Support the Reasons. Oppose the Methods

We have taken in more money than many other clubs in our league without investing. Martinez fronts for the board and asks for patience and trust. Surely it is about time that the board answered for themselves.

Some fans have accepted that we are broke, but if true, why?

We have consistently finished in the top half of the league and thereby earned more money than teams who have consistently finished below us. Our fan base is a very solid 35,000 with a good travelling support. We make profits at every transfer window. We have had a huge cash windfall from the media of much larger amounts than those teams below us.

Yet we spend far less on players than other clubs below us. We tend to sell before we buy... Why? We loan out far more players than we loan in. We loan players out early in the window without cover for injuries. Our fit players at this season's start was about the same number as we have injured, yet no cover is provided.

All the above are questions that have occurred to me as I write. Every one who has played the game understands that the manager puts his list of transfer targets to the board months before the first game of the season. Every manager wants his targets signed and bedded in before the window closes. It is preferable for new players to take part in the pre-season matches before the season starts. Only the mega rich clubs can afford to wait until the last day of the window because they already have big squads.

These are fair observations and the fans deserve to have valid reasons for our tardiness in the transfer windows compared to our competitors. They cannot all be wrong surely!

I do not advocate hostile protests but it is difficult to watch other clubs moving positively while we dither, mull over and think about things. I am worried about us being seen as a feeder club and not a contender.

Then you advise us to back off a little, as we ought to act with a little more 'class'? Well it's a pity the current custodians haven't acted with some degree of 'class'.

One day, hopefully soon, the truth will come out with regards to Everton's true financial standing (including the current nine loans/mortgages outstanding) , and the various loans to Vibrac etc

No-one wonder we can't find a buyer, were mortgaged up to the hilt.

At least the current campaign, may highlite the failings of Kenwright and co, however unpalatable it may feel for some, directors and supporters alike.

It's a difficult one as health is a private matter and therefore will probably not be made public one way or another. I suspect that Bill's health; if it is as bad as some rumours have suggested, will in all probablility lead to changes at the club one way or another with or without the protests.

After 20 years without a trophy and WHP now looking like a dead duck - how long would you like to wait before fans become restless? I think a lot of supporters have had just about all they can take and it's nothing to do with transfers or results.

If the little guy has a point to make in this world it's mightily hard to get your message out there, you have to chip away at any angle you can.

If you're in a public profile you are in a priviledged position where you can say it in a great manner comfortably knowing your message will go out to all.

The protesters need a spokesperson, a voice the media turn to when discussing the present Everton situation. I don't know who that person is but I think it would be wise to find one and put him/her forward.

For me there are two issues with the present board; Where's the money going?
What plans do you have to take us forward in terms of stadium development?

I wouldn't focus on Kenwright but rather the board as a whole. What do they do?

So assuming that the BoD accept that there is a problem, and that is a big IF, where does this Fan Representative Body start to discuss/mediate.

From what I have seen over the years on TW there is everything but agreement on what is wrong here, and any list of priorities are as far from being a discussion document as were the Nuremberg Trials.

Perhaps what is needed is a finite list of what the fans want/expect in the short term.

Something along the lines

1. Bill Out,
2. If no Bill out - more money in.
3. More money for what, new Ground, new players,
4. If no new ground, when, how will GP be updated
5. How far have we progressed on a buy out???>?

So as not to confuse the issue, 5 key points should suffice, 3 would be more than enough and for some only the first one is important - but this is meant to be a mediation so a very clear message has to be sent that A) the fans are in agreement and B) that the BoD are prepared to talk to them.

Just a thought, but would the FA consider a charge of bringing the game (at Goodison) into disrepute if the board continue to ignore the fans requests?

A list of SMART (specific, measurable, achievable, realistic and times) objectives would be a starting points.

For the record, writing the article got my thinking as it was initially thought leader but I have emailed Robert Elstone along similar lines this afternoon. I have no idea if it will lead to anything but who knows...... If you don't try etc.

The general response from my cohort was "not in my name" and it generally passed without a great deal of distraction for those who made the trip to Southampton.

I understand another whip round means the same thing will happen again on Sunday. Whilst the message on the banner is still to be determined, whatever it is hopefully they'll drop the red letters.

Once again, there is no middle ground in this, we are all being ushered in to opposing camps, either pro or anti the Board. By definition any protest polarises opinion and this will have a bigger dividing line considering it is being done in front of 37k Evertonians.

I recognise that the protest is borne out of frustration from 16 years of Board ineptitude and not simply one barren transfer window (to date) but it doesn't sit right with me. I'm not a fan of banners or marches or protests that could have a negative impact on the performance of the team.

Whether you agree with the methods or not, it has attracted media attention and having done so, I would much prefer to hear an appointed spokesperson articulate their grievances in the media rather than taking this form of action.

I know "Kopite Behaviour" is a useful catch all to hide behind but I really do think we're better than a ten-bob whip round to get a message across. It's been done before by our neighbours and by United and as I recall we all had a good laugh at their expense.

It's clear the Board aren't engaging, but there again I don't hear Abramovich or Levy or Kroenke or any other Premier League Chairman coming out and discussing their long term strategy with the supporters, so I'm not sure why we have a given right to expect it.

Appoint a spokesperson who can articulate the grievances then arrange media interviews with the networks. The Board will then indirectly need to put a counter argument forward probably through Elstone. Handled correctly It can be done in a mature conciliatory manner without rancour or recrimination.

We all want a more progressive forward looking Everton, but any protest will only succeed by taking the majority with you. I don't think the current tactics of this campaign will do that.

Best bet if you want to know where the money is going the best bet is to read the balance sheets. Don't wind yourself up into believing that there's financial malpractice going on at the club.

Regarding the ground development issue I have read that the board is looking at several options all of which will be difficult if not impossible as we probably don't have money to develop a new stadium. I believe that they are still dependent on either help from the councils or EU or on a retail outlet leveraged solution.

The board is pretty innocent on most of the usual charges thrown at it but one thing it's guilty of is not being good with information. the information may well be out there though and just needs finding?

Potestors throughout history haven't all been a pitch-fork wieilding mob but it seems that today anyone who dares to complain or take direct action is frowned upon, because others of an opposite persuasion take exception to it or it upsets their sensibilites.

As for the other point "It's clear the Board aren't engaging, but there again I don't hear Abramovich or Levy or Kroenke or any other Premier League Chairman coming out and discussing their long term strategy with the supporters, so I'm not sure why we have a given right to expect it."

Abramovich, Levy, Kroenke et al don't have to say a single word or make any statements to the fans because they have all contributed heavily in one way or another in advancing their clubs on and off the pitch therefore their actions speak louder than any words. Pity we can't say the same about our present custodians.

http://www.Evertonfc.com/content/fans/your-stadium/the-opportunity

The internet has plenty of info on the plans. We must also recognize that a lot of work on potential development sites and options is confidential commercial info that they aren't going to spray everywhere.

You can see the problem though, they need £200MM that they don't really have. It's easy to slag them over the stadium issue but its been an issue for several boards and it isn't an easy one.

I have a plan to go to the moon in my own self-made rocket, it's just possible I wll be able to build the thing in the next five years, however, I haven't quite worked out how I am going to pay for the fuel or indeed how I am going to return to Earth once I get there - my wife says I'm an idiot for not taking everything into consideration, so reluctanlty on her advice I have decided to spend my money and time on other things - Journey to the centre-of-the-earth anyone?

By definition our Board, or for that matter the Board of any company, should be held accountable and I have no issues with pressure being applied to ascertain what their long term vision and plan is for the Club. However unlike a FTSE 100 company which is about share value and dividend payments we are dealing with an intangible irrational emotional entity here.

I don't care to get too involved or distracted by machinations off the pitch, my concern is what happens on the pitch, however I do agree that this is directly affected by the financial backing and support of the Board.

I also absolutely agree that the organisers of the Fly By are Evertonians and have the best interest of the club and supporters at heart. I am just struggling with the methods they have chosen to express their frustration.

I've no problem with it.

The fly by and round the ground protests complete with It's a Knockout figures of Benitez was just a side show.

Did they listen? No, they went into an expensive public inquiry and made fools of themselves.

Do you think they will listen to reason from another fan source?

Please post links to articles where the board are actually making an effort to take the Club forwards.

These days I watch my football in a busy sports bar in the Cypriot resort of Pafos (Pathos) and, in so doing, meet fans of clubs from across Britain and, increasingly, Russia.

In the build up to games, I guess the conversation is similar to Ken Buckley's Room of Nonsense. The emphasis, quite rightly, is who is going to play centre-half of lead the attack rather than on Boards of Directors and what's surprising is that even the rulers of Arsenal, Manu and Spurs never get a good word said about them.

Abramovavich is a swindler according to the Ruskies who seem more absorbed by our Premier than their own equivalent whilst British Chelsea
fans would have him out rather than lose the Special One.As though he would ever have been there in the first place !

As for Man City, the Arabs are classed as a necessary evil although 'different class' to the late, lamented Peter Swales !

Arsenal's board are seen as a bunch of gin swilling buffoons and the majority of their followers can't wait for them to remove Wenger.

I won't start on those of a Delia Smith persuasion ( a stupid cow, apparently !) and even the Bournemouth bunch ask how can they arrive in the top division when their board provides only a Div 1 ground ?

So they're useless the lot of them. Trouble is some are more useless than others !

Keep it up.

However the word "Class" rings out loud and clear for me. It is the Class system that is most obvious here. the Club do their little bit for the poor with their much vaunted community projects, and Naismith kindly dips into his pockets for a few season tickets, but the reality is that Man City come to play and they want to charge upwards of 㿖.

The fans want a chance to ask questions, and promised meetings are forgotten. Kenwright, Earl and Woods have no idea how the average, dyed-in-the-wool, ordinary Everton fan lives, and no interest in whether they can attend the new Premier League world of middle-class, middle-age football.

These people have never run the gauntlet of Stanley toting thugs in Leeds or London. They haven't slummed it up and down the land spending their last pound on getting to some shit-hole 200 miles away.

They have no care for the poor or the disadvantaged, as they munch on some lamb noisettes, rinsed down with a nice drop of Chateaux la Nice. These people treat us with disdain, and use every trick in the book to make us think we matter... we don't .

How do you propose that the club moves us forward on the ground issue when they patently don't have the facility to do so? Oh yes, sell the club with no buyers interested under any terms, self finance it or perhaps stop buying players. Fancy me missing those simple options. Don't they have a zero interest club credit card they can use or perhaps they can buy a new ground from the Garden Centre on easy terms? :-)

If not Walton Hall then it has to be another option. Constructiveness from the fans would be an asset for the club at this time.

The basic principle behind DK was good in that we got a new ground with most of the cost being carried by Tesco and I don't put big blame on the board as many do, remember that hindsight is always 20:20. They democratically asked the fans to vote on the issue and in the end they didn't get permission to go ahead.

We still don't have a new ground.

I'll give you my answer - because a hoop keeps moving only if you keep hitting it with a stick.

As for the plane not being original or unique, give me a fucking break.

What is it a protest or a new fashion movement?

Stick with anything that works, elbow anything that doesn't.

1. A set, collection, group, or configuration containing members regarded as having certain attributes or traits in common; a kind or category.
2. A division based on quality, rank, or grade, as:
a. A grade of mail: a package sent third class.
b. A quality of accommodation on public transport: tourist class.
3.
a. A social stratum whose members share certain economic, social, or cultural characteristics: the lower-income classes.
b. Social rank or caste, especially high rank.
c. Informal Elegance of style, taste, and manner: an actor with class.
4.
a. A group of students who are taught together, usually at a regularly scheduled time and in the same subject.
b. The period during which such a group meets: had to stay after class.
c. The subject material taught to or studied by such a group: found the math class challenging.
d. A group of students or alumni who have the same year of graduation.
5. Biology A taxonomic category ranking below a phylum or division and above an order.
6. Statistics An interval in a frequency distribution.
7. Linguistics A group of words belonging to the same grammatical category that share a particular set of morphological properties, such as a set of inflections.
8. Mathematics A collection of sets whose members share a specified property.

Not sure which of those he finds himself in i.e.. 1/8

In the two instances that a fly-by has been used as a means for change, it simply had no impact. Our neighbours had the lot from fly-by to marches but it was the fallout between Hicks and Gillett and the finance drying up that saw change happen.

The OT fly-by was aimed squarely at David Moyes, not the Board, and had diddly squat impact. It was their failure to qualify for the CL that did for him.

I accept that whilst I don't agree with this tactic it did generate significant media attention probably because it was such "un-Everton" like behaviour.

By gaining this media attention, my point is that the protesters should make the most of it by getting the salient points across in a more coherent manner, one that requires the Board to respond, not simply pulling the same stunt again but with a different one liner.

Debating society semantics?

Fine - ok your 'repetition doesn't necessarily mean it will be successful' and I'll raise you...'it doesn't mean it won't either.'

You add - 'In the 2 instances that a fly by has been used it As a means for change, it simply had no impact'

100% wrong.

Until last week, BK was talked about in the national press (re his role at Everton) in favourable terms and the (fucking long!) list of mistakes and bullshit either ignored or forgiven.

A fly-by is announced and suddenly there's a big piece in a national paper that suggests maybe he's hopeless and should fuck off out of it.

That IS change (or are you suggesting that any Evertonian believed a fly-by would result in BK throwing his hand in and a multi-billionaire showing up?)

As for 'salient points' and a 'more coherent manner' well all very laudable and Bertie Wooster I'm sure, but unfortunately, we're dealing with passionate Evertonians who have a breaking point.

(another case of Galatians 6.7 being ignored by Everton FC).

Christ, man, you'll be making excuses for the Everton Place fiasco next. In fact, go on... I challenge you!!

I usually refrain from responding you the utter shite you post. But I couldn't help but respond to your below sentence that proves once and for all you are nothing but a WUM.

"The basic principle behind DK was good in that we got a new ground with most of the cost being carried by Tesco"...Martin Mason 18/8/2015.

During the public inquiry, Tesco said publicly that they weren't providing a single penny towards the new stadium. And here you are, nearly 6 years since the end of the public inquiry, still peddling the same myth that clown Wyness was peddling back in the summer of 2007.

Shame on you.

Elstone has already declared that WHP is not going to happen and the lies about Tesco funding were exposed by Terry Leahy himself.

The reason Desperation Kirkby was called in was that it contravened all local and regional planning development plans, something the Club knew because KEIOC told them.

They couldn't make a good enough case to have the inquiry overturn the development plans because it was based on a pack of lies.

Obviously, Martin believes that Tesco (a privately held company, that was at that time moderately successful) and their shareholders were going to be happy that they were providing a subsidy for a football stadium. Even though, during the Public Inquiry, it was apparent that this 㿠m "subsidy" was in fact an uplift value based on Everton receiving the land free, and then developing it. In other words it wasn't actual money, but something to go on the balance sheet when the stadium was built...

(I should add Tesco had done this a few times before with smaller stadiums, and had put exactly ٞ in investment or subsidy to the sporting teams concerned.) Martin probably believes it would've been different with DK as the then Tesco CEO was a Blue, and a friend of BK and therefore a "friend of Everton".

The thing is, and I advise you sit down with a cup of tea for this, Everton (under the current owners) never intended to build the stadium; they mistakenly believed a planning consent for a provincial site with shitty transport links would smoke out the investors, who would see the opportunity to recoup their investment and then some, despite the fact that secondary revenue opportunities were to be seriously curtailed by the council.

Why weren't they going to build the stadium? Well, the basic design was 㿾m for the "mid-level" stadium (their words). The fit out would've pushed costs to over 𧴜m. And they never had the money. Shocker, I know... The bigger shock to me is that Leahy sold this to the Tesco Board -- who would've ran the risk of, if a planning consent was given, building a fucking great big store with their enabling partner unable to put a spade in the ground... (unless of course the money was "ring-fenced").

He's either deluded, ill-informed or a total embarrassment.... probably all three to be fair.

Unlike Richard Dodds who put forward views that many disagreed with but clearly showed he was a passionate Blue, Martin belittles the Club and propagates lies as fact and when challenged blithely ignores the questions put to him and fails to provide supporting references to his claims.

To repeat for clarity: the 2 previous fly bys instigated by our neighbours and United intended to effect change didn't work. I have already acknowledged that the one undertaken at Southampton did generate a great deal of media attention.

Having created the media attention and raised the profile of the issue, rather than repeat the stunt, I am suggesting that the organisers utilise the progress they have made by broadening their approach to create a platform from which a more joined up debate can be had which will require the Board to engage.

You seem intent on polarising the argument in to a for and against with the inference that these "passionate Evertonians" are somehow more worthy and dedicated than those who choose to express their views in different ways.

Divisive and unnecessary.

'My opening comment is a play on the meaning of the word "class", as it was used to describe how Evertonians should behave, and as I point out, an opportunity to explore the current malaise in our, once great game, and exclusion of people on low incomes, who in previous times were the lifeblood of the club.'

Yea I got your drift the first time - you were talking about class - was it 3a &b that you were highlighting.

Pity in the modern era that 'class' rears it's ugly head!

Could you suggest to the protesters a point or points salient enough to get this Board of Directors (sic) to respond? To date, there's been more response from the Finch Farm cat!

AGM anyone?

My protest (hardly original I know) will be painting my knob mid-grey, sauntering up to the Directors' box and showing them the white-eared elephant.

Without a change of tactic I don't think the fly by stunt will have any effect, beyond polarising the opinions of Evertonians.

The grievances over the last 16 years are well known and have been aired on many occasions. It is wholly appropriate to put pressure on the Board to answer these points providing they are presented in the right way.

As I remarked earlier, now that the protest group has engaged the media in the story a more effective next stage, rather than another fly by, albeit this time at a home game, would be to engage with the media outlets secure interviews and get a coherent message across that articulates the reason for the protest.

If air time is given, then it is likely that there will be a right of reply offered to the Club which they would be ill-advised to ignore. By establishing dialogue through a mediator dialogue can begin and both sides can better understand each other's position.

Your White Elephant protest is quite apt. The King of Siam gave these as gifts to people he didn't like because they were difficult to dispose of and expensive to maintain.

Remind you of anything?

We wouldn't turn up at the pictures for example to watch Star Wars whilst flying a plane overhead demanding George Lucas piss off. It's much the same with football. You know who's going to be on stage and your choose to pay your money or not.

I feel, therefore, that I have a right to object to the way Kenwright has presided over an awful interregnum and has masqueraded as a chairman of a great club.His possible illness may be a tragedy for him and his family, but for Everton Football Club, it may well be a blessing, if it leads to a change in the Boardroom.

I do hope the protests continue and that it leads to change in the Boardroom. I am fed up being patronised by Liverpool fans and fans of the so-called Sky four, I want to, before I shuffle off this mortal coil, see us back as we were in the sixties or eighties when we were a power in the land. That cannot happen under Kenwright's stewardship as the last two decades have shown.

I wish Kenwright well and hope that the health scare proves to be unsubstantiated, but I want him out.

Kenwright may leave much to be desired but, believe me, there are lots of chairmen who have, and do, make a bigger balls of the job than even he does. Just look at the record books.

We have no right to be up in the top four. I don't wanna be owned by criminal Russians or the like. I'm grateful Everton, from the top down has a connection with the city, club and area. That's a rare thing. We need:

1. A virtuous billionaire owner
2. To fill a 50,000 stadium every other week
3. Win the PL or be top 4 regularly in order to buy the success necessary to please some of our fans.

Are any of these things likely?

Keep up the good, and I'm sure, hard work.

Nearly all clubs have been or are addressing their stadium requirements, and very few have billionaire owners funding them... just a structured assessment of the issues and objectives, and a deliverable plan to achieve them, as opposed to mere window dressing.

Let's not be revisionist: we were offered a true state-of-the-art 50k+ stadium in a prime location, with financial assistance to die for, and spurned the opportunity with the now infamous power struggle that ensued to enable the current incumbents to retain control. The chance was there at King's Dock, and was swept under the carpet for evermore. It has nothing to do with anyone assuming we have a god-given right to top four status... but we most certainly do have a right to expect them to do the right thing for the club, and not simply act in their own personal interests.

However, on that point, there was a time when we could "assume our god-given status".... and back it up with substance, that was built on our history, the comparative size of our fanbase and average attendances, and the quality of our stadium. All of which has been allowed to slowly erode in relative and real terms.

You may be right that we cannot assume that we have any god-given rights to any number of things... but we can expect our owners to at least halt our fall down the pecking order and match the ambition and continued investment of our loyal (if aging) fanbase, by competing with our peers in the transfer market, and by actually delivering something to address are infrastructure requirements for once.

Neither has happened... and our relative status will continue to decline unless Roberto produces miracles on the pitch... because other clubs are not idly doing nothing.

A government inquiry for the Kirkby move (one I didn't want anyway) do people realise how difficult it is to get a Government inquiry? There are other things going on here. The council has demonstrated that it will bend over backwards to help LFC but put up as many barriers has it can when it comes to Everton.

All this time, silence or bare-faced lies from the board; no AGM: "Is this legal?"

The council never said improving Goodison was not an option 15 years ago...... or ever! Quite the opposite in fact. They have stated on several occasions that they would be receptive to an application to redevelop.

The club also never applied to build a stadium on Stanley Park. The council practically gifted the club the Kings Dock site with enabling packages.

They also bailed the club out over the training ground and have offered the club WHP... I'm not sure the council could do much more to be honest.

1. Fan protest is demonstrably useless. Gilette and Hicks were effectively kicked out by the bank. Ashely is still in charge at Newcastle, Lerner at Villa, the Glazer's are still in Old Trafford.

2. There is no apparent alternative to fan protest to get the 'message out' that Kenwrights board are perpetually lurching from disaster to crisis.

That simple distillation of the debate shows the problem. The sole course of action decided on is one that is clearly recognised as useless. If the intent is to raise awareness of the reality at the top echelon of the club then that message is being polluted by all the sneering and smirking at the tactics of those delivering the message.

In the media yesterday we had Rodney Marsh taking the rise wondering what the banner will read next time now that Stones has done his bit FFS. Its in the media sure, but, showing up the board for what they are is making us a laughing stock as much as anything else...just the same as they did when they, the media, found the most genetically challenged knuckle-dragging geordies they could to speak about the Ashely protests.

If you think about it the reason for this is obvious. Why does anyone else give a toss about our boardroom troubles?. I don't care about the Barcodes problems...couldnt be bothered if Lerner cant sell Villa....so why should anyone else give a damn about Kenwrights mismanagement other than have a chuckle that Everton are the latest gutter-media delivered freak show?.

So what we have, effectively, is a fan protest which only really serves the need for those fans to do 'something....anything' so they feel better about themselves at the price of, fleetingly, tarring us all with the idiot brush in the national press. Is there surprise that this isn't better supported in the fanbase than it is?

How come you forgot to mention that our very own Peter Johnson relinquished control not long after feeling the pressure from an increasingly disillusioned fanbase? I mean, why feel the need to make strained comparisons about clubs you "have no interest in", yet who's plight you seem so familiar with,........ especially when there is a very direct and obvious comparison much closer to home? Where we tarred with the idiot brush then? I can't remember any media backlash...... or accusations of idiot/kopite behaviour.

View it from another angle: Should we become known as the most apathetic fanbase in the country? The ones who are least bothered about their club despite the protest group being able to list the owners obvious failings and mishaps. Haven't the fans the right, or even responsibility to highlight to the national media if they feel it is not being covered properly? At what point are we entitled to protest..... when it's too late? Or would that even be wrong in your eyes?

Who cares if every football fan is interested or not? The point is that the issues have to be covered by the media, and not manipulated by the club. Perhaps then the so called majority can make a more informed judgement based on more than the normal turgid coverage of our club.

Suffice to say, the protest has significantly increased the column inches in the papers.... with several club generated articles too. Indicating that the club is taking it far more seriously than a knuckle-dragging exercise.

The situation with Johnson was clearly different though. There was another party waiting to take up the reigns. I'm also not entirely convinced about the part the protesting played in Johnsons departure or whether other forces were in play that were far more significant.

Whatever the situation really was there the examples I cited were the recent experiences of 'heavily publicised' fan protest. I stress that as the point of our recent protests was, as you note, to play the media game.

You are right about the increase in column inches as a result of this protesting....but are they column inches supporting or castigating the fanbase?. Overwhelmingly what I have read is negative or frankly insulting. On one blog I noted the redoubtable Colin Fitzpatrick actually thank an author for a piece that portrayed the situation accurately...so rare was actual 'good press' that came from the increased profile.

While this is the reaction the wider media is taking to our fanbase protests why are the club going to deal sincerely with any of us?. The attitude of 'if thats your best shot' has to be anticipated off the back of this surely?.

I could equally argue that you can't compare all the protests at other clubs. The grievances, the club's situations and the respective boards/ownership arrangements, and how long they've all been in control can all be quite different. Villa's owner and the previous much maligned incumbent at least resolved their stadium issue and invested their own money in their club to a far greater extent than ours. Similarly Newcastle on the stadium front at least... and on team investment for most of the prem era..... not to mention the brass neck and financial resources of Ashley to absorb criticism and failings.

On top of that, invariably a flurry of good results or a high profile signing or two can be enough to bring the natives back in line as we've seen many times, especially if there's a foil by way of a disliked manager for instance. Let's face it, a proportion of the Man Utd hoardes might've turned on their club, but there's plenty more where they came from, and Fergie never turned on the owners, and importantly they kept winning things, and when they stopped winning Moyes came in the spotlight....

It should also be remembered that like Everton, these boards all have influential friends in the media. They all employ people specifically from that background too, and favours are called in, as revealed with the now infamous emailgate. Just as we saw during the Kirkby debacle... when endless articles of untruths appeared in the press and on websites in support of the project. Only to evaporate under scrutiny. Similarly now, when the protest occurred plausible articles started to appear at an unprecedented rate..... All similarly disected on the various forums. However, as with kirkby, in amongst them are several stating the case of the protestors...... and as on that occasion, only then will the problems be properly reported.

The evidence for this is manifest. The clubs who have changed hands have either been capital-based and we all know ones football club must be within easy reach of Heathrow...or cheap-to-run (low wage bill etc) championship clubs who's investors can try and goldmine-strike into the Prem TV rights profits. No clubs of our stature and position have changed hands recently that I can immediately think of?.

In fact our two most similarly sized and historied peers Newcastle and Villa are both similarly unable to attract buyers....despite both having, as you note, better infrastructure than us and being either the most successful or only club in their city. Even 'cheap and cheerful' little West Broms' deal has been dragging on so long it looks very much like its been another example of a charlatan trying to leverage his way into club ownership a la Pompey.

From that observation of the marketplace alone I cant see how any other conclusion can be reached that there are no buyers looking for clubs in our position?.

Realistically I don't understand the view that the club need to pull in a buyer either?. People who operate at the level we need as an owner don't wait for a pamphlet to drop through the door. They identify a need for something and then assign a team to acquire it. I've seen it happen albeit in a business context.

EFC are in such a modest position in terms of ability to fight off a takeover that we would be very low-hanging fruit indeed for someone wishing to own a club in our position. One 'leaked' article to a tabloid of a genuine 'chinese industrialist' (wild example) wishing to buyout Kenwright and the rug comes out from under this board in a heartbeat. The board are not supported for any other reason that lack of practical alternative from what I can see.

As to other protests being different. In some ways thats right and others its not. The big difference was the LFC situation with the bank forcing the sale. We saw the aftermath of that with the legal fights over the price that the bank forced on Gillete and Hicks. That does show the amount RS fans spitting on their relations bothered them though...they wouldnt have sold at the price Fenway got the club for no matter what. With Villa and Newcastle the situation is identical to us though...the problem is no interest. Both are expressly up for sale...so both are in weak positions to reject reasonable offers. There appears to be a lack of genuine offers.

Cant say I've noticed a lot of pro-board media coverage before these protests started to be honest Tom. WHP got very little exposure for what should have been a sizeable story. Certainly Spurs intrigue with their new ground footprint aquisition got a lot more mileage in the nationals. Not really sure what the propaganda is you suggest that there is a need to defeat?.

Newsflash - 10 years later, even though we've had a much larger attendance and all that time and exposure in the PL they're now a major rival to Everton (thanks to the current board).

They also do not have any debt or a massively rich owner, they have the least wealthy owner.

What they do have is a forward thinking, commercially aware, proficient and organised board that plan ahead with targets years at a time.

We fly the seat of our pace & plan days at a time.

These are all quite strained subjective arguments.

It's now common knowledge that Man City's owners were in talks with Everton before they were City, as proven by the people who set up the talks. So, why did they not force the issue then? Why would they? They have no need to when they have alternatives, and wouldn't ever want their eventual acquisition appearing as second choice. The club themselves have said many times that they have been in talks with interested parties.

Whether or not some club's are now struggling to sell is irrelevant and dependent on several factors, not least the price.... but the fact is their eventual sale will be their second or even third time in the period that BK has been supposedly trying to sell us. I mean you can stretch a subjective argument so far but I cannot believe than in era that has seen practically ALL clubs change hands we are marked out as THE exception to the rule.

As regards interest in the club..... it is very much dependent on price, and whether or not we have genuinely been up for sale. If BK was prepared to sell for a reasonable price (and not the near 1,000% profit some have quoted) then I've little doubt that there would be several interested parties. The other issue of course is the structure of our ownership and the ensuing complexity of any sale.... which has been a mystery and subject to much conjecture since day one.... and increasingly so since Kings Dock.

As regards pro-board articles, our local rag has been repeatedly taken to task by various fan groups regarding their pro-board stance resulting in a recent symposium, so I'm not sure where you're coming from there.

WHP hasn't made any serious headlines because it hasn't even merited a planning application..... Meanwhile the club you compared us to on that score have already long-since delivered a modernised WHL.... and have now secured land and funding to rebuild a second time on a much grander scale..... why would we possibly attract the same attention, when we've failed to deliver so often before?

Yes, I use the term stupid because they have realised that attacking BK on his own will fail, as it did last time, so now they have changed their approach to "time to go" and mention all the board – even one flag with the CEO's name on it, who is a PAYE employee!

The reason why I call them all stupid and possiby selfish is because forcing out the current board with no alternative option is a waste of time and puts us in a worse position than we are with the current shareholders. I will repeat it again: nothing wrong with disagreement but we to date have nobody whosoever willing to takeover the club, so please explain to me what are you trying to achieve?

BK could have sold the club many times for just the share price, that I can guarantee, but we don't need new owners that don't have the funds to invest in the business. Just remember when you sit in the ground with low-price season tickets, some as stupidly low as 䀋 which I had myself. but I still believe selling premium seat like my sons for 䀋 is bad business. So when you find new owners, don't forget us fans will also have to pay a lot more to watch EFC than we do now; that's a fact if you want to progress to the next level.

I would be more willing to support protest if we had another option to compare. Until then, I'm afraid all the money we raise goes to the players yet most on here are deluded to that simple fact. Open your eyes and take the passion out of it and EFC's business plan is a low-risk option by a business that has very poor cash flow and all its poor decisions are based around this simple fact.

The current board don't have the wealth to change that so we need somebody else to bridge that gap; until then, we will always be in that chasing pack. I don't like that one bit but the difference for us to go the next level we all so want so much is minimum 𧶲/500 million invest depending on if you change the stadium. The problems at EFC don't necessary change by forcing out the board.

All that and your only argument is that you assume that new owners mean higher prices (which you actually advocate in anycase)... Other clubs have low prices for kids too.

It is a ridiculous non-argument to say that people cannot protest at this board's well-documented serial ineptitude, impotence and complete inability to deliver anything without having to produce names of potential buyers. How many had heard of half of them before they emerged in directors boxes all over the country.

If people see failings on or off the pitch.... if they can trace them back years or even decades then they are more than entitled to protest. As they say....Get over it!

In my world, "Stupid" is having the facts laid out in front of you, year after trophyless year.... and choosing to not only ignore them, but to generate circular non-arguments to detract from the issues.

All our money goes on players? Honestly, the mind boggles.

Oh yes, the same old answer I have put up with for years from the Board Out lobby: "It's not our job to find new buyers!!!" Oh, but it's your job to try and force or even ask business owners of a business that is fit for purpose to sell up and walk away, totally deluded.

The approach is all wrong as it was before; I told you so then and I will repeat myself again and again: EFC is a business as well as a club we all love and the majority of fans like myself aren't happy that EFC haven't won any pots for years, but at the same time we see without major investment we can't go to that next level that we all want and that's the monkey on our back as a club. BK and the board have failed on that one task, I agree, but forcing them out doesn't solve that problem at all.

Past mistakes are all well documented, some valid, some not... but we can't change it and without a healthy EBITA we can't set aside money for a stadium without sacrificing the playing side.

Yes, in hindsight, we would have taken the debt for Kings Dock but we can't change that now, regrettably. I have no problems with protest at any level but I find it completely useless if your main objective doesn't solve our problems; it actually puts us in a much, much worse position if the new owners don't have cleared funds to invest, so that is why I just don't get why the protest needs to go down the path it has.

Please explain to me and the other fans out there what do we do next if you force a frustrated sale on the board?

Steve J: some excellent points raised in your posts. Keep it up, debate is healthy for all parties.

How is it a strained subjective argument pointing out clear facts?.

Its well known that Shinawatra put the Sheikhs on to City. Given that gentlemans pedigree I'm sure some editing will take place in the official history. Surely they had their team look at us at the same time but City's advantage over ours was obvious...have we got confirmation that there was contact?.

The club has indeed said they have been in contact with interested parties...lets leave aside your decision to trust them now on a point that suits you....have they ever said any of these parties were able to deliver the required credentials though?. I'd suggest that a serious party willing to take us on wouldnt be deflected very easily by the collection of rank amateurs making up our board. Or are our board suddenly machiavellian geniuses able to control the media and defeat massed-ranks of billionaires?.

How can it be irrelevent if Newcastle and Villa cant sell?. Both are commercially more viable than we are as you've noted yourself indirectly. How can you have 'little doubt' that price is the issue?. At this level price is an intangible....and dependent on the boards ability to resist an unwelcome bid. This board has no ability whatsoever to deflect even a derisory bid from a party with constructive proposals. That party goes public...ignoring any requests for confidentiality which can be circumvented ridiculously easily...and they get the club. If I remember it right Kenwright has even already said he needs to offload...even if he hasnt done it...if a prospective new owner was there with a genuine offer to take over the club and develop it what do you honestly think Kenwright and his happy band of muppets could do about it?.

You say there have been lots of pro-board articles....where?. Saying what?. The local symposium was more to do with bias towards the RS not bias towards Kenwright. Everything I saw was complaint about no Everton articles period not articles of the wrong spin. Thats only the local media as well....theres been naff all in the nationals about Everton, before the Stones business, in either direction. Part of the problem now with this protest is the fact that pro-board or, at least, anti-Evertonian pieces HAVE started to appear in the nationals. Awareness of the 'plight' of Evertonians has been raised and the general reaction has been to have a good laugh at our expense. Is that what the protest was intended to achieve....if so I've got to ask why?

Pointing out clear facts? Is that some kind of attempt at weird irony?

You've attempted to isolate the cases of Villa and Newcastle, building a supposed argument, while completely ignoring the blindingly obvious.

Saying a club is struggling to be sold is subjective and strained when you don't really compare the asking price, levels of debt, current structure of ownership or whatever other issues are involved, or indeed if there's genuine intent to sell in the first place .......as we've seen with our lot, saying something is for sale is one thing (especially when faced with discontent amongst the fanbase/shareholders), actually meaning it is quite another. Furthermore, it's both strained and by definition completely irrelevant when both clubs mentioned have actually ALREADY been sold once in the time that we've supposedly been up for sale..... which in turn could easily add an additional obstacle and margins and therefore reluctance to sell at a loss in their cases, that seriously does not affect our lot..... who are set to profit very handsomely regardless. The irrelevance is then further magnified when viewed in the broader context of the number of other clubs who have also been sold in the same period..... In other words, it's a best a complete non-argument, at worst completely disingenuous.

As regards machiavellian geniuses, have you been following the story so far, or have you been in a coma for the past 15yrs. The manipulation of the press over both the Kings Dock and Destination Kirkby episodes and the various shenanigans over the years has been well documented and are too numerous to list here again. The drip-fed as well as flooding-the-market variety of articles was suspected long before emailgate even, which wasn't exposed by the press, but by fans. Our lot, and indeed most clubs hold most, if not all the cards when it comes to dictating what goes out to press.... only when the issue is so blatantly obvious or potentially toxic as say the carpet bagging leveraged sales, or nationally significant as was the case of both LFC and MUFC do the national press focus on it..... and even then it's quite often prompted by the fans themselves. Otherwise, most would prefer to stay on speaking terms with the clubs. ..... as the priority will always be football matters, as is invariably the case for their readers too.

You also seem to have your facts skewed about The symposium..... this was essentially prompted by the BU, and was about the complete lack of investigative journalism into the running of our club, and specifically the workings and structure of our board..... because the same paper had been so active in doing precisely that for the other lot. Little or nothing to do with any supposed journalistic bias about football, or team issues. Yes, the paper is only a local one.... but it is the one that traditionally has the largest local football related readership, and the one publication tasked with providing comfortably the most extensive coverage of our club for the fans.

The fact that Aston Villa and Newcastle haven't sold is manifest. Whether they were sold 10 years ago or not is spurious as the issue is the market today. Whether there is a difference in price or an issue with any one of a dozen permutations in the sale is irrelevant...

You suggest that buyers are tripping over some undecipherable facet of the purchase process every single time across three distinct and separate clubs and each time it's been done without a hint of the parties involved escaping into the media? Newcastle, Villa and us must be able to teach security to MI5 by now! Clearly West Brom didn't get the memo!

At the same time cheap-to-own Championship or London clubs, as you note, have changed hands. Funny that this tortuous process of buying a club, that you claim is continuously forestalling the sale of Villa, Newcastle and ourselves (if we are for sale) didn't stand in the way of those transactions isn't it Tom... it's almost like there's another factor in play?!

Manipulation of the press??. Kenwright and his mob....are you honestly saying the superficial twaddle that was piped out about Kirkby represented media manipulation? The club never showed anywhere near the depth of information necessary to make a considered decision on let alone amount to a genuine story... and the vocal opposition to what was released was meaningless as the project would still have been thrown out regardless of that 'furore'.

In serious press terms it was kids squabbling in the kiddie pool no more interesting than that. Out in the grown up world it warranted not a squeak. The machinations of the board can then be measured on that scale... as I said amateur and dismissable... a serious party who had identified value in acquiring Everton would brush this board aside in short order.

As for the symposium, like I said, I saw a lot of references to the 'red Echo' etc. To you, with your inside track, it may have had deeper purpose and meaning but I think you'll find the message that went out to the fanbase was somewhat more simplistic.

Anyway, Tom, if you're just going to keep digging into more oblique and tenuous justifications for your position, there's no more point to continuing this. I'm happy to leave this with the disagreement.

Are Arsenal a cheap-to-own Champioship club? Or Sunderland, or West Ham, or Spurs, or Newcastle, or Chelsea, or Man Utd, or Man City, or Leicester, or Aston Villa, or Palace, or Liverpool, or Derby, or Southampton, or Brum.......? Do I need to go on, because I can easily double, triple or even quadruple that list just off the top of my head?

All of these clubs have changed hands since we have supposedly been for up for sale; some have been sold twice in that time... and some in only the last few years too. So I suggest it is you who is attempting an extremely "tenuous justification" for your stance, not I.