The Everton Board Thread (Inc. Bill Kenwright / Blue Union)

[davek]

See here is the thing for me, their is no question in my mind that Bill knows he should have sold this club on years ago ! Bill knows full well what the entire world thinks of him still sticking around and holding back the club and yet he still does it !

For me, this is all about Bill and his dreams don,t include you or me because he has chosen to surround himself with people who are "a means to an end" to keep him at the club till his dream plays out.

Once everyone understands that, then you can start to understand your place in Bill Kenwrights Everton. For my part, I stopped going the match when I figured out that the owner and his business associates are not in it for the same reasons that me and my father started going to the game in the first place.

A new generation of fan has been held back because of selfish men.

Tubey had it spot on a few pages back: because of his own vanity to be Everton chairman, Kenwright got Everton involved with people who he, nor the club, can control. He's made the club hostages to a couple of spivs who are so rich they wont see any reason to sell Everton until they get top dollar for the shares they own. It'll be a long wait. We're probably looking at Green snuffing it and some other family member maybe viewing matters differently vis-a-vis the shares owned in this club.

He's called Billy Liar for a reason: this being the biggest reason of all.

 

[Dell Boy]

You're pretty naive if you think these sharks aren't into Everton for all they can bleed off the club.

But this is it - you've got to prove it before you can say any of that for definite. As a business Everton is a basket case. 11 years or whatever is a hell of a long time to be in it for a pipe dream. With the economy and property market in a nosedive isn't it reasonable that those sharks as you call them would have got tired and forced Kenwright to sell?

 

[Dell Boy]

He's made the club hostages to a couple of spivs who are so rich they wont see any reason to sell Everton until they get top dollar for the shares they own. It'll be a long wait. We're probably looking at Green snuffing it and some other family member maybe viewing matters differently vis-a-vis the shares owned in this club.

So they're top businessmen but will act irrationally according to you?

The claims on here are that said shadey operators helped Kenwright buy for the club for peanuts 11 years ago. That they've knowingly creamed off a few million each and every year via this murky cess pit of 'other operating costs', they've turned away various potential buyers by asking for hundreds of millions (even though that would have crystallised a massive profit) and all the time are just sitting back waiting for another sheik or whatever to turn up with even more hundreds of millions? And then they'd swan off into the sunset?

That just doesn't make sense to me.

 

[Sharpys top lip]

So they're top businessmen but will act irrationally according to you?

The claims on here are that said shadey operators helped Kenwright buy for the club for peanuts 11 years ago. That they've knowingly creamed off a few million each and every year via this murky cess pit of 'other operating costs', they've turned away various potential buyers by asking for hundreds of millions (even though that would have crystallised a massive profit) and all the time are just sitting back waiting for another sheik or whatever to turn up with even more hundreds of millions? And then they'd swan off into the sunset?

That just doesn't make sense to me.

your missing the point.

why sell, when you make healthy profit every season...

OOC!!!!

 

[Foot Long Hot Dog]

your missing the point.

why sell, when you make healthy profit every season...

OOC!!!!

Oh ffs not again, tell me you're not being serious?

 

[Essex Blue]

Nah, NTL went bust mate, you can't blame the man for that.

Yes he did borrow some cash on the strength of it completing, but I've heard many a Blue saying that he should be doing exactly the same thing in January on the strength of the massive hike in TV cash due from Sky in the summer, what's the difference? The other issues he deserves to carry the can for, but the NTL one is bollocks imo.

The new TV deal has been struck, whereas our 'deal' with NTL had not, that is the major difference. If Kenwright hadn't have taken the loan out then there wouldn't have been an issue, so how you can blame anyone other than Kenwright over the NTL farce is beyond me.

 

[nsno-chris]

considering your own experience, you should have realised how poor our deal with nike an kit bag really is. Clubs at the lower end of the PL have far better deals. I'm sure some championship clubs have kit deals not far of ours. But considering your experiences, you know this already!!!

I have always been critical (well before the Kit Bag deal and BK's regime) of our commercial operations, its an area tat the club has fallen behind for many years and we have lost a lot of ground. However, I would you (or someone else) to explain to me how this is a bad deal given the our current financial situation and the need to free cash flow. I'm not concerned with other clubs, I would like for you to explain how you would have negotiated an alternative deal or what other way you would have concluded this business.

To me the KitBag deal does seem bad on paper, but its not actually that bad, not brilliant, but not bad, and if someone can answer my question above I'll explain my reasoning as to why i think the deal is ok. Lets see if anyone can answer this without crappy little comments like 'well spurs have negotiated £xxxx'

 

[Allezfan]

I'm not a buisness man though, chris. I'm an electrician.

I don't know what a good deal is, what I do know is what the market average deal is and ours gets us less money than that. Saying that I can't compare it with other clubs essentially removes the only argument I have. Which is that we're at a disadvantage to our competitors because they're making more money from those deals then we are. I think that's very relevant.

 

[Essex Blue]

Oh ffs not again, tell me you're not being serious?

You do acknowledge that Earle is making a fortune through providing us with bridging loans every year, and that Earle decides the interest rates?

How is loaning your own company money at an interest rate of your own choosing any different from buying biros at inflated prices from another company that the directors are 'close' to? Who decides whether the interest rate is in the best interest of the company and/or its shareholders?

The simple fact is, that despite it being against the law, there will be businesses up and down the country who have been doing exactly what we have been discussing over the last few pages. I don't suppose you have any idea of how many prosecutions the CPS have brought forward for this supposed 'fraud'? Or are you of the opinion that the law is enough to stop directors from taking the piss? I doubt it some how.

Just because it's against the law doesn't mean that it's not happening. And how would you go about proving that a particular action was, or was not, in the best interest of the company and its shareholders? The answer is that is VERY difficult to do so, which is why there are so few prosecutions.

 

[Foot Long Hot Dog]

The new TV deal has been struck, whereas our 'deal' with NTL had not, that is the major difference. If Kenwright hadn't have taken the loan out then there wouldn't have been an issue, so how you can blame anyone other than Kenwright over the NTL farce is beyond me.

Bollocks.

The deal had been agreed & the paperwork had been issued.

They went bust between the sign off & pay out.

You make it sound like he'd had a chat with them & borrowed £Xm off the back of it. He borrowed cash to strengthen the side post the deal being agreed. Sky could go bust between now & next summer for all we know & yet there's many who'll be urging him to borrow in Jan off the back of the increase due in summer.

You can't pick & choose what's 'right or wrong' regarding business decisons based on what suits your agenda.

 

[Essex Blue]

Bollocks.

The deal had been agreed & the paperwork had been issued.

They went bust between the sign off & pay out.

You make it sound like he'd had a chat with them & borrowed £Xm off the back of it. He borrowed cash to strengthen the side post the deal being agreed. Sky could go bust between now & next summer for all we know & yet there's many who'll be urging him to borrow in Jan off the back of the increase due in summer.

You can't pick & choose what's 'right or wrong' regarding business decisons based on what suits your agenda.

I'm not sure that is the case, but even if it was, Kenwright would still be at fault.

I advocate the idea of borrowing money now on the back of the new TV money, but if it was done and Sky went bust then it would still be the fault of the individuals who went out and took the risk. Clearly.

 

[banno]

Can he provide the manager with a adequate budget each season?
Can he balance the books?

If the answer to any of the above is 'no' then he shouldn't be in the Football business.

 

[davek]

Bollocks.

The deal had been agreed & the paperwork had been issued.

They went bust between the sign off & pay out.

You make it sound like he'd had a chat with them & borrowed £Xm off the back of it. He borrowed cash to strengthen the side post the deal being agreed. Sky could go bust between now & next summer for all we know & yet there's many who'll be urging him to borrow in Jan off the back of the increase due in summer.

You can't pick & choose what's 'right or wrong' regarding business decisons based on what suits your agenda.

You do have proof of that, right?

The only thing we know for sure is that while other clubs around us like Villa and Newcastle were busy tying up these mug investors like NTL for a £20-£30M upfront windfall, Bill and his hired hands missed the boat...and because they did they then 'made up for' this by taking out a secutritisation deal that loaned the club £30M with an interest rate paid back over 25 years handing us into the bargain a whopping £75M total EFC has to pay back to the Pru.

They should be punted down the road for just that one error that crippled us in their first year or so in charge, nevermind the two failed stadium bids and the other assorted **** ups along the way.

 

[Foot Long Hot Dog]

You do acknowledge that Earle is making a fortune through providing us with bridging loans every year, and that Earle decides the interest rates?

How is loaning your own company money at an interest rate of your own choosing any different from buying biros at inflated prices from another company that the directors are 'close' to? Who decides whether the interest rate is in the best interest of the company and/or its shareholders?

The simple fact is, that despite it being against the law, there will be businesses up and down the country who have been doing exactly what we have been discussing over the last few pages. I don't suppose you have any idea of how many prosecutions the CPS have brought forward for this supposed 'fraud'? Or are you of the opinion that the law is enough to stop directors from taking the piss? I doubt it some how.

Just because it's against the law doesn't mean that it's not happening. And how would you go about proving that a particular action was, or was not, in the best interest of the company and its shareholders? The answer is that is VERY difficult to do so, which is why there are so few prosecutions.

You assume (maybe rightly) that the Vibrac loan is connected to Earl, given the postal address, but it's still nonetheless an assumption & not a proven fact. You've then assumed that he chose the interest rate. You've then further assumed that the interest rate charged is beyond what the business could expect to obtain in the current corporate finance market.
You've also assumed that the club was capable of obtaining a loan in market at all, given the current economic climate & the disdain with which football clubs are currently viewed with. (hence the forced OD reduction).

Would I prefer it I he'd have gifted it us, or loaned it a 0% APR? of course I would. But am I going to automatically conclude that this loan is somehow him goosing EFC? No Im not. You have however have made a handful of assumptions & concluded that they're 'fact'. btw I think the Vibrac loan was first taken in 2011 maybe renewed this last summer.

How many Directors are exposed & prosecuted is irrelevant to those actions being as bent as a nine bob. You appear to be insinuating that the lack of (to your knowledge) legal action taken, means that there's hoardes of Directors all filling their boots at their shareholders expense. It's yet another assumption based on jack ****.

 

[nsno-chris]

I'm not a buisness man though, chris. I'm an electrician.

I don't know what a good deal is, what I do know is what the market average deal is and ours gets us less money than that. Saying that I can't compare it with other clubs essentially removes the only argument I have. Which is that we're at a disadvantage to our competitors because they're making more money from those deals then we are. I think that's very relevant.

But if you have 2 clubs, there will be major differences between them, whether financial constraints and position, fan base, marketing opportunities, location etc, so comparing to clubs a like is irrelvant unforunatley because there will always be a variance as to what affects negotiation for certain aspects.