The Everton Board Thread (Inc. Bill Kenwright / Blue Union)

[Frank Drebin]

I thought he was talking about fatt... I mean Goat.

At least we're not Villa.

Well anyway, was the tamworth post accurate?

 

[Matt Damon]

Well anyway, was the tamworth post accurate?

It was epic popcorn. You obviously enjoyed a bite.

 

[Frank Drebin]

It was epic popcorn. You obviously enjoyed a bite.

It amused me reading it but I wasn't sad enough to research on wikipedia and copy and paste the results. Those people are awful, don't you agree?

 

[Deleted member 28206]

SOMEONE CHIN SOMONE FFS

 

[The Equaliser]

At least we're not City!

 

[davek]

They became accustomed to spending big. Thought they had a divine right to spend. Thought last summer they'd click their fingers and Moyes would be theirs. Thought they actually have more money than us.

Wrong on all counts.



Yes.



I was telling people about this two and a half years ago.



It doesn't matter. Its the scale of the debt that counts. Villa owe Lerner approximately £120million and other institutions another £20million to £30million.

Thats 150% of their annual turnover - at its peak. They're Greece to Everton's - UK.



They made in ONE year that amount greater than us. That was them in Europe.

This season their gates are down % higher than Everton's (which are climbing) and are 15th in the league and are out of both cups.

Their revenues will be down. Depending on how Everton get on in the cup, I'd say our revenue may even be higher this season than theirs.



That may be the case, but its all leveraged to Lerner. Strictly speaking that is debt and not a asset - THEY OWE MORE THAN THOSE ASSETS ARE WORTH.

Lerner can't write it off unless he sells Villa for more than the debt. Then he loses any profit. The fact Villa's turnovers going down means their value is going down. So all in all their position is declining, meaning Lerner has to put more money in to keep the value up, even though he's meant to be cutting costs.

Its a catch 22 situation. Basically meaning they're fecked as a business model.



I agree to certain extent. Commercial revenues, and the commercial infrastructure at the club need money putting into them to generate more money.

That area of Everton needs serious work.



Have they though? Villa can't fill their stadium. Every time I've been there its never full. Has Lerner actually put money into the club? Its all borrowings. He's put more money into just keep them afloat. He's actually taken more money out in 4 years than he's put in!

Additionally they spent money, money they received from Sky and revenue + borrowings. Its not Lerners money. Its all from the Villa balance sheet.

Everton haven't borrowed £150million and aren't that level in NET debt. Additionally, we're not 15th in the league with a declining revenue (on all fronts).



I will look down my nose at them. They spunked themselves £150million into the red ****e and thought that they could take our manager off us last summer. They even claim they're a bigger club than Everton.

For the reasons laid out. Holding Lerner up to be a brilliant owner (as Davek has done over the last two and a half years) is a joke.

Kenwright may have faults and there are issues in the Everton business structure. But the fundamentals of Everton are nothing as bad as Aston Villa.

The amount of money they've spent on wages has crippled them. One thing Kentight has done right is keeping a grip on wages.


However, in Everton's case the scope for commercial revenues at Everton and major failings on improving the structural issues of the club's business model are a cause for concern. But the facts remain. Everton are not - £150million in debt.


At least we're not Villa!

I'd be surprised if that explanation is acceptable to Steken1. You skate over his main point about the assets of Villa way too easily with your 'strictly speaking' nonsense. 'They Owe more than those assets are worth'. You need to break down what Villa's assets actually are to get away with a sweeping statement like that. Whatsmore, they are effectively safe from Lerner because the only way he could get rid of them and get his family's money back on their outlay thus far is to find a new owner - he cant take them down brcik by brick and use the physical properties of a stadium/training facilities etc to put in his back garden and sell them off as job lot. At least with Villa the Lerner's actually have the opportunity to attract a buyer, at least in part, on the basis of those assets: a stadium that can be developed and a training facility that can be done with as they like...unlike at Everton where neither is possible because outsiders to the club control those 'assets'.

Mind you, we shouldn;t be surprised. You were the 'analyst' 18 months ago telling us all that the Everton was stable and had no need for a sell off of players to keep the wolf from the door.

*sigh*

 

[kenada_blue]

I'd be surprised if that explanation is acceptable to Steken1. You skate over his main point about the assets of Villa way too easily with your 'strictly speaking' nonsense. 'They Owe more than those assets are worth'. You need to break down what Villa's assets actually are to get away with a sweeping statement like that. Whatsmore, they are effectively safe from Lerner because the only way he could get rid of them and get his family's money back on their outlay thus far is to find a new owner - he cant take them down brcik by brick and use the physical properties of a stadium/training facilities etc to put in his back garden and sell them off as job lot. At least with Villa the Lerner's actually have the opportunity to attract a buyer, at least in part, on the basis of those assets: a stadium that can be developed and a training facility that can be done with as they like...unlike at Everton where neither is possible because outsiders to the club control those 'assets'.

Mind you, we shouldn;t be surprised. You were the 'analyst' 18 months ago telling us all that the Everton was stable and had no need for a sell off of players to keep the wolf from the door.

*sigh*

He always misses this point.

We're an apparent untapped gold mine.

 

[steken1]

PS.

Lerner put feelers out to try and sell the club three months ago.

SSSHH. Don't tell anyone.

“They became accustomed to spending big. Thought they had a divine right to spend. Thought last summer they'd click their fingers and Moyes would be theirs. Thought they actually have more money than us.

Wrong on all counts.â€

Stated as fact.

Hmmm, they have outspent us by 60-70m over the last three years. They may not have more money than us, but they undoubtedly have access to more credit. Now why could that be?

Odd that they saw fit to protest about the Mcleish appointment and it was well documented at the time that loads jibbed it due to his appointment. You seriously think a group of fans that remained staunch through the Doug Ellis years are deserting because they aren’t spending big.

“It doesn't matter. Its the scale of the debt that counts. Villa owe Lerner approximately £120million and other institutions another £20million to £30million.

Thats 150% of their annual turnover - at its peak. They're Greece to Everton's - UK.â€

latest figures I've seen in the Guardian show Villa have a debt of £110m and are paying interest of £5m. We're paying £4.5m on £45m. The cost of credit is a good indicator to as to the health of a company.

Also, the ability to service debt is more important than scale. Unless you think Man Utd are in a worse position than Everton?

Using an EU analogy is a good one. Certain countries have the ability to improve their situation of their own volition; other countries are reliant on the group to keep them afloat. I know which group EFC belongs to.

Their owner could pay or write off their debt without a second thought should he choose to. Ours would be hard pressed to pay for the sandwiches at the AGM. Perhaps that’s why we don’t have any?

Another important factor is who this debt is owed to. Its unlikely Lerner will call in the debt to the point where his own business cannot function. Everton are begging the banks every season "not to kill us". Our debts could be called in tomorrow. A financial collapse at any of our creditors would see us in Administration immediately.

“They made in ONE year that amount greater than us. That was them in Europe.â€

A bog standard run in the Europa League worth £12m???

Their gates are down by a higher percentage but their take at the gate was £5m higher than ours to start with. They also have a far greater provision for corporate sales and their gates are still higher than ours. Their commercial side also makes some £4m more than EFC, how is that likely to change, considering both clubs have been crap all season. Throw in they are not giving free sponsorship to a local charity this year and your well out!

I'd be shocked if EFC took more in matchday income than them. I just can't see it.


“That may be the case, but its all leveraged to Lerner. Strictly speaking that is debt and not a asset - THEY OWE MORE THAN THOSE ASSETS ARE WORTH.

Lerner can't write it off unless he sells Villa for more than the debt. Then he loses any profit. The fact Villa's turnovers going down means their value is going down. So all in all their position is declining, meaning Lerner has to put more money in to keep the value up, even though he's meant to be cutting costs.

Its a catch 22 situation. Basically meaning they're fecked as a business model.â€

Now they have sold almost £70m in players with much of that due to be paid over the next few years. Their debt will drop massively in the next two financial years. Our own accounts show ours will remain stagnant with only the overdraft looking like coming down.

So the income from player sales will take them to 70ish million. They own a training ground and Stadium worth £30m??? (conservative est) and they do not have a charge over their future season ticket sales.

Then they have a debt owed to the owner of the company at a net position of £40m. They have a turnover higher than ours and scope to kick on.

No doubt they are in a bad place. BUT take into account their debt is likely much lower in this years and next years accounts, they have assets worth £30M??? and they have access to cheaper credit and more of it if an opportunity to boost infrastructure should arise and you have a club IMO in a healthier position than us. For the simple reason we have absolutely no room for manouvre and nobody trying to create any.

 

[kenada_blue]

Steken1 has delivered one hell of a body blow there

 

[davek]

“They became accustomed to spending big. Thought they had a divine right to spend. Thought last summer they'd click their fingers and Moyes would be theirs. Thought they actually have more money than us.

Wrong on all counts.â€

Stated as fact.

Hmmm, they have outspent us by 60-70m over the last three years. They may not have more money than us, but they undoubtedly have access to more credit. Now why could that be?

Odd that they saw fit to protest about the Mcleish appointment and it was well documented at the time that loads jibbed it due to his appointment. You seriously think a group of fans that remained staunch through the Doug Ellis years are deserting because they aren’t spending big.

“It doesn't matter. Its the scale of the debt that counts. Villa owe Lerner approximately £120million and other institutions another £20million to £30million.

Thats 150% of their annual turnover - at its peak. They're Greece to Everton's - UK.â€

latest figures I've seen in the Guardian show Villa have a debt of £110m and are paying interest of £5m. We're paying £4.5m on £45m. The cost of credit is a good indicator to as to the health of a company.

Also, the ability to service debt is more important than scale. Unless you think Man Utd are in a worse position than Everton?

Using an EU analogy is a good one. Certain countries have the ability to improve their situation of their own volition; other countries are reliant on the group to keep them afloat. I know which group EFC belongs to.

Their owner could pay or write off their debt without a second thought should he choose to. Ours would be hard pressed to pay for the sandwiches at the AGM. Perhaps that’s why we don’t have any?

Another important factor is who this debt is owed to. Its unlikely Lerner will call in the debt to the point where his own business cannot function. Everton are begging the banks every season "not to kill us". Our debts could be called in tomorrow. A financial collapse at any of our creditors would see us in Administration immediately.

“They made in ONE year that amount greater than us. That was them in Europe.â€

A bog standard run in the Europa League worth £12m???

Their gates are down by a higher percentage but their take at the gate was £5m higher than ours to start with. They also have a far greater provision for corporate sales and their gates are still higher than ours. Their commercial side also makes some £4m more than EFC, how is that likely to change, considering both clubs have been crap all season. Throw in they are not giving free sponsorship to a local charity this year and your well out!

I'd be shocked if EFC took more in matchday income than them. I just can't see it.


“That may be the case, but its all leveraged to Lerner. Strictly speaking that is debt and not a asset - THEY OWE MORE THAN THOSE ASSETS ARE WORTH.

Lerner can't write it off unless he sells Villa for more than the debt. Then he loses any profit. The fact Villa's turnovers going down means their value is going down. So all in all their position is declining, meaning Lerner has to put more money in to keep the value up, even though he's meant to be cutting costs.

Its a catch 22 situation. Basically meaning they're fecked as a business model.â€

Now they have sold almost £70m in players with much of that due to be paid over the next few years. Their debt will drop massively in the next two financial years. Our own accounts show ours will remain stagnant with only the overdraft looking like coming down.

So the income from player sales will take them to 70ish million. They own a training ground and Stadium worth £30m??? (conservative est) and they do not have a charge over their future season ticket sales.

Then they have a debt owed to the owner of the company at a net position of £40m. They have a turnover higher than ours and scope to kick on.

No doubt they are in a bad place. BUT take into account their debt is likely much lower in this years and next years accounts, they have assets worth £30M??? and they have access to cheaper credit and more of it if an opportunity to boost infrastructure should arise and you have a club IMO in a healthier position than us. For the simple reason we have absolutely no room for manouvre and nobody trying to create any.

 

[Elong]

That's one hell of a counter that.

 

[Deleted member 28206]

BANG BOOM GOODNIGHT. TWEET TWEET

 

[Matt Damon]

Stated as fact.

Hmmm, they have outspent us by 60-70m over the last three years. They may not have more money than us, but they undoubtedly have access to more credit. Now why could that be?

IT IS FACT. They may have outspent us, but what have they won. They may have HAD more access to credit, but that access to credit is now gone. Why else are they selling players and cutting costs across the board?

Odd that they saw fit to protest about the Mcleish appointment and it was well documented at the time that loads jibbed it due to his appointment. You seriously think a group of fans that remained staunch through the Doug Ellis years are deserting because they aren’t spending big.

Yes. That coupled to the fact the economy of the midlands took a bigger downturn relative to the Northwest as its primarily secondary manufacturing (automotive) whilst the northwest is primary manufacturing and its automotive plants are ranked as higher efficiency.

This has led to attendances being down 14% at times for them. Averaged at 7-8% for the season.

latest figures I've seen in the Guardian show Villa have a debt of £110m and are paying interest of £5m. We're paying £4.5m on £45m. The cost of credit is a good indicator to as to the health of a company.

Also, the ability to service debt is more important than scale. Unless you think Man Utd are in a worse position than Everton?

Using an EU analogy is a good one. Certain countries have the ability to improve their situation of their own volition; other countries are reliant on the group to keep them afloat. I know which group EFC belongs to.

Their owner could pay or write off their debt without a second thought should he choose to. Ours would be hard pressed to pay for the sandwiches at the AGM. Perhaps that’s why we don’t have any?

Aston Villa owe £140million. The Guardian figures being reported under report their loss in 2009/2010. That was quoted as £28million however the actual figure was between £40m to £46m.

What they actually did is shift debt from banks. But it was only moved not paid back.

Net debt are by my estimation £146million.

Another important factor is who this debt is owed to. Its unlikely Lerner will call in the debt to the point where his own business cannot function. Everton are begging the banks every season "not to kill us". Our debts could be called in tomorrow. A financial collapse at any of our creditors would see us in Administration immediately.

Lerner operates a group of companies. Should one part of the group not perform and be a risk to his other businesses - he will be forced to liquidate that group company to protect the group. Other shareholders will demand it.

A bog standard run in the Europa League worth £12m???

Their gates are down by a higher percentage but their take at the gate was £5m higher than ours to start with. They also have a far greater provision for corporate sales and their gates are still higher than ours. Their commercial side also makes some £4m more than EFC, how is that likely to change, considering both clubs have been crap all season. Throw in they are not giving free sponsorship to a local charity this year and your well out!

Yes. This extra revenue was in their own accounts down to extra revenue from European football and extra sponsorship. You do know they had a major issue with a sponsor who pulled out don't you?

I'd be shocked if EFC took more in matchday income than them. I just can't see it.

Everton certainly can if Villa's (never capacity) gates fall by 11%.

Now they have sold almost £70m in players with much of that due to be paid over the next few years. Their debt will drop massively in the next two financial years. Our own accounts show ours will remain stagnant with only the overdraft looking like coming down.

They sold £40million and purchased £10million worth last summer. £30million of that has already been accounted for as DEBT in the previous seasons accounts. So the net position which the guardian is saying £110million; but that fails to account for further projected losses and a declining revenue. So the net position is £146million debt as I see it.

So the income from player sales will take them to 70ish million. They own a training ground and Stadium worth £30m??? (conservative est) and they do not have a charge over their future season ticket sales.

Then they have a debt owed to the owner of the company at a net position of £40m. They have a turnover higher than ours and scope to kick on.

No it wont. For the reasons already stated. You've included player transfer income that has already been included in previous seasons. That is what known as "Double Counting".

You've massively overstated the sales in the summer. Combined this was no more than £38 million and minus N'zogbia don't come to a net improvement of more than £28million in the debt position. Even then they've continued to lose around £20 to £28 million million this season.

Remember - Their revenue has declined negating any improvement due to cutting costs. At best they've treaded water in net debt terms for the season.

You've made a huge assumption there which is totally incorrect, doubling what they actually took in in transfers!

Scope to kick on? Are you having a laugh?

No doubt they are in a bad place. BUT take into account their debt is likely much lower in this years and next years accounts, they have assets worth £30M??? and they have access to cheaper credit and more of it if an opportunity to boost infrastructure should arise and you have a club IMO in a healthier position than us. For the simple reason we have absolutely no room for manouvre and nobody trying to create any.

They are in a very bad place. "much likely". Laughable. Their debt will stay the same and won't start to come down until next years accounts (if at all) even then it'll be no more than 10% decrease (on £150million) and that assumes they'll sell someone else and don't make a net spend.

They are NOT in a healthier position than us. They have absolutely no room to manoeuvre.

Their debt is near £150million. They've sold and sold. Shifted debt around attempted to cut wage costs, have a declining revenue stream.

To say they're in a better position than us is ridiculous.

Especially in cost management terms.

AT LEAST WE'RE NOT VILLA!

 

[Phenom]

He really does all that research and font changing purely for his popcorning, ok then.

 

[davek]

IT IS FACT. They may have outspent us, but what have they won. They may have HAD more access to credit, but that access to credit is now gone. Why else are they selling players and cutting costs across the board?



Yes. That coupled to the fact the economy of the midlands took a bigger downturn relative to the Northwest as its primarily secondary manufacturing (automotive) whilst the northwest is primary manufacturing and its automotive plants are ranked as higher efficiency.

This has led to attendances being down 14% at times for them. Averaged at 7-8% for the season.



Aston Villa owe £140million. The Guardian figures being reported under report their loss in 2009/2010. That was quoted as £28million however the actual figure was between £40m to £46m.

What they actually did is shift debt from banks. But it was only moved not paid back.

Net debt are by my estimation £146million.



Lerner operates a group of companies. Should one part of the group not perform and be a risk to his other businesses - he will be forced to liquidate that group company to protect the group. Other shareholders will demand it.




Yes. This extra revenue was in their own accounts down to extra revenue from European football and extra sponsorship. You do know they had a major issue with a sponsor who pulled out don't you?



Everton certainly can if Villa's (never capacity) gates fall by 11%.



They sold £40million and purchased £10million worth last summer. £30million of that has already been accounted for as DEBT in the previous seasons accounts. So the net position which the guardian is saying £110million; but that fails to account for further projected losses and a declining revenue. So the net position is £146million debt as I see it.



No it wont. For the reasons already stated. You've included player transfer income that has already been included in previous seasons. That is what known as "Double Counting".

You've massively overstated the sales in the summer. Combined this was no more than £38 million and minus N'zogbia don't come to a net improvement of more than £28million in the debt position. Even then they've continued to lose around £20 to £28 million million this season.

Remember - Their revenue has declined negating any improvement due to cutting costs. At best they've treaded water in net debt terms for the season.

You've made a huge assumption there which is totally incorrect, doubling what they actually took in in transfers!

Scope to kick on? Are you having a laugh?



They are in a very bad place. "much likely". Laughable. Their debt will stay the same and won't start to come down until next years accounts (if at all) even then it'll be no more than 10% decrease (on £150million) and that assumes they'll sell someone else and don't make a net spend.

They are NOT in a healthier position than us. They have absolutely no room to manoeuvre.

Their debt is near £150million. They've sold and sold. Shifted debt around attempted to cut wage costs, have a declining revenue stream.

To say they're in a better position than us is ridiculous.

Especially in cost management terms.

AT LEAST WE'RE NOT VILLA!