Mr. Bill Kenrwright

[davek]

so ambitious your sat in front of a computer doing sweet F all about it; other than venting this poison inside you, trying to get more and more people to hate.

Its not going to achieve anything.

Ever.

And really you don't know anything about the subject first hand. Rumours, gossip, speculation, maybe some old paperwork.

Take some coaching badges, or build up a business that's worth 100 million. Then you can do something about it and we can say, my, that Davek was ambitious wasn't he.

That's your response: 'go and make a billion and take control'?

That's some defence of the current regime.

Put your thinking cap on, knock off the lame attempts to portray Kenwright's detractors as wanting the world, and have another go.

 

[Deleted member 28206]

so ambitious your sat in front of a computer doing sweet F all about it; other than venting this poison inside you, trying to get more and more people to hate.

Its not going to achieve anything.

Ever.

And really you don't know anything about the subject first hand. Rumours, gossip, speculation, maybe some old paperwork.

Take some coaching badges, or build up a business that's worth 100 million. Then you can do something about it and we can say, my, that Davek was ambitious wasn't he.

 

[neonleon]

That's your response: 'go and make a billion and take control'?

That's some defence of the current regime.

Put your thinking cap on, knock off the lame attempts to portray Kenwright's detractors as wanting the world, and have another go.

It wasn't a defence of the current regime. Strange you saw it that way.

I was highlighting the fallacy of your ambition.

Don't believe I need to give that another go. I nailed it first time.

 

[Muggins]

That's exactly it; no more, no less.

It horrifies me that you could even doubt I'm serious.

I've asked you this before DaveK. You ignored the question as far as i can remember.

It seems that rather than debate and suggest serious solutions to problems (in vain or not), you just look down your nose, and say "we should have the best"...Yes i agree, but in your opinion, what exactly is that???

don't pretend you're thick. I'm not having that.

 

[davek]

I've asked you this before DaveK. You ignored the question as far as i can remember.

It seems that rather than debate and suggest serious solutions to problems (in vain or not), you just look down your nose, and say "we should have the best"...Yes i agree, but in your opinion, what exactly is that???

don't pretend you're thick. I'm not having that.

Isn't as plain as a pikestaff? We should have success on the pitch. But where we are is here: the manager starts the season off by stating that we're shooting for the stars of a top 6 finish. That's not a jibe at the manager, btw. He's having to lower his expectations because he works within a strait-jacket provided by 'blue Bill' and his sleeping partners on the board.

Here's a 'serious suggestion': Kenwright forces the issue of at least a share issue to get funds in for Moyes to spend. But even this has been rebuffed time and time again by the board who wont allow their share value to be diluted.

But in any case, I reject this business of 'putting up the alternative'. I'm not an expert in running a football club, but I expect those who do describe themselves as owners and controllers to have half a clue about running one. If they cant move this club forward they should **** off.

That's my position. let's hear anyone opposed defend these clowns.

 

[daz4matty]

Isn't as plain as a pikestaff? We should have success on the pitch. But where we are is here: the manager starts the season off by stating that we're shooting for the stars of a top 6 finish. That's not a jibe at the manager, btw. He's having to lower his expectations because he works within a strait-jacket provided by 'blue Bill' and his sleeping partners on the board.

Here's a 'serious suggestion': Kenwright forces the issue of at least a share issue to get funds in for Moyes to spend. But even this has been rebuffed time and time again by the board who wont allow their share value to be diluted.

But in any case, I reject this business of 'putting up the alternative'. I'm not an expert in running a football club, but I expect those who do describe themselves as owners and controllers to have half a clue about running one. If they cant move this club forward they should **** off.

That's my position. let's hear anyone opposed defend these clowns.

No true evertonian can defend these clowns but on here you get a lot of wind up merchants and some probably dont even support everton.

 

[Muggins]

Isn't as plain as a pikestaff? We should have success on the pitch. But where we are is here: the manager starts the season off by stating that we're shooting for the stars of a top 6 finish. That's not a jibe at the manager, btw. He's having to lower his expectations because he works within a strait-jacket provided by 'blue Bill' and his sleeping partners on the board.

Here's a 'serious suggestion': Kenwright forces the issue of at least a share issue to get funds in for Moyes to spend. But even this has been rebuffed time and time again by the board who wont allow their share value to be diluted.

But in any case, I reject this business of 'putting up the alternative'. I'm not an expert in running a football club, but I expect those who do describe themselves as owners and controllers to have half a clue about running one. If they cant move this club forward they should **** off.

That's my position. let's hear anyone opposed defend these clowns.

So in summarisation. Kenwright should take steps to 'create' money via increasing available shares? But this is not likely to happen as its effectively cheapening the current shares stakeholders own?

This makes it sound like it's down to the other share holders to agree to this (losing value/money), which is their decision. So how much can Bill actually do to make this happen?? sounds like we are in a catch 22 which no-one can do anything about...

please respond. i like talking.

 

[neonleon]

No true evertonian can defend these clowns but on here you get a lot of wind up merchants and some probably dont even support everton.

Oh god, can I take it all back. Daz has implied I'm not a true Evertonian. and probably don't even support everton.

I was watching Everton when you weren't even a glint in your milkman's ballsack.

 

[Muggins]

Oh god, can I take it all back. Daz has implied I'm not a true Evertonian. and probably don't even support everton.

I was watching Everton when you weren't even a glint in your milkman's ballsack.

I heard you gave up Everton for Merseyside Blue...

 

[neonleon]

I heard you gave up Everton for Merseyside Blue...

true dat.

 

[davek]

So in summarisation. Kenwright should take steps to 'create' money via increasing available shares? But this is not likely to happen as its effectively cheapening the current shares stakeholders own?

This makes it sound like it's down to the other share holders to agree to this (losing value/money), which is their decision. So how much can Bill actually do to make this happen?? sounds like we are in a catch 22 which no-one can do anything about...

please respond. i like talking.

Well that comes back to Kenwright's judgement in inviting one of them on the board and encouraging the other to loan money that effectively gives him a big say so in how the organisation is run.

There really is no defence of this lot. I'm not surprised in the slightest that the only line of defence that's usually put forward is that 'blue Bill' employed David Moyes. It's like the defence of Philip Carter: 'he never sacked Kendall'. The pair of them are pretty clueless though. Everton are lions led by donkeys. They have been for over two decades.

 

[Muggins]

Well that comes back to Kenwright's judgement in inviting one of them on the board and encouraging the other to loan money that effectively gives him a big say so in how the organisation is run.

There really is no defence of this lot. I'm not surprised in the slightest that the only line of defence that's usually put forward is that 'blue Bill' employed David Moyes. It's like the defence of Philip Carter: 'he never sacked Kendall'. The pair of them are pretty clueless though. Everton are lions led by donkeys. They have been for over two decades.

So you're saying that pushing for an increase in shares won't happen because,

a ) no shareholder wants to lose value in what they own or originally spent.

and

b ) even if they are prepared to do this for the good of the club, Bill has created a situation where this can't happen unless he and his two mates okay it, which they won't.

a few observations IF this is the case...

1. It seems that our expectations of the club are overshadowed by Bills financial aspirations.

2. Bill more than likely loves Everton, but not enough to make himself poorer. (funny that, the money it costs me to go and watch the blues play defo makes ME poorer)

3. This supports Bills quest to get an 'Arab' (they are all rich you know) investor to save him taking the risk personally.

4. Bills happy to watch the blues every week, hoping, we somehow pull a fantastic season out of the bag, changing the whole situation and making him look like he's actually done well.

All of this is speculation of course, but is this about right DaveK???

 

[Big Neville Southall]

It's worrying when fans give more stick to Moyes than they do to Kenwright

 

[daz4matty]

Oh god, can I take it all back. Daz has implied I'm not a true Evertonian. and probably don't even support everton.

I was watching Everton when you weren't even a glint in your milkman's ballsack.

You just have a big gob and talk crap,by the way we play in blue nugget

 

[neonleon]

You just have a big gob and talk crap,by the way we play in blue nugget

anyone know what he's on about?