AGMs reinstated at shareholders meeting

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

Like, the truth?

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

Agree! Completely inappropriate. The guys falling to bits

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!

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?

What an utter tool.

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.

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)??

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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?

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

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.

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

"a very important victory"? In what way?

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?

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.

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."

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.

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.

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?

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?

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

"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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

Behave will ya.

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