Jump to content
IGNORED

Board/Owners Related Stuff


Recommended Posts

 

I have no idea what a gold stat is so I certainly wont be handing any out

 

The Board should be applauded for showing a bit of backbone in the Stones saga but you are trying to turn a positive into a negative. You have them down as a bunch of lying crooks who are fleecing the club , yet they have massively backed the manager by turning down a record bid for a defender

 

You're quick enough to moan about the Board and throw around wild accusations and conspiracy theories, at least have the balls to acknowledge when they get it right

Ok, well done board for rejecting an offer less than what John stones is realistically worth. £13m less than what Chelsea sold David "nut meg me" luiz for.

 

I guess the fact that we don't "need" to sell is down to all the commercial deals we've signed? Nope.Good old dickie scudamore thats who

 

Backing the manager??? Don't make me laugh. You have seen our net spend haven't you???

 

who have stoke had to sell? No one as far as I can see, but they have shaquiri doing a good job...

 

I suppose when the board has sold practically everything that isn't nailed down and outsourced everything else I guess retaining a player is a big thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I won't bother reading any more. Haf, Dunc, anyone - explain what is covered in "other operating costs".

Until we know what that MIGHT entail, stop arguing!

 

It's like arguing Astro-physics, only a few understand it. Otherwise, there's no poin discussing

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I won't bother reading any more. Haf, Dunc, anyone - explain what is covered in "other operating costs".

Until we know what that MIGHT entail, stop arguing!

 

It's like arguing Astro-physics, only a few understand it. Otherwise, there's no poin discussing

 

Said it before. Pencil sharpeners, chartering planes to Krasnodar/Australia/USA, paper clips, hotel bills, Finch Farm fixtures and fittings, leccy bills (significant figure, floodlights at the ground probably need more than 50p in the meter). Everything that isn't specifically itemised in the accounts, and the auditors will see the receipts for all of it before they sign off.

 

I've said it before, I've been audited in the past when I was treasurer for a charity for a few years, you keep records of everything and any discrepancy will be flagged up and you'll be in the shit. I was as clean as the driven snow but every audit terrified me in case I'd inadvertently made a mistake. If I'd put a fiver into my wallet rather than the charity tin by mistake the auditor would've found it.

 

It's not astro physics, it's really quite simple.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Said it before. Pencil sharpeners, chartering planes to Krasnodar/Australia/USA, paper clips, hotel bills, Finch Farm fixtures and fittings, leccy bills (significant figure, floodlights at the ground probably need more than 50p in the meter). Everything that isn't specifically itemised in the accounts, and the auditors will see the receipts for all of it before they sign off.

 

I've said it before, I've been audited in the past when I was treasurer for a charity for a few years, you keep records of everything and any discrepancy will be flagged up and you'll be in the shit. I was as clean as the driven snow but every audit terrified me in case I'd inadvertently made a mistake. If I'd put a fiver into my wallet rather than the charity tin by mistake the auditor would've found it.

 

It's not astro physics, it's really quite simple.

the jump in difference isn't simple to explain though. If it was that easy, there'd be an article explaining things.

 

I don't buy the conspiracy, that's crazy, but a brief breakdown would be interesting

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the jump in difference isn't simple to explain though. If it was that easy, there'd be an article explaining things.

 

I don't buy the conspiracy, that's crazy, but a brief breakdown would be interesting

 

The jump was in 2007/8 when we moved, moving house is ridiculously expensive. Anyone who's done it will know.

 

After that,

 

2008 £21.0m

2009 £21.2m

2010 £23.7m

2011 £23.5m

2012 £22.7m

2013 £21.8m

2014 £26.3m

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

The jump was in 2007/8 when we moved, moving house is ridiculously expensive. Anyone who's done it will know.

 

After that,

 

2008 £21.0m

2009 £21.2m

2010 £23.7m

2011 £23.5m

2012 £22.7m

2013 £21.8m

2014 £26.3m

It's a rental Mike. It cost £1.4m per year to rent finch farm now £1m. If We were buying it for £25m and therefore we were paying it over a few years I'd understand. But all fixtures and fittings etc will be looked after by LCC now. so I'm either missing something or I need to see figures and explanations that appease my discomfort.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nothing will be covered by LCC, this is a business rental, not a home. Everything that needs to be spent on it will be covered by the tenant.

Everton won't be getting on the phone to the council if a few bulbs go out, or they need new treadmills, or the pool needs maintenance.

 

I think Mike has made it all ready easy to understand to be honest. So I think it goes down as you're missing something haf, everyone else seems to get it. Even the pressure groups aren't focusing on it anymore.

Edited by StevO
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nothing will be covered by LCC, this is a business rental, not a home. Everything that needs to be spent on it will be covered by the tenant.

Everton won't be getting on the phone to the council if a few bulbs go out, or they need new treadmills, or the pool needs maintenance.

 

I think Mike has made it all ready easy to understand to be honest. So I think it goes down as you're missing something haf, everyone else seems to get it. Even the pressure groups aren't focusing on it anymore.

Looks like the excel spreadsheet needs launching with some real comparison work.

 

 

Finch Farm was acquired in 2006 by Everton who later sold the land on for £2.1 million and then had it developed to the clubs specification by developers ROM Capital (an arm of the aAim Group) who as of March 2010 are known as Hudson Capital Properties.

 

On completion, Finch Farm was valued by ROM Capital at £17 M. Everton signed a 50-year tenancy agreement with ROM Capital for Finch Farm.[5] Everton have an option to purchase the site every 5 years.

 

Between the 2006/07 and 2007/08 financial accounts' "Other Operating Costs" increased significantly from £11.7m to £21.1m. The club largely attributed this rise to Finch Farm in the club's Financial Review in the annual report:

 

That's a 10m increase...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looking forward to seeing this excel sheet. Should solve a few issues.

 

Steve is right. The rent we pay will just be for the bare 'bricks and mortar'. We'll have to pay everything else. Several times in the past I have looked into my own shop...and from what I remember, all agreements are for the tennant to fix and repair etc.

 

I'm not sure what the size comparison between Bellefield and Finch Farm is, but I can imagine that if I have a shop that costs 20k per year...then move to one that is bigger and pay 40k per year, then all other costs are going to jump up too.

 

Maybe we are focusing on the wrong area here. Maybe instead of saying 'because the other costs have rocketed, the board are taking money', we should be saying 'the board have fucked up and not realised how much extra this nice new training facility is going to cost us....forever!!!'.

 

Just a little thought.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looking forward to seeing this excel sheet. Should solve a few issues.

 

Steve is right. The rent we pay will just be for the bare 'bricks and mortar'. We'll have to pay everything else. Several times in the past I have looked into my own shop...and from what I remember, all agreements are for the tennant to fix and repair etc.

 

I'm not sure what the size comparison between Bellefield and Finch Farm is, but I can imagine that if I have a shop that costs 20k per year...then move to one that is bigger and pay 40k per year, then all other costs are going to jump up too.

 

Maybe we are focusing on the wrong area here. Maybe instead of saying 'because the other costs have rocketed, the board are taking money', we should be saying 'the board have fucked up and not realised how much extra this nice new training facility is going to cost us....forever!!!'.

 

Just a little thought.

It was elstones quote that created the suspicion.

 

A 100% increase maybe, 150% increase may create a bit of "eh up", but the increase is enormous! 400%.

 

The problem is there will be elements of assumptions being made.

 

We will never get to the bottom of this unless a full investigation is carried out. To some just being in line with spurs or whoever is enough, for me it's the massive jump.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was elstones quote that created the suspicion.

 

A 100% increase maybe, 150% increase may create a bit of "eh up", but the increase is enormous! 400%.

 

The problem is there will be elements of assumptions being made.

 

We will never get to the bottom of this unless a full investigation is carried out. To some just being in line with spurs or whoever is enough, for me it's the massive jump.

Sorry, excuse me if I'm going over the same shot here. It's been ages since I looked at Everton's accounts (ssadly, I have several years worth saved on my laptop! Sad case!)

 

You're saying there is a 400% jump...is this 'other operating costs'? The previous post stated 'other operating costs' went from £11.7mill to £21.?mill. What's 400% in relation to?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry, excuse me if I'm going over the same shot here. It's been ages since I looked at Everton's accounts (ssadly, I have several years worth saved on my laptop! Sad case!)

 

You're saying there is a 400% jump...is this 'other operating costs'? The previous post stated 'other operating costs' went from £11.7mill to £21.?mill. What's 400% in relation to?

TV money. We're trying to figure just what and some say finch farm costs. Others says the board took that money as a little bonus. Others say we used a lot of pencils and hotels that year.

 

Regardless of whether you think money is missing or not the vast majority of fans think the club could be run better. I think Bill should in the least fire Elstone and hire a top business person to run it. Who knows after a couple years of solid sponsorship and payment of debt everyone may love bill and thank him for hiring new guy. Just doesn't make sense to keep RE when the board and he are under fire.

 

Firing Elstone would appease a lot of fans and if things went for the better could really turn the tide in the support for the board. No brainier really.

Edited by markjazzbassist
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks like the excel spreadsheet needs launching with some real comparison work.

Finch Farm was acquired in 2006 by Everton who later sold the land on for £2.1 million and then had it developed to the clubs specification by developers ROM Capital (an arm of the aAim Group) who as of March 2010 are known as Hudson Capital Properties.

On completion, Finch Farm was valued by ROM Capital at £17 M. Everton signed a 50-year tenancy agreement with ROM Capital for Finch Farm.[5] Everton have an option to purchase the site every 5 years.

Between the 2006/07 and 2007/08 financial accounts' "Other Operating Costs" increased significantly from £11.7m to £21.1m. The club largely attributed this rise to Finch Farm in the club's Financial Review in the annual report:

That's a 10m increase...

As you've quoted me here, I don't see your point?

Everyone else accepts that finch farm costs more to run than bellefield did.

Even the pressure groups have dropped it.

The only person I can think of who has a problem with this is you. I'm not even sure why I'm replying anymore. There have been that many good posts from Mike and Matt about the other costs, that I'm at a loss as to why you keep pushing it when no one else is even close to believing your angle on this.

Any other problems with the board I'm normally in agreement with you, but this one has been and gone, many times over. When the BU give up on it and you don't, maybe it's time to reconsider?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry, excuse me if I'm going over the same shot here. It's been ages since I looked at Everton's accounts (ssadly, I have several years worth saved on my laptop! Sad case!)

 

You're saying there is a 400% jump...is this 'other operating costs'? The previous post stated 'other operating costs' went from £11.7mill to £21.?mill. What's 400% in relation to?

Apologies 400% increase in training ground costs. (50k a week to200k a week)

 

However the operating costs need normalising as it was only after finch farm that elstone said majority of costs go into that.

 

Steve, have the pressure groups dropped it??? Not sure if they have. I think they've accepted that unless an investigation is carried out into it then it's all huff and puff.

 

http://www.sos1878.co.uk/everton-fans/exposing-efc-board-is-a-game-of-cat-and-mouse/

 

 

This is dated June and captures where we are, doesn't mean they are satisfied, more frustrated

Edited by Hafnia
Link to comment
Share on other sites

All that has gone on in the last three weeks from various pressure groups, and you find one article from June.

 

Try harder.

oh right wasnt sure of what constitutes recent... For me June is pretty recent and the article more or less states it's a situation that doesn't sit right but the club will spin it any way they can. Which has been the theme all along.

 

Yeah I guess the other lads have thought "let's fuck all this toing and froing... Lets use what is clear as day(commercial deals) and use that".

 

The operating costs is an argument and a figure that needs investigation rather than debate. Until we have complete transparency it ain't gonna happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This "WatchedToffee" fella is saying we've took out a £20m+ Loan on the 10th of August against future TV Revenue. The company it's taken from is JG Funding and doesn't look all that prosperous looking at the forms he's uploaded

Edited by MC11
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This "WatchedToffee" fella is saying we've took out a £20m+ Loan on the 10th of August against future TV Revenue. The company it's taken from is JG Funding and doesn't look all that prosperous looking at the forms he's uploaded

 

Old news.

 

http://www.toffeetalk.com/index.php?/topic/24944-longest-thread-for-everton-discussion/?p=478666

 

Thought people would be happy that we've given up on the Vibrac "payday loans" (despite several other clubs using them) but apparently not.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vibrac_Corporation

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Old news.

 

http://www.toffeetalk.com/index.php?/topic/24944-longest-thread-for-everton-discussion/?p=478666

 

Thought people would be happy that we've given up on the Vibrac "payday loans" (despite several other clubs using them) but apparently not.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vibrac_Corporation

 

i think the problem people had with Vibrac was that Robert Earl works for/with them so he benefits from our debt yet is on our board. kinda a head scratcher.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

i think the problem people had with Vibrac was that Robert Earl works for/with them so he benefits from our debt yet is on our board. kinda a head scratcher.

 

Earl operates from the same building as Vibrac in the Virgin Islands but to be accurate there's no evidence at all that he has anything to do with them. Maybe they were just the company next door who were convenient and offered us a decent deal (devil's advocate mode). And if they are so bad why do other clubs use them? And if Earl is profiteering why are we moving away from them?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Earl operates from the same building as Vibrac in the Virgin Islands but to be accurate there's no evidence at all that he has anything to do with them. Maybe they were just the company next door who were convenient and offered us a decent deal (devil's advocate mode). And if they are so bad why do other clubs use them? And if Earl is profiteering why are we moving away from them?

I wasn't saying I agree just stating the counter argument. I did look into other clubs financials as you well know and did see that anyone outside the big boys do the vibrac loans as well to buy players. I don't think that's bad at all. Even IF RE is profiting it's not illegal, but it does make you question his integrity (IF, again if).

 

Id love for us to get in a situation where we don't do the loans and have said if we skipped this window splashing cash to say hey, we have 20-30m stashed for next window, we won't use the vibrac again and will just keep replenish this war chest, I'd be okay with that cause we'd save a lot in the long term on interest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, we are officially the only club in the Premier League with no other ambition than to stay still and tread water. No wonder when our "friends" can fleece millions off the club with their high-interest rate loans.

 

Here's what I predict will happen in the near future:

 

First we will see a full-on PR exercise on the Echo, basically written by EFC PR department. It has actually already started with the Yarmolenko story ("honestly, we tried").

In October we will hear that meetings regarding the stadium have been held but no-one still has any idea how it could be financed, so it's basically still dead in the water. If we are lucky we might get some artists' impressions which might even include bat lights.

We will be around 10th position most of the season. A good run will see us stave off relegation but we won't be anywhere near European spots because at some point we will have injuries to key players. We will also struggle to score again in many games because there's just not enough creativity. Remember we have played four games so far in PL and in only one of those the team played well (City was borderline, but we never stood a chance). Against Spurs we managed two chances and their keeper only needed to make one decent save all game and that was because of a mistake from their defender. Plus Howard saved us that point.

Some of our more ambitious youngsters will realise that this club is going absolutely nowhere so they will definitely tell their agents to look for a new club. I will be quite surprised if this time next year Stones and Lukaku are still at the club.

The club should get 60-70 million for the pair but despite that and the TV money Martinez will have at most 50 million to spend. Of course we were led to believe we had 20 million to spend on a player this window as well, but who really believes RM will have about 50 million to spend next summer without sales? Anyone? And with that money he will need to replace those two, find a new keeper and somehow strengthen the squad (remembering that several players are getting on).

 

Let's recap: Martinez told even before the window opened he had identified the need for three players: a centre back, a number ten and a forward. We totally failed with one of the positions, I very much doubt Rodriguez will ever play more than a handful of games and Mori is a big risk. We did sign two right wingers and a decent midfielder. Yay.

Let's look at what other clubs signed, just for comparison:

  • Aston Villa. Veretout, Traore (not the shite one), Gestede, J Ayew, Gueye (not the shite one) and a couple of others.
  • Crystal Palace: Bamford, Cabaye, Sako, Wickham.
  • Leicester: Inler.
  • Newcastle: Mitrovic, Thauvin, Wijnaldum.
  • Southampton: Clasie, van Dijk, Soares, Romeu, Juanmi.
  • Stoke: Shaqiri, Afellay, El Ouriachi, Joselu.
  • Sunderland: Lens.
  • Swansea: A Ayew, Eder.
  • WBA: Evans, Rondon.
  • West Ham: Payet, Ogbonna (yes, he's had a poor start but remember this was our #1 target for CB), Obiang, Antonio and a few others.

I can't believe how many players who would have strengthened our squad moved to the PL. Not all of them would have been first choice (any strikers on that list would have been backup to Lukaku and CB's would have been third choice) but they would have either improved the squad or been interesting young players to get excited about. Some would have been perfect fits: Andre Ayew on that problematic left midfield spot? I guess Swansea is a more interesting club. Payet would have been a perfect fit for that #10 spot. But West Ham is in London.. (anyone else worried that players choose West Ham over us just because they play in London?). Lens and Shaqiri would have been good fits for LW as well. Some good strikers there as well I would have been happy with to add some depth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...