Moyes linked with Villa and Spurs

[davek]

Two/three years ago, we were the fifth best team in England, not really good enough to catch the top 4 that often (though we came close twice and were damned unlucky the year we did finish fourth) but better than the rest of the league. Now City and Spurs have joined the elite and we're probably the seventh best team in England, not really good enough to catch the top 6 but better than the rest of the league.

It's all very well comparing us with Villa, Newcastle, Sunderland, Bolton, Stoke, Fulham et all. Those are teams we're currently doing better than despite spending less money. And good for us, you know. But I don't want to be the best of the rest, I don''t want to be 7th, I want to do what Spurs and City have done and catch the elite. It's the gap between us and the big boys that's worrying me, not the gap between us and the Sunderlands of the world.

I think if you're looking over your shoulder you're doing something wrong.

Spot on. The club are in a state of managed decline, where debt repayment is the only thing on the minds of the board of directors and where the football side of things is being left to mend and make do. But there's some who think the club are well run because it's not in administration. You just couldn't make it up. I feel like weeping sometimes with the idiocy of these people. They'll go on about other clubs difficulties but have zero of interest to say about the club they support because the reality of facing Everton's future is too grotesque for them.

Complete cowardice is, I believe, the bottom line on this.

 

[Matt Damon]

Come on lids. Why are we still banging on about our own situation, endlessly chasing our tails, when the focal point of this debate was Moyes going to Villa. Guess what? He ain't going.

Discuss..

Bravo sir! Bravo!

*applauds furiously*


To be fair, I like sirblue57, Kenada_blue (to an extent), Davek (rationed), Chang Elephant

Manxtoffee, NEILER (he's boss), and Blacktoffee who all add to the debate on here.


Its good that Evertonians do ask questions and do debate whats happening at other clubs.

Its a pleasure to discuss finance with these lids. It really is!

 

[manxtoffee]

Spot on. The club are in a state of managed decline, where debt repayment is the only thing on the minds of the board of directors and where the football side of things is being left to mend and make do. But there's some who think the club are well run because it's not in administration. You just couldn't make it up. I feel like weeping sometimes with the idiocy of these people. They'll go on about other clubs difficulties but have zero of interest to say about the club they support because the reality of facing Everton's future is too grotesque for them.


Complete cowardice is, I believe, the bottom line on this.

Not once I've defended our board, in fact I've been critical to the point they've been and still are reactive rather than proactive, hence our status quo, but at the same time, they have now(it seems to me)to have taken the necessary steps to make sure we at least contain our debts whilst we try miserably, I may add, to find ways to increase revenues, which in truth they to the extent achieved.

 

[sirblue57]

Not once I've defended our board, in fact I've been critical to the point they've been and still are reactive rather than proactive, hence our status quo, but at the same time, they have now(it seems to me)to have taken the necessary steps to make sure we at least contain our debts whilst we try miserably, I may add, to find ways to increase revenues, which in truth they to the extent achieved.

its took them eleven long and wasted years to get that far. i truly dread to think how long before we can compete with the sunderlands of this world.<weeps profusely>

 

[Matt Damon]

Not once I've defended our board, in fact I've been critical to the point they've been and still are reactive rather than proactive, hence our status quo, but at the same time, they have now(it seems to me)to have taken the necessary steps to make sure we at least contain our debts whilst we try miserably, I may add, to find ways to increase revenues, which in truth they to the extent achieved.

Well as Neiler says, whether they achieved it is debatable since about 75% of all revenue increases have been Sky TV money related.

Diversification of revenue streams should be the priority which is infrastructure dependent since if the increase was more like 50% TV money and 50% stadium/commerical related we could be alot happier.

But still.

The massive debts haven't been wracked up unlike other clubs who are double or even quadruple ours. Meaning IT SHOULD be easier to improve and increase revenues.

Since the debt would be like a drag slowing the changes.

 

[Matt Damon]

its took them eleven long and wasted years to get that far. i truly dread to think how long before we can compete with the sunderlands of this world.<weeps profusely>

HUH?

Have you read Sunderland's accounts for last year? They've sold £44million worth of players in the last 12 months.

There's a reason for that too! They were in Villa's position last year. Over extended.

 

[milks]

Which is true to a point.

But the problem is....the current board do not have anything in place off the field. If they do, they have limited means and long time scales.

The only thing that could change would be a new owner to take steps the current board cant/havent done but again this takes time...and also neglets the team.

We can all wax lyrical about what the can do, but forgetting how this effects the team and transfers on the pitch.

We also forget that Moyes has been 9 years and has handled his situation perfectly in terms of eyeing talent with limited resources. BUT how long can that last? Moyes will want to prove himself elsewhere at some point, so as these fictional plans for infastructure take place, we will still have the same transfer policy.

Our success with this transfer model is solely down to Moyes. If he is out of the equation, his type is a rare breed and would be a big gamble to replace and bring a level of success we want. And Moyes has proved that this model only gets you so far.

There is the problem that hasn't been addressed. Well have to work to the same contraints we have now on the field while measures may take place off the field for a long long time.

Arsenal have the best business model, but have not won anything in 6 years and rarely spent. Key players are wanting to leave.

Compare them to us and how we want to be and youll see the huge task and problem without any investment in the team, a small investment in our case.

Moyes is indeed instrumental to Everton's stability over the past few seasons. Let's not forget that it's the faith shown in Moyes through the rocky periods by the board than enables us to sit here and still laud him for the work he has achieved. Look at the comparisons in the EPL, I would hazard a guess that finishing 17th would have been the end for the manager at many clubs with fan aspirations as lofty as ours. Last season for example, the dismissals of Hughton, Allardyce and (at the time) Hodgson and Di Matteo were questioned loudly by those in the know. Put Moyes in the same boat at the same clubs, he'd have probably been sacked as well. As it is I can genuinely only see him leaving to replace Ferguson at United, such is his draw to Everton in spite of the restrictions he has worked with.

It's this, that in my eyes gives Kenwright some credit. On the other hand...and a much, much bigger hand it is, he and Elstone (who I feel is far more culpable) have indeed failed to capitalise on the commercial potential of Everton. Seemedly nothing in place either, which is a worry. The replacement of the board/Chairman causes instability, the appointment of the right people either to the board OR in key strategic positions within the business would make a huge leap in sorting out the problems.

Don't get too hung up on Arsenal either. They still need to sell £20m of players as season to meet their legendary 'break even' point for sustainability.

 

[davek]

Not once I've defended our board, in fact I've been critical to the point they've been and still are reactive rather than proactive, hence our status quo, but at the same time, they have now(it seems to me)to have taken the necessary steps to make sure we at least contain our debts whilst we try miserably, I may add, to find ways to increase revenues, which in truth they to the extent achieved.

Despite player sales and zero net spending, the debt grows by the year. That's not really containing things. As for revenues, they've done nothing beyond cut a less than brilliant shirt sponsorship deal and their own shortsightedness has meant that the proposed annexe wont be built now.

We're not dealing with people who are top notch in the industry here; our board of directors and CEO are completely bereft of ideas beyond the 'let's get a council to build us a stadium' one they've been hawking around for the past 11 years. As I say, it's managed decline now for this lot. They know Moyes cant possibly compete with the other 6 above us, and that that situation will intensify as the years go by. They hope to sell up eventually and they're prepared to wait for a big offer for their shares. They're in no hurry. It's the football side of things that'll continue to deteriorate. If the trap door looms large they'll simply get shut of the manager and see if someone can steady the ship and preserve PL status. They know, though, that Moyes is a safe pair of hands in that respect and he's loyal beyond belief and wont rock the boat.

It's a nightmare scenario for anyone wanting Everton to be a success.

 

[sirblue57]

HUH?

Have you read Sunderland's accounts for last year? They've sold £44million worth of players in the last 12 months.

There's a reason for that too!

i swear to god, if you start with sunderlands finances, i will hunt you down and tie you to a tree by your gizzards, while glueing an ipod to your ears playing YNWA and analfield rap on constant loop and my ex dragon, sorry mother in laws face stuck in front of your eyes till the madness stops.

 

[Matt Damon]

i swear to god, if you start with sunderlands finances, i will hunt you down and tie you to a tree by your gizzards, while glueing an ipod to your ears playing YNWA and analfield rap on constant loop and my ex dragon, sorry mother in laws face stuck in front of your eyes till the madness stops.

*flicks through Sunderland's statement of accounts for 2010*

Now you mention it..... Sunderland....

 

[sirblue57]

*flicks through Sunderland's statement of accounts for 2010*

Now you mention it..... Sunderland....

<sharpens knife>

 

[Matt Damon]

<sharpens knife>

http://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/sport/8854805.Sunderland_report___27m_loss_in_latest_accounts/
Sunderland report £27m loss in latest accounts

SUNDERLAND'S latest set of accounts have revealed a pre-tax loss of £27.9m, and a wages-to-turnover ratio of more than 70 per cent.

The annual report and financial statements of Sunderland Limited for the year ending July 31, 2010 show losses rose by £1.4m on the previous 12 months.

Turnover increased from £64.6m to £65.4m, but the club's investment in the playing squad in a bid to retain its Premier League status pushed it further into the red.

Gross transfer fees of £28m, excluding wages, were committed during the reporting period, although neither a club record £13m swoop for striker Asamoah Gyan nor the £24m sale of Darren Bent were included in the figures.

A loan of £19m from owner Ellis Short was capitalised - or transferred into shares - in November 2009, and the Texan has since injected interest free-loans of £22.4m and £6m and promised his continued support.

Wages accounted for £46.63m, a rise of £2.5m on the previous year. Alarmingly, wages now account for 71.2 per cent of Sunderland's total turnover, way above the industry's accepted optimal figure of no more than 50 per cent.

Directors were paid a total of £1.12m, a fall of £821,000, and the highest-paid director - who is not named in the report - collected £325,678, down from £888,142.

Chairman Niall Quinn has recently criticised supporters who choose to watch the clubs home games via illegal broadcasts in the city's pubs, and the accounts show that gate receipts fell from £13.88m in 2009 to £12.6m during the reporting period. However, television and media payments increased by almost £4m.

The report says: "The directors consider the major risk of the business to be a significant period of absence from the FA Premier League. Ongoing investment in the playing squad aims to reduce this risk."

So Sunderland have managed to cut further losses to 2011, by selling players (i.e. two consecutive losses 2009 and 2010 of £26million and £28million) or £54 million in two years!

Add another loss of about £27million +/-5million in 2011 (I've not checked their outgoings on player purchases)

.... and include the £44 million in player sales:

To a net loss of £38million +/-£10million over three years (although won't be fully reflected since last part is staggered payment)




It SMACKS of balancing the books !!!!

 

[sirblue57]

< dulls knife to cause more suffering, gets ipod,glue,puts glue back and gets staple gun.>

 

[Matt Damon]

< dulls knife to cause more suffering, gets ipod,glue,puts glue back and gets staple gun.>

*prepares Newcastle's accounts*


Or do you want to talk about Everton relative to Villa some more?

 

[linglong]

I think the days off silly spending by the lesser clubs,Everton included,are over so yes theres a lot of balancing of the books going on.

It has too becuase sooner or later there's going to be a crash and the money will dry up it simply can't carry on the way it has done in the last 15 years or so.