Buying and Valuing a Football Club – Everton FC

A long read on valuing Everton FC, the issues around valuations and my view on what represents good value to both parties

Paul The Esk 25/06/2022 80comments  |  Jump to last

Imagine being offered a business that has the following characteristics:

  • Is particularly sensitive to the timing of the transaction
  • Has lost money six out of the last seven years
  • Is cashflow negative
  • Has an impaired and depreciating inventory
  • Has significant future capex requirement
  • Is subject to regulation in terms of investment and future Proft & Loss performance
  • Has a moderate balance sheet
  • Has a net debt position

So what is the appeal of such a business?

  • It’s in a sector in which the very best businesses have grown significantly in value in recent years
  • It’s in a sector that some investors believe to be cheap relative to other businesses in similar sectors
  • Relatively few businesses of this nature come to market
  • It holds a licence that guarantees the majority of its current revenue year after year subject to performance criteria
  • A significant improvement in product performance opens another licensing opportunity that generates substantially greater revenue
  • A number of revenue streams are totally undeveloped
  • It has a large and loyal customer base, relatively under-exploited in revenue terms
  • The capex requirement funds a fixed asset that will increase revenue streams and add shareholder value
  • The business could have brand appeal in the future from a different class of investor
  • The R&D capabilities of the business could be massively improved
  • The business has under-performed for many years and represents a turn-around opportunity

How does a prospective buyer go about agreeing a value for such a business? And then, assuming the business is acquired, how do you turn it around or redevelop it and make it competitive at the top end of its sector?

Firstly, valuation from Moshiri’s perspective

A business is worth what the buyer is prepared to spend, and what the seller is prepared to accept. Every buyer and every seller will have different views on what they are buying or selling, different reasons and motivations (dependent on their own circumstances) for buying and selling, and often one or the other will have a specific timing in mind (although from a negotiation perspective it is important usually never to volunteer your timing objectives). Occasionally business owners enter a forced sale position (although again, they would do everything to disguise that fact).

Article continues below video content


Every consultant, agent or banker involved in the sale or purchase of a business will have a valuation model based on factors such as balance sheet, turnover, profitability, competitive peer valuation models, future capex requirement etc. Football is no different in the sense that the models exist.

However, I take the view that almost every football club represents such a unique cocktail of valuation, prospective owner and prospective seller factors, both good and bad, that most of the models used traditionally are not hugely valuable.

It makes no sense to me at least, that the price Newcastle United were sold for, or the price Chelsea have been sold for, bears any significant relevance to the value of Everton. Similarly the part-ownership disposals of clubs as diverse as Manchester City, Liverpool and West Ham United have little comparative value because of the unique circumstances of each club and their prospective buyers and sellers.

From Moshiri’s perspective, the sale price of Everton will be a balance of what he has already invested, what he thinks he is giving up in terms of future value then discounted by the knowledge that, in order to achieve that value, he has a weighty amount of further investment to make. I suspect he is also taking a view on what Newcastle were sold for, and West Ham part-sold for – but as I say I don’t hold much store by those comparative valuations.

On a fundamental basis, in my view, the equity has next to zero value. Loss-making, negative cash flow, depreciating inventory (players), huge capex (stadium), large research & development costs (academy) and a lack of business intelligence and track record within the business. Moshiri and his team will obviously hold a contrary opinion.

He will argue that the current position is a reflection of a post-Covid, still early stage investment not yet reaping the rewards of that investment in performance and revenue terms.

Additionally, it has some intangible assets. As a seller, Moshiri could argue Premier League membership is an annual licence, renewed on the back of satisfactory performance (ie, not getting relegated). Additionally there is the prospect of other licences to generate higher revenues for out-performance (qualification for European tournaments).

Players are intangible assets and often cited as being fundamental to valuations. Yes, perhaps in relation to performance, a good squad gets you European football which adds to the value of the club, but it is also expensive and carries significant costs. The player values are like inventory, they tie up capital, they depreciate over time, and if sold have to be replaced, often at greater expense. Realistically, can Moshiri argue Everton’s inventory is worth a premium over acquisition, market or replacement value?

The academy is the research and development arm of the business, producing products (players) to be sold or to enter our own inventory, but also in developing a particular playing style. A very successful academy can create a product characteristic that has future value (Ajax, for example). Can Moshiri point to the current performance of the academy (despite the recent personnel changes) and claim there is value in it, either through style or actual product?

Moshiri will have a view that Everton’s brand and global awareness has a value which adds to the sale price. The counter-argument is to look at commercial performance, particularly sponsorship levels. If Moshiri’s assertion is right, then that would be reflected in sponsorship levels paid by the club’s current partners. However, there is little evidence of that value being reflected in current commercial deals.

Moshiri will argue that the progress on the new stadium at Bramley-Moore Dock, the planning permission, the construction contract with Laing O’Rourke, the construction to date, the steady progression to the scheduled completion date, has value to the new owner and therefore has to be reflected in price.

A strong, committed, invaluable management team with a superior track record can add to a company’s valuation. Can Moshiri say that about his current board and executive? Indeed, can the prospective buyer demand a discount given past performance and the future replacement costs?

Finally evidence of good governance, strong systems and good people, good relationships with regulators and a reputation for best practices adds to the sale price. The contrary is equally true. An absence of good governance deters some investors or reduces the price offered.

Due diligence

Proper, thorough due diligence tells the buyer what the seller doesn’t tell you. Depending upon the condition of the business and the performance of the previous owners, due diligence can either confirm what is in good order or can highlight potential problems leading to further price negotiations.

Thoughts behind the offer (from the buyer’s perspective)

So the buyer will have the funds to buy and invest (one hopes). He or she will be attracted to the sector, the geography and the particular circumstances of Everton Football Club. He or she will have a clear idea of what they want to spend in acquiring the club, but equally importantly, what further capital or, perhaps in the case of introducing connected sponsor partners, what future revenues are required to be injected to meet their investment programme.

As football is a regulated business, and it is thought Everton have specific arrangements regarding their profitability and sustainability position, the buyer will want a full understanding of the implications in terms of the restrictions it places on their future spending plans regarding the squad. They will require full assurances from the Premier League as to future conditions. This may have a significant effect on price.

From a footballing perspective, the potential buyers will want an understanding of the football management team, their ambitions and their costing for what they require for their future plans. Ideally, the potential owners should employ valuation specialists alongside the existing management opinion to create a portfolio analysis projecting future values, future wage obligations, and future capex requirements to complete their squad. This is a crucial exercise and again underlines the specific nature of each individual club valuation.

More than anything, including the stadium or new commercial arrangements, it is the knowledge of what is required to invest in the team, the ability to do that (from a regulatory point of view) and the likelihood of achieving the ultimate objective – trophies and regular Champions League qualification – that will drive and frame expectations for revenue growth. This is a key element in valuing a football club.

The buyer will have a detailed analysis of the board and executive team, knowing who, if any, they wish to keep, and the replacement costs for those leaving the business. Disruption costs need also to be considered in this exercise.

Specifically for Everton, the future capex requirement on the new stadium. What has been agreed in terms of cost? What has been spent already? And what is the potential for cost over-runs, general contingency financing and also delays to the project?

In addition, there must be a firm idea of the revenue model for the new stadium, including naming rights, sponsor packages, premium seating revenues and general admission revenues. Added into that are the additional revenue-creating opportunities arising from a state-of-the-art modern stadium. Perhaps capacity increases may also be considered both in terms of cost and future revenues – based on planning approval, the site's ability to increase capacity, and their confidence in filling a bigger stadium.

The funding model for future investment in the stadium has an impact on the price the buyer wishes to pay. An acquisition partly or predominantly funded by debt carries greater cost than self-funding (although all capital carries a cost obviously). Why does it impact the acquisition cost? Because it influences the net cash the stadium will generate in the years ahead. It may also affect the future marketability of the club through onerous “make good” or early redemption charges.

The buyer will also have a view as to the capacity for the club to grow commercially? How much of the club’s potential has already been exploited, how much more growth is there, and what is the cost of acquiring the growth? This also has an impact on the price paid.

So what are Everton worth?

Firstly, sorry for all the words, I hope you stuck with it, but it’s important to realise why football club purchases are each unique and that should be reflected in what the seller expects and what the buyer is prepared to pay.

Figures such as £500 million for the club and £500 million for the stadium have been thrown about. I think they’re nonsense. I started with all the difficulties the club faces, I commented that on a fundamental basis one could argue the equity is worth nothing. Yet the current owner will argue that he’s spent near £800 million on share purchases and loans, that that level of investment counts for something. He’ll argue that all the costs already incurred on the new stadium – planning, pre-construction, filling the dock, now at the stage of steelwork being erected – has to be reflected in the club’s value.

Yet for all of that, the new owner has major investment required in players, in replacing the board and executive, in funding on-going losses for perhaps a further 2 years.

How much of the construction costs have yet to be found? It can’t be the full £500 million as all works to date have been paid for.

A £1 billion investment in Everton’s current condition doesn’t suggest much upside in terms of future valuations. How long, even with a brand new stadium, for Everton to be worth in excess of £1 billion to give the new investors a return on their investment? What performance levels would the football team have to reach and how likely is that? Investment at that level, £1 billion, is a huge risk with limited medium-term upside and plenty of downside potential.

A huge commitment of £1 billion leaves less (logically) to invest in the squad – every pound that goes to existing shareholders is effectively a pound that doesn’t go to the squad.

Moshiri, given his position, given the future capital needs of the club and current financial performance (let alone footballing performance) has to be realistic on price. By all means get the commitment to funding the stadium and future squad development, but the price of the equity has to reflect the club’s (and his) failings.

There’s always a payment for potential in situations where fundamentals suggest little or no value. There’s also an element of saving face, logically in business that doesn’t matter, but the reality is that it does to an extent.

Timing is important too, for the club’s sake, for its ability to get on in this window, a takeover has to happen sooner rather than later. Completing after or close to the window closing won’t help the club much at the beginning of this next window. That perhaps works in Moshiri’s favour in terms of price negotiation.

So, deep breath, if the equity was sold for £250 million, if the remaining £300 to £400 million of funding for the stadium was guaranteed by the new owner, if there’s a commitment to provide sponsor revenue to fund player acquisitions, if Moshiri retained up to 20% of the equity then both buyer and seller would likely feel aggrieved, but then that’s usually a sign of a fair deal for all parties.

Follow @theesk
Share article:

Reader Comments (80)

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


Tony Everan
1 Posted 25/06/2022 at 08:45:06
Paul, great detail and insight here. I am hoping you can give the takeover details a forensic examination when they become apparent. So much of the club's future success and stability hinges upon it.

A residual thought from reading this is how much will the ongoing debt cost the club and how much will be left for investment in the squad? The income we generate has to be greater than the interest on debts we are paying and that has to be sustainable.

Only when these details can be locked in with reasonable logical foresight can we feel that any offer is a good one. Your cool-headed impartial insights into that, Paul, are as accurate and good as we are going to get. I look forward to it as it's going to be a crystal ball type of article that sees into the club's future.

Also a sort of naive question: What sort of covenants can be attached to investors to protect the club from unscrupulous investors? After all, it is more than just a business, it is of the utmost historical and cultural importance to large swathes of the local community.

Maynard Hanna
2 Posted 25/06/2022 at 09:27:19
This is as good an in-depth analysis as we can get at this stage. I thank you for it.

Speaking as a relative novice in such matters, is it likely that any such deal could be concluded before September? (Or indeed even earlier in August?)

Players return for pre-season in early July, and our manager will be doing his level best to bring in some new faces hopefully before the season kicks off. If any prospective takeover is still ongoing, that will surely lead to possible negative influences within the club.

Given all that you say that has to be done by any new owners, can a deal be done for September or even earlier in August? I would be interested to know your thinking on this.

Great article.

Stu Darlington
3 Posted 25/06/2022 at 09:47:00
Paul,

A comprehensive examination of the complexities of valuing a modern Premier League football club.

Correct me if I'm wrong but you seem to be saying £1Billion seems to be an over-optimistic figure for the valuation of the club and it will probably be closer to £650-£700 million that the club goes for?

I think for most supporters the actual sale figures will be immaterial provided that:

1) The cost of the new stadium is guaranteed; and

2) There's something left in the pot to fund the acquisition of new players.

I recognise that No 2 is problematic as it doesn't matter how wealthy the new owners are, we are still handicapped under FFP regulations as a result of our present financial situation.

I am encouraged, however, by Mr Thelwell's explanation of his transfer strategy for future acquisitions. It seems to be in accordance with what a lot of ToffeeWebbers have been saying for some time.

Whatever happens, I agree with you that timing is of the essence; the last day of the transfer window won't help much in the short run.

John Zapa
4 Posted 25/06/2022 at 10:59:48
Very good analysis of the situation, Paul.

I think you left out an important point of valuation, the fact that the club has 3 large and successful other clubs (competitors) at its doorstep in the North-West. Newcastle was the sole big Premier League club in the North-East, alone in its city, while Chelsea is the most successful club in the capital over the last decade.

I think that alone would bring down the value of the club to potential investors.

Tony Abrahams
5 Posted 25/06/2022 at 11:49:16
I sometimes find it hard to comprehend this type of thing, so thanks for writing things down as plainly as possible, Paul.

I personally think that Moshiri, has got into the waters of having a forced sale, and just pray that, if he does end up keeping 20% of the equity, that will be it….

Whilst the new owners will take charge of everything else regarding Everton FC🤞

Jerome Shields
6 Posted 25/06/2022 at 12:04:32
Moshiri is in a difficult situation of his own making. He took over a badly run club that was mid-table at best, occupying a dated stadium, heavily in debt, with a leased training ground, and top-heavy with the management that caused it all.

He cleared the debt and injected cash which was spent ineffectively by the same management. He then got involved in controlling recruitment costs and expenditure, adding to the problems.

Everton are now working in tandem with the officials of the Premier League Profit and Sustainability Committee to rectify the resulting losses. Having come to agreement with the Premier League Profit and Sustainabilty Committee, at the end of last season, it looked as if they may have had to then deal with the Football League Profit and Sustainability Committee, who looked less easy to deal with.

Thankfully relegation was avoided, but that period would have had an effect on Moshiri.

Moshiri has 80% of his shares up for sale because he doen't fancy taking on the risk of heading into another season to fight relegation and take on the risks alone of financing the new stadium. It might be also apparent that being subject to Premier League Profit and Sustainability Rules require extra finance, since it is unlikely that extra income from a European place is possible, without being subject to Uefa Financial Fair Play Rules which may be more restrictive than Premier League rules.

Moshiri is holding on to 20% of his shares to recuperate part of his investment on the Stadium completion. He also is hoping he will receive a premium on selling 80% of his shares. The other Shareholder who probably dealt with the Premier League Profit and Sustainability Committee will have his say as well and be involved in the negotiations.

All of this is central to the takeover negotiations and is being hinted at in most statements on the negotiations.

Larry O'Hara
7 Posted 25/06/2022 at 12:19:00
Paul, as usual an illuminating outline.

Three points:

1) Do you think (as others have asked) we will be lumbered with debt, and if so, how debilitating will that be?

2) You rightly say each sale has unique circumstances: does not the position of the stadium in a regeneration area not add value? Indeed, is there any land there that EFC own to be included aside from stadium footprint?

3) Do you think it feasible that player acquisitions can indeed be funded from sponsorship, thereby conforming to FFP?

And a final question you do not have to answer: Has anybody from the club sought the benefit of your expertise, and if not, why not?

Clive Rogers
8 Posted 25/06/2022 at 12:21:10
Paul, do we know how much the club’s debt is and how much is owed to Moshiri?
Mike Gaynes
9 Posted 25/06/2022 at 16:33:37
Paul, your superb analysis is financial only, so it leaves out one element that increases the price of an asset like Everton -- the emotional appeal of owning it. Becoming a sports team owner confers worldwide publicity and ego gratification unlike that of any other business purchase.

Clive, Moshiri's announcement in January that he had converted his £100 million loan into equity, taking his ownership share to 94.1%, means the club owes him no debt.

Jay Harris
10 Posted 25/06/2022 at 16:53:46
Paul,

Another excellent expose of the current situation with regard to the takeover.

My hope is, no matter what the deal, we get an owner who shows the commitment and ability to get us back to the top table.

Clive Rogers
11 Posted 25/06/2022 at 17:40:49
Thanks, Mike. Is there any other debt, as it's been reported that Moshiri wants £500M including the debt. That might not be true of course.
Mike Gaynes
12 Posted 25/06/2022 at 22:57:08
Paul The Esk would know, but he didn't mention any debt in this article.

Paul, can you answer Clive's question?

Graham Fylde
13 Posted 25/06/2022 at 23:22:19
Clive, I'm sure I remember reading in another of Paul's articles that we carry £130m of external debt and that the lenders (banks, I think) have covenants attached.
Mike Gaynes
14 Posted 26/06/2022 at 00:26:27
This article from March 29 says net debt is £58.7 million.

Everton reveals growing debt, $158M loss in '21

Jerome Shields
15 Posted 26/06/2022 at 05:37:59
Mike #14,

That's the figure that I remember. But it could have been a whole lot more if Moshiri had not converted his loans into equity.

Jerome Shields
16 Posted 26/06/2022 at 08:29:52
Given the experience we have of the Everton parties involved regarding buying and selling, it would be like them to look as if they are going to make a Horlicks of things. I doubt things will be straight-forward. Moshiri may want fair value, but long suffering Evertonians are entitled to fair warning.
Michael Kenrick
17 Posted 26/06/2022 at 08:57:27
There is actually a very good article on this topic in The Echo:

How £1Bn Everton valuation might not be so crazy to US investors

The standard of journalism is far higher than the normal footie crap and this analysis seems to be much more 'on the money' (ouch!) It shows a greater understanding of the American perspective — which will be important as that is where the money is coming from — rather than Paul's somewhat hidebound English business model.

It's by Dave Powell and follows on from the previous one I highlighted last weekend: An American view of Everton's investment potential

Laurie Hartley
18 Posted 26/06/2022 at 09:43:41
Thanks for another intriguing article, Paul.

Presumably it is a given that any new owner would expect the club to maintain its Premier League status and that the business will produce a return on investment.

Given our current financial condition, there will be no ROI until we move into the new stadium so what do you perceive as the potential prize once that takes place?

Clive Rogers
19 Posted 26/06/2022 at 10:25:29
Thanks Mike, Graham. Not as bad as I thought it might be.
Danny O’Neill
20 Posted 26/06/2022 at 10:39:56
Thanks as always, Paul. A few thoughts.

I guess any potential investor will look at the return of investment potential. They will look at potential future profit margins.

It's interesting you mention capex. I now work in a managed services sector. I wonder how much we, or future owners, look at opex and outsourcing certain aspects of the operation? It is often more cost-effective than capex. But inevitably there will be a combination of both. That would be sensible in my opinion.

We do have a large customer base. But it can and should be larger. We need to build the brand. Not just beyond L4, but beyond the city of Liverpool. Beyond Merseyside. Beyond Cheshire and North Wales.

I have watched with interest at how Manchester City hasn't really caught on in the same way as our red cousins and Manchester United considering their success. Admittedly I'm only using London as a gauge.

Our international ToffeeWebers may have a different view. But we need to go national and then global to compete. I want my cake and to be able to eat it, so I still want to retain that Everton culture. But we can do both. People from all over the country and the world will buy into Everton once they realise the power of it.

This is a turnaround opportunity. But I thought that with Moshiri. Turn it around and be the club we should be. Especially with the new iconic stadium on the horizon.

Stop being cosy, comfortable little Everton. Grow this club commercially as well as on the pitch. The two will sit and grow hand in glove.

And as you allude to; do it now. Sooner rather than later. Let's go and disrupt the football world and annoy the pundits who play us down, continuously beat us into submission and unfortunately have convinced a generation that we should be happy with our lot.

No!

We are Everton. Eventually to become 10 times League Champions and beyond before my time is up.

I know there are a few obvious soundbites in there, but surely this time, we have finally learned our lesson. No room for sentiment this time. Be ruthless. Be Sir John Moores. At the time, changed when not good enough. Investment. Building an iconic stand to make Goodison a stand-out stadium in its now bygone day.

With the new stadium at Bramley-Moore Dock we have an opportunity. Grasp it. Don't waste it. But to do so, we need change.

Mark Taylor
21 Posted 26/06/2022 at 11:02:41
I can't see a sale price that gives Moshiri his money back, still less a return, which makes me think that offering an upside is the only viable option. Maybe rather than just retaining 20% of the whole, a more interesting approach would be to create a structure with the club and the stadium as seperate entities and give Moshiri a larger stake in the latter.

The less actual cash handed over for the club itself, the more we will have to spend on the much needed squad re-alignment.

Laurie Hartley
22 Posted 26/06/2022 at 12:08:31
Danny # 20 - I agree with you that Everton has the potential to go international, especially in America.

Perhaps the marketing potential that the stadium build offers has this American consortium licking their lips. One way or another, that waterfront will be unrecognisable 10 years from now.

That is why I don't think our owner is going to let it go as part of a fire sale somehow. My gut feeling is that, by the time we move into the new stadium at Bramley-Moore Dock, he will have his money back and retain 20% of a club worth well North of the £1 billion being bandied about at the moment.

Come 1 July, I expect the sparks to fly on this and the transfer front.

Derek Moore
23 Posted 26/06/2022 at 14:35:58
Interesting analysis that misses the point completely.

For all the big accounting words and numbers in here, the author has overlooked the most obvious and basic economic fundamental of all.

Supply and demand.

There are twenty premier league clubs. There will only ever be twenty premier league clubs. Everton - despite our current managements best efforts - are one of those twenty clubs.

So we have a finite and very limited supply.

A simple Google has Forbes stating the number of billionaires in the world as 2,755 in 2021. This is a 127% rise in ten years from 2011 where Forbes put the figure at a mere 1,210 billionaires.
Not all or even most of these people wish to buy a Premier League team of course. But quite a few of them do. This is the demand side of the equation.

Voila. A forever finite and prestigious asset in an environment where more and more incredibly wealthy people every year have the funds to acquire one.
More or more people seeking to own a small and permanently limited number of assets.
What happens? What you might think happens. The price rises.

How does one make a profit ultimately though? One owns the asset for a time, allows the pool of people who desire to own it grow some more and then puts it up for sale. Your profit is in the scarcity of the asset itself and is reflected entirely in it's price.

It's that simple, and why the club will likely go for a valuation far north of what Paul believes it's "worth". The fact is the club is worth whatever you can get for it. Because there's only twenty premier league teams. And there will only ever be twenty of them.

It's very much the same for bitcoin. A scarcity limited asset with little utilitarian value and produces no revenue or income. Or indeed has any intrinsic value whatsoever.
Bitcoin achieved parity with the US dollar in 2011. That is, you could buy one a bitcoin for a buck. Yesterday one would have set you back a cool $21,100.
Why? The same reason. Supply and demand.


Paul [The Esk]
24 Posted 26/06/2022 at 17:07:33
Thanks for all the comments. I will work through the responses and publish later.
Paul Smith
25 Posted 26/06/2022 at 17:45:48
Michael 17.

Paul has Dave as a guest on his latest pod. Fascinating stuff. He's well informed on both Mersey clubs and speaks at length about his knowledge of the takeover and his recent trip to the States where Everton where mentioned in terms of investment, well before the recent takeover talk.

Kevin Molloy
26 Posted 26/06/2022 at 18:44:50
I'd add a final bullet point:

● Made its owner £50M without him needing to put in a penny.

Michael Kenrick
27 Posted 26/06/2022 at 19:22:46
Thanks, Paul @25. I'll listen out for that.

Kevin @26, Full disclosure: the prices Kenwright received for his shares are based on reasonable estimates. Other than the original tranche Moshiri purchased in 2016, I don't believe the prices paid have been disclosed publically.

Additional disclosure: We can't be sure that Kenwright never put one penny into the club. It's a great line... but also may be a great lie.

Heck, he told someone he mortgaged his house to save the club – or was it to buy new lawnmowers for Finch Farm... So I would tread carefully with that one.

Dave Lynch
28 Posted 26/06/2022 at 19:50:34
There lies the problem, Michael.

Nobody outside a select few insiders knows the truth. Everything about this club since Bill took over has been smoke and mirrors, The Esk is trying to make some sense of the finances but nobody knows.

Jay Harris
29 Posted 26/06/2022 at 20:07:13
Michael, It was revealed at the time that Kenwright's house was only worth £1M at that time and there was no evidence of a remortgage.
Kevin Molloy
30 Posted 26/06/2022 at 21:59:35
Michael, yes noted. Perhaps it would be better to say the club made the last owner tens of millions without any evidence of notable investment. The message being to prospective owners, if you can hang in there and you know what you're doing, you can make a lot of money just by standing still.
Jerome Shields
31 Posted 26/06/2022 at 22:00:56
Michael #17

Thank you for making me aware of that well presented article in the Echo. It certainly give a broad perspective to Everton's worth and potential. It seems that Moshiri by design or not may have pitched his share sale correctly and the perceived weakness that has got him to his current situation, may be strengths, in that they answer questions on Evertons resilence and possible doable solutions.

I am not aware of what Moshiri actually paid for his Everton shareholding, and as for what Kenwright got, I doubt if we ever find out. But I have always held the view that Moshiri got his shares at a discount, because he was prepared to leave Kenwright in situ.

So Moshiri was always quids in, though recent events resulting from threatened sanctions and mismanagement by injecting funds without appropriate income regeneration, brought him to the stage of seeking an alternative finance structure and seeking to redeem 80% of his shares.

In the end, the deal will come down to simple satisfactory accommodation between the buyer and seller, which satisfies the needs and aspirations of both parties.

Stu Darlington
32 Posted 26/06/2022 at 23:37:12
Derek@23
An interesting and unique way of looking at the topic but unfortunately over simplistic and misleading.
Supply and Demand is never a simple binary relationship,
Many factors can affect demand ie price,expectations,Govt regulations etc.etc.,similarly with supply,
Your analysis implies being a member of the Premier League makes all clubs in that league the same ie homogeneous.They are not.would you expect Brentford or Bournemouth to sell for the same price as Man Utd or Chelsea? Of course not.They will sell,but for a vastly different price,because it is not simply being in the Premier League that is the deciding factor.
Also,are you certain the Premier League will always remain at 20? What if the ESL rears its head again
What about the “ sleeping giants” in the lower leagues,some with massive potential in terms of support base,grounds etc?Probably a more attractive investment prospect in the long term than some of the smaller Premier League clubs.
My god,what am I doing this is an Everton football club site,not an applied economics seminar!
I know, I need to get out more.
Derek Moore
33 Posted 26/06/2022 at 00:02:06
I kept my explanation as simple as possible for brevity sake Stu (#32), but it's far from an over simplistic and misleading view I offer.

Of course there are other factors in the price of anything and everything. But rather than explain the effect of real negative interest rates on assets or the possibility of a priced in return for future diversified streaming revenue or the attractiveness of a premier league football team as a defensive asset in a sideways or falling market I chose to keep it brief.

The fact is that Paul article is a simple business analysis, that focuses on profit/loss, capex and cashflow as being pivotal or even meaningful to the "value" of a PL football team whilst entirely ignoring the reality that drives their inexorable surge in prices.
That reality is many more extremely wealthy people wishing to own one and having the means to do so than there are clubs themselves. Supply and demand.

Of course, disagree by all means as is your right. If you continue to do so though I'd be curious to hear your "applied economics seminar" explanation of why a bitcoin costs $21,100 despite having little utilitarian value and zero intrinsic value?


Mike Gaynes
34 Posted 27/06/2022 at 00:26:03
DM #33, I would point out that one Schneiderlin cost £24 million despite having despite having little utilitarian value and zero intrinsic value.

Danny #20, similar phenomenon in the States. A couple of times over the years I've asked kit shop managers which shirts sell and which don't, and they see United, RS, Chelsea, Bayern, Barca and Real Madrid shirts flying out the door while the City and PSG shirts just sit there.

I've noted the same thing in the leagues I referee every week. I'll see 20 United shirts or 10 RS or Chelsea shirts for every City jersey, even though they're the recurrent champions and best team to watch.

I've never seen an Everton shirt, of course. Maybe Yank ownership will change that. Especially if we can snag Pulisic in the Richarlison deal.

Kieran Kinsella
35 Posted 27/06/2022 at 05:08:07
Off topic but do we have any preseason games beyond Arsenal and Adrian Heath and co? It’s almost July and we are barely a month away from the new season and I haven’t seen anything else announced.
No game against some team tenuously linked to our sponsor? Or a pub team in Austria?
Tony Abrahams
36 Posted 27/06/2022 at 08:30:42
Back on topic, but even the echo has a report claiming Moshiri might cut his losses and walk away with a £280 Million profit. His overall outlay supposedly stands at around £400 million, so he would be losing around double what Bill Kenwright has made out of Everton football club?

If Moshiri is cutting his losses now, then he’s obviously missing his banker, but hopefully things move forward, and he picks the right owners for Everton. Maybe the price of the club will be more, considering there is supposed to be a few more looking at Everton, so good look Farhad, just please sell to people, who are prepared to work very hard to make us successful.

Danny O’Neill
37 Posted 27/06/2022 at 09:02:01
I too wish him well Tony. I've heard that he's pretty disillusioned and scarred after last season.

We can point the finger at him because like a Prime Minister, President or General, the buck stops with him.

But I just think he's been let down by those he trusted to deliver.

Again, we can say that he could have put different people in place and should have.

He may have failed short term but his long term legacy will be the stadium. That's why I keep hearing talk of him retaining a percentage. And as far as I'm concerned, he deserves a return from this because he showed financial commitment but was failed by others.

But like you say, hopefully he will find the right buyers he want to push this club of ours beyond the banks of the Mersey, onto Europe and beyond.

Christine Foster
38 Posted 27/06/2022 at 09:31:35
Danny, yes, I thought his heart had gone when he hasn't shown at Goodison for so long,

It would be interesting though to understand what or who he is disillusioned with. The obvious one is Kenwright, or the agents… it would confirm what many of us believe under his watch. Trust gone west with his money..

Martin Mason
39 Posted 27/06/2022 at 09:32:48
We have been a train wreck since our last League trophy. 35 years or so of often comical mismanagement and closer to going under than we perhaps know. I hope this sale brings in the professionalism and business acumen that we have desperately needed.
Brendan McLaughlin
40 Posted 27/06/2022 at 09:44:41
Christine #38

Who should Moshiri be most disillisioned with? I think – given his choice of managers and DOFs – he simply needs to look in the mirror for the answer.

Barry Rathbone
41 Posted 27/06/2022 at 09:45:47
If reports Moshiri is willing to take a hit of over £100M just to be shut, then he'll sell to the first person who offers the loot.

Amazing how the game still attracts business people who think a tweak here and there and a few hundred million on players will transform matters.

Worryingly, a similar crew led by Peter Kenyon is waiting in the wings.

Stu Darlington
42 Posted 27/06/2022 at 09:52:18
Derek @33

Okay, I'll give it a go, at the risk of boring everybody to death.

For a start, you are trying to compare apples and pears. Football clubs are tangible assets and Paul's simple business analysis, as you put it, is the way business people value these assets.

Bitcoin is a crypto currency which cannot be used for anything much except speculative, risky trading; trading them at the moment is the only thing you can do with them, they cannot be used for anything else

You quote Bitcoin selling at around $21.000 in mid-June 2022, but you don't tell us that it was selling for around $47,300 at the end of 2021 and continued to fall through the first half of 2022 – a fall of around 66%.

Supply and demand? Not so – it was speculators turning to other assets that traditionally perform better in a slowing economy, higher interest rates, and higher inflation.

So to sum up, Bitcoin is a purely speculative phenomenon based on expectations, football clubs are tangible assets which can be valued in the way Paul describes in his article. Of course supply, demand and price are inter-related, a change in any one can affect the others, but there are many factors that can come into play.

As I said earlier, it is not a simple binary relationship where there is a fixed supply of a product, ie, football clubs, and an increasing number of rich potential buyers.

Anyway that's me done, I'm not playing anymore, I'd sooner talk about football!

Danny O’Neill
43 Posted 27/06/2022 at 10:27:21
I like that Stu. Not boring at all! I don't confess to understand Bitcoin in detail but you explain it well.

Martin @39; a point I've made on countless occasions. But we've been regressing since the 1970s, let alone since we had that wonderful period under Howard Kendall. Once that was prematurely over, we reverted to type.

Brendan @40. I understand your point. He should look in the mirror. But I do feel some empathy with him for trusting people who probably told him they had his back. I guess that comes down to judgement and ultimately he owns the keys to the locker. But he was let down by people who I guess told him them would look after his investment. They failed. Give idiots too much money and they will throw it around and waste it.

So, he's at a stick or twist and look in the mirror moment.

Stick and change the board. Put your own people in place.

Or twist and sell to someone who will do likewise.

Either way, rid this club of the systematic failures that have plagued it and been a ball and chain around it's neck for decades. And if we go back to the 70s, there are now 4 decades with a 5th one approaching.

Half a century of regression interspersed with 3 years of hope and glory that reminded us of who we are.

Never forget who we are. Never let those who will try to tell us that we shouldn't have expectation. Everton expects.

Tony Shelby
44 Posted 27/06/2022 at 10:44:33
Brendan (40) - Bang-on.

Moshiri is a billionaire businessman.

He cut his teeth at the likes of Ernst & Young and Deloitte & Touche before eventually becoming Chairman of USM Holdings.

And it's not as if he's new to the world of Premier League football clubs. In 2007, he and Usmanov bought a significant stake in Arsenal which they increased over the next 5 years to almost 30%. During the 9 or so years that they were jointly shareholders in Arsenal, Usmanov was extremely vocal about the club and, in his opinion, how it was not being run properly or showing enough ambition. I'm sure we all remember the Usmanov v Kroenke headlines that frequented the sports pages on a regular basis.

Given their relationship, I can only assume that Moshiri shared the same opinion. His subsequent actions, in selling his Arsenal shares and buying into Everton, bankrolled by Usmanov, suggest exactly that.

In short, Moshiri is an exceptionally experienced businessman with years in the PL. How anyone can blame someone other than him for the failures of his tenure are beyond me!

Tony Shelby
45 Posted 27/06/2022 at 10:44:33
Brendan (40) - Bang-on.

Moshiri is a billionaire businessman.

He cut his teeth at the likes of Ernst & Young and Deloitte & Touche before eventually becoming Chairman of USM Holdings.

And it's not as if he's new to the world of Premier League football clubs. In 2007, he and Usmanov bought a significant stake in Arsenal which they increased over the next 5 years to almost 30%. During the 9 or so years that they were jointly shareholders in Arsenal, Usmanov was extremely vocal about the club and, in his opinion, how it was not being run properly or showing enough ambition. I'm sure we all remember the Usmanov v Kroenke headlines that frequented the sports paGiven their relationship, I can only assume that Moshiri shared the same opinion. His subsequent actions, in selling his Arsenal shares and buying into Everton, bankrolled by Usmanov, suggest exactly that.

Tony Shelby
46 Posted 27/06/2022 at 10:44:33
Brendan (40) - Bang-on.

Moshiri is a billionaire businessman.

He cut his teeth at the likes of Ernst & Young and Deloitte & Touche before eventually becoming Chairman of USM Holdings.

And it's not as if he's new to the world of Premier League football clubs. In 2007, he and Usmanov bought a significant stake in Arsenal which they increased over the next 5 years to almost 30%. During the 9 or so years that they were jointly shareholders in Arsenal, Usmanov was extremely vocal about the club and, in his opinion, how it was not being run properly or showing enough ambition. I'm sure we all remember the Usmanov v Kroenke headlines that frequented the sports paGiven their relationship, I can only assume that Moshiri shared the same opinion. His subsequent actions, in selling his Arsenal shares and buying into Everton, bankrolled by Usmanov, suggest exactly that.

Derek Moore
47 Posted 27/06/2022 at 10:47:30
You were almost there Stu, but didn't quite square the circle.

A PL Football Club is as much as a speculative asset as a Bitcoin - which is why I made the analogy in the first place.

There are business aspects to running a football club but ultimately it really is just a scarcity limited asset whose price rises based upon supply and demand.

The proof is quite simply in the pudding. Despite out of control costs, mountains of red ink and limited means in which to increase short term revenue the price of football clubs rises inexorably higher.

It's really no more or less complicated than that.

Phil (Kelsall) Roberts
49 Posted 27/06/2022 at 11:00:40
Tony,

I think you need to go to a re-education camp as you are not on message.

The official ToffeeWeb party line is our current predicament is solely down to one man, Bill Kenwright.

You may be arrested, taken away and locked in Rupert's Tower until you change your wrong thinking.

Tony Shelby
50 Posted 27/06/2022 at 11:06:21
Phil (49) - So I've noticed.

I've taken the precaution of using a foreign VPN so that the thought police can't track me down and kick my door in.

Clive Rogers
51 Posted 27/06/2022 at 11:55:13
Tony, Tony and Tony, Moshiri is not a businessman in the traditional sense, as he has never built a business up from scratch or turned around a failing business. He’s an accountant who was drafter in to an already big business by his associate and friends Usmanov. It was a proper businessman we needed as Moshiri has now discovered to his cost. He is desperate to sell.
Tony Shelby
52 Posted 27/06/2022 at 12:12:21
Clive (51) - I think you've misunderstood my post(s), probably because only one of them was complete.

I'm not suggesting that Moshiri was the right man for Everton. I'm saying that the failure of his regime is predominantly his responsibility.

Brendan McLaughlin
53 Posted 27/06/2022 at 12:12:44
Danny #43

Certainly I too feel some empathy towards Moshiri. He came in and put his money where his mouth was but I don't believe our decline under his tenure was significantly impacted by the decisions he let others make on his behalf.

Rather it was the decisions that were primarily his alone that amost cost us our premier league status.

Tony #44, 45, 46 & 48

No apology necessary...there can never be enough posts beginning "Bang on Brendan" unless of course it's a dodgy website!

Danny O’Neill
54 Posted 27/06/2022 at 12:33:13
I'll give you that Brendan. He done himself no favours interfering. But I guess he started working and felt the need.

Your closing paragraph. I've just nearly choked on my sausage roll!!

Clive Rogers
55 Posted 27/06/2022 at 12:38:31
Moshiri has failed on both the football side and also the business side.
Jerome Shields
56 Posted 27/06/2022 at 13:03:48
Moshiri has played to his strengths and may came out with a profit on his investment in Everton. He did think or was bluffed that Management of Everton only needed a cash inject, but found that he had to get involved to attempt to steady the ship.

The Management of Everton where only interested in their own self interest and proceeded the same as they had before maintaining the status even after Moshiri got involved. The combination of the power play between Moshiri &Co and Kenwright &Co has resulted in Everton season after season not been Managed properly resulting in losses and subject to guidance set out of the Premier League Profit and Sustainability Committee. Everton also came close to relegation and total disaster.

This all is the end product of over twenty years of year on year poor Club Management, which is recognisable as the Culture of Everton. Which the dogs in the street know is the result of deep problems within the Club, more so than Moshiri involvement. From most Fans perspective Moshiri is only part of the problem. He has tried to progress the Club, but there have been internal drags on progress.

Moshiri as a investor will come out of Everton with a profit, if the Management of the Club had have been up to it , Everton on the pitch would have been also successful.

Moshiri is about to hand the banton on to new investors and it will be up to them to deal with these Management issues that still exist. . The jury will be out for sometime yet even after new parties takeover Everton , whether they are capable of doing so.

Brendan McLaughlin
57 Posted 27/06/2022 at 13:25:06
Jerome #56

It's a pity the "dogs on the steet" don't fill Goodison every week then as surely Blue Bill would get a much rougher ride on match days than apparently he currently receives.

Brian Murray
58 Posted 27/06/2022 at 13:32:51
Bang on brendan. you have penetrated the area well. 😂
Aidan Wade
59 Posted 27/06/2022 at 15:26:15
So intrinsically worth nothing net and expensive to maintain but also popular and could accrue value for an investor by simply existing. Our club is a bitcoin.

EDIT: I see this comparison was made earlier in the comments - oh well.

Jerome Shields
60 Posted 27/06/2022 at 15:31:23

Brendan McLaughlin
62 Posted 27/06/2022 at 16:17:44
Jerome #60

Is that another "No comment" or did you press "Enter" by mistake?😊😊😊

Jerome Shields
63 Posted 27/06/2022 at 18:37:10
I did post a comment.

So you are saying that Attending fans:

Are happy with over 27 years of no trophies,

Just avoiding relegation.

The Major Shareholder selling 80 percentage of his share.

Being run, under a agreement with the Premier Profit and Sustainability Committee.

Little or no transfer budget.

I squad of questionable quality.

Years of losses.

Competitors advancing.

The Chairman throughout this period.

I think you need to attend a few matches. Actually better not to mention any of the above to whoever you sitting beside.

Brendan McLaughlin
64 Posted 27/06/2022 at 19:12:32
No Jerome #63

I said nothing of the sort so why waste your time arguing claims I didn't make?

I don't think they are at all happy and so wonder why is it that Blue Bill doesn't face a much more hostile reception at Goodison. As you allude I've only ever attended Goodison sporadically but I've never seen anyone on ToffeeWeb who claims they do attend regularly argue that fans are openly anti-Kenwright.

Only the opposite in fact when some posters who appear to be both regular attenders and anti-Kenwight express their bewilderment that the Goodison crowd are quite benign in their attitude to Blue Bill.

Interesting sneer: "I think you need to attend a few matches."

Does that apply to all ToffeeWeb contributors who because of where they live don't get to attend Goodison regularly?

B.O.B.

Dave Abrahams
65 Posted 27/06/2022 at 19:40:29
Brendan (64) I don’t think the crowd are quite benign in their attitude to Kenwright I don’t think they know enough about his time as owner and chairman of Everton or they do but choose to ignore it and are more interested in how we do on the pitch.

I was with an Everton fan last year who said he thought Kenwright had done well for Everton, I explained to him that when Kenwright took over Everton we owned Goodison Park and Bellefield, we were £20 M in the black, when Mr. Moshiri bought him out we were financially very heavy in debt, Goodison Park was mortgaged up to the hilt, Bellefield had been sold,Finch Farm had been bought then sold and now leased back from Liverpool Council at a huge cost for the next twenty five years, that Kenwight had made a conservative £40M out of the buy out with a lot of doubt about he had funded the club when he bought it.

He knew none of this and maybe not about Kings Dock and Kirby which are all part of Kenwright’s history along with quite a bit more, but I think you are educated enough to know this but maybe doubt most of it and I think this goes goes for a lot of Everton fans.

Brendan McLaughlin
67 Posted 27/06/2022 at 21:45:03
Dave #65,

I certainly agree that there are differing views on Kenwright and that's why I challenged Jerome's (# 60) bogus claim that the "dogs on the street know" the true reason for our decline.

Indeed you yourself met one supporter who obviously didn't know.

I'm genuinely curious how you would characterise the Goodison crowd's reaction to Kenwright on matchdays. I've described it as benign, what word would you use?

Jerome Shields
68 Posted 28/06/2022 at 07:21:10
Brendan #64

Yes, Brendan you are ignoring a lot of facts and trying to hide behind individuals attending Goodison watching a match. Most of them can't see Bill, lucky enough, most have better things to think about. They are there to watch a match. I don't even think of Bill when I attend.

A lot I come across know very little about Everton's background, just as Dave gives you an example of. I don't fire off an answer, they are Evertonians on a day out. I am glad to be there. They are all disappointed with progress.

I remember talking to an older real dedicated fan in Johnson's time, he couldn't understand what was going on. I told him it was to do with money. Now, 30 years later, it still is.

Rick Tarleton
69 Posted 28/06/2022 at 07:29:36
Paul, thank you for explaining this financial morass to a financial ingenu. Above all, thank you for bothering. Everton are very lucky to have people like you on their case.

It's amazing that so many Evertonians are not aware of just how disastrous the Kenwright years have been. He is still seen as a True Blue who is doing his best for his beloved club by so many. His acting skills remain.

A little point, but it reinforces Mike Gaynes's point (34), on a recent trip to Durban, I was at the Kingsmead Stadium and, during an interval in play, I wandered round the stadium I counted football shirts being worn. Liverpool won comfortably, then Man Utd, then Chelsea. Man City only had two and Everton had one.

I challenged this man and he was the son of a scouser who'd emigrated to South Africa and had remained an Evertonian. Despite City's success, they lack the global appeal of the two main rivals.

As an inhabitant of the English shires these days, I think more or less the same pattern is true here. In my walking football group, 30 or so ageing from 49 to me at 75, there are four Liverpool fans, two Man Utd fans, three Leicester fans (our nearest team) and only one Man City fan and he's what you call a heritage supporter from Manchester originally.

Danny O’Neill
70 Posted 28/06/2022 at 08:14:19
I think when it comes down to it, when we go into match mode, we focus on supporting the team. Nothing else matters for that brief period of time.

Before the Palace match, in the Winslow, I met with Brian Murray and there was a dad and young lad up from Gloucester (I think). I used my oft coined phrase "Bring the points home" and gave the young lad a fist bump as they headed to the stadium. He did, bless him, and that's all I was interested in at that moment in time. That boy must have had the time of his life and there is no going back from Everton for him now. "Blessed and cursed" as Christine would say, but who would have it any different?

We were not passive last season. I saw times when we made our thoughts quite clear, but it was mostly generated at the former manager. I don't know if it's a deliberate ploy or an English culture thing, but we mostly target our frustration at the manager. They are often the fall guy. The buffer zone that protects the fat cats in the board room who hang them out to dry.

But back to my point, and especially towards the end of last season. There was just sheer devotion and commitment to haul that team of ours over the line. That was all that mattered to us.

I have commented on these pages on the subject of board and Chairman but, at the match, I don't recall thinking for one minute who was in the Director's Box. It didn't matter. Everton scraping points to survive was all that mattered.

But we can't and shouldn't let it go. It's just that, in my opinion, match day is not the place to do it. That's when the team need us, as we have proven more than most that we can drag them along with us. More than anyone.

Brian Murray
71 Posted 28/06/2022 at 08:25:10
Unfortunately, a match-going fan, wherever he's from, is only interested in what's happens on the pitch and rightly so as it's his or her pilgrimage and we are all blinkered in that way.

When, season after season, eventually the penny drops and their day is dictated by who and why the club can't do what everyone else does and buy players – not as we see now, having to sell our crown jewel before we can scramble about.

Pathetic and embarrassing.

Andy Meighan
72 Posted 28/06/2022 at 09:23:04
Danny #37.

Maybe he has been let down by those he trusted; we'll never know. What I do know is he has let himself down with his abject choice of managers. The culmination being the fat clown who used to manage our loveable neighbours. And by all accounts, he was adamant on him, after allegedly being warned off.

Koeman was another huge mistake, he has set us back 3 years with his appalling signings, of which we are still paying the price today. I've got no sympathy for the man whatsoever.

The only thing I will say in his favour is the new stadium at Bramley-Moore Dock, end of.

Maybe a change of ownership might bring about a change of luck. Because we are certainly overdue some. The sooner him, Billy the Jinx, and Denise double-barrelled are out of office, won't be a day too soon in my eyes.

Dave Abrahams
73 Posted 28/06/2022 at 09:38:45
Brendan (67), the supporter I told Kenwright’s history to is only one of many I have related that history to, it’s very surprising how many even after being told just shrug and won’t alter their views on him but some are very urprised and admit they hadn’t heard that side of him.

However to answer your question about the crowds reaction to Kenwright on match days, benign or not interested could fit in quite well, speaking for myself I am only interested in how we play and concentrate on that, if his picture comes up on the large screen at the game there is some reaction, depending on how the team is doing, if the match is in play I certainly wouldn’t be looking at the screen but at the pitch.

Regarding Kenwright he only really gets my back up when he is mentioned on here or if people bring him up in conversations and of the many Everton fans I know and drink with most of them dislike him intensely and agree he might like Everton FC but he really loves himself.

Danny O’Neill
74 Posted 28/06/2022 at 09:40:14
I'd agree with a lot of what you say Andy. The owner is not without fault. He wanted to own from afar, which I can take. It can work but either put the right people in charge of your investment or be direct hands on. As long as you know what you're doing. He should have put a stronger leadership team in place.

But he left the wrong people in charge of Everton and his money. I can only assume he understandably got a bit twitchy as his money was literally being burned or thrown away and appointed managers who were more interested in playing golf than managing Everton. So he interfered and made poor decisions. Yes, the buck stops with him ultimately but he was let down.

His main failing, in my opinion, and based on what I read, was to focus on trying to fix the manager position. Not his job. He should have been looking at, questioning and changing the board. Not the manager.

Jerome Shields
75 Posted 28/06/2022 at 10:30:10
Danny#74

That is what should be done, but in my experience is does not happen.It's the Management team that is concentrated on. I put it down to the old asymmetric graph of the Binomial distribution.You may know it from your school days as height of a population against number. The hump with 5% tallest and 5% shortest.

So the perfect Management team is a asymmetrical shape( one side mirrors the other).With the right balance of ability and talent, with 5% useless and 5% great ability.

At Everton the graph is very much lopsided to the right and is kept so by Kenwright and his appointments, or rather the control that gives him to obtain his objectives.Moshiri did try to bring in skills to push the graph to the left, but met resistance from Kenwright &Co, or rather had them swallowed up. He even got involved himself, but was always going to be up against it.

Of course the result of this lopsided graph to the right is underperformance both on and off the pitch. It is only when more Managenent ability with control is added to the team that the asymmetrical shape, of a good Management team can be achieved.

This is what we as fans should be looking for in this takeover. Paul the Esk has highlighted the technical detail, which is often lost in human negotiations, especially imo at Everton.

Raymond Fox
76 Posted 28/06/2022 at 13:58:21
What the club is worth I couldnt even think of coming up with a figure, its much too complicated for my simple mind.

As far as us progressing into a regular top 6 side which presumably is the goal of any owner of our club, lets just say I'll believe it when I see it.
The Premiership is most definitely not a level playing field for the reasons mentioned by Jerome for one.

Would I invest my money in the club from the position we are now in, no I would not.
I will continue to watch and support the club like I have for 50+ years and suffered like the rest of you in recent years.
Can we do better, sure we can, but can we compete with Man City, Man Utd to name only two, I have serious doubts.

Brendan McLaughlin
77 Posted 28/06/2022 at 15:03:12
Jerome #75

I rather think you've got that wrong.

Distribution graphs demonstrate amongst other things the extent to which any given population are gathered around or dispersed from the norm or centre.

Surely, to use your example, we want our distribution skewed so that we have a much greater percentage than 5% at the talented end?

Was going to let this go but was a tad concerned in case Danny is sitting his GCSE Maths paper any time soon!

BTW
So the perfect management team is an asymmetrical shape (one side mirrors the other).. Are you sure?

Jerome Shields
78 Posted 28/06/2022 at 17:59:55
Yes, I am sure.
Brendan McLaughlin
79 Posted 28/06/2022 at 18:13:24
Jerome #78

Are you sure, you're sure?

"asymmetrical
(eɪsɪmetrɪkəl IPA Pronunciation Guide)
ADJECTIVE
Something that is asymmetrical has two sides or halves that are different in shape, size, or style.
Synonyms: uneven, odd, unbalanced, lopsided
"

Dale Self
80 Posted 28/06/2022 at 18:45:52
As a stat snob, I applaud your effort there, Brendan.
Brendan McLaughlin
81 Posted 28/06/2022 at 19:02:36
Thanks, Dale #80

Between you and me... it's not fuckin easy!

Jerome Shields
82 Posted 29/06/2022 at 00:33:09
Brendan #61

Do you realise you have not made one comment on this thread regarding the actual article? You would find it easier if you did. It is something you do on most threads.


Brendan McLaughlin
83 Posted 29/06/2022 at 09:12:38
True Jerome#82

I'm generally only moved to comment when someone posts shite. Would you say that was pretty typical or atypical? 😊😊😊


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


, placement: 'Below Article Thumbnails', target_type: 'mix' });