Stake. Com

[allen]

The chief objection I have is that our club's hierarchy have for years portrayed themselves as ethically pure and have now taken the utter piss in doing a u-turn on gambling.

This is my view, too.

Even that would be easier to swallow if it'd been a significant improvement on our Cazoo deal. But it isn't.

 

[GrandOldTeam]

This is my view, too.

Even that would be easier to swallow if it'd been a significant improvement on our Cazoo deal. But it isn't.

Easier said than done though isn't it?

For all we know, Cazoo could have been the agitators.

USM perhaps provided a commercial safety blanket that allowed them to take less or talk up the the PR nonsense.

Now that's gone, and with the scrutiny on Everton's finances - they've got the be pragmatic.

“In an ideal world moving forward we would look to have a different type of sponsor on the front of our shirts like all football clubs would"

It's not an ideal world for Everton at the moment, far from it.

 

[DualityNSNO]

Easier said than done though isn't it?

For all we know, Cazoo could have been the agitators.

USM perhaps provided a commercial safety blanket that allowed them to take less or talk up the the PR nonsense.

Now that's gone, and with the scrutiny on Everton's finances - they've got the be pragmatic.

“In an ideal world moving forward we would look to have a different type of sponsor on the front of our shirts like all football clubs would"

It's not an ideal world for Everton at the moment, far from it.

Yeah, we need the money, however they come, and this is an easy short-term solution.

I'd love if TeamViewer or an airline piped up and got in for 20m/year but that's hardly happening anyway.

 

[allen]

Easier said than done though isn't it?

For all we know, Cazoo could have been the agitators.

USM perhaps provided a commercial safety blanket that allowed them to take less or talk up the the PR nonsense.

Now that's gone, and with the scrutiny on Everton's finances - they've got the be pragmatic.

“In an ideal world moving forward we would look to have a different type of sponsor on the front of our shirts like all football clubs would"

It's not an ideal world for Everton at the moment, far from it.

Oh I'm not saying it would be easy to find an alternative. But this deal certainly ticks all the boxes of Everton's path-of-least-resistance commercial operation.

A gambling firm was always going to be an easy source of sponsorship cash. That we got just enough to label it a "record deal" as some sort of justification also seems very convenient.

I'm not saying this wasn't the best deal available. But if you asked me what I thought would be the easiest deal to strike, I'd say it'd be this one.

 

[GrandOldTeam]

Yeah, we need the money, however they come, and this is an easy short-term solution.

I'd love if TeamViewer or an airline piped up and got in for 20m/year but that's hardly happening anyway.

I reckon gambling/bad ethics could be pointed at 15/16 of the 20 teams in the Prem.

The team most under scrutiny for finances at the moment also seems to be the team most under ethical scrutiny.

That Telegraph article by a journo who once moaned about Everton having Lukaku on loan - saying the loan market was unfair because it was a way for Chelsea to equip Everton to weaken Chelsea's challenges. Search his mentions/references to Everton and all you'll find is digs - I remember when Moyes signed a West Ham contract he put in the title that it was an Everton snub

 

[GrandOldTeam]

Oh I'm not saying it would be easy to find an alternative. But this deal certainly ticks all the boxes of Everton's path-of-least-resistance commercial operation.

A gambling firm was always going to be an easy source of sponsorship cash. That we got just enough to label it a "record deal" as some sort of justification also seems very convenient.

I'm not saying this wasn't the best deal available. But if you asked me what I thought would be the easiest deal to strike, I'd say it'd be this one.

The Times etc claim Everton ended their sponsorship with Cazoo, which if true you'd say that would have been the easiest deal?

Though I do wonder if we had a USM related sponsorship lined up when we ended Cazoo, only for a massive spanner to be thrown in and it's left us scrambling.

 

[kev]

Yeah, we need the money, however they come, and this is an easy short-term solution.

I'd love if TeamViewer or an airline piped up and got in for 20m/year but that's hardly happening anyway.

An airline?
Imagine the fume from the environmentalists.

 

[chrismpw]

Oh I'm not saying it would be easy to find an alternative. But this deal certainly ticks all the boxes of Everton's path-of-least-resistance commercial operation.

A gambling firm was always going to be an easy source of sponsorship cash. That we got just enough to label it a "record deal" as some sort of justification also seems very convenient.

I'm not saying this wasn't the best deal available. But if you asked me what I thought would be the easiest deal to strike, I'd say it'd be this one.

Says how much excess money these gambling companies collect off the desperate, if they have it to throw at football clubs just to be noticed, doesn't it. Also gives a massive clue who the perpetual winners are and who the losers are.

 

[allen]

The Times etc claim Everton ended their sponsorship with Cazoo, which if true you'd say that would have been the easiest deal?

Cazoo and Everton reached the end of the initial 2 year deal, and couldn't agree on the terms of an extension:

[Paid Content - Blacklisted]/news/e...-cazoo-to-end-after-this-season/LMYl8MSp2dGR/

"We were unable to agree suitable terms to extend our sponsorship of Everton beyond the original two years."

Reading between the lines, I imagine that means Cazoo wanted to low-ball us. That would fit with both our poor performance last season and Cazoo's well-publicised commercial problems.

Edit: ah, quote comes from an Athletic article, statement from Cazoo.

 

[GrandOldTeam]

Cazoo and Everton reached the end of the initial 2 year deal, and couldn't agree on the terms of an extension:

http://[Paid Content - Blacklisted]...-cazoo-to-end-after-this-season/LMYl8MSp2dGR/

Reading between the lines, I imagine that means Cazoo wanted to low-ball us. That would fit with both our poor performance last season and Cazoo's well-publicised commercial problems.

Edit: ah, quote comes from an Athletic article, statement from Cazoo.

Yeah, same article though says the club activated a break clause;

Cazoo took over sponsorship of Everton's shirts in the summer of 2020, with the initial deal running until this summer. The Athletic understands termination of the deal is not connected to the current Russian invasion of Ukraine, which has impacted a number of Everton's other commercial ties – with the club having activated a break clause written into the deal.

We'll never know and can only second guess, but I think Everton could have done what Villa did and extended if they wanted. That to me would feel like the easiest deal but maybe out of opportunity or necessity, they've thought go for more cash.

 

[allen]

Yeah, same article though says the club activated a break clause;



We'll never know and can only second guess, but I think Everton could have done what Villa did and extended if they wanted. That to me would feel like the easiest deal but maybe out of opportunity or necessity, they've thought go for more cash.

Yes, I think all the signs point to the renewed deal on offer from Cazoo being significantly less.

I mean, if that wasn't the case, it would make Everton's voluntary decision to get marginally more from a hugely controversial sponsor baffling.

I can't spin this whole thing any way that makes our commercial operation look good.

 

[kev]

This is my view, too.

Even that would be easier to swallow if it'd been a significant improvement on our Cazoo deal. But it isn't.

I have seen 'rumours' on here and Twitter etc saying Cazoo was £9.6m and this deal is £10m.
Is this confirmed? because the ONLY official announcements that I have seen give no actual figures, but just confirm that this deal is worth more than Cazoo i.e. "It's a record deal"
Are people just assuming that the deal is only worth an extra £400,000? or do they have access to the facts?

 

[GoldenToffee]

Yeah, same article though says the club activated a break clause;



We'll never know and can only second guess, but I think Everton could have done what Villa did and extended if they wanted. That to me would feel like the easiest deal but maybe out of opportunity or necessity, they've thought go for more cash.

Apparently Cazoo were adamant that we couldn't break the contract but Blue Bill hit back at them saying "Cazoo yes we can!".

 

[allen]

I have seen 'rumours' on here and Twitter etc saying Cazoo was £9.6m and this deal is £10m.
Is this confirmed? because the ONLY official announcements that I have seen give no actual figures, but just confirm that this deal is worth more than Cazoo i.e. "It's a record deal"
Are people just assuming that the deal is only worth an extra £400,000? or do they have access to the facts?

I'm sure some sources have heard the correct figures, these things tend to be reported with a reasonable degree of accuracy.

But I'm not even sure you need to believe those precise figures, necessarily. You'd think Everton would want to sell this deal to the fanbase, so if it was significantly more than Cazoo, you imagine they'd tell us by how much. Instead you just get "club record," suggesting to me it's only marginally so.

 

[Upper Bullens Blue]

I'll be interested to see if this sponsorship deal stops people buying replica shirts. I won't be buying one on aesthetic grounds - that logo is dreadful - rather than on moral grounds (I'm really not all that outraged by gambling).

But, if it's true that 75% of fans are against the deal, then I'd expect to see very few fans wearing Everton shirts with the Stake.com logo at Goodison next season.