Where will the club be in 5 years time. I see no strategy.

[billycopper]

You see those 'achievements' are down to Moyes arent they. You could say they were down to Kenwright if he had given Moyes a significant transfer kitty and we paid top 6 wages, but he hasnt and we dont. The chairman can provide the funds by maximising income to the club - the stadium is exactly the same as when he took over, and our commercial deals are dreadful compared to similar clubs. The lines of communication with the fans are at an all time low, and there is no confidence that we have any forward thinking strategy at all.

His other main task was to bring in investment to the club, and the only time he has managed this, amazingly enough, was when his own position at the club needed shoring up, and he found a buyer for Gregg's shares. Not his own shares of course. It should be very easy to list, say, four or five of his achievements at Everton after all this time at the club? So feel free to have a try.

It was a ballsy move by Kenwright to appoint Moyes in the first place and then to stick with him.

Where is a transfer kitty going to come from? Villa will be losing their sponsors at the end of the season and clubs like Blackburn have struggled to find any sponsor at all. As Elstone points out the deal with Chang is the largest in the club's history. We may feel that we're worth more but getting it is another matter.

Let me put it this way, which other club's owners would you prefer that we had?

 

[Goat]

It was a ballsy move by Kenwright to appoint Moyes in the first place and then to stick with him.

Where is a transfer kitty going to come from? Villa will be losing their sponsors at the end of the season and clubs like Blackburn have struggled to find any sponsor at all. As Elstone points out the deal with Chang is the largest in the club's history. We may feel that we're worth more but getting it is another matter.

Let me put it this way, which other club's owners would you prefer that we had?

I would take ANY of the other 19.

ANY.

 

[Brennan]

It was a ballsy move by Kenwright to appoint Moyes in the first place and then to stick with him.

Where is a transfer kitty going to come from? Villa will be losing their sponsors at the end of the season and clubs like Blackburn have struggled to find any sponsor at all. As Elstone points out the deal with Chang is the largest in the club's history. We may feel that we're worth more but getting it is another matter.

Let me put it this way, which other club's owners would you prefer that we had?

Villa get twice as much per year as we do from their shirt sponsor. Sunderland could get up to £20m per year depending on league position, we're stuck on £4m.

 

[billycopper]

Wait, WHAT?

They paid 20m for the Club.

They havent paid any debts, they have all increased.
They havent spent any money on Goodison, bar the odd lick of paint.
They have "invested" ZERO money into the Club, ZERO, not a single penny.

Its "said" they want a return of 150m to "let go of the Club", not a bad return on 20m, you would say?

And lets not mention the Years and Years of free seats to every game, the free wine, the phone, the car and all the other perks there are to "running" a Premier League Club.

I look forward to your reply.

Neither of us knows what goes on in the boardroom. It's heresay and our own interpretations. So you really think that Bill is hanging on waiting for somebody with more money than sense to meet his valuation? The club is losing money year on year, so the value will surely be going down rather than up. How is he ever going to get the £20m back let alone make a profit?

Bill is playing with his own and his partners money and he's right when he says that they're small fish. Earl is worth £200m. Compare that with Usmanov (Arsenal, £11.2b), Lerner (Villa, £605m), Abramovich (Chelsea, £8b), Al-Fayed (Fulham, £1.2b) Mansour (City, £22.8b), Glazer (United, £1.5b), Ashley (Newcastle, £1.6b), Zingarevich (Reading, £430m), Liebherr (Southampton, £3b), Short (Sunderland, £2b) and Lewis (Spurs, £1.9b). If some billionaire owners aren't prepared to spend big than how can we expect someone with comparatively modest wealth to do so?

If Bill paid the debts the bank would swallow his money and it would never be seen again. He doesn't have the funds to improve the ground and it probably wouldn't add enough value to make commercial sense in any case. Do you want somebody to invest in the club or do you want a benefactor? An investor would be looking for a return and they wouldn't wait over 10 years to get it.

I don't begrudge him any perks. For one thing we can write them off against tax. If there was transparency where we could see how many hundred of thousands the chairman of other clubs were taking in salaries each year and, if it's to be believed that Bill doesn't take a salary, then we've got a very good deal.

 

[Allezfan]

Neither of us knows what goes on in the boardroom. It's heresay and our own interpretations. So you really think that Bill is hanging on waiting for somebody with more money than sense to meet his valuation? The club is losing money year on year, so the value will surely be going down rather than up. How is he ever going to get the £20m back let alone make a profit?

Bill is playing with his own and his partners money and he's right when he says that they're small fish. Earl is worth £200m. Compare that with Usmanov (Arsenal, £11.2b), Lerner (Villa, £605m), Abramovich (Chelsea, £8b), Al-Fayed (Fulham, £1.2b) Mansour (City, £22.8b), Glazer (United, £1.5b), Ashley (Newcastle, £1.6b), Zingarevich (Reading, £430m), Liebherr (Southampton, £3b), Short (Sunderland, £2b) and Lewis (Spurs, £1.9b). If some billionaire owners aren't prepared to spend big than how can we expect someone with comparatively modest wealth to do so?

If Bill paid the debts the bank would swallow his money and it would never be seen again. He doesn't have the funds to improve the ground and it probably wouldn't add enough value to make commercial sense in any case. Do you want somebody to invest in the club or do you want a benefactor? An investor would be looking for a return and they wouldn't wait over 10 years to get it.

I don't begrudge him any perks. For one thing we can write them off against tax. If there was transparency where we could see how many hundred of thousands the chairman of other clubs were taking in salaries each year and, if it's to be believed that Bill doesn't take a salary, then we've got a very good deal.

Come on, nobody gets involved in football to make money. That's a complete myth,

 

[billycopper]

I would take ANY of the other 19.

ANY.

Really? Changing managers at least once per season? Selling your star players? Mortgaging the club up to the eyeballs? Renaming the ground after your company?

 

[Brennan]

Really? Changing managers at least once per season? Selling your star players? Mortgaging the club up to the eyeballs? Renaming the ground after your company?

Rooney
Lescott
Arteta
Pienaar
Baines (would have happened if he hadn't said no)
Fellaini (is gunna happen if we don't get CL football)

 

[billycopper]

Villa get twice as much per year as we do from their shirt sponsor. Sunderland could get up to £20m per year depending on league position, we're stuck on £4m.

I agree that we're worth more I'm just not sure that it's down to incompetence that we're not getting it. Villa are the first club in England's second city, whereas we're the second club in a smaller city as far as shirt sponsors are concerned. Maybe Elstone would tell you that our deal with Chang is strategically important and also offers benefits in kind? I imagine that it's getting more and more difficult for middling sides to find companies prepared to spend significant amounts on shirt sponsorship.

 

[billycopper]

Rooney
Lescott
Arteta
Pienaar
Baines (would have happened if he hadn't said no)
Fellaini (is gunna happen if we don't get CL football)

I'd argue that Arsenal have suffered far more from the loss of players like Fabregas, Nasri and Van Persie than we have. Selling players is part of their business plan too whereas we try to hold on to our best players. If we didn't have any debt we might not sell anyone, yet Arsenal have money in the bank and continue to trade for profit.

 

[Brennan]

I'd argue that Arsenal have suffered far more from the loss of players like Fabregas, Nasri and Van Persie than we have. Selling players is part of their business plan too whereas we try to hold on to our best players. If we didn't have any debt we might not sell anyone, yet Arsenal have money in the bank and continue to trade for profit.

We're talking about Everton, right ?

And Arsenal also have a big f*** off mortgage, you know to pay for the nice new stadium they have. We could have one of those too if Bill and his mates weren't such monumental bel ends.

 

[billycopper]

Come on, nobody gets involved in football to make money. That's a complete myth,

Supposedly the Glazers borrowed millions to buy United even though they could have afforded to use their own money. From club profits they pay off the interest and keep the rest. They're making fortunes!

I would imagine that Usmanov & Kroenke (Arsenal) and Joe Lewis (Spurs) are at least as interested in the financial side of the game as the sport. I think that Lerner (Villa) and Henry (Liverpool) thought that it might be easier to make money and be successful than it really is.

 

[Bluenose1995]

were going nowhere with that snake in the grass Kenwright running the show sick of seeing that fat lumps face.

 

[Goat]

He said Bill doesnt take a salary lads.

Thats good enough for me.

 

[billycopper]

We're talking about Everton, right ?

And Arsenal also have a big f*** off mortgage, you know to pay for the nice new stadium they have. We could have one of those too if Bill and his mates weren't such monumental bel ends.

Arsenal's stated policy is to invest no more than £15m in young players and to sell them on at the peak of their value. Baines is probably at the peak of his value now but Moyes would fight to keep him unless the offer was too good to turn down. We only occasionally sell our best players whereas it happens almost yearly at the Emirates.

 

[Allezfan]

Supposedly the Glazers borrowed millions to buy United even though they could have afforded to use their own money. From club profits they pay off the interest and keep the rest. They're making fortunes!

I would imagine that Usmanov & Kroenke (Arsenal) and Joe Lewis (Spurs) are at least as interested in the financial side of the game as the sport. I think that Lerner (Villa) and Henry (Liverpool) thought that it might be easier to make money and be successful than it really is.

You don't make money from football and none seriously tries.

Man U might just be the exception but if owners really wanted to make money out of football clubs they wouldn't invest in the playing staff. If Barcelona spent the 16th most on wages and transfers in spain every year, they'd be most profitable. they wouldn't get relegated and their profits would be much higher then now when they're the best team in the world.

But no owners act that way at all and even if they did they would make about a tenth of what the average decent sized non sporting business makes. Just in terms of time it's not worth it. That money could be better spent if you all want in return is money.

Lerner, Henry, Lewis etc have pumped millions into their clubs with no financial reward.