Bill Kenwright

[Exeter_Gently]

Won’t back down will he I have to give him that

Bill must have something on him.

 

[4737carlin]

Ineptitude was happening at this club long before he came on the scene.

Only for it to be made a lot worse by his messing, hopefully this window is the start of us getting back to where we were 6 + years ago and the regularity of top 8 finishes and European football

 

[4737carlin]

I don't really see why anyone would clap him one way or the other really. He is not a player or anything. It would be like clapping someone from the box office.

Good point that, its like when a player gets sent off and fans clap him as he leaves the field, just bizzare

 

[Papa Shango]

Good point that, its like when a player gets sent off and fans clap him as he leaves the field, just bizzare

Depends what they are getting sent off for...

 

[Papa Shango]

Bill needs to go away and let the dust settle

I think people may soften on him in time, but how can we miss him if he won't go away?

Well he's a fan isn't he? He will always be there in some form (unlike someone else).

What I do find odd is why do the cameras always pan to him during a game? I get it if there is someone vaguely important in the box with him, Southgate for example, but does this happen at other clubs when they are on telly?

Genuinely have no idea as I don't watch other clubs, I have just always found it a bit odd.

 

[Jokerdan]

He's an old 'hoofer'. Of course he wants his visage on the screen.

 

[Joey66]

Not sure City ownership were ever really interested to be honest mate.

People look at Kings dock with misty eyes as well and forget the detail of the deal, I remember it well, if we moved there it was a mixed ownership arrangement, the club would only have owned 49% of the development and been a minority shareholder in the development and revenue on the stadium would have been shared with other key stakeholders of the development who controlled 51%. Ultimately it would have been a cracking stadium but probably a bad deal for the club, it would have been owned by a management company of which we would have had just a minority 49% stake.

The whole narrative around king dock has got so narrow over the years and much detail of the deal omitted or younger fans just don’t remember it and think we just didn’t get this brilliant stadium we would own outright for next to nothing, that would have made us really wealthy, when really that wasn’t the case at all. The deal was completely different.

Thats before you look at the reverse mortgage thing, which we rightly swerved, that ultimately scuppered the whole thing.

It was far more complex then is often portrayed.

It would have been the making of us mate BK & his train set as he would not get another 30 million of investment, so he could keep his toy train set - add then the Kirkby stadia debacle - how much funds were wasted on that farce?

 

[Ralphie Boy]

is this the sarcasm thread or what?we still havent replaced Lukaku and yet we have had a successful transfer window?
What about all the years of dross he has overseen us buy.

close thread now for pity’s sake.

 

[Westend Blue]

Moshiri has probably payed more to kia Joorby then kenwrong has put actual money into the club in the last 33 years

 

[Papa Shango]

He's an old 'hoofer'. Of course he wants his visage on the screen.

I am sure he does but he doesn't control the Sky/BT etc cameras.

Actually wouldn't shock me if people claimed he does...

 

[Papa Shango]

Moshiri has probably payed more to kia Joorby then kenwrong has put actual money into the club in the last 33 years

This is not a good thing!

 

[Westend Blue]

This is not a good thing!

Not saying it is or that the football decisions have been sound but bull gets away with murder for how little he has done for the club monetary wise

 

[Tom Hughes]

Another issue a lot of younger fans dont get is how back then the money in the game was a fraction of what it is now, as an example a few months later United bought Ronaldo, the fee was 12m, ok we couldn't find the money, but that was understandable, besides Kings Dock might not have benefited us that much anyway, just look at how many clubs back then did move and went backwards.
As for the City owners thing, if they really wanted us they would of made a real move on the club, they didnt

Again, rewriting history. Our contribution for the Kings Dock stadium was roughly the cost of One teenage Wayne Rooney to Man Utd (sold a year later at a grossly reduced rate because the club's finances under Kenwright were an absolute mess). Other clubs weren't getting anything like our deal.... to say Kings Dock wouldn't have been favourable, yet a smaller BMD would with less capacity, less flexibility, less corporate in an inferior location at a cost of £550-700m is nonsense.

 

[4737carlin]

Again, rewriting history. Our contribution for the Kings Dock stadium was roughly the cost of One teenage Wayne Rooney to Man Utd (sold a year later at a grossly reduced rate because the club's finances under Kenwright were an absolute mess). Other clubs weren't getting anything like our deal.... to say Kings Dock wouldn't have been favourable, yet a smaller BMD would with less capacity, less flexibility, less corporate in an inferior location at a cost of £550-700m is nonsense.

Haha really read what you have just wrote, you actually said

"the club's finances under Kenwright were an absolute mess"

You wrote that a few weeks after we have just had to sell a player because FFP restrictions were a reality 6 or so years into a successor took control of the club.

 

[Tom Hughes]

Wouldn't agree with that interpretation at all mate. We hold very different memories, analysis and i would suggest opinions on those events.

Each to their own on the opinion of the deal, i think it was a poor one that wouldn't have benefited the club for the facts and reasons i outlined in my post, in terms of ownership, minority stake in the holding company and revenue distribution.

That's not to say Bill would have gone for it, if events had of transpired differently he probably would have, it has however turned into a bit of unicorn and the fact of the process seem to have gotten lost. It wasn't a great deal at all, the stadium was cracking though, but Everton would have been a minority shareholder in terms of ownership and revenue generation.

Additionally and personally i was and would have been wholly against Greggs reverse mortgage proposal - we know how they go.

I attended every AGM at that time and followed every bit of news on it. These excuses were never offered because they could never be substantiated as unfavourable. Kenwright offered no answers to the questions. The reverse mortgage was for an absolute pittance and we were getting a 49% stake..... making us the single biggest stakeholder. Entitled to all football related income, with a director who was going to benefit from the other activities. How can that have possibly not been in our favour? The power struggle that ensued was what sunk the deal...... the Council, Liverpool vision, city planners and other stakeholders couldn't believe it. They'd assembled a financial package of leveraged enabling development and investment funds and grants and the club turned it down!! All well documented!