Club Report Overall Operating Loss of Nearly £7M

[GhostOfDixie]

You're joking me, how?

Are we more attractive to investment now? Is the current stadium capable of providing us with the money need to compete?

It really depends mate on what happens next, and we just have to wait and see and not speculate that the doomesday scenario is fast on the horizon, because we just don't no.

I doubt for a single second that the LCC is going to cast away one of it's biggest selling assets. I would wait to see what happens first mate. Hold tight and stay strong bro.

 

[Goat]

You're joking me, how?

Are we more attractive to investment now? Is the current stadium capable of providing us with the money need to compete?

Well we dont need to find £78m for a start, win, win surely?

 

[chicoazul]

I was all doomsday for a moment there like.

 

[Goat]

If we didnt get invest with 2 5th place finishes and an FA Cup Final, we aint gonna get it off the back of the utter gash season we are having at the moment.

Hows that for Doomsday.

 

[Gwladys St. Glory]

Is the current stadium capable of providing us with the money need to compete?

Has for over 100 years Chico but that's irrelevant because it's not the stadium itself that generates funds year over year. Are you suggesting City's new stadium is funding their purchases? They'd have been in no better position to challenge the top 4 with it if you take their ownership out of the equation.

Three things fund a club more than anything else, the supporters (gate receipts etc.), the board and the clubs results on the pitch. Other than upping the seating capacity to provide more gate revenue the stadium has little to do with long term sustainability. Considering how "awful" Goodison Park is only proves that point.

There's a reason the majority of our debt is secured against gate receipts. Evertonian's are the clubs greatest assest, not the damn stadium, bless her.

 

[GhostOfDixie]

If we didnt get invest with 2 5th place finishes and an FA Cup Final, we aint gonna get it off the back of the utter gash season we are having at the moment.

Hows that for Doomsday.

stay off the skunk man.

 

[TX Bill]

I knew I'd get the blame. Davewrong.

Damn me...damn me to hell and back.

Picturing half buried Statue of Liberty here.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

Has for over 100 years Chico but that's irrelevant because it's not the stadium itself that generates funds year over year. Are you suggesting City's new stadium is funding their purchases? They'd have been in no better position to challenge the top 4 with it if you take their ownership out of the equation.

Three things fund a club more than anything else, the supporters (gate receipts etc.), the board and the clubs results on the pitch. Other than upping the seating capacity to provide more gate revenue the stadium has little to do with long term sustainability. Considering how "awful" Goodison Park is only proves that point.

There's a reason the majority of our debt is secured against gate receipts. Evertonian's are the clubs greatest assest, not the damn stadium, bless her.

That's like saying Old Trafford back in 1990 would be good enough for Man Utd now, or Highbury would have been good enough for Arsenal back then. They're the two clubs in this league that are self sufficient and have to be the role models we go after rather than the Chelseas and Man City's of this world.

For the people that have skipped the issue of what next. I dare say Chico is primarily swiping at KEIOC rather than you, as its their stuff that you have all consumed to come up with your anti-Kirkby stance. It's the easiest thing in the world to say something is crap. Proposing something different is a bit harder but still nowhere near as hard as actually getting on and doing something.

So surely if KEIOC were so confident that this scheme would fail instead of sitting here smugly saying "told you so..." they'd have several alternatives ready and waiting for the fateful day when DK flopped where they can really earn their corn. "**** yeah, we've got our wish, now we can go to this wonderful stadium in this wonderful location that we've wanted all along. Here you go Bill..."

But nothing. No doubt the advocates will say "ah, it's not their job to do anything constructive, that's the job of the board..." Cop out I say. The people behind KEIOC are clearly no mugs, so lets see what you boys have got.

 

[davek]

That's like saying Old Trafford back in 1990 would be good enough for Man Utd now, or Highbury would have been good enough for Arsenal back then. They're the two clubs in this league that are self sufficient and have to be the role models we go after rather than the Chelseas and Man City's of this world.

For the people that have skipped the issue of what next. I dare say Chico is primarily swiping at KEIOC rather than you, as its their stuff that you have all consumed to come up with your anti-Kirkby stance. It's the easiest thing in the world to say something is crap. Proposing something different is a bit harder but still nowhere near as hard as actually getting on and doing something.

So surely if KEIOC were so confident that this scheme would fail instead of sitting here smugly saying "told you so..." they'd have several alternatives ready and waiting for the fateful day when DK flopped where they can really earn their corn. "**** yeah, we've got our wish, now we can go to this wonderful stadium in this wonderful location that we've wanted all along. Here you go Bill..."

But nothing. No doubt the advocates will say "ah, it's not their job to do anything constructive, that's the job of the board..." Cop out I say. The people behind KEIOC are clearly no mugs, so lets see what you boys have got.

You're way better than that, Bruce.

The corpse of Destination Kirkby is barely cold and you're expecting a campaign group with no control over the club's ownership to lay down and enforce a Plan B immediately? Read those two paragraphs back to yourself!

As far as that IS concerned, though, I do hear something will be forthcoming in the near future by way of an idea for a new stadium venture which will be costed. Let's wait and see. In the absence of this clueless and bankrupt board of directors coming up with one, it'll be a welcome development. The board of directors are currently in 'stew in our own piss' mode, so expect precisely fcuk all from that quarter.

 

[The Esk]

There are two basic models for running a football club successfully. Success meaning the ability to compete in the Premiership and Europe with a reasonable chance of winning a trophy.

The first is based on a traditional business model which is moderate investment, then ensure it is profitable, ie have income greater than expenditure, and re-invest the profits to make the business grow. In the case of a football club that means buying better players and paying higher wages out of the cash the business generates. Only Man United and Arsenal are anywhere near this business model.Tottenham would be the next nearest although they've consistently sold players to generate profits.

The second and most recent model is to have a balance sheet so great that it does not matter what losses the company makes, there's always sufficient capital to meet those losses. The best example of this is Chelsea and now Manchester City.

Incidentally Liverpool do not fit into either model, their income is too small and their owners not wealthy enough to support the second model. Hence it is unlikely they'll win the Premiership with their current owners, unless they find and inject significant cash into the business.

Everton are in exactly the same position, not enough income, and a balance sheet that must make their bankers whince on a daily basis.

The solution for Everton is a change of ownership. Despite what BK says about the lack of suitable investors, the truth is that there are investors out there, but not at the price he commands for his shares. The irony of course is that now post Kirkby, the longer he waits to sell the less valuable his shares become.

Post new ownership, what model would apply to Everton? In the first instance it must be to have a capital base to meet losses, fund investment in playing staff, and a new stadium. Only then perhaps in 5 years time could we perhaps see a profitable business, able to support and develop itself. These factors of course, reduce the price investors would be prepared to pay for the club.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

This is the thing though isn't it? I dare say that, correctly, the club will be chastised for not having a plan B but it seems equally so that KEIOC didn't have a plan post their campaign actually working. The whole stadium project has been going on for ages and there have been precious few alternatives supplied by any of the protagonists in this whole debacle.

The key to any successful negotiation is having a strong next best alternative. KEIOC suggest that taking the club to Kirkby will mean we lose, but as far as I can see making us stay put means we lose too. Where the heck is the scenario whereby the club wins?

That's what gets me about this whole thing. It's almost like it's not so much an anti-Kirkby campaign as an anti-Kenright one and as soon you start getting personal in any debate you've pretty much lost because rather than creating win-win situations you start taking up positions that you're then forced to defend.

That's what has happened here. KEIOC have said Kirkby is [Poor language removed] no matter what. The club have said Kirkby is great no matter what, and the two have been waging this stupid war over the past few years rather than working together to build something great that both parties could support.

Rest assured this is not a good time for our club and it saddens me that many here appear to be almost gloating just because Kenright has fallen on his face.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

The solution for Everton is a change of ownership. Despite what BK says about the lack of suitable investors, the truth is that there are investors out there, but not at the price he commands for his shares. The irony of course is that now post Kirkby, the longer he waits to sell the less valuable his shares become.

I'm afraid this is an argument I simply don't understand. If we're to jump into the Man City/Chelsea league then we need mega wealthy people, not just the Gillettes or Lerners of this world, the multi billionaire types that are happy to throw money away without wanting an immediate return. So on the one hand we're saying there must be lots of these types out there, but on the other hand saying these multi billionaires are being put off buying the club because Kenright apparently wants a few million more.

Does that really make sense?

 

[The Esk]

I'm afraid this is an argument I simply don't understand. If we're to jump into the Man City/Chelsea league then we need mega wealthy people, not just the Gillettes or Lerners of this world, the multi billionaire types that are happy to throw money away without wanting an immediate return. So on the one hand we're saying there must be lots of these types out there, but on the other hand saying these multi billionaires are being put off buying the club because Kenright apparently wants a few million more.

Does that really make sense?

Yes it makes absolute sense. Most of these super wealthy types are happy to throw millions at things they own, but reluctant to acquire those assets in the first place at over-inflated prices. Possibly it's an ego thing, but I see it in other sectors not football.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

Is that a hunch or a fact?

 

[The Esk]

Fact based on personal experience