Topic: Main Stand Expansion (U/C) Pics and Progress in here

[The Lord Admiral]

We're talking about a cash investment here, an interest free loan. The value of the asset doesn't make cash pop out of thin air however much it rises.

Again, you're making an assumption I don't share, there. The same one, in fact. They are a sports ownership business. So owning Liverpool isn't a stepping stone, it's their core business. If they sold it, what else would they buy? Another football club? What's the point?

No it doesn't make cash pop out of thin air. But you know what leverage is and so do they. And interest rates are incredibly low. And it could be argued it's very very low risk for them and the club, given the TV money coming in. I don't fully buy it that it was an 'interest free' loan either to be honest. That might be how it's been written down, but they haven't done it for nothing. Otherwise they wouldn't be the top business people they are. But that's another discussion too.


If/when they sell, they'd buy another sports franchise that was massively undervalued like they did with us. Because there will come a point where there is more profit in that for them then there is in LFC. Or less of a ball ache. Or both.

Anyway, I don't want to hijack the thread any more. It's an interesting discussion and it doesn't have to be polemic ('They're great owners vs They're greedy bastards'). But I don't think there's anything wrong with keeping an eye on them and if necessary holding them to account. I happen to think they are being a bit greedy here and they're acting for the good of FSG rather than LFC. I don't think there's anything wrong with asking them that question.

[Alan_X]

Not an exchange thread

[Giovanni]

I see the imbeciles have moved into this thread. Craig has it spot on below, people should read this before blowing a gasket:

Looks like you were already here.

At least FSG threw us a few crumbs of 2000 GA seats though, what great guys.

[ScouseWar]

Finally get to post on here when the Main Stand is all but finished.

Fantastic photos, thanks to everyone who uploaded them.  Just hope the ARE gets done now too.

Disappointed with John Henry's comments.  Build a load more corporate into the ARE and a hotel too, with rooms facing Stanley Parkto get non-match day revenue up...

Let the corporate pay for it...   and then hopefully the Centenery becomes Main Stand II,,
and then the Kop is increased with no corporates.   Kop comes last while we wait to get the WBR re-routed.

[Brian Blessed]

Finally get to post on here when the Main Stand is all but finished.

Fantastic photos, thanks to everyone who uploaded them.  Just hope the ARE gets done now too.

Disappointed with John Henry's comments.  Build a load more corporate into the ARE and a hotel too, with rooms facing Stanley Parkto get non-match day revenue up...

Let the corporate pay for it...   and then hopefully the Centenery becomes Main Stand II,,
and then the Kop is increased with no corporates.   Kop comes last while we wait to get the WBR re-routed.

Welcome! The discussion of expanding The Kop has been done to death. It's not happening.

[JCM]

Yep, not happening, and neither is the Anfield Road End

[CraigDS]

and neither is the Anfield Road End

Not been decided yet.

[JCM]

Decided ?

What happened to their vow (promise) to build a new stadium or redevelop Anfield up to 60,000 when they bought the club.  Are they not duty bound to fulfil these obligations as part of the terms of their purchase.

[CraigDS]

Decided ?

Yes. No decision has been made if to do so or not.

What happened to their vow (promise) to build a new stadium or redevelop Anfield up to 60,000 when they bought the club.  Are they not duty bound to fulfil these obligations as part of the terms of their purchase.

As has been discussed many times, such a promise was never made.

[JCM]

Sorry, that's not how I remember it

[CraigDS]

Sorry, that's not how I remember it

Then you remember it wrong.

[ToneLa]

Decided ?

What happened to their vow (promise) to build a new stadium or redevelop Anfield up to 60,000 when they bought the club.  Are they not duty bound to fulfil these obligations as part of the terms of their purchase.

Link please?

And I doubt those were the terms of purchase. They purchased us in a dire spot indeed.

[Alan_X]

Decided ?

What happened to their vow (promise) to build a new stadium or redevelop Anfield up to 60,000 when they bought the club.  Are they not duty bound to fulfil these obligations as part of the terms of their purchase.

There is no obligation.

[Danny Boy]

Decided ?

What happened to their vow (promise) to build a new stadium or redevelop Anfield up to 60,000 when they bought the club.  Are they not duty bound to fulfil these obligations as part of the terms of their purchase.

Key words here are 'up to 60,000' - that doesn't mean they have to take it all the way up to that level.

[Eeyore]

There is no obligation.

Of course not Liverpool Football Business Club exists to make Fenway's Sports Group's rich owners even richer.

[JCM]

Right, ok, well thanks for clearing that up then - but might be just me, but I thought something around 60,000 was the general aim. 

Seems such a shame to ditch it though just because it won't make money for them fast enough, as I'm sure it would break even over a longer period

[laddo]

Sorry, that's not how I remember it

You're right, Broughton said it - http://www.skysports.com/football/news/11669/6431042/reds-chief-outlines-deal

"They have built stadiums and they have restored stadiums. They have not committed to which is the right thing.

"We will have a stadium of more than 60,000. We will get substantial stadium development."

And: http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/well-give-you-60000-anfield-3392536

"There’s definitely a commitment to invest in a stadium and we will finish up with a 60,000-plus seater stadium.

“Where they haven't finalised their view is whether that should be the new stadium or whether there are still opportunities to build at Anfield itself.

“They have done both. The people involved have built the new stadium at Baltimore Orioles, for example, and at Fenway Park they looked at the two options and decided that actually redevelopment with all of the tradition was better than a new stadium.

“They are committed to looking at both very professionally and seeing which is the best option.”

So yes, there was an agreement to supply a stadium, whether new or redeveloped, of Around 60k.

[CraigDS]

You're right, Broughton said it - http://www.skysports.com/football/news/11669/6431042/reds-chief-outlines-deal

"They have built stadiums and they have restored stadiums. They have not committed to which is the right thing.

"We will have a stadium of more than 60,000. We will get substantial stadium development."

And: http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/well-give-you-60000-anfield-3392536

"There’s definitely a commitment to invest in a stadium and we will finish up with a 60,000-plus seater stadium.

“Where they haven't finalised their view is whether that should be the new stadium or whether there are still opportunities to build at Anfield itself.

“They have done both. The people involved have built the new stadium at Baltimore Orioles, for example, and at Fenway Park they looked at the two options and decided that actually redevelopment with all of the tradition was better than a new stadium.

“They are committed to looking at both very professionally and seeing which is the best option.”

So yes, there was an agreement to supply a stadium, whether new or redeveloped, of Around 60k.

Broughton isn't FSG.

[meady1981]

Jonny 5, can you just document the empty space behind the ARE for the next few years please mate I need my fix. And Craig can you explain to people what the different bits of litter and leaves blowing about do. Alan can show us diagrams of empty space expansions he's worked on before and whiteboots can slag off the empty space for not being empty enough and we can all be thread best buddies again 4eva.

[JCM]

Broughton isn't FSG, your right Craig, but I would guess that most of our fan base believed that the new owners were prepared to sort out the stadium issue once and for all.  It was very much mentioned at the time and indeed stressed to the supporter base.

Ending up with a half developed stadium does not seem to fulfil these expectations

Thanks Laddo

[CraigDS]

Ending up with a half developed stadium does not seem to fulfil these expectations

Which brings me back round to...

Not been decided yet.

[Nessy76]

I assume most of the people going on about 60,000 are fans who regularly lose out on tickets, is that right?

[JCM]

I live in Liverpool and have supported LFC for over forty years.  I have two young boys desperate to go to games but can't get tickets, so yes, I'm one of those people 'going on about not getting tickets' - is that ok

[laddo]

Broughton isn't FSG.

Never realised.

He is the man who sold the club to them though and outlined the agreements made in selling the club to them in the quotes above.

FSG have always said they'll not deliver not promise etc publicly, but clearly they made these such agreements when purchasing the club, speaking to the club's acting chairman at the time.

Pretty naive to think that only FSG's public statements are what their plans are.

[CraigDS]

Never realised.

He is the man who sold the club to them though and outlined the agreements made in selling the club to them in the quotes above.

He doesn't mention any agreement. He says they haven't committed to Anfield or a new stadium but have committed to solving the stadium issue, and then gave his opinion as to size.

There was no agreement what so ever as to them having to provide a 60k stadium solution.

FSG have always said they'll not deliver not promise etc publicly, but clearly they made these such agreements when purchasing the club, speaking to the club's acting chairman at the time.

Pretty naive to think that only FSG's public statements are what their plans are.

There is zero mention of an agreement.

[rob1966]

Any outsider reading some of the comments would think we're a right ungrateful bunch of bastards. Saved from the cowboys, money spent on players, Kloppo as manager and Main Stand redeveloped and yet still moaning about the owners.

[Nessy76]

I live in Liverpool and have supported LFC for over forty years.  I have two young boys desperate to go to games but can't get tickets, so yes, I'm one of those people 'going on about not getting tickets' - is that ok

Er, yes that's fine. Just a question, why so touchy?

[laddo]

There is zero mention of an agreement.

"There’s definitely a commitment to invest in a stadium and we will finish up with a 60,000-plus seater stadium."

Agreement no, a commitment yes.

I agree with FSG not giving public announcements on it, but clearly they gave a commitment privately. Not really sure why you are so intent on denying that. Or do you know more than the then acting chairman?

[Nessy76]

"There’s definitely a commitment to invest in a stadium and we will finish up with a 60,000-plus seater stadium."

Agreement no, a commitment yes.

I agree with FSG not giving public announcements on it, but clearly they gave a commitment privately. Not really sure why you are so intent on denying that. Or do you know more than the then acting chairman?

They have invested in the stadium. You can't hold someone to somebody else's word, anyway. That's Broughton speaking isn't it? He was never part of FSG or authorised to speak on their behalf.

[redprodigal]

Any outsider reading some of the comments would think we're a right ungrateful bunch of bastards. Saved from the cowboys, money spent on players, Kloppo as manager and Main Stand redeveloped and yet still moaning about the owners.

Correct, you just can't please some miserable bastards folk.

[Peter McGurk]

I know people can't generally bothered to read more than two or three sentences, so in summary... the man never made any commitment to any number or new or redeveloped. People should listen to what he said, not what they like to think he said.

Further details for anyone with the required attention span:

http://www.theanfieldwrap.com/2012/06/john-w-henry-on-the-stadium-question/

It's absolutely no news whatsoever that any expansion is required to stack up financially. Sorry and all that but...

[oojason]

I know people can't generally bothered to read more than two or three sentences, so in summary... the man never made any commitment to any number or new or redeveloped. People should listen to what he said, not what they like to think he said.

Further details for anyone with the required attention span:

http://www.theanfieldwrap.com/2012/06/john-w-henry-on-the-stadium-question/

It's absolutely no news whatsoever that any expansion is required to stack up financially. Sorry and all that but...

Erm... it does stack up financially - just not to the liking of Henry in his latest comments - he'd seemingly like ticket prices higher to help pay for it (more quickly).

As the mods sometimes say on here - read, think, and then post - and try not to belittle your fellow fans. You can do this - yes, yes - you can.

[PaulD]

As you just did!

[AnimalMasch]

I live in Liverpool and have supported LFC for over forty years.  I have two young boys desperate to go to games but can't get tickets, so yes, I'm one of those people 'going on about not getting tickets' - is that ok

Can I ask why you can't get tickets ? Demand ? Or prices?

[CraigDS]

"There’s definitely a commitment to invest in a stadium and we will finish up with a 60,000-plus seater stadium."

Agreement no, a commitment yes.

I agree with FSG not giving public announcements on it, but clearly they gave a commitment privately. Not really sure why you are so intent on denying that. Or do you know more than the then acting chairman?

Laddo is commited to investing £50m in RAWK.

Now that's me saying that, not you, but I assume you now consider this an agreement and you'll be sending RAWK HQ a cheque?

[JCM]

Look Craig, I think the vast majority of supporters were / are under the impression that FSG had given some sort of commitment to redevelop Anfield upon buying the club (and yes 60,000)

To suggest this is not the case really looks like a childish attempt to re-write history

[CraigDS]

Look Craig, I think the vast majority of supporters were / are under the impression that FSG had given some sort of commitment to redevelop Anfield upon buying the club (and yes 60,000)

To suggest this is not the case really looks like a childish attempt to re-write history

Look JCM.

Childish to point out you were wrong to be under that impression? Bizarre way of thinking, rather than just admitting you got it wrong and they gave no such commitment you're going to attack me for pointing out your error.

What next, would you accuse me of being pedantic for telling you the Earth isn't flat?

[JCM]

Henry is a clever man so I don't expect this to ever have been a written agreement, but its what Broughton and the fan base were led to believe and appeared in the media.

It was also an impression they were happy to go with.

Similarly Henry gave no written agreement to only redevelop Anfield to 53,791 and leave us with a lop-sided, half developed stadium.

Historical revisionism at its best.

[CraigDS]

Henry is a clever man so I don't expect this to ever have been a written agreement, but its what Broughton and the fan base were led to believe and appeared in the media.

It was also an impression they were happy to go with.

Similarly Henry gave no written agreement to only redevelop Anfield to 53,791 and leave us with a lop-sided, half developed stadium.

Historical revisionism at its best.

Hilarious.

[Giovanni]

it was well documented that any sale came with a condition to redevelop/build a new stadium.

If that isn't true, it's just another example of the great deal FSG got when they 'saved' us.