Season 2011-12 Fan Articles
Mentioned in Dispatches
By Matt Traynor :: 25/07/2011
43 Comments (»Last)
Reactions to the progamme ?How to Buy a Football Club? that was shown on Channel Four a few nights ago have been appearing in numerous threads, and have mainly been a mix of shock, surprise and fear about what could happen to Everton, and how lucky we are to have one of us as Chairman.
The only thing that shocked me is the reaction to a piece of investigative journalism that was, frankly, big on hyperbole as the hype around the programme. There were a few points that were made that were not reinforced, as it didn?t suit the programme maker's aims, and I?d like to draw those out here, and see what others think.
Firstly, there are a lot of these companies like London Nominees that operate. I have worked for one such firm as an advisor, and they all operate perfectly legally, because there is nothing illegal in what they are doing.
The key to understanding why the revelations in Dispatches are nothing to worry about from our perspective is the clubs that were mentioned as being for sale. All of them were Championship or League 1 clubs. That?s probably why they didn?t bother trying to interview Richard Scudamore, who would normally be only to happy to promote the Premier League as being the cleanest there is in terms of its governance ? compared to some leagues in Europe, and around the world, it is.
What London Nominees were offering was the chance to buy a club, and make a killing on it by getting promotion to the Premier League, and the riches therein. Where London Nominees over-stepped their mark was in saying that they would be willing to help the eventual owner have a controlling stake in more than one club, which is clearly against the rules. The way that looked to me was of a couple of guys who would say anything to get a deal going, and would at some point down the line, try to encourage the investors to focus on one club. If that didn?t transpire, I?d still expect due diligence from both the selling club and the Football League to flush out any conflict of interest issues.
The other thing to consider, was the prices quoted for the clubs were around £15M. I believe that all the clubs mentioned are majority or solely owned by the sellers, not like the Everton situation where a substantial number of shares are held by individuals.
London Nominees stated that their payment would be 5% of the sale price in cash, and 20% in shares of the club. Simple mathematics tells us that only 3 teams can get promotion to the EPL each year. Therefore what London Nominees are trying to do is have a 20% stake in as many clubs as possible, which they can then sell themselves for a tidy profit if the club makes it, and let go to rot if they don?t. Many Private Equity companies do this ? the company I worked for raised funds for new start-ups in a technology sector, and the 5% in cash, and 20% in shares is fairly standard in doing that. One company going to IPO makes the $$$ for all of us; others won?t make it... but if on balance you get a couple of successes, you?re doing well. If a company looked like it was struggling, we?d break it up and put the best bits into other companies.
I don?t believe that under current regulations there would be anything wrong with a company (or individual) having a 20% interest in more than one team. That is one area that maybe the regulators should look at. The Culture Media, and Sports Select Committee, having witnessed their ?grilling? of the Murdoch media moguls last week, do not fill me with confidence that they will actually publish anything meaningful in their final report into Football in the UK. Almost everyone I know in the game is expecting an endorsement of the Football League and The Premier League, and a criticism of the governing body globally. I can almost see Blatter quaking in his boots...
So overall, my view of the programme was ?move along, nothing to see here?. I personally doubt that a company like that would ever see Everton as a viable target, and would hope that any such approach would be given the short-shrift it deserved. If Everton is to be sold, one would hope that the buyers would be in it for the long-haul and, as long as we can remain in the top tier, it?s unlikely we?d attract the attention of such carpet baggers.
Reader Comments (43)
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
2 Posted 25/07/2011 at 19:34:22
3 Posted 25/07/2011 at 19:43:01
4 Posted 25/07/2011 at 19:49:06
5 Posted 25/07/2011 at 19:50:30
Look at that kopite at Wolves, how come that mighty club is outspending us now and are about to start redeveloping their ground, he is hardly a rich Arab.
6 Posted 25/07/2011 at 19:42:15
I was really let down by that report. Because, 60 minutes after it was finished, I was left scratching my head and wondering why they even bothered to air the show.
Even their attempts to drag Bryan Robson's name through the mud failed. Their silly quotes from clubs and individuals where laughable ? "Alex Ferguson denies promising players to his mate." Shockingly obvious.
7 Posted 25/07/2011 at 20:03:34
There have been many posts on here stating why have Birmingham been able to get investment and we have not and why have Blackburn got investment when we have not.
Lets be honest when these takeovers were taking place there is a considerable amount of people on this site who would have wanted them to come into everton? People have been saying get Kenwright out at all costs.
Suddenly Yeung has had his assets frozen and they are in the championship and selling off half their squad and Blackburn have not bought Ronaldinho, Beckham and Raul they have in fact sold their best player.
I don't think people can really argue with what Richard's posted because if they were being honest they would have had everton sold to the two owners i mentioned above in a flash.
I really don't think you can deny that, can you?
8 Posted 25/07/2011 at 20:01:48
Football has become a sordid business now with parasitic agents being the most obvious feature of that.
However, I don't think we should overlook the players in all this. However much they protest, '' well you would take it if someone offered it to you '', it's still a fact that Everton spend around £60million a year in players' wages. In 5 years you could build an Emirates stadium with that money.
Greedy sleazeballs like Ashley Cole, Rio Ferdinand and John Terry crying about only be on £100k a week. Football has gone rotten.
9 Posted 25/07/2011 at 20:17:13
11 Posted 25/07/2011 at 20:19:14
Nobody wants a shyster to take control, but for a man to claim he's looking for investment for 24/7 over 11 years and finding none, while other clubs find new ownership is understandably going to lead them to ask questions. The answer is he's not looking.
12 Posted 25/07/2011 at 20:21:00
If the FA were't so spineless and inept in deciding who was fit to own a club then a little more dignity would return to football.
Richard Dodd, I think the last line of your post is way too generous to Kenwright but apologize for my response to the rest of it.
13 Posted 25/07/2011 at 20:31:56
Whether the club is up for sale or not, or whether Kenwright is after too much money is not the point i was making. I don't know the answer to those questions i could guess but like all of us it would only be a guess.
What i am saying is that Richard states "Far too many Toffeewebbers would sell to the first shyster who flashed a few Quid/Dollars/Rubels etc". Now if you were being honest do you not agree that there is a considerable amount of people on this site who would have wanted at the time for Kenwright to have sold to Carson Yeung or the Indians at Blackburn? I could look through the archives to find posts, but i think we all know that they are there.
That is why i don't agree with what Andy states, unless you don't regards someone like Yeung as a "shyster"?
14 Posted 25/07/2011 at 20:58:33
Everton have a relatively stable income, which funds a squad of premiership players being paid premiership wages. Wolves had a major boost to their income when they were promoted two years ago and the significant majority of their squad are still essentially championship players receiving championship wages.
In a couple of year?s time (if they survive that long) they?ll hit the same financial glass ceiling that we have but, for now, it would be stranger if they didn?t have a larger transfer budget than us.
As for the ?that mighty club? dig, if their fans put as much stock in the ?If you know yer history? drivel as ours do, they?d claim to be bigger than the likes of Spurs and Man City.
15 Posted 25/07/2011 at 21:14:48
I understand what your saying, alls I am saying is in such a short space of time that Morgan seems to have done not too bad a job, he must be doing something right to be able to develop their stadium, whilst all Kenwright has done is sell off and mortgage off everything we own and if he had not struck lucky with Walter Smiths advice over Moyes only christ knows where we would be.
I am not begging for an Arab, just someone who can do basic business like not taking down tents and knocking holes in walls to build on ground we actually don't own, that is just gross missmanagement of the highest order.
16 Posted 25/07/2011 at 21:25:44
Am I missing something here?
17 Posted 25/07/2011 at 21:33:13
18 Posted 25/07/2011 at 21:45:49
19 Posted 25/07/2011 at 21:39:41
We need real top quality head cases like these.
It might go tits up for a bit but look how it ends up - marvellous.
20 Posted 25/07/2011 at 21:47:46
21 Posted 25/07/2011 at 22:08:59
"Thank God,Blue Bill respects our club enough not to take their money! "
He respected the club a lot when he tried to sell our souls with DK though didnt he.
22 Posted 25/07/2011 at 23:04:06
Aiden, Everton is a failing business but it's not for sale.
23 Posted 25/07/2011 at 23:28:40
We have a premiership wage bill but a championship business model. Which is why we're so fucked now. That is entirely Bill & co's fault. We've on the whole been a pauper of a club for 11 years. Years of austerity and after all that shrift we have record debts, no transfer funds and still no closer to a new stadium. Thank god Bill didn't sell to a shyster, eh.
24 Posted 25/07/2011 at 23:36:12
Meanwhile the stagnation continues, and strangely enough, clubs below us (in terms of league position) continue to find ways of investing and financing new players... It's going to catch up with us eventually I fear.
25 Posted 26/07/2011 at 02:15:12
it has already caught up with us.
We have let Pienaar,Vaughan, Gosling and Bellefield go and have nothing to show for it.
We had Yak,Yobo and Vaughan out on loan to save the wage bill when we were crying out for reinforcements and we only needed to get 4 or 5 points more to qualify for Europe and get a higher league placing(worth almost 1 million per place) but the shortsighted mingebags that our board consists of would not have an extra penny put into the squad content instead to run up over 20 milion in unexplained operating costs.
26 Posted 26/07/2011 at 03:48:12
We already have one shyster on the board, no need for another one!!
27 Posted 26/07/2011 at 07:15:18
28 Posted 26/07/2011 at 07:56:29
Well let's just hope we never have one of THEM running Everton.
(rolls eyes, tuts, shakes head)
29 Posted 26/07/2011 at 07:59:14
It's not about BK ? it never has been as he only owns just 27% of EFC; we have 73% of other shareholders yet you fail ever to mention this simple fact. BK doesn?t and has never owned EFC out right. COYB
30 Posted 26/07/2011 at 10:53:20
Has this changed?
31 Posted 26/07/2011 at 11:26:53
I wouldn't put it past somone putting their hands in the till.
Doddy, who are BCR Sports? Why has Earl not been to Goodison for 3 years? What influence does Phil Green have on our club?
32 Posted 26/07/2011 at 13:04:26
33 Posted 26/07/2011 at 13:59:33
"Production of Taramasalata and Houmous have been cancelled in Greece due to the possibility of a double-dip recession."
34 Posted 26/07/2011 at 14:48:26
35 Posted 26/07/2011 at 15:18:52
36 Posted 26/07/2011 at 17:43:32
EFC as a private company don?t need to pander to minority shareholders, company business is conducted at Board meetings not AGMs. They need a majority to change this, yes... but that is life; get over it, because that?s how business works. It's not a closed shop at all, it?s the real world that you just don?t seem to understand at all.
We, me and you as fans, don?t own EFC; you need to look at what they do in the form of business matters, such as accounts etc, which must be, when appropriate, kept within. Fact is the club is officially for sale but you won't or chose not to understand that, whether they have an AGM or not, and each shareholder can choose who they sell that share to ? that?s no different to any other business worldwide.
Is that so hard for you to understand or are you just so far gone in your bitterness that you have lost what is real and what isn?t? By all means critize, but the Companies Act is not and has not been designed by the EFC board. COYB
37 Posted 26/07/2011 at 22:03:17
Is it not the case that Everton's Articles of Association did have the set-up for AGMs but 'Blue' Bill fucking Kenwright and his band of merry men changed the Articles of Association and removed them?
Also, we have DOCUMENTARY proof, in the case of the Kirkby enquiry, that EFC is not for sale.
Everton is not for sale; it is looking for 'INVESTMENT'
38 Posted 26/07/2011 at 22:57:01
Your responses Alan smack of the sort of responses Elstone or Ian Ross would come out with virtually verbatim. I chose to look at the information in the public domain Alan and not listen to your club plant like ramblings. Elstone was quoted on oath saying the club had never previously been for sale at the DK hearings, he subsequently used both the words sale and very quickly reverted to the word investment. A modicum of education would be able to identify that these are completely different things, as a businessman if I was offered an investment opportunity in a business I wouldn't expect to be taking control of it, if it was offered to me for sale I would, see the difference yet?
BK has a litany of lies over his 12 or so years of being Chairman at the club or will you deny these as rumours too? My so called "bitterness", a delightful term BK's fans cry whenever challenged, is that such a poor excuse for an argument be attempted when the questions asked of the board are perfectly valid. If the company didn't need AGMs why bother to maintain them for the shareholders for the best part of the club's history right until the shambolic and shameful property scam of DK was thrust upon the club by the Chairman and his board, the very questions being asked at the EGM that were finally exposed at the DK hearings under oath. Stick to an amalgam of reading all the facts to hand Alan before churning out the tired party line, it doesn't wash.
39 Posted 27/07/2011 at 08:03:22
If you look at my post, I don?t back BK all the time ? I mention ?content? and give my reasons. It amazes me how you get so angry and send personal abuse at me and others and to be honest some of your posts just let your argument down which is a shame, maybe you should look at Tom's replies ? they are extremely professional and interesting and yes, provide a different opinion.
Question my acumen as much as you want, I really don?t care ? I have thick skin and get it daily. I give my opinion based on EFC as a business and not a fan; I can separate them both on non-match days, you can't ? that?s why you are as weak as BK. Passion is a bonus in business; having passions and direction is rare.
I understand completely what you post but they are side issues. The DK inquest answers are not in EFC constitution mapped for posterity of EFC, they said what had to be said at the time but, as soon as the appeal failed, the business plan completely changed and they are now just historical text.
The sad thing about the recent posts and difference of opinion is we all want the same resolution? goal, whatever you want to call it ? so maybe me and everybody else should concentrate on solutions? COYB
40 Posted 27/07/2011 at 08:42:43
On another point, you have accused me several times of giving the club line and also being a club ?plant? (normally called a scouse Bastard at work, not a plant!) I think last week. I can assure you I?m not and I?m sure TW can easily back up my identity from my email address. I?m just a life-long fan and STH that has a different opinion about our problems than some others. COYB
41 Posted 27/07/2011 at 09:06:53
What the company in the programme was essentially advocating, was that you could make your money by getting a club into the PL and then selling up/cashing in, at which point they would also sell their shareholding.
I'm not convinced how easily this could be achieved. I can't remember off-hand any example of any club getting to the Prem, and then immediately selling up (can anyone confirm?)
So whilst the current Premier League rules would stop an individual or entity having a significant interest of more than 10% in more than 1 Premier League or Football League club, I think use of proxies, and different investment vehicles (as advocated in the Dispatches programme) could get around that - and that was my point about whether the authorities should consider that.
NTL's proposed 9.9% investment into multiple clubs was, I believe, part of it's strategy of acquiring stakes in clubs that it believed would be the mainstay of the Premier League, to further it's own media growth aims. Again, some might question whether a group hoping to acquire broadcasting rights was in a conflict of interest position (imagine the impact on the value of their stake if a team was to suffer relegation?) The question never arose.
The main concern, again if memory serves me correctly, was that Tottenham's owners, Enic, also owned controlling stakes in clubs in Greece and the Czech Republic in the late 90s, and those two teams got drawn together in the UEFA Cup, which caused a problem then. Can't recall how they got round it...
42 Posted 29/07/2011 at 10:14:07
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/14338011.stm and appears to be valued at £145m
43 Posted 29/07/2011 at 17:38:01
We will never be sold because Everton FC are hiding something from us fans... Until the truth come out, we will be a shadow of the likes of Liverpool. I hate saying it, but when they protested last year, us Blues were all laughing at them... but guess what ? it worked for them!
Maybe we should do it too... but we won't cos we settle for second best all the time and the club know that; that's why they treat us like this. Maybe someone should protest against the club? I would, and just might do one day but when we're down in the dumps and selling all our players, the fans will jump on it. Shame we never did this years ago.
44 Posted 29/07/2011 at 19:56:30
Let's have a grown-up thought of what will happen if the protest wins, you can't do that later ? it would put us on the scrap heap? Red Shite 30 mins from going bump and they lost control of the company and its creditors took over, the bank, and they will sell to the penny to cover their debt which is what they did for the RS. COYB
Add Your Comments
In order to post a comment, 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 Talking Points submissions across the site.
1 Posted 25/07/2011 at 19:26:19