Romey 1878 Posted June 5, 2012 Report Share Posted June 5, 2012 This man made the biggest difference, we would have had £20 million which would have set us up for a much better decade. European exposure and less debt, could have even had a knock on effect of being able to keep hold of our players and making the champions league every year. The best part it would have been earned rather than given by a sugar daddy. But Fifa dont do dreams they like the 'big' teams with their big stars. Wouldn't Ferguson's goal only have taken it into extra-time anyway? (my memory could just be being poor here). If that's the case then it wasn't exactly a foregone conclusion that we'd have made the group stages. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
c1982 Posted June 5, 2012 Report Share Posted June 5, 2012 Wouldn't Ferguson's goal only have taken it into extra-time anyway? (my memory could just be being poor here). If that's the case then it wasn't exactly a foregone conclusion that we'd have made the group stages. Correct - look at Villareal now anyway, a champs league run wouldn't have necessarily meant success in the proceeding years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Romey 1878 Posted June 5, 2012 Report Share Posted June 5, 2012 You do realise you are moaning about wanting improvement, and then moaning that the club has improved but it's too late. They're getting it right now, give them a chance to see if it carries on. I think one point that Steve is trying to make is the long-term strategy is piss poor. Take the Kitbag deal. Yes it improves things but it means that for the next 7 years, or however long is left on the deal with them, we can't improve on it again. Meanwhile our close rivals can and will probably sign 2 deals in that time which will totally eclispse our deal. When you're not competing with your close rivals off the field then you're in trouble. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pete0 Posted June 5, 2012 Report Share Posted June 5, 2012 Wouldn't Ferguson's goal only have taken it into extra-time anyway? (my memory could just be being poor here). If that's the case then it wasn't exactly a foregone conclusion that we'd have made the group stages. We had the momentum, Forlan even game out and said he thought it was game over after the Ferguson goal as we were steam rolling them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pete0 Posted June 5, 2012 Report Share Posted June 5, 2012 I think one point that Steve is trying to make is the long-term strategy is piss poor. Take the Kitbag deal. Yes it improves things but it means that for the next 7 years, or however long is left on the deal with them, we can't improve on it again. Meanwhile our close rivals can and will probably sign 2 deals in that time which will totally eclispse our deal. When you're not competing with your close rivals off the field then you're in trouble. It's a step forward to the bigger deals. Progress takes time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Romey 1878 Posted June 5, 2012 Report Share Posted June 5, 2012 We had the momentum, Forlan even game out and said he thought it was game over after the Ferguson goal as we were steam rolling them. Still no guarantee that we'd have scored another goal. You only have to remember the Fiorentina game a few season ago to see that momentum doesn't always equate goals. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Posted June 5, 2012 Report Share Posted June 5, 2012 Again I agree mate. We all know these quick turn around deals arent the answer. OK we went from 0.5m loss on merch to 3m profit over night, but to lock it down for 10 years is poor planning. I also think these record deals are only records due to the length of our poor performance. I know what my boss would do if I told him we were hemoraging money but I think we are doing well. I would be replaced before I was out of the door. absolutely, but the need for money coming in mightve meant that 10yr was all that was being offered. Kitbag had to preserve their business too so made sense to them even though they made a loss so far on the deal. Truth is we dont know how the deal was orchestrated nor the defining factors. Our 3m is buttons in comparison to others but its a lot more than -0.5m negotiated at the start of a global recession.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Romey 1878 Posted June 5, 2012 Report Share Posted June 5, 2012 It's a step forward to the bigger deals. Progress takes time. How can you not see that tying us into deals for that sort of period of time is just plain stupid? It doesn't allow growth to happen, all it does is allow our rivals a big opportunity to move away from us. It shows poor business sense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Posted June 5, 2012 Report Share Posted June 5, 2012 (edited) I think one point that Steve is trying to make is the long-term strategy is piss poor. Take the Kitbag deal. Yes it improves things but it means that for the next 7 years, or however long is left on the deal with them, we can't improve on it again. Meanwhile our close rivals can and will probably sign 2 deals in that time which will totally eclispse our deal. When you're not competing with your close rivals off the field then you're in trouble. we are 4 yrs in and I wouldnt be surprised if theres a clause to review next year. But thats the point - weve no idea on the details. If it turns out we can renegotiate next year then who knows. We just dont know anything and were not entitled to know these sensitive business details! How can you not see that tying us into deals for that sort of period of time is just plain stupid? It doesn't allow growth to happen, all it does is allow our rivals a big opportunity to move away from us. It shows poor business sense. it was crisis management - stick the plaster on now, we'll get to the surgery later Edited June 5, 2012 by Matt Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Romey 1878 Posted June 5, 2012 Report Share Posted June 5, 2012 we are 4 yrs in and I wouldnt be surprised if theres a clause to review next year. But thats the point - weve no idea on the details. If it turns out we can renegotiate next year then who knows. We just dont know anything and were not entitled to know these sensitive business details! it was crisis management - stick the plaster on now, we'll get to the surgery later Kitbag have just got us into this deal with Nike for the next three years (?) so I highly doubt anything would be up for review within that time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Romey 1878 Posted June 5, 2012 Report Share Posted June 5, 2012 And that stick the plaster on now, get to surgery later is exactly what is wrong with this club when it comes to off field matters! I'm done with this now, we're just going round in circles. The same circles we always go round in. I'm not sure why I let myself get involved, I just end up feeling totally frustrated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
c1982 Posted June 5, 2012 Report Share Posted June 5, 2012 Well as much as they have their opponents I'm sure that the sale of baines will add some support. Remember they clearly indicated that to keep going the club needs to sell our best players. The reality of this will no doubt inadvertently pressure the board. http://thtandlcab-football.com/2012/06/05/every-player-has-their-price/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StevO Posted June 5, 2012 Report Share Posted June 5, 2012 (edited) It's a step forward to the bigger deals. Progress takes time. Its not at all, it is a lack of foresight. It could have been a good deal if it was for three years, then renegotiate. £3m is already a small deal three years down the line, imagine how small it will be in another five. Progress does take time, but right now we arent even standing still. edit, just caught up. what mark said. Edited June 5, 2012 by StevO Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hafnia Posted June 6, 2012 Report Share Posted June 6, 2012 http://thtandlcab-fo...as-their-price/ Interesting site - is that little curly alan ball? If so - he is very well sourced. I do feel the sale of baines would be a disaster if it does happen - there aren't many quality left backs out there and therefore the cost to backfill would be high - especially to try and get anywhere near his quality. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
c1982 Posted June 6, 2012 Report Share Posted June 6, 2012 Interesting site - is that little curly alan ball? If so - he is very well sourced. Correct, he seems a genuinely good bloke and very, very knowledgable along with THT. I look and listen out for what LCAB has to say on talksport and twitter - sometimes you just have to look beyond him talking in codes and calling himself the oracle though!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Louis Posted June 6, 2012 Author Report Share Posted June 6, 2012 Its not at all, it is a lack of foresight. It could have been a good deal if it was for three years, then renegotiate. £3m is already a small deal three years down the line, imagine how small it will be in another five. Progress does take time, but right now we arent even standing still. edit, just caught up. what mark said. Steve, but it could be said that this is what happened. We moved from a situation where Puma was the manufacturer and the retail stores were operated in house, to a deal with JJB Sports where they chose Umbro in 2004, to the situation in 2009 where Kitbag become the partner and Le Coq Sportif became the manufacturer, now three years on Kitbag remain but they have opted for Nike. I'm presuming the reason Kitbag changed to Nike is because it'll offer more money to Kitbag (and presumably Everton if enough are sold). The deal seems to align Kitbag's interest with Everton's interest and that can't be a bad thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hafnia Posted June 6, 2012 Report Share Posted June 6, 2012 Problem I have is that we used to be pioneers, these days we can't even replicate the commercial success of the others such as man united, spurs, villa, arsenal etc etc. We have improved but are nowhere near where we need to be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StevO Posted June 6, 2012 Report Share Posted June 6, 2012 Steve, but it could be said that this is what happened. We moved from a situation where Puma was the manufacturer and the retail stores were operated in house, to a deal with JJB Sports where they chose Umbro in 2004, to the situation in 2009 where Kitbag become the partner and Le Coq Sportif became the manufacturer, now three years on Kitbag remain but they have opted for Nike. I'm presuming the reason Kitbag changed to Nike is because it'll offer more money to Kitbag (and presumably Everton if enough are sold). The deal seems to align Kitbag's interest with Everton's interest and that can't be a bad thing. Im sure the interests are aligned Louis, but when Villa and Newcastle can bring in deals so much bigger than ours when we are still tied in to this deal for a further seven years I would think this deal will have suited KitBag a lot more than Everton. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
c1982 Posted June 7, 2012 Report Share Posted June 7, 2012 Sorry... http://www.themerseyjuror.co.uk/2012/06/07/a-message-to-blue-union-haters/ Will be interesting what people make of this though... I'm swerving it and will see how it looks on Sunday! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Posted June 7, 2012 Report Share Posted June 7, 2012 Sorry... http://www.themersey...e-union-haters/ Will be interesting what people make of this though... I'm swerving it and will see how it looks on Sunday! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Romey 1878 Posted June 7, 2012 Report Share Posted June 7, 2012 What's so funny about the article? It makes some very valid points. I expected more of an adult response from you, Matt, shame on you . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pete0 Posted June 7, 2012 Report Share Posted June 7, 2012 What's so funny about the article? It makes some very valid points. I expected more of an adult response from you, Matt, shame on you . Like the one about the only problem with Peter Johnson is that he's a red Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Romey 1878 Posted June 7, 2012 Report Share Posted June 7, 2012 I didn't think I'd have to highlight it but I'll do it, just for you, Pete - It makes SOME valid points. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Romey 1878 Posted June 7, 2012 Report Share Posted June 7, 2012 (edited) Like the one about the only problem with Peter Johnson is that he's a red And that wasn't the point the article made. That point was about why Kenwright and Johnson are viewed so differently by a lot of Evertonians. I happen to agree with that point; Kenwright gets a lot more slack than Johnson did because he's a blue and Johnson was a red. Edited June 7, 2012 by Romey 1878 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pete0 Posted June 7, 2012 Report Share Posted June 7, 2012 I didn't think I'd have to highlight it but I'll do it, just for you, Pete - It makes SOME valid points. I thought you were joking. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Romey 1878 Posted June 7, 2012 Report Share Posted June 7, 2012 I thought you were joking. Nope. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pete0 Posted June 7, 2012 Report Share Posted June 7, 2012 And that wasn't the point the article made. That point was about why Kenwright and Johnson are viewed so differently by a lot of Evertonians. I happen to agree with that point; Kenwright gets a lot more slack than Johnson did because he's a blue and Johnson was a red. It read very like a Kenwright out piece of propaganda to me. Under Peter Johnson the club had off-field assets of close to £19million. He invested an extra £15million in 1996 trust. The Park End was re-developed under his stewardship. A brand new megastore was built. Under Bill Kenwright we have no assets left and we are nearly £40million in debt. After 13 years he is yet to invest a single penny of his or his board member’s money. Peter Johnson is a red. Bill Kenwright is a blue. That’s what it boils down to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Romey 1878 Posted June 7, 2012 Report Share Posted June 7, 2012 That's why I'm saying some points are valid. They need to talk more about the board as a whole, rather than Kenwright alone. Yes, he needs to take the brunt of the blame but not all of it. The article touches on the other board members, but not enough for me. The complete dismissal of valid points really grates on me when it comes to this whole issue. And that dismissal is from both sides, mind. Both sides need to acknowledge that there are valid arguments from both sides of the fence. We should be capable of discussion but it always descends into childishness. Which is why I'm always reluctant to get involved whenever new BU articles have appeared. I understand it's an emotive issue but we're all blues aren't we? We all want the same thing; a successful Everton Football Club. I want Kenwright, and the other board members, to sell up, but I'm certainly not a Blue Union supporter. It just pains me to see blue fighting blue, blues saying to other blues that they aren't "real" Evertonians, you're just a Kopite. We can disagree but not get petty, we're supposed to be one of the most knowledgeable set of fans around after all. I'll get off my soapbox now, I just hate the whole situation . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Posted June 7, 2012 Report Share Posted June 7, 2012 (edited) What's so funny about the article? It makes some very valid points. I expected more of an adult response from you, Matt, shame on you . difficult to give an adult response to a spoilt adolescent whos not getting their own way. Thats what it reads like. Ive been to bed and laid there for 45 mins before deciding to get up again to rip it apart.... Im not sure how far I'll get before giving up... Edited June 7, 2012 by Matt Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pete0 Posted June 7, 2012 Report Share Posted June 7, 2012 That's why I'm saying some points are valid. They need to talk more about the board as a whole, rather than Kenwright alone. Yes, he needs to take the brunt of the blame but not all of it. The article touches on the other board members, but not enough for me. The complete dismissal of valid points really grates on me when it comes to this whole issue. And that dismissal is from both sides, mind. Both sides need to acknowledge that there are valid arguments from both sides of the fence. We should be capable of discussion but it always descends into childishness. Which is why I'm always reluctant to get involved whenever new BU articles have appeared. I understand it's an emotive issue but we're all blues aren't we? We all want the same thing; a successful Everton Football Club. I want Kenwright, and the other board members, to sell up, but I'm certainly not a Blue Union supporter. It just pains me to see blue fighting blue, blues saying to other blues that they aren't "real" Evertonians, you're just a Kopite. We can disagree but not get petty, we're supposed to be one of the most knowledgeable set of fans around after all. I'll get off my soapbox now, I just hate the whole situation . For me the BU is just bunch of idiots who are jealous of the shower over the park. If they just gave the facts (and let people make their mind up for themselves) they would have more acknowledgement from me, but they're almost politician-like with their account of the 'truths' and how they are the solution, in an attempt to sheep the rest of us into jumping on to the bandwagon. As you say, we're knowledgeable fans, the BU numbers prove that by being such a small minority. If they were in the Liverpool -or any other thick fickle fan clubs- camp, their scarfs would have been on full wave at every match within a month. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.