The Everton Board Thread 2014/15

[Chang Elephant]

It's about 200 miles from Liverpool.

Hard to believe that Kenwright actually tried that

 

[Whistlin' Dixie]

Not sure why you continue to do this mate as it doesn't help your cause.

There's no evidence that Earl does not participate even though he lives in the US

Might be from 2009, but I haven't heard anything to the contrary, since.

http://www.theguardian.com/football/2009/jan/20/david-conn-everton-robert-earl

Everton are struggling to compete financially with the big clubs despite having the Planet Hollywood entrepreneur, Robert Earl, as a 23% shareholder and Sir Philip Green, the billionaire owner of British Home Stores, as an adviser.

When Keith Wyness, Everton's former chief executive, resigned from the club last summer he was reported to be unhappy with Green's involvement in the club. Green, a longstanding friend of the chairman Bill Kenwright, has provided advice but says he has never put any money into Everton, and does not want to own a football club.

"I have no status at Everton," he said. "I speak to Bill Kenwright if he calls me. He has not spoken to me about the new stadium for weeks and weeks."

A spokesman for Earl said he had contributed financially by providing personal guarantees so that Everton could extend their bank borrowings and sign new players. He does not, the spokesman said, intend to put further money in until Everton are in a new stadium, when the club could be in a position to attract further investment.

 

[AndyC]

I think Robert Earl is based in New York, certainly the U.S., and irrespective of his attitude to investing further into Everton as a 23% shareholder it strikes me as being inconceivable that he does not play an active part in key decision making.
I'd go so far as to suggest, he probably insists on countersigning all major commercial contracts in order to 'protect' his investment.

 

[The Esk]

... but you do.

... Google Wyness and how he got on the board.

... mate.

As I say I have no desire to question your's or anyone else's posts unless there appears to be inaccuracies.

The requirement to hold 3 shares to be a Director of the Club was in the original 1892 Articles of Association. I am not sure when it disappeared but it is not present in the 29 December 2000 version, nor the revised September 2008 version. Besides which as we have already agreed Elstone, although a member of the Board is not a Director of The Everton Football Club Limited.

There's plenty to criticise the Board and management team of Everton without having to resort to inaccuracies. As I stated earlier those inaccuracies weaken the argument and make the Board's defence easier for them.

 

[sageyefc]

Havent we got the smallest amount of board members in the league

 

[Ruairi77]

I think Robert Earl is based in New York, certainly the U.S., and irrespective of his attitude to investing further into Everton as a 23% shareholder it strikes me as being inconceivable that he does not play an active part in key decision making.
I'd go so far as to suggest, he probably insists on countersigning all major commercial contracts in order to 'protect' his investment.

Think he's based out of florida. Watched a game with us in Boston last season as his son goes to college here. The only interesting thing he said is that Everton didn't pay 28 mil for Lukaku. I would imagine he's involved with the bigger decisions.

 

[Bluesnapper]

Must have missed you questioning this poster with posts such as his one. I have tried and been unsuccessful.

only that 'The Blue Union will employ professionals' Presumably the Blue Union will pay the fees to these professionals they employ?

 

[MartSlinger]

Our Club is boss, our board is horrible.
Its genuinely grim supporting a Club that literally just exists, does nothing but exist.

 

[bizzaro]

As I say I have no desire to question your's or anyone else's posts unless there appears to be inaccuracies.

The requirement to hold 3 shares to be a Director of the Club was in the original 1892 Articles of Association. I am not sure when it disappeared but it is not present in the 29 December 2000 version, nor the revised September 2008 version. Besides which as we have already agreed Elstone, although a member of the Board is not a Director of The Everton Football Club Limited.

There's plenty to criticise the Board and management team of Everton without having to resort to inaccuracies. As I stated earlier those inaccuracies weaken the argument and make the Board's defence easier for them.

He is a 'shadow director' however if I am not mistaken.

Someone very wise and clever and knowledgeable in the FFP force once told me this.

A fellow Master FFP Jedi

 

[The Esk]

Must have missed you questioning this poster with posts such as his one. I have tried and been unsuccessful.

I did not pass comment on his post, but here's some others I've made along the way:

For those that are convinced that the Board and/or associates are acting illegally or acting in a manner which is damaging to the Company's (Everton Football Club Company Limited) interests and effecting this alleged activity through the BVI Company, BCR Sports they are probably aware that there is a process through BVI law to force the BVI Company to disclose information which might prove the alleged behaviour.

It is possible to apply through the BVI Courts for a disclosure order (sometimes known as a Norwich Pharmacal Order).

Given the certainty with which some claim wrong doings, I am surprised no-one (to my knowledge) has attempted this. Perhaps their words are stronger than their convictions..........

Just for clarification, criticism of the Board and individual directors, officers and shareholders is perfectly acceptable and welcome as part of the debate.

Unfounded allegations of criminal behaviour will not be tolerated.

Thanks

Mate, if you are making allegations of "hacking emails" publicly then you should be able to back it up with very convincing evidence or withdraw the remark.

As I said earlier in the week, all sides need to start looking forward, not backwards.

The common theme is change and that's what we should all be working towards, change either of the commercial performance so that the club can improve the playing squad (the minimum acceptable change) or change of ownership etc etc.

BU have a role to play, the key is (as it is with the Board) persuading them of the right strategy and tactics to bring change about.

The point is there should be as much accuracy as possible in posters' comments regardless of whether or not they are pro or anti the current Board.

This site is determinedly neutral on Club matters. All members including moderators can have and express their personal opinions, but we reserve the right to point out inaccuracies if and when they occur.

 

[The Esk]

He is a 'shadow director' however if I am not mistaken.

That is true, but he is a shadow director by his actions not by virtue of being a Board member.

 

[roydo]

This site is determinedly neutral on Club matters

And Independent of it. Fiercely so. I have been in the meetings.

 

[bizzaro]

That is true, but he is a shadow director by his actions not by virtue of being a Board member.

He's a 'shadow director' in the legal sense. This is what the FFP Jedi Master once told me.

*waives hand at plotters*

'These are not the droids you are looking for'

 

[Chang Elephant]

He's a 'shadow director' in the legal sense. This is what the FFP Jedi Master once told me.

*waives hand at plotters*

'These are not the droids you are looking for'

Medication please Mathew

 

[bizzaro]

I did not pass comment on his post, but here's some others I've made along the way:

The point is there should be as much accuracy as possible in posters' comments regardless of whether or not they are pro or anti the current Board.

This site is determinedly neutral on Club matters. All members including moderators can have and express their personal opinions, but we reserve the right to point out inaccuracies if and when they occur.

Quite right. Master Esk.

I in my post - only SPECULATED - and commented that it would be useful to know and for us to monitor in the interests of transparency who VIBRAC are and so on.

Those claiming illegality in behaviour must remember that they must have evidence of such before making the claim.

Debating in the interests of transparency for a socially important institution - Everton Football Club

is surely acceptable however.

In fact this is IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST.

But making wild assertions is not.

Isn't this a bridging loan so as to even out money available to the club when the club isn't earning in the summer period?

The key thing is - does the loaner have any association with the club.

The Caymans are notoriously opaque when it comes to finding out who does the loaning.

Also taking a loan and then pocketing the interest 'apparently legitimately' would be one way of certain shareholders taking money out of the club and claiming they are not on club pay. Lerner did it at Aston Villa.


Lets find out who the loaning party is and what the interest rate is. If its above market average (considering the base rate) then we will know to dig some more.

@the esk

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...fueled-by-secretive-loans-beat-uefa-clampdown
Soccer Transfers Fueled by Secretive Loans Beat UEFA Bid
Sept. 30 (Bloomberg) -- Soccer’s transfer market is getting an extra kick from offshore lending, even as the sport’s European ruling body UEFA tries to restrict record spending.

Vibrac Corp., a closely held lender in the British Virgin Islands, financed as much as 150 million pounds ($245 million) of loans in England, Spain and Germany last year, a person with direct knowledge of the deals said. Doyen Sports provided about $130 million of financing the last two years, Chief Executive Officer Nelio Lucas said.

As UEFA tries to rein in spending with so-called financial fair play rules, some teams are still taking business risks by signing players, according to Raffaele Poli, a researcher at CIES Football Observatory in Neuchatel, Switzerland, who tracks the market. Transfer spending in Europe’s biggest five leagues rose 9 percent to a record 2.4 billion euros ($3.1 billion) in the last off-season, CIES research shows.


“UEFA’s rules aren’t having as much of an effect as they would like,” Poli said. Middle and low-ranking clubs “are taking risks to keep up with the bigger ones.”

To be sure, the biggest factor contributing to the transfer spending boom is an increase in English Premier League television rights money, Poli said. The league accounted for 45 percent of all spending in Europe’s biggest five leagues in the last off-season, according to CIES.

Manchester United, whose broadcast income for fiscal 2014 rose by 34 percent, more than doubled its spending on signings to about 150 million pounds. It hired Angel di Maria for a club record fee of 59.7 million pounds. Publicly listed United, whose financiers include Bank of America Corp., hasn’t notified investors of any deals with offshore lenders.



Interesting - that Everton are NOT alone in this.

But this does mean that the tax authorities and others will no doubt be looking at who these people are very closely.

I for one would like to know who they are - if they're taking £1.0 to £2.5million in fees out of the club or 10% interest (as reported in 2011)


Vibrac loaned money against future Premier League income including television revenue to U.K. teams including West Ham, Southampton, Everton, Fulham and Reading since 2011, according to filings by the clubs. Mousehole Ltd., which is also registered in the British Virgins Islands, financed Atletico Madrid, Getafe and Deportivo La Coruna in Spain and Germany’s Hertha Berlin in 2011, according to filings by JG Funding Ltd., an associated company based in London.

Vibrac and Mousehole are controlled by a single anonymous investor, the person said, adding Mousehole isn’t currently active. Vibrac may loan as much as 150 million pounds again to clubs this year, the person said.

10 Percent
The offshore loans aren’t necessarily plowed into transfer spending, according to Graham Shear, a lawyer at London-based Berwin Leighton Paisner who oversees deals for Vibrac. He said clubs often seek funds before the start of the season to help manage uncertainties in their cash flow, which can vary depending on the team’s performance.

Vibrac typically commands annual interest rates of between 6.5 percent and 10 percent, the person said, adding the loans can be arranged in as little as 24 hours.

That’s ideal for clubs chasing a new recruit, said Javier Ferrero, a partner at Senn Ferrero y Asociados, a law firm in Madrid that represents four non-bank lenders that operate in Spain’s La Liga.

“If they see an opportunity when a player comes onto the market, they try to act as quickly as possible,” Ferrero said.

So it seems Everton are covering cashflows this summer whilst they recruit.

However again. The lack of transparency is a little disturbing.

This is BLOOMBERG.com reporting. Not some average joe blog.


I could understand if the club wants to ensure that they have players in IN PLENTY OF TIME.

However, we should be watchful and mindful that this club is NOT a poor club.

The Stadium in my book is a priority this club should not take its eyes off.