AGMs reinstated at shareholders meeting

, 26 June, 88comments  |  Jump to most recent
Motion passes with near unanimous vote
Everton's shareholders, including Chairman Bill Kenwright and the Directors present, have voted to permanently reinstate Annual General Meetings of the Everton FC company after a five-year moratorium. The motion was carried almost unanimously by a show-of-hands vote at tonight's meeting at the Philharmonic hall in which issues from the club's debt and commercial performance to the stadium issue and new investment were discussed.

Mr Kenwright told shareholders that he decided to do away with the AGM process in 2008 because "things were getting fractious" and that "proxies were taking control" but he now believes it should be reinstated.

Presumably referring to his private August 2011 meeting with the Blue Union, transcripts of which were then released by the umbrella supporters group, Mr Kenwright started the meeting by saying that, "Something happened to me in 2011 which left me raped, bruised and betrayed' and described how he no longer wished to meet with shareholders after the incident.

He apologised to those shareholders who felt that their voices had been stifled by his decision and admitted that he felt AGMs should be reinstated.

CEO Robert Elstone then took up the issue of the club's financial performance and specifically addressed the controversial issue of "other operating costs" in the annual accounts. He expressed his surprise at the focus placed on that particular item when Everton are the only Premier League club that discloses those costs.

Nevertheless, he showed figures breaking down the expenses and attributing them to various costs like business bar wages, image rights, travel and player accommodation, the upkeep of Goodison, insurance charges, etc.

Mr Elstone claimed that expenses categorised under "other operating costs" are almost half that of Liverpool FC and are decreasing with a projection of £21.8m for 2013-14, down from £22.5m last season.

The CEO explained that the club has held positive discussions with Chang over an extension to their current sponsorship deal and defended the Kitbag merchandising deal as "a really good deal for this football club."

Speaking of the recent purchase of Finch Farm by Liverpool City Council, Mr Elstone said that the club's rent had been reduced by a third under the new tenancy agreement.

He went on to say that while TV revenue is up and keeps the club ranked 6th in the Premier League for broadcast income, matchday revenue has remained unchanged over the last five years as the club has been committed to "keeping Goodison affordable" with season ticket prices about £250 less than Liverpool FC.

The chairman had begun the evening describing how divisive the Destination Kirkby proposal had been to the fanbase and Mr Elstone said that the search for a new stadium continues, with one site in particular being "investigated very thoroughly" by Everton and LCC but asserted that without the kind of "leg up" that the likes of Manchester City, Arsenal and West Ham had in building their new grounds, the situation remains very challenging.

Later, in the question and answer session, Mr Kenwright said that a ground-share with Liverpool is on the table but there has been no progress made. He expanded on Mr Elstone's reference to a new site by saying that the site the club have identified is close to Goodison Park and that supporters would be "very happy" with it.

Moving on to the status of the search for new ownership of Everton, Mr Elstone denied that the Board's asking price was scaring off potential buyers. He also cautioned against seeing new ownership as the solution to the club's problems, showing a slide of how other top-flight buyouts, like the Venyks group at Blackburn, have worked out in recent years.

When asked why the Directors have not invested personally in the club, Mr Kenwright insisted that none of them has the money to do so. He admitted that the club's debt is growing, that Everton pay creditors around £4m a year, but that the Board is managing the growth of that debt.

He explained that £25m in borrowings was sanctioned because he, Robert Earl and Jon Woods had guaranteed the loans. He also asserted that the Board members' decision not to draw any salary from the club amounted to a "colossal" investment in the club.

Mr Kenwright said that the club would consider a rights issue to raise more capital, something they have thus far been reticent to do.

 

Reader Comments (88)

Note: the following content is not moderated or vetted by the site owners at the time of submission. Comments are the responsibility of the poster. Disclaimer


Patrick Murphy
1 Posted 26/06/2013 at 19:02:24
First class network of advisers, agents, bankers etc are all out there seeking investment. Reasons it hasn't come to fruition is not price.

As reported by David Prentice (@prenno) June 26, 2013

Paul Ferry
2 Posted 26/06/2013 at 19:06:29
Something happened to me in 2011 which left me raped, bruised and betrayed'

Like, the truth?

He becomes more and more embarrassing with each new spew from his chops

Lenny Kingman
3 Posted 26/06/2013 at 19:09:36
How a man in his position can use the word rape in such a way is in need of cerebral attention.
Paul Andrews
4 Posted 26/06/2013 at 19:10:25
Errrr 2011 was only 2 years ago.
What happened to the previous 3 years AGM's ?
Ross Edwards
5 Posted 26/06/2013 at 19:13:27
How long is that going to last? You could say that us fans have been feeling "raped, bruised and betrayed" since 1999.
Phil Sammon
6 Posted 26/06/2013 at 19:20:16
Lenny

Agree! Completely inappropriate. The guys falling to bits

Colin Glassar
7 Posted 26/06/2013 at 19:31:42
What a load of coswallop. Wtf raped BK then? C'mon, own up you dirty bugger.
Ross Edwards
9 Posted 26/06/2013 at 19:38:22
Something happened in 2011 which left him raped? Hmmm.
Paul Andrews
10 Posted 26/06/2013 at 19:45:39
Awight ? Awight the back??
Ross Edwards
11 Posted 26/06/2013 at 19:49:27
Basically, we have learnt nothing from this meeting. I guarentee that Bill won't attend the AGMs or won't hold one next year. Another one of his shifty lies.
Stu Smith
12 Posted 26/06/2013 at 19:48:38
Was that the situation with Gregg?
Brian Waring
13 Posted 26/06/2013 at 19:53:06
I was expecting a tough time for BK and Co, sort of scratching my head as what actually was learnt tonight.
Kevin Tully
14 Posted 26/06/2013 at 19:58:46
I thought it was against the law to take a dividend from a loss making operation?
Sean Lloyd
15 Posted 26/06/2013 at 19:59:27
How lucky are we that the board don't draw a wage from the club! Of course any under performing financial meltdown of a business should pay their custodians a handsome wage for the privilege of plunging us further to the financial abyss. They've already had their pay off years before by selling and stripping down everything in sight.

They were some of the most random and uninspiring replies to questioning I've heard from Ken-Wrong-Bill in a long time - surprising given his propensity of making a scene!

They all need lining up and pushing off a cliff face, lies, lies and more lies! I wish someone would have asked 'Where's Sly Stalone?' Just so Bill could also repeat: I spoke to him last night, he calls every week!

Kevin Tully
16 Posted 26/06/2013 at 20:01:44
My favourite bit is when Bill comes out with the old ' I was only to talking to someone about that yesterday'

The only thing missing was 'someone approached us this week looking to buy the club'

Notice they are still using the phrase 'investment' instead of buyer?

Brian Waring
17 Posted 26/06/2013 at 20:04:21
That's the thing Sean, you never get a concrete answer from BK, it's always 'we're in talks' 'we're looking into it'
Sean Lloyd
18 Posted 26/06/2013 at 20:10:09
The board were let off the hook there, what kind of answer is 'Yep' to a detailed floor question in a BUSINESS meeting? This charlatan has no shame.
Phil Sammon
19 Posted 26/06/2013 at 20:13:33
Haha. He did say 'Yep' as well didn't he.

What an utter tool.

Matt Traynor
20 Posted 26/06/2013 at 20:18:52
Still, reassuring to know that Keith Wyness was there, and told other attendees he was trying to get a group together for a buyout!
Sean Lloyd
21 Posted 26/06/2013 at 20:20:17
No matter the price, out of principle and blind logic the club would rebuff anything of Wyness' making - promising or not.. If they can blacklist supporters and groups, 'investment' is easy to turn away - just like potential Abu Dhabi links pre- Man City!
Phil Walling
22 Posted 26/06/2013 at 20:05:36
So the debt is only £14M not £42M as regularly reported here !
It seems the owners of the Club-the assembled shareholders- were satisfied enough to give their Chairman a round of applause.Amazing.
I guess if they -with (to me) huge sums invested-are happy how thing are going,ordinary fans like me should let them get on with it and stop fretting about things I can`t alter.
On the other hand,I shall get upset if the team is crap and may even withdraw my custom.
So there!
Dan Brierley
23 Posted 26/06/2013 at 20:20:54
Does anybody have any details about the 'Other Operating Costs' with regards to the breakdown?
Matt Traynor
24 Posted 26/06/2013 at 20:46:42
Dan #592, stop trolling.

Phil #591, that £14m figure was mis-reported in the Echo feed.

It was someone referring to the actual loss we made in the season we sold Bellefield.

Geoff Freeman
25 Posted 26/06/2013 at 20:47:41
Sean,wasn't the deciding factor between Everton and Man City for the Arabs the fact that they had a nice shines new stadium.
Ray Griffin
26 Posted 26/06/2013 at 20:54:35
"He also asserted that the Board members' decision not to draw any salary from the club amounted to a "colossal" investment in the club"

Been down that road..... these guys are investors & not employees so therefore the idea of drawing a salary is a total crock. That's not what they signed up for & incidentally, what do they do to deserve a salary anyway (besides design club badges)??

Kev Wood
27 Posted 26/06/2013 at 21:02:34
Well done ToffeeWeb on getting a well-written intro to the meeting up so quickly and opening up the discussion so fast. It sounds as though the meeting was disciplined and constructive.
Paul Andrews
28 Posted 26/06/2013 at 21:08:59
Another result inspired by The Blue Union lads.
Well done.
Brian Denton
29 Posted 26/06/2013 at 21:05:27
Just back from the EGM. Sorry folks, but love him or loathe him Kenwright played a blinder tonight.
Kevin Tully
30 Posted 26/06/2013 at 20:59:17
Dan# 592,

To be honest, people need to stop focusing on sections of the accounts. We needed to hear a strategy for redevelopment, or a new stadium to take us away from the stagnant state we are in.

As far as I am concerned, nothing the Board said even points to any possibility of either.

For that reason, and that reason alone, they should stand down and sell the club to a new owner, at a realistic price, with the guarantee of either option.

They are clearly out of ideas, out of cash, and offer no incentive for them to stay on as custodians.

When the best you can do is point to a new pitch, toilets and a CCTV upgrade, you know the game is up. Before tonight, I said they would be 'looking & talking.' Unfortunately, that's all they bring to the table.

We need a new dynamic in the boardroom, not a bunch of old fogeys who are stuck in 1987. They would be laughed out of any serious football club.

Phil Walling
32 Posted 26/06/2013 at 21:08:11
I wondered about the disparity,Matt. I suppose we could put it all down to the Board doing their best to put a good spin on the situation.
They seem to have explained `other operating costs` satisfactorily although just how they could ever have justified taking Directors` Fees from a company losing £14M in a year defies logic.Investment by any other name,indeed!
Brian Waring
33 Posted 26/06/2013 at 21:15:51
Brian, I'm only going by the echo feed on the meeting, and obviously you were there, but his answers to the questions from the floor were hardly 'blinding'
Dan Brierley
34 Posted 26/06/2013 at 21:07:11
Matt 595, I am genuinely surprised at the lack of reaction, given this was apprently one of the many tell tale signs of bad business management. I can only assume that the lack of interest in the breadown means it did not in fact reveal huge interest or arrangement fees for offshore financial groups, but actually reflected...*drum roll*....the costs associated to running a football club? Or was the breakdown itself not accurate enough to form a conclusion?
James Martin
35 Posted 26/06/2013 at 21:17:31
I do not understand the stadium issue. How can a ground share still be on the agenda while Liverpool are ploughing ahead with the redevelopment of Anfield? When is that going to go off the agenda?

As for a site for any potential new stadium, hwo can their be six or seven that are being narrowed down to two or three? I thought a while back that the club couldn't find any available sites in the city and now all of a sudden theirs 7 and ones right next to Goodison. I could understand if perhaps Liverpool's has fallen through so Stanley Park became open but 6 others? Also why has it taken so long to even identify a site? No funding plan or timescale in place or anything. can't believe they've put that on the official site as though its big news.

Brian Waring
37 Posted 26/06/2013 at 21:21:49
James, think they just say what people want to hear.
Matt Traynor
38 Posted 26/06/2013 at 21:19:27
Dan, a partial breakdown was given. When someone asked a question during the session at the end, Elstone refused to go into further details. Also, when someone asked about the kit supply deal, and quoted figures supposedly earned by other clubs, Elstone disputed the figures quoted for other clubs - offering no further insight into our situation.

The reaction from some who were there was the presentations shown were largely fluff - fair enough, that is their call. The main result from tonight was the re-instatement of AGMs.

Ian Bennett
39 Posted 26/06/2013 at 20:52:09
Dan 592:- I reckon they break down as follows:-

Loyalty payments to Hans Sagers.
Professional costs of keeping lawyers and accountants on stand by as we work 24/7 on everything.
Wind tunnel and research lab for the lawn mowers.
Medical bills to solve Terry Phelans troublesome hamstrings.
Vintage clothing for Alan Whittle.
Sun bed bill for Mike Walker.
Mini bar bill for Dome.
Buying the actual kit from Kitbag plus P&P.
The staff buying Carlsberg at £5 a pint and serving it as Chang for £2.50.

. Large purchase of theatre tickets to crap west end productions.

I pass the baton on.

Dan Brierley
40 Posted 26/06/2013 at 21:25:08
Matt 616, thanks for the detail. Hopefully we can get a bit more analysis, as it will be extremely disappointing if nothing was learnt from tonight.
Patrick Murphy
41 Posted 26/06/2013 at 21:25:16
Matt I think that getting the AGM's re-instated was the result that the shareholders were looking for and I wouldn't expect the next meeting to be as easy a ride for the Board as tonight's was.

But BK must realise how silly and out of touch he is beginning to sound, no wonder he doesn't want to attend these meetings. In some ways I feel sorry for him because he is being pulled in 2 directions, the fans want him to build Everton as a club but his friends want their money back with interest and he can't find a path that will please both parties.

To consider leaving Goodison to move a short distance away with no capital to build anew smacks of 'pie in the sky' thinking. I just wish Green and or Woods would take the lead and remove the chairman from his duties, similar to Moyes Bill has tried his best but it is now time to move on, for the good of the club and for his own good.

Ian Smitham
42 Posted 26/06/2013 at 21:24:00
Just got back from the meeting. Well done to those who instigated it. Sat next to Keith Wyness throughout and at the end he said that the figures are all correct. The "other costs" issue was addressed and explained fully. Or at least as fully as is reasonable, I.e. no account of the split between first and second class stamps, but a good explanation. Equally so with the 85p figure.

Also, regarding the clubs assets I found it interesting that they are all on the books as £29m including Jags at 1.2m, Baines at £1.0 m and Fella at £4.2m. As a group they are insured at £150m.

Robert Elstone is an accountant by trade, the clubs lawyer was on hand, I found his presentation interesting and he seemed well briefed, as you would hope, expect.

I did not see any cynicism in the Board, nor the audience and as I left I felt that there had been a lot happier people. No doubt others won't but I am interested to hear from others who were there.

Guy Hastings
43 Posted 26/06/2013 at 21:45:10
Lenny 552, I agree 100%. His use of 'raped' in such a context is well nigh unforgiveable. This is not an anti-BK point as I'm ambivalent on his stewardship. Making a melodramatic point is one thing, useing rape as a metaphor is quite another.
Ste Traverse
44 Posted 26/06/2013 at 21:51:21
Unforgivable that this twat Kenwright links a so-called leaked conversation with rape. Probably on the hunt for sympathy as usual.

Suprised there wasn't any tears.

What a pathetic drama queen this man is. What has this club done to deserve to have this bumbling idiot fronting it?

Paul Andrews
45 Posted 26/06/2013 at 22:05:53
Matt,616

I agree 100% it has to be considered a very important victory that the board bowed to the pressure and reinstated the AGMs.

John Gee
46 Posted 26/06/2013 at 22:10:01
The word 'rape' is an emotive word and perhaps the word 'violated' would have been more appropriate. But castigating someone for their language skills in what amounts to a question and answer session is narrowing to an almost laser guided amount and doesn't really help the debate. He didn't choose the right word but we all know what he meant.

In the Confucius sense, the reinstatement of the AGMs was an initial small step. I'd hesitate to applaud anyone for this miniscule victory as they should never have been taken away and were probably only reinstated as a result of a mass fan backlash that had nothing to do with pressure groups and everything to do with social media.

Thank you, Michael, for the live forum, it allowed me to keep an eye on what was going on without having to resort to the Echo's (*spit*) feed.

Paul McAllister
47 Posted 26/06/2013 at 22:27:25
When was the last time Sly rang?
James Flynn
48 Posted 26/06/2013 at 22:17:53
Paul (632) - They bowed to nothing. The next AGM results in something different than what I've read from this one? C'mon, already.

Only in his dreams, could Stradivarius play his violin as well as our owners played this meeting.

"a very important victory"? In what way?

Colin Glassar
49 Posted 26/06/2013 at 22:27:41
I can't see any lawn mowers being bought. No wonder our pitch was crap this season.
Ray Griffin
50 Posted 26/06/2013 at 22:24:30
Ian - 617

Love it, especially the west-end tickets

Other drains on EFC resources

Hiring of tents in various Bedouin oasis's in pursuit of buyers
Agent fees to Billy's old man
Market research on ground relocation to Dublin, Glasgow, Holyhead (good train/boat service to be fair)
Kendall's bar bills
New badge research, design etc. (offset by settling on a 4 year old's effort)
Alan Ball's white boots
Are we still paying Alex Nyarko?

Paul Andrews
51 Posted 26/06/2013 at 22:57:14
James,

In the way that they were forced into it by pressure from supporters.

I think it is a significant victory in the respect that it shows what can be done if the pressure is put on them constantly.

James Asquith
52 Posted 26/06/2013 at 22:55:46
"He also asserted that the Board members' decision not to draw any salary from the club amounted to a "colossal" investment in the club."

The club's own Articles of Association absolutely forbid any director (who is not also an employee of the club) from receiving any remuneration whatsoever. See Article 19 "Remuneration of Directors"

So that could be rewritten as "He also asserted that the Board members not doing something they are legally barred from doing anyway amounted to a "colossal" investment in the club."

James Flynn
53 Posted 26/06/2013 at 23:03:51
Paul - Won't quarrel.

My view is that approving AGMs being re-instated is a bigger take-away for Kenright and them than for you and me.

I'm open to be wrong, but what I've read so far on here and the Echo link, is that nothing happened at all during the meeting. For our owners, the AGM was just a media event and they won.

Not surprised, so not disappointed.

Ian Smitham
54 Posted 26/06/2013 at 23:14:26
James #665, thought you did well tonight. Also found Michael Owen's question at the end interesting. I guess we need to know now which Director(s) are employees also. Then, just to be clear, we need to know not what they take as remuneration, but as expenses and any other benefits. An example might be: If a Director has a meal at the club, how is it accounted for?

I am not that bothered about that level of detail, more the principle; whilst not getting paid in the form of wages, what other benefits do they enjoy? Who pays Earl's hotel bill and the cost of the flight (is it in business class?) when and if he comes to the Board meetings we heard about?

James, also, can you give us the benefit of your thoughts on the meeting please.

Paul Ferry
55 Posted 26/06/2013 at 23:29:59
I'm still waiting to hear how Teary Billy 'played a blinder tonight' (605)

I admit that I had to follow the Echo-feed, but that made TB look like an utter dithering idiot who rarely gave direct answers to direct questions but fobbed them off with strategic avoidances and, needless to say, the usual doggerel: "was only taking to him yesterday" - "rang someone in NYC" - "we're looking into it" - "that's been on my mind" ...

So fill me in please: what constituted TB playing a blinder at The Phil?

Robert Collins
56 Posted 26/06/2013 at 23:35:14
Come on boys, you must agree we cannot sell our club to just anyone?

Do we want Carson Yung (Birmingham), Venyky's or even that knob that owns Newcastle.

Can you image Joe Kinnear as our director of football and Pardew manager?

The AGM was reinstated, that's a positive.

Could we expect much more?

Barry Rathbone
57 Posted 26/06/2013 at 23:04:47
Sounds as toothless as expected.

The issue with BK & co is not how good the kit deal is or the management of debt or even if Goodison is subsiding and quite possibly they are doing the best they can.

Well done, kudos and applause all round... but, in today's game, it's not enough.

As a club, we are not at the races if Roberto works a miracle and produces a cracking set of new players this year they'll be gone next season!

The only question is: Why are they still in charge?

It always comes back to blind faith that, year upon year, no suitable buyers come along; I just find it stretches the bounds of credulity. Far more likely the idea terms are beyond sensible.

There again, the word "investment" rather than "sale" raises the eyebrows.

John Keating
58 Posted 26/06/2013 at 23:43:19
I must admit if I had enough money to buy Everton, I'd keep Bill on as a non executive Director. I'd make David France Honorary Chairman and Bill Honorary Vice Chairman. Without doubt he can talk some shite and keep the masses and media happy and content in the land of Oz.
James Asquith
59 Posted 26/06/2013 at 23:22:10
James (668),

We've (the SA) been urging the board to re-instate AGMs for over 2 years. We frequently argued:

- that it would be a small, but meaningful, step in the direction of engagement and transparency;
- that the directors and executive team had nothing to fear from AGMs;
- that it would be a PR win for the board and the club;
- that it would move us towards healing the split amongst the fans brought about by Destination Kirkby.

We were fobbed off time and time again.

When we announced we were seeking a mandate for an EGM the club quietly told journalists we had absolutely no chance of getting the required votes.

When we told the board we had the votes and gave them a final chance to re-instate AGMs voluntarily (which we thought would be better for everyone than having to force them to an EGM), we were turned down again.

So there's only really two possibilities:

1) Tonight was a win for the small shareholders;
or:
2) The board could have saved a whole load of time, money and friction by listening to, and engaging meaningfully with, their stakeholders.

I go with option 2 as it fits into a pattern - fans advised re-developing Goodison in the 90s (GFE even paid for a feasibility study and outline plan); fans advised Destination Kirkby was going to be called in and it was; fans advised that planning consent would be denied and it was; etc.

The badge fiasco also shows how valuable meaningful engagement can be.

Nobody should imagine bringing back AGMs will solve all our problems and herald a whole new era. Rather we should see it as a step in the right direction.

We should keep pushing and challenging the board. And sometimes we'll be wrong and they'll be right. And sometimes we'll bring something useful to the table. And sometimes that will be taken up and sometimes it won't. But if we do it in the right way (as we did tonight) things will improve over time. Slowly maybe, maybe too slowly, but I'm not giving up on it, because it's my club too and I've a right to spend my time and energy trying to improve it any way I see fit.

And I welcome the efforts of every other Evertonian with the same goal, whether they agree on the details or not.

Robert Collins
60 Posted 26/06/2013 at 23:54:55
The reason why BK is still with us is that he needs to find a mug who will dip into his own pockets and find £140 million to buy the club and another £400 million for a new stadium and then pump in say another £80 - 150 million for team building.

These kind of people are two a penny on any street corner.

Ian Smitham
61 Posted 27/06/2013 at 00:10:14
James #688, how confusing with James #668, anyway, excellent post.
James Asquith
62 Posted 26/06/2013 at 23:53:21
Ian (673)

None of the directors is employed by the club (haven't been since Keith Wyness was simultaneously on the board and employed as CEO). As for expenses, I'm 99% sure Bill, Jon Woods and Sir Philip don't claim for transport (e.g. to matches (including aways), board meetings, etc) or for things like hotel accommodation. I've no idea how Robert Earl plays it, but since he's not been seen at the old lady since Rocky was in town I hardly think it matters much.

There are suspicions around the VIBRAC loan - i.e. that one or more director(s) or other interested parties (perhaps with the initials PG) have an interest in VIBRAC and are thus benefitting from the interest payments we make to them. But then there are suspicions that 9/11 was an inside job too. There is zero evidence for it apart from BCR Sports (Earl's investment vehicle) being registered at the same address as VIBRAC. But that address houses thousands of companies, investment trusts and other entities. Until the worldwide socialist revolution abolishes offshore secrecy jurisdictions that's a non-starter for all practical purposes.

I do think the "no wages = investment" argument was misjudged and badly articulated. I think what the answer the questioner wanted to get was that the board have not put a penny into the club in terms of loans, share issues or any other recognised financial instrument. Which is true.

I think what the board struggled to articulate was that they see their job as increasing the value of the company (which goes hand in hand with being a more successful football club) and that they work tirelessly on our behalf (and their own as it affects the price of their shares) to this end.

Different people have different opinions on how successful they've been in those efforts, but I don't think even the most rabid anti-Kenwrightist thinks they're deliberately trying to destroy the club.

As to my thoughts on the meeting, this is already too long, so I'll just emphasize what I said above: it's a step in the right direction.

James Asquith
63 Posted 27/06/2013 at 00:23:50
Meant to add (re: board investment), we learned tonight that BK, JW and RE have underwritten loans the club have taken out. This can be seen as a form of (minor) investment.

Presumably the underwriting means the loans are either available when they otherwise would not be, or are available at a lower rate. The underwriters would not receive compensation for assuming this risk and are thus exposing themselves to potential financial cost without the prospect of personal reward.

If the loans are appropriate then there is a benefit to the company...and thus to me and every other shareholder including the directors. But there is no prospect of personal gain outwith the company for them in this.

Patrick Murphy
64 Posted 27/06/2013 at 00:43:29
I meant to raise that point earlier James, I saw it mentioned on the Echo's stream, but it didn't give much in the way of detail. Was this the original £20m facility that BK was banging on about or is this a newly acquired loan?

Andy Crooks
65 Posted 27/06/2013 at 00:41:20
Bill Kenwright is a victim of the English language; as he has demonstrated tonight, it does what it likes with him.

It is excellent to be able to read about the meeting so quickly, so thanks to those who attended for letting us know about it.

Dan Brierley
66 Posted 27/06/2013 at 05:37:56
James Asquith, many thanks for your factual and balanced insights. It is refreshing to hear some views that paint the full story, and not just oen side. I look forward to hearing from you more on this website.
Albert Perkins
67 Posted 27/06/2013 at 06:05:16
It's obvious......Kenwrite wants to groundshare Anfield!
George McKane
68 Posted 27/06/2013 at 08:04:29
I was asked for my comments on the EGM on City Talk half an hour ago.

I suggested that maybe it was Goodison that was the "new site" BUT I firmly said that Evertonians are great supporters and are not easily fooled but still and always support the TEAM.

Some Red sent a message making a stupid comment and I said he should just go back to bed and behave himself.

Brian Denton
70 Posted 27/06/2013 at 10:21:12
I knew my statement that Bill had played a blinder would be interpreted as my giving support to him etc etc

No. I meant by his own lights he had a good meeting, and pulled the rabbit out of the hat when he supported the AGM reinstatement.

By the way, are NONE of the most vehement anti-Kenwright ToffeeWebbers actually shareholders? He did have an easy ride, but that's hardly his fault if there were no probing questions from the floor. That bloke who always does the analysis of the accounts for ToffeeWeb, for example; I would have welcomed his input.

Paul Andrews
71 Posted 27/06/2013 at 11:40:11
James Asquith (#665),

Thanks for pointing out yet another lie from our esteemed Chairman. They are not taking a salary that they are not entitled to? How noble of them.
Gavin Ramejkis
72 Posted 27/06/2013 at 11:39:33
Brian

I believe the emphasis of a slow but steady approach was the call to arms, a tirade of abusive questions would have been just what BK and his group would have wanted as an easy excuse to close shop again.

One step at a time with AGMs reinstated and a platform created for further poignant questions and seeking answers available to the shareholders. You can't win the war in one day.

Paul Andrews
73 Posted 27/06/2013 at 11:42:12
James,

I forgot to congratulate you and the Shareholders Association on your victory in having the AGM's reinstated. Good man.

And congratulations are due to Dave Kelly whose expertise in these matters must have been a great help to you.

Chris Morris
74 Posted 27/06/2013 at 11:47:03
Unless it's a one-day war.
Michael Hegarty
75 Posted 27/06/2013 at 13:52:08
James Asquith - What a reasonable, balanced and refreshing view you have on things. Please post on here more often to try and educate the one-sided, blinkered view of the majority of regular posters.
Patrick Murphy
76 Posted 27/06/2013 at 14:03:53
Michael I agree that James Asquith gave a balanced viewpoint, but I would argue that in the absence of any real details the meeting last night was merely a re-opening of dialogue between the shareholders and the club.

There are still plenty of issues that need to be addressed and it does seem that Mr Kenwright is not forthcoming with actual facts to support his tenure. He and Elstone merely trot out platitudes and spin which seems to keep the natives happy, it still doesn't explain away why a club of our size is struggling to keep pace with the middle ranked clubs never mind the top ones.

They seem to think that fate has dealt them a bad hand but if you drill down into the real situation you will see that it is them and them alone that have loaded the club with debt, sold assets which haven't reduced that debt, signed up to inadequate sponsorship deals and sold future income to keep us afloat for the time being.

The management of Everton FC is so busy fire-fighting that nobody has the foresight to stand above the day-to-day problems and look at the longer term picture, if they did they may frighten themselves into taking action. As Mr Kenwright seems of a nervous disposition and finds it difficult to face the shareholders it hardly sends out the message that the club has the right man in charge to aggressively seek a solution to EFC's long-term problems.


Kevin Tully
77 Posted 27/06/2013 at 14:22:11
Good post, Patrick.

The way forward now would be to commission a firm who could come up with 2/3 proposals to redevelop Goodison. (I know a couple have already been done, but it will need re-costing etc.)

Then, put in place a plan for a rights issue, to start the ball rolling. Bring in some outside commercial expertise to put a framework in place for naming rights, middle-tier sponsorship, and 10-year bonds for corporate boxes and hospitality suites, top-end restaurants.

Once you are satisfied with the numbers, see what assistance is available from LCC, and central Government regeneration grants.

BK has stated publicly he will accept funding from the fanbase, no excuses now. Elstone said he doesn't see anything happening in the next five years, well "Goodbye, Mr Elstone" would be my shout.

Andrew Hawes
78 Posted 27/06/2013 at 14:48:24
Fact: no investor will look at this club while we reside in a ancient,crumbling stadium no matter how good the atmosphere is!

Fact: we spend a few million a season ,punch above our weight but insist on champions league football!

Fact: Bill Kenwright has told us we have debts of 45million, nearly all our turnover goes on players wages and he can't afford to bankroll us as he's not wealthy enough but he's accused of being a liar!

If I was a billionaire taking over this club I would pay Bill to be chairman. Portsmouth, Leeds,B lackburn, Newcastle etc etc all examples of what kind of chairman you could end up with?

Get a grip a consistent top ten side is all we can work for until something changes financially, it's clear from listening to Bill that youth is going to be given a chance this season along with a couple of decent signings, no point harping on about our excellent youth system if the only player produced from it in 7 or 8 years to make our first team is Rooney?

Stones, Barkley, Duffy, Junior all apparently destined to be excellent players. Well let them on the pitch then!
Paul Andrews
79 Posted 27/06/2013 at 15:52:22
Kevin,851

What we can take out of Elstone stating he doesn't see anything happening in the next 5 years is that he also doesn't see the sale of the club in the next 5 years.
Not a great scenario them staying for another 5 years Kevin.

Paul Andrews
80 Posted 27/06/2013 at 15:55:14
Andrew,865.
All due respect,if you we're a billionaire you would have had a lot of luck getting there.With your judgement of character it would be a miracle.
Kevin Tully
81 Posted 27/06/2013 at 16:01:54
Andrew - When you have a Board of Directors at a Premier League club who freely admit they are 'skint,' have ran up a shitload of debt, and have no plans for the future, there is only one answer my friend.

Ste Traverse
82 Posted 27/06/2013 at 18:23:56
Andrew Hawes #865.

Given the shedload of cock-ups on his watch, if Bill Kenwright was a red like Peter Johnson was,or just some foreigner who had no connection with EFC, you'd be lumping Bungling Bill in with those Chairman you mention at Portsmouth, Leeds,Blackburn, Newcastle etc.

I wouldn't have him as Chairman of the after school club my young lad goes to, let alone Chairman of EFC.

James Asquith
83 Posted 27/06/2013 at 19:15:54
Ste,

"Portsmouth, Leeds,Blackburn, Newcastle etc." Every single one of those clubs has been relegated in recent seasons. Evertonian or not, had we been relegated under Kenwright 90% of fans would have turned on him.

Likewise, I don't remember much talk of Johnson's red leanings over the summer of '95.

Bottom line is most fans will judge the Chairman on how the team performs on the pitch. Only a minority ever care about behind the scenes stuff unless it gets desperate or has a direct impact on results.

And (judging by most of what I read on the internet) only a minority of them have any clue what they're talking about. That's not a criticism, just an observation.

Tony I'Anson
84 Posted 27/06/2013 at 19:32:16
I managed to make the EGM on a Proxy. Someone asked about the German model of football and the teams in the CL final, so when Robert mentioned Trust Everton (and Tony & Mike), I asked the board would they genuinely consider the possibility of accessing finance from the extended, non-match-going, fan base to fund any other capital projects in the future. Bill said Yes.

James, it was nice to meet you. It was indicated that the board were underwriting loans. Did you catch which ones and how much?

The update for everyone will be as indicated on the last website update.

Michael Hegarty
85 Posted 27/06/2013 at 20:56:55
Patrick Murphy, who are the mid ranked teams that we're struggling to keep pace with? Some of them might have spent more than us in the transfer market recently but until they finish above us in the league then surely our model is working better than their's
Phil Walling
86 Posted 28/06/2013 at 10:19:02
Paul 883,I think Elstone told it how it is. James Askwith is right - only a slump in team performance that threatens or,god forbid,results in relegation will see the main support base turn against the Chairman.
The recent level of attendances plus tv income ensures annual losses can be contained at c£6M and the increase in the latter may even see that figure improved upon.
The interest payments can be met without undue alarm and with managers charged largely with a`sell to buy`policy,things can carry on much as they`ve done over the last 14 years.
Not ideal,I know,but few of us would wish relegation on the club even if it meant `Goodbye Biil!`
Patrick Murphy
87 Posted 28/06/2013 at 11:08:03
Michael #116 Swansea, Norwich, WBA, Southampton are building their clubs on solid foundations, whilst they may not pose an immediate threat to our top 6/7 position, over time they will catch up and eventually overtake us on the pitch. In this era you cannot stand still for long and Everton have done exactly that and will suffer the consequences,

It is for that reason that the media trot out their mantra of EFC being over-achievers, as I've said before this is because the club has seen no real investment and is relying on future income to keep itself afloat. But of course if we keep over achieving then it masks the real issues,

if we start to have negative results on the pitch it will have a greater impact on us than it would on those clubs who are built on better foundations. Don't forget that Everton FC had a head start on all of the clubs I mentioned and we haven't taken advantage in fact we have squandered that advantage.

Phil Walling
88 Posted 28/06/2013 at 14:56:05
I agree, Patrick, but nowt can be done about it!
Richie Wright
89 Posted 29/06/2013 at 06:56:44
This site on Everton Road offers many pluses for a stadium.......in the shadow of our own emblem.


Google 53.416547,-2.968338

I tried to get people interested years ago to no avail... it still remains the best option for our new ground. Imagine the sight that would behold the passengers of a cruise liner.... a blue gem glistening on the sky line, day and night.

Eric Myles
92 Posted 29/06/2013 at 08:25:43
Andrew #865 "Fact: Bill Kenwright has told us we have debts of £45million, nearly all our turnover goes on players wages and he can't afford to bankroll us as he's not wealthy enough but he's accused of being a liar!"

FACT: He's a liar if he says debt is £45million, that's nett debt, the actual debt is much more. FACT

David Israel
93 Posted 29/06/2013 at 17:18:57
Vintage Bill Kenwright:

Q from the floor: I'm very impressed of the presentation; my question: the £4m in bank charge - have the board ever considered opening shares to be bought by fans around the world?

BK: I spoke to someone in New York last night, so that is something I would consider.

Chris Morris
94 Posted 29/06/2013 at 17:20:21
Richie Wright 553

Behave will ya.

You'll never get a cruise liner down Everton Road!


Add Your Comments

In order to post a comment, you need to be logged in as a registered user of the site.

» Log in now

Or Sign up as a ToffeeWeb Member — it's free, takes just a few minutes and will allow you to post your comments on articles and Talking Points submissions across the site.


About these ads

© ToffeeWeb