Investment in Everton

Status
Not open for further replies.
They can't sell ALL of the shares can they? What about Joey Blue Socks who owns 1 or 2 shares and paid £3k. I think theres only 35,000 shares in the company,

what difference do you think that would that make to our current situation of needing a new stadium etc???

do you mean to raise funds as opposed to 'investment' thru selling the shares at inflated prices?? or floating the company?

i'm no economist. just want your full stance on this.

(not bad at monopoly though - the oranges, always the oranges)

It's not that difficult to understand really: the major shareholders agree to sell their shares...buyers look at the whole of what it'd mean to buy those shares in Everton, what needs to be done, what they could hope to achieve, then either agree a deal or walk away. My point is that it's never been tried. Not ever. Paul Gregg requested the sale of the club. No chance, nothing doing. And he was inside the boardroom. It's just investment and status quo that's on offer. When that scenario changes we can all rest happily in the knowledge that Everton does not have its buyer and we can all get our heads down and accept the shitty hand fate has dealt us.
 

It's not that difficult to understand really: the major shareholders agree to sell their shares...buyers look at the whole of what it'd mean to buy those shares in Everton, what needs to be done, what they could hope to achieve, then either agree a deal or walk away. My point is that it's never been tried. Not ever. Paul Gregg requested the sale of the club. No chance, nothing doing. And he was inside the boardroom. It's just investment and status quo that's on offer. When that scenario changes we can all rest happily in the knowledge that Everton does not have its buyer and we can all get our heads down and accept the shitty hand fate has dealt us.

So the shareholders offer to sell their shares to someone who understands fully what the club need and then promise to follow thru on these 'needs'.

Does that mean we'd need a new majority shareholder and therefore Bill to sell his majority? Its confusing stuff but is that not the situation we are in now?

Do you, in your opinion think there is a company / individual out there who would happily purchase the shares and build us a new stadium (with transport links) ????

as oppose to someone who would lets say 'blindly' invest in a football club under the impression we want to be a brand like Manchester United and part of a global conglomorate?

It is possible don't get me wrong, but who????

Is your point that we should try it, and if there really is no one out there interested, then we would at least know and can accept our fate?

i think thats fair.
 
Just some definitions for those who don't seem to know the difference:

in·vest·ment
   /ɪnˈvɛstmənt/ [in-vest-muhnt]
–noun
1.
the investing of money or capital in order to gain profitable returns, as interest, income, or appreciation in value.

NOT

do·na·tion
   [doh-nay-shun]
–noun
1.
an act or instance of presenting something as a gift, grant, or contribution.
 
Just some definitions for those who don't seem to know the difference:

in·vest·ment
   /ɪnˈvɛstmənt/ [in-vest-muhnt]
–noun
1.
the investing of money or capital in order to gain profitable returns, as interest, income, or appreciation in value.

NOT

do·na·tion
   [doh-nay-shun]
–noun
1.
an act or instance of presenting something as a gift, grant, or contribution.

Thats quite condescending of you. cheers mate.

point taken though.
 
Thats quite condescending of you. cheers mate.

point taken though.

I did think that when I was writing it actually!

All I wanted to point out was that most people on here seem to want someone to put in some short term cash to take more out over time, effectively gambling on us substantially increasing our income. We've all seen that, generally, it doesn't work out that way.
 

I did think that when I was writing it actually!

All I wanted to point out was that most people on here seem to want someone to put in some short term cash to take more out over time, effectively gambling on us substantially increasing our income. We've all seen that, generally, it doesn't work out that way.

agreed. business is business i guess, business is about dishonesty.

I get a bag of potatos for £20, split it in two, then sell both bags for £15.

I'm a tenner up, but if the customers found out they'd scream daylight robbery,

I'm screaming 'free enterprise'...

what do you do?

*shrugs
 
It could be that most of the people that have thus far approached us don't actually have a great deal of cash in the liquidity sense of the word, and any purchase would therefore be done on borrowed cash. There are no shortage of examples of this being incredibly bad news.
 
Fact is if someone like Hicks took over us, or Earle if he could stump up the cash. We would end up disappearing. We don't have the reputation, or media love. So yeah lets get some person who is not interested in Everton, like Hicks was not interested in Liverpool - and allow them to use our club as a vehicle to make them money, and not us.

Is that what we want?

We invest in the club at grass roots level. Like we have been doing for the past 10 years. Become self-sufficient that way.

For me I would prefer that any day and I guarantee that if a Yank came knocking with a billion to screw us over, it will happen, and we will yearn for the Kenwright days.

Careful what you wish for. We don't have the stability to cope with the [Poor language removed] that Liverpool have had.
 
So we dont want a Chairman that comes in and buys the Club for very little and hopes to sell on for a much higher price and yet doesnt "invest" any of his own money into the Club??

*IRONY ALERT*

MEEP MEEEP MEEEEP
 

Would Kenwright still be at the helm if Moyes wasnt manager and doing his magic?

Would Kenwright sell up if we were fighting relegation every year and someone came up to buy us?

I still believe the rest of the board and not just Kenwright have a massive part to play in the "put nothing in, try and get something out" brigade (we do have weathly business men at the club, but none who want to part with their cash).

Kenwright aint in any rush. The mentality is - We're generating a small profit, we're building additions to the ground that will bring a revenue stream. The team has been built over years that is self sufficient ie buy a player for £2mill, sell for £10mill etc in terms of transfers. There's no real need to pump money into the team as its doing a decent job.

Now this is bollocks because it'll just go round in circles as it has been for years.

We're lucky to have Moyes who seems to take that mentality on the chin and gets on finding good players for cheap or getting rid of players to make money for new ones.

But if that did happen...I'm sure we'd have probably had mutliple owners over the years.
 
Bill would be a great chairman if he could just cease lying for a year or two, smash his Gerry Marsden YNWA LP in half, bring back AGM's to the people's club, make a decent financial decision every now and again, take the gagging orders off Wynness Birch and Gregg, go public on the ownership of the club/relationship with Philip Green, and reduce the asking price on the sale of the club to market value.

I *know* he can do it, he's ex boys pen.:dance::dance::dance:
 
Bill would be a great chairman if he could just cease lying for a year or two, smash his Gerry Marsden YNWA LP in half, bring back AGM's to the people's club, make a decent financial decision every now and again, take the gagging orders off Wynness Birch and Gregg, go public on the ownership of the club/relationship with Philip Green, and reduce the asking price on the sale of the club to market value.

I *know* he can do it, he's ex boys pen.:dance::dance::dance:

Theres a difference between an owner and a chairman you know. See H&G.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join Grand Old Team to get involved in the Everton discussion. Signing up is quick, easy, and completely free.

Shop

Back
Top