Skip to Main Content
Members:   Log In Sign Up
Text:  A  A  A

The Responsibility of Everton's Board?

by   |   02/01/2015  Comments (65)  jump

I am asking this as, over the past number of weeks, there has been a large amount of comments regarding the play of Everton's team, both in effort and style, plus the manager's decisions on player selection and his philosophy. There are two opinions with the supporters and just reading the comments the majority want the manager out and the rest wanting him to be given the chance to turn it around.

Regardless of their conflicting opinions, the majority of both feel that at this time his style of play is not working with the players we have and he should alter it until we have the players who will be comfortable with it.

Because of the business they are in, Everton FC are the same as other professional sports – they are in the entertainment business. This is the start of the Board's responsibility: to ensure that the correct people are hired and held accountable for the entertainment side of the club and the high standard that the customer / supporter demands as, the better the entertainment, the more Everton supporters; whereas, if there is a drop in entertainment, the less Everton Supporters turn up.

Without going into how you became a supporter, it is fair to say that there are about (these may not be accurate figures) say 25,000 to 30,000 hardcore supporters that practically guarantee a large amount of the club's annual income, both in pre-season with season ticket sales... plus attendance at friendlies and home games.

As all the supporters do not live within walking distance of Goodison Park, a high number travel by train, bus, taxi, carpool and even some by air. As well as providing income to the travel industries, the supporters are providing income to people who rely on them in the businesses near the ground for food and refreshments.

This also becomes the responsibility of the Board as if (a) a large amount of the supporters decide that they may not attend the game – and that is possible in the present climate – and (b) taking in the amount of money they spend (these figures are not accurate but are being used for demonstration) £35 for the game plus £35 pound for transport and refreshment, that means for every 1,000 supporters not attending, £35,000 is being lost to the club and £35,000 to the transport and refreshment industires — and I am sure that these people will not remain quite for long...

So... are the board being responsible by:

(a) Announcing that they are remaining with the present management and are satisfied with the job he is doing?

Or (b) bringing in a troubleshooter – ie, a new manager – to resolve the problems?

Or (c) become irresponsible by leaving the responsibility to the Chairman to make the decision?

Everton are a massive organization and there is no way that one man should be responsible for major decisions that affect the club. The supporters deserve a lot better than they are getting.

back Return to Talking Points index  :  Add your Comments back



Reader Comments (65)

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


Michael Kenrick
1 Posted 03/01/2015 at 05:38:35
It’s an interesting question that would concern "a massive organization", William... but I think if you looked hard, you’ll find the management structure at Everton — and especially who’s really calling the shots — to be a rather small group... in fact... a group of just one.

Robert Elstone is the Chief Executive Officer and itÂ’s his job is to run the club on a day-to-day basis under the remit of the Board of Directors. He has staff, of course, but I feel sure they are there to do his bidding.

Likewise, Robert Elstone is there to do the bidding of the Board.

And just who on that Board is really present in any meaningful sense? Well, Bill Kenwright goes to pretty much every game, and I think Jon Woods is usually with him. Er... thatÂ’s it.

Robert Earl? Not been seen since Sly Stalone briefly became and Evertonian a few years back. And Life President Sir Phillip Carter? Just a figurehead these days...

So, in a nutshell, what you are looking at for implementing this programme of responsibility you’ve identified is the man himself, Bill Kenwright. Jon Woods is basically his sidekick. When the Board makes a decision, it’s actually Bill Kenwright – unless it involves Big Money, when a shady cartel of Spurs supporters emerges from for the shadows to provide guidance and direction.

This probably doesnÂ’t answer your question, IÂ’m afraid... but the answer is simply Bill Kenwright. And heÂ’s a lovely man, so everything should be alright in the end.

Rick Tarleton
2 Posted 03/01/2015 at 06:37:30
Michael, sarcasm is the lowest form of wit, but in this case, youÂ’re exactly right. Bullshit Billy is in charge and God help us!
Mike Price
3 Posted 03/01/2015 at 06:40:54
IÂ’m getting seriously depressed by all of this. I was so pleased that weÂ’d landed a Â’progressive managerÂ’, and am stunned by whatÂ’s happening. Talk about pride before a fall...

Never been more worried about relegation... kittens in a dogfight.

Denis Richardson
4 Posted 03/01/2015 at 07:58:07
The OP had me laughing tbh.

Not sure where this Â’responsibility for entertainmentÂ’ came from - did you not see the last few years under Moyes? Remember Neville and Heitinga, those swash buckling midfield maestros elegantly stroking the ball around the park to the likes of the great Denis Stracq... those were the days!!!

Fact is, three guys own around 75% of the shares and BK is the figurehead out of the three. As long as weÂ’re in the prem, preferably top half, he sleeps happy. ThatÂ’s basically it, regardless of how much Â’entertainmentÂ’ is provided.

Mike Allison
5 Posted 03/01/2015 at 08:33:26
Denis, we played far better attacking football in the last few years under Moyes. DonÂ’t try to be one of the rewrite history brigade. We hammered teams, passing and moving beautifully, we just couldnÂ’t do it consistently enough and we didnÂ’t even try to against the big teams.

Swansea away springs to mind as a particularly good example, but there were plenty of others. And Heitinga barely played.

Christine Foster
6 Posted 03/01/2015 at 09:07:16
Rick, sarcasm the lowest form of wit? Sorry thatÂ’s just a southern response as sarcasm does not exist below Watford as they have it removed at birth. All traces of sarcasm are then reengineered by means of the introduction of a SELF gene, to the established Insecure humor (ISH) trait forming a new genetic trait called SELFISH. Thus the ability to cope with sarcasm as humor is severely diminished and a self-defense mechanism called belittling is enacted.

Unfortunately as the gene is localized to the southern counties, the ability to ridicule diminishes once used beyond Birmingham. If used in the northwest, the user is normally politely told were to go. Further north and the user is likely to suffer verbal and physical abuse. Once Scotland is reached, the user is met with total denial and spoken to as one would a child.

Denis Richardson
7 Posted 03/01/2015 at 09:10:36
Mike, thereÂ’s no history being rewritten. Under Moyes we had to go through many many games of utter shite. Every now and then the sun shined out of the dogÂ’s arse but, by-and-large, we were awful to watch.

The last few games under Roberto have sadly sunk to those same lows. Please donÂ’t pick out the odd bright game to suggest that our general level of play wasnÂ’t slightly better than garbage.

I painfully remember a clearly over-the-hill Cahill and equally geriatric Saha leading the line for about 15 odd games on the trot and scoring fook all. I get shivers when I think of NevilleÂ’s diagonal floaters to no-one in particular, traveling at around 3 mph, or Howard/Jags/Distin (take your pick) trying to see who could launch the ball furthest to the moon, or Anichebe (remember him?) running around trying to pretend he was a footballer.

Oh Happy days...

The OP (if I understand it correctly) is suggesting that the board has a responsibility to provide entertainment. Whilst I donÂ’t disagree in principle to this, itÂ’s obvious that this is not the case with our board given the large amounts of tripe served up by Moyes in the recent past and Roberto this season.

The first 7 months of last season alas seem to be a one-off...

Eric Myles
8 Posted 03/01/2015 at 09:24:12
Bill, itÂ’s not the supporters that guarantee a large proportion of the ClubÂ’s income, itÂ’s one man and his telly rights, Rupert Murdoch.
Joe Clitherow
9 Posted 03/01/2015 at 09:24:59
Denis,

It is much worse than the last few games. Pretty much every game this season, with the only exception I can recall being about 45 mins against Arsenal, has been turgid, boring, dire shite.

In my opinion far far more boring than Moyes unless you are entertained by slow passing between Jagielka, Distin and Howard. Moyes at least played in the opponentÂ’s half but these days we are lucky to see 2 pr 3 shots on target each game. Strangely our shots to goals ratio is very high, which to me suggests a combination of better quality player finishing coupled with looking for the perfect chance.

As entertainment, it is much worse watching live as opposed to on TV, as then you can truly appreciate how static and how little off the ball movement there truly is these days. Obviously this is a big part in how easily teams counter us.

Martinez Out Now!

Peter Barry
10 Posted 03/01/2015 at 09:38:35
Just a thought but — as it is apparent from every one of his statements that Roberto does not think he is doing anything wrong... so how can he possibly put it right?
Scott Robinson
11 Posted 03/01/2015 at 10:32:24
The boardÂ’s responsibility is actually to its shareholders. I think Everton is set up as a plc so, first and foremost, it has a responsibility to act in the best interests of its shareholders.

It also has a duty to its stakeholders, which by-and-large are its fans, but from a corporate perspective, it should be thinking what serves the club best from a commercial perspective.

Football is a results business – stuff people have been saying that Everton doesn’t sack its managers... all nice and good in theory and they said that about MUFC but ultimately at the end of the day, if results don’t improve and our first tier standing is threatened, then there needs to be change.

This assumes that the cost of paying out RM is less than the foregone revenue of PL status.

Kunal Desai
12 Posted 03/01/2015 at 11:53:20
Here is how I see it.

I do not believe Everton will ever attract a Â’high profileÂ’ manager who has a track record of winning as I believe they would not be prepared to work with limited funds but more importantly would not want Kenwright and his pals as their employers. Everton will be plodding along and making up the numbers without winning anything whilst these clowns are in charge.

So, if Martinez is sacked, it really doesnÂ’t solve the bigger picture, IÂ’m afraid. The root of the cause must be eradicated before a business becomes successful.

James Hughes
13 Posted 03/01/2015 at 12:24:31
Re- Responsibilty of the board,

Michael, you are spot on with the summary.

BK needs to realise quite quickly (he must have noticed surely) that the present results and performances are more than bad reviews.

I will continue in a form he will identify with, pointing out that, unless the bad run is halted quickly, then we wonÂ’t be playing in the West End but at the end of the pier.

We are a big club, not massive, but still a big club and we donÂ’t maximise our history, profile, potential etc. If Boys Pen Bill is not up to task, step aside please.

To continue with the entertainment theme, if he was on The Apprentice, he would surely get Sir Alan SugarÂ’s finger.

Mike Childs
14 Posted 03/01/2015 at 14:17:36
Kunai spot on.
Bill Gall
15 Posted 03/01/2015 at 14:32:32
Well I guess the answer to my question is that some members of the board are being irresponsible as major shareholders by allowing one man to run the club how he wants to. Some one should remind BK that at this time a lot of supporters consider Martinez a failure and going along with his own failings since becoming Chairman he will be considered by some as the biggest failure in the history of Everton.
Denis Richardson
16 Posted 03/01/2015 at 15:27:19
Scott, youÂ’re right that any boardÂ’s main responsibility is to the companyÂ’s shareholders... problem is that the merry three, of which BK is one, own/ control about 75% of the shares. So they can do whatever they want.

The company is actually a Ltd and not Plc but that doesnÂ’t change the above. I am one of the many (very) minor shareholders who can do fuck all.

One thing is guaranteed: Once BK smells relegation, Roberto will be clearing out his desk sharpish.

Daniel A Johnson
17 Posted 03/01/2015 at 15:42:29
Kenwright is a greedy bastard.

He would have sold years ago if he had a realistic asking price. His dreams of moving stadium and getting into the top 4 will just inflate his buy-out price even more.

However, the thought of relegation will well and truly turn BillÂ’s trousers a dark shade of brown.

Relegation would destroy this club; I think even Kenwright is aware of that.

Brian Denton
18 Posted 03/01/2015 at 16:08:27
Relegation wouldnÂ’t Â’destroyÂ’ this club. Any more than relegation a couple of years ago Â’destroyedÂ’ Newcastle or West Ham. It would be highly unpleasant, no doubt, and financially awkward if we were down for any length of time. But Â’destroyÂ’ us? DonÂ’t be so fucking melodramatic.
Michael Kenrick
19 Posted 03/01/2015 at 16:14:32
Brian, youÂ’re right from a literal perspective; however, there is a very palpable fear that relegation would destroy everything this fine old club clings onto in terms of faded and dimming history, and dust gathering on a little-used trophy cabinet.

If we think confidence has been seriously dented now, it would be totally decimated by relegation. The parachute payments may help in the first year or two but, if Everton failed to come back up in that timeframe, then we really could be looking at a Forest / Wednesday / Leeds scenario played out oh so painfully in our own perennially sad back yard... with them gobshites rubbing themselves red raw with glee.

Too painful to contemplate... Everything possible must be done to avoid that. I would be saddened to see Martinez go so early but he’s doing nothing to save himself – or us – at the moment.

Gerry Killen
20 Posted 03/01/2015 at 16:25:39
Like most ToffeeWebbers, I am still scratching my head wondering whatÂ’s gone wrong after such a wonderful season last year.

There is no point looking back to our pre-season – or lack of it. Surely Roberto would be in daily touch of the coaching staff while he was in Brazil? Send for Jimmy Lumsden?

To me, there is no point in sacking the manager at this stage of the game, though he needs to be told not to be so stubborn. Old heads like Steve Bruce and all the other guys that have been around a long time have seen the videos of our games and countered accordingly, so Roberto must have a Plan B.

We had some awful bad luck to start with: both Barkley and Mirallas suffered injuries as well as older players not being replaced – this has had a huge effect on his plans.

We must trust the younger players, playing in their preferred positions, to come good. Browning was great against the Reds yet he has vanished. And I hope Roberto isnÂ’t holding a grudge against Luke Garbutt. He is just the player we need in the team - full of energy and a Blue through and through.

Anyway, IÂ’m sure we will get things right soon and the crowds at Goodison get behind the team. We are Everton!

COYB

Ian Burns
21 Posted 03/01/2015 at 15:54:09
Bill, an interesting article and points raised for consideration. Michael, a well-written response – BK really IS a nice man... just the wrong man!

However, my personal concern is survival right now – entertainment can come later.

RM is running a self-serving campaign who simply cannot see what he is doing wrong. Even the Sky four at lunchtime today laid into his tactics and lack of understanding in what is required at this critical time.

I am taking every opportunity in every article written on TW to call for RM to go – such is my frustration and concern for our safety.

Will Firstbrook
22 Posted 03/01/2015 at 15:56:17
Kunal - nailed on.

Winning managers are not looking for a pet project. They are looking for a situation where they have significant funds and a high degree (if not absolute) decision-making autonomy. Thanks to our current executive, neither exists here and therefore our ability/hope to attract a gaffer of any pedigree is remote. ManagerÂ’s in demand today are not all that different from the mercenary players dominating the game.

As such our options generally are limited to: 1) find and up and coming manager looking to cut their teeth on a bigger stage (technically Roberto falls in this category) or, 2) take on a has-been who enjoyed some success in the past but is likely in the twilight of their career and looking for a nice retirement paycheck (McClaren, etc).

Everton has a wonderful history that most acknowledge. However, the current financial and organizational structure is what really determines who we can attract.

Eddie Dunn
23 Posted 03/01/2015 at 16:21:58
The only way every fan would be happy is if we had a German style fan-based share issue, and we all had a vote in the clubÂ’s affairs. This would help us all to really be a part of this strange thing of which we all have loyalty.

I personally think that Kenwright is a good custodian for EFC and I would hate some Sheik or bent Russian to wreck the club.

Incidentally, count up all the income from TV and the rest from Matchday sales and our little sponsorships and then remove all of the wages paid and the running costs... and you will not find much left over.

The worst thing a club can do is over stretch and owe the banks – look at Leeds. Oblivion beckons for those who go down that road. It is greedy agents for greedy players and managers that is getting the money from Rupert Murdoch and his horrid organisation.

Remember the last twat that "owned" the club (Peter Johnson)... Bill is like a saint in comparison.

Frank Crewe
24 Posted 03/01/2015 at 16:32:50
@Dan17.

Who should BK sell to exactly. How about one of those far east millionaires? Change the name to Everton Tigers and play in RED shirts.

Apparently what people who donÂ’t like BK are looking for is a billionaire who will:
a. Fund a spending spree on players.
b. Pay off all the clubs debts.
c. Spend millions redeveloping Goodison.
d. Appoint a top notch manager and coaching staff.
e. WonÂ’t raise ticket prices.
f. Will not interfere in the playing side at all.
g. Will not change the name of the club or ground.

And the reward for these small trifles is the chance to sit up in the directors box and bask in the warm glow of the fans appreciation, unless it all goes pear shaped and then he gets to be told what a total twat he is and why doesnÂ’t he die in a fire.

I canÂ’t understand it. You would think the worlds billionaires would be elbowing each other out of the way for the chance at such an opportunity. Their loss.

Daniel A Johnson
25 Posted 03/01/2015 at 16:55:26
@ Frank Crewe 24

Why is Kenwright holding on? I canÂ’t think why, other than greed.

I agree selling is a minefield but Kenwright is sitting in Goodison whilst it crumbles around him year on year. He hasnÂ’t the finances, the contacts or the business brain to take us forward.

So why hold on? WhatÂ’s he waiting for?

Andy Crooks
26 Posted 03/01/2015 at 16:56:38
Good post, Michael Kenrick. I know your role is providing a platform for others but in a time of what I believe is crisis would you not consider a blog?
Frank Crewe
27 Posted 03/01/2015 at 17:01:35
Dan 25

Yeah itÂ’s greed. BK just knows that there is a sucker out there somewhere with more money than sense. All he has to do is hold out long enough until this unknown idiot arrives with a huge cheque burning a hole in his pocket.

Why would anyone in their right mind want to buy Everton? WhatÂ’s in it for them? How long would it be before they received a return on their investment?

Michael Kenrick
28 Posted 03/01/2015 at 19:41:09
Yer makin’ me blush, Andy... But seriously I’ll admit I don’t have much original to say these days that is not being said far better by others on here — including your good self, of course!

I tend to be somewhat reactionary (hopefully just in the literal sense) in terms of cherry-picking issues others raise that rattle my cage bars. And I guess I do get sucked in to these conspiracy theories as being likely to provide more valid explanations, rather than scrabbling around as we have collectively as fans to try to explain the malaise that has taken hold of our team.

Bill Gall
29 Posted 03/01/2015 at 20:15:48
Thank you, Michael, and all the other supporters of our great club with your comments. As the comments show mainly we are run by a 1 man band who chooses to say nothing about the situation that the club are presently in. To me, this means he is satisfied with what is going on and the only thing that is going to get his head out of the sand is for someÂ’one to kick him up the arse and show him there only 15,000 spectators at the next game. This may demonstrate that he may control the employees but it is the supporters who control the future of the club.
Brian Denton
30 Posted 03/01/2015 at 21:20:32
Frank, yes IÂ’ve been wondering myself where Eugene is lately. It seems like ages since he posted. Maybe heÂ’s gone over to Kipper.....
Nicholas Ryan
31 Posted 03/01/2015 at 23:10:18
I think IÂ’ve said this before on here, but: my sister is a freelance theatre designer, and in a career of about 30 years, she has only had to instruct solicitors once, over unpaid (or late paid) fees...

The non-(late)-payer... err... Bill Kenwright.

Frank Crewe
32 Posted 04/01/2015 at 02:39:09
Bill @29

Name me any PL chairman that actually tell the supporters of their club anything about what going on at their club. Because I donÂ’t know of any. The only time supporters hear from the chairman is when a manager is getting the bullet.

LetÂ’s be honest for a change: if any of you had AmbramovichÂ’s or CityÂ’s ownersÂ’ billions would you seriously buy Everton? Remember itÂ’s cost a billion quid each to put Man City and Chelski on top. Would you be willing to put your hand in your pocket and come up with that kind of cash? Especially since you wonÂ’t see any of it coming back.

How long has Villa been on the market now? DonÂ’t see a queue of billionaires lining up to buy them. I hear Levy will let Spurs go for a mere one billion quid. DoesnÂ’t appear to be any takers yet.

Look at the guy who owns QPR. All he has to show for the millions heÂ’s chucked at them is two promotions to the PL immediately followed by two relegations straight back again.

Owning a football club is an expensive, thankless business and the bigger the club the more expensive and thankless it becomes.

Alan Sugar said all you do is continually spend and thatÂ’s why he sold Spurs. IÂ’ll tell you now I wouldnÂ’t take on running Everton even if BK was giving it away. All you get is hassle, abuse and big bills.

Anto Byrne
33 Posted 04/01/2015 at 03:14:46
Everton is a privately owned club. Perhaps it should be floated and shares issued. Shareholders will have a vested interest and the chairman will no longer dictate as EFC will have an appointed board and a real CEO. A successful club will attract takeover bids no doubt. It may be a way to compete with the big clubs ..........?
Michael Kenrick
34 Posted 04/01/2015 at 04:44:31
Anto, there are already shareholders, somewhere around 300, I believe. Most are small shareholders, each holding no more than one or two... perhaps a handful of the 35,000 shares in Everton Football Club that are outstanding.

The shares are privately traded and are unlikely to ever be floated in a public offering. There was a vogue for that among football clubs 10 or 15 years ago but I donÂ’t believe it was ever an option for EFC.

The shareholders have a vested interest, but Chairman Bill still dictates... for the simple reason that his vested interest is bigger – he and his pals control something like 67% of all Everton shares. That gives him the authority to call the shots and it is not something he is lightly giving up for the whim of the supporters. The rest of us get to have our say (nominally) at the AGM, although Bill did away with those for seven years because he was getting too much heat.

Indeed over many years, various ownership schemes have been mooted, Trust Everton being the most recent. But nothing changes on the shares front.

ThereÂ’s also been talk of takeovers, usually invented for seemingly nefarious reasons, and they also never amount to anything. ItÂ’s an odd business but you would think the men with the big money would have figured out an exit strategy.

That was to be Destination Kirkby... but serious errors put paid to that little boondoggle. ItÂ’s a strange business, it really is. The new stadium, if it happens may be the next vehicle for change... or it may just be more smoke and mirrors!

Tom Hughes
35 Posted 04/01/2015 at 09:14:30
Frank #32.

Can you tell us how come every single prem club has changed ownership during BKs tenure if there have been no potential buyers? Some several times, and some very recently?

The title of the OP is very important here. The responsibilities of the board are quite simply stated. They have to try to maximise the clubÂ’s potential to succeed by supporting their manager, providing the infrastructure to increase all revenue streams. No-one expects guaranteed success, but they are entitled to believe that the board should act in the clubÂ’s best interests at all times. This they patently failed to do with respect to both Kings Dock and destination Kirkby debacles.

The boards of practically EVERY other club in the entire league have delivered more than our board in these respects.

David Holroyd
36 Posted 04/01/2015 at 12:32:35
Kenwright loves Everton, I have no doubt about that. But he wonÂ’t sell not while the Sky and BT gravy train rumbles on. While the above pay around 㿼 million a year, this is the time we should be trying to find the best young talent around. The other week we played the oldest back four in Premier League history...

Howard, Jagielka, Distin, Barry, Osman, Pienaar, & EtoÂ’o are all over 30; is Martinez all that progressive? It doesnÂ’t look like it.

Someone said you wonÂ’t win anything with kids; well, we wonÂ’t win any thing with the over-thirties.

Mirallas and Barkley are the only ones that can go past anyone; we need more of theses types of players.

Bill Gall
37 Posted 04/01/2015 at 13:33:52
With the knowledge that B.K. is the major shareholder and this means he controls the club is it possible for a prospective buyer to just buy the shares owned by the other board members and become owner of Everton football club and Bk just become a minority shareholder. Or does BK hold more shares than the other board members combined.
Brian Hill
38 Posted 04/01/2015 at 14:02:06
Bill,

Kenwright has 9,044 shares, equating to 25.84%.
Woods has 6,622 ,18.92%.
Earl has 8,146, 23.27%.
Others 11,188, 31.97%.
Total 35,000,100%.

In theory Woods, Earl and AN Others could sell enough shares to leave BK in the minority but the likelihood of this happening is about the same as the Wayans Brothers doing something funny.

Brian Denton
39 Posted 04/01/2015 at 14:14:35
WhatÂ’s GrantchesterÂ’s holding?
Frank Crewe
40 Posted 04/01/2015 at 13:53:48
@ Tom 36

Have any of those clubs been more successful under their current owners than they were under their previous owners?

The only ones are Manure, Chelski and Citeh and that is because their owners were either prepared to go into massive debt like Manure or who had access to almost unlimited amounts of cash like Citeh and Chelski. The rest have done no better or even worse.

Only 7 clubs, Everton being one of them, have never been relegated from the PL. The rest, new owners or not, have been relegated at least once, and sometimes more than once. Sometimes never to come back.

For Everton to be consistently successful requires an owner like Chelsea or City. Billionaires with money to burn. Now the fact is that all these changes of ownership you speak of were from one millionaire to another who had nowhere near enough cash to really boost the fortunes of the club. Unfortunately billionaire owners are few and far between and only two exist in the PL.

IÂ’m sure if a multi billionaire like Abramovich wanted to take over at Everton then he would but Everton are a long term project. New ground needed plus heavy spending on the squad to make it competitive. It simply isnÂ’t worth the bother.

Kieran Riding
41 Posted 04/01/2015 at 14:21:22
IÂ’d love Grantchester to take over. He canÂ’t stand Earl though can he.
Gavin Ramejkis
42 Posted 04/01/2015 at 14:07:42
Robert Elstone is also on the Board of Directors as well as being KenwrightÂ’s patsy and puppet, his bio on Pravda is hilarious:

"In his time at Everton Robert has introduced a number of key organisational and structural developments that have led to improved financial performance, greater stability in the business and a strong, empowered Management team.

Robert's also been responsible for substantial commercial progress in retail, sponsorship – the Club's record Chang deal – and ticketing."

Gavin Ramejkis
43 Posted 04/01/2015 at 14:31:06
Regards the bulk purchasing of Everton shares, didnÂ’t Bill Jong Ill also sew himself up for life by agreeing that ALL of the major shareholders have to mutually agree before any of them can sell their shares? Thus locking each of them into a Mexican standoff, each of the carpetbaggers hanging on for maximum profit with minimum investment?
Brian Hill
44 Posted 04/01/2015 at 14:33:12
Brian,

Grantchester has 2,773 shares, about 8.5%

Bill Gall
45 Posted 04/01/2015 at 14:29:17
Brian # 39. Thank you for the information and looking at the holdings of shares it seems all that Earl has to do is gain another 1,000 shares to become majority holder.

This may or may not be difficult but it does appear that BK has not got an unassailable hold as majority owner of the club.

Brian Denton
46 Posted 04/01/2015 at 15:14:23
Gavin, is that true? Seems a bit unlikely that anyone as financially savvy as our beloved non-Bill directors would tie themselves into an agreement like that. One of the major features investors like is liquidity, and that set-up means their shareholding wouldnÂ’t be.
Tom Hughes
47 Posted 04/01/2015 at 14:44:35
Frank (#41),

You were implying that clubs were not able to find new owners..... Since BK first said that he was on the look out for new owners 24/7, nearly all of them have indeed been sold. Many of which traditionally having much smaller fanbases than ours..... which is after all the real asset for sale.

You are also confusing the achievements of the board with that of Moyes, who managed to craft good sides from almost nothing (practically zero net spend in 11 years) when all around, even relative minnows could regularly outspend us, and we teetered on the verge of administration, having to sell to buy, and even to sell just to stay in business at one point.

Now as a club, we have easily the oldest facilities in the Premier League, with less executive boxes than some conference clubs, and we are now regularly out-supported by clubs with smaller fanbases than ours, and who rarely did so before. Now, if our current manager is not be able to turn around our present malaise, where will we be?

Other clubs have built for the future.... outspent us on and off the field..... improved their stadiums dramatically and grown their matchday support. Not all with sugardaddies too. How have they done this? We have delivered comfortably the least.... and this has been papered over by the achievements of Moyes, and Martinez last year, and of course the TV money. If he has lost his touch and we cannot get back to winning ways, we could be well and truly screwed..... aging fanbase in a two-club city, where the other club can squander fortunes every year.

How much different might this have been if we were now at the Kings Dock? Regularly playing in front of 50k fans, with 10 years of additional funds having been available to our Manager? IÂ’m sorry, but we can go around the houses forever, but it is undeniable that this board denied us that chance and have never answered for it since.

Comparing us to QPR is irrelevant, and an insult..... a tiny club of little significance which has spent the vast majority of its history in the lower leagues..... soon they may be playing in a new modern stadium almost as big as GP. God help us if they ever get a better manager than us too.

Bill Gall
48 Posted 04/01/2015 at 16:42:01
Brian #47,

Money people have a mean streak when it comes to their own money and I do not see anyone having to go cap in hand to the other shareholders if he is offered a substantial profit for his shares.

Bill Gall
49 Posted 04/01/2015 at 17:01:21
Brian #47, I was agreeing with your comment.
Michael Kenrick
50 Posted 04/01/2015 at 17:09:10
Bill, I know you're looking for some kind of change, like a takeover scenario, but I feel confident in saying that Earl is not the one to make that happen. He has shown very little interest in taking control – although you could come up with a scenario where he tries to buy out a chunk of the shares held by Kenwright or Woods, and thus gain control, if he felt the actions (or inactions) of the Chairman were endangering the value of his stake.

But don't hold your breath...

Bill Gall
51 Posted 04/01/2015 at 17:25:49
Michael, I think this more or less answers section (c) of the Responsibility of Everton's Board. That they are irresponsible and are leaving it all up to BK — and that to me shows that they are only interested in their own shares and being a member of the board is just waiting for someone to buy them out and they do not have the interest in Everton FC that a member of our board should have.
Derek Thomas
53 Posted 05/01/2015 at 12:15:17
This Thread needs to be kept front and centre and if Blue Union, KEIOC or any body has Bill's email, He, She, You, They, need to bombard Bill with, 'Sort it Bill' / ' Comments Bill', ' WTF Bill '

1) I think Bill would have already reminded Roberto of his basic remit... Break even point is 10th, Moyesy averaged 7th, so the odd blip won't matter, win the FA cup big Bonus, Win the Europa / get 4th or 3rd, Huge bonus, do not too bad in the CL Massive bonus.

2) He may have also said...'You're the Manager, Manage it.'

3) Sorry Bill, He can't. He's part of the problem, NOT the Solution

Gavin Ramejkis
54 Posted 05/01/2015 at 12:14:00
Brian and Bill, the silent man Woods was brought in by BK to buy into the club shares as part of True Blue Holdings, so was Paul Gregg although Paul's money didn't buy the shares – they were bought by his wife Anita Gregg.

Gregg was shafted by his so-called friend BK and Earl appeared but it was always rumoured and never once denied that the BVI based BCR Sports company that bought Gregg's shares was only fronted by Earl utilising funds from Sir Philip Green. So, in essence, Woods was part of the True Blue Holdings "one for all and all for a profit" deal to agree to sell together.

Earl isn't interested in Everton one single iota beyond scoring a profit for the real owner of the shares and hasn't stepped foot in Goodison for over 5 years so you can write off him ever taking over.

Returning to Jon Woods, he also seems to have a very cut-throat unsavoury business practice past if you research what happened to his former business partner and how he subsequently treated his family. I suspect he will disappear from the club only if BK ever does, like a pair of Lyle Lanley's (lookup the Simpsons Monorail episode).

In precis, I guess what I surmise the situation to be is that Everton will only ever be sold if BK, Woods and BCR Sports are all offered absolutely top whack and not what the club is genuinely worth. You need to feed all three carpetbaggers; the lesser shareholders wouldn't be involved — and I believe Grantchester at 8.5% is the biggest of the smaller shareholdings.

Brian Harrison
55 Posted 05/01/2015 at 16:40:55
Gavin

I agree with a lot of what you say, I am not sure Gregg or his wife were interested in Everton either. I only ever see BK or Woods at the game. I look at Villa: their owner Lerner has said the club is up for sale at roughly the same price as Everton is valued at, yet there seem to be no takers.

Maybe taking over Villa or Everton with old stadiums is the drawback. I will be interested to see what happens at West Ham when they move into the Olympic stadium. I think they are more viable once the move takes place than either Everton or Villa, and I think now Spurs are going to build a new ground they will also attract the sort of investment that we are looking for.

Also, with both of them being in London, attracting players will be a lot easier than for us or Villa – that's without the extra wages they will get at them clubs if they are taken over.

Tom Hughes
56 Posted 05/01/2015 at 16:58:26
City are the contradiction. A club that was in the third tier of English football, with a smaller fanbase than ours, in a stadium that they didn't own, and competing for new fans in a city already boasting one of the world's biggest clubs.

Goodison's problems would have been solvable with their petty cash, and the local rival considerably smaller than MUFC.

Bill Gall
57 Posted 05/01/2015 at 17:45:44
Are Everons shares at a fixed price or do they gain or loose going on the markets they are invesred in.

If we were to have a prospective buyer or consortium who wanted to buy the club what is it they have to actually purchase ?. Is it the majority of shares plus any outstanding depts. Or is it the majority of shares plus the valuation of the club and its assets or a combination of both.
And at the timeof purchase are the shareholders allowed to charge what ever fee they want for their shares.

Hope some one in the finacial markets can explain or guide us less knoweledgeable people to a web site.

Joe Clitherow
58 Posted 05/01/2015 at 18:29:28
The shares are private Bill which means they are not quoted on public markets. They are transacted according to private sale between buyer and seller. I have some - last price was about � per share
Bill Gall
59 Posted 05/01/2015 at 19:24:41
Joe thank you for the information, sorry I spelt debt wrong .

Going on your figures and looking at the shares the board are holding including Granchester that comes to approx
35 million pounds so even if they are offered a 30% increase for there shares that brings it to 42 million pounds . So what else is involved in buying Everton F.C. as B.K. has been looking 24/7 for a number of years so there must be a lot more upfront expenses to purchase Everton FC and these expenses must increase yearly.

Bill Gall
60 Posted 05/01/2015 at 20:44:19
Guess my age catching up 30% of 35 is 10.5 that makes the sum 45.5 million. Best go lie down and have a rest.
Clive Rogers
61 Posted 05/01/2015 at 21:37:16
David #37

He may love Everton, but I suspect not as much as he loves himself.

Clive Rogers
62 Posted 05/01/2015 at 21:53:14
Tom #48

Really good true post.

Tony I'Anson
63 Posted 08/01/2015 at 20:32:36
Hello Michael re #35 "Indeed over many years, various ownership schemes have been mooted, Trust Everton being the most recent. But nothing changes on the shares front."

Trust Everton was the operating name of Community Football Assets Ltd (CFAL) from 12/10/11 when the company was incorporated, up to 15/11/14 and the meeting at the Casa in Liverpool. Shortly after that meeting the operating name was changed to Everton First. (see www.Evertonfirst.com)

I can confirm that ownership has never been about share ownership, apart maybe from 1 token share in EFC Co Ltd. It's been only about ownership of the fixed commercial property assets relating to the club, rented back to the club on a commercial basis.

This has been the case ever since CFAL was incorporated and is still as of today. It's been 4 years I know, but there has been significant progress during that time.

Gavin McGarvey
64 Posted 11/01/2015 at 09:17:33
The ownership arrangement at Everton certainly seems very old fashioned.

I listened to the Gregg interview on NBC posted recently and to him it really does seem very much a part time thing. While I guess in theory he does have some sort of responsibility to the club, he looks like the kind of guy who's just getting on with whatever he does that made him all that money.

As a guess he bought the shares as a favour to a friend, and as long as Bill kept that investment safe he'd never bother him. Something similar is implied here about Woods. Grantchester seems to be the remnant of the Johnson regime that lost out in the power struggle after he decided to get out.

While there is nothing to be condemned about this, it is frustrating for us as we really want to see some sort of progress on both fronts: players and stadium. Does Bill have the money for the significant investment required? Obviously not. Could he have sold to Abramovich or the Sheikhs at City? Well, that's the 600 million pound question, isn't it? Who knows?

As Michael says, although Bill turns up for the game, most of the responsibility is with Elstone, he runs the club. Something most of us feel he could do better, particularly in terms of sponsorship and improving the stadium.

In some ways we are lucky, having directors who take such a back seat in running the club, just happy to turn up once a season or so. Most directors know next to nothing about football and ruin their clubs with their ham-fisted interference. As every year passes without a trophy however, it is difficult to appreciate this.

Neil Quinn
65 Posted 11/01/2015 at 10:17:24
Whilst I'm not Kenwright's biggest fan, I also don't think he's the devil incarnate. I think his biggest problem is getting into bed with the wrong people.

These wrong'uns, as previously mentioned, couldn't care less about the wellbeing of Everton & are only interested in a return on their cash. In my opinion, the asking price is dictated by them and not Bill.

I'm not saying Kenwright is totally innocent with regards to the mismanagement of the club (Fortress Sports Fund & Kings Dock debacles as an example) but I do think he cares about who he would sell to.


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
Menu
OK

We use cookies to enhance your experience on ToffeeWeb and to enable certain features. By using the website you are consenting to our use of cookies in accordance with our cookie policy.