The road to recovery

I’ve not seen it mentioned anywhere yet, certainly not by any associated formally with Everton, but in four seasons time (2028) the institution that became Everton Football club will be 150 years old.

St. Domingo Methodist Church’s new chapel was first opened in 1871. Six years later, a new minister was appointed, the Rev B.S. Chambers. He started a cricket team for the young boys in the parish, but because cricket was only a summer sport, he decided to form a football club for the winter months. Thus, The St. Domingo Football Club was formed in 1878. The football club became so popular and drew in people from outside the parish and as a result in November 1879, at a meeting in the Queen’s Head Hotel the name was changed to the name we love and is known worldwide today as Everton Football Club.

The last three decades have done much to destroy the legacy of our football club, and despite (possibly also contributed by) the new stadium – much more on this later in the article, our competitiveness, and actually our ability to function, to survive, has seriously reduced, to the point that we genuinely face the existential crisis spoken of by its primary author, Farhad Moshiri.

However, this article is not going down that well-trodden path. Instead it looks at (in as much as a single article can) what needs to be done so that when we enter our 150th year in four years time, we are in a much better place than we are now. Given the point at which the recovery process begins it is quite possible that a full recovery cannot be completed in this time frame, however much of the hard work, the turn-around from where we are now will have been done and it is then a case of seeing strategies playing out.

A New Everton

Regardless, the idea of creating a recovery period of four years leading into our 150th year anniversary provides space to plan and execute, not only immediate short term survival strategies, but a long term vision of a new Everton on and off the field.

Make no doubt about it, a New Everton is required. In a sense, and I recognise the dangers of this comparison and how much a sacrilege this would be for many, but, and I am making a non-political point, this is Everton’s New Labour moment. To return to power, whilst respecting our past, identity and our values,  we have to become something else, do things differently and adopt to the modern environment of a small number of “super clubs” and the following pack. Off the pitch, I will not be talking about hyper-commercialism, but a totally different approach to the city of Liverpool, its people and increasingly its reliance on the visitor market.

However, before that, we need to sort out our current mess.

What needs to happen immediately?

Despite the protestations of many, there remains the chance of administration – a small, but still realistic chance. Why? Because, we continue to spend more than we earn operationally, we have a yet to be completed and still not fully financed capital project with very short timeframes to completion, a huge and unsustainable debt burden, and no obvious short-term funder other than through the sale of player assets, an inevitable but sad consequence of where we are.

To date, we have had mutually consenting (mainly) and supporting funders. The drawn out and ultimately failing takeover attempt by 777 Partners has greatly increased our debt position. 777 Partners own precarious financial position and depending upon what happens in the New York Southern District Court and/or with various State insurance regulators in coming days, may change the nature of that relationship. Particularly if their potential administrators or the existing corporate restructuring advisors were looking at their own debt recovery positions.

Everton’s major creditors include: Rights & Media Funding – approximately £225 million, secured on charge on bank accounts, future player receivables, properties and other tangible assets; MSP Sports Capital £160 million, secured against the  Everton Stadium Development Company and its assets: 777 Partners & associated companies approximately £200 million – junior debt with a subordinated security arrangement with Rights and Media Funding: negligible debt to Metro Bank; and football other trade creditors perhaps as high as £70 million. In addition, Farhad Moshiri though Bluesky Capital £450 million – unsecured.

In addition to the above, Laing O’Rourke’s remaining construction and fitting out costs are estimated at £95 million – some of which has been met by pre-payments, but not all.

Thus a new buyer, (not 777 Partners), has through Moshiri’s misjudgements and choice of 777 Partners previously, a huge barrier to entry. All of the above are costs before a single penny or cent is spent on the playing squad and future management recruitment or future business strategy investment.

It is inconceivable that a new buyer would (i) pay Moshiri anything for his equity and (ii) agree to pay all outstanding liabilities. A difficult position for creditors to accept, and to date, one that has been resisted, however it has to be faced – there needs to be an enormous capital restructuring including hair cuts for creditors in any future purchase of the club. A failure to recognise this, or a failure to agree an incoming proposal of such, means no likely sale of the club and ultimately administration where the restructuring is taken out of the hands of the principals.

What might a restructuring look like?

The most vulnerable creditor is the current owner Farhad Moshiri which perhaps, partially at least, explains his blind faith in 777 Partners – their offer (no matter how unlikely to succeed) offered the prospect of some partial repayment.

No new owner, incoming investor would offer this now. Moshiri’s shareholder loans would be wiped out completely. He might be offered a small retained shareholding going forwards but the reality is that he faces an almost complete loss position.

Rights and Media Funding are  long term lenders to the club. Because of their lending to other clubs it is unlikely they would swap part of their existing debt for an equity stake, however a new owner providing long term secure debt against the stadium may generate enough capital to significantly reduce the R&MF loans. It would be sensible to do so, and any existing debt going forwards either moved to a better quality lender as Everton’s position improves or paid off completely given the exceptionally high cost of borrowing.

MSP Sports Capital are the creditors with the most immediate potential need for repayment. It is their extension of the current loans due to them that allow the club to remain (in the eyes of the directors) a going concern. Secured against the stadium development company, they are secure. The out strategy for them is a new owner either paying with equity funding or the use of a major debt package against the stadium (as per Arsenal and Tottenham stadium funding models). Because of today’s much higher interest rate environment, equity would be preferable. Too much debt loaded on the stadium (i) reduces the increased revenue benefit of a new stadium and/or (ii) leads to much higher ticket prices. For argument’s sake, £400 million of stadium debt at 9% (optimistic) translates to an average annual interest cost per seat of £680.

777 Partners and associated companies’ debt is an interesting one. Their future position would depend on Everton’s own solvency, what was agreed with the two more senior debt providers, and importantly their own future. It has long been a view that a significant element of their debt would be converted to equity. Given all that is now known and additionally alleged about 777, their future is uncertain. Of course, their creditors in their own corporate restructuring (however that transpires) would seek maximum recovery. The reality is far different.  A future equity stake would be highly undesirable from a branding, fans and new owners’ perspective. Who would willingly want to maintain that association?  At best, 777 Partners and associated companies, or their creditor representatives, might see an offer of a partial recovery (15-20 cents to the dollar?) or the issuance of very junior, long date, low coupon debt which in balance sheet terms may be beneficial to 777’s balance sheet (i.e. not crystallising immediate losses. Regardless, a significant cash payment to 777 or whomever is extremely unlikely.

Whatever all the above looks like when negotiated, due consideration has to be given to Everton’s football creditor position and the very strict requirements in meeting those obligations.

Aside from creditors?

Fan shareholdings

New owners must give due consideration to existing shareholders. Share retention is important. Equally, in the context of New Everton an extension of fan share ownership is highly desirable. Whilst not likely to raise significant sums in the context of all that is required, a block of minority holders, individual Everton fans, say perhaps representing 5% of the new share capital would have huge benefits. It strengthens the fan/club bond, it provides tangible evidence of fan ownership and in the context of engagement provides (under a different format to the existing FAB/shareholder association/club relationships) an opportunity for an entirely new governance, engagement and scrutiny model. We would always be minority holders, but what an opportunity for new owners of a New Everton…….

New management

The management of the club has to be totally revolutionised, from board, to executive, to mid-management. First, let me acknowledge that there are plenty of good people working at the club. However it has to be said that the overall culture of the club, the lack of collective, comparative expertise when compared to other clubs is a reflection of the quality of past owners, board members and senior executives. This has to radically change. If we want a a successful club in the future, this is the reality. There is no room for sentiment, no nod to long term, cosy relationship – there has to be total change.

Any new owner not bringing this message, and not bringing people at the top of the business in to do this often unpleasant but necessary task is frankly not going to succeed.

Whilst we can point to historical misfortunes, to global events like the pandemic and economic set-backs including the impact of recent year’s construction cost inflation, ultimately we are in our current position because of the failure of owners and directors to address our competitiveness in managing and a football club and running a successful  commercial operation.

Apart from culture, the harsh reality of cost management and income generation can only be addressed through better owners, the highest quality board membership and exemplary executive recruitment.

Regional economic regeneration and the relationship with the City of Liverpool

Sir Jim Ratcliffe has come in for some considerable criticism for (despite his own considerable wealth) his call for public funding for the redevelopment of Old Trafford. He has neatly tied together the benefits of regeneration, of new investment required around Old  Trafford, job opportunities, tourism potential etc with his own club’s needs.

For what it is worth, I think he is entirely correct. I say that because if he can justify a case for Manchester United (owned by billionaires on both sides of the Atlantic) in a more prosperous city than Liverpool, how on earth cannot the same argument with much greater validity (and need) be made for Everton, Bramley-Moore and the redevelopment of the Northern Docks and North Liverpool more generally.

In an instant Ratcliffe has laid bare the lack of dynamic thinking of Moshiri, of the Everton Board. Personally, I think there’s an undeniable case for some form of development aid for Everton. This is a huge topic, but surely this unites everyone across the City and region. What local or regional politician, MP or members of the House of Lords, or any other political influence/public body cannot see this as a wonderful opportunity. Of course, the current Government have very different ideas and whilst many would argue Starmer’s Labour might not be that different, why are we not making this a condition of continued support for a new Labour Government? Liverpool has been ignored by generations of Tory Cabinets (managed decline, anyone?) but equally it could be argued, might be taken for granted by a future Labour Government too.

Everton’s current ownership and management should have been banging the doors down of the Treasury and elsewhere – seemingly not. There can be no excuse for an incoming owner  not to demand such support, not only for the stadium, but the surrounding area. Without supporting investment in infra-structure and amenities, in isolation the New Everton Stadium will not fulfil its economic, revenue generating potential.

Finally, a slightly different point, but one that would represent New Everton (in my opinion). Whilst I understand the  significance in heritage terms of the “dock wall”, the reality is that it is madness to have the new stadium hidden by it. The dock wall built, no doubt, with security in mind – keeping people out of the docks and protecting precious cargoes and their ships separates the people of Liverpool from the very feature that provided the city with almost all of its wealth – the River Mersey. It might be too late for an immediate change, but what better representation of a New Everton and indeed an new relationship with the city and its multitude of visitors than opening up the stadium and plaza completely? Emotionally it would be significant, but equally economically and commercially. Do we need to retain ownership of the plaza? People have discussed the part sale of the stadium as a solution to our obvious financial difficulties. How about removing the wall and selling the plaza back to the city or other private developers. Integrate the stadium with the future development around it.

It would make economic sense, but perhaps more importantly, be representative of a more integrated Everton, an outward-looking Everton, a New Everton.  We, as Evertonians know the unique bond between us and our City, a bond stronger in every sense than the bond between the City and the club that carries its name. A bond, in truth, more representative of the city’s values and history.

The road to recovery starts with new ownership, definitely not ownership defined by Moshiri’s judgements. It requires strong, well resourced owners prepared to take the essence of Everton and radically engineer a much brighter, more competitive future. It requires, new understanding, courage, and the ability to utilise our past, our assets for the benefit of our club going forwards, to reward existing and future fans and to benefit the city as we have in the past.

The road to recovery is there, in front of us, Moshiri just needs to pass the opportunity to new custodians. It would be fitting if that recovery starting now, would be well established and more, before our 150th anniversary.

Up the Toffees!

Categories: Uncategorized

Tagged as: , , , ,

17 replies »

  1. Absolutely RIGHT, “ Someone to take our beloved club by the scruff of the neck,and have that burning desire ( important) to bring us back slowly but surely to where Everton FC BELONG

  2. I’ve was saying 7 years ago we needed a re-set and reality check, we were trying to shop in M&S with an Aldi budget with unrealistic short term thinking and unrealistic ambition. I was ridiculed on a number of Everton forums with the Mantra “we are Everton”, we are a big club.

    I think there will be a big reset in the PL post master and those clubs that swallow the bitter pill now, build from within a future proof business will win out. The best players will always follow the money but there are plenty within with the youngsters to keep us in the top level while we rebuild. Accept survival is success for the time being and have achievable goals and I firmly believe we will come out the other side a better club built on good foundations not sand.

    For me Bramley Moore will always be tinged with the stench of Moshiri and his ruination of our club but hopefully we can use it to a springboard to a brighter future.

    Final comment, I don’t think there are many managers that could have got us out of the mess of this season so big credit to Dyche. We have one or two in our ranks that remind me of Lyon’s, Watson, Reid, and others that would have died for Everton so a big thanks goes out to them and all the others for their efforts this season UTFT

  3. Come on Dan! Now we’re talking. I’m sick of hoping our fat cats are benevolent. Time to be sure now!

  4. Paul, how would a fan shareholding scheme start up? It does seem the perfect time for fans with a few quid to organise a new shareholders association (or join the existing association) and put forward an offering.

    • Hi Dan, thanks for your reply. I’d hope perhaps the new owners would offer fans a limited holding via a fan trust separate to the EFCSA and FAB. Allow the fan trust to bring some new thinkers in to challenge the status quo of the past

      • Thanks for the reply Paul. Considering a new owner would be taking on huge amounts of debt, it could make sense to do this. However, I guess it would be a protracted affair and would add complexity to an already complex situation.

        That said, during disruption and uncertainty is the perfect time for fan ownership, even a small percentage.

    • The main issue with a fan’s share issue would be giving some kind of assurance that the next lot in charge are not another bunch of chancers/incompetents. At the end of the day, the club should be owned entirely by the supporters, I doubt any external party will ever look after the club and care for it in the way the supporters would.

  5. So you want the fans of other clubs to subsidise Everton through their tax payments. Why stop at Everton? Why not subsidise all football clubs?

  6. Great article, excellently written as usual. Some depressing reading, albeit not new, and yet feels like the most pivotal summer in recent history.

  7. Excellent analysis Paul. We can no longer stumble through the jungle like we have been doing for the past few year.
    On the fieId, and to mix metaphors, I hope Dyche and his coaches manage to cling onto the wreckage during the coming storms – we really need them.

  8. Hi Paul, great read again.
    It seems inevitable that Moshiri will be taking the largest haircut from any future deal. He should really be thinking about to spin this in his favour (he doesn’t seem to have much choice). Make his loans a contribution to the future, show the fans that whilst painted into a very black corner, he has done the right thing (even if his hand is forced), and let him retain a minority share. His mistakes rank high but all said, he has pumped over £750m into the club.

    I haven’t seen the full detail of EFC plans after BMD is opened but I understand the site will be fully open. I don’t have any fears about how the wall is perceived, as you approach from the city centre the wall is a constant feature and BMD looms hugely over it. It is a breathtaking view. Even though the new entrance points have been sympathetically created, they do appear a little austere. It will be interesting to see how they age. I think these points will remain closed on non match days and the general access will be via the turret entrances currently being reconstructed under scaffolding.
    Entry is still accessible via the Mersey Rover Dock wall side with a public walkway that runs right along the west site edge. It would be a travesty IF there were plans to permanently block this off and I don’t think it is being considered.

    In my opinion, the west side river plaza with the canal lock and seating area will undoubtedly generate the most public attention on non match days. Being able to walk along the Mersey wall and onto the BMD site will be a joy for many and EFC & LCC should look to exploit it.

    Perhaps the old plans for LCC to invest should be revisited in a new context alongside PEEL. Construction between BMD and the Pier Head is accelerating and this has very clearly been kick started by EFC / BMD. We perhaps missed an opportunity to conjure up a deal with PEEL who own the entire stretch. EAST SIDE, the plans for redevelopment and construction are also well under way.

    A final note – I can easily see my two season tickets (currently £1400), going up to £2,000 at BMD. Thats a £300 per ticket rise before we get into your analogy above. Like it or not, we all have to play our part in EFC’s regeneration and commercially, whilst the club can do much better, EFC fans have to buy everything from official EFC sources. Whether it’s a fans experience, shirt, pie or pint – if we don’t invest in all things EFC, we will never generate the income to make us competitive. Anything and everything that is sold on that fan plaza must come back to EFC – I’d be amazed if it isn’t.

    It’s also about time EFC show the other 45,000 plus fans what their match day experience will be like. I want to see how the majority will benefit, what their environment will look like, how they will consume food and drink. The ALL experiences look amazing but with another 45,000 plus fans to satisfy surely the bulk of money will still be made from them (including me).

    Regards

    Keith.

  9. A typically well thought out summary, shame none of the previous management thought to invite you onto the board. Just a little piece of info for others. Media and Rights Group owner, Micheal Tabor, is of Russian origin.

    I applaud your idea of removing the wall, would lend a totally different atmosphere to the whole project. Let’s hope someone in the new management is savvy enough to read blogs like this to gauge genuine fans feelings.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.