enforces: a salary cap, no relegation, varying playing schedules, etc, etc, in order to ensure that all clubs can thrive and that success is spread around. The EPL does none of this and shows no ability or even interest to do so.
Jay Harris
12   Posted 29/03/2011 at 03:18:41

Report abuse

"I'm bored with this question".

"I see 8 or 9 potential buyers a year".

"In fact I turned 3 away recently".

"Once I tell them the terms they go wow and I don't hear from them again"

"I'm still trying 24/7 though"
Gavin Ramejkis
13   Posted 29/03/2011 at 07:35:09

Report abuse

Eric #11, if BK can "reputedly" pay Keith Harris (yeah we know it's bullshit) then the club could pay Broughton a finder's fee paid on the conclusion of a successful takeover. The trouble is BK would only leave Goodison in a wooden overcoat.
Alan Williams
14   Posted 29/03/2011 at 07:57:15

Report abuse

Again fans just don?t get it do they? Broughton was appointed because the main creditor was looking at pulling the plug so they enforced this change as a condition of sale; without that, LFC would have gone in to administration.

EFC to date don?t have that issue. Broughton arranged a buyer on the cheap to the value of the debt owed to the bank, which was a good deal for the bank... but was it good for LFC??? ? Who knows? Since then, they have scrapped the new stadium due to lack of funds and sold players to cover expenditure, just what EFC have been doing for the past 5 years.

They appoint KD to give them time and appease their stupid fans, these new owners to date haven?t added value apart from clearing the debt. EFC can do that tomorrow by selling Rodwell and Streak.

Please, when you look at comparisons, look at the finer details as EFC problems are different than most other clubs. We need a massive cash injection that will return very little if any money to any interested party, therein lies our problem. This problem we have is bigger than your hatred of BK. COYB

Phil Bellis
15   Posted 29/03/2011 at 09:10:09

Report abuse

Bit harsh...make it a taxi
Dan Brierley
16   Posted 29/03/2011 at 10:07:07

Report abuse

James #8

Tell that to Randy Lerner, who's club has already accumulated debts in excess of £100M since he took over at Villa. It also looks increasingly likely he is going to have to spend big again this summer, just to get his club out of the bottom half of the table.

And I'm sorry, I cannot agree with your statement regarding becoming 'massively profitable'. The Premier League teams owe more than 3 BILLION pounds in debt. This is is more than the French, German and Italian leagues put together. How do you see profitability in that?
Eric Myles
17   Posted 29/03/2011 at 10:49:17

Report abuse

But Dan, that's only a couple of teams that make the majority of that £3 billion debt. Take them out and compare like with like.
Neil Humphreys
18   Posted 29/03/2011 at 10:52:29

Report abuse


We arent for sale and more to the point 'we' as in you and I have no part of ownership and therefore say as to what happens in Ken's corner shop. Only through the likes of a fans trust could we even begin to have some form of sway.

Your only option is to grin and bear it, or vote with your feet. We can however sit on the sidelimes and throw stones as our beloved club goes to the dogs.

Jamie Connor
19   Posted 29/03/2011 at 12:14:47

Report abuse

What I can't get my head around is, if you're searching 24/7 and can't find anyone, then what is the main factor deterring interest?

I can't believe for a second that it's down to Goodison's age and state. Look at QPR: Loftus Road is a shack even beyond ours yet they attracted interest whilst outside the exposure and glitz of the Premier League to become one of the richest clubs in the world.

So tell us, oh mighty board, where are we coming short?!

Dave Lynch
20   Posted 29/03/2011 at 13:19:16

Report abuse

The lying bastard has never looked 1/1 never mind 24/7. I'll bet anything that any interest in us has come about from parties approching him, not the other way round.

If we get to the start of the season with the same board and management structure, then I'm finished with it, lads. I have invested year upon year a lot of emotion and money in this club, as have a lot of us on this site. I honestly cannot do it anymore.

All as I end up feeling is let down, miserable and bitter and twisted. Bitter and twisted toward the state we are in as a club and not toward other clubs.

Dan Brierley
21   Posted 29/03/2011 at 13:58:08

Report abuse

Eric, the teams that take up most of the debt are the ones challenging for the title and Champions League every season. It's not a coincidence that those carrying the most debt are the top sides. This is what you need to spend to be at the top in the UK.

Spurs are a good yardstick this season. They have spent big, brought in some great players, yet still sit 14 points off the title. It requires big money to win the Premier League.
Mike Gwyer
22   Posted 29/03/2011 at 14:39:45

Report abuse

Eric (posts 10 & 17):

The financial plug has been pulled big time.

Profit in the EPL is governed by Sky and the Champions League, obviously for TV rights. With Sky's viewing figures dropping and the additional legal action pending regarding the ability to view EPL matches via European feeds, then there is definitely a time bomb waiting to explode for most clubs in the EPL.

Additionally, a lot of clubs are already feeling the pinch, not just EFC: the big 4 are heavily dependant on Champions League qualification ? let's see what happens to the mighty RS when they fail for the second season runnning or even Spurs who spent big last summer but may not qualify for the CL this season.

I would say that if BK could sell he'd be off tomorrow but, with no potential buyers in sight, it looks like players will be going out, rather than coming in, over the summer.
David O'Keefe
23   Posted 29/03/2011 at 16:37:40

Report abuse

Mike, you have asserted that Sky's viewing figures are falling, provide evidence. Secondly, are figures falling for Sky Sports alone or across all Sky channels?
Peter Roberts
24   Posted 29/03/2011 at 19:03:43

Report abuse

Mike, as a former Sky salesman until very recently, I'm not sure where your assertion of Sky's viewing figures are coming from. Everything I've seen says that more and more people are buying Sky than before, with over 10M subscribers in the UK.
Simon Jenkins
25   Posted 29/03/2011 at 19:09:26

Report abuse

Mike #22 ? more people have Sky than ever before, and as the rest of the UK goes digital over the next 18 months, even more people are going to be getting Sky. You're wrong in asserting Sky viewing figures are dropping, it is the complete opposite.
Steve Harris
26   Posted 29/03/2011 at 19:06:39

Report abuse

Dave #20 ? thanks for summing up exactly how I've been feeling. I'm also bitter and twisted at the lies and incompetence emanating from the Chairman and his Board. Remember Sir Philip Carter's statement at the opening of Everton 2: 'exciting signings' he claimed, alas none followed... not a sausage.

Then in January, after the optimism of a top 4 challenge had been unceremoniously squashed, we sell our most creative player, and don't replace him, it's a shambles and the lack of transparency and accountability at the club is depressing.

And as for Kenwright's and Elstone's claim that we are for sale, aargh! If you want to, seriously want to sell something ? you will! No excuses and no more lies.... KENWRIGHT OUT!

Mike Gwyer
27   Posted 29/03/2011 at 19:05:24

Report abuse

Posts 23 & 24,

I did a search on the EPL's incoming cash, hoping to find out how much of it went EFC's way. I came across a link from Barb that stated Sky Sport's viewing figures, for the last quarter in 2010, were down on the previous quarter.

After your response's I did the same search but I can't find the link, I think if you search you will find it. Anyway's, pie charts are for fools and politicians - you can bend all figures to suit your needs.
Andy Riley
28   Posted 29/03/2011 at 20:15:22

Report abuse

Alan #14 ? I actually think Liverpool's problems with Waldorf and Stadler and ours with BK are similar. As BK won't tell anyone what the asking price is, it can only be assumed that he's asking ridiculous money in the same way that they were.

I think he paid £800 per share or so when he bought out Johnson so he would need to explain what value he's added since then if he's looking to sell at any figure in excess of that. I think that is precisely the reason why he's "bored with that question!"

Dan Brierley
29   Posted 29/03/2011 at 21:55:06

Report abuse

Andy 28#. How can BK put a value on the club, when he doesn't own it outright? He only owns a quarter of the total amount of shares.
David Israel
30   Posted 30/03/2011 at 00:31:21

Report abuse

I'm afraid Alan Williams, #14, has it right: Martin Broughton was forcibly brought in by the RS's creditors, namely Barclays, to try and sell that outfit for at least the amount owed to said bank. We do not owe any similar amount to any bank, in fact, even as a percentage of our turnover, our debt is significantly lower than what the RS's was prior to its taking over by the latest tandem of Yankees.

This is not to say that we don't need to empower someone to go out and try to find a serious buyer. That is not my point. Let me come up with a good comparison (I think): the RS were in dire straits similar to those of the Irish before they asked for an EU bail-out; we are more like the UK's Exchequer: struggling along but not in any immediate danger of hitting the ropes.
Michael Kenrick
31   Posted 30/03/2011 at 05:34:03

Report abuse

Alan (328) ? good memory: he (they... the participants in True Blue Holdings) paid £857 per share. Multiply by 35,000 (the number of Everton Shares) and you get £30M ? the value of the club in 1999-2000.

Now in 11 years, the price would have perhaps doubled (£60M) just to keep up with inflation. Word is the sale price is £180M... another factor of THREE.

Who said owing a Premier League club was unprofitable?

But hang on... no buyers (apparently). So, I think it is reasonable to conclude the price is too high. But would he accept "only" £60M?

I think the answer is No... and I think that is the prime reason why Everton have not been sold.

Dan (#29): I believe Bill Kenwright speaks for the rest of the Board in such matters, and the Board members hold 24,236 shares, or 69.25%. That gives them total power to dictate the price.

Power that has enabled them over the years to progressively erode, neutralize, and ultimately eviscerate any power that may have resided in the disparate so-called minor shareholders and their tin-pot bureaucracy known affectionately as the Everton Shareholders Association.
Rob Keys
32   Posted 30/03/2011 at 06:12:18

Report abuse

There is huge potential OUTSIDE the UK, my friends. Yes, football clubs ? in almost any country ? seem to be badly run, and it's true that clubs that are big on debt are on the brink. But what amazes me time and again is that clubs are either ignorant or myopic.

The American market is huge. Yes, you cannot overtake the big boys of baseball and American football, but you don't have to get to be lucrative. Take NBA as an example. The top players are paid a lot more than those in the English football. And they have a more egalitarian system of drafts and picks. It's a land of 300 million people.

The Asian market is huge. Put China and India together, you get two thirds of the world's population. And you are talking about a very fast growing middle class in both countries, ie, money to spend. As far as I know, the dominant brand of football they are more familiar with is British/English football.

For India, and many Commonwealth countries, the answer is bleeding obvious. But the attempts to break into the market are almost non-existent, except for broadcast. Then again, with so many fans moaning about how transatlantic pre-seasons are useless, or Asia visits are a waste of time, it's perhaps symptomatic of the larger issue... most people CAN'T see beyond the UK.

We can't have it both ways, can you? We want good pre-season with quality clubs (even that is contentious). We don't want to travel far away, say that it's a waste of time, but sound astounded that people from elsewhere don't know about us, and then a billionaire to spend hundreds of millions to pay off our debts.

And should that someone come along, we complain that they are some rich, mercenary person who doesn't have a sense of history, passion, and just wants to make money off the club.

Sorry guys, there is a reason why we WERE the Mersey Millionaires. Nobody can sustain that kind of giving without being calculative about what kind of returns they can get.

For selfless giving, well the only way I see it is fans banding together and giving, as suggested by many here. But there is probably a reason why they are only the minority: it's incredibly difficult to make this type of arrangement work.

James Hollister
33   Posted 30/03/2011 at 06:28:48

Report abuse

Rob Keys ? My understanding, albeit not very much, is that it works well at Arsenal with the fans.
Dan Brierley
34   Posted 30/03/2011 at 08:34:22

Report abuse

If the sale price is £180M Michael, then I would be first to support any movement to get BK out of Everton (considering Lerner took over Villa for £62M). Although the only things I have seen stated publicly are by Keith Harris and Moyes, would not suggest that the sale price is over rated. Both of those men have nothing to gain by lying, as they don't own any shares. I also don't hear any grumblings from the EFCSA to suggest we are over priced. Where did the £180M figure come from?
Gavin Ramejkis
35   Posted 30/03/2011 at 12:23:00

Report abuse

Dan, why would the Shareholders Association ever complain over share prices unless they dropped through the floor? The nature of cloak and dagger and mythical buyers probably has them creaming in their pants as gullible as non-shareholders.
Michael Kenrick
36   Posted 30/03/2011 at 14:43:31

Report abuse

Dan, I think the £180M figure originally cropped up in 2008: Club for sale?

There was another long discussion about this here: Thank the lord Bill is our chairman, and here: Let's Be Realistic

And I recall there was a recent news article that had a figure like that too. But obviously it's not being bandied about by anyone the perennial doubters will trust, and so it comes down to a matter of belief, and I wouldn't get hung up on the exact figure.

My point is I believe the club has not been sold in the last few years because the asking price has been too high. Of course, on this point, I am at odds with none other than David Moyes. But I don't find what he said very convincing to be honest.

However, I accept that fans like you and David Thomas will always question such things and that is fine ? we are all in the same position of the fan/shareholder who asked Bill Kenwright if the club was for sale, and if so, at what price. Do you remember the answer he received?
Andy Riley
37   Posted 30/03/2011 at 18:00:25

Report abuse

What is needed here is a bit of honesty from BK which could help to unify the fans and increase his credibility. Further, if David Moyes believes that price is not a factor in any sale, does he actually know what the price is or is he just accepting what BK says about the price being fair?

Like I said earlier, it's more a less a matter of public record what BK and Co paid to buy out Johnson so most of us have an idea of what would be considered a reasonable profit for such an allegedly committed Evertonian who insists he has only the best interests of the club at heart. The fact he won't even announce a price range to me speaks volumes about his serious intent to sell!

Dan Brierley
38   Posted 30/03/2011 at 18:06:09

Report abuse

Yes, but again its down to context. We had the same debate regarding 'the club is not for sale' in the Kirkby documents.

My view is pretty similar to Kenwright. I am also bored with people suggesting the reason the club hasn't been sold is due to being over-priced. Even though there is not a single shred of evidence to back that up, and it being the opposite view of those most likely to know (Moyes, Harris, EFCSA). If you were a genuine buyer with the finances to boot, I am pretty sure the board will not be 'bored' to listen. This statement was made to a bloke who owns a couple of shares, and thinks he has the right to know the internal workings of the club!

How often do people mention '24/7' on here? Do people not know it's an analogy? Things always seem to be taken wildly out of context with BK. Is it deserved based on the things he has said in the past (ring-fenced etc.)? Probably, yes. But I am one of these people that does not believe a thing unless it has some credible evidence. The guy has had his fingers burnt for making statements in the past that were not necessarily in his control to make. Now he won't comment on anything.

To suggest that the club is valued at 3 times more than Villa changed hands for is staggering. Personally, I'd be unhappy if we were valued at above £80M, never mind £180M...

David O'Keefe
39   Posted 30/03/2011 at 20:30:22

Report abuse

"I am also bored with people suggesting the reason the club hasn't been sold is due to being over priced. Even though, there is not a single shred of evidence to back that up, and it being the opposite view of those most likely to know (Moyes, Harris, EFCSA). If you were a genuine buyer with the finances to boot, I am pretty sure the board will not be 'bored' to listen."

I am bored with people who make all kinds of reasons for the club not being sold. Even though there is not a shred of evidence to back them up.

The price range Dan is £120 million (Harris) to a staggering £180 million (Cannon). Not reliable sources, but the club has apparently had a buyer go all the way to due diligence before it all inevitabily came to naught.

Nobody takes BK's words out of context, we only do what is fair and reasonable; hold him to account. It appears that you have a problem with the supporters/shareholders doing just that.
Michael Kenrick
40   Posted 30/03/2011 at 20:45:45

Report abuse

Exactly, David; great response.

Dan, we are simple supporters/shareholders at the bottom of the food chain, we can only go on the scraps we are fed from above. The amazing thing is how differently those scraps taste to each of us.

Bill K says "24/7" in the context of searching for a buyer and some people think that means "all the time" as in... er... "24 hours a day, 7 days a week". If that's not what he meant then why did he say it?

BK says "ringfenced" in the context of money for Everton's share of Kings Dock, which would be taken by most to mean "set aside and reserved only for this use" when, in reality it meant "does not exist"... err, WTF?!?!

BK says "the cheque will be in the bank in the morning" in the context of "Fortress Sports Fund" and it turns out to be a complete fabrication...

How any half-intelligent person can look pass shit like this to find mitigating "context" is beyond my comprehension... but I guess that's exactly what you are advocating.

Scraps of food? Or bits of bullshit. What's that French saying? One man's meat is another man's poison?
Chad Schofield
41   Posted 30/03/2011 at 20:43:53

Report abuse


There are shreds of evidence to support that figure, unfortunately they are just that ? shreds. That though is not really surprising given supposed (note supposed) NDAs in place.

One thing is clear though, there is a distinct lack of transparency, which will obviously lead to hearsay. I just don't understand people who try to defend the shambolic situation and don't try to use what little "evidence" there is, but simply spout ill-thought out rubbish like anyone who had tried but failed to buy the club would be shouting from the rafters about their failure.
Ped Pearl
42   Posted 30/03/2011 at 21:31:24

Report abuse

To ask the question... At what price is the club for sale? ? is just like asking... How much is a car? I would've also shunned such ignorance.

Count how many clubs have had successful takeovers... is it up to 3 now!? To purchase the club would take an investment of £500m as we also need a small thing called a new stadium.
Dennis Stevens
43   Posted 30/03/2011 at 22:58:09

Report abuse

In the article about Bernard Mullin in the Telegraph, they comment that Mullin "... believes the holdings of Everton?s top three shareholders, which total 75 per cent, could be acquired for between £75 million and £100 million." Not that you place too much faith in anything that's in the press, of course.
Dan Brierley
44   Posted 31/03/2011 at 19:12:56

Report abuse

"I am bored with people who make all kinds of reasons for the club not being sold."

David, it has been laid out many times on here exactly why Everton struggle to find a buyer in today's market. All I will say, is that would-be buyers look for something that they can make money out of.

To get Everton to being title contenders with a stadium capable of making decent revenue, is not exactly something that I would consider a risk-free investment. It's going to take big up front money, with no guarantee that it will be successful.

I don't see trying to take on Abramovich, the Arabs and the Glaziers as an appealing prospect.

Andrew Rimmer
45   Posted 31/03/2011 at 21:09:26

Report abuse

Are we the only club that hasn't been sold recently?
Steve Smith
46   Posted 31/03/2011 at 22:52:15

Report abuse

"Martin Broughton had this remit at Liverpool and within six months was able to deliver upon this objective."

No he didn't, his brief was to sell the club at a profit, he didn't do this, he used brinkmanship of the highest order to sell the club for way below it's actual worth and, managed to con the major shareholders out of millions, H & G are correct in my opinion, that was an epic swindle.

A proper interim board can and must represent the shareholders to the best of their ability in all of their dealings, {note: not the club, the shareholders}

Many of you on here believe we have a shadow director in our midst and, assuming that's the case, I would suggest he's much more up to speed with the British company laws than H & G ever were, so in essence an interim board has as many teeth as the current shareholders or shadows allow it to have, in other words gummy by anyone's standards.
David O'Keefe
47   Posted 01/04/2011 at 13:35:02

Report abuse

"David, it has been laid out many times on here exactly why Everton struggle to find a buyer in today's market."

Your view: Facilities prevent sale- no evidence.

My view: Asking price is preventing a sale- some evidence.

Thats it, Dan, you don't have any evidence to back that up, until a prospect buyer states that he backed out because of the facilitles. Then I will concede.

As for the asking price? Well thats subjective, but knowing the price range and standard of facilities, coupled with the lack of assets; I think Harris' 120million is far too much.

In the end, Dan, we have our opinions, but the belief that the clubs poor facilities are hindering a search for a buyer is without foundation.
Denis Richardson
48   Posted 01/04/2011 at 16:48:53

Report abuse

David / Dan ? to be honest, you could carry on your discussion until the cows come home. However, I actually think you are both right.

A buyer looking at Everton will have to factor in the stadium issue (new one or redevelopment) and the costs associated with it. These are not going to be small.

However, too high a price for the shares (on top of the cost needed to answer the stadium issue) will also scare buyers off.

I wonder, given

i ? the presumably high cost of sorting out the stadium issue (per press today £250M!)

ii ? the debts the club already has (about £50M I think)

iii ? the extremely high wage vs income ratio (about 70%?)

iv ? the probable heavy investment needed in the squad to challenge at the top (taking into account number of 1st team players towards the end of their careers needing replacement)

Are Everton shares actually worth anything?

Before people start, I am just thinking out loud. How many years of Sky money (assuming no trophies and no relegation) would it need to recoup/payoff the 4 points above? (Remembering significant player sales will likely lead to relegation.)

Given that, the £75M-£180M being stated for the price of the shares, seems way too high.

I have not built any financial models and don't have the football industry expertise to do so but just looking at these 4 points is a little scary.

Hopefully someone can point out some obvious mistakes/omissions in what I've written above to shed a little light into the tunnel...
David O'Keefe
49   Posted 01/04/2011 at 18:40:23

Report abuse

Denis: I would take the £250 million figure with a pinch of salt. If it's for the redevelopment of GP, as given by the men behind Destination Kirkby, it can be discarded. If it's for a new build then it would be an entirely different matter.

Also that the club has a negative asset value of £26million, take that into account and then Bill's minimum asking price according to Harris is ludricous.

A buyer can be found, but not with these jokers in charge of the sale, hence the title of the article.
Gavin Ramejkis
50   Posted 02/04/2011 at 10:40:48

Report abuse

The premise of the original article is a very fair one; as it stands, the club is losing more and more money season on season and the sale of its only remaining assets (players) isn't sustainable. In light of this, the debt will increase exponentially if it is allowed to continue and a sale at a reasonable cost is better than eventual bankruptcy and receivership, where shares won't be worth a carrot, only an absolute self interested megalomaniac idiot can see that ? or can they?
Dan Brierley
51   Posted 02/04/2011 at 10:22:49

Report abuse

David, when Harris quoted £100-10ú20 million, was it for a full 100% buy out? Or the 70% needed for full ownership? I have never seen it printed, so I am not sure what context it was said in.

If we compare to Villa, a club with roughly the same kind of structure and income as us, they sold 57% for £62million four years ago, valuing the club at £110 million. Now it would be fair to say they would be valued at £150-160 million based on their turnover increases since the takeover.

When Kenwright bought Everton for £30 million, turnover was £22.67 million. Since then, turnover has increased 350% to £79 million. So is it not fair to assume that the share price should increase proportionately, as with any other business in the world?

Of course, you have to factor in debt, which has increased from £19 million in 1999, to £44 million in 2010. Which is 234% increase over that period, and suggests it's much more manageable now than it was in 1999.

£100-120 million does not seem like an unfair asking price for 70% of Everton's shares, when we use financial facts and income growth to come to that conclusion.

David O'Keefe
52   Posted 02/04/2011 at 11:34:44

Report abuse

Dan, A small point: total liabilities are £91 million, which is not a small point as it exceeds the value of the club's assets by £26 million. I no longer believe that the debt is manageable and January's transfer dealings is an indication that the club is now in serious financial trouble.
Dan Brierley
53   Posted 02/04/2011 at 12:00:52

Report abuse

I agree, we are not in a healthy financial position. You are right, we have seen the club getting players out on loan to save some much needed money.

Players will no doubt be sold this summer in order to balance the books. I would not be suprised to see Heitinga, Yakubu, Vaughan, Saha and possibly Arteta moving on to pay off some debt, and younger players on lower wages coming in as replacements.

I am not 100% convinced of Moyes's tactical knowledge, but I am more confident he has the ability to pick out gems that will move the squad forward. The burning question is: How much money will be available to Moyes after servicing the debt?

James Hollister
54   Posted 02/04/2011 at 12:06:33

Report abuse

BK didn't put a penny into buying Everton. He bought PJ out with loan... and did he repay this loan? ... apparently not.

The premise is still the same. Everton was sold for £20M, not £30M.

This board needs removing entirely, if we are ever to sell anything.

Also, I remember a couple years ago regarding redevelopment, it wouldn't cost anywhere near £250 million. In fact I am sure it said the cost for a structural rebuild, would come in at around £75 Million, it would probably be cheaper still now with the cost of steel being much lower than it was at the time when the evaluation was carried out.

James Hollister
55   Posted 02/04/2011 at 12:26:41

Report abuse

Dan Brierley:
I am dreading how the books will look next year. The huge wage increase for players not withstanding... the debt we are in is only going to get bigger.

The only logical thing to do, to lower wage increases, is to sell our biggest assets, and hope to god that he has enough money with which to bring in cheaper players (not on £75 grand a week).

Even with a sale of Fellaini, Rodwell and Arteta and possibly Baines, I doubt he'd get much change to buy those few gems that are left... coz all that money from sales would have to go back into servicing the loans for debts.

I am very concerned about this summer: How can you balance the books without selling your best players, and then bringing more in? All I can see is a lose-lose situation that may become a reality.
David O'Keefe
56   Posted 02/04/2011 at 18:05:00

Report abuse

Dan #53 good points, but the real problem is staring you in the face: The board and chairman. What have they done in the last twelve months to improve the club's financial postion? Nothing is the answer.

They will probably take that course of action in the summer, but remember even a quality Championship player costs upward of £6 million ? is it feasible? I would say not.
Dennis Stevens
57   Posted 03/04/2011 at 01:35:37

Report abuse

Didn't Ellis leave Villa with a largely redeveloped stadium & clear of debt, Dan?

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
Subscribe to The Athletic, Get 40% off

Bet on Everton and get a deposit bonus with bet365 at


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.