06 Jan 2017 14:47:30
This Ushmanov deal where we sold the naming rights of Finch Farm for allegedly 75 million but of which some of this is a new shirt sponsorship deal sounds a little suspect to even me as an Evertonian. Apparently FFP rules allow investment from commercial revenues but not private ones. What's next. a naming right for a kit bag? The training balls? I guess every club does some of this. but it makes a mockery of the FFP rules. in my opinion anyway! But if it allows us to buy a couple of players and the FA don't get on our backs. who cares?

{Ed002's Note - It is a simple sponsorship deal - nothing more, nothing less.}

1.) 06 Jan 2017
06 Jan 2017 15:02:41
Degsy most of the big clubs have used the same tactic to put money into their clubs, we are just following suit. FFP rules are a joke anyway until the punishments are actually punitive the super rich clubs will just treat them with contempt.

{Ed002's Note - It is not a "tactic" - it is simple sponsorship.}

2.) 06 Jan 2017
06 Jan 2017 15:12:09
I know that;s what is being said Ed002, but what benefit is Ushmanov getting? USM advertising? Tax breaks? Apparently it is a multi million deal. I had never heard of USM prior to this so I guess it has worked on me. but how many non Evertonians know the name of our training ground? Is that worth multi million ads to him. or is there another reason? I am sure he would have got more TV coverage for multi million ads!

{Ed002's Note - USM is a very well known business and they are discussing aquisitions in telecommunications and internet distribution of sports in mainland Europe - Moshiri is their Chairman. There is nothing underhand, nothing unusual or anything else about this simple sponsorship deal. The amounts involved are far less than say Manchester United's AON sponsorship of their training facilities and light years away from the shirt deals the like of Chelsea has. If you are not happy with it perhaps some sort of hate campaign on Facebook would help drive Moshiri from the club?}

3.) 06 Jan 2017
06 Jan 2017 16:43:31
As Ed sometimes says, (not in so many words) we and I include myself in this need to concentrate on supporting and forget about the business side, leave that to people in the know. Nothing to see here.

4.) 06 Jan 2017
06 Jan 2017 16:17:33
No Ed002 I am extremely happy with it. And thank you yet again for explaining it as you see it. I appreciate your clear and honest appraisal. I am just very suspicious of "big business" and what goes on. I remember when Man City renamed their stadium and someone on here said, "What is next? Naming rights for each corner flag? " I guess it is difficult in certain circumstances to define "from footballing activities". which is what I believe the FFP rules state. You could argue that any money going into a football club is money from footballing activities! Our red neighbours "ripped off" 2 Americans for £200 million that basically stopped them going bankrupt at the time. no FA involvement there I noticed!

{Ed002's Note - You really need to stop discussing FFP and I have no idea what your point is about Liverpool and FA involvement.}

5.) 06 Jan 2017
06 Jan 2017 19:30:59
Find myself agreeing with elements of Degsy's thought process. From a purely commercial point of view, if you invest in sponsorship to the tune of £75m you would be looking for s return of more than that value over some sort of time horizon (5 - 10 years) from the direct and indirect halo effects of the deal. That's clearly not going to happen here so there is definitely more to it than simple sponsorship. However, don't believe at all it is sinister or underhand and hope we spend it wisely. Good times ahead.

{Ed025's Note - good times indeed bulls mate..

6.) 07 Jan 2017
06 Jan 2017 15:51:45
Degsy. Good points but as ed says. Drop the looking for catches in a deal, the dodgy past is behind us let's enjoy the new investment

7.) 07 Jan 2017
06 Jan 2017 17:59:08
I am not a sailor so would never try and captain a ship, i am not a millionaire businessman so would never question a sponsorship deal.
I am an Evertonian who pays to watch the onfield business side of things and that is all i have an opinion on.

Maybe other fans should follow suit and stop being skeptical about deals that actually benefit our club and make the onfield personell more attractive to watch.

8.) 07 Jan 2017
07 Jan 2017 12:30:25
Good point bluegray87 but those of us oldenough to remember the Peter Johnson years whereby his way of skirting round the rules were by him having ownership of Everton and his girlfriend bimbo owning Tranmere Rovers . well we have a little bit of skeptism. probably where there is none needed and so I will drop it. but don't blame us for having the skeptism. it has historical value!

9.) 07 Jan 2017
07 Jan 2017 14:46:41
Totally different situation this than the Johnson era Degsy.
We have a man who came in last season with investment, let's have it right he is the majority shareholder but he is not owner the same way Johnson was.
Just buckle up Degsy and enjoy the ride, we are on the right path with the right men in charge of all the important positions.
I am not saying you are wrong being skeptical, just trust in Moshiri, he did not get to were he is in business by losing money.