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

[dead_soft]

It would keep any potential protest movement on the back burner for a little while longer.

What potential protest? It doesn't seem likely to happen.

 

[canuckblue]

And when was the last time this happend?? The BU don't march when the team is doing ok in the league

Don't recall the club being in the relegation battles a year or two ago, either, and the BU was making noises then.
Thing is, tell enough lies and no one believes you when you're actually telling the truth. And this board has had such a litany of bull**** over the years it beggars belief. It would be far better if they said nothing than pull out more titillating claptrap.

 

[Chang Elephant]

TAX; its a benefit for the club to be in the city boundaries. Nothing at all to do with the fanbase, the city would be concerned that they would be loosing a viable business that pays a hell of a lot of tax to a council that is in the ****

Wait, why have we got Robert Earl on board, yet we're still paying tax ? That would be silly.

 

[Foot Long Hot Dog]

Why would they think that? The council would surely take the opposite view: that Everton were beaten back by their own fanbase who gave them a torrid time over such a move outside the city boundary that they'll never raise the issue of leaving us again.

The fact that they bent over for the RS, offered them half of Stanley Park for peanuts & then rushed through their 2nd planning application for a much bigger capacity stadium without a second thought, left them wide open for calls of foul.

Combined with the Kirkby debacle, they're under a certain amount of pressure to be seen to assist imo.

 

[dead_soft]

Well if the team is doing good, we should make hay whilst the sun shines and sort out the stadium issue once and for all, plus marketing and merchandising.

Then everyone is happy.

Well that doesn't correlate. Team winning does not mean the club suddenly gets a load of cash to build a stadium and remodel the infrastructure of the club. Nor does it create land to build a stadium.

I'm not an avid Kenwright fan but nor will I invent stuff to get angry about

 

[davek]

& you're such a one eyed cynic Dave...

I can assure you that naivety is not something I'm often accused of....

If he'd have just chucked out the usual, it's an on-going process that's not easy to solve, then I'd have agreed with you.

However, there was no need for the specifics he put into that, probably amount to **** all, but that doesn't mean that there's not some meaningful dialogue taking place, with more than a fag packet idea behind it.

Oh it looks like a significant moment doesn't it? 90 words to a shareholder group devoted to a vague update of progress made with the city council. It's exactly what you dismiss it as: the usual 'ongoing process' flannel they've trotted out since Destination Kirkby died its death.


14 years trying to build a new stadium and not a brick laid. You couldn't make this lot up.

 

[davek]

The fact that they bent over for the RS, offered them half of Stanley Park for peanuts & then rushed through their 2nd planning application for a much bigger capacity stadium without a second thought, left them wide open for calls of foul.

Combined with the Kirkby debacle, they're under a certain amount of pressure to be seen to assist imo.

They did the same for Everton over the Kings Dock. They are under ZERO pressure in that respect.

 

[dead_soft]

Oh i'm not; i just think its hilarious

True - are you getting the 'You will find out - UP THE BLUE UNION' comments with them? As if they are some secret spy group ready to pounce? The Everton Eta

 

[ically]

TAX; its a benefit for the club to be in the city boundaries. Nothing at all to do with the fanbase, the city would be concerned that they would be loosing a viable business that pays a hell of a lot of tax to a council that is in the ****

Correct me if i'm wrong,But it didn't concern the MP for Walton at the time.

 

[nsno-chris]

Don't recall the club being in the relegation battles a year or two ago, either, and the BU was making noises then.
Thing is, tell enough lies and no one believes you when you're actually telling the truth. And this board has had such a litany of bull**** over the years it beggars belief. It would be far better if they said nothing than pull out more titillating claptrap.

One of the marches was before a Wolves game in 2011; we had 10 points before the game and where close to the relegation zone; hence, the BU organised a march.

A couple of months later, the BU followers wanted another march, they refused because they did not want to upset the teams performance

 

[davek]

TAX; its a benefit for the club to be in the city boundaries. Nothing at all to do with the fanbase, the city would be concerned that they would be loosing a viable business that pays a hell of a lot of tax to a council that is in the ****

Yes, but for that to be a serious issue for them Everton would have to have serious plans to leave the city...they dont. Do you think any neighbouring authorities on M'side would get into that with Everton after Kirkby?

Not a chance.

 

[nsno-chris]

Correct me if i'm wrong,But it didn't concern the MP for Walton at the time.

Well a Councillor/MP against the people who actually balance the balance the books and look for ways to generate income are 2 separate things.

A secondly, I was referring to the here and now and the fact that the council needs to cut another £50m from its budget with more cuts due in the forthcoming years.

 

[nsno-chris]

Yes, but for that to be a serious issue for them Everton would have to have serious plans to leave the city...they dont. Do you think any neighbouring authorities on M'side would get into that with Everton after Kirkby?

Not a chance.

But you don't know whats being discussed behind closed doors.

 

[Foot Long Hot Dog]

Oh it looks like a significant moment doesn't it? 90 words to a shareholder group devoted to a vague update of progress made with the city council. It's exactly what you dismiss it as: the usual 'ongoing process' flannel they've trotted out since Destination Kirkby died its death.


14 years trying to build a new stadium and not a brick laid. You couldn't make this lot up.

You're eager to dismiss it as nothing more than a soundbite Dave & we both know the current incumbents will almost certainly never lay a brick for the stadium solution.

However, in your eagerness to bat it off as total pony, you might be missing what I would consider to be the potential obvious here.

If there was a scheme that had potential council support, was part of a regeneration programme & (given the funds) was both acceptable to the fanbase & deliverable. If this scheme was drawn up & ready to roll out, would it not be a massive help in them trying to move the club on? As the elephant in the room for EFC has always been the stadium & the uncertain cost issue that surrounds it's solution for any potential buyer. If there was something, approved, costed & with a sensible price tag, surely that would be a step forward?

 

[nsno-chris]

True - are you getting the 'You will find out - UP THE BLUE UNION' comments with them? As if they are some secret spy group ready to pounce? The Everton Eta

They've just arrived hahaha