Season 2011-12
The Mail Bag
I'm Missing Something
32 Comments: I can't help but think that we're missing something. No, I don't mean a striker that can score a goal or a winger that can cross a ball ? I mean at the very heart of what?s going on at the club.
I tried to ask these questions a couple of years ago but I was accused of being a Kenwright/Moyes apologist. I'm going to try again because something doesn't add up for me.
As I understand it, the intrinsic and extrinsic value of the club are dropping rapidly. We have no capital left to exploit and the value of the playing staff has to be on the wane at least. The current board haven't put a single penny into the club and appear to be unable or unwilling to do so now or in the future.
All of this brings me to the questions that I am really struggling with. First, Where are the buyers? and second, Who is benefitting from the Current Position?
The Buyers
We keep being told, at opportune moments, that there are 3, 4 or 5 buyers waiting to step in (I have to say at this point that "Investment" can mean putting money in OR buying shares so please don't get stressed out when Elstone or Kenwright use the term instead of "Buying The Club") but where are they? Isn't it too simplistic to say that they are scared off by the asking price?
If I was in a position to buy the club tomorrow and, on meeting the board or a broker, was given a ridiculous price, the very next thing I would do is to speak to Sky and tell them exactly that. For all those that are exasperated by fans that aren't screaming for blood, is it not safe to assume that most match-going fans would be up in arms? I think they would if there was clear evidence that the board were blocking a buy-out for the sake of their own personal margin.
Who Is Benefitting?
While the value of the Club is dropping, so is the value of the shares owned by Kenwright, Earl and Woods (Green?). Now, whatever you feel about the Directors, surely you have to agree that they're no mugs, each of them have accumulated substantial personal wealth. I own my own business and trust me it's hard enough to make thousands never mind millions. I genuinely don't understand how they are going to make more money by devaluing the club.
Writing that last piece also brought up another point which is if Kenwright is a lying, blithering buffoon, how does he manage to control the Local and National media?
So there it is I have no answers but something just doesn't make sense. I really don't want another we hate Kenwright, Moyes, Hibbert, Saha, Earl, Green, Neville response but any theories people have might help. There are usually lots of clued up people responding and I would like to be able to have a clear stance.
It's going to be a long hard slog at best but COYB
Gareth Prytherch, Posted 25/01/2012 at 12:02:51
Comments
Note: the following content is not moderated or vetted by the site owners at the time of submission. Comments are the responsibility of the poster. Disclaimer
Gareth,
Do not under-estimate the role Ian Ross played in keeping the media quiet. He was an ex-Liverpool Echo journo and threatened anyone with a ban from Goodison who dared question motives. As a local sports writer, you cannot be barred from Everton and sell papers.
IF there have been approaches for the club, it will be conducted through third parties, and if the price quoted is as ridiculous as we are led to believe, any buyer will just turn their attention elsewhere. They won't go crying to the media, it would make them look just as foolish as Bill & Co.
Elstone & Kenwright have recently stated publicly there are "Genuine talks taking place" and "There are three or four interested parties, there always is."
Now, they are either lying through their teeth, or the "interested parties" have laughed their cocks off and done one.
You be the judge. There is a new overseas TV deal to be negotiated as well as new rights for Premier League games... it will be a record deal. The current board are happy to beg, steal & borrow until they can flog off some of our stars until this new deal is reached. It could add millions to the value of the club if we are still in the Premier League. They will stay in control as long as they can keep the lights on, or a rich benefactor comes along.
Do you honestly believe they give a flying fuck what mess they will leave behind?
Do not under-estimate the role Ian Ross played in keeping the media quiet. He was an ex-Liverpool Echo journo and threatened anyone with a ban from Goodison who dared question motives. As a local sports writer, you cannot be barred from Everton and sell papers.
IF there have been approaches for the club, it will be conducted through third parties, and if the price quoted is as ridiculous as we are led to believe, any buyer will just turn their attention elsewhere. They won't go crying to the media, it would make them look just as foolish as Bill & Co.
Elstone & Kenwright have recently stated publicly there are "Genuine talks taking place" and "There are three or four interested parties, there always is."
Now, they are either lying through their teeth, or the "interested parties" have laughed their cocks off and done one.
You be the judge. There is a new overseas TV deal to be negotiated as well as new rights for Premier League games... it will be a record deal. The current board are happy to beg, steal & borrow until they can flog off some of our stars until this new deal is reached. It could add millions to the value of the club if we are still in the Premier League. They will stay in control as long as they can keep the lights on, or a rich benefactor comes along.
Do you honestly believe they give a flying fuck what mess they will leave behind?
While I am very unhappy and unable to understand the clubs present financial position, it would appear very wrong for anyone to suggest that Kenwright is a "blithering buffoon". While he is not in the billionaire bracket it has to be acknowledged that he heads a vibrant entertainment mini-empire. Which is currently doing quite well having recently declared a healthy profit..
Gareth, I've been puzzled along time about Bill's contiuned ownership of the club. The current owners are successful business men outside the world of football. Even if we don't like him, Bill does have one of the biggest theatre production companies in Europe, if not the world.
We've had some great league placing performances over the years continually being the 'best of the rest' and getting into Europe, propelling the clubs stock up. But we are in a decline now, and by the looks of this year, a sharp decline. We are nowhere near the top 4 and getting left behind financially everyday. At this point, its proven the ownership cannot financially provide anything to push us forward. The club losing players and selling off all our other assets just to make an ends meet, what are they actually getting out of being the owners?
My own belief is that somehow the owners are holding out to the new UEFA Financial Fair Play program comes in and supposedly levels the playing field in terms of finance spending. I think that they would be a better sell to prospective owners as its a more fairer system from toip to bottom. Unfortunatley for us, that means no sugar daddy coming in and blowing millions on star players to catch up with Man City's.
We've had some great league placing performances over the years continually being the 'best of the rest' and getting into Europe, propelling the clubs stock up. But we are in a decline now, and by the looks of this year, a sharp decline. We are nowhere near the top 4 and getting left behind financially everyday. At this point, its proven the ownership cannot financially provide anything to push us forward. The club losing players and selling off all our other assets just to make an ends meet, what are they actually getting out of being the owners?
My own belief is that somehow the owners are holding out to the new UEFA Financial Fair Play program comes in and supposedly levels the playing field in terms of finance spending. I think that they would be a better sell to prospective owners as its a more fairer system from toip to bottom. Unfortunatley for us, that means no sugar daddy coming in and blowing millions on star players to catch up with Man City's.
Kevin (#708) answers some of these points well. The TV deal is a key one for Everton, who are far too dependent on broadcast revenue as a proportion of total earnings - with matchday revenue hit by falling attendances, limited corporate facilities, and the merchandise operation being one of the great mysteries of our time.
Currently the Premier League negotiates the sale of the TV rights. The last overseas deal (worth a flat £18m per year to all clubs) was negotiated to a length to bring it in line with the domestic TV deal.
There has been much speculation on these pages that the next deal will be worth less, Sky have a monopoly, will therefore pay less, or the Portsmouth Landlady will be the breaking of it, etc. etc.
What I think is clear is that IPTV companies will be a big part of this bid, with companies like Apple and Google rumoured to be interested (and Apple has greater cash reserves than the US of A at the moment). It is possible that the next deal will be worth more than ever.
A reason to hold on to power? Not really, those revenue streams are the same for all clubs (notwithstanding the performance element of the Premier League TV money). Plus as the club's financial performance continues to decay, the danger of falling out of that money pot becomes ever greater.
Currently the Premier League negotiates the sale of the TV rights. The last overseas deal (worth a flat £18m per year to all clubs) was negotiated to a length to bring it in line with the domestic TV deal.
There has been much speculation on these pages that the next deal will be worth less, Sky have a monopoly, will therefore pay less, or the Portsmouth Landlady will be the breaking of it, etc. etc.
What I think is clear is that IPTV companies will be a big part of this bid, with companies like Apple and Google rumoured to be interested (and Apple has greater cash reserves than the US of A at the moment). It is possible that the next deal will be worth more than ever.
A reason to hold on to power? Not really, those revenue streams are the same for all clubs (notwithstanding the performance element of the Premier League TV money). Plus as the club's financial performance continues to decay, the danger of falling out of that money pot becomes ever greater.
Gareth
My view is BK and chums hatched a game plan to sell for top dollar via a new stadium (citeh sorta proving they were right).
It mattered not a jot what it took - out of the city, on a retail park whatever - as long as it made shareholders top whack.
They've never recovered from the pot of gold being taken away exactly like my mate around the corner who has had his house for sale for 18 months flatly refusing to lower his price.
His view is the housing market will recover as it always has and in the meantime he's quite happy to stay where he is.
There are always buyers as evidenced elsewhere - Reading most recently - BK and other shareholders are doing the same as my mate and yes it is for their own personal margin.
Problem is I am not a shareholder and I'm not happy to stay where we are.
The media thing is Bill's game - now that he is good at.
My view is BK and chums hatched a game plan to sell for top dollar via a new stadium (citeh sorta proving they were right).
It mattered not a jot what it took - out of the city, on a retail park whatever - as long as it made shareholders top whack.
They've never recovered from the pot of gold being taken away exactly like my mate around the corner who has had his house for sale for 18 months flatly refusing to lower his price.
His view is the housing market will recover as it always has and in the meantime he's quite happy to stay where he is.
There are always buyers as evidenced elsewhere - Reading most recently - BK and other shareholders are doing the same as my mate and yes it is for their own personal margin.
Problem is I am not a shareholder and I'm not happy to stay where we are.
The media thing is Bill's game - now that he is good at.
Apols for double post - didn't see Kristian's (#712) response.
I think people are not understanding what FFP actually means. It relates to cumulative losses over a moving 3 year average based on turnover and costs.
Now just putting aside the massive turnover that other clubs have, and not forgetting their much higher total wage bill, Everton's last accounts showed that before debt charge, they just about broke even. Even at a £5m loss due to debt servicing, we'll still be well within FFP. Even at double that.
As other clubs sign megabucks sponsorship and licensing deals, the only saving grace is that we clearly have a lot of room for improvement, even before you begin looking at what a new stadium could bring. But that has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with FFP. FFP will not be the gamechanger some believe it to be - it's UEFA introducing it FFS!
I think people are not understanding what FFP actually means. It relates to cumulative losses over a moving 3 year average based on turnover and costs.
Now just putting aside the massive turnover that other clubs have, and not forgetting their much higher total wage bill, Everton's last accounts showed that before debt charge, they just about broke even. Even at a £5m loss due to debt servicing, we'll still be well within FFP. Even at double that.
As other clubs sign megabucks sponsorship and licensing deals, the only saving grace is that we clearly have a lot of room for improvement, even before you begin looking at what a new stadium could bring. But that has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with FFP. FFP will not be the gamechanger some believe it to be - it's UEFA introducing it FFS!
James #711 That was the point I, and others since have made.
Kevin #708 I can see where Ross might have held sway over The Echo but I'm not sure him or Bill could silence Sky/Mirror Group etc
Matt #713 Thanks for that, that might make some sense except for one thing. Surely, we would be more attractive to someone wanting to take advantage of the IPTV / Overseas TV deal now not after the deal has been done. It is clear that other clubs ownership has been decided based on those deals coming in (Blackburn, Liverpool, Man City etc).
Barry #714 I'm not convinced of that argument as I don't think it's just Bill's decision. I'm surprised that none of the Director's have decided that enough is enough. These guys all took calculated risks on a daily basis but I think this is a biggie!
Kevin #708 I can see where Ross might have held sway over The Echo but I'm not sure him or Bill could silence Sky/Mirror Group etc
Matt #713 Thanks for that, that might make some sense except for one thing. Surely, we would be more attractive to someone wanting to take advantage of the IPTV / Overseas TV deal now not after the deal has been done. It is clear that other clubs ownership has been decided based on those deals coming in (Blackburn, Liverpool, Man City etc).
Barry #714 I'm not convinced of that argument as I don't think it's just Bill's decision. I'm surprised that none of the Director's have decided that enough is enough. These guys all took calculated risks on a daily basis but I think this is a biggie!
The club don't need to silence Sky if they are not interested Gareth. The fact the board want too much money to sell the club is a non-story, and they cannot prove it anyway, non-disclosure agreements etc. Guess what paper Mirror group own?
Kenwright has said he is being advised by " the best businessman in the world." I don't know if that advice takes into account any financial interest Green may have in our club. Extremely murky waters.
I believe Kenwright maybe in hock to more than one party, we may never know. it will however, make a sale even more complicated. We don't even get to hear where Earl & Woods stand in regards to a sale.
What a mess.
Kenwright has said he is being advised by " the best businessman in the world." I don't know if that advice takes into account any financial interest Green may have in our club. Extremely murky waters.
I believe Kenwright maybe in hock to more than one party, we may never know. it will however, make a sale even more complicated. We don't even get to hear where Earl & Woods stand in regards to a sale.
What a mess.
Gareth (#719) I'm afraid how you feel rather depends on your view of the world, marketing and the value of your brand.
A few months ago, RS MD Ian Ayre got my hackles raised by trying to argue that clubs like Liverpool should take a greater portion of the overseas TV deal, and not share it equally.
I put this down to the fact that they are doing shite, not qualifying for Champs League, and blowing oodles of cash on players like Carroll, Downing and Henderson.
But I also felt that their global appeal was being realised by the TV deal, and the fact that they were able to nail a £20m PER SEASON shirt sponsorship deal, and now the kit sponsorship deal.
The domestic TV deal pays more to the teams that are shown more often. Last season Man U were shown 26 times, we I think were on 14 times. Each club is guaranteed 10 appearances (about £445k a time).
Whether this makes us more attractive now is moot, as our commercial arm is not taking advantage of this global reach. Some fans on here do not think it is important, and that we are really just a backwater PL club in global terms.
Any business being taken over will look at the order books. If Everton are taking in, say, £10m per year now in commercial revenue, then the seller cannot claim that he could easily double/triple that amount had he invested in the business, and claim a premium for it!
A few months ago, RS MD Ian Ayre got my hackles raised by trying to argue that clubs like Liverpool should take a greater portion of the overseas TV deal, and not share it equally.
I put this down to the fact that they are doing shite, not qualifying for Champs League, and blowing oodles of cash on players like Carroll, Downing and Henderson.
But I also felt that their global appeal was being realised by the TV deal, and the fact that they were able to nail a £20m PER SEASON shirt sponsorship deal, and now the kit sponsorship deal.
The domestic TV deal pays more to the teams that are shown more often. Last season Man U were shown 26 times, we I think were on 14 times. Each club is guaranteed 10 appearances (about £445k a time).
Whether this makes us more attractive now is moot, as our commercial arm is not taking advantage of this global reach. Some fans on here do not think it is important, and that we are really just a backwater PL club in global terms.
Any business being taken over will look at the order books. If Everton are taking in, say, £10m per year now in commercial revenue, then the seller cannot claim that he could easily double/triple that amount had he invested in the business, and claim a premium for it!
Kenwright and his board are analagous to George W Bush and his administration.
He flaps and talks shit about his credentials whilst the board get away with murder and remain unaccessible.
Kenwright is a plonker but he is not the cancer.
He flaps and talks shit about his credentials whilst the board get away with murder and remain unaccessible.
Kenwright is a plonker but he is not the cancer.
The current world economic climate is contributing to both a lack of success in finding a buyer, and a devaluation of the club.
However, to go back to the main point; I liken the current situation at everton, as being the same as most home owners who have a mortgage at the moment.
The house that you have invested in and bought, is currently worth less than you paid for it. You might want to sell it, but there aren't any buyers out there who will pay you what you paid for it, never mind make a profit. So you do what everyone else does; stick there and hope that the situation improves enough for the financials to turn around in the future, and for the situation to improve and make a better sale.
I don't see any difference really to EFC's/shareholders predicament. People can moan about shareholders not selling, but I doubt anyone else would do anything different.
You don't sell when stocks are low, you wait for an up-turn.
However, to go back to the main point; I liken the current situation at everton, as being the same as most home owners who have a mortgage at the moment.
The house that you have invested in and bought, is currently worth less than you paid for it. You might want to sell it, but there aren't any buyers out there who will pay you what you paid for it, never mind make a profit. So you do what everyone else does; stick there and hope that the situation improves enough for the financials to turn around in the future, and for the situation to improve and make a better sale.
I don't see any difference really to EFC's/shareholders predicament. People can moan about shareholders not selling, but I doubt anyone else would do anything different.
You don't sell when stocks are low, you wait for an up-turn.
Why wouldn't any buyers who had been quoted ridiculous prices go bleating to the media?
Mainly because they have to sign a confidentiality clause before these negotiations take place!
Mainly because they have to sign a confidentiality clause before these negotiations take place!
Jeremy, Bill Kenwright TBH consortium allegedly bought their shares at £857 12 years ago.
If they were to sell for the £100M+ figure they are rumoured to be looking for, that would value their shares today at £2900+ each.
This can hardly be described as an investment that is worth today less than they paid for it.
Certainly at Bill's valuation.
Your analogy just doesn't work.
If they were to sell for the £100M+ figure they are rumoured to be looking for, that would value their shares today at £2900+ each.
This can hardly be described as an investment that is worth today less than they paid for it.
Certainly at Bill's valuation.
Your analogy just doesn't work.
"Do you honestly believe they give a flying fuck what mess they will leave behind?"
Kevin , hasn't Gareth pre-empted that question? Its not enough to say that they don't care, because if they devalue the club they cost themselves money. Gareth explained this, of course they care, because they can't 'leave anything behind' if its in a mess.
Kevin , hasn't Gareth pre-empted that question? Its not enough to say that they don't care, because if they devalue the club they cost themselves money. Gareth explained this, of course they care, because they can't 'leave anything behind' if its in a mess.
Thanks again Matt Traynor, what you're saying makes better sense!
No quarrel particulary. But given our current state (only assets left to sell are players), how does it benefit current ownership if we're relegated?
There's no more Moyes miracles. That's done.
I can't see what advantage current ownership see in hanging on when we can all see hanging on is all we have left to hope for.
Green and Kenwright out!
There's no more Moyes miracles. That's done.
I can't see what advantage current ownership see in hanging on when we can all see hanging on is all we have left to hope for.
Green and Kenwright out!
If as everyone says our only unsold assets are our players then how can Billy think we are worth £150 M. Sentiment and history will play no part in any sale whereas potential,without massive player and managerial reconstruction, and assets will. At this moment in time we have neither the players to provide that potential nor the assets to guarantee the sale.
Gareth,
Before you even get to speak about the price, you have to sign an exclusivity agreement which prohibits you from speaking out to anyone else should you not like the ridiculous price or Ts & Cs of the sale.
The shares are not traded on the open market so the majority shareholders control the price that they ask for the Club. They obviously think someone is stupid enough to pay the ridiculous price they ask so will not budge until they find that idiot or the Club goes into administration.
If Kenwright is a lying, blithering buffoon? Hasn't that been demonstrated to you without any doubt by now? He controls the media by banning anyone from the Club who writes anything bad about him.
Before you even get to speak about the price, you have to sign an exclusivity agreement which prohibits you from speaking out to anyone else should you not like the ridiculous price or Ts & Cs of the sale.
The shares are not traded on the open market so the majority shareholders control the price that they ask for the Club. They obviously think someone is stupid enough to pay the ridiculous price they ask so will not budge until they find that idiot or the Club goes into administration.
If Kenwright is a lying, blithering buffoon? Hasn't that been demonstrated to you without any doubt by now? He controls the media by banning anyone from the Club who writes anything bad about him.
Kevin #720, my thinking is along the same lines as you.
Paul Gregg has publicly said that Phillip Green paid the money for the shares he sold which appear in Robert Earles name.
Kenwright originally borrowed the money for his shares from Gregg's wife. Presumably when the Gregg's sold their shares after falling out with Kenwright they would ask for him to repay that money. It's anyone's guess where Bill got the money from but my guess would be a 'friend'.
John Woods is a lifelong Blue whos family have been involved with the Club for generations and he got on the Board at the time of TBH.
Each of them represent approximately one third of the Board ownership (Woods slightly less than the other 2) which represents approximately 71% ownership of the total number of shares.
So these 3 men control the Club and even if Woods were to disagree with the strategy of the board he would not be able to do anything about it being outnumbered more than 2 to 1 in voting.
Paul Gregg has publicly said that Phillip Green paid the money for the shares he sold which appear in Robert Earles name.
Kenwright originally borrowed the money for his shares from Gregg's wife. Presumably when the Gregg's sold their shares after falling out with Kenwright they would ask for him to repay that money. It's anyone's guess where Bill got the money from but my guess would be a 'friend'.
John Woods is a lifelong Blue whos family have been involved with the Club for generations and he got on the Board at the time of TBH.
Each of them represent approximately one third of the Board ownership (Woods slightly less than the other 2) which represents approximately 71% ownership of the total number of shares.
So these 3 men control the Club and even if Woods were to disagree with the strategy of the board he would not be able to do anything about it being outnumbered more than 2 to 1 in voting.
Eric Myles 857, "He controls the media by banning anyone from the Club who writes anything bad about him." In all seriousness, can you name anyone who has actually been banned from the club for writing anything bad about Bill Kenwright? What are their names? Have any reporters for the Merseyside media stated, "I once had a great story about Everton and I didn't dare write it because Bill Kenwright threatened to have me banned?" Wouldn't such a ban lose its impact once it was publicly known?
There are Premiership rules controlling access to the media after all. I'm sure there is an incestuous relationship between club and media but Kenwright has been in charge for many years and there is enough turnover in journalism that you would think someone who had experienced this threat would have mentioned it by now from the safety of some other newspaper in another city. Many journalists who can't get their stories published these days post them under pseudonyms on any of hundreds of websites. Yet this has not happened to Kenwright to my knowledge.
Do these cowering frightened hacks who have been threatened by BK exist or are they figments of people's fevered imaginations like the queue of would-be buyers down Goodison Road ready to ante up but who won't because the price is just too damn high? These are troubled times my friend and rumour and innuendo doesn't help anyone.
There are Premiership rules controlling access to the media after all. I'm sure there is an incestuous relationship between club and media but Kenwright has been in charge for many years and there is enough turnover in journalism that you would think someone who had experienced this threat would have mentioned it by now from the safety of some other newspaper in another city. Many journalists who can't get their stories published these days post them under pseudonyms on any of hundreds of websites. Yet this has not happened to Kenwright to my knowledge.
Do these cowering frightened hacks who have been threatened by BK exist or are they figments of people's fevered imaginations like the queue of would-be buyers down Goodison Road ready to ante up but who won't because the price is just too damn high? These are troubled times my friend and rumour and innuendo doesn't help anyone.
I'm not sure I agree about this confidentiality agreement nonsense, what people seem to be suggesting is more water tight than a super injunction which has already been found to be unenforceable.
My point about Bill being seen as a blithering idiot is that he's quite clearly not whether we like him or not.
You can't ban the media it is part of the competition rules for the PL, FAC, etc. you can ban individual journalists and I can see how that would be difficult for the likes of the Liverpool Echo but I think the National media is different. I think it's probably more to do with the 'who cares' syndrome. We're not Man U, City, Chelsea, Arsenal or the other lot.
With regard to the last point about shareholders, my understanding is that because we have individual shareholdings it would be easier to make a move because all of the shares don't have to bought in one go. You could in effect approach any one of the board and effect change from the inside. This is why Arsenal are constantly worried about a takeover.
My point about Bill being seen as a blithering idiot is that he's quite clearly not whether we like him or not.
You can't ban the media it is part of the competition rules for the PL, FAC, etc. you can ban individual journalists and I can see how that would be difficult for the likes of the Liverpool Echo but I think the National media is different. I think it's probably more to do with the 'who cares' syndrome. We're not Man U, City, Chelsea, Arsenal or the other lot.
With regard to the last point about shareholders, my understanding is that because we have individual shareholdings it would be easier to make a move because all of the shares don't have to bought in one go. You could in effect approach any one of the board and effect change from the inside. This is why Arsenal are constantly worried about a takeover.
Jack #862, our very own Liverpool Echo was banned from Goodison not so long ago.
Gareth, just because you own shares you are not guranteed a seat on the board and so cannot effect change.
Especially so when the majority vote of the board is controlled by one man.
Especially so when the majority vote of the board is controlled by one man.
Eric,170: I'm aware of what was no more than a rumour last February. It was reported on NSNO and on a kopite blog. It was put about by an Echo music reporter. Greg O'Keefe, however, said he continued to report as usual. But look - if - that limited "ban" from EFC press conferences occurred, doesn't it tell you that Kenwright's so called manipulation by threats was unsuccessful?
I just find it difficult to build this picture of Kenwright, ineffectual in so many areas, as a Svengali keeping reporters in lockstep behind him. Given the antipathy and bias we have seen from the media, those threats don't seem to be working very well.
I just find it difficult to build this picture of Kenwright, ineffectual in so many areas, as a Svengali keeping reporters in lockstep behind him. Given the antipathy and bias we have seen from the media, those threats don't seem to be working very well.
Jack #862
"or are they figments of people's fevered imaginations like the queue of would-be buyers down Goodison Road ready to ante up but who won't because the price is just too damn high?"
Are you calling Elstone & Kenwright bare faced liars then?
I repeat - they are in genuine talks with THREE OR FOUR INTERESTED PARTIES.
"or are they figments of people's fevered imaginations like the queue of would-be buyers down Goodison Road ready to ante up but who won't because the price is just too damn high?"
Are you calling Elstone & Kenwright bare faced liars then?
I repeat - they are in genuine talks with THREE OR FOUR INTERESTED PARTIES.
Jack #862 some names for you.
"Ian Doyle of the Daily Post who was banned for writing this and the Echo staff who were banned in February for reporting a series of articles including this"
http://www.sos1878.co.uk/everton-news/blue-union-statement-a-means-to-an-end/
"Mail On Sunday was asked to leave the press conference after the club banned Mail reporters following an article in Saturday's paper"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2sLsSFX-lp8
Everton journos like Prentice and O'Keefe have been locked out of the place as a continuing punishment for the survey of fans the paper did last week.
http://www.grandoldteam.com/forum/archive/index.php/t-34168.html?s=a14f88eb7b41b8e271c7a8666e634724
"Ian Doyle of the Daily Post who was banned for writing this and the Echo staff who were banned in February for reporting a series of articles including this"
http://www.sos1878.co.uk/everton-news/blue-union-statement-a-means-to-an-end/
"Mail On Sunday was asked to leave the press conference after the club banned Mail reporters following an article in Saturday's paper"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2sLsSFX-lp8
Everton journos like Prentice and O'Keefe have been locked out of the place as a continuing punishment for the survey of fans the paper did last week.
http://www.grandoldteam.com/forum/archive/index.php/t-34168.html?s=a14f88eb7b41b8e271c7a8666e634724
Eric - I'm not doubting your word by any means, but I have to say three or four blog entries don't amount to confirmation. I did a Nexis search on Ian Doyle's bylines in the Daily Post alone and there were 896 in the last two years, the vast majority about Everton, the most recent today. He doesn't seem to be locked out does he? Has he said he has been banned?
If certain reporters are being punished ? like the BBC was given a slap on the wrist over that outrageous montage of Fellaini ? then the policy of keeping reporters in line with threats, if it exists, doesn't seem to be working. The negative press continues so they're not exactly being kept in line are they?
The fact is that, when the media is totally unfair in its coverage, as they often are about Everton, some retaliation is understandable, if reprehensible.
If certain reporters are being punished ? like the BBC was given a slap on the wrist over that outrageous montage of Fellaini ? then the policy of keeping reporters in line with threats, if it exists, doesn't seem to be working. The negative press continues so they're not exactly being kept in line are they?
The fact is that, when the media is totally unfair in its coverage, as they often are about Everton, some retaliation is understandable, if reprehensible.
I don't believe that if there was ever any serious buyer we wouldn't have heard about it. Confidentiality agreement or not, when the white were first bought by Hicks and Gillette it was widely reported in the papers that they and some middle eastern people were wanting to buy the club. How did this get in the papers if there these non disclosure agreements? If someone wanted to buy us and were serious then we would have found out
So Jack do you believe the Echo was unfair in it's report that the Arteta money was going to the bank and that the Club were right to force them to retract that statement and make an apology?
Jack the club have banned certain journalists from Press conferences, they can't ban them from the ground. I wanted to confirm this for myself after reading press releases made by the Blue Union so I emailed Everton. To cut a long story short the club admitted that certain journalists had been banned from press conferences because of articles that they had written.
I have also had an exchange of emails with the chief sports writer at the Guardian about Everton. When I asked him why they were not writing stories about local journalists getting banned he wasn't even aware that this was going on. Since those emails Tony Barrett from The Times was banned and I again contacted him to ask why The Guardian didn't follow the story up but the silence was deafening. I think the fact that no national or local media is willing to come out and publicise these actions is a damning indictment about the state of journalism in this country.
I have also had an exchange of emails with the chief sports writer at the Guardian about Everton. When I asked him why they were not writing stories about local journalists getting banned he wasn't even aware that this was going on. Since those emails Tony Barrett from The Times was banned and I again contacted him to ask why The Guardian didn't follow the story up but the silence was deafening. I think the fact that no national or local media is willing to come out and publicise these actions is a damning indictment about the state of journalism in this country.
I should add that now that Mr Ross has departed I hope we see a different approach from the club.
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.
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
-sm.jpg)
-sm.jpg)
-sm.jpg)
703 Posted 25/01/2012 at 14:07:04
Report abuse
I think it's because - and this doesn't just apply to football coverage - the media is an incestuous business where the distinction between 'insiders' and 'outsiders' is a very important one. Bill is very much an insider.