New Everton Owners: The Friedkin Group

[allen]

Like I said last last time, that isn’t my point! It’s nothing to do with saying it won’t work or we shouldn’t be hopeful, i can’t really make that any clearer. I am very simply saying that this isn’t the massive change in MO and evidence of a cleverer/more ruthless approach that some people are suggesting because it’s very much the same sort of thing as we did last time.

You haven’t made your point very clearly, I’m afraid.

How is the Friedkin’s approach “very much the same sort of thing,” that Moshiri did?

 

[Seathestars]

Why did we allow that cockwomble to attend the final game at Goodison when so many Evertonians were desperate to be there. Asking because I don't know but does he have the right to attend because he heads up the Premier League?

Fuming when I saw he had been there on the last day, that smug smarmy face.
He threw us under a bus. I know we avoided 777 because of the PL delaying it, but that points deduction bus came first.

 

[Lanolin]

You haven’t made your point very clearly, I’m afraid.

How is the Friedkin’s approach “very much the same sort of thing,” that Moshiri did?

I don’t know how to make it any clearer. We used a ‘loophole’ to hugely inflate our sponsorship deals with companies he had a massive stake in. It was very much the same sort of thing, and everybody said how clever it was…until it wasn’t. If you want to argue that it’s somehow a totally different thing to save face then knock yourself out, but it’s clearly the same sort of thing in the context of the discussion.

 

[Jokerdan]

Daft question, but could Everton ‘re-buy’ Goodison, the Women’s team or the companies in a few year as a merger… then sell them again to yet another holding company?

Not a daft question, at all. If we follow the Chelsea format then there are clearly so many holes in the financial regulations big enough to drive a horse and cart through that we should have little difficulties in following the same route.

But, of course, unless we do it soon I guarantee that when the likes of Chelsea have maximised their quota Masters and his crew of charlatans will put a stop to it.

We are, currently, probably best placed than any other PL team to manipulate the current financial guidelines insofar as we have a new 'paid for' stadium and an existing legacy stadium plus ladies football team. Even the rent boys haven't got those.

 

[pfim]

Daft question, but could Everton ‘re-buy’ Goodison, the Women’s team or the companies in a few year as a merger… then sell them again to yet another holding company?

There would need to be a difference in the two sales prices for it to matter. Meaning the club bought them for 50m and then sold for 100m.

I don't think that's realistically possible and still be able to get away with it.

 

[allen]

I don’t know how to make it any clearer. We used a ‘loophole’ to hugely inflate our sponsorship deals with companies he had a massive stake in. It was very much the same sort of thing, and everybody said how clever it was…until it wasn’t. If you want to argue that it’s somehow a totally different thing to save face then knock yourself out, but it’s clearly the same sort of thing in the context of the discussion.

But the Friedkins haven’t done that.

I’m honestly confused by what point you’re trying to make about them being similar.

They both tried to find ways of working around the system, that I will of course agree with you on.

But the sheer reality of their approaches aren’t the same at all.

The Friedkins are following the template that has just been proven to work to the Premier League’s satisfaction by Chelsea.

How one regime faired with dodgy sponsorship schemes has no bearing on how the other might fair by doing something totally different - with active precedent this season just gone.

That is ultimately what matters, and why I think it’s fine for people to hope this is a more grown up outfit that’ll have better results.

If you don’t, cool.

 

[Lanolin]

But the Friedkins haven’t done that.

I’m honestly confused by what point you’re trying to make about them being similar.

They both tried to find ways of working around the system, that I will of course agree with you on.

But the sheer reality of their approaches aren’t the same.

The Friedkins are following the template that has just been proven to work to the Premier League’s satisfaction by Chelsea.

How one regime faired with dodgy sponsorship schemes has no bearing on how the other might fair by doing something totally different - with active precedent this season just gone.

That is ultimately what matters, and why I think it’s fine for people to hope this is a more grown up outfit.

If you don’t, cool.

The context of my post was a response to somebody talking about taking advantage of loopholes. Obviously it’s not the same loophole, and I’ve never said it was. I very simply said that we weren’t too nice or too stupid to take advantage of loopholes, because we had taken advantage of a different loophole. That it didn’t work out wasn’t due to them not being grown up or being clever enough to exploit it, it was because economic sanctions from the government meant we could no longer do it. Once again, I am not saying we can’t hope that these lot are more successful, but pretending that this is the type of thing the previous owners wouldn’t have tried to take advantage of is a bit mad, the evidence very strongly suggests they would.

It’s not even a big deal, it’s just 2 bugbears I have; firstly that people try to make these emperors new clothes points about things being totally different even though they aren’t backed up by anything, and secondly people lazily putting everything down to us being ‘too nice’ when most other clubs probably think the exact opposite about us and there’s plenty of reasons they’d be right.

 

[tommye]

But the Friedkins haven’t done that.

I’m honestly confused by what point you’re trying to make about them being similar.

They both tried to find ways of working around the system, that I will of course agree with you on.

But the sheer reality of their approaches aren’t the same at all.

The Friedkins are following the template that has just been proven to work to the Premier League’s satisfaction by Chelsea.

How one regime faired with dodgy sponsorship schemes has no bearing on how the other might fair by doing something totally different - with active precedent this season just gone.

That is ultimately what matters, and why I think it’s fine for people to hope this is a more grown up outfit that’ll have better results.

If you don’t, cool.

The context of my post was a response to somebody talking about taking advantage of loopholes. Obviously it’s not the same loophole, and I’ve never said it was. I very simply said that we weren’t too nice or too stupid to take advantage of loopholes, because we had taken advantage of a different loophole. That it didn’t work out wasn’t due to them not being grown up or being clever enough to exploit it, it was because economic sanctions from the government meant we could no longer do it. Once again, I am not saying we can’t hope that these lot are more successful, but pretending that this is the type of thing the previous owners wouldn’t have tried to take advantage of is a bit mad, the evidence very strongly suggests they would.

It’s not even a big deal, it’s just 2 bugbears I have; firstly that people try to make these emperors new clothes points about things being totally different even though they aren’t backed up by anything, and secondly people lazily putting everything down to us being ‘too nice’ when most other clubs probably think the exact opposite about us and there’s plenty of reasons they’d be right.

Get a room lads.


Preferably without Internet.
Thanks

 

[allen]

Once again, I am not saying we can’t hope that these lot are more successful, but pretending that this is the type of thing the previous owners wouldn’t have tried to take advantage of is a bit mad, the evidence very strongly suggests they would.

Okay, fair enough. You may well be right about that.

I think context is important, though.

Moshiri undertook a $1 billion construction project, with bills for hundreds of millions due regularly, and tried to fund it - and the team - using madcap sponsorship schemes bankrolled by a single Oligarch’s pocket money.

The Friedkins are undertaking a one-off dodge to improve our PSR position.

Their money is coming from a wide range of very wealthy people who believe in them and their vision.

 

[allen]

Get a room lads.


Preferably without Internet.
Thanks

Signing off, I need food!

 

[tommye]

Okay, fair enough. You may well be right about that.

I think context is important, though.

Moshiri undertook a $1 billion construction project, with bills for hundreds of millions due regularly, and tried to fund it - and the team - using madcap sponsorship schemes bankrolled by a single Oligarch’s pocket money.

The Friedkins are undertaking a one-off dodge to improve our PSR position.

Their money is coming from a wide range of very wealthy people who believe in them and their vision.

 

[Street end man]

How does WH Lung/Taipan cope when it's rammed all day Sunday,when we're at home on the same day and if anyone can park there?

 

[allen]

A screed as forthright and frankly superbly written as that takes time to craft, tommye!

I’d not read your perfectly reasonable chastisement until after I’d written it!

 

[Exeter_Gently]

How does WH Lung/Taipan cope when it's rammed all day Sunday,when we're at home on the same day and if anyone can park there?

They've just installed pay and display in their car park.

 

[bluesb1970]

Like I said last last time, that isn’t my point! It’s nothing to do with saying it won’t work or we shouldn’t be hopeful, i can’t really make that any clearer. I am very simply saying that this isn’t the massive change in MO and evidence of a cleverer/more ruthless approach that some people are suggesting because it’s very much the same sort of thing as we did last time.

How can we be doing the same sort of thing, when the new backroom/board has only just come together? Have you got an example of “the same sort of things”?