Charles Green's quote as referenced by Gavin.

"If you look at the valuations, Manchester United are valued on the New York Stock Market at £1.2 billion. Everton are up for sale at around £300-400 million. So, as great as these clubs are, how can they be valued at those amounts and Rangers at only £30 million? It's inconceivable that those values will remain."

This can't possibly be the figures that BK and the Board are proposing to sell the club for surely?

I must admit I don't much care for this particular guy (Charles Green), but then again, his claims must have some substance.

Mr Chairman refuses to reveal a selling price so we don't know.

With an annual turn over between 80 to 90 million, requiring a new ground and the board already selling off most of our assets I honestly think this is rubbish. we wouldn't get anywhere near 100 million never mind four times that! Liverpool went for a lot less than that and whether we like it or not we are a lot smaller as a 'business interest' than they are. If he genuinely is looking for such a ridiculous amount then no doubt Jenny Seagrove will be taking us over when Bill departs!

Wouldn't be in the least surprised.

Looking at cause and effect of the "non-sale mystery" greed seems more plausible than Kenwrights infamous "no-one's buying football clubs".

No wonder he won't answer questions.

If true then would certainly explain the lack of interest. Surely not even someone like kenwright would think that those sort of figures are achievable?

I think there is a misconception about our selling price and the devil is in the detail!

I was told from a very good contact that EFC was nearly sold early 2012 and I have many reasons to believe this, mainly because I got the same story within days of each other from two separate people who would know such events were underway.

Anyway, as I have said before, the price of the club is way below the £300 million quoted but EFC board have placed a caveat on any sale that the buyer must prove they have additional funds to invest in the club — otherwise they will not sell up; this is where the sale always stalls.

The board believe if these funds aren’t guaranteed then they won't sell as there is no added value. You could argue they are protecting our future and maybe they have seen what happened to the Moores family at LFC. It’s certainly not ideal, but if true would mean the price quoted via this article does hold substance if they are including the after-sale investment.

If you wish to be critical, you could argue that the Board aren’t being realistic. Like most things on this subject, the glass is either half-full or half-empty depending on your perspective. Moyes not signing his new contract I believe will advance any potential sale — watch this space.

Is Charles Green employed by the club and in the know? If not then it's a load of twaddle/bather (Thanks Nick)

Probably true but as Paul states, Kenwrong won't tell anyone the price he wants so how does Charlieboy have the inside scoop?

Tony I suspect the old boy network which make up football chairman probably chew the fat and gas incessantly bragging about their clubs. The Man U price is obviously from the Stock Exchange and who knows what Billy Bullshitter or Robbie Keane a like have said to Green during the Naismith signing?

Its all speculative but as Paul clearly states BK refuses point blank to name the price he and his leeches are looking for.

Clearly £300M+ is ludicrous in the current scheme of things when we effectively need to have a net income from player transfers to stay afloat.

That said, I do think that figures of £100M could easily be justified on the basis of:
i) Turnover (80-90M)
ii) Asset value (i.e. players - current squad under contract has got to be worth c.£130M on the open market, e.g. Felliani £30M, Baines £20M, Jags £15M, Mirallas £10M, Jelavic £10M, Heitinga £6M, Coleman £5M, Gibson £5M, Osman £5M, Pienaar £5M, Howard £4M, Oviedo £3M, Naismith £3M, Anichebe £3M plus another c.£10M for collective youth players (Gueye, Vellios, Duffy, Berkley, McAleny, Junior, etc)
iii) Brand value + goodwill - some value in the heritage
iv) Potential Revenues (Premier League money seems to continually go up and a big windfall on the way).
v) Comparative values of other clubs

Obviously there are a number of problems (need for new ground, lack of ownership of land assets and commercial rights sold cheaply) but looking at it as a business you could make a case of up to 2x turnover or asset value+goodwill so getting in the c.£150M bracket.

Ultimately I think anyone taking over would need to invest £300-400M in total (initial purchase+new ground+little player investment) but there's no way you could argue the club alone is worth that.

£300-£440m for a new stadium which no doubt will look like all the other soulless bowls with a lower tier, a corporate tier, and an upper tier that look the same the world over. Shudder at the thought.

Nick #275

"Soulless bowls" ... Yes please!

I remember being soooo proud in 1966 when we hosted (and I attended) a World Cup semi-final, at the time we were clearly the owner of the best club ground in the country.

If replacing the Grand Old Lady with a modern stadium (yes, I know they're all similar) means we get back to somewhere near our former eminence, I'll settle for that.

Gavin,

This issue raised its head last April and I posted on here then that Bill had effectively let the cat out of the bag.

He does so towards the end of this Sky interview. http://www.skysports.com/video/inline/0,,16477_7644397,00.html
If the link doesn’t work google, “Sky, Kenwright and Moyes”

When pressed as to the price and likely buyers for Everton he sets out two non-negotiable issues:

(1) Everton must be in the Champions’ League;
(2) Everton need a new ground.

He then says that the overdraft needs paying off, and points out that the main shareholders need to be paid.

By my reckoning this means:

· £70m to pay off the overdraft (it may be less, I don’t have the up to date figure)
· £100m for the main shareholders (I can’t see Earl and co. walking away for much less)
· £100m in transfer fees/wages for the manager to spend (which might even be insufficient to bring CL football given that our main rivals for the four spots – Manure, Shitty, Chelski and the Arse can all get hold of way more disposable dosh)
· £200m for a stadium (don’t laugh, but Bill would probably insist this money is ‘ring-fenced’ or rather committed up front).

Therefore, someone needs to walk in the door ready to hand over £270m in cash immediately, and be prepared to guarantee another £200.

I am pretty sure I am close to the truth in the above figures. It more or less explains the numbers you quote, Gavin, and also why we remain unsold, in suspended and splendid animation.

The way out of this impasse is anyone’s guess.

Tony (279), I suspect you are along the right lines there. It may be that the sale price to shareholders is not by itself prohibitively high, but the terms of sale i.e. not wishing to sell to some dubious shady charatan who will asset strip and leave us totally potless and millions in the hole. The physical assets may have been stripped already but the assets on the pitch are there.

The need to guarantee investment in the team plus new ground that is better than GP would I imagine make those numbers i.e. £300-400m in the right area for the actual investment required. Agreement would need to be legally watertight and evidence of 'ring fenced' funds etc. I reckon with his background over KD etc Bill knows a bullshitter when he sees one...

Tony

If you can guarantee the £270m I'll guarantee the £200!

Tony with all respect the shareholders can only demand what their shares are worth and not a thing more. The overdraft is a liability on the value of the business which would devalue it, likewise the payer values are speculative - teams will only pay what they want for a player not some arbitrary figure out of the air. The shareholders have invested not a penny beyond their purchase so they should take just that figure not a penny more - the old the value of your investment may rise or fall being quite apt seeing as how they haven't to a man spent a single penny.

Per BK's two demands
* the club must be in the champions league - never going to happen in his stewardship as he has made no speculative investment in the playing squad to achieve this
* Everton need a new ground - again as an outgoing chairman he's got a brass neck making demands of a buyer - do as BK does and bullshit a jackanory story of some mythical investment pot or ringfenced fund only for it to do a BKesque vanishing act like the KD and DK.

He has waffled on about being desperate to sell YET bought more shares which is the actions of someone clearly not desperate to sell but looking for a bigger pay off.

The above would imply why the club remains unsold

- unreal expectations of value of just what they are selling which is a poorly ran business laden with debt which means its value is low
- unreal demands of investment from a gang of carpetbaggers who have the cheek to demand something they haven't done in over a decade themselves

I long ago stopped believing a single word Kenwright says (nb: it saves time) so nothing he utters shocks or surprises me.

One thing Charles Green says that I think IS bollocks is the following.

"The reality is fans want to see the top teams play each other. They want to see Bayern Munich play Barcelona, or Real Madrid play Manchester United, and it's those games that will drive the future of football."

Once the old European cup format was ditched, the whole thing became a bore.

There WAS a time I'd have enjoyed watching Bayern play Barcelona - ie: over two legs, the loser goes out.

But now I can see them play every fucking season in the 'champions' league, with the result more often than not meaning fuck-all, I'd rather watch Location, Location, Lofuckingcation.

I remember a few years back reading a piece by author and 'football consultant', Alex Fynn who had for years argued for the European Super League, only to have a change of heart and argue that with the CL, the games lacked what a game like the derby (or a game V City, United etc) gives, which is genuine feeling/atmosphere due to over a hundred years of (often bitter) rivalry.

Its probably fair to say that Charles Green knows more about the topic than most people on TW given he's part of the industry inner circle. Also the value of Everton would/should have increased significantly after the recent announcment of the new sky deal, so its difficult to value the club accurately, nevermind whether the shareholders are greedy or not.

With the bottom premiership club guaranteed 60 million from the 13-14 season onward, that would probably mean at least an extra 20-30m a year in TV money for Everton if we keep managing to get top 8 finishes from next season onwards. Assuming that the ridiculous wage inflation for players and managers does not continue, then we should be able to get rid of the overdraft and invest more in the team (admittedly along with every other premiership club). Staying up this year will probably see the club borrow against the 13-14 higher TV money and so provide a relatively large transfer pot next summer, whoever the manager may be.

My fear though is that wages will simply head for the moon again, with 200k a week player demands becoming common (nevermind 100k a week!). All it takes is for a couple of none 'big' clubs to give in, then the rest will have less choice re keeping wage structures in tact.

If a European Super League is indeed the next big thing, you can bet your life that we would not be in it, our history in European football , our indebtedness without a monied backer and our ground would be real barriers to our inclusion.

I also agree whilst being in the CL as it stands would be a novel experience it still doesn't rank highly with most British clubs fans , with one noteable exception.

I have heard about any potential buyer having to sign contracts to build a new ground and invest heavily in the playing staff etc. but I don't think we have seen anything in black & white.

Imagine trying to sell your old house and insisting it had a full make-over, complete with new extension on the back and a new car on the drive. Add to this a ludicrous asking price in the first place.

I just wish we had confirmation of the terms this board want to impose on a potential purchaser, it would make for some very interesting reading.

Gavin – Just to be clear: I am not arguing for Kenwright’s position. I am simply stating what I think it is, based on his public pronouncements, in an interview in which I believe he was drawn to show more of his hand than he intended. And I share much of your frustration about the decades of wheel-spinning.

Your point about shareholders and what they “should” do might be true in some ideal, parallel universe where justice always wins the day, and greed and profit play no part in decision-making. But we are down here on earth, and I don’t believe that all of our current “investor/shareholders” were driven by altruistic motives: they want a return.

The whole question of whether a football club is a “business” is an interesting one. Unless you subscribe to the ‘greater fool theory’ of investment (i.e. someone will buy shares because they think a greater fool will arrive to take them off their hands later at a higher price) I cannot for the life of me think why anyone (other than a fan with loads of spare cash) would want to buy Everton in 2012.

If we look at the two biggest purchases of English clubs, Abramovich appears to be have been seeking the power and prestige brought by playing around with the small change in his pocket. And the Man City situation seems similar: someone with a hell of a lot of cash wanting an interesting toy to play with.

Kevin Tully – it might be interesting, but we will never be told. As you know, no-one seeking to maximise their self-interest enters into a negotiation by putting their financial cards on the table in advance.

Ken, a world beating stadium doesn't mean it has to lack architectural substance.

I'd preferably have an updated version of the main stand on three sides. With something centred on the fan only, nothing corporate, on the Gwladys St end.

Completely non-plussed by modern bowls.

After making enquiries at the time I can confirm that the club was being touted at offers around 200 million since reduced to 180 million and rumoured to be around 150 million now.

However there were conditions which made the sale complicated which may have a lot to do with evaporating interest.

Green's figure probably includes taking care of the debt and stadium costs.

Enough has been said of Kenwrights lies and incompetence so I wont go on about it again but barring an Anbramovich or rich Sheik it looks like we are stuck with him until the goodwill balloon bursts.

So someone comes in and parts with 300 million. Clears the forty million debt gives Moyes decent funds but obviously not the ridiculous amounts Mancini and Di Matteo have had, we do a Liverpool and improve the ground increasing the capacity by 10,000 where would we have a chance of finishing and secondly we're do they find these extra fans to fill the stadium? Even if they loved the club nobody is going to part with that sort of money because they will never see it again. Our league place might improve a little but not enough to regularly challenge for a CL place. This is as good as it gets.

What if new owners came in, and simply wiped out the debt - no more, no less?
We would at least be a self-sustainable club that breaks even. This is all I want - obviously a rich Sheikh would be nice, but if that can't happen, just give me a businessman who can run the club better than the current lot. That can't be too hard can it? And no need for £300-400 million!

It's Philip Green, not Charles Green, who said buying Everton would cost over £300m......

Where and when did Phillip (no tax) Green say that Karl?

Oh dear......

'twas only a jest, Patrick. Although I might add that he probably has said that to Kenwright and it explains why 'only cranks in Manchester bedsits' ever express an interest.

Sorry, Karl, Naive as always, I thought you had an exclusive!

Chris #274, £100 million might be a fair price, debt free. i.e. the current owners pay off their debt out of the sale price.

It might leave them with the price of a bag of Liqourice Allsorts to share between them.

Thats get it right and not get carried away. Charlies Green ACTUALLY said "we hear rumours that Everton are valued at £300 - £400 million".

That actually doesn't mean very much and it also suits his argument which is that he believes Rangers are worth far more than the £80 mill valuation by inflating Evertons "rumoured" value.

Patrick Murphy - you've even changed Charles Greens actual words.

The interview can be listened to here and the key bit is in the last 5 minutes.

http://www.talksport.co.uk/radio/richard-keys-and-andy-gray/121029/rangers-chief-executive-charles-green-joins-keys-gray-studio-184098

I'm sorry Brian , but I never changed one iota of Mr. Greens words , I copied and pasted it from the site!

NB - re-reading your post again , you took your information from Talksport and I took mine from Gavin's original ESPN link. Blame ESPN not me thankyou!

I took my information from the actual interview on Taksport which I listened to at the time and have posted the link for everyone else to do the same if they wish.

However, you're right ESPN have changed his actual words in the transcript they've published from the Talksport interview

Brian , Thanks for the confirmation, however an apology for your opening accusation would have been nice.

It doesn't matter what Charles Green says anyway!

It might as well have been Hughie Green for what it's worth.

The only Green whose valuation matters is Philip Green.

My house is "rumored" to be looked at for £8,000,000,000

However it's only a three bedroom flat and it's a fix-er-upper.

You can't trust me and you certainly can't trust that lot. What are we on now anyways? 100 investors have taken a look and passed??

If I couldn't sell my house in 12 years, I'd probably lower the price. Just saying...

Chris James - who on God's earth would pay £5M for Coleman?

Would £300m be ridiculous if we finished 4th this year? Which is, by the way, the reason Moyesy is stalling on his contract.

Drew #636, the prize money for finishing fourth is about £750k more than for finishing fifth, £1.5m for finishing sixth etc. Therefore whether you finish 4th or 17th should have little material impact on the value of the club.

I thinks there is a simple explanation as to why the club has not been sold.

It's due to two or maybe three obstacles:

1. The asking price.

2. Onerous conditions of the sale.

3. Maybe those conditions of sale & asking price are in place to ward off potential buyers, pointing to the fact this board actually do not want a sale at this moment in time. Unless they make a fortune.

Simples.

Drew, £300 million would be ridiculous if we won the double, the Grand National and the boat race.

Nick, who on Gods earth would pay £19M for Henderson or £15M for Jack Rodwell? Coleman has more to offer than both of these for the coming years.

Matt, it was more about the potential income from becoming a Champ League club.

Rich men buy clubs in the Championship who have the potential to be promoted to the Premier League gravy train.

If you wanted to buy a club and buy the best players in the world and still see a return on your investment, Everton in 4th place would represent value at that kind of figure versus buying Chelsea, Man Utd, Man City, Spurs, the shite (aaaahahahaha, only joking).

Nah, maybe not.

Drew 636, if you're right about Moyes then he's one cheeky get.

Karl #542, friend, what makes you say that please?