The views below are submitted by registered users of evertonfc.com and do not necessarily reflect the views of Everton Football Club. View the Blueroom acceptable usage policy.

FAO of blues think there's been no buyers for this club.
  • BlueTezza
    Posts: 28
    Read this article and have a look at these e-mails that are on it.

    http://www.toffeeweb.com/season/11-12/comment/editorial/18626.html

    It would appear Bill Kenwright turned away the multi-billionares who ended up purchasing Man City.

    To think we could and probably would have been were they are now.

    You Kenwright 'supporters' wanted evidence. Now you have it.

    Another disgraceful chapter is written in the Kenwright years.
  • HOWIE8
    Posts: 7,525
    BlueTezza said:

    Read this article and have a look at these e-mails that are on it.

    http://www.toffeeweb.com/season/11-12/comment/editorial/18626.html

    It would appear Bill Kenwright turned away the multi-billionares who ended up purchasing Man City.

    To think we could and probably would have been were they are now.

    You Kenwright 'supporters' wanted evidence. Now you have it.

    Another disgraceful chapter is written in the Kenwright years.



    If this is true, then it is the worst chapter in Kenwrights tenure, not another one. I find it difficult to believe how this information has come to light now, just through this toffeeweb article, i mean this is back page revelations, that have not been published anywhere else ??!!!! Seems a bit odd................

  • 1ceablue
    Posts: 3,253
    Was this written by Tickets in disguise..........
  • OldGoldenVision
    Posts: 19,509
    should ban anything posted on toffeeweb
  • DRINGO
    Posts: 636
    WHO ARE THOS EMAILS SUPPOSED TO BE FROM AND TOO ? WHY BLACK THE NAMES OUT ?
  • 1ceablue
    Posts: 3,253
    DRINGO said:

    WHO ARE THOS EMAILS SUPPOSED TO BE FROM AND TOO ? WHY BLACK THE NAMES OUT ?



    Probably between the writer of the article and the muppet who taped the BK conversation........why black the names out indeed......
  • ScouseBlues
    Posts: 235
    Im not going to beleive that there genuine emails just coz some lad on toffeeweb says so, how gullable are some ppl
  • milky71
    Posts: 8,769
    Am i right n thinking Grand old Team are no longer associated with them
  • OldGoldenVision
    Posts: 19,509
    I think most of the splinter groups are so grumpy they've just taken to falling out with eachother now theyve managed to "out" our financial predicament and cant sink any lower
  • 11blue
    Posts: 4,669
    BlueTezza said:

    Read this article and have a look at these e-mails that are on it.

    http://www.toffeeweb.com/season/11-12/comment/editorial/18626.html

    It would appear Bill Kenwright turned away the multi-billionares who ended up purchasing Man City.

    To think we could and probably would have been were they are now.

    You Kenwright 'supporters' wanted evidence. Now you have it.

    Another disgraceful chapter is written in the Kenwright years.



    Do you honestly believe this??

    If he has turned down buyers how have the papers not picked up on this???

    And if this is true how come he have found out three years later FFS!!

  • OldGoldenVision
    Posts: 19,509
    I think that email was put out years ago and dismissed as rubbish. They've just dragged it up again now to "validate" their "article"

    tumbleweed_small.jpg
    280 x 273 - 23K
  • DRINGO
    Posts: 636
    THE BLOKE WHO WRITES THAT ARTICLE SAYS "but I have yet to be shaken from the belief that Bill, or the Board in general, are either holding out for too much money or just plain don't want to sell."

    HOW COULD HE BE SHAKEN BY THE FACT HE'S HOLDING OUT FOR TOO MUCH MONEY ? YET THOSE EMAILS SUGGESTING HE'S BEING OBTRUSE RATHER THAN HOLDING OUT FOR TOO MUCH MONEY ? SEEMS A STRAGE THING TO SAY ? SO THEN IF HE'S BEING OBTRUSE WHY WOULD HE BE ? AS THE WAY THINGS ARE GOING THERE WONT BE AN EVERTON IN A FEW YEARS TIME CERTAINLY NOT IN THE PREM LEAGUE ! AND HIS TIME WOULD BE OVER THEN IF THAT HAPPENED ANYWAY ? SO ITS A LOSE LOSE SITUATION ?
  • DRINGO
    Posts: 636
    OldGoldenVision said:

    I think that email was put out years ago and dismissed as rubbish. They've just dragged it up again now to "validate" their "article"



    YEAH I THINK I SEEN IT AGES AGO TOO !
  • blue4eva77
    Posts: 276
    BS....... and this only comes to light now ?

    What a coincidence this is yes. In the same 7 day span that Kenwright comes out with his dribble and the pathetic showing against QPR, this BS just suddenly appears.

    Just another sh.ite attempt to further destroy a club already on its knee's.

    BS i say !
  • OldGoldenVision
    Posts: 19,509
    D'yer reckon Toffeeweb has been taken over by RS? Cunnin devils they are!
  • ScouseBlues
    Posts: 235
    OldGoldenVision said:

    D'yer reckon Toffeeweb has been taken over by RS? Cunnin devils they are!



    Could well be lol, the gang of moaning biatches
  • HOWIE8
    Posts: 7,525
    Never mind Toffeeweb, the blokes name is LYNDON LLOYD, shouldnt he be singled out as a BLUESH--E trying his best to ruin OUR football club..............
  • deso1957bc
    Posts: 545
    Pyar f*ckin ostriches on here!
    Don't know, don't wan't to know..
  • Shaun26
    Posts: 155
    As time goes on im starting to believe that maybe articles like this are partly true! No interest in us seem's very odd to me
  • bluewookie
    Posts: 137
    Lol, I don't understand....Everyone wanted our financial situation confirming. Now it is and it's as we expected, we're skint.
  • ToffeeCup
    Posts: 2,959
    You had me up until you mentioned Toffeeweb.



    The thing that gets me about the Kirkby development is that having gone for it as the owners did, and once it was called in to a government review, they had to claim that they had no intention of selling their shares.

    You either understand why that claim had to be made or you don't. If you don't then Everton FC would benefit from you removing yourself from the conversation in a similar manner that one member of Blue Union just has.

    But the reason is clear. Once the legal review of the development starts the opposing side will argue why the project should not go ahead and will leave no stone unturned in doing that. This will include stating that the only reason that the owners want the project to go ahead is for their own financial gain and not for the long term benefit of the club and more than likely in a manner which will be detrimental to the whole situation surround the club(incidentally, I think that to be the case and am glad that Kirkby never went ahead).

    Now, its up to the person making the decision to make the call and consider all the issues involved. They, as is their right, may or may not believe Evertons owners when they say they have no interest in selling the club and profiting from the Kirkby deal. But in law, while the owners are in court and face no charges, the lawyer arguing against the development has to accept to some extent the fact that the owners have stated that they have no interest to sell in writing. Its not as if he can call them a liar, but he can quote them previously as saying that they want to sell. And the situation may appear farcical, as it did, but he has to accept that they have stated it in writing.

    For them not to have done so would have let themselves open to the suggestion and it would have been remiss of them not to do so given the situation they were in.





    Now, what you can do/claim or make up armed with that statement of not selling the club, even though there are dozens of statements in the public domain saying the is for sale, is quite another thing all together.

    Does it lead to proof that Everton really should be in Man Cities boots and vice versa... that really is just more embarrassing nonsense.

    Surely we've had enough of that currently.
Add a Comment

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Forum

Poll

No poll attached to this discussion.

In this Discussion