I have now seen 2 Chang adverts involving Everton, one poster in Malaysia, and one TV advert in Thailand. Not really the coverage you'd expect.

So whilst I don't know what the club have done (if anything), I'd be disappointed if they peered at any potential market and concluded that 'We don't sell there, so let's not try'.

If Chang are sponsoring these events, then we should have someone persuading them to have a few action shots from our games against the top four dotted about so that people might at least notice the Chang logo and ask which team it belongs to.

Or is that too much to ask?

And the point made above is correct. Why do Chang have to advertise Everton in Bangkok? Its a waste of money for them, we simply have no marketing power, as we haven't won anything since EPL became global. As a brand, you want to be associated with champions, the best of the best. If you want your brand to be the best, how is it a good thing to associate with a team that has no success in the modern era? Chang is a product of Thai Beverage PLC, a company with a turnover in the billions. Blaming Kenwright for not having leverage in their marketing policies is quite frankly ridiculous. Everton is a drop in the ocean to them.

I don't know enough about UK sales to comment but please, cut the normal insinuations and provide evidence of incompetence then I'll make my own mind up and please remember that EFC have proven businessmen with marketing expertise at the club and they know vastly more about marketing than the vast majority of fans. I've always found buying shirts ridiculous anyway and one day it'll go out of fashion.

"I worked in Bangkok years ago "
What were you? Bill's Ladyboy?

Isn't it remotely possible that, having seen posters of Everton players in action with a recognisable logo on their shirts (or even the shirts themselves on a rack next to the more familiar ones), a percentage of the locals may be curious enough to find out about the club. Then, knowing the name Everton, when checking out what EPL games were available for viewing they might just decide to watch the game. Isn't that how advertising works?

Dan Brierly (#221), not sure what point you are trying to make. Chang are associated with us despite our lack of recent success. The fact that they sponsor us isn't exactly a secret, and we aren't that inconsequential that they need to hide the fact. If they are sponsoring these events anyway what harm would it do them to have a few action shots of our players playing the likes of the top 4 clubs. They could even point out that we have beaten these teams on occasion!

You say, "And understandably, there is a whole section on Leicester City in Survanabhumi Airport." which seems to contradict everything else you have written. That section is only there because the sponsors are happy with the association and trying to make it work for both parties.

Please refer to posts 203 and 428 on the "Do We Still Need the Blue Union" thread for your much sought evidence of the Board's failure to market the club outside of Liverpool (the question at the end of the latter post being one you craftily dodged)

To those that say that Chang pay EFC to advertise their brand and should not be promoting EFC, all I can ask is have you not seen the recent DHL / Man Utd adverts?

As from now I'll be using FedEx.

Chang board meeting... "We could do a TV ad with Everton, but they've won nowt for years & no-one supports 'em."

Honestly, we can't compare to Man Utd any more, we missed the boat years ago.

The only time I've seen Everton linked with Chang was during the world cup when there was a picture of Pienaar around town.

As for the shirts you saw in the shops they were most likely fakes.

and how do you know that the club hasn't been marketing its shirts everywhere? That it has failed to do so doesn't mean that it hasn't tried. Use logic. Same for you Gavin, you get a tiny fraction of the story and think you have the big picture.

Noel@236

There hasn’t been a shred of proof posted on here about the board’s failure to market its products only large does of opinion and conjecture and I craftily dodge nothing, I walk away when I see silence, spit flecked mouths and swiveling eyeballs. You compare the mighty blues with Man United? Absolutely delusional. We’re the smallest club in Liverpool never mind the Northwest and never mind the EPL, we don’t register on any scale where shirt sales actually happen.

I know we are proud Evertonians but we live in a dream world sometimes that our incompetent office staff sit round all day turning down massive deals because they can't stop playing solitaire on their PCs. We aren't fashionable, we don't have European Cup pedigree, we don't have World Class names. We haven't won anything for ages.

Until I have evidence I will just keep supporting the club on and off the pitch. I honestly don't think Moyes would do such a good job if he knew Bill was spitefully turning down huge offers for the club either. They just aren't happening. Fingers crossed they might in our lifetime but I would actually rather be us than City.

I've already spelt out to you the lack of EFC marketing in a country where we know there is a sizeable EFC fanbase and demand for merchandise, while Gavin has given other examples of failure to capitalise on marketing opportunities in other countries outside your mythical 20m (is that metres or miles?) radius. So I won't re-post that.

In the interests of fairness, however I wil re-post the question that you say you didn't dodge (although never answered) to allow you respond now:

One final point Martin, regarding your "We are small now because we are small” comment. You are stating your belief that we are small (by the way, it’s your opinion that we are small, one which I wholeheartedly disagree with) simply because….well, for no other reason than we just are. If so, then it stands to reason that the board can neither be blamed or praised for our current standing. If you truly believe that to be the case, then why on earth do you expend so much time and energy praising their actions?

Noel, we are financially a small club which is all that matters and I state that as fact not for dicussion. I do not praise the board, I defend them against irrational criticism, there's a massive difference. History doesn't make us big or in any way justify the totally irrational expectations of some of our fans.

"I do not praise the board, I defend them against irrational criticism, there's a massive difference"

Martin Mason on 'Do We Still Need The Blue Union? thread

"Would you prefer us to be in the first division with healthy accounts? Of course you wouldn't - you just like to perpetuate the myth that EFC are doing badly because of the current board. We are doing amazingly well because of them..."

I was not suggesting Chang should be doing a TV ad campaign with EFC. I used DHL as an example to show that clubs can get their retail partners to promote them. Someone mentioned Leicester City in Bangkok airport too due to their retail partner / sponsor. Nobody will convince me Leicester City are more marketeable that EFC outside of anywhere but the midlands.The point is that more can be done and should have been done.

Agreed, we (i.e. the Board and Club) missed the boat and are way behind MUFC in terms of how the club is marketed. That's no excuse not to try maximise revenue streams via existing and future marketing opportunities (examples already given)

Nowhere do I allege that I know what the board have tried to do. I've simply been making the case that unless there are consumers to be won, or kept, marketing people wouldn't exist. Please read the post properly.

I was defending them still and it is impossible to defend them without this also coming across as praise. What I mean is that I'd never initiate any post praising the board.

You are stating opinion as fact and trying to apply a totally irrelevant and ridiculous analogy of a ship and a football club. The club have failed to sell a lot of shirts everywhere? prove that they have not made every reasonable attempt possible to do so which is what matters. I've told you why they don't sell shirts, they don't sell shirts because nobody will buy them. Who are Everton? When did they last beat Barcelona in the CL?

I could be wrong on this, but I am pretty sure that we were their first major sporting partner, certainly the first in Europe (which was a market they wanted to grow their presence in).

Companies in sports marketing don't just throw money at a team. It's all based on deliverables, KPIs, ROMI (return on marketing investment). Sometimes it's just the company buying the association with a successful brand (Man U and almost any of their shirt sponsors in history). Sometimes there's a connection between the owners of the club and the sponsors (QPR, Man City).

Sponsors are invariably after some gain - the betting websites etc. are notorious for their short term deals - they just want their URL known which they get from the domestic TV, and hey presto they're off after 1-2 years. Others will work with their team to maximise the benefits of the deal, and I believe this has been the case with Thai Bev.

It's just possible that Thai Bev have outgrown this deal, outgrown Everton maybe.

Otherwise, it sort of makes you think "Why are we sponsored by Chang at all?"
Maybe, nobody else would stump up the same sort of cash, but personally I might have been tempted by a smaller amount from a sponsor who might give me plenty of exposure in their home market.

Yet more goalpost shifting. You don't initiate posts praising the Board, you just praise them when others criticise them - is that it?

To recap, you are on record, in black and white, as praising the Board. Multiple times.

Then claiming you don't praise the Board and only defend them against "irrational criticism".

Then, when presented with proof (which I know you value) of your praise of the Board, you claim that you meant that you don't initiate a post praising the Board.

All this after claiming that "we are small now because we are small", logic which renders any praise or criticism of the Board irrelevant.

And you claim it's others whose posts are "irrational"...

I can see that logic and comprehension aren’t your strong points so let me try again. I often defend the board from the often irrational criticism it gets on here. I don’t always defend it though. Now, in defending it there will be times where it is unavoidable to give it credit. For example if I say that they have done very well to get us to 7th place on the lowest net spend in the EPL then that is a defence to a criticism that they’ve done badly and it is giving them the credit that only an idiot would deny them in this particular case. You’ve added 2 and 2 and got 5 I’m afraid; nice try but no Mars Bar. My point on not initiating posts in praise of the board then is very simple, I don’t post to praise the board only respond to defend them. Were I to initiate posts praising the board it would indicate some kind of unconditional support and praise which I don’t give them. Do you get it now? Colin, are you beginning to understand it?

Colin, being thick is a problem I've had all of the way through my life especially through University and getting a First Class Honours degree in Engineering when they were real. It blights me terribly now as an Engineering Manager running my own humble little operation. Just imagine the potential I could have reached if I'd been as bright as some on here. Perhaps I could then see what a mess these charlatans on the EFC board are making, what fools they are making of us their customers. Yes, I may have even bought an Everton shirt but of course they don't sell them outside of Walton do they never mind Horsham.

Congrats on the education - that validates all your previous contradictions. Case closed.

Defend this then; Fortress, KD, DK, no AGM's, Park Place, even down to the lagging on the pipes, year after year of ' xx million' ' operating expenses'. Fernandes, Gosling, Pienaar, Vadis.

To suggest that the board deserves credit for getting us to seventh with 'the lowest spend in the EPL' is an abrogation of sense in every department.

I don't know where to even begin with that non-sequitur.

ps: Martin, you lose in the intelligence stakes once you start listing qualifications – irrespective of your incoherent musings.

I don’t believe that I’ve ever said that it is ONLY a business. From the point of view of the board it’s a business. From the point of view of the fans it isn’t a business at all; we are at the very base level customers of what the business sells and we exercise the choice on which business we buy that product from, let’s call it “support?” Most that support EFC do so because we have ties from the area or we were introduced to the product by friends or family? Most of us a far more deeply involved than being simply purchasers of the product though.

I “support” the Everton business because I was originally from the area, my relatives introduced me to the club and I’ve had the pleasure of watching them through bad and good times, I have an association with them that transcends business although it is pretty irrational in this day and age

Did I say I can’t be thick? Read again and be sure of one thing; you’ve never bailed me out and I’d bet I’d buy and sell you on or at anything any time. Although I have a degree I also did a trade apprenticeship and went the ONC/HNC route when they were real qualifications. It were reet tough when I were a lad, you guys just wouldn’t understand though.

Before you start accusing me of accusing the board of X again, I'm really not. I'm just hoping that they are being more creative and constructive than shrugging and saying "no-one wants to buy our shirts!".

Sam, what if nobody wants to buy our shirts? Do we get the board to force them to buy :-)

What you ask needs no explanation.

Anyone can see that our club is not well run and fails to exploit opportunity.

I happen to believe it is because the board are disinterested and in Kenwrights case is that he is too busy in London to see what is going on at Goodison except for coming up for the match.

Can anyone condone a statement from a chairman of a large organisation who says "I don't know where 24 million unexplained operating costs are going"

I am sure as hell if it was your business you would want to know.

Jay, you are stating an opinion, do you not understand that. "anyone can see" is not a statement of proof.

You don't understand a balance sheet neither do you mate? Any balance sheet at thet level will list "other costs". The balance sheet of every club in the EPL lists a line item of "other costs" (go and look at them). What is it that you don't understand about "other" costs, it means those not specifically listed.

Of course you have a conspiricy theory about the "other costs" but you find it hard to say. Get it out please so that I can ask you to provide a shred of evidence for it. You don't have a bloody scooby; please don't say you have a degree? I'll take mine back to the cracker shop if you do.

You simply can't make claims such as the board getting the club to 7th place when not a man jack o them is on the touch line and the players are funded by income coming despite and not because of them and the actually coal face winning sufficient games to achieve 7th is down to the Manager not the board or chairman. It like a sad roundabout churning the same tired line ad nauseum, the straw man arguments will continue to be dismantled as quickly as they are repeated.

The club could do better on so many things, the argument of no one would buy the shirts is a traversty of your own and oddlly BK's perspective alone, where's the evidence? Where's the evidence that a marketing campaign to widen the branding of the club seeking additional sponsorships and corporate partnerships has failed or was never worthy of being tried out? A project should define the decision points made for the selection of the path to proceed with examples of what was not chosen with supporting reasons why as part of the originating business case. Unfortunately BK's track record on cold hard documented facts is no plan B, no disconnect and shutdown of the project when it clearly no longer met the original business justification and continued to waste monies

Or would you deny the evidence of those monies wasted on a fatally flawed project despite them being available via a freedom of information act request?

For your information I actually have 3 degrees.

One in marketing,one in accountancy and one from the University of life (which is far more valuable than the other 2). I also own a multi million dollar comapny which has been very successfully run since 1998.

You can do what you like with your degree but you can stick your patronising attitude up your arse.

I guess when I get my degree in engineering it'll all make sense.

If you look at our commercial income it pails in comparison with many other clubs.

There are so many opportunities the club could exploit and so many other areas that could be improved.

We should all get a degree in engineering then we can learn how to bury our heads in the sand and convince ourselves we cannot do better because we are already perfect.

In fact it could be the future of mankind if we could all get a degree in engineering.

EUREKA.

OK, the question is what f*cking marketing genius can sell a J50 polo shirt worth J5 to somebody who either hates Everton or has never heard of them which means about 99.999999% of people on the planet? the EFC board doesn't go out and try to market shirts because our shirts are unsellable, until we get exposure and become a brand EFC is irrelevant. Our board don't try big time to sell shirts because they know about selling not because they don't know.

Oh yes let's set up a marketing operation in Australia to cash in on Tim, this would probably sell 3 shirts to go with the 2 in America if we cash in on the other Tim

Oh yes, United can sell shirts, now I wonder why that is? Oh yes, they have constant exposure worldwide and Muppets have heard of them.

I really worry about the future of our club, not because of the bloody board or manager but because of our own fans.

This is why football fans don't run football clubs.

another top post mate

Martin,

On several occasions you have stated your opinion that the Blue Union are not representative of the fans because - among other things - they are a minority.

You then make a sweeping statement like the above, claiming to know how the fans view things.

Was there a module on irony in that engineering degree? The evidence throughout this thread is that you can't even engineer an argument that's not self-contradictory.

Or want a reclaim on being misquoted as that's pretty much verbatim?

You forgot to add "without a clue between them of how this could ever actually be achieved"

Gavin
The difference between you and Bill is that he helps run a football club and knows how a football club is run. You're a fan and you don't. That is why fans don't run football clubs.

Then, one of the accountants said, "Here comes the conductor". All of the accountants piled into the bathroom. The engineers were puzzled. The conductor came aboard and collected tickets from all the engineers. He went to the bathroom, knocked on the door, and said "Ticket please". An accountant stuck their only ticket under the door. The conductor took the ticket and left. A few minutes later, the accountants emerged from the bathroom. The engineers felt really stupid.

On the way back from the convention, the group of engineering majors had ONE ticket for their group. They started snickering at the accountants, who had NO tickets amongst them. When the accountant lookout shouted "Conductor coming!", all the accountants again piled into a bathroom. All of the engineers went into another bathroom. Then, before the conductor came on board, one of the accountants left the bathroom, knocked on the other bathroom, and said "Ticket please".

Martin, I have tried to engage you on the other aspect of the post, whereby our current sponsor wasn't actively promoting our club at an ideal opportunity, ie. football events that they were sponsoring. Okay, there have been some responses that say that isn't Chang's responsibility (and we may not be 'big' enough for them anymore), some that say other sponsors do it for their teams, and even one that says Chang do advertise their association with us openly and regularly.

Parking the argument about availability of shirts, etc, do you think it would be unreasonable to have an agreement in place with your chief sponsor that took advantage of ALL opportunities to advertise our club? If you do agree with that, would you also agree that responsibility for the provision of such an agreement would likely lie with our marketing department? Providing we are still in agreement, can you not see any merit in what was in the original post instead of trying to dismiss it completely?

You obviously think that if you talk complete bollocks with authority that some numpty will believe it.

You're bringing the intelligence level of this site down... Considerably.

I've got to admit Martin I'm a bit confused as to why you think the current board are doing such a good job.

He already has most of toffeewebbers pissing themselves laughing at the nonesense and to think I used to look up to engineers.

Brent #714 nice one for a Friday afternoon.LOL

Noel@699

Of course it isn't a business for the fans. How much profit have you made on Everton recently?

This is why fans don't run football clubs and why small unrepresentative minorities are rightly unable to influence them.

I know that's a lot of questions but I'm sure an engineer of your calibre can handle it. The evidence is there that our peers have done better than Everton in the commercial department, so the onus is now on you to prove that our CEO and his merry men have been doing all they can in that regard. And if they have done their best but failed to do better than clubs around us, then they're clearly not up to the task and we should be looking for more competent people who are up to the job. If they haven't done their best, well, what do you do to shirkers in your company?

Gavin; for Martin's answer to your #749, see his none answer at #574...

Roll on Monday night.

I’m not accusing the club of not having done their best and so don’t have to prove anything. The onus of proof is on those who say that they aren’t doing their best. Can you show that Villa and Spurs actually make a lot of money from shirt sales abroad even though you say that their shirts are available and Everton’s aren’t? In the shop I recently visited in Asia none of these shirts were available, none are available where I am now and I don’t believe that they are widely available anywhere. Why would a butterfly fan with the choice of associating himself with any team in the world buy an 8th rated small English team with no European exposure? I ask again, why should any non partisan supporter pay J50 for an Everton shirt worth J5? Two things influence me, If I want an Everton shirt I can buy one any time as anybody can. Everton’s board has several successful retailers who have forgotten more about selling shirts than the total knowledge their critics have ever possessed. Why should I believe that somehow shirts aren't available and the EFC board don't know about selling shirts.
You may be right but to convince me you need better arguments which show that they are losing money by their actions or that they could significantly increase revenue by different actions or perhaps why you know better than proven successful retailers. I'd also like to see EFCs side of the argument. The evidence isn’t there, you provide no evidence mate only opinion. We get rid of shirkers but we don’t do it via kangaroo courts, the people doing the judgement are experts in the field and the person has the right to defend himself. There’s the difference.

Best Wishes

There is no one at the club who understands the Asian market, or any market it seems, that's why they had to farm merchandising out to a 3rd party. I don't need to show that Villa and Spurs are making a lot of money from shirt sales abroad. That's irrelevant. What is relevant is that their shirts ARE available abroad and they're not losing money doing it while at the same time they benefit from the exposure that it brings. Zero dollars spent on that exposure I might add.

You keep talking about marketing the club to Asians out in the boonies who have never heard of Everton. I'm not talking about butterfly fans, I'm talking about existing, along-for-the-ride with disposable income fans. I've got 200 locals in the supporters group who have to organize themselves into groups of about 5 or 6 to order their kit online to maximise savings on shipping. Meanwhile that lone, deluded Villan fan in the pub down the road from me can go down to the shop and buy one. I guess that makes sense in Bizarro land.

I was born and raised in Singapore to an English father. Never lived in the UK. Dad was from Bedfordshire. You know how I became a fan? He used to play lots of Lennon & McCartney that's how I knew about Liverpool. My favourite color is blue. One day I went to my mates house and saw the '87 league champions poster on his wall. I asked who Everton were and he said they were from Liverpool. I thought, a team from Liverpool, plays in blue and they're champions?! I'm in! It's as simple as that when you're 10 years old. No one knows when or how the next fan is going to come about. I've worked retail long enough to know impulse buys happen. Who knows, that kid who saw us come back 4-4 against Man U, that Phil Neville challenge, or saw AJ make the Shite look stupid, might just see the blue shirt in a shop which seals the deal and he becomes an EFC fan. What's for damn sure is that if it's not on the shelf, no one can buy it. And you know that old chestnut, out of sight, out of mind. It's not costing other clubs to have their kit available. Why did Everton lose money doing it with all this wonderful experience on tap on the board?

People at the top end now are rarely engineers, that is the problem. They are mainly bean counters. they are all lifers whereas I'm independent. I'm an engineer and I do nothing but engineering. I have never fired anybody; I make sure that when we get them on board they are the right people, that we pay them the right money and that we look after them.

Andy@828

Good try but total fail and no Mars Bar. Rory can prove he lives in Singapore. He just can't support any of what he says about selling Everton shirts.

I think Everton have focused on consolidation over the last 10 years and that has been successfully achieved - merchandising (and the majority of marketing) has been outsourced at a guaranteed profit. The 3rd party are world leaders but I guess the kind of changes we all want will take some time to achieve. Given that they make more profit if they sell more they have all the incentive they need to proceed as quickly as possible before their contract with Everton ends. At the end of that time Everton's image is likely to be much changed and improved so this is a long term investment.

Needless (and embarrassing) to mention there is the planned investment in infrastructure at Goodison park that has yet to work out. That was presumably part of the original deal so those original terms may well have changed or there will be other similar projects in the future - at no cost to Everton.

So yes we would all like to see Everton posters & shirts all over the UK and the world and given that the Premier League is a worldwide brand that should not be impossible BUT that goes hand in hand with gradual increase on profit from that investment being proven. My guess is that is where we are now (a gradual rolling out) and that process is far behind some other clubs who were doing this a long time before us.

I am a fan of outsourcing when there is better expertise to be had compared with that in house, and in a rapidly developing area of technology that makes sense. Others think otherwise and there is an argument that we should be a marketing company along with a football company as the two go hand in hand - perhaps that is to come in the future when more financial risk can be taken, but at the moment the downside of making a large loss is so huge (ultimately relegation) and the upside so high risk we should stick with doing what we are doing.

Think about that one, Martin.

Unfortunately if I now want to buy something using University money I have to buy it from an authorised source (often more expensive). If there is no authorised source I have to register the company prior to using it, and that can take weeks. We turn around jobs in a day so waiting isn't an option. Consequently we find ways around having to authorise companies - particularly software companies overseas. Small pots of money spring up for 'petty cash' while we all grouse at the bean counters, the University save money - its not going to change soon.

Incidentally while looking at the accounts of Newcastle FC I see 'Other Expenses' ran at £27 million in 2009 - ours aren't so unreasonable. What is this? Everything apart from wages.

Exceptional posts, so much more informative and eloquent than my "engineer's" prose. Yes, bean counting is very important and to be fair engineers rarely make good managers.

I'm not an accountant but I believe that "other expenses" are simply other costs that aren't listed on the high level balance sheet. You can't list them all.

Brent

That's a bit deep for me mate.

Utter rubbish... Everton's primary business – apart from football – is selling a brand. To suggest the club should not be involved in marketing is nonsense of a Masonic scale.

Anyway Martin, talking to you is like clapping with one hand, so I'm going to retire undefeated here since you haven't answered any of my questions. I may not be able to prove my opinion about shirt sales to you but I can leave you with some evidence that illustrates some of Everton's commercial inadequacies, in comparison with its peers.

Aston Villa

Following Wembley appearances in both domestic cup competitions, Aston Villa return to the Money League for the first time since 2003/04 with revenue of £89.6m. They take their place as England’s seventh highest revenue generating club, replacing Newcastle United who spent the 2008/09 season in the Football League Championship.

During 2009/10 the club promoted Acorns, a local children’s hospice, on its shirtfront rather than a fee paying sponsor and so understandably its commercial revenue of £13.1m is lower than many of its competitors. This revenue stream will increase in 2010/11 as Villa begins a three year deal with FxPro having re-established a commercial framework for its shirt sponsorship whilst maintaining close links with Acorns as its principal charity partner.

Rory's note: Everton's commercial income for 2009/10 was £9.7m, £2.4m less than Villa's despite them having a non-fee paying sponsor that year and Everton having had a Cup Final appearance in '09.

Tottenham Hotspur

Spurs’ strong on-pitch performance secured them a fourth place finish in the Premier League and allowed them to qualify, via a play-off, for the UEFA Champions League for the first time. The club subsequently won its play-off and beat Internazionale, the reigning champions, to win its group and progress to the knockout stage.

Commercial revenue increased by £2.8m (10%) to £31.5m with 2009/10 being the final season of the club’s shirt front sponsorship with Mansion worth a reported average of £8.5m per season. In 2010/11 Autonomy is the club’s new shirt sponsor in the Premier League, and Investec has that right in all domestic cup and European competition matches. The deals are reportedly worth £10m and £2.5m per season respectively. Tottenham’s kit deal with Puma runs to the end of the 2010/11 season, and reportedly generates approximately £5m in revenue per season.

Everton's deal with Chang was worth £2.6m per season in 2010, followed by a 3-year extension of £3m per season until 2014. The Le Coq Sportif deal was worth £5m for up to five years (so potentially £1m per season?) but was ditched after three to partner with Nike in a 3-year deal worth £3.3m per season. Lastly, there's the 10-year deal with Kitbag at £3m per season.

Manchester City

Manchester City are the biggest climbers in this year’s Money League, moving up nine places from 20th to 11th. Under the ownership of the Abu Dhabi United Group, significant investment in the playing squad translated into a fifth placed finish in the Premier League, the club’s highest since the league began. As a result, the club recorded its highest ever revenues, with an increase of £38.1m (44%) to £125.1m.

Commercial revenue more than doubled to £46.7m and was the principal driver of the club’s overall revenue growth. 2009/10 was the first year of improved shirt sponsorship and kit supply deals with Etihad Airways and Umbro respectively. The new Umbro deal facilitated merchandising revenue growth of 60% to £7.9m. The club has focused on expanding its commercial partnership portfolio, revenue from which grew five fold in 2009/10, including deals with the Abu Dhabi Tourism Authority, Etisalat, and Aabar all of which are based in the Middle East. Further growth in this area is anticipated in 2010/11 as a result of additional deals, including those with Heineken and Jaguar.

Everton's commercial income increased 25% when they finished 5th, not doubled.

Liverpool

The increase in broadcast revenue was offset by a £5.6m decrease in commercial revenues, from £67.7m to £62.0m. This reduction is attributed to reduced royalties and merchandising income. However Liverpool’s 2010/11 commercial revenues will be boosted by the new four year deal with Standard Chartered Bank, providing a reported £20m per season – £12.5m more per annum than under the previous agreement with Carlsberg.

'nuff said.

Perhaps we should get a marketing department then to provide the exposure and market the brand?

1. have their shirts for sale in stores
2. do sell a few
3. benefit from the exposure and publicity
4. haven't lost money in doing so
5. when they've done similar things to us, like having spells in Europe, Wembley appearances or finishing 5th, did better to capitalize on the opportunity and achieve much greater increases in revenue.

If you can't see how that shows Everton can do better than it has done, rather than take the easy way out, then I simply must refrain from going further into a battle of logic with an unarmed engineer, especially one who has apparently never heard of a stalemate, draw, tie, double KO...

There are many types of businesses and many types of business models. A businessman can be successful in one area but that's no guaranteed he'd be a success in another and savvy ones will avoid getting into areas they are not well-versed in. The ones on our board may be successful in their respective fields, they may even be fit to maintain the status quo of our club, but they are clearly not the ones who are going to get us out of this mire and take us forward.

Q1) Do you think the Board should've done better, given the Fuck-ups it has presided over?

Q2) Or do you think they haven't presided over any fuck-ups?

I understand the outsourcing argument, and focusing on core business activities. However...

- The business of football in the Premier League has changed beyond all recognition, and I'd venture expectation, since the league formed in 1993. Today with its global appeal, it's very much about promoting the brand and increasing the brand value - that's what drives sponsorship value

- Football clubs have always been about merchandising as one of their primary revenue sources. Everton claimed to lose 750k per year before outsourcing. I've worked in businesses where you dump the "bad" bits of the business into other operating units, to either lump the loss makers together (or bury them in profitable units), and that could have happened here.

- The deal with Nike is between them and Kitbag. Everton's deal is with Kitbag. I believe this is an example of a bad long-term deal - looks good in the accounts, as guaranteed income, but all the upside is with Kitbag, and as deals around us grow in value, we're locked in. Arsenal have had the same impact with the Emirates naming rights, albeit on a much larger scale, they are counting down the days to its expiry.

- I don't believe outsourcing one of your primary revenue streams is good business, in any business, and believe it was a symptom of how cash-poor the club was, that it was the best solution to them rather than undertaking a third party review of the merchandising, or bringing expertise in to do it.

- That last point is key. These are now £100m-£200m turnover businesses, and as such the executive team looks different from 20 years ago. To illustrate this (but not compare us with them), a few years back Man City started paying a CEO £35k a week, above the average for Premier League players (though well below their own!). I'm not besmirching the executives at Everton, merely to say I don't think we have enough of, or have been looking for, the right calibre of people - we can't afford it, and there's no-one there to make a business case for it anyway. (Suggesting those of a "retail" mind advising the club have another agenda, maybe?)

Sorry mate but every point you list as fact there is only opinion. Other clubs are not us. Do you have revenue figures for merchandise, before and after they changed their business model? Even that wouldn't be conclusive though because there could be

Why would men with proven business expertide adopt a business strategy unless they genuinely believed that they would benefit from it. You may be absolutely correct in what you say but there are 2 sides to every argument and I haven't heard the other so forming a conclusion rather than an opinion is impossible for me. All I know is that if I want a shirt I can buy one, I wouldn't have one at any price and I'm an Evertonian. Why should a neutral observer in a foreign country buy the shirt of a small UK club that has no brand hence giving no street cred unless say like you they have a Liverpool connection of some kind?

There is massive area that holds live events, surrounded by bars and shops. It its totally covered in everything Everton. Pictures of players adorn banners. Its a sea of blue and white Everton flags etc.

All business owners and all people in all walks of life will make mistakes and Everton’s board has made many. Making judgments in hindsight is always easy though, boards have to make decisions on the trot, many which can be associated with the very survival of the business and many of which need finance which they may not be able to get.

KD was a no less than a total disaster for EFC and its fans and if the board genuinely had the chance to do the deal and didn't then it would be classed as the fuck-up of the century. I’ve never seen the club’s explanation of why it didn’t happen though so again can only state an opinion.

My own guess was that they were desperate to do the deal but were totally dependent on getting external finance for the £30M and in the end they didn’t get it. The deal was just never on. BK was of course guilty of misleading the fans by claiming that the money was ringfenced which it patently wasn’t because they never had it. That doesn’t imply a fuck-up —only that BK is a bullshitter.

DK was (with the benefit of hindsight) a disaster because they didn’t do their homework and went ahead with what they saw as a golden deal which they had little chance of getting approval for. As they say, if the deal looks too good to be true... then it is. On the face of it, it was a great opportunity where they could have got the ground financed from the retail development but there were still a lot of unanswered questions. Remember also that they didn’t mislead the fans; we voted in support.

I believe that the major problem in the relationship between the board and a very critical but still small minority of our fans is that these fans are frustrated because they believe that the board is failing badly on the basis they have not re-established the club back to the position they feel it warrants but that it has only seen fleetingly since 1970 and which has otherwise been in decline. This decline is being temporarily arrested now by selling assets, not by any sustainable growth in revenue, and it is unsustainable.

Many critical fans believe that the board should sell the club at any price, that anything is better than the current board, that there really is a billionaire around the corner who is only discouraged by the board and its ridiculous asking price for the club — but these are all unsubstantiated opinions from angry fans. That the board has an agenda which doesn’t align with those of many fans is correct but that is in itself not incompetence and they would have to be total idiots to put their own money into an unreconstructed club.

There are large numbers of fans who go to the game to enjoy it and really don’t care about the politics. The vast majority are in my opinion in between the extremes and see that it is also fair to say that, without resources to spend on players, we have recovered as a club since they came and our on-the-field performances are actually quite good considering. Incompetence and skullduggery are very much unproven for me at least.

Puts his Captain Mainwaring voice on

Stupid boy. Get a sense of humour wiill you.

*puts on Pike voice* Capt.Mainwaring! he said bloody, Mum said you shouldn't say that didn't she Uncle Frank.

So, to sum up ( with hindsight ) The Board may have made mistakes, but what the hey ( again with hindsight ) we see that everybody makes mistakes, so with one leap, Bill's teflon coated cape of infallibility renders him blameless.

Nah, pull the other one, any one of those ' what the hey, every one makes a mistake ' mistakes, should be cause to at least offer a resignation, yeah its a fair cop guv, it happened on my watch.

Add it all together and feet should not touch.

Also, isen't calling DK a 'Virtually free' stadium, misleading fans to get their vote?

Martin #970 para 4 ' My own guess '...objection your honour, offering opinion as putative fact.

Martin #970 para 6 ' I believe '...cue Hamlet music * wearily* objection your honour, offering opinion as putative fact yet again.

Nothing on the tv here, so, prior to bed * retires to armchair on rooftop balcony with cigar and whisky to shoot breeze with Capt Kirk*

Bill Kenwright: there's no bigger Everton fan than me!

By the way, if you think me being raised in Singapore and having ancestral roots in East Anglia means I have a 'Liverpool connection', well, I'll take that as a compliment, thanks. I'm a prime example of the neutral fan in a foreign country that you're talking about. The only reason I starting supporting Everton was that they wore my favorite colour and I knew the Beatles were from Liverpool. In fact I was probably very close to becoming a red because of that and the Shite were always on the box even then. Thank God I found out there was team from the city in Blue. As I grew older, the more I learnt about our history, the prouder I became that I was an Evertonian. I can hold my own against any plastic Sky fan who dares to try and tell me Everton are a small club. And the older, pre-Sky generation who know their stuff, readily acknowledge my 'street cred' when I say I'm an Evertonian. And you're right I can't prove it, but I believe that out of the millions out there, there will be many others just like me who might one day become proud Evertonians. But Everton do not have exclusivity on proud footballing histories and if they don't start to market themselves, if Everton continue to be non-participants in the ever-growing Sky juggernaut of branding and commercialism, then just like MOTD, they're going to be left behind and forgotten, always last.

I think the biggest mistake the club has made in recent times has been to latch on to that silly People's Club moniker. What better way to alienate anyone who isn't from Liverpool? What does 'The People's Club' mean to anyone who doesn't live in the city or can't get to the match? All it does is reinforce the idea that if you're a foreign fan, you support the Shite, they're the international brand. Much like it was believed only people in Manchester supported City, United was for everyone else. A great example of how NOT to grow your brand. I know what Moyes meant by it when he said it but I think it does the club no favours.

Please recognise though m'lud that by saying "my own guess" and "I believe" I'm only clarifying that I'm expressing things as my opinion not as fact and that this is to my credit not detriment?.

Where are you mate? Obviously somehwere East of Atyray. Did you say Bali?

IF that was the truth then I’d say that collectively it was a fuck-up given that for the club in general it appeared to be such a wonderful opportunity.

What you have to remember though is that each board member can have his own opinion and that’ll be based on what is to their own benefit and that is company democracy. Sometimes events happen because agreement can’t be reached to make them happen. It doesn’t have to be a fuck-up much as it’d appear to us as such.

“Virtually free” wasn’t necessarily misleading; based on the full development they could have got the stadium for very little outlay. I’d say that it was only true subject to some heavy conditions though so yes, slightly misleading but is that not expected.

Firstly Martin, you’re arguments go against economic orthodoxy of the last 20-30 years which concentrates on the supply of a good rather than demand-as Say’s Law would have it, ‘supply creates its own demand’, or even Latent Demand, which is defined as a desire or preference which a consumer is unable to satisfy due to lack of information about the product's availability. As an unreconstructed Keynesian, I think 80% of supply side theory is complete bollocks, but it does have some merit.

My understanding of your argument is thus. We (all the Twebbers) are about to launch a new soft drink, and we’re having a meeting about advertising strategy. Your input is “Nah, sack it off boys, Coke, Pepsi and 7up have got it sewn up, I vote that we all go and get proper jobs”

The history of advertising is one of new or little known products trying to grab a share of the market, as yes I do accept that Football (or supporting any team) is unique as the consumers keep using the product even when it is substandard and there are better alternatives out there (our loyalty should be to Manu , then Chelsea , then City etc), but that doesn’t mean that the club shouldn’t try to increase revenue streams, by raising the profile of the club.

Yes there are risks about spending money on campaigns that may achieve very little, but as other posters have highlighted that there are similar-sized teams that have a larger turnover than Everton, and we either stay as we are and keep on treading water and hope that we can keep our heads above water ad infinitum, or somebody in charge does something to break the impasse.

Hence the Kitbag deal, and as you say, the guaranteed income.

The deal WAS on, Bill was offered the £30M by his bessy mate at the time and he refused it as he would lose control of the Club.

So in your own word it has to be classed as the "fuck-up of the century."

The irony of course is that such deals further damage the long-term revenue potential of the club, which when it comes to due diligence will have a negative impact on the valuation of the club by the potential buyers, hence it's a false economy.

But BK doesn't have control over the club so how did he block the deal because of control issues?

Are you also saying the BK allowed the dealing to go on for so long in the knowledge that he was going to block it in the end.

Is there any credible source where I could read an unbiased account of what actually happened? I genuinely don't know but what's intimated above sound like the least likely.

Karl@003

Income is only one part of the picture, have a look at wages and debt servicing and you'll see the EFC is essentially broke

There are plenty of references to the disagreement, what Paul Gregg offered, and what he demanded in return. However I doubt you would deign any of them to be credible or unbiased so it's moot.

FWIW a company I was employed by at the time was engaged on various planning issues related to the Kings' Waterfront Development, having been involved in several schemes in the Merseyside area over the years. As a general principle, I'm not in favour of much of our local government planning system, with elected councillors often acting either by self-interest or, arguably worse, without having bothered to become familiar with the topic on the agenda making decisions. This was one of the "best" examples prior to getting preferred bidder status. The euphoria felt was quickly dissipated when we realised that Everton didn't have the £30m "ring-fenced", so when the revised costing showed that Everton would actually need to find closer to £60m, there was a general feeling of "meh". The whole process was marginally better than my first experience of council meetings, when the first item discussed, and the hottest debate of the night, was whether more cases of beer could've been put on the refreshment trolley if they'd cut back on sandwiches...

KD was a disaster for us but it didn’t need incompetence and skullduggery for it to fail. What it needed was only a club that was actually penniless trying to fool a consortium that it was in the big league and could actually contribute money that it didn’t have. How could it possibly have succeeded? We as fans fell for it when we should have known better and that is the bitter disappointment. It was too good to be true and so it proved.

Matt, after you've tried Black Cat, the Mehkong goes down like sweet nectar! Interestingly enough, as of the last Annual Report, BK has increased his shareholding by 290 shares. Evidence perhaps, that he's asking way to high a premium over the value of the club, if he thinks the return is worth putting another ~£300k into his shareholding of something he's 'desperate to sell'?

Directors' No. of Shares
			May 2011	May 2010
W Kenwright CBE		9,044		8,754
J V Woods		6,622		6,622
R I Earl		8,146		8,146
Sir P D Carter CBE	714		714

For some goods you are correct in that supply could create its own demand such as say a new iPod. For football shirts I'd say that there's no such relationship. Success and marketability of the club will create the demand for shirts. Without this, a soccer shirt is worthless and no amount of supply could create demand. Barcelona shirts sell not because they have unique properties but because Barcelona is a brand and some of its players sub brands.

If that's such a bad deal it makes you wonder why the board took the £30M loan from Bears, or sold Finch Farm and rented it back?

To me this sound like an academic discussion on price rather than the availabilty of a product driving up demand. In other words - make it cheap enough and demand will rise? Of course if we were to have enough unsold stock (a frequent problem in the past) then price would drop but so would profit. This is not the sort of demand we need.
Happy to be wrong! But then so are most economists most of the time I am led to believe.

I stand by my earlier contention. Marketing has to be underpinned by profit and in our case quick profit.It IS possible for marketing to drive image and sales rapidly upwards of course but that tends to be VERY expensive. Ask Man City.

This link is useful for the purposes of this discussion: http://www.footballmarketing.biz/marketing-football.html#

Demand creating supply, supply stimulating demand.

The key though is to improve the core product - ie the team.

Do that, win things and they will come.......

That's very simple. They did what you state to buy players and finance the difference between income and expenditure.

Thomas

As I say, there are goods which will obey that law of supply and demand but for football shirts surely the only supply that creates demand could be supply of success from the brand. The brand is the club not the shirt, the shirt only means an association. Nobody who doesn't first establish the association will buy the shirt unless it is a unique situation like Rory's. If we were to establish a supply to create a demand which one or ones of the millions of sports outlets in the world would we establish stock. How would we justify to the banks that there'd be an increase in revenue for the increase in costs?

Post 037 is without doubt the biggest pile of incongruous gibberish I've had the misfortune of ever reading on this site.

Do you actually realise that your posts are utter nonsense?

Utter flim-flam.

A sticking point was the dissolution of TBH, although this did eventually happen as it had to after Gregg wanted out.

I am intrigued by your comment ref:" It was an exceptionally complex development with multiple partners none of whom had a clue on a property development of this size and nature and the likelihood was always that it had a very high risk of failure." As things stand, I would find it hard to believe that it got to preferred status, especially given the fun and games going on with LCC at that time. I was too far removed from the project to have that kind of insight, but I will ask around and try to find out the credentials or otherwise of the other partners.

I only ever saw the business case, and, probably like Bill, I was blinded by the numbers!

Everything about this club is about the brand, the products, the press releases, the football... etc.

They ARE mutually dependent, commercially the same side of the same coin. To make some half-arsed distinction between the club and the shirt it sells shows a basic misunderstanding of the basic concepts being discussed.

To say the brand is not the shirt is nonsense... if it has the badge on it, then it's the brand.

You continually accuse posters of dressing up opinion as fact whilst insisting in passing your shit-stained view of all things Everton, as the one and only truth. Well, we want facts Martin. Facts. Come on.

''As I say, there are goods which will obey that law of supply and demand but for football shirts surely the only supply that creates demand could be supply of success from the brand.'' Fuckin prove it!

''Barcelona shirts sell not because they have unique properties but because Barcelona is a brand and some of its players sub brands.'' Facts please!

Come on Martin, I'm waiting with baited breath. Give me proof or stop talking shite.

Oh and stop calling my football club small. Fool.>

FFS, he has to be a wind up, surely. One with a faintly impressive CV, i'll give you that.

I'm not interested in whether Martin's opinion is right or wrong. I want to see the demonstrable facts behind the opinion. Facts so solid, they would survive a going over by SYP. I want Martin to prove, beyond any doubt, what he's saying is correct.

Until then, everything he says is like a turd falling in my drink. (B. Hicks 1992)

Problem is, if you've spent any length of time on this site, you may have noticed that Martin will not accept any contrary point of view, unless it has been backed up with facts that Martin, and only Martin, can verify.

Probably just taking the piss really. What can I say, Sweet FA on the tele.

Take it easy, and Bill Hicks RIP, possibly The Greatest.

That's not what he's saying at all... and that's why he's so infuriating.

He's defending the failure of our board to market the brand properly, solely on the basis that we are not a big enough club... Therefore our marketing is saturated already.

He's conveniently ignoring the fact that you can have all the success in the world, but if your fail to exploit the commercial opportunities then you'll still sell below your potential. He is talking with authority on a subject he clearly knows nothing about... and that subject is generally based on common sense.

Mason's MO is to defend the board at the expense of any sense. Kids have to start supporting a club at some stage... footballing success is certainly central to that but poor marketing takes us out of the shop window for potential fans.

Fuck it. I lived my life before I became an engineer.

What's your prediction for tmmw? I reckon we'll struggle without Gibson, without stating the obvious. Need to take the game to them, would love a win but can see a score draw a la Villa in recent years.

University of life lad!

- strikes match on kecks, lights Woodbine, flicks match into gutter, gobs jet of golly through front teeth, walks confidently into bookies, winks just before entering -

(oh wait, not life, I meant Lancaster)

What do reckon for tomorrow then Eugene?

2-0 man.

Touring all year. On tele six times a week. Weekend in Butlins on his tax return.

2-1 to them

(taps nose) It's been fixed mate, put your house on it - a mate of mine in the merch was out in Singapore and heard these Chinese Mafia fellers talkin' about it.

Deffo like!

(I've put everything I've got on it - if we lose 2-1, I stand to pick up 34 nicker).

So by virtue of the 'Wisdom of Crowds' (and 3 apparently is a crowd I think that eans we're going to shade it 2-1 in the last 10 minutes. 2-1 is currently 7-1 with Paddy Power. You don't get that at the bank.

Martin @011, sir, I believe it is convention that a "controlling director" of a company is one who has ownership of 25% of a company or who has influence over others who combined have ownership of 25% of the shares of a company. Clearly BK is leader of a concert party that does have control of the Company. He fits the criteria of controlling director.

Matt@ 007, "asset stripping" is quite a specific phrase, please can you help me understand the way that BK has been doing this? Looking for only factual analysis please rather than heresay.

Ian

Hardly the financial nouse that you were implying they had when they presided over "the fuck-up of the century."

I’m wary about responding first thing in the morning because some of you are plainly drink fuelled when you make your posts which I suspect is true of you but I’ll try
I can’t prove it, it was opinion as it must be because there is no provable theory on it and no working model but like I say opinion can be nonsense like a lot of the stuff spouted on here or it can be valid

Answer me these questions. If Barcelona shirts were put into a shop but instead of Barcelona, the shirts were branded with Wycombe Wanderers would they sell? If I put 2000 Northwich Victoria shirts in a sports shop in Singapore would they sell by virtue of supply creating its own demand? Who knows more about marketing goods, Everton’s board with proven business acumen or a numpty like you?

I rest my case

I do not defend the failure of the board to market the brand properly, they have tried the option of self marketing and made the commercial decision to outsource it. They know vastly more about marketing than you and they have the figures in front of them to show whether their decisions are valid or not. You have nothing except opinion and a foot in your mouth. If you can show me that they are suffering losses now and will continue to do so in the future compared with when they were doing in-house marketing then I’ll accept that what they did was wrong, if you can show me quantitatively that they can somehow start to sell shirts from a small unsuccessful clubs in mass markets where people have never heard of EFC and have the free choice to buy successful Spanish, German and UK club shirts then I’ll accept your garbage. You can’t do this by marketing; I doubt you could do it by gunpoint.

Kids have to start supporting clubs sometime, now how do kids star supporting clubs? Let’s not look at kids in the UK because they will usually support local teams but this still applies to them. Let’s look at kids in say Malaysia. They learn about football in magazines that are full of stories and pictures, not of small clubs like ours but massive clubs with massive stars; they watch soccer on ESPN and Star and it’s mainly Spanish, EPL is on of course and you see small clubs like EFC on but when they are playing big clubs. If you were a clever marketer how, when they know nothing about little Old Everton, would you get shirts into shops where there was somehow some magic potential for sales and how would you convince them to buy when they don’t know EFC from Northwich Vics.

Come to Kazakhstan and you’ll see people with EPL shirts on, nobody wears an Everton shirt. Now, you can’t buy shirts here and there are no clubs that market shirts out here so these people are buying from the Internet. It’s easy to buy Everton shirts over the internet so why don’t they buy Everton shirts? The answer is that EFC are not a brand and people buy only brand goods, if I opened a shop here selling Everton shirts then I’d sell none because they are not associated with a brand. It is nonsense to suggest that the shirt is a brand.

Let's use the example quoted in the original post. Chang (Carlsberg) market their beer on our shirts. They don't however enhance their marketing in Thailand by showing images of Everton on their advertising material. They advertise their brand in the UK because many people in the UK have heard of Chang Beer, it's now available in the UK and they have the potential to increase sales here. They don't use Everton in their home advertising but clubs like Barcelona because they are known brands and EFC aren't. Chang obviously see Everton as unmarketable and they have the ability to mass market EFC and increase their sales by supply of our club. Don't they understand that if they put EFC in their adverts kids will start to support EFC and buy Chang and EFC could sell shirts in Thai supermarkets. Wait though, perhaps they think that this concept is absolute baloney? don't these guys know anything about selling? are they incompetent?

Or are you saying that it is BK's fault that there are no counterfeit Everton shirts??

Please stick to the argument, rather than speculating on my level of intelligence....

You HAVE defended the decision of the board to fail to market properly, in fact you did it in the very sentence you deny doing it in...

"I do not defend the failure of the board to market the brand properly, they have tried the option of self-marketing and made the commercial decision to outsource it."

In this very sentence you ADMIT they failed to self-market. You've also been given evidence that merchandise is no longer available in places where people want to buy it due to outsourcing ... Listen carefully —THAT IS ALSO A FAILURE TO MARKET PROPERLY!!!!

I doubt you'll get that rather obvious point... as you've ignored similar points made throughout related threads.

Interesting that you need to extend your argument to Kazakhstan in order to try and make a point... however, marketing in the UK and Ireland is problematic... you want evidence? Biggest single supporters group in NI is an Evertonian supporters club... try finding a shirt, let alone anything else.

ps: "They know vastly more about marketing than you"

That would be your opinion... dressed up, as... er... fact.

And I haven't counted the future revenue streams that have been borrowed against/outsourced etc.

Overall I believe the accounts would show a reduction in the clubs asset base, net of depreciation etc.

It's all there, Martin... you choose for some bizarre reason to ignore these escapades under this board's regime, it has to be because you can't use the brains you were born with — or it's by design.

Seriously, even your insults lack coherency.

As for the rest of your response... E-Bay having shops..??

Christ -– you're into 'monkey tennis' territory...

Hilarious stuff.

Doing nothing, investing nothing, fiddling while we turn in to Leeds in slow motion.

Lay out your arguments on why you think our board "does nothing", why they are "fiddling" and how you believe that they compare with Leeds. all unsubstantiated nonsense of course but if you at least lay out your reasoning (or is that a bit too grandiose a description) I can destroy it. I can't answer silly insinuations.

You'll notice one common thread on responses made to me here, As soon as I ask for some kind of substantiation I get silence.

1. What a ridiculous fuckin question, but i'll give it a go. The sale of Wycombe Wanderers (instead of Barcelona. WTF?) shirts would depend on the level of support in the area, for that one (or both?) team(s).

2. No. Dont be silly.

3. I'm edging towards a numpty like me.

Northwich Victoria/Wycombe are not Everton. Wycombe are a small club Martin. Do you get that premise? Wycombe small, Everton much bigger, Barcelona huge. A lot of posters on this thread are bemoaning the FACT that, even in areas close to home, with substantial EFC support, it is impossible to walk into a sports shop and purchase an Everton shirt, whilst our rivals shirts saturate the market.
Your pathetic attempts to derail the debate and the misplaced arrogance in your posts, do you no favours.

Dumping 200 Everton shirts in a shop in Singapore and expecting them to sell would, obviously, not work. I think the original post was attempting to point out that, with a clever marketing strategy, developed with our main sponsor and popular local brand, we just may have a chance to shift a few of them,

It's not engineering, Martin.

From, pause, the evidence of, pause, my own, pause, 'kin, pause, eyes.

Thats what I have seen, or rather not seen.

And I said WE the Club were (doing) a Leeds in slow motion.

Now you tell me if I have missed where they have added any value to the Club, other than re-mortgaging the mortgages, done anything to have improved the overall off the field running of the Club. Invested one brass wazoo of their own money.

But you know all this.

Of course there is a chance that your majority of one has the absolute truth of it. But to admit that is to admit that the reverse may also be true...and maybe that would lead to..well we can't all be wrong. This, alas does not sit well with some.

I have now had enough ( for now ) of your brand of ' have you stopped beating your wife ' shinanigins, the joys(?) of the X factor is calling.

Enjoy your Irrelevance until the next slow week.

Be seeing you.

Thank you, I’m ever so glad that you have got my point although you still managed to waffle around it.

Who gives one about not being able to buy an Everton shirt in a shop? We’re in the year 2012 now, why would you need to find anything in a shop?

Colin @496
You are correct in the first sentence and that was my point so you see in two posts you've agreed with everything I said and that is fantastic. Regarding the rest? “May” is not a basis used by businessmen for investing in distribution and sales of merchandise.

It is engineering too as we engineers don’t do anything without first providing a quantified justification for doing so. We sell solutions to problems, kind of opposite to some TW posters who imagine problems and never have any solutions. It’s why fans don’t run football clubs; they’d be bankrupt in hours.

With the vagaries of sizing at the moment and the fact that different clothing firms have different ideas on what constitutes Medium, Large etc it's a right pain buying clothing, particularly shirts, "tops" etc
There's every chance that you will find the item doesn't fit, doesn't suit, is not as described etc. and have the hassle, and often expense, of returning it
For something that you like but doesn't fit, you can then re-order a different size and take another chance
I imagine (opine?) that deliveries outside the UK are considerably more expensive for the buyer
So, in Everton's case, buying on-line is not always an attractive proposition and ex-pat supporters are particularly disadvantaged

You make valid comments (and thank you for your civility) but it is a comment that is valid to all on-line shopping and yet on-line shopping is rapidly displacing shops. Whilst yes the cost of delivery has to be included on-line shopping should significantly reduce the cost of the item. The size issue is valid but nothing like the problem it was as the sizes now cover a broad range, I think most know whether they are L, XL or XXL for example? The cost abroad is higher than it perhaps would be if the shirts were sold in shops but don't forget that you'd still have to pay for transport, storage, distribution and sales staff so is the cost likely to be lower? I doubt it.

I believe that if the board thought they could sell extra shirts by stocking them in shops everywhere they would do it, I don't believe that they are that stupid. Shopping habits have changed.

However, I was in Everton 2 a few years ago and spotted a replica 1985 grey Hafnia shirt — magic! Presumed I was a Medium (no, not a seer!) but, on trying it, found it was definitely of the `85, pencil-slim, gay shorts Sharpie era, so a Large it was!

So yes, one could respond..

"Yes I hear what you're saying and would defend your right to say it but can't really agree with you this time"

But remember, it would cost you no more (or less) to respond..

"You waffling twat. You opinion-on-everyfuckingthing nobhead. You ill-informed, posting simply to hear the tappity-tap-tap sound of your keyboard, ball-bag".

I'm not for one second saying that's how you SHOULD have responded to Martin, but..surely it's good to know the option is there at the same price.

What it boils down to for me though is if the club want to sell merchandise they have to make it as easy and cost effective for the consumer as possible.

The way to do that is have it available at as many outlets as possible, or offer free delivery and returns online.

The club do neither of the above, and as a result probably get almost nothing out of me p.a. merchandise-wise, whereas if they did either of the above they would probably get somewhere between £50-£100 p.a. instead.

They do offer free delivery on orders of over £100 in an effort to increase basket value but for me this is too high as it feels like the club are trying to screw a larger than necessary purchase out of you, and there’s only so much extra I’ll spend to save a fiver.

I genuinely think the lowest delivery charge of £4.95 puts people off.

People might “poo-poo” this as “it’s only a fiver”, but its not a fiver if things start going back and forth and if I’m going to save the club money on “bricks” they should pass it to me on “clicks”, or as you rightly say make the online product cheaper, which I’m pretty sure they don’t.

So to be honest, for me much of it boils down to the principle. At £4.95 I can almost guarantee they are making money on delivery, which is their prerogative but I personally think it costs them money in the long run compared to the extra sales gleaned from offering free delivery. I for one, literally, don’t buy it.

So, the club loses sales, less people are seen trotting around in Everton gear "promoting the brand" and bit by bit what I imagine is an ever decreasing fanbase puts less and less revenue into the club simply because the club don’t make buying as easy and cost-effective for the consumer as it possibly could be.

Correct but that is the difference between intelligent civil people and the rest; the former have the option but never use it even though they have the ability and opportunity to do it well. Some others, however, believe that they are OK to use the alternative at least on the internet where they feel that civil and social norms don't apply and they don't have to suffer the consequences of being taken to account for what they have said as they would do if it were said face to face.

That was alot different when we were first sponsored by Chang though, a member of my family said you could buy 1st, 2nd and 3rd strips out there then and I can only think thats because the kits were done by Umbro which is obviously a more popular template for the kit copiers... because now you cant find any... in countries like Thailand it must be about the ability to afford the kit, or at least a copy of the kit, that helps people decide.

I did see a few Chang banners with Jags, Arteta & Cahill on in a few beach bars in Cambodia but apart from that we were pretty under-represented.. but then most teams were.. apart from the obvious teams I only saw one other thai fan wearing a premiership shirt and that was a west ham one... Chang did the deal with Real & Barca at the time I was out there.. it's the first time Real & Barca have done any sponsorship deal together and I would imagine is Spanish league backed as their presence wasn't massive at all, unfortunately though it's all hype and the bigger players getting big wages is who they want to see.. I'd imagine they'd love a bit of Alex Nyarko out there...

I reckon theres a chance it should all change with Nike coming in though, its an easier to copy shirt and should hopefully make us more prominent... it is a shame that we don't seem to feature as part of the main nike distribution deal as surely it would raise profile straight away...The deal has obviously been good for the club though, everybody of the playing generation would rather be wearing nike and it makes us alot more attractive proposition, I hope we can push on and take advantage of that in order to build a better relationship with them, kind of in the way Arsenal did when they first had their kit done by them, it was definitely beneficial for them in the long run.. and nike as well...

End of the day if we can get up there again then we will be supported anywhere but I think that they kind of reject it in Thailand because Chang is so common there that its not so cool(they also sponsor the shirt of every Thai league team over there) I like it though, its a good beer and certainly a better logo and brand than most of the sponsors in the league.. I just wouldn't count on them loving us in Thailand too much, while they are pretty obsessed with football, really they haven't got a clue (and we shouldn't let that worry us too much until it comes to the time you need them to put our match on in the bar!)

If the margin on the shirt is indeed £45 (i.e 90% margin) then in order to encourage supporters to buy online, when they have no other realsitic option such as a local store, should I believe be taken on by the club for their own good.

One argument is that the club have a captive audience so they'd be mad not to charge delivery. I cant go anywhere else, I'm tied in as a fan so I'm going to pay the delivery charge aren't I?

But I'm not, and I don't, so the club loses a sale and I wont be the only one. I'd wager the cost of me not buying at all is also a lot higher than the cost of covering the delivery charge.

My lad doesn't want an Everton shirt because it's going to put money into the club - he wants it because it associates him with the club going back to the original thread. No shirt - less association - less association - Everton who......?

I have an LFC supporting friend, who has a young son that he understandably tried to bring up as a red. However one day, when that young son was about five or six years old, they were strolling through a sports store in Dublin and the kid decided he wanted a Chelsea jersey instead.

Why? Because he preferred the colour blue. Nothing to do with them being a “big” club, filthy rich, recent Premier League champions etc. He just plain preferred the look of their jersey because it was blue. He’s now an avid Chelsea fan. His family invariably buy him Chelsea kits, training tops etc for his birthdays and at Christmas. His dad has also brought him to Stamford Bridge and naturally, as he gets older and starts to earn himself, I expect he’ll end up pumping a fair amount of his hard earned cash into Chelsea.

Everton also wear blue but alas, have no presence whatsoever in sports stores in Ireland, due to the Board entering into a contract with a third party which limits distribution of EFC merchandise.

Now there is no guarantee of this, but had there been any Everton merchandise in Ireland, he may well have chosen Everton just because we are blue and all that money being spent on Chelsea merchandise may well be going to Everton instead.

What I do know for sure is that the failure to market the club in Ireland means that there is absolutely no chance he could have chosen Everton (or Everton chosen him)

That’s why you need to find Everton merchandise in a shop.

And that’s not even addressing the points about USA and Australia, which have already been made / ignored. Both are what I would call emerging markets in footballing terms, yet financial powerhouses whose average family have relatively large disposable incomes. Both countries have a large numbers of kids who play the game and don’t generally have an emotional attachment to an English club. Everton have, in recent years, had the poster boys for their national teams in our first team squad. But alas, no merchandise in those countries means kids are never going to walk into their local sports shop and say “Hey, look! That’s Cahill / Landon / Howard’s team. I want that!”

PS Ciarán at 199. Excellent post. The fact that Martin had to respond to personal insults and snide remarks in his response tells its own story.

Your post at 549, in the context of post 432 which came before it, is either brilliant self-parody or a staggering lack of self-awareness.

I now see you as a Viz character - 'Martin Mason And His Semantics Antics' ('he's always painting himself into a corner').

I believe when you post the contrary nonsense you do, it's like someone pissing down their legs to give themselves a nice warm feeling

(but forgetting this will eventually lead to them stinking of piss).

As for your desperate 'you wouldn't say that if we weren't on the internet' - two things.

1) Toffeeweb IS on the internet.

2) Let's assume Ciarán is 6' 5" and an expert at some particularly violent marshal art involving Kung Fu stars and breaking bricks with his head. Now read back all your responses to him and then state that YOU would be happy to say all those things to his face.

Exactly.

More semantics, sleight-of-hand, murky-the-waters nonsense.

You should know Martin (does that Robert De Niro 'eyes thing' from Meet The Fokkers) I'm watching you.

Martin & Colin, I wasn't making it up. >200 supporters
right here, willing and able to buy shirts and more. And those are just the ones with Facebook. The Malaysian Evertonians group has >150 members at last count. So let's knock this 'no one buys Everton shirts in Asia' thing on the head, eh? Thailand and Khazakstan are not representative of every market in the region, least of all cities like Singapore, KL, HK, Taipei, Shanghai, Beijing, Tokyo, Seoul, Sydney, or Melbourne.

My lad turned 5 whilst on holiday in Spain this summer. I bought a small football to kick about on the beach, which turned out to be a Barca one.

My lad wears his Everton kit (bought from the club shop by family) to death and picked up on the crest on the ball. Later on in town he connected the colours and crest on the ball to the shirt on sale in the shops and said he wanted a "Varcalona", as he calls them, shirt. I said I didnt think so.

On his birthday we saw one from last season (much better shirt than this season in my view), which was reduced and fitted him like a dream, so I reneged and bought it. He hasnt got a Danny who "Varcalona" really are but it's stuck now - his nailed on favourite team is Everton, then England, then "Varcalona".

Don't fret... I've owned a few Barcelona shirts myself. Among many other club shirts that aren't ours.

Shitfaced simians have probably got a bit more class than to hold up an engineering degree as some sort of badge of honour like.

Thanks for the reply. The points I raised were twofold and to be fair you responded to the point around our discussion. The other point has been ignored but is factual and that is why I am surprised that it has not received the attention due.

To return to your points, and I among looking to score
Points against a fellow blue.

The assets of the club have declined as the club is making losses, action is being taken to somehow continue trading during the loss making period, that does not imply asset stripping which in round figures is where money is being taken from a business to line the pockets of the beneficiaries, shareholders. Even the most one eyed can see that is not the case here and I would expect that the accountants, the directors and shareholders would verify that point, along with all those who read the accounts

Against that, like others I want to know about the costs of running the business that are hidden under one line in the accounts and seem to be large without being specified

Again, not looking for a row, Ian

You’re missing the point again mate. Generally speaking I would be civil to anybody f2f or on the internet because that’s how I am. Don’t read my responses to Ciaron to understand the situation but Ciaron’s to me that I responded to. People like yourself and Cioran who believe somehow that being on the internet relieves you of the requirement to be civil to others have to expect getting your own back and I will sometimes respond in kind. If you can’t take it then don’t give it.

http://www.bluesblood.com/bb/index.php

Ahhhh right - "It's not me, it's HIM"

As I said, semantics, waffle, blarney, more waffle and...fooling absolutely nobody.

- eyes-fingers-eyes-fingers-eyes-fingers -

I'm.

Watching.

You.

('mate')

Show me where I attacked anything other then your argument... Just once.

So I'll save my 'Who would you name the stands after and why?' for the next international break. Can't wait!

Not one single personal insult.

Gracious apology though.