The Directors/Company Secretary

Everton Football Club Limited (“the Company”)

Goodison Park
Liverpool
L4 4EL

REQUISITION BY MEMBERS OF EXTRAORDINARY GENERAL MEETING

(Section 303 Companies Act 2006 and Article 10.3 of the Company’s Articles of Association)

Dear Sirs

We, the undersigned, being not less than one-fifth in number of members of the company as at the date of this notice REQUIRE
you forthwith to proceed to convene a general meeting of the Company for the purpose of

1. Obtaining from the Board of Directors their comments on the recent DTZ report which;

i. describes the current funding options being pursued by the Club in order to meet its projected contribution of £78
million towards the Kirkby Stadium viz:
• Long term bank debt
• Syndicated debt
• Private Equity funding
• Securitisation of future income streams
• Securitisation of new stadium naming rights
• Realisation of existing assets

i. explains that the Club have indicated that additional borrowing beyond £78 million could expose the Club to an
unsustainable level of debt, resulting in an unviable position;

i. projects that the stadium must be operational at the start of the 2010/2011 football season and that a delay of one
year will increase stadium costs by circa £6 million, excluding fit out;

i. states that unless Tesco receive planning permission for an amount of retail space (which grossly exceeds that set out
in planning legislation and policies), then the stadium will not be viable.

2. Obtaining from the Board of Directors details of contingency plans they have in place in the event of;

i. the planning application being called in by the Secretary of State thereby delaying the commencement of
construction works;

ii. a legal challenge by local residents whose homes are under threat of compulsory purchase;

iii. the granting of planning permission for a reduced amount of retail space which renders the stadium unviable in
economic terms.

and

3. To pass such resolutions in relation to 1 and 2 above as may be thought fit.

Dated

Name Number of Shares Signature

Fellow Shareholder
We write to ask for your support to request an Extraordinary General Meeting of Everton Football Club to discuss the proposed ground move to Kirkby. We believe
that the events over the past year in relation to the Tesco led Destination Kirkby proposals must be discussed by the shareholders of Everton Football Club and the
merits of such proposals considered fully to determine if the Kirkby scheme will be beneficial or detrimental to the long term welfare of the club.
Clearly, the current custodians of the club are faced with a difficult task to address the stadium issue without any new investment and this matter has to be resolved
for the club to move on from its strong foundation on the pitch. We request the support of fellow shareholders in our attempt to open up honest dialogue and debate
with the club to enable all shareholders to fully understand the real facts surrounding the Kirkby proposals. We have contacted committee members of both the 1938
and 2006 Shareholders Associations and have received the support of both committees in our attempts to petition the club for the second EGM in just 4 years.
Whether you are for or against the Kirkby proposals, we urge you to put aside your perception, take time to read through the accompanying literature and hope that
after careful consideration you will support us in our efforts. The literature identifies what we were previously promised by the club and the reality of the situation
according to a variety of sources including the Tesco led planning application submitted to Knowsley Borough Council.
We trust you will agree that this matter is critical to the future of Everton Football Club and we hope to receive your considered support.
Many Thanks, Mark Grayson and Tony Bennett, June 2008
The following comments were attributed to Keith Wyness prior to the vote concerning the Kirkby proposals and as you can see the reality of the
situation would appear to be somewhat different from the claims made by the board of Everton Football Club.
Keith Wyness, Wigan Programme, 10th August 2007 The Reality
As set out within the sections above the key headline figures are;
Q You described Everton’s proposed stadium move as the deal of the century. Why? • Total cost of the new stadium circa £130m
• EFC contribution circa £78m
• Shortfall circa £52m

We’re very lucky to have this opportunity; it’s a wonderful deal because we’ll end up with a
A stadium with a very low level of debt added to the club.
Q It seems a very short timescale from confirming that this is where the club wants to go until the fans’ vote?
The Club have indicated that additional borrowing beyond this point could expose the Club to an
unsustainable level of debt, resulting in an unviable proposition.
DTZ April 2008
“[The reaction by Everton FC to} All efforts from me and my engaged professional team to meet with and
openly discuss the Bestway ‘Loop site’ and promote it as a potential relocation site for Everton FC, having
gained the technical support of HOK Sport Architecture and WSP Engineers, totally astounded me.

If you look at the facts and understand that this Is not just the best option but the only option
A we have at present
Towards the end of last year you announced that you had entered into an exclusivity agreement with
Q Knowsley and Tesco to explore the feasibility of the project. However, there has been a negative reaction
from supporters that “there is no Plan B”. Why is this the case?
There isn’t a Plan B because there is no other deliverable project that can actually finance and
deliver the redevelopment of Goodison. There are sites within the city of Liverpool but there is
A no site that can deliver the contribution we are going to get from the Knowsley Project that can
make the stadium affordable. This is the only one that can realistically be delivered
Realistically, I couldn’t have done much more and I was just stone-walled for much of the time by EFC’s
Directors and to make things worse most of all that was said publicly regarding the Bestway site by EFC or
it’s representatives was so inaccurate that so often it genuinely beggared belief and surprised me.”
Malcolm Carter, Bestway, March 2008
“If the Kirkby project does not happen, then the Plan B will be to look again at Goodison Park and I
suppose that the Scotland Road site would have to become a Plan C.”
Bill Kenwright, Everton FC AGM, 4th December 2007

You have said that the new stadium would bring in £10m additional revenue annually, which would be
Q available to the manager for transfers. What is that based on?
I think it’s fair to look at that. All our studies so far have shown that a new stadium can produce
A revenues of that sort of scale. It depends on how well the team is doing and how many fans turn up.
The business plan is unclear however it is questionable how the club can generate £10m per annum
for the Manager and Team Building if there are to be just 10,000 additional seats and 25 new corporate
boxes in comparison to Goodison? Furthermore, any additional income will be offset by servicing
increased borrowing.

Q Are you confident that it will lead to extra investment?
It makes us an extremely attractive option. With a new training ground now, and potentially
A a new stadium, we’ve got to be one of the most attractive investment opportunities in the
Premiership. I think this is another key factor we have all got to look at.
The site already has decent transport links through the M57 motorway. What other infrastructure will be
Q put in place?
There are already new train links being planned and built right next to the stadium almost.
Obviously the M57 is already there but the transportation experts have already said they believe
this will be the best transportation-served football stadium in the whole of the north west, if not
A the UK. That’s a very big factor as we look forward to the next 50 to 100 years. This is a decision we
have got to look at to take us forward as a club. It is the next 50 to 100 years and transportation
links are key to that, as is a bigger catchment areas for a potential new stadium, Those are key
things we have got to look to.
A further point that is of relevance to any debate on the options that might be available to the Club
to fund a new stadium, is the willingness and abilities of the Club’s directors to sell some or all of their
interests in the Club in order to attract an investor who or which might have the ability in financial terms
to fund a new stadium in its entirety or at the very least fund the shortfall that exists in the context of this
proposals. As is pointed out in greater detail in the financial statement document 26), this is not an option
as the current directors have no intention of selling any of their interests in the Club.
Revised Planning Statement (Document 18), April 2008
The proposed station at Headbolt Lane will not service passengers from Liverpool and the line from
Liverpool to Kirkby is a single line track with 6 carriage trains running at a maximum of 15 minutes. The
train services to Kirkby are inadequate to cope with match day demands.
The CPZ [Car Parking Zone] will be the most rigorously enforced at any football ground and cars will be
clamped or towed away’. Parking will be 30 minutes walk away. One of Europe’s largest park and ride
schemes requiring 95 buses to make 2 trips each will be required, leaving supporters queuing for an hour
after the game with similar queues at the railway station which can process fewer than 4,000 passengers
in the first 75 minutes after the final whistle.

Q Are there other projects of its kind in this country you could compare it to? “The board of Coventry City Football Club can confirm that it has today filed in court notices of intent to
go into administration”.
I’m sure there are stadium and regeneration projects that are Similar. Coventry is one that people
A have spoken about as a similar type of model Official Coventry City FC Statement, 3rd December 2007

THE BENEFITS FOR EVERTONIANS as detailed in the Kirkby Ballot Literature The Reality
The transport infrastructure in Kirkby is inadequate to allow 50,000 supporters to attend football
Comprehensive bus and rail public transport services
matches in Kirkby in a safe and timely manner.
Everton Football Club is turning its back on its spiritual home and the heart of its traditional fan base. 4
Strategic highway accessibility is exceptionally good, providing direct connections to 4 million households within a
million households will not be within a 45 minute journey on match days. This is not a strong base for
45 minute journey. A strong base for the future
the future, this is a worrying concern.
“The stadium shall not be used for any Events other than Sporting Events. No concerts or music events
shall take place.”
Ability to hold concerts and other special events
“There shall be no more than 6 non-EFC major association football events per annum (where a major
event is a single day event attended by 10,000 visitors or more).
KIRKBY STADIUM USAGE (DOCUMENT 29) March 2008

The beauty of this new facility is that Everton will’ have a very small debt. We have the opportunity to receive a If tickets were priced at an average of £35 each an increase in attendance from 40,100 to 50,400 would
significant contribution towards the project from our development partners, ensuring we will be in a position to result in an increase of just £6.8m in gate receipts per annum assuming that the ground was sold out
build this new home - worth £150million - without a large drain on the Club finances. Simply put, it’s more money for all 19 home league matches. Costs associated with servicing the new debt would exceed £4.3m per
to spend on the team itself. annum if the club borrowed £50m over 25 years at 7%.

Petition for an Extraordinary General Meeting of Everton Football Club, Summer 2008
 Is Relocating to Kirkby in the best long term interest of Everton Football Club?
After over a century of calling Goodison Park our home, the current board of Everton
Football Club plan to relocate the club to a 50,000 seater stadium in Kirkby, some
nine miles from the rejuvenated Liverpool city centre. Some reasons supplied by the
board for this controversial upheaval would appear to be compelling. Goodison Park’s
corporate and general facilities are undoubtedly dated and add little to the match
day experience whilst the stadium itself with a capacity of 40,100 would appear to
be unable to generate the revenue streams required by a top-flight premiership club.
Obstructed views, inadequate catering and antiquated toilet facilities are all valid
Artist impression of the Kirkby
development from the “Destination
Kirkby” promotional material
criticisms of the current match day experience at Goodison Park, yet these are clearly
symptomatic of the lack of investment, over the decades, in the stadium infrastructure
by the board and perhaps these shortcomings could be addressed for significantly
less than the burgeoning cost being attributed to a new stadium in Kirkby? Whilst
undoubtedly dated, Goodison Park remains a bastion of classically designed football
stadia and continues to attract critical acclaim from opposing managers, none more
so than Arsene Wenger, referees and fan groups around the country. In 2008 it was
identified as having more atmosphere than our illustrious neighbours at both Anfield
and Old Trafford. However, it is clear that the experience for the general fan is not the
primary motivator for the relocation to Kirkby.
Whilst Evertonians were initially promised a world class stadium that would be
effectively free under the ‘deal of the century’, it’s now apparent to even the casual
observer that the proposed stadium at Kirkby is little more than a stock design facility
found primarily, but not exclusively, on retail parks around the country. These are home
to teams such as Coventry, Wigan, Southampton, Warrington Wolves and the proposed
development for St Helens to name but a few. The Government’s think tank CABE has
recently heavily criticised the design, describing it at best as a missed opportunity for
Everton Football Club.
shares. They, like the majority of Shareholder Number of Shares %
fans, are unlikely to benefit from
the move to Kirkby. Allegedly, just Bill Kenwright 8754 26
five individuals own 85% of shares BCR Sports 8146 24
in Everton. Are these individuals Jon Woods 6622 19
likely to benefit as a result of the
Arthur Abercromby 2878 8
club relocating to Kirkby? Tesco’s
own consultants, DTZ, confirm Lord Grantchester 2773 8
that Everton’s contribution to the £130M stadium will be at least £78M with a further
£52m to be cross subsidised from the retail element of the scheme. Clearly this subsidy
is very appealing to the board of directors and its major shareholders as the club and
their shareholding will benefit from the value obtained through this incentive. Does
this incentive influence the ability of the board to adequately determine if the Kirkby
proposals are actually in the best long term interest of the club? With no investment
forthcoming from the board, the financial strategy to generate the club’s contribution
is reliant on the sale of the club’s remaining assets, Goodison and Bellefield, the delivery
and securitization of stadium naming rights with any subsequent shortfall being made
up with additional debt finance.
What is the level of this additional debt? To describe the figures promised for the
sale of the assets and the stadium naming rights deal as ambitious would be an
understatement; approaching £2M an acre for land with planning permission in
Walton isn’t realistic. The application to turn Bellefield into housing has already been
dismissed by Liverpool City Council due to its over ambitious nature and will only be
granted planning permission for approximately thirty dwellings meaning a reduced
monetary yield for Everton. Perhaps most ambitious of all is a naming rights deal for a
stadium on an out of town retail park that will surpass anything secured in the history
of the English Premier League. These targets are simply too ambitious; the reality
is that the reliance on debt finance will inevitably approach £50M. In light of the
shortcomings of the proposed stadium and the clubs current financial predicament,
should Everton take on this level of additional debt?
As a business, Everton Football Club is a loss-making organisation and despite Keith
Wyness implementing a three-year plan to correct this position, this situation is set to
prevail for the foreseeable future.

A basic understanding of the proposed transport scheme, a scheme that again was
promised to provide the best served stadium in the country, shows that with a heavily
policed no parking zone, park and ride facilities based miles from the stadium, park and
walk facilities based up to a 45 minute walk away from the ground were introduced only
after it was discovered that there was an inadequate supply of buses for the park and
ride scheme and a reliance on a grossly inadequate rail facility that, due to having only
a single track can only handle just 3,840 passengers per hour, will be fundamentally
detrimental to many aspects of the Evertonians match going experience.
If the Kirkby relocation isn’t being pursued for the benefit of the general supporters
then perhaps this scheme will benefit the club and its shareholders?
The majority of people owning shares in the club don’t do so for financial gain. 56%
hold only one share with these 724 individuals owning just 2% of the 34,305 issued
The table below highlights Everton’s recent financial performance.
It is interesting to note that in 2005/06 gate receipts of £18.1m were attained from
an average league attendance of 36,827. In 2006/07 gate receipts of £17.1m were
attained from an average attendance of 36,358. This calculation equates to average
income of £481 per spectator and if cup games were included in the calculation this
figure would drop. If a move to Kirkby resulted with attendances increasing from an
average of 36,592 for the previous 2 seasons to a capacity of 50,401 for every game
throughout the season gate receipt revenue will increase by just £6.6m per year.
Will a move to Kirkby and an increase in capacity from 40,000 to 50,000 really improve
this situation? Will an additional 25 executive boxes really make a huge difference
to the finances of Everton Football Club. More importantly, will the club attain the
demand and attendances necessary for this proposal to be successful?

Everton Football Club Financial Performance over previous 8 seasons

Season Gate Receipts TV & Merit Sponsorship Merchandising Other Total Turnover Net Profit/(Loss) Total Debtor / Creditor Liability
1999/00 24,072,692 Inc Inc Inc 4,070,167 28,142,859 (11,169,099) (19,513,571)
2000/01 12,969,000 12,856,000 3,542,000 2,152,000 1,333,000 32,852,000 (3,652,818) (33,653,730)
2001/02 13,400,000 18,900,000 2,900,000 1,900,000 1,100,000 38,200,000 1,555,000 (31,938,000)
2002/03 14,700,000 25,100,000 2,400,000 3,300,000 1,100,000 46,600,000 (12,980,000) (50,826,000)
2003/04 15,600,000 20,700,000 2,600,000 3,500,000 1,800,000 44,200,000 (15,376,000) (56,568,000)
2004/05 18,700,000 29,500,000 4,200,000 5,400,000 2,000,000 59,800,000 25,510,000 (40,432,000)
2005/06 18,100,000 26,300,000 5,200,000 7,600,000 700,000 57,900,000 (10,794,000) (48,261,000)
2006/07 17,090,000 27,462,000 4,600,000 1,082,000 1,178,000 51,412,000 (9,426,000) (58,823,000)
If the majority of shareholders and fans of the club are not the main beneficiaries of a move to Kirkby then just who are?
Petition for an Extraordinary General Meeting of Everton Football Club, Summer 2008
 What are the planning issues?
The planned move to Kirkby is complex and fraught with difficulties that are
outside the control of Everton and its management team. The basic premise is
that Tesco, as developers, have proposed the construction of a huge retail park
the size of which is dictated by the offer to provide a £50M cross subsidy to
the stadium. Without the stadium there is no need to build a retail park of the
proposed size, the enormous size of the retail park with Britain’s largest Tesco
store and major retail companies such as ARCADIA, Marks & Spencer and TK
Maxx will ensure increased footfall, increased spending and increased profits
for the retail operators. Without the enormous retail park there will be no
stadium, conversely without the stadium there is no justification for the
size of the retail park.
You may not be aware of the planning policies that are in place to prevent
exactly what Tesco are proposing at Kirkby. Not only is this development a
400% increase on what Knowsley Council and the Government agreed was
required in Kirkby as recently as 2006, the proposal ominously contravenes
a piece of regional planning policy known as the Regional Spatial Strategy
(RSS) which incorporates a retail hierarchy identifying Liverpool at its summit.
Kirkby is not included in this strategy. Despite this, Knowsley Council and
Tesco have approached the Secretary of State and have attempted to
influence the proposed changes to this document. This approach has failed.
Furthermore, all neighbouring authorities and concerned developers such as
Grosvenor (Liverpool 1) and St Modwen (Project Jennifer and Skelmersdale)
have submitted major objections to this retail scheme. Nobody, apart from
thousands of Kirkby residents, have actually objected to the stadium.
Furthermore, the planned development also contravenes Knowsley’s own
Planning Policy (UDP, 2004) and more importantly it fails to comply with the
Governments own National Planning Policy. It is at major odds with PPS:6 as
the development would seriously prejudice the vitality and viability of other
centres in the Merseyside Region. It is also at odds with PPG:17 which states
that out of centre retail and leisure uses associated with stadia should not
be granted unless it complies with national policy on retailing.
The recent offer by Tesco to apparently reduce the retail floor space did not
appease the objectors and Liverpool, Sefton, West Lancs and St Helens Council
have all lodged formal objections to the development.Whilst Knowsley Council
will clearly indicate to the secretary of state their willingness to grant planning
permission the whole project, at best, will be called in for detailed examination
and at worst refused permission due to the level of the aforementioned
objections based on government planning policy.
In March of 2007, a full four months before the ballot, work began in earnest on
the huge amount of documents that make up the Tesco planning application.
For such an application, whose significant non-compliance with planning
policy is readily accepted by Tesco, to be successfully accepted, it has to have
enough weight or material considerations in order to attempt to balance out
the contradiction to policy.
We have been made aware of the ‘positive’ material considerations being used
by Tesco as counter balance: regeneration, a revived town centre, 700 new
jobs, road, parking and public transport improvements etc but are the vast
majority of Evertonians aware of the ‘negative’ material considerations being
used to add weight to the Tesco planning application? This unsurprisingly,
is where Everton Football Club really comes in to the equation. A sample of
these negative material considerations taken from the planning application
documents can be read below:
• “Without ‘a critical mass’ of retail development there can be no stadium,
without a stadium there can be no retail development, without the retail
development there can be no regeneration of Kirkby.”
• “If an alternative viable site for a stadium could be found then the need for
the massive retail element in Kirkby could not be justified.”
Do these quotes from the Tesco planning application explain why the club
entered into an exclusivity deal and has ignored and so easily dismissed other
potential sites within the city? Does Everton Football Club actually benefit
from such a blinkered approach?
Petition for an Extraordinary General Meeting of Everton Football Club, Summer 2008
Further reading of the Tesco planning documents reveal additional material
considerations that appear to be detrimental to the club undertaking a serious
investigation of alternatives. For example, the documents state:
• “Goodison Park cannot be redeveloped beyond a 37,000 seat capacity.”
Again, this statement is a material consideration in favour of the Tesco planning
application by attempting to demonstrate that the club has done all it can to
avoid building a new stadium upon the open green space at the Kirkby site.
Some of you may recall that this statement directly contradicts the two
options for a redeveloped Goodison provided by Bill Kenwright and the board
during the Kings Dock ballot. Why where there no alternatives given during
the Kirkby debate?
Do the following quotes, again taken from the planning documents reveal the
fundamental motivation of the board of Everton Football Club for moving to
Kirkby?
• “ Whilst the club has stabilised its position in the last few years there has been a
legacy of debt which is long term in nature and impacts on present and
future borrowing possibilities”
• “The club cannot and are unlikely to be in a position in the future to fund the costs
of the stadium.
• “Everton FC have a desperate financial need to leave Goodison Park and the
club have explored all of the options available in order to fund a new
stadium.”
• “A further point that is of relevance to any debate on the options that might be
available to the Club to fund a new stadium, is the willingness and abilities of
the Club’s directors to sell some or all of their interests in the Club in order
to attract an investor who or which might have the ability in financial terms to
fund a new stadium in its entirety or at the very least fund the shortfall that exists
in the context of this proposal. As is pointed out in greater detail in the financial
statement document 26), this is not an option as the current directors have no
intention of selling any of their interests in the Club.”
Are the above statements at the heart of the stadium issue and are these
reasons sufficient justification for such a monumental decision that will
likely affect us all for the remainder of our lifetime? Clearly the current board
are struggling to finance a solution to the stadium problem and the Kirkby
proposals, as inadequate and as flawed as they appear to be, do offer the
current board their best opportunity to raise the funds necessary to construct
a new stadium. However, will these individuals, who we had previously
entrusted and who had previously struggled to find the finance to see the
Kings Dock come to fruition, be able to deliver a stadium worthy to be the new
home of Everton Football Club?
Whilst the above statements may well be true of the situation today, if new
investment was brought into the club through a change of ownership or
through a rights issue the possibilities concerning what is ‘deliverable’ for
Everton Football Club would no doubt change in the future. With this in mind
is it wise for a 130 year old institution to turn away from its spiritual home, its
heritage, its tradition and its heartland to relocate to an uncertain future in
Kirkby as this is being portrayed as the only deliverable option to the club?
Please remember that moving away from Goodison Park and relocating to
Kirkby is not the only option available to Everton Football Club. There are other
options available to the club if not to the board.
Whilst the collapse of the previous Kings Dock proposals may have soured the
relationship between the Officers of Liverpool City Council and members of
the current board of Everton Football Club, the will of Liverpool City Council to
retain Everton Football Club in its rightful heartland has been clearly stated.
It should be noted that Liverpool City Council passed a resolution in October
2007 stating its intention to do everything possible to help Everton Football
Club find a solution to this difficult stadium issue. We, as Evertonians, hope
that the current custodians of Everton Football Club will reconsider the clubs
position and enter into meaningful dialogue with the City Council to finally
resolve this difficult situation to the satisfaction of all Evertonians.
 What are the transport issues?
In the summer of 2007 Evertonians were advised by the club that the proposed
relocation to a new stadium in Kirkby would result in improved accessibility and
comprehensive improvements to transport infrastructure. Unfortunately, this is
not the case and the frailties with the transport proposals as revealed in the
planning application make a mockery of the notion that the stadium will be
the ‘best served stadium in the North West’. The unfolding facts confirm that
the transportation issues would actually result in further inconvenience to the
majority of match going Evertonians
The club has failed to acknowledge that during the ballot process over 10,000
Evertonians registered their opposition to the idea of relocating the club to
Kirkby. Little has been done to placate concerns and with the emergence of
actual facts and information related to the move, subsequent independent
studies have revealed that Everton FC will lose a significant proportion of
existing match going Evertonians should the club relocate to Kirkby. This is a
fundamental flaw in the long term business plan associated with the move to
Kirkby as it is reliant on increased attendances. Whilst it is acknowledged that
new stadia do benefit from a ‘new stadium effect’, concerns remain in relation
to the long term sustainability of attendances should the transport proposals
prove impracticable in reality.
The proposals in relation to transportation are concerning. How will these
proposals encourage the old, the young and the disabled to attend games
when these supporters will be expected to walk for up to 45 minutes just to
get to their cars, or be expected to wait in spectator queuing reservoirs with a
density of 4 persons per m2 for over one hour prior to being ‘crush loaded’ into
trains that are incapable of running more frequently than every 15 minutes?
The inadequate plans incorporate the idea that 250 Evertonians will attend the
game by bicycle and the bus strategy will require buses be brought in from all
over the north west just to provide the numbers required, that is providing these
buses are actually required during ‘off peak’ times. In essence, there will not be
enough buses to service the stadium to capacity during peak times, including
Saturday afternoons.
Will you or your family be happy to walk such great distances to get to and from your car on match days?
Is this improvement?
Petition for an Extraordinary General Meeting of Everton Football Club, Summer 2008
In light of the requirement to enforce a strictly controlled parking zone, the
diagram below illustrates the distances Evertonians will be expected to walk to
get to their vehicles under the proposals made by Steer Davies Gleeve in their
optimistic transport plan.
Clearly the distances being proposed will deter parents from bringing younger
fans, the future of the club, to see Everton FC if they would be expected to walk
distances of over 2 kilometres and for up to 45 minutes just to get to the ground.
In addition, these weary young legs will still face a further 45 minute walk to
return to their vehicles after the final whistle. Not only will the endurance of
many a supporter be tested, the overall journey times will be increased for the
majority of supporters attempting to get to and from the stadium.
The board must consider if it is realistic to expect our supporters to tolerate the
additional inconvenience that the Steer Davies Gleave report highlights? Will
these transport proposals be conducive to encourage existing as well as new
Everton supporters to attend and continue attending Everton football matches
in the future? How will future generations of football supporter be encouraged to
follow Everton when there will be a more convenient and accessible alternative
waiting for them in Stanley Park? Liverpool fans already realise the significance
‘One City, One Club, One Name, Liverpool’.
Is it realistic to expect home supporters to feel an affinity for the ground when
they will be expected to turn up at the new stadium in more coaches than the
away support? Will it really feel like home?
It is worth noting that in its entire history Everton Football Club has only ever
attained an average attendance of more than 50,000 spectators during one season;
that was the championship winning season of 1962/63. Are the board confident that
the transport proposals will help to facilitate regular capacity crowds of 50,401?
This decision will burden the club for at least a generation. It must be the right
one, the very future of Everton Football Club should not be left to chance and
the belief that ‘it’ll be alright on the night’.
What are the costs and will the stadium be fitting for a club of Everton’s stature?
Prior to the ballot, Evertonians were informed that the proposed stadium
in Kirkby would leave the club with very little debt and it was implied that
Tesco would provide a contribution of £50m towards the stadium. We now
know that Tesco are not providing the club with £50m, rather that the club are
reliant on a contribution of £52m which will be derived from the value of the
proposed units to be incorporated into the retail element of the development.
Due to the planning issues discussed previously, and the inappropriate scale
of the proposed retail development, there is uncertainty if the actual quantity
of retail will be approved on the scale anticipated by the club, raising doubts
as to whether the retail element will provide a sufficient yield to subsidise
the construction of a new stadium. Clearly, with the significant objections
to the Destination Kirkby proposals from neighbouring local authorities
such as Liverpool, Sefton, St Helens and West Lancs councils, this is almost
certain to result in a reduction of the required retail enabling subsidy and
raises questions as to whether the additional expenditure by the club would
represent value for money. Having voted in good faith on the assumption
that the club would get a new stadium for very little debt, have the proposals
now changed sufficiently to question the outcome of the ballot? Would the
majority of Evertonians continue to endorse the proposals knowing what we
know today?
The stadium itself is described in the planning documents as a ‘mid-level
quality stadium’ and will cost £100m, this equates to £1,984 per seat. What
is striking about these costs is that Everton will actually be spending less per
spectator than a club like Brighton and Hove Albion, a lower league team who,
without the benefit of massive amounts of TV revenue, intend to spend up to
£2,364 per seat on their own proposed £52m 22,000 seater stadium.
Are Evertonians really being given a stadium that is befitting of the club
motto Nil Satis Nisi Optimum? It would appear that the reality of the situation
is far from the iconic and world class structure promised. Barr Construction
who have previously constructed new stadia for the likes of Bournemouth
FC, Cheltenham Town FC and Kidderminster Harriers FC certainly have a track
record for building cost effective structures but are these iconic and befitting
a club of Everton’s standing within the game? Barr’s stadia portfolio can be
found here: http://www.barr.co.uk/brochures/stadia.pdf.
The cost benchmarking information below, taken from the planning application
identifies how the Kirkby proposals fair with other recent schemes. It is
interesting to note that Arsenal were prepared to spend £4,025 per spectator,
Huddersfield Town, over a decade ago, spent £2,452 per spectator, Hull City
£2,466 per spectator whereas Everton will spend just £2,000 per spectator.
Thank you for your time. If you support our request for the holding of an EGM, please sign the attached Requisition,
stating the number of shares that you hold, and return it in the enclosed prepaid envelope
Petition for an Extraordinary General Meeting of Everton Football Club, Summer 2008
Of course the club has identified that further costs will be incurred fitting
out large areas but not all of the ground and the additional amount spent,
up to £30m, would, if this work was actually undertaken, increase Everton’s
spending to £2,579 per seat which would still be short of the £2,640 average
for a stadium of this scale and these costs are still someway short of the £3,125
and £4,025 per seat spent by our Premiership competitors in Manchester City
and Arsenal. Do these figures suggest that Everton are to achieve value for
money or are Evertonians actually being given a lesser quality stadium than
our contemporaries in the Premier League?
Clearly, the Kirkby stadium proposals including the associated transport services
will be a far cry from the world class or iconic stadium that Evertonians were
promised. The reality will be functional, uninspiring and difficult to access and in
a recent report commissioned by Tesco and Everton for Knowsley Metropolitan
Borough Council, the Government sponsored advisors the Commission for
Architecture and the Built Environment (CABE) stated the following about
Everton’s proposed stadium:
“We are not convinced by this masterplan that there is a clear understanding of
the space required for managing large crowds converging on the stadium. Also,
we do not feel that an inspiring sense of arrival, as one would expect to have
upon approaching a stadium of this size and significance, has been achieved.”
“It is our view that Design and Build contracts can produce successful
outcomes only when high quality design is embedded in the process; we do
not feel that this has been achieved in this case.”
“We think that both Everton and Kirkby deserve a stadium of first class
design quality, and we are not convinced that this has been realised by the
current proposals.” CABE, April 2008
If you are not yet concerned by the quality of the proposed stadium design
then perhaps the following statement by Knowsley Council may provide clarity
concerning the reality of the Kirkby proposals and what Evertonians could
expect for decades to come:
“the building has been criticised by some consultees and local community
representations as being of poor design quality. It has to be acknowledged
that the design adopted here, in contrast to some recent stadium proposals, is
not one for an iconic exemplar building. Rather, the design is a somewhat more
traditional stadium design with four separate stands and this shows in its outward
appearance. Indeed, a somewhat utilitarian and cost-conscious design is evident
in the way that the underside of the upper stands is revealed to outward view.”
Extracts from Keith Wyness Open Letter, 9th August 2007
“In the light of the joint statement issued on Monday, August 6 by Liverpool City Council and Bestway, the owners of the “trumpet” loop site located
just off Scotland Road, I feel it is imperative that we pass comment both by asking those who regard this site as a possible location for a new home for
Everton Football Club a series of highly-pertinent questions and by making some general observations.”
“Would any compulsory purchase orders be required in order that we could attain the size of site we require? If CPOs are required, is it not the case that
they could take up to 12 months to attain?”
“We do not believe that the existing transport infrastructure in the Scotland Road area would be able to cope with the volume of traffic generated on matchdays.”
“Would the construction of a development which would also include a large retail element not dramatically undermine – and anger – those behind the
Grosvenor and Project Jennifer schemes? Is there not a very real possibility of a legal challenge from these other developers?”
“if the scheme was to be “called in” by central government, the entire project could be subjected to a delay of anything up to a year.”
“Without wishing, in any way, to call into question the integrity and professionalism of those who have pulled the Scotland Road “rabbit” out of a
hitherto cunningly-concealed hat, we do find it curious that it is being portrayed as a genuine, realistic and deliverable scheme at the precise moment
our supporters are being invited to participate in a ballot about our proposed relocation to Kirkby”.

Extracts from Terry Leahy’s Open Letter to Evertonians

“As a businessman my head rules, as a football fan it’s more complex – it’s about heart as well as head.”
“I want to argue in this article that when it comes to the vote on Kirkby, it must be the other way round and in the best interests of the club we love,
our heads must guide our hearts in making this decision.”
“Now let me declare an interest right up front. Tesco will benefit if the £400 million redevelopment of Kirkby takes place.”
“The construction of the stadium itself would cost around £110 million. Barr Construction have an integrated design, steel manufacture and
construction operation which makes huge savings on that figure. Tesco as the developer is forgoing the normal development profit on the
construction of around £15 million, in addition to the contribution it is making directly. So if you went out to buy this stadium it would cost you
£150 million. It has been designed to be extendable to 60,000 seats which, when it happens, will cost another £25 million and there is ample space
in the stadium to add further lounges, facilities and finishes to the highest standards in the Premier League when the club completes its investment.
This would be in addition to the very good provision from day one, but could be anything from £15 – £25 million dependent on what you ultimately
want. So you are looking at a stadium which when finally developed is around £200 million, and £150 million from day one. It is therefore, most
definitely, not a stadium on the cheap. It will be a fitting home for a club of Everton’s tradition and standing“.
“Clearly it’s possible to lift the stadium design for Kirkby (or one like it) and drop it onto Goodison or the loop site – and in my heart as a fan, it looks
nice. But unless the club is offered a concrete proposal to own a £150 million stadium for around £35 million investment by Everton, and delivered
by 2010 / 11 then I’m afraid it is not a realistic option.”
“The Kirkby stadium is based loosely on the Cologne stadium. It will be a traditional four sided England Premier League ground, with 21st century
facilities. Kirkby has the best access within 45 mins of any Premier League ground.”
“I have heard it suggested that a ‘no’ vote for Kirkby would precipitate a change at the club, and thereby increase the likelihood of new investment.
I have two reactions; first Bill Kenwright, Keith Wyness and David Moyes have turned a relegation side into a European side, something that a
number of better invested clubs have failed to do. Second, the prospect of outside investment in the club is massively increased by the Kirkby
proposal. Without it, any prospective investor knows that the first £150 million of investment would have to go into a stadium, with nothing to show
on the pitch. With Kirkby, new investment could go straight into the team, with the prospect of a return by way of better results”
“One final point, in my business life I have learned the most valuable commodity is trust. Without it you don’t have much to build on. I may not
always like it, but I’ve learned to trust the people closest to issues to make the best judgement. When the Board, the manager and the leading players
of Everton are unanimous that a move to Kirkby is right, I know they have the best interest of the club at heart and I trust their judgement. Whichever
way I look at it, the heart says Goodison but the head says Kirkby.”

“We are now at the planning stage, to see if we can get it approved. That decision will be reached very shortly. Work will start very quickly
then after that if it is approved
The planning process is very complicated. There are lots of different factors. There is definitely a chance that it may not get through in the
way we want it to. It could get called in by the government office. If that does happen, it may jeopardise the whole thing. It’s a very serious
issue for us.
Plan B at the minute is just being here at Goodison but that will give us longer term problems, as we have always known. There isn’t the
opportunity to develop Goodison in the way we would have hoped, so the new stadium is crucial for us to go forward.
There is no doubt for Everton to attract the right investor, the stadium is a crucial part of that. I don’t think people would be prepared to
invest in the club until that is resolved.”
Keith Wyness, Liverpool Echo, 28th May 2008
Further information in relation to the Tesco/Everton Planning Application can be found at Knowsley Councils website:
http://www.knowsley.gov.uk/consultation/kirkby/kirkby_tesco_intro.html
Petition for an Extraordinary General Meeting of Everton Football Club, Summer 2008