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

[Dell Boy]

kenwright must love the likes of you mate.

Maybe. Who knows. Why not for once try and put some clear facts out there?

It's very easy to be so negative and dismissive. Is it because Kenwright is a bit of a luvvie? Did you used to have a fancy for Kenwright's missus?

 

[magicjuan]

Am loving the cool attitude. I picture you practicing that Liam Gallagher swagger in the mirror most evenings. Well in.

I'm nobody's lapdog and will happily debate any facts you want. You lost me completely when you tried to make out that a group of 'global financiers' were sniffing around the club as a stepping stone to a major construction project in the city.

I've never said the Board, the senior staff let alone Kenwright was faultless. Far from it. I think plenty of mistakes have been made and I'd welcome a new owner if they were genuine. Just one huge mistake is the total lack of corporate governance in stopping shareholder meetings. Kings Dock was another. Even this farce with Moyes contract is ridiculous.

Just to show me where I've been going wrong:

1. What's a fair price for the club in light of the new TV deal?

2. What evidence is there of wrongdoing or shadey practices?

3. How are NDAs enforcable in a practical sense in the context of buying Everton?

4. Are you saying Kenwright has ever turned down a serious bid for the club?

I would advise you go back and re read the posts you seem to be alludingnto, especially the parts concerning global financiers, then rearrange your line of questions, then we can kick on.

 

[D410]

http://www.keioc.net/index.php?mact=News,cntnt01,detail,0&cntnt01articleid=407&cntnt01returnid=15

On the back of the quite ludicrous assertion by Everton’s PR Paul Tyrrell on the Stan Collymore show that our current owners are looking for £125m for the club, a club that they paid just under £22m for thirteen years ago, KEIOC have been undertaking our own valuation exercise and whilst it in no way purports to be an academic work of the magnitude of Tom Markham’s excellent attempt to produce a universal methodology to value premier league clubs, it will offer a tailor made answer as to why nobody has bought the club even though it's apparently been for sale since the moment those that Bill Kenwright speaks on behalf of bought the club from Peter Johnson.

Indeed, KEIOC would be mortified by any potential owner who was willing to offer the current owners selling price as it would confirm their total lack of acumen and the likely long term outcome such a sale would bring by the people who have confirmed on more than one occasion what they’re actually interested in despite the rhetoric the chairman offers to prove otherwise

 

[Neiler]

The whole thing is so unspecific, you can buy shares in Everton but you can't buy Everton - the share issue is so diverse. So if your valueing Everton at 125mllion, that the club value - not necessarily what the board are looking for for a controlling interest.

The 125mill value places sharers in the 3000-4000 share price, which tbh isn't unreasonable, given the major shareholders don't own the whole of Everton they can only agree a share price for their shares which stand collectively at at about 84%.

So what your looking at is a book value for the entire efc not what the major shareholders would receive for there shares - despite the pages of rethoric on the interview and subject!

Keioc make me smile.

 

[billy bluestar]

The whole thing is so unspecific, you can buy shares in Everton but you can't buy Everton - the share issue is so diverse. So if your valueing Everton at 125mllion, that the club value - not necessarily what the board are looking for for a controlling interest.

The 125mill value places sharers in the 3000-4000 share price, which tbh isn't unreasonable, given the major shareholders don't own the whole of Everton they can only agree a share price for their shares which stand collectively at at about 84%.

So what your looking at is a book value for the entire efc not what the major shareholders would receive for there shares - despite the pages of rethoric on the interview and subject!

Keioc make me smile.

You know, you get bored of the pros and cons of the board. I know the real reason why we have not been sold, most people in business,know, why we have not been sold.
It's very simple really.

 

[Neiler]

You know, you get bored of the pros and cons of the board. I know the real reason why we have not been sold, most people in business,know, why we have not been sold.
It's very simple really.

True mate, sometimes the stuff posted is just badly and blatantly mistruth - I know I shouldn't but people actually believe some of it!

Not that I'm against change mind!

 

[davek]

The whole thing is so unspecific, you can buy shares in Everton but you can't buy Everton - the share issue is so diverse. So if your valueing Everton at 125mllion, that the club value - not necessarily what the board are looking for for a controlling interest.

The 125mill value places sharers in the 3000-4000 share price, which tbh isn't unreasonable, given the major shareholders don't own the whole of Everton they can only agree a share price for their shares which stand collectively at at about 84%.

So what your looking at is a book value for the entire efc not what the major shareholders would receive for there shares - despite the pages of rethoric on the interview and subject!

Keioc make me smile.

They paid about £850 per share via True Blue, IIRC. Then for the next 13 years they proceeded to invest zero English pounds, put another £30M on the club debt, failed twice to secure a stadium scheme, left Goodison to pretty much rot beyond a lick of paint every three years or so, sold off property owned by the club (inclusing its training ground), subcontracted out for poor return goods and services....and you believe they should be rewarded five-fold.

*sigh*

 

[Neiler]

They paid about £850 per share via True Blue, IIRC. Then for the next 13 years they proceeded to invest zero English pounds, put another £30M on the club debt, failed twice to secure a stadium scheme, left Goodison to pretty much rot beyond a lick of paint every three years or so, sold off property owned by the club (inclusing its training ground), subcontracted out for poor return goods and services....and you believe they should be rewarded five-fold.

*sigh*

BCR paid more i believe for their shares, the Greggs pocketed a profit of 7mill.

Which isnt my point tbf, the point is buying the majority shares in Everton will be a hell of a lot less then the 125mill in the article or mentioned in the interview, i amazes me so many have opinions on this and yet dont know the in and outs of it.

The 3000 is a guesstimate, just as i imagine the book value is. I think we all remember Johnson was on the ropes and had no choice to sell or go under. 850 was a great deal, no doubt, but shares were changing hands for 4000 a peice after 1995.

There is also a hell of a difference in the sense that the club was turning over 25mill and had a debt of 20 mill under Johnson, it turns over over 80 mill now and the ration is considerably lower at 46mill. The business if it stays in the PL is guaranteed over 60 mill as a minimum in TV cash per year - thats a hell of a different market place from the one Johnson sold in.

Like everyone i would welcome a change and fresh investment, but you have to honestly appraise the thing and be factual. The 125mill asking price is a staging point for ire and not factual. It amazes me how people just read and believe it.

 

[davek]

BCR paid more i believe for their shares, the Greggs pocketed a profit of 7mill.

Which isnt my point tbf, the point is buying the majority shares in Everton will be a hell of a lot less then the 125mill in the article or mentioned in the interview, i amazes me so many have opinions on this and yet dont know the in and outs of it.

The 3000 is a guesstimate, just as i imagine the book value is. I think we all remember Johnson was on the ropes and had no choice to sell or go under. 850 was a great deal, no doubt, but shares were changing hands for 4000 a peice after 1995.

There is also a hell of a difference in the sense that the club was turning over 25mill and had a debt of 20 mill under Johnson, it turns over over 80 mill now and the ration is considerably lower at 46mill. The business if it stays in the PL is guaranteed over 60 mill as a minimum in TV cash per year - thats a hell of a different market place from the one Johnson sold in.

Like everyone i would welcome a change and fresh investment, but you have to honestly appraise the thing and be factual. The 125mill asking price is a staging point for ire and not factual. It amazes me how people just read and believe it.

It appears to be a pretty good staging point given how many times we've heard similar ball park figures from different sources now. The fact that tv money has inflated the club's revenue is only acceptable as a consideration for price if your willing to concede it really is all about making a profit (for kenwright and Woods as much as Earl). I'd be happy to factor tv money if you'd concede that all the talk of finding the 'right buyer' and being a custodian from Bill is just all bluster.

 

[micknick]

Dave would you be willing to write an article on the current ownership?

Serious question.

I think it would be good to have two sides of the story from two different members and I think you would definitely be one side of the fence.

 

[Neiler]

It appears to be a pretty good staging point given how many times we've heard similar ball park figures from different sources now. The fact that tv money has inflated the club's revenue is only acceptable as a consideration for price if your willing to concede it really is all about making a profit (for kenwright and Woods as much as Earl). I'd be happy to factor tv money if you'd concede that all the talk of finding the 'right buyer' and being a custodian from Bill is just all bluster.

No mate, i still dont think he has bad intent - i think he wants out - i do think he wants to make a profit though, you would be of your wig not to. Honestly though i, he and we all know we need change to break the glass ceiling.

Its not entirely true mate about profit, just look at the current shareholders, i think we posted a profit once since they have been in the board yet we know they will make a profit. We're seeing the same thing with carpet bag investors in championship clubs at the mo - Leeds, Forest etc.

Point is the 125mill figure is a red hering its the price to buy the whole of Everton, to buy a controlling interest say half Woods and Bill shares would be half if not less then that again. The 125mill is a fallacy. I laughed at almost 50 page thread on the interview on here and the fury.

 

[D410]

No mate, i still dont think he has bad intent - i think he wants out - i do think he wants to make a profit though, you would be of your wig not to. Honestly though i, he and we all know we need change to break the glass ceiling.

Its not entirely true mate about profit, just look at the current shareholders, i think we posted a profit once since they have been in the board yet we know they will make a profit. We're seeing the same thing with carpet bag investors in championship clubs at the mo - Leeds, Forest etc.

Point is the 125mill figure is a red hering its the price to buy the whole of Everton, to buy a controlling interest say half Woods and Bill shares would be half if not less then that again. The 125mill is a fallacy. I laughed at almost 50 page thread on the interview on here and the fury.

You are welcome to publish rebuttal and your own study in response to the follow up KEIOC article however you would be better served showing patience and holding your comment until you have actually read the report.

 

[Dell Boy]

Dave - why can't Kenwright be genuinely after two goals? A safe custodian for the club AND a fair price?

 

[Neiler]

You are welcome to publish rebuttal and your own study in response to the follow up KEIOC article however you would be better served showing patience and holding your comment until you have actually read the report.

Eh why did you post it on a public forum, if you didn't want people to comment? That kind of response isn't very helpfull is it? in terms of inclusiveness, winning people to the banner or reassuring people that my points aren't in any way valid, or that whats posted above by KEIOC has any credence bar scaring people with rhetoric - tell me, had KEIOC even reasoned my points - didnt think so. You have to laugh: "stop making factual points we dont agree with or we haven't thought of". So if anyone has a comment to make on what they have so far published on a public forum your saying there not allowed analyse and critique it? - brilliant, well done lads.

Just want to point out that im all for a change at the helm, but really the quality of analysis, scare tactics of rhetoric and misleading nature of their articles really should be pointed out.

Their welcome to rebuttal me - ill be here, but i have a sneaky feeling that the above was published on here so they can trouble shoot the pre published "unbiased report" from the opinions of regular fans - sad really.

 

[davek]

Dave would you be willing to write an article on the current ownership?

Serious question.

I think it would be good to have two sides of the story from two different members and I think you would definitely be one side of the fence.

There's better analysis out there that drills down way deeper than I ever could. For that reason I'd swerve it.