I really dont understand the clapping of Kenwright. I dont agree that booing was correct neither as it could have impacted on the team. I did neither. Only traffic on the M6 stopped me from joining in the protest, and only made it into goodison 5 minutes before kick off. Does Kenwright really have that much support for the job he has done/doing?

Oh - another one of these. The problem is David, that while fans like myself DID have every sympathy (and a little admiration) for the BU's cause, this constant ramming of your opinion down our throats is leading to a revolt. We have heard your message, some of us agree with a lot of what you say. But while most of you HEAR reasonable retorts to the (sometimes vitriolic) nature of your cause, very few of you actually LISTEN.

The only reason Kenwright was cheered by the MAJORITY of the crowd was because a MINORITY booed. Do you see what happens when you try and force a mass of people to forcibly share your own opinion? They begin to react in a manner contrary to what you necessitated.

YOU made them pick a side. So stop crying now they have.

Just read that a prospective buyer has walked away because of the asking price.

£100m, plus the £40m worth of debt.

IF this is true, then we all know the reason the club has not been sold.

If he loves the club so much, why does he want such a huge profit?

David and Dan, as unpalatable as it may be to you both, the simple conclusion to draw from the cheering and clapping is that there were very many people at Goodison who have widely differing views on Bill Kenwright to your own.

Without making any comment as to whether I support him or not, and whether yesterday's protest was appropriate, or not, I do sense that the support offered Bill Kenwright was in part a manifestation of the feeling among many that the march was both futile and misguided. I know for sure it has been derided in many quarters and has been the source of great amusement to a number of my (non-Evertonian) friends. In particular the "simple aims" cited in the media had people pissing themselves with laughter.

Never underestimate the ability of others to form different views to others (regardless of the sense or otherwise of one's argument).

Too many "others" ;o)

What is it that Kenwright supporters think he has done for the club? i could have done what he has. sell all assets and high profile players to the highest bidder, and re-mortgaged the clubto the hilt, and spend a big chunk of other expences on his company credit card lavishing would be investors that live in Manchester bedsits.

You seem to contradict yourself slightly. Firstly, I don't feel as though you're 'occupying the middle ground'. But also, you say in one sentence

"I have never booed Everton in all my time of watching but wouldn't condone [condemn] others that do, as ? if they have paid good money to watch ? it is their right to air their views"

And yet at the end of the post you say

"I beg my fellow supporters to not let the love that we all have for our club and the support for Everton lead to confusion and hence support for the current regime".

Finally, very well said Max Fine, if that is your real name...!

Sorry, to clarify, you're saying on one hand, yes please express your views, thats your right, having paid your money. But then say (post-Kenwright cheers), actually, please don't express them, unless I agree with them...which I don't!

What is clear from yesterday, is that 35,000 match going Evertonians had a chance to express there views yesterday. about 3% did so before the game. 10's of thousands did it when Kenwright's face appeared on a 10ft screen.

Max Fine,

One of the most sensible posts on this website for as long time.

I completely agree with Max Fine. I'm certainly not in favour of Kenwright in all that he does and I was certainly against DK with every fibre in my body, but the lunacy of BU and their "protest march" has led me to picking a side and it's not the one I thought I'd go for. I know most match going Evertonians feel the same as me. We're not 100% with BK but we do understand that there is no real alternative, there is absolutely no chance of investment and the lunatics are just having their 15 minutes of fame and severely damaging the club.

If BU really want to help the club attract investment (for investment read gift - as there is no chance of a return on the money) why not work with BK to have some form of investment via a mass share issue to a conglomerate of fans. Have BU even looked into the fans buying the club? It seems to me that they do nothing but pick holes in what BK and the club does but do not offer any solutions. 50,000 fans could put £1,000 in each to buy say 50% of the club for £50m. I'm sure there's different connotations (100,000 for £1,000 or 50,000 for £2,000, etc.) that be could be considered to raise £100m - £150m to buy the club and provide some funds for the manager.

Why don't these pressure groups look into solutions? Bar a fans takeover, there is absolutely no chance of a takeover in the next five years as Everton are not a good investment and there is no blue rich enough to throw £100m+ away, and that is BK's problem.

How much people can change in a couple of weeks. QPR Booing his appearance on the screen. Yesterday applauding it.

People are fucking gullible.

Shaun [11] - I suspect you'll find it's mainly that the majority were silent but now the battle lines are being drawn there is no room for people being silent.

Steve,

In my opinion if you asked all the people on the protest to follow your idea and give £1,000.00. I would imagine you would not see well over 50% of them for dust.

I'm not saying it is a bad idea just that in my opinion that is the reality of what will happen.

Shaun,page 6 of the football section in the Mail on Sunday.

" Chairman Bill Kenwright has put a £100m price tag on Everton despite their precarious finances. At least one serious potential buyer has walked away from a Goodison deal ,believing the asking price is too high with Everton £40m in debt."

That's my point Dave. They do not want to put their hand in their pockets. They just want to moan, or else BU would have been banging this drum long ago, and then we wouldn't have any divisions in the ranks of the fans.

I am loving the anger being directed at The BU. If don't support them fine, but some of the criticisms raised have been ridiculous.

Max fine......... living proof that some will swallow any oldbull. How long have you been posting I wonder? You seem to be forgetting the silent voices who didn't turn up to our lowest Saturday league attendance in 9yrs....... over 5000 less than the corresponding fixturelast yr. what great progress this once great club is making? Whatever clapping you heard was mute in comparison to the chants of the protest...... I felt no need to boo inside the ground, even though I had attended the protest. Strange how your saviour wasn't roundly applauded at the QPR game.

Tom you're making Max's point for him. Did he nail his colours to the mast? But now you're saying he's against you as you attended the protest. People like you are forcing others to take sides and when you do this, some people who would not have run to BK's defence now feel that they have no choice. If BU wants to succeed in it's objectives it needs to stop being so divisive. It's human nature for people to not be told what to think and many will do u-turns on their own beliefs just for that reason.

I cannot see the club being sold. There is no one out there to buy it, certainly not in the way that we want. And if BK does sell it I believe he'll have to sell it so cheaply that he and the other shareholders will make a loss.

My thoughts on the reaction from the ground when BK came on was one of astonishment.
I honestly think that some people don't deserve a club like Everton - or put it another way, they deserve an Everton as it is at the moment.
The saddest day of me ever ever being an evertonian bar none.
These blue union lads have absolutely no chance with the majority of the ground clapping a picture of Bill Kenwright - it just shows that not only are they fighting a board without a clue, they are fighting a fan base that is equally clueless.
Who is the fool - the fool or the fool who follows the fool?

I said in the live match day forum that if Bill looked foreign and talked funny he'd be out on his ear. I really don't know what his appeal is other than his luvvie blue ways.

Steve #16

" There is no one out there to buy it "

Didn't the club say they were in talks with three potential buyers this week alone?

Tom Hughes.

It's possible, Tom, that yesterday's relatively poor attendance was due to Villa selling less than half of their allocation.

I was at the game and, to be honest, I didn't know what was going on as I wasn't looking at the screen. When I realised, I was surprised too, as were most around me. The subs were out warming up by the Gwladys mind, so how much applause was aimed at them not the screen is anyones guess!

Not officially that I saw Kevin, but no doubt that's just one of the club's infamous smokescreens.

How can anyone in their right mind buy Everton? There's is no way to make money out of us unless you buy for a bottom price and then sell for much more (including any money spent on infrastructure and the playing side). I truly believe that as the global financial crisis deepens (double dip recession is inevitable now), the football bubble will burst (attendances are vastly down across the league) and so football clubs will be worse less as a result.

Only an Evertonian with money to burn would buy us, and who is out there, Lord Granchester? Sir Ted Leahy? Sir Paul McCartney? No chance. We won't be sold as it does not make financial sense, and it would not matter who was selling us, as we're a vastly overpriced and poorly maintained dinosaur of a bygone era.

Steve, the club would be sold within a week if the asking price was realistic.

The business turns over £80m. It has value and prestige.

At the moment, negotiations probably don't get much further than " How much, you must be mental...."

Nick (#23) if BK was called Peter Johnson, those fans who are defending BK would be foaming at the mouth trying to get him out.

Kevin, the business is bleeding money. The only way to make money is to sell off most of the players to reduce the wage bill, and we all know where that will take us.

Also, we cannot just sell to anyone. Apart from City, no decent owners have taken over in recent times. The RS are in safer hands at the moment, but let's look again in a few years, as for everyone else they're all getting relegated. Even the much trumpeted Lerner has reeled in Villa's spending and appears to be tightening the reins.

What's happening is natural. Football clubs are spending too much money and need to sort themselves out. No one is going to come in and get a cheque book out and start spending £50m a window, We'd just carry on as we have done.

We're not an attractive proposition. Look were we come in shirt sales world wide, look at our gate reciepts, so what if we get 35,000 most weeks, we charge much less than most. Do some sums, 35,000 at £30 or 30,000 at £40?

We need to jettison dead wood and to clear our wage bill ready for turbulence of the financial markets in the next few years. The next TV deal will be for much less (particularly if the pubs do not need to pay sky to show games as looks likely).

There is no knight in shining armour. In my opinion the financial crisis could be good for us as it will lessen the rich poor divide and should see foreign players head elsewhere, Russia and the Middle East, whilst South Americans can now afford to stay in Brazil. Which means us, with our never ending supply of competent local talent will be able to compete.

I've already commented on Kenwright on many other posts, the clapping today was a sad indication of the lack of concern of so many supporters.

Sorry if you felt that I was contradictory in my post. I am no wordsmith nor do I have the personal wealth to have a clever PR department spinning yarns of journeys to Goodison on my late uncles bycycle. I was trying to illustrate that I am a fair minded individual and not a beholder of any extreme views , I appologise if that didnt come across. As for Max Fines comments of ramming my views down peoples throats that was not my intention either. Furthermore if its someone who holds dictatorial views and will not enter into dialogue(except when It suits) your after Max - I think you may have a picture of him on your bedside table.

So now we know .....or do we? According to the Mail on Sunday, Blue Bill has put a £100M price tag on Everton but with the debt level still at c£40M, one aspiring buyer has already walked away!

Has Bill got this figure right? With the issued share capital valued at no more than £30M, is a premium of £70M a little unrealistic?

Having seen the outcome of recent takeovers at Blackburn and Birmingham, I`d like Bill to stay but if the price is right... but is it?

Whatever the rights and wrongs of particular actions, the campaign by the BU is both understandable and necessary in putting pressure on the Board.

But the excellent points made by Max Fine are illustarted by some of the later comments in this thread - that the majority of fans are 'not concerned' or will 'swallow any old bull'. Yesterday they were being described as 'sheep' etc.

I suspect that, like me, the majority are worried and sometimes repelled by the disproprtionate blame and sheer hatred directed at BK and the current board (often seen on this site). That may help to explain the clapping at the game. The most vocal critics may not like it, but if the campaign is to be successful in raising the level of pressure, they have to start from where people are and not level gratuitous insults to fellow blues.

Richard - Don't worry as we are always told that Bill doesn't take a "penny" out of the Club etc.

Therefore, he's hardly likely to sell the Club for an "unrealistic" figure which would make him possibly a very handsome profit on his original investment, is he?

It's in The Mail so it must be true.

It's a hell of a coincidence that is come to light the day after the march.

I don't think there was as much cheering for him as people think. His face appearing on the screen coincided with "Stoke 1 Liverpool 0" going across the bottom of the screen! I for one was cheering that!!

If its true then it's a crazy price to ask

I guess the big question always has been "How much do you want for EFC?" and we've never had an answer.

£100M..........Jesus!!!

I hope it's not true.

Shaun. Think the journalist involved may have been working on this for some time.

It would explain the lack of 'serious buyers.' It takes two to tango and you also need a 'serious seller', not a blagger working on behalf of two greedy Spurs fans.

Isn't it strange how when the Chairman, Manager and players of Everton Football club put out statements they are all treated as lies, damned lies.

Some hack from the Mail on Sunday invents a story of seismic proportions that BK is asking for £70 million over the odds, and its BK and the board found out. My god Get real.

Michael.

I am friends with a Football journalist of a national paper and I remember once suggesting that they make up stories, especially regarding transfers.

His reply, which I do believe as I know him very well, was that there is never any smoke without fire. In other words they will have some foundation for it. With regard to transfers it can be news reaches them from a trusted source within a Club, but also agents, managers etc may hint that a certain player is moving. Obviously in some cases the.media are being manipulated by a player, agent, manager etc who wants to 'get the ball rolling without doing things formally such as asking for a move, circulating a player for transfer etc. So not all stories are 100% accurate, but nonetheless they won't publish things with no foundation.

In this case, I would suspect they have been tipped off by a Club insider or somebody close that ' prospective buyer' and have gone with the story. Could be the BK regime putting a number out tyhere to invite interest or somebody trying to drive the price down or even exactly wahat it says, that a prospective buyer has walked away because he was asked for £100m.

Whichever way, there will be some foundation in there somewhere.

Michael (9).. Kenwright has been proven to be a liar, and the statements by staff which he pays each week are likely to be a little biased, aren't they? If not, they are unlikely to rock the boat with controversial statements.

Karl (10) " there is never any smoke without fire. In other words they will have some foundation for it." = hacked phone calls?

I'm still waiting to find out what these people were applauding. No investment? Being treated with utter contempt? No assets? No signings? A crumbling stadium? Crippling debt? Banned agms?

Clap Kenwright?

Will I fuck.

Karl 10 Are you seriously telling me that Journalists have never put a story out there which have had no foundation at all. I dont for one minute beleive that.

Alex 11 For the BK haters this is mannah from heaven. Anther story to beat him with. I dont believe that he would be asking for £100 million for the club. I think that the smoke you speak of may have come as Karl says from a prospective buyer to drive the price if anything.

Michael @9, all Bill or Bobby have to do is refute the allegedly spurious, journo-hack scumbag made-up, plucked from the air figure.

Or, pehaps, as is much more likely, keep schtum and don't dignify the blatant lie with any king of riposte.

Or is that not "getting real".

Michael.

I think you will find that these days most of the reputable ones (and I would include the Mail on Sunday in that, knowing who I know) have to be able to justify their source to their Editor for fear of ruining their relationship with players and Managers who they rely on for stories.

And Alex, mentioning hacked phonecalls by less reputable publications is a perfect example of them publishing stories that they KNEW were true even though the way they found out was disgraceful.

Finally, Michael: How much do you think BK is asking for Everton? I'm not going to agree or disagree, but just wondered what you think would be the price bearing in mind the debts and liabilities total around £80m and the stadium issue.

I thought it was the Villa fans doing the cheering!!

And good points made above about subsituting Bill Kenwright for Peter Johnson or "dem Yanks".
Dunno how he gets away with it, honestly I don't... Perhaps it's `cos so many match-going Blues have never seen a great, winning Everton team.

Max Fine, so you actually agreed with The Blue Union but you've got a bit sick off them so you're now revolting?

If they showed you on the big screen I think I'd boo you. Grow some balls and stick to what you believe in.

On Facebook, The Blue Union has about 3,000 'likes'. On twitter, Toffeeweb has 4,800 followers, NSNO (another popular fan site) has about 1,700 followers. Unfortunately, the MAJORITY (as Max puts it) of match going Evertonians don't spend a lot of time reading t'internet. If all you read is the Echo and the Daily Mail or hear what your mates say in the pub, what would cause you to doubt Kenwright? And those are the people who clapped.

It's going to take a lot more shit than Arteta being sold or a few leaflets outside a pre-season friendly for these fans to be shaken out of their Dave Prentice induced slumber.

First off, this is my first time posting though I've been a regular site reader for a while.

I just want to say that I don't believe that £100m is too unreasonable an asking price even with the £40m debt. Given that the Premier League is just really starting to market itself well, to believe that an established club with rich history and a rabid fan base is not worth that much is extreme. The players are worth £60m+, while Goodison has some kind of equity. This puts the price of the Everton identity and brand at less than £100m and close to £50m.

While I believe that this asking price is reasonable (not that we know that this is the real asking price)... what makes Kenwright so repulsive is his need to display himself as a martyr. There are 6 billion - 1 people in the world who would not anger me with their desire to profit from a business venture they had mismanaged. Kenwright is not one of them. It is impossible to sympathize with someone who lies so consistently about his willingness to sell for the good of the club and not his coffers.

I understand silence. Not booing is definitely an option. But cheering a terrible chairman simply because others boo him seems irresponsible. He will just paint himself as a man of the people that only a tiny minority find anything but competent and lovable.

Apologies to those following this thread: I thought we had a good story in the £100M price-tag piece form the Mail who remember just published a wonderfully luvvy piece on Kenwright. I had made it a news story, which meant it could have its own comment thread, and I moved a few of the above over there on that basis.

However, Lyndon thought otherwise and made his own value judgement that the story should be treated with scepticism ? presumably as it came from the Mail and was uncorroborated. He switched it to a Rumour Mill entry ? and lost access to any comments.

I've moved the comments back here... I think this is a major taking point... but I suppose that's just me.

Hang on ? isn't this what everyone and the Blue Union has wanted to know for the past 3 or 4 years???

Apologies on the Comments front ? I didn't realise you'd moved things around so much already, but yes, as an uncorroborated story I don't think it can only qualify as anything more than a Rumour Mill item at this stage.

If true, it is , of course, a major talking point but, given the Mail's track record, this does not merit being labeled as news unless there's more substance to it, in my opinion.

Score one for comments being added to Rumour Mill stories?!

Where I was sitting, the vast majority neither booed nor clapped. Just after the team came out, his image flashed up and there was some booing which stopped when the screen went back to the team.

Immediately after the first goal, his image came up once again, mixed booing and applause; his image disappeared but returned seconds later to less booing and more polite applause but like I said, and like myself, the majority did neither.

Sad that Everton are about to launch their PR fightback campaign based on turning fans against one another; then again, it began just after the game when Graeme Sharp on Radio City suggested the Blue Union should pack it in as the protest was a failure... yeah right. If you look into the distance, the two mounted officers are at the head of the protest, how many do you reckon turned out?

http://a5.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/s720x720/297179_218852004838501_205517092838659_619230_300792217_n.jpg

Alan (45) and others ? you appear to have inadvertently made the point that I, Paul Thomson, David Thomas and Graeme Hodkinson were talking about.

The fact is that I have neither been fully behind the BU nor done an about-turn because I "got a bit sick of them". I stated previously that I agree with a number of the excuses/arguments/merits put forth by each side. However, you (and others) have interpreted what I've said and retaliated with impolitic and predictable aggression. At what point did I say I was at any time in 100% agreement or disagreement with the BU? I stated that the militant behaviour of some of their supporters was forcing fans that might have been sympathetic to the BU cause to completely reject it. Why the obsession with having me in one camp or the other?

At the slightest hint of not wholly sharing yours and other people?s opinions on the state of EFC?s ?plight?, I have been accused of "swallowing any old bull", of BK "being my saviour", of showing a "lack of concern", of "[not deserving] a club like Everton", of having "no balls" and of having "dictatorial views". If this school-yard name-calling and vitriol is indicative of the messengers carrying the BU cause, then it is not BK or a conspiracy led media standing in the way of you having your voice heard ? it is you yourselves.

FYI, I am (and always have been) 100% in support of the BU's attempt to draw attention to the fact that we, as fans, are dissatisfied with the performance of those charged with running our club. Most of us have appraisals in our various lines of work, so I don't think it's unreasonable to put forward our concerns at the boards own (in)competencies. As it is, hindsight has taught us what a huge missed opportunity Kings Dock was and that destination Tesco-Kirby was an ill thought out political and commercial disaster. They should not be allowed to forget this. However, I am also realistic as to what we should expect the board to do about it now. As Chris Jones (4) put it, some of the BU's "manifesto" is laughably unrealistic and verges on the embarrassing.

Does anyone actually believe that the Daily Mail unearthed an "unnamed buyer"? A buyer who could easily acquire the weight of the Everton support to bolster his bid by stating his intentions publically? I get 2-3 letters a month from estate agents telling me somebody wants to buy my house, but until there?s a man with a suitcase full of cash at my door I'm not going to entertain the idea. I wouldn?t expect BK to take any similar ?offer? seriously either. Or are we actually demanding that the board "give" the club away and forfeit their purchased shares?

So far as I see it, the players (who you would assume to be in a better position than us fans to judge the board) seem intent on publically voicing their support of the club and of BEGGING the fans to get behind them. So either a certain number of people know something about the black heart of EFC that the players aren?t privy to, or our board has the ability to force a good number of our team to spout sound-bytes against their wishes.

The fact that we are just about ticking over as a business cannot be disputed, but the same could also be said for 90% of all other football clubs. Are all of our financial constraints BK?s fault? Will ousting him solve them? Maybe, maybe not. None of us can know for certain.

Am I also a BK sympathiser if I state that there are reasons not to be so downbeat about the club at the minute? Do I ?not care? about the club as much as you if I dare see positives where you don?t? The team on Saturday looked more balanced, together and passionate than I have seen them in a long time. And we appear to have some exciting young prospects coming through to boot. Am I really acting contrary to the interests of EFC by being optimistic about our teams? chances as they are? Hope is the reason we are all so passionate about the club, regardless of our opinions on the state of its ownership, and football is nothing without it.

Of course I would have a rich sugar daddy at the helm willingly throw hundreds of millions at the blue cause over BK and his commercial-loan-cronies, but I don?t believe we can make it happen by having a collective whinge about it. I find it slightly ironic that the same people who accuse BK of arrogantly dismissing fans? concerns, make equally arrogant sweeping statements that the fans heard clapping over the boos obviously haven?t been enlightened by the internet as much as they have.

Whatever our opinions on BK the man, his faults, his bullshit and his spin, the TEAM is better off now than before BK and Co took over. I?m not saying it couldn?t improve if he left, but Mike Ashley gave NUFC £100million in the form of an interest-free loan when he bought the club (for £137 million). Are they any better off? Would they have Freddy Shepherd back in a heartbeat?

In a massively convoluted way, what I?m hopefully trying to communicate is that, while accepting that BK has made mistakes and is a less than perfect chairman, some of us don?t believe that ridding him of the club at this moment in time will be a quick fix to anything. In MY opinion, it?s becoming an unnecessary distraction.

So you can ?boo? me all you like ? call me an ?apologist?, ?clueless? and a ?fence-sitter? if it makes you feel any better. Feel free to accuse me of being misinformed and of having opinions based solely on reading the Daily Mail and listening to me mates in the pub because I don?t wholly share your views. If, however, you would like to put forward your suggestions, opinions and solutions to EFC?s current predicament then I?m more than happy to listen to them. But don't just sneer at me and insinuate that I must be converted from my ill-informed opinions in order to share your enlightened bubble of superiority.

David, the majority of Saturdays crowd clapped Kenwright and it leaves you bewildered, crap feeling being in the minority isn't it?

Michael and Lyndon - it's well beyond my capabilities but hasn't someone put together a vaulation of the club on these pages before....?

It would be interesting to see how far adrift that valuation is from the £100m quoted - which I'm sure is a number just plucked out of the air by the Daily Mail sports desk. If it were true it sounds pretty ambitious to me.

I'd love to know where this concept of majority clapped or booed came from as neither is correct and its bollocks to claim it. Plenty of people did nothing.

Max,

You seem to have attempted to make the moral high ground because people are aggressively ramming their opinion down you throat. You claim that everyone had to choose and insinuate that by detailing their cause, and actually highlighting the dissatisfaction they feel (something you suggest you agree with on you latest post) they have forced people into actively supporting the current regime.

Of course by me responding to your posts, I suppose I am aggressively forcing you into a corner... but there's quite a few areas of you argument that don't make sense to me. So rather than imposing my viewpoint onto you, perhaps you could answer some questions.



Have you got some kind of attention deficit? It seems that if you're exhausted by the BU's cause, and the clarification of what they hope to achieve already then you may have a problem.

How do you believe ideas develop? Are reasonable retorts to the (sometimes vitriolic) from either side acceptable... or are you just bored of the subject.

I'm not sure how the BU have forced anyone to share their opinion... but if you could suggest a way in which they or anybody who shares many of their ideals could get their message across without communicating with their target audience I'd love to hear it. Perhaps the fact that the "MAJORITY" reacted "in a manner contrary to what you necessitated" is a sign that they have not communicated their ideas as much as they could.

Who made them pick a side? Seriously... who has forced people into a corner of black and white, you're with us or a problem?

You admit that previously (how long ago?) you "agreed with a number of the excuses/arguments/merits put forth by each side" - seemingly until people responded to your post. So was that the turning point? Given that you started with "Oh - another one of these.". I'm not sure how else people could have interpreted what you said. Perhaps though you could explain this (with or without militant aggression)?

"I stated that the militant behaviour of some of their supporters was forcing fans that might have been sympathetic to the BU cause to completely reject it"... yet the transparent tactics by the current regime is acceptable?

Why the obsession with having me in one camp or the other? I put that back at you. You're the one stating there is a binary choice.

I agree that people shouldn't get caught up in school-yard name-calling and vitriol - but seriously, look at what you have written. I'm not sure what you were expecting.

BK and/or his men have actively sought to control the media. It's not difficult to find this out... but I'm not going to put anything in this post or it is likely to be removed. That wide spread seemingly is the reach of the regime's (I refuse to call it the club - as this has nothing to do with Everton other than they are currently employees/custodians) that they can affect free-speech on independent websites.

If you are "(and always have been) 100% in support of the BU's attempt to draw attention to the fact that we, as fans, are dissatisfied with the performance of those charged with running our club." there will be those who are more vehement in their opinion than you... but just because they do does not mean you have to completely agree with them or be against them. Surely if you believe this then you would be more anti-those who simply want to take a passive role or are supportive of the current situation, given you're already off-center?


"Most of us have appraisals in our various lines of work, so I don't think it's unreasonable to put forward our concerns at the boards own (in)competencies"... but currently there is no way in which to do this. The board have closed up shop and other than propaganda, do not engage with the fans. This I think is the thing that resonates most... as it reeks of both arrogance and fear.

"Hindsight has taught us what a huge missed opportunity Kings Dock was and that destination Tesco-Kirby was an ill thought out political and commercial disaster. They should not be allowed to forget this"... But had you at your workplace overseen such utter disasters would you expect to still have a job?

"However, I am also realistic as to what we should expect the board to do about it now."... OK, fill us in.

"Some of the BU's "manifesto" is laughably unrealistic and verges on the embarrassing." Perhaps you could help form a "Plan B" or help shape the BU - but that takes not being bored already. While there was a lot of controversy over how the BU released the BK notes, it really did show how laughably unrealistic and embarrassing out chairman is. The self-proclaimed salesmen extraordinaire.


"Does anyone actually believe that the Daily Mail unearthed an "unnamed buyer"? A buyer who could easily acquire the weight of the Everton support to bolster his bid by stating his intentions publically?" Well who had most to gain from this announcement?

"I get 2-3 letters a month from estate agents telling me somebody wants to buy my house, but until there?s a man with a suitcase full of cash at my door I'm not going to entertain the idea."... But if you actively wanted to sell your house then you would instruct an Estate Agent rather than just hoping somebody is going to arrive at your door, right?



"I wouldn?t expect BK to take any similar ?offer? seriously either.". Even though he has been supposedly been actively trying to sell for years - fuck... surely any avenue would be worth investigating if you're that desperate to sell.

"Or are we actually demanding that the board "give" the club away and forfeit their purchased shares?". £30 million (if that's the shareholding) would provide a loss given inflation. But what's a fair return in you eyes? 10% p.a? Compound interest wise I think I'm right in saying that's £94M... but of course they have mortgaged of almost all of the available assets made available since taking over in 1999. Debt has also spiraled, so is a return of 10% p.a justified?


"So far as I see it, the players (who you would assume to be in a better position than us fans to judge the board) seem intent on publically voicing their support of the club and of BEGGING the fans to get behind them." Yep, employees are always impartial. This has been come about because people want to hear about plans to move us on given we have been pleading poverty for 12 years rather than Neville's new shin pads.

Are all of our financial constraints BK?s fault? No, but many are or have arisen because of his actions... something which is unacceptable.

Will ousting him solve them? It depends on who takes over... but they too will have to take responsibility for their actions - regarsless of whether they're a blue or not.

Do I ?not care? about the club as much as you if I dare see positives where you don?t? No, I don't believe so... but I also believe that you can have a rational debate/discussion without saying you're on this or that side.

"Of course I would have a rich sugar daddy at the helm willingly throw hundreds of millions at the blue cause over BK and his commercial-loan-cronies, but I don?t believe we can make it happen by having a collective whinge about it." Unfortunately, as history has proven, accepting the status quo does not push us forward either.

"I find it slightly ironic that the same people who accuse BK of arrogantly dismissing fans? concerns, make equally arrogant sweeping statements that the fans heard clapping over the boos obviously haven?t been enlightened by the internet as much as they have." Perhaps you're right... maybe the board could manufacture some kind of vote for all to see so we could have another horrific split like Destination Kirkby brought about - I mean everything that was promised then was honest and well thought out right?

"In a massively convoluted way, what I?m hopefully trying to communicate is that, while accepting that BK has made mistakes and is a less than perfect chairman, some of us don?t believe that ridding him of the club at this moment in time will be a quick fix to anything." But the man has had 12 years to engineer an exit strategy. At what point should a man who admits he does not have the resources to maintain the club let alone move the club forward leave? It's absurd. The problem is that really for the last few years especially we have been going backwards as a business. The more we take out in terms of secured/unsecured loans, the less attractive we are to any potential purchasers... but the longer Bill is in charge the worse the terms of borrowing becomes.

"If, however, you would like to put forward your suggestions, opinions and solutions to EFC?s current predicament then I?m more than happy to listen to them."
Isn't that what the BU have tried to do, like it or not?

David Price 52. I stated that people began cheering. It certainly wasn't the majority. What staggers many is that anyone should cheer !! How you can cheer a man who has lead our club to financial ruin - beyond me.

What a great post by Chad Schofield .I wish that I had the capacity to construct and write such a well structured post.He has said everything that I tried unsuccesfully to put across - Thankyou.

Thanks David, unfortunately a bit long and posted in a thread now off the main landing page so I can't see Max responding.

I just want to say that Kenwright shouldn't be getting booed at all. The problem is that the camera pans to him way too much. This is a problem he wouldn't have if he simply stayed in his luxury suite. Oh wait...Goodison doesn't have any of those...I apologize, he should be booed.

You may remember an article ?Cheering for Kenwright? (http://www.toffeeweb.com/season/11-12/comment/mailbag/mbitem.php?submissionID=18960) that was submitted to this website on Sunday.
I posted in it a couple of times, but as the article has now gone off the front page (and probably away from the attention of the one poster in particular I wanted to reply to), I hoped I might respond by way of starting a new thread.

As it stands, Chad was one of the few people to actually read my views and reply without feeling the need to use knee-jerk diatribe as rhetoric . As I said I would be happy to be drawn into any reasonable conversation on the matter, he probably deserves that I try and answer some of the points he also took the time to raise. Quite a lot of his questions involved quoting and questioning some of my original posts, so I will leave my original quotes in there as well as his questions regarding them ? I hope this doesn?t make it too confusing to follow (my original comments are post # 2 and 50 in the original thread quoted above).

I will begin in the order(ish) in which he expressed them:

Are you bored of the subject [of the BU]? / I'm not sure how the BU have forced anyone to share their opinion / Who made them pick a side?
Firstly, you have misunderstood my exasperation with the subject of the BU. My issue isn?t with the BU themselves ? I am all for demanding Kenwright be less dismissive of the fans? concerns ? my issue more with the BU supporters who DEMAND that everybody get behind THEIR views because they are the right ones. I find THIS attitude exhausting and shouldn?t need to point out the irony of somebody slagging BK off for lacking the humility to respond to his critics, whilst refusing to accept that anyone could have a different opinion to themselves. David?s was one of a number of contributions to toffeeweb within a VERY limited timeframe to say near enough the exact same thing. Unfortunately, his mailbag contribution may have been the proverbial straw that fianlly broke this camels back as it felt like a case of everybody shouting to get their opinion heard and nobody listening.
To clarify, I was not saying I?m ?bored? of the BU?s cause, I was saying that if you refuse to listen to somebody who is not 100% in agreement, then you eventually force them to adopt a more extreme view in order to be heard. While the supporters no doubt feel that they are ?championing? the BU?s cause by making a public display of booing BK, what they actually did was force a section of the fans to either agree or disagree with the actual act of booing. The fans who cheered instead of jeered BK may not have necessarily disagreed with the BU ? however they were forced into having to state that they did not agree with them either. THIS made them appear to ?pick a side?, and this was what David seemed so incredulous about. I was just trying to make him see this.

How do you believe ideas develop? Are reasonable retorts to the (sometimes vitriolic) from either side acceptable?
Ideas need to develop through communication between parties who are respectful of each other?s opinions and who are both willing to accept that compromise is inevitable. If we gloss over the conduct of the supporters? group in how the BU/BK meeting came to be made public, I honestly believe that the BU have the best of intentions and would be willing to negotiate in this way. So yes, of course ideas have to develop through reasonable retort. However - bar yourself - I have had very little rhetoric from the staunch BU SUPPORTERS that hasn?t been tainted with sarcasm or vitriol. THAT was the point I was trying to make.

[Do you know of] a way in which they or anybody who shares many of their ideals could get their message across without communicating with their target audience?
The fact that the "MAJORITY" reacted "in a manner contrary to what you necessitated" is a sign that they have not communicated their ideas as much as they could.
If you want me to condone the act of booing an individual of EFC in order to necessitate the BU message then you will never have my agreement. I will never and have never booed an individual of the club ? but maybe I?m on my high horse again.
The BU ?leaked? a transcript of their meeting with BK causing massive embarrassment to the club, gaining notoriety and national media attention almost overnight. As a result, they received the media exposure they craved and have very publically communicated their concerns. After this weekend?s march, I doubt there?s a sane fan alive that hasn?t now heard of the BU. So in answer to your question, I believe they had ALREADY ably communicated with their target audience and shouldn?t have felt the need to boo during a home match. Like it or not ? and I keep stressing this point ? the cheers were a direct result of the boos. Why are you so insistent that the lack of rallying cries in support of the BU is now a sign that they are not getting their message across? Is it really so ludicrous to accept that a large portion of the fans simply don?t agree with the BU? Why is this such a bitter pill to swallow?
Personally, I believe the real reason we haven?t witnessed a fans? revolt against the board isn?t, as you put it because ?the [BU] have not communicated their ideas as much as they could?, it?s because the BU haven?t uncovered such a massive conspiracy as they think they have. Most of what they leaked has been ?known? by supporters for some time.

You admit that previously (how long ago?) you "agreed with a number of the excuses/arguments/merits put forth by each side"
- seemingly until people responded to your post. So was that the turning point?
Again, I think you have misunderstood me. By ?stated previously? I mean exactly that. I have previously stated that I am in agreement with aspects of the arguments coming from each side. I STILL agree with certain aspects of both arguments. This simply appears to be a miscommunication of the English I used in my post; I haven?t ?previously? believed in something and done an about turn ? I still hold the same opinions that I?ve always had ? I?ve just stated them before now is all I was saying.

"I stated that the militant behaviour of some of their supporters was forcing fans that might have been sympathetic to the BU cause to completely reject it"
.. yet the transparent tactics by the current regime is acceptable?
?Why the obsession with having me in one camp or the other??
- I put that back at you. You're the one stating there is a binary choice.
I have never stated that I think the tactics of the current board are acceptable ? in fact I think I have specifically stated that they aren?t. However, because I criticise an aspect of the BU support you immediately retaliate with a tit-for-tat argument as to whether I believe the tactics of the board are acceptable by default... then you want me to explain why I think that some supporters would only have us in one camp or the other? I PERSONALLY believe that I can take umbrage with the tactics borne by each side, but it FEELS like by doing this I am being quoted as offering support to one side over the other. By criticising the BU, I am labelled as automatically supporting BK and vice-versa. This is exactly the point I set out to explain in my very first post ? that the cheerers were being shoe-horned into the pro BK camp because they didn?t entirely agree with the booers ? whereas their actual individual opinions might have been somewhere in the middle. Like mine.

I agree that people shouldn't get caught up in school-yard name-calling and vitriol - but seriously, look at what you have written. I'm not sure what you were expecting.
Fair enough. I stated a strong opinion and expected to either be supported or vilified for it. Neither am I surprised / shocked nor offended by the name-calling either. That?s just the nature of internet forums and associated anonymity ? it helped me prove a point but I?m not actually that ar*ed about it - besides, some of it was quite funny.

BK and/or his men have actively sought to control the media. It's not difficult to find this out... but I'm not going to put anything in this post or it is likely to be removed. That wide spread seemingly is the reach of the regime's (I refuse to call it the club - as this has nothing to do with Everton other than they are currently employees/custodians) that they can affect free-speech on independent websites.
Nobody controls the media ? BK and co have ATTEMPTED to influence and put positive spin on media stories as MANY corporations have done, and will continue to do. The BU is also guilty of this. I didn?t think Ian Ross?s ?outing? on a message board was anything other than laughable either. Propaganda has been a fact of life long before you or I ever existed ? Alistair Cambell did not invent it ? he merely gave it a different name.
And the only ?free-speech? that BK and his cronies can affect is the kind of free-speech that can be sued on grounds of defamation. This ?free-speech? is usually groundless gossip based on hear-say and conjecture, and while it may be entertaining for a while, it has little relevance without facts. That said, while BK may have his reasons for banning AGM?s and journalists from the ground, the fact remains that it was and still is a shambolic decision and one that can only be interpreted one way by the EFC fans. If he cannot see where these ?contempt? jibes come from, then he is an idiot.

If you are "(and always have been) 100% in support of the BU's attempt to draw attention to the fact that we, as fans, are dissatisfied with the performance of those charged with running our club."
there will be those who are more vehement in their opinion than you... but just because they do does not mean you have to completely agree with them or be against them. Surely if you believe this then you would be more anti-those who simply want to take a passive role or are supportive of the current situation, given you're already off-center?
If there are supporters who think we can ?move forward? with the current board in charge (assuming the chances of an anonymous £100 million cash injection are nil) then I would disagree with them, yes. If this puts me in the anti-BK camp on this particular facet of the BU cause then fine ? put me in that camp. If somebody was to personally tell me that they are either passive or thought BK could take us further , (without getting into the arguments of whether the current board have done a good / bad / indifferent job), I would personally express to them that I believe the board in their current guise have taken us as far as they can. However, I have never met a single person who thinks that Bill CAN take us forward without a huge influx of ?free? cash. Who ACTUALLY thinks this ? the ?cheerers?? I think you misunderstand them.
Unfortunately, a lot of the anti-BK crowd see myself and others pulling away from some of their more ?vehement? beliefs and assume we must be in disagreement with them if we?re not in full agreement. Am I ?against? the BU if I do not necessarily think that success can follow any old regime change, and I do not believe that ?any change? is better than no change at all? Bar the billionaire sugar daddy scenario, a lot of people just can?t see who there is out there to take us to this elusive ?next level?. This does not mean I am ?against? the BU, but for the same reasons it doesn?t mean I am fully in agreement with everything they say either.

"Most of us have appraisals in our various lines of work, so I don't think it's unreasonable to put forward our concerns at the boards own (in)competencies".
.. but currently there is no way in which to do this. The board have closed up shop and other than propaganda, do not engage with the fans. This I think is the thing that resonates most... as it reeks of both arrogance and fear.
This is probably the crux of the matter ? and the stick with which the BU deserve to beat the board with. Only the board can now answer how they are going to address these concerns. I don?t think ?100% transparency? is the answer, but some middle ground most definitely has to be reached. With BK doing much of the conceding.

"Hindsight has taught us what a huge missed opportunity Kings Dock was and that destination Tesco-Kirby was an ill thought out political and commercial disaster. They should not be allowed to forget this"
... But had you at your workplace overseen such utter disasters would you expect to still have a job?
If I had collective ownership of my workplace, I might expect to receive leniency from myself, yes.

"However, I am also realistic as to what we should expect the board to do about it now.".
.. OK, fill us in.
I do not realistically expect them to hand over the reins to a billionaire sugar daddy because there isn?t one.
I do not realistically expect them to ?give-up? their initial share investment because I would not be willing to do the same.
I do not realistically expect them to throw their personal wealth at the financial black-hole that is a premiership club as I would not be willing to do the same.
I do not realistically expect them to be able to rewind the clock, predict the global explosion of wealth that happened in the premiership and adjust their numerous business balls-ups accordingly.
I do not realistically expect them to reject a £10million fee and force a 29 year old player to stay at a club he doesn?t want to be it.
I do not realistically expect them to have to take the flack for Moyes playing 0 strikers at home to QPR
I DO realistically expect us to compete for a premiership place that reflects our ranking in the Deloitte football money league ? we are currently ranked 8th, just ahead of Fulham and West Ham and just behind Villa.

"Some of the BU's "manifesto" is laughably unrealistic and verges on the embarrassing."
Perhaps you could help form a "Plan B" or help shape the BU - but that takes not being bored already. While there was a lot of controversy over how the BU released the BK notes, it really did show how laughably unrealistic and embarrassing out chairman is. The self-proclaimed salesmen extraordinaire.
Neither side has covered themselves in glory really, but yes the biggest red face should belong to that of our chairman. Whether I believe the leaked transcript covers the WHOLE conversation is another matter ? but then the BU are welcome to utilise propaganda and spin as much as Bill is I suppose...
The reason I made the flippant remarks regarding the BU?s ?manifesto? is not, as you presumptuously put it , because I am ?bored? and don?t want to help shape it ? it?s because it has been far more succinctly and articulately put in the article by Mark over on twohundredpercent (http://www.twohundredpercent.net/?p=14985).
If I may paraphrase the author in order to make my point:
I was merely pointing out to those hammering the the anti-BK drum that the BU are still some way from a place at the table for meaningful negotiations given that the board are essentially being preached to by an infant organisation with insufficient relevant expertise, who use language more akin to a Socialist Workers? Party leaflet that contains politically-sound but meaningless claims. Nevertheless, I also agree with the articles closing position that the BU?s now-proven claims about the club?s recent past and sincere, pertinent worries about its near future, demand far greater respect than they are currently afforded. That pretty much summarises my thoughts and perceptions of the BU.

"Does anyone actually believe that the Daily Mail unearthed an "unnamed buyer"? A buyer who could easily acquire the weight of the Everton support to bolster his bid by stating his intentions publically?"
Well who had most to gain from this announcement?
Er, the potential ?buyer? in my opinion (for the reasons I stated). But I guess we can just agree to disagree on that one.

"I get 2-3 letters a month from estate agents telling me somebody wants to buy my house, but until there?s a man with a suitcase full of cash at my door I'm not going to entertain the idea."
... But if you actively wanted to sell your house then you would instruct an Estate Agent rather than just hoping somebody is going to arrive at your door, right?
If I actively appointed an estate agent, I suspect that all those ?claims? of interest might turn out to be bullsh*t.

Surely any avenue would be worth investigating if you're that desperate to sell?
As incredulous you are as to why I honestly don?t believe there is a suitable seller out there, I am equally as incredulous as to why you think there is. Just how many avenues are there to explore when you want to sell a muti-million pound corporation that doesn?t make any money? Do you put it on a three-for-two? Stick it on ebay? Stack it on the shelf closest to the entrance of the supermarket? Again, unless you can educate me as to the ways and means of selling a premiership club and the things that Bk has / has not done in this quest, it looks like we?ll have to agree to disagree.

"Or are we actually demanding that the board "give" the club away and forfeit their purchased shares?".
£30 million (if that's the shareholding) would provide a loss given inflation. But what's a fair return in you eyes? 10% p.a? Compound interest wise I think I'm right in saying that's £94M... but of course they have mortgaged of almost all of the available assets made available since taking over in 1999. Debt has also spiralled, so is a return of 10% p.a justified?
I am at a loss as to what a fair price is ? but given that Ashley wanted £100million (plus an extra £100 million to buy out his interest free loan) for an NUFC entering the championship, BK?s £100million asking price doesn?t appear to be as unrealistic as it first sounds. Unfortunately I have no other basis for valuation other than past sale prices though, so I will happily concede to the the opinion of anyone with expertise in this area.

"So far as I see it, the players (who you would assume to be in a better position than us fans to judge the board) seem intent on publically voicing their support of the club and of BEGGING the fans to get behind them."
Yep, employees are always impartial. This has been come about because people want to hear about plans to move us on given we have been pleading poverty for 12 years rather than Neville's new shin pads.
My point was that the players have no reason to say anything ? whether people want to hear their views on it or not they are media-trained well enough to be able to side-step the issue. They could therefore have said nothing and ONLY talked about their ?new shin-pads?. But the players have actively been outspoken in their support of not just the team and the manager (expected) but the board as well (not as expected). For example, how many of the Liverpool team expressed their desire for G&H to stay in charge? I heard them ask for the board wrangling not to detract from team support, but I didn?t hear any specific encouragement for the G&H regime. I appreciate we may have interpreted the players actions completely differently though, so I?ll leave it there.

?Are all of our financial constraints BK?s fault??
No, but many are or have arisen because of his actions... something which is unacceptable.
I agree ? and I believe the BU have done an excellent job in making Bill aware of this. Still doesn?t mean that the problems facing EFC now can be solved by him leaving though.

?Will ousting him solve them??
It depends on who takes over... but they too will have to take responsibility for their actions - regarsless of whether they're a blue or not.
Seems like we are in complete agreement here. I will point out that I have never let Bill?s undoubted status as a fan cloud my judgement though.

?Do I ?not care? about the club as much as you if I dare see positives where you don?t??
No, I don't believe so... but I also believe that you can have a rational debate/discussion without saying you're on this or that side.
Yep, agreed ? I thought this was the point I was trying to make all along.

"I find it slightly ironic that the same people who accuse BK of arrogantly dismissing fans? concerns, make equally arrogant sweeping statements that the fans heard clapping over the boos obviously haven?t been enlightened by the internet as much as they have."
Perhaps you're right... maybe the board could manufacture some kind of vote for all to see so we could have another horrific split like Destination Kirkby brought about - I mean everything that was promised then was honest and well thought out right?
I think we?re going over old ground here ? I think the fans are perfectly well informed and capable of forming their own opinions regarding the merits of BK staying/going ? and you don?t. You believe that fans were misled over DK, that this was the only reason they voted in favour of it, and that this in turn means the fans must be blinkered on the issue of BK now. However, there was no landslide victory for DK. Throughout the whole debacle there were plenty of arguments ringing out from all sides - don?t be so naive to think that while each prospective side chose not to LISTEN to the other, this meant that they couldn?t HEAR them. Ring any bells?
If the board hadn?t instigated a vote then there would have been an outcry. Should BK and co have just decided for or against it without consulting the fans? Preferably against because it eventually ended up being a waste of time and money? If the board had done nothing to investigate and make moves towards this possible avenue of building a new ground, they would have been even more vilified for their inaction than for daring to consider it.
We cannot slag the board off for being too slow off the mark with regards Kings Dock (for which there was also a vote by the way) and then also call them for being TOO eager when Destination Kirby cropped up. Even the artist?s impression of DK was shit so you can hardly castigate Bill for painting an image of the Bernabau and misleading the fans that way. I voted against the move (whereas I voted in favour of Kings Dock) ? but a lot of fans were eager to believe our ground was the shackle around the clubs neck preventing a sale and/or investment, and that DK was the answer. Some STILL believe that. Maybe it was ? I am unable to predict an alternate future so cannot say. To therefore nonchalantly sweep aside the opinions of fellow blues who don?t agree with you on the issue of BK, as obviously being the same ill-informed ?sheep? who were in favour of DK, is a little sanctimonious.
And why is it so detrimental to have the fans have differing opinions on what the ground should look like / where it should be anyway? I would imagine we are politically and personally split on many things, but as long as we have our support of the team in common, that?s all that matters on a Saturday afternoon. The division that came about through DK NEVER spilled over to how the team was supported on a match day. After the boos on Saturday, I am now of the belief that the BU split IS beginning to detracting from what is happening on the pitch. Although - as it turned out - the Blue Union supporters inadvertently ended up generating a fantastic passionate atmosphere by virtue of the fact that in order to counteract the boos, damn near everyone else cheered.
In any case, I will continue to stress the other point I was trying to make: is it really such a crime to want to concentrate on the positives seen on the pitch rather than go looking for negatives off it? Or does this put me in the ?passive? camp and mean that I must be unconcerned with the state of the club?

"In a massively convoluted way, what I?m hopefully trying to communicate is that, while accepting that BK has made mistakes and is a less than perfect chairman, some of us don?t believe that ridding him of the club at this moment in time will be a quick fix to anything."
But the man has had 12 years to engineer an exit strategy. At what point should a man who admits he does not have the resources to maintain the club let alone move the club forward leave? It's absurd. The problem is that really for the last few years especially we have been going backwards as a business. The more we take out in terms of secured/unsecured loans, the less attractive we are to any potential purchasers... but the longer Bill is in charge the worse the terms of borrowing becomes.
I am in 100% agreement with you that I don?t think the club can progress with him at the helm, as I have already stated. BK has also admitted as much himself. The real bone of contention is whether we should already have had someone else in charge by now, and I understand the frustrations of those that say he?s had long enough to find a buyer.
That said, do we realistically think that for the WHOLE 12 years he?s been in charge he should have concentrated on manufacturing an ?exit strategy?? I wouldn?t say that was realistic, but again we may have differing opinions there. We also seem to have differing views as to the amount and/or existence of the suitable replacements that have materialised throughout this period. But until one of us has irrefutable proof as to the existence or not of any potential suitors, this issue will remain elusive.
For BK to be forcibly ?ousted? (which seems to be the desire for some) there has to be a realistic chance of somebody suitable standing in the wings, and in my opinion there isn?t. We cannot force a suitable new owner to materialise through sheer will. Or maybe you could enlighten me as to who the prospective buyers are and where they have been hiding all this time?

"If, however, you would like to put forward your suggestions, opinions and solutions to EFC?s current predicament then I?m more than happy to listen to them."
Isn't that what the BU have tried to do, like it or not?
If the BU?s ?solution? other than giving EFC to a set of rich and able and investors (who aren?t identified or even suggested at by name) is hidden somewhere within that manifesto, then I haven?t seen it. They have rightly drawn attention to a number of pertinent issues, but they haven?t offered up a solution at all.

As a final note, if we can all agree that different fans can each have the best interests of the club at heart whilst also having differing opinions on how best this might be achieved... then I may well have communicated the point I failed to make in my first post.

Max, thank you for taking the time to reply.

I don't think there's a great deal of point in me trying to counter the points that you have eloquently made in your last post... and thank you also for formatting it in a way in which was considerably more legible.

The only points that I will make are that BU as the new kids (perhaps more than metaphorically in yours and others opinion) I feel deserve more time. It's very harsh to judge them on the actions of what is likely only going to be a few rogues, especially given the lengths the BU went to stress they did not want negativity in the ground.

You could try and counter that with "How dare they instruct me how or how not to act", but in effect they have done what was needed. While many "knew" or suspected Bill's erratic behaviour, even with the "proof" as handed to the press, you are still doubtful about the whole story. Given that the likely hood of anyone ever being able to demonstrate that there are interested/suitable parties to but would be basically impossible - given that you would seem to call them out as fakes all the way through, biting the electronic money etc!

Admittedly I am quite a sceptical person, but I believe that we can do better and regardless of whether the 24/7 search has been 12 years in total... it has gone on too long. I do not expect the board to fuck things up as much as they have. Our marketing (Everton Two was a stroke of genius) has improved in many ways, but there are still faults. I believe though that the lack of communication (they do not need transparency but...) that is the crux. Things are unsustainable and have been for some time.

I would not dismiss those who were taken in by the idea of DK at all. You're right the plans looked shitty (which is always a bad sign, in the same sense as when a fast food joint has shitty pics of the food it might be worth given the place a miss), but until the plans were picked to pieces by far more knowledgeable fans than me, I was in support of it.

The fact is that the club can be persuasive, but since DK fell apart they look like they couldn't give two fucks what the fans want... and at a time when more than ever we need everyone onside.

So yes, I think it is time for a change. In the same way as if Howard kept needlessly messing up, you have to look at Bill to take some personal responsibility. I hope he continues as an ambassador - but really he should have passed responsibility to someone else years ago... not just be on the brink of doing so. You can shoot down the fledglings who have finally managed to do something proactive. And while I don't agree with booing Bill, it was always going to be used as a propaganda tool - hence the timing of the fuhrer's pop ups.

Anyway, I'm really rambling now... but thank you again for your response and I see where you're coming from in a lot of ways.

Appreciate you taking the time to check back here for a reply - I submitted it to the front page just in case, but it fits better where it is.

It's clear from what you say that the BU no doubt deserve more leeway than I've currently afforded them - and it is also clear I can be a right condescending twat...!

All the best to you

Max