Skip to Main Content
Members:   Log In  |  Sign Up
The Mail Bag

Don't Bank On It

Comments (43)

Still no new investment in the club. Hardly a surprise... and by that I'm not having a dig at Kenwright but rather stating the bleedin' obvious: there's a recession on. Nobody with any sense is going to sink a substantial fraction of their hard-earned into a football club just now. But let's turn conventional wisdom on its head: is the last fifteen years of operating the club on a ball of string, blu-tack and sticking plaster going to turn out to be an advantage that nobody expected?

Our lovable neighbours appear more and more like the bus at the end of The Italian Job: if they don't have a really good idea soon, the weight of all that money is going to tip them into oblivion. It's also been said, and I'll admit I have absolutely nothing other than what's already publicly well known to back this up, that Man Utd aren't so very far from the edge of the same cliff. Even Abramovich is keeping a tighter hold on his wallet these days...

Only Manchester City are spraying cash like they have a bottomless supply of the stuff ? which they more or less do. But how much use they can make of it in future with Uefa's impending plan to bar heavy-loss-making clubs from Europe, is open to question ? or more probably to creative accounting...

We all know that what's happened at Chelski and Middle Eastlands is at best grossly unfair, and anything that limits the influence of such biblically wealthy individuals on football has to be a good thing. Far better that we had, say, eight clubs each with a realistic shot at qualifying for the Champions League than four clubs that monotonously do so year after year after year after year after year after year.

That seems to be happening by itself to some extent anyway but, if Platini gets his way, this is a space worth watching. It seems just possible that we may be witnessing the beginning of the end of this top-heavy wealth-drenched era in English football.

I'm making no predictions here. It's probably pie in the sky, and the rich clubs will find ways to remain so. But, just for the sake of argument, let's suppose I'm right, and the cash is starting to drain out of the game. Everton is well used to running on a budget, where the likes of Liverpool and Man Utd certainly aren't. You'd rather be heading into that version of the future from our situation than theirs...
Richard Pike, Birmingham     Posted 08/10/2010 at 00:14:44

back Return to the Mail Bag


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

Jay Harris
1   Posted 08/10/2010 at 01:46:50

Report abuse

Some good points well made but I just cant agree with you, Richard.

The chance of Liverpool or United going under is about as strong as winning the lottery when you havent even bought a ticket.

While the Sky money keeps rolling in and the Asian and US markets are only just beginning to open up there are even bigger earnings to be made out of global branding something our pitiful chairman thinks is only applicable to the theatre.

We are more likely to go under through lack of investment or even reinvestment than 2 of the biggest brands in the world.

Football is unfair but then life isnt always fair either but money and power will always be king and Mr 24/7 needs to wake up to that fact sooner than later.

Stability means standing still whereas progress means moving forward ahead of trends instead of decaying slowly through stagnation.
Matt Traynor
2   Posted 08/10/2010 at 02:30:31

Report abuse

Richard, even Man City have revealed the bulk of their spending is now over, due to the new UEFA rules kicking in about operating losses not exceeding £39m (I think) over a rolling 3 fiscal years.

So these clubs are also now switching focus to increasing other revenue streams to inflate operating income, and no doubt looking at bending accountancy rules to deflate operating expenditure. Stadium development / redevelopment is obviously part of this.

So in short we've missed the "boat" that any wealthy benefactor would've offered. I've no doubt BK's recent emergence from the shadows to talk about these new investors that had appeared was purely in response to some of the negativity surrounding yet another false start being directed at the board, rather than just at the manager and players.

So one win at Birmingham, and he'll retreat back into his shell until the heat goes back on him. Watch his space...
James Flynn
3   Posted 08/10/2010 at 03:25:32

Report abuse

Richard, what game on you talking about the "cash draining out of"?

Football cash is growing (and not slowly). Most especially, almost exclusivey, EPL cash. EFC just needs to jump in and grab their share.
Bill Goodall
4   Posted 08/10/2010 at 04:53:51

Report abuse

Do you say eight teams with a chance of qualifying for the champions league because we now generally finish in the top eight. Or will it be 17 teams if we finish 17th.
To say it is unfair that some other club has a billionare pouring money into it is short sighted. What if in 2, 4 or even 10 years Bill Gates decides to pour billions into Everton. Will we stop supporting Everton because it is unfair to the other clubs that can't compete. I for one would cheer the house down if that was what won us the league.
Simon Birkett
5   Posted 08/10/2010 at 08:28:59

Report abuse

The key word has always been 'investors' ? we are not looking for buyers of the club but people to invest.

The other clubs who are attracting more public interest are doing so because they are in effect up for sale and the interested parties want sole ownership, not the shared or minimal ownership on offer by Kenwright.

As said above, a recession is on and people don't want to put all their kids' inheritance into one pot and are not as likely to invest in a rollercoaster market such as football.
Jimmy Hacking
6   Posted 08/10/2010 at 10:45:16

Report abuse

This whole "Investment" thing is bollocks. I will no doubt get shot down for saying so, but i've never understood this: who wants to "invest" say, £100 million in Everton?

What will that money be used for? Paying our debts? Restructuring our debts? Sprucing up Goodison? Buying two or three good players? That's not "investing" ? that is "giving". The benefactor would be lucky to get £50 million back from his or her £100 million investment.

So what Bill is looking for 24/7 is an idiotic multi-millioniare who will hand over the cash and then back off and keep his gob shut. Good luck with that one, Bill. And some of you wonder why his 24/7 search is fruitless...

We need a BUYER ? not an investor.

David Price
7   Posted 08/10/2010 at 10:36:52

Report abuse

Excellent summary Richard, loved the Italian job link, very good but i can't get the tune out of my head now !.
Don't think City have all bases covered, don't forget, their wages alone equate to their current income, so therefore excludes them from european football when the rule comes into force.
Yes, their income will increase with CL cash, but it will stop them from cornering the market on every player just to stop other clubs buying them.
Man Utd will need new owners, it's only Fergie keeping things together there, imagine Rafa sellng Ronaldo for £80m and getting nothing back for transfers and saying nothing. Fergie is a one off and their cycle of dominance is nearing it's end.
You'd think, however, we should have cracked it with a Chinese investment by now with our links etc. It's that step into the unknown with foreign investors that concerns me.
As a post said stay still or progress, but left out a third option and that is for the bus to fall off the edge.
Come on your lordship, £30m gift to the club, loose change that's all we want for the next couple of years.
Dave Lynch
8   Posted 08/10/2010 at 10:58:38

Report abuse

"Far better to have eight clubs with a chance of qualifying for the CL than four clubs that monotonously do so every year".

What a load of capatilist bollox. It would be much better if every club in the prem where in with a decent shout of qualifying. Why just 8? Football is fooked because of that very reason, to few clubs with massive spending power that rape the not so fortunate clubs of their talent year after year (Rooney anyone).

The only way round it is wage capping a la rugby league, look at what that did to Wigan who where pissing the title and the CC every season. It leveled the playing field no end. A wage cap would blow the Prem wide open.

Kevin Tully
9   Posted 08/10/2010 at 11:06:49

Report abuse

Good piece Richard. The current business model is unsustainable. When wages are 70 -80% of turnover, the bubble will burst, and Platini realises this. Clubs are going into administration just trying their place in the Premier League, and Portsmouth are a good example. Dundee in the S.P.L now find themselves in the same predicament. The circus at Anfield has magnified the problems with the media scrutinising every angle.

It will turn full circle, and clubs are going to have to survive on their income, apart from a few exceptions.

Arsenal seem to have the best business model, with matchday income being their bread and butter. This can go tits up though, if Wenger leaves and their team becomes also rans.

I believe if we can keep our debt mangeable, we will be in a decent position, once the playing field levels out.

Every club in the Premier League has been living beyond their means, and owners have written off hundreds of millions in loans.

Contrary to everyones belief, even Sky do not have an endless pot of gold. Once subscriptions are dwindling, the T.V. revenue will be adjusted accordingly.
Alex Gibney
10   Posted 08/10/2010 at 11:39:22

Report abuse

Yes we're well used to operating on a budget. That's why we can't attract the top players and why we will not compete for the top honours. As for Kenwright, the recession has only been here for the last 18 months not since 2004 or whenever he has been searching for investment. He just doesn't want to sell unless its on his terms.
Gavin Ramejkis
11   Posted 08/10/2010 at 11:34:23

Report abuse

The whole crux of this matter is the wording - "investor" rather than "buyer", BK is one of the biggest bullshitters going and his contradictions are as bad as his lies, "the club is for sale" suddenly changes to there are no investors. After so many years its a pretty damning indictment that after all the clubs who have been bought and sold that not one sign of change at Everton smacks of what must only be ridiculous terms on offer.

Wealthy people are so because of only a few scenarios; they inherit the wealth, they marry the wealth and or divorce it for a nice backhander/meal ticket/profit or they are ruthless business people and earn it. In all but the first scenario which are very few and far between we are talking about calculating money makers not old boys club, hope and a prayer chancers. You have absolutely no chance of finding anyone of that ilk willing to give money away. I'd love to see Keith Harris' remit, a true mission impossible.
Guy Hastings
12   Posted 08/10/2010 at 12:05:34

Report abuse

Good point made in the Guardian today about the potential new boys across the park redevloping Anfield instead of cracking one with the Stanley Park project. Disapproving noises already from the council on that score.

'New England Sports Ventures, the company bidding for control of Liverpool, is on a collision course with the city's council over plans to redevelop Anfield. The Liverpool chairman, Martin Broughton, has confirmed the club's prospective new owners NESV ? which has a track-record in redeveloping a sports stadium with the Boston Red Sox ? will consider upgrading Anfield if a £300m offer to gain control from Tom Hicks and George Gillett is accepted in the high court next week. It is understood that a commitment to put £100m towards a new stadium had previously been a condition of the sale.

The leader of the council, however, insists a U-turn on the stadium would be unlikely to gain approval. "I would discourage them [NESV] from redeveloping Anfield and would encourage them to stick to the commitment that is already in place because I think that is the best solution for everyone ? for the club and the city," councillor Joe Anderson said.

Gavin Ramejkis
13   Posted 08/10/2010 at 12:18:38

Report abuse

It is an interesting piece Guy but the posturing from the Council is a bit silly given the current economic climate. They obviously want the Stanley Park build to happen as it has more opportunities for employment and expenditure in the city but if there's no money it simply wont happen and eventually the planning permission will have to be withdrawn. They could then play hardball over redevelopment permission but again this would be a pointless exercise in spite which could see the purchase of the RS stutter and be withdrawn leaving them with nothing.

Money talks and it will be the prime driver of what happens either way and not the council.
Marc Williams
14   Posted 08/10/2010 at 12:03:56

Report abuse

Jimmy 6# : 100% agree with you fella.

The whole 'investment' spin by our current chairman is farcical to anyone with even the most minute amount of economic nous! He & his 'Ghost backers' came up with a business plan that was in effect nothing more than a gamble. If it came off ; retail development joint venture then sale, they could all have walked away for a huge profit for relatively little outlay.

However, it was all in the timing & with everything geared to Kirkby, they weren't interested in any other options & have now missed the boat for the foreseeable future. Moyes was integral to this business model in so far as he had to keep us stable on a limited budget, selling young talent or 'bargain buys' that rose in value, whenever cashflow was tight. He in effect had to buy the board time but as the economy turned the financial chickens have been coming home to roost for about 3 years.

With no more money for new players, Moyes has tried to hold on to what he has in contravention to the 'business plan'. By not maximising the return from our only real assets (the players, as everything else is sold, mortgaged, leased) the club are now exacerbating this situation. This cannot go on & with Pienaar going on the cheap in January or free in the summer, I fear a firesale next summer.

Norman Merrill
15   Posted 08/10/2010 at 12:42:26

Report abuse

It has been mentioned on Sky sports that Mr Henry would sooner make improvements to Anfield, as opposed to spending £400 million on new stadium. Something he did with the Red Sox stadium, talking about keeping heritage intact.
Peter Laing
16   Posted 08/10/2010 at 13:17:10

Report abuse

The issue that really irks with me is the role of Robert Earl, and the purpoted financial backing that Kenwright has received from Sir Philip Green to hold onto his train-set. What is our strategy? Do we have a five year plan? Why do we continue to underspend when the likes of Stoke etc seem to have more cash available for transfers? Seen as we are staying at Goodison what is the plan and can I wait any less than 10 mins in the Upper Bullens at half-time to take a piss?
Stephen Kenny
17   Posted 08/10/2010 at 13:41:10

Report abuse

I find it very odd that he refused a fully legitimate question of how much the club was up for sale for?

Surely it is much easier to sell something if prospective buyer's know the price?

Or maybe stating the price publicly would have blown the Blue Bill myth out of the water for even the most docile Evertonians. The club first, me second....... err o.k Bill.
Kevin Tully
18   Posted 08/10/2010 at 13:41:05

Report abuse

On plans for a new or shared stadium, the focus will be on the announcement of who wins the 2018 world cup bid.

The "new Anfield" was mentioned in the bid as a venue. If it's confirmed that the English bid has won, I think a groundshare becomes even more likely. The government may become involved as well as local councils, so there may well be large grants available. Imagine the uproar if they just invested in the shite.
Charles King
19   Posted 08/10/2010 at 14:22:00

Report abuse

Why is investment "less urgent"?

Have we won the league and I haven't noticed?

Outrageous complacency, talk about fiddling while Rome burns.
Paul McGinty
20   Posted 08/10/2010 at 15:02:54

Report abuse

A sidebar to this thread, as an expat living in the USA and a long time New York Times subscriber, I learned yesterday NESV is 16.58% owned by that venerable newspaper. Next up. Stevie G will be doing the OP Ed column! Seriously, it's so depressing that the Reds look like they are getting bailed out again.
Sean Picton
21   Posted 08/10/2010 at 16:13:50

Report abuse

I agree to an extent that we are very good at running our club on very little budget. However, my concerns are simple, but would be very damaging to our club should the following happen.

So far, we have been extremely lucky to keep hold of Arteta, Rodwell and Pienaar but, should they decide that they want to move to bigger and better things, then I do not think we are in for good times. I think this would then lead to us being a 10th to 12th place team (if we are not already), or thereabouts.

Other players like Jags, Coleman, Heitinga and Yakubu have all been linked with moves away. Losing a player like Arteta will obviously send a negative 'we are a selling club' message out across to the fans and remaining players. Maybe then the other players will assess reality that in fact we are not progressing quickly, if at all.

No pace in the team or height (upfront) are problems we have had for years and we have not addressed it. Also, we have been lucky so far to keep hold of Moyes as he is the budget maestro. Not good times at all ahead if players' heads are turned come January if we are around the 15th place mark.

David Hallwood
22   Posted 08/10/2010 at 17:17:59

Report abuse

Jay harris #1
You make some good points but I can't agree with your assertion that "The chance of Liverpool or United going under is about as strong as winning the lottery when you havent even bought a ticket".

In the great scheme of things football clubs aren't big businesses, and if Lehman Bros can go tits up then any firm can. I side with Richard that football is close to reaching the tipping point in finances, the most interesting comment of the season so far is from Abramovich, who has stated that he won't be pouring money into Chelsea and that it will have to stand on its own two feet like any other business.

Just because an individual has got 'biblical wealth' doesn't make them a soft touch, or have a wish to throw money away. In a strange way I would like to see football implode; sometimes boils need lancing
Richard Pike
23   Posted 08/10/2010 at 18:52:33

Report abuse

@ 1 Jay: I'm not suggesting Liverpool or United will go under; it seems to be very hard to actually kill a club off. For "oblivion", read "the Championship" or even "the Premier League mid-table". Ask their fans whether they think there's much of a difference.

@ 3 James: "...for the sake of argument...". And football cash may be growing. Now. But for how long? It can't go on forever. As David (22) says, there's likely to be a tipping point somewhere and the thrust of the piece is that we may be getting close to it now. What if Sky decide that the next TV deal isn't worth what they paid for this one? What if the far east gets bored with the Premier League? Which they might if Liverpool and ManYoo aren't looking like winning it, and that's not an unrealistic scenario in the near future.

@ 4 Bill, 8 Dave: yes, if I'd written this a year ago I'd have said five clubs, obviously. It needn't be eight, I picked that number because it's close to happening now, and it needn't even be the same clubs every year but without some consistency there's no incentive to build year on year, or to run your club well to maintain your status. Would it really be better if every Premier League team had a shot? You might as well write their names on the wall and throw a dart. Football has never been like that and it won't become so now. And are you saying it ISN'T grossly unfair that one individual can have so much influence? For the record, I'm not being short-sighted, do you think I haven't run the thought experiment of Bill Gates buying Everton and handing over his AmEx? I'd be very uncomfortable with it, to be honest.
Jon Cox
24   Posted 08/10/2010 at 18:47:02

Report abuse

I think I heard that it's Monday for the high court. I stand to be corrected.

The problem here is that the board of lfc and in contension with Hicks and Gillette. The difference between the the two is that Hicks and co. actually own the club. It, at the end of the day is irrelevant what the board say or think.

It was touted tonight on the radio that if all does not go according to plan then our illustrious enemy could well lose 9 points.

Because of the money they'll lose then watch out for a scorched earth policy being enacted, and a very protracted legal battle ensue.

Thing is RBS will be piling in come the 15th and everyone will be be finally convinced that the media are a bunch of the biggest lying sychophants in the history of mankind.

Not quite a rant but close.

By the way, every comment on this thread really enjoyable to read. Top draw stuff.
Jon Cox
25   Posted 08/10/2010 at 19:22:27

Report abuse

PS where's Tony Marsh, I'd love to hear what he has to say?
Gavin Ramejkis
26   Posted 08/10/2010 at 22:37:56

Report abuse

David Hallwood, Lehman Brothers were allowed to go to the wall as scapegoats to quite rightly scare the living shit out of the corrupts greedy bankers in the USA, its a pity that Fred the Shred and a few others weren't jailed and the likes of RBS weren't allowed to go bust, the tax payers would be a damn site better off. The crap about bankers leaving the country in their droves would have been disproved as other banks such as Barclays moved in and hoovered up the remains.
David Hallwood
27   Posted 08/10/2010 at 23:29:21

Report abuse

Gavin I agree with that BUT they did go to the wall as many other business have with a greater turnover and earning power than Man U. I was trying to make the point that I don't buy this theory that football clubs are somehow immune from 'proper' business, and the fact that there always seems to be someone to take over a football club to my mind doesn't factor in the fact that the debt that football clubs hold is becoming untenable.
Richard Pike
28   Posted 09/10/2010 at 01:24:02

Report abuse

John: is he the guy who'd be trying to convince us all that the lack of investment in the club, and probably the entire credit crunch, can be blamed solely on Hibbert and Osman?
Danny Lizars
29   Posted 09/10/2010 at 05:15:35

Report abuse

Just came across this article from the BBC website:?

It goes on there about the shite facing a possible points deduction if they are not bought out soon by the guy who wears red socks! But, with this being the shite, what are the chances that they will actually get a points deduction? If it was the mighty blues in the same situation would it be different?

Look at the way they got the rules bent a few years back to get into the Champions League! If they were to get a points deduction, it would certainly put a smile on my face! So they could be in administration by the time they play us a week Sunday. What a game that's going to be! Talking of which... anybody got any tickets going spare for the game?

Ernie McAllister
30   Posted 09/10/2010 at 07:49:11

Report abuse

but rather stating the bleedin' obvious: there's a recession on

I chuckle at statements like this. The only recession on is one in people's minds.

I am not into politics but lets be absolutely clear. The only recession that exists is one in people's minds fed to it by a very very stupid government.

Recession my arse, you cant and shouldn't ever use this as an excuse for the fat controller. This is the premier league its immune to any recession. The big clubs and all the lower ones to have been having record breaking attendances this season infact season on season actually.

The fact remains that the fat controller and his cronies haven't a single penny to invest, and his deflections and deceit not withstanding is the bleedin obvious point that you should have made.

Kenwright really really has to take his cronies and walk away.
They are doing far more damage by staying than he would if he walked away.

Ernie McAllister
31   Posted 09/10/2010 at 07:56:36

Report abuse

The other thing is that the boston red socks owner as stated he wont be paying their debt off all at once. He is only worth 550million in personal wealth. Therefore after buying for 300million he will still need to find an extra 100 million then he would need another 350m+ to redevelop the red shite? Thats all without strengthening their team on the pitch.

RBS want all the money now, and not at some future date. The supposedly new owner doesn't have the money to buyout it out anyway , certainly not in one lump sum, then we have the hicks of this world that will stall it.

There is a very long way to go with this, and hopefully it will be the end of the RS permanently. Good riddance to poor white trash I say
Gavin Ramejkis
32   Posted 09/10/2010 at 07:58:16

Report abuse

Ernie, I agree Black Bill is responsible but there bloody is a recession, I got stuck out of work tail end of last year because of it for four months despite enough qualifications and experience coming out of my backside than most and I'm pretty sure there are plenty of others on this website who have had similar if not worse stories of the recession and how it has hit them, average folks have been hit the hardest by this
Martin Clark
33   Posted 09/10/2010 at 10:27:52

Report abuse

Who'd have thought, a discussion about the recession on a football forum! Just found it amusing.

I'm not too fussed if Liverpool exist or not! It would be great to see them struggle for once! I know its not nice to take pleasure in others suffering but can make an exception.

Makes you wonder about our position. We have debt obviously, but it makes everything a gamble. If UEFA bring in their rule of not permitting teams into the competition who are not run within their means, it would make sense to move grounds now! So we would have increased income by the time the law comes in. That if we're still capable of qualifying for Europe in a few years.

I reckon we should share a stadium with the Redshite as they might not be around much longer and it would be a waste of an opportunity!

We could call it Anfield 2 Everton 3!
Bill Slater
34   Posted 09/10/2010 at 11:04:26

Report abuse

Red Sox fans are moaning about their owner buying a soccer club.
Charles King
35   Posted 09/10/2010 at 10:22:41

Report abuse

Just seen Broughton (the fella who invited the latest yank) blink first, he's laying the cable talking how administration would be catastrophic.

Could it be, could it really be?

That excruciating youtube video could be the final nail, supercilious untouchable bullies, posturing in front of their favourite media the camera.

Now Hicks and Gillette faced with losing millions have declared war, the unanswered years of pure bile culminating with comparisons of being rapists despite the Benitez's transfer folly shows every sign of dragging past the RBS deadline, administration is a real possibility.


Jon Cox
36   Posted 09/10/2010 at 13:30:36

Report abuse

Agreed Charles.

The two guys have never answered back at their critics through the media of the press, and now they'll come out fighting.

As Carles says, this could go way past the deadline and could get very messy indeed.

Anyway Jimmy Corkhill was always a dead wrong 'un.
Lee Kidd
37   Posted 09/10/2010 at 13:47:08

Report abuse

If Liverpool went into administration, I'd be straight on e-Bay looking for the worlds smallest violin.
Jay Harris
38   Posted 09/10/2010 at 16:11:31

Report abuse

Calm down Calm down.

Even if Hicks and Gillette's holding company (Kop Holdings) were forced under by RBS there is no certainty the league will deduct 9 points as it is a holding company and not the club.

Anyway they're all just flexing their muscles right now just watch out for a side deal on or before the day of the court hearing.

I dont see their pact with the devil running out soon unfortunately.
Bill Slater
39   Posted 09/10/2010 at 16:00:47

Report abuse

Just a thought. If they do go into Administration and lose 9 points, is it likely they will still go down? I honestly don't think they would, and I reckon many RS fans would take the hit of finishing lower-mid table just to get rid of the current All American Heroes.

The real point is what else does administration mean?

There has been a mention in the media that the vultures would circle and pick up the Club for a song. So what? It means they would have more to invest after they have bought the place and new players.

Would all/some of the decent players have to be sold as part of the fire sale? Are they any good anyway?

At the end of it all, would administration not be that bad for them as their big debts will be written off and so long as they stay in the Prem, they could be ok in a couple of seasons. I bleeding hope not.
John McLoughlin
40   Posted 09/10/2010 at 17:43:42

Report abuse

As long as BK is looking for an investor, rather than a new owner, we'll be skint. We will continue not challenging for the league and fall further down the pecking order. Our best younger players ie Fellaini & Rodwell will move to teams that want to win things.
Tony I'Anson
41   Posted 09/10/2010 at 18:40:38

Report abuse

If I were the brand manager of Disney, Sony or dare I say Honda, I would be spending much time sitting on the toilet. However, in this scenario, the rules of branding do not apply.

Their fiasco actually strengthens the brand across the world if David beats Goliath. Or even if David is defeated, the brand loyalty will be reflected in an increased fan base across the world (shirt sales) and create another global generation of Red fans in Asia, China and other far flung corners of the globe. Did anyone stick up for "Rockys" opponents?

I also hear some film director is looking to cash in and make a film about this fiasco. If this takes off, it's a commercial dream for them as it will only serve to strengthen their brand. Is this why the Red Sox guy is looking at this and has just increased his offer? Hmmm, wonder if he has any contacts in Hollywood.
Tony X Williams
42   Posted 10/10/2010 at 11:47:20

Report abuse

Remember, lads, this is Liverpool we are talking about. Not a chance in hell of them being deducted points or going into administration. Remember what happened when they failed to qualify for the Champions League... yep, they changed the rules so 'darling' LFC can still get in!

The same fucking thing will happen again, the Premier League won't let it happen. Those red twats will worm out of it some bleedin way or other.
Ped Pearl
43   Posted 13/10/2010 at 03:20:04

Report abuse

It's just been reported in the News of the World that Peter Johnson is in emergency rescue talks aimed at saving the Red Shite. This has alerted supermarket giant Netto who want to help them build a new Red Shite stadium and shopping centre in Widnes.

This one has legs guys. Agent Johnson knows he will never get a better opportunity to take control of his first love and, with the aid of some Scandinavian businessmen, they can fuck off where they belong... with the added bonus that it's closer to John Lennon Airport ? so easier access for their fan base. Back of the net(to)!

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.

© ToffeeWeb

Latest News

Subscribe to The Athletic, Get 40% off

Online Football Betting with Betway

Bet on Everton and get a deposit bonus with bet365 at

Recent Articles

Talking Points & General Forum

Pinned Links


We use cookies to enhance your experience on ToffeeWeb and to enable certain features. By using the website you are consenting to our use of cookies in accordance with our cookie policy.