Everton - Make us an offer

Eyepopper

Lowering the tone since 2006
Joined
Sep 1, 2006
Messages
67,383
Everyone knows Everton are in need of funds, Moyes seems to be inviting offers for their players in the press today...

"I think it's already been said that the money, depending on the value, would go to the bank," he told the Liverpool Echo.


"Everybody's got a price - Fabregas, Ronaldo, you name it. If anyone bids big enough I'm sure we'd take it. I'm not daft."
Click to expand...


He's already admitted that Everton may struggle to finish top 10 this season.



Sad state of affairs.
 
Looks like they were banking on £20m for Rodwell, but no one seems to want him much any more.
 
How much did the Arse offered for Jagielka? Baines is probably the other one who could fetch a high price
 
moyes has done wonders with the little money made available to him over the years.

hard times for him but he could do with a couple of loan signings. macheda or mame diouf could be good for them actually.
 
SATA said:
How much did the Arse offered for Jagielka? Baines is probably the other one who could fetch a high price
Click to expand...

Had a 12million offer rejected.

I like Everton a lot, I'd hate to see them going down.
 
Gooners could do a lot worse than handing Everton a big cheque and taking Baines, Jagielka and Arteta off their hands
 
Baines is a quality player and I am surprised he is still at Everton, I expected a top team to come in for him this summer
 
Why are they so skint? They're a big..ish club.
 
I'm not actually sure Baines would suit Arsenal. His main strength is his crossing ability, which would be wasted at a team that don't get men in the box.
 
It's kind of strange that Everton have found themselves in this position with regular top 10 finishes when clubs like Stoke can afford to spend money here and there. I reckon it has something to do with wages at Everton although looking at their squad it's really small and doesn't have too many big names in it, so it might not be that.
 
Arsenal could do worse than take Jagielka, though he is 29. If Coleman wasn't injured, he'd be useful as a replacement for Eboue as back-up for Sagna and spare winger.
 
They're spending 5million a year too much and the bank have effectively cut off their credit.
 
If they'd beaten Villareal in 2005 history would be so different.
 
Donut said:
We should get Rodwell while his stock is low.
Click to expand...

It depends if you see his future in midfield or central defence. If it's at centre-back then I'm not sure we need him, even if he does turn out good.
 
Yes, give him our deadwood for Rodwell and Barkley. He could use Gibson and Diouf for sure.
 
I like the way people are mentioning swap deals when what they need is money. They need another Rooney and have done for years.
 
Everton still without new players have a team that easily should make top 10

Jagielka, Arteta, Cahill, Fellaini, Distin, Saha, Beckford, Heitinga, Howard, Baines, Coleman, Osman...that is without a doubt a top 10 team
 
lysglimt said:
Everton still without new players have a team that easily should make top 10

Jagielka, Arteta, Cahill, Fellaini, Distin, Saha, Beckford, Heitinga, Howard, Baines, Coleman, Osman...that is without a doubt a top 10 team
Click to expand...

No doubt, if they can all play every week. Where are the replacements?
 
Sarni said:
It's kind of strange that Everton have found themselves in this position with regular top 10 finishes when clubs like Stoke can afford to spend money here and there. I reckon it has something to do with wages at Everton although looking at their squad it's really small and doesn't have too many big names in it, so it might not be that.
Click to expand...


Stoke are a club built financially on the realities of the Championship, though are bringing in premier league television revenues.

It is an odd situation at Everton, for a club that fills over 40,000 seats and sells all of its season tickets and gets big revenues from television for finishing relatively highly every year. Their commercial activity must be awful, for a profound club in a big city for many years amongst the best sides in England they have a very low profile.
 
MikeUpNorth said:
They're Chelsea before Abramovich.
Click to expand...

Chelsea were bigger at home and abroad with a bigger and better squad, who had just rebuilt their stadium.

Everton on the otherhand have not bought expensive players, have a fairly utilitarian squad, have not invested anything in their ground for who knows how long and have been getting crowds north of 40,000 for years and years. This besides not being close to challenging for anything.
 
Team Brian GB said:
Stoke are a club built financially on the realities of the Championship, though are bringing in premier league television revenues.

It is an odd situation at Everton, for a club that fills over 40,000 seats and sells all of its season tickets and gets big revenues from television for finishing relatively highly every year. Their commercial activity must be awful, for a profound club in a big city for many years amongst the best sides in England they have a very low profile.
Click to expand...

Over 60% of their total revenue comes from telly deal with SKY and believe it or not, their match day revenue is worse than their commercial one. Not in terms of sheer numbers but relatively to how much they should get out of 40k seats.
 
Team Brian GB said:
Chelsea were bigger at home and abroad with a bigger and better squad, who had just rebuilt their stadium.

Everton on the otherhand have not bought expensive players, have a fairly utilitarian squad, have not invested anything in their ground for who knows how long and have been getting crowds north of 40,000 for years and years. This besides not being close to challenging for anything.
Click to expand...

Chelsea were financially on their knees near the end of Bates' time.

Though yes, they had a bit more glamour through the Gullit/Vialli years. Little known fact, I went to a load of Chelsea games using one of my mate's season tickets in the 1995/96 season. :nervous:
 
Skywarden said:
Over 60% of their total revenue comes from telly deal with SKY and believe it or not, their match day revenue is worse than their commercial one. Not in terms of sheer numbers but relatively to how much they should get out of 40k seats.
Click to expand...


That is awful, then the chairman has nobody to blame but himself.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.