Topic: Straightening the Kop

[fickle]

With all that's been knocked down over the last 21 years, why has the kop not been straightened at the main stand end?

I can understand the Kemlyn end being stepped so as to stay in a certain footprint and not go over the road. I can understand why the main stand end was originally stepped as houses were closer to to kop, but they have long since gone. All that remains is tha Albert. If you look on photos in the new stand thread, you can see that if the kop was straightened at that end that it would not encroach onto the Albert.

It would not require a lot of contruction work (relatively speaking) as all the infrastructure is in place.

[meady1981]

Where's Craig

[Alan_X]

What do you mean? It's the shape it is at the back because of Walton Breck Road. Nothing to do with the Albert.

[fickle]

What do you mean? It's the shape it is at the back because of Walton Breck Road. Nothing to do with the Albert.

You're right if you're only talking about the Kemlyn side. If you're on about the main stand side then Walton Breck Rd has nothing to do with it, look at the photo in the other thread

[fickle]

Where's Craig

??

[meady1981]

??

Craig is usually right on hand to provide calm and measured analysis into the structural and financial validity of people's outlandish ideas.
 

[fickle]

Craig is usually right on hand to provide calm and measured analysis into the structural and financial validity of people's outlandish ideas.
 

OUTLANDISH? How very dare you. There is nothing outlandish about my suggestion, it also makes perfect financial sense as the infrastructure is already there.

It's also playing havoc with my Asberques syndrome/OCD same as them fucking awful sloping stands like the Emirates, Reebok, Etihad etc. 

[Alan_X]

You're right if you're only talking about the Kemlyn side. If you're on about the main stand side then Walton Breck Rd has nothing to do with it, look at the photo in the other thread

OK. It's been discussed on here before somewhere. You're right you could square it off on that side and get some extra seats in. You could also square off the other side if it cantilevered over the road. I did a bit of modelling to show how that might work a while back.

I don't know what the cost would be but it's probably one of the easier options for squeezing a few more seats in if there's demand after the current redevelopment. It's a standalone piece of work though so there's no great benefit in doing if now and complicating the logistics of a tight site that has tens of thousands of supporters walking through it on a regular basis.

[Peter McGurk]

OUTLANDISH? How very dare you. There is nothing outlandish about my suggestion, it also makes perfect financial sense as the infrastructure is already there.

It's also playing havoc with my Asberques syndrome/OCD same as them fucking awful sloping stands like the Emirates, Reebok, Etihad etc.

i doubt it make perfect financial sense. Obviously there's no structure there so it would have to come from the ground up or be propped off the existing kop, plus the roof, plus re-look at the escapes... for relatively few extra seats.

[andy07]

Looking at footing of the Kop end Main Stand truss support, it is sufficiently far back to enable the Kop roof support to be replaced with a wider version is ever needed, would enable an expansion of the Kop on the Main Stand side of maybe 25 seats per row.  Couple this with squaring of the corner could add 3000 seats, a significant cost for little gain?

[Alan_X]

Looking at footing of the Kop end Main Stand truss support, it is sufficiently far back to enable the Kop roof support to be replaced with a wider version is ever needed, would enable an expansion of the Kop on the Main Stand side of maybe 25 seats per row.  Couple this with squaring of the corner could add 3000 seats, a significant cost for little gain?

There's a few metres at most:



The cost of demolishing the Kop Roof and rebuilding it with a new truss and truss support a few metres over for a few extra seats per row (never 25 seats per row) would be exorbitant.

Cantilevering the seating back on each side might be more cost effective for getting a few hundred/thousand seats.

*Edit - the minimum seat width is 460mm and there's around 4.5 metres space between the existing Kop roof truss support and the new Main Stand roof truss support. So maybe 10 seats per row.

[The Lord Admiral]

Interesting.

And now my OCD is off and running. Cheers!

[Peter McGurk]

Interesting.

And now my OCD is off and running. Cheers!

I wouldn't get too excited. The view cut off caused by the main stand reduces the area significantly (and the kop roof supports get in the way)

[Peter McGurk]

I wouldn't get too excited. The view cut off caused by the main stand reduces the area significantly

Probably the best that could be done without moving roof supports (shown in pink):

[The Lord Admiral]

I wouldn't get too excited. The view cut off caused by the main stand reduces the area significantly (and the kop roof supports get in the way)

ha, re the OCD I meant in terms of every time I look at it now I'll notice it, rather than think about them re-doing it. 

Thanks for the pics though, useful to envision it.

[The Lord Admiral]

OK. It's been discussed on here before somewhere. You're right you could square it off on that side and get some extra seats in. You could also square off the other side if it cantilevered over the road. I did a bit of modelling to show how that might work a while back.

have you got pics of that Alan? Sounds interesting.

[Alan_X]

have you got pics of that Alan? Sounds interesting.

It's on a hard drive somewhere or buried in a thread somehwere on here.

[fickle]

Probably the best that could be done without moving roof supports (shown in pink):

That's all I was suggesting

[Titi Camara]

Aye, too many nancy boys in there for my liking!

[Peter McGurk]

That's all I was suggesting

It still doesn't make financial sense - existing infrastructure or not. It still needs building over a road.

[free_at_last]

It still doesn't make financial sense - existing infrastructure or not. It still needs building over a road.

How much would be talking though? That looks like it would increase the Kop by 10%. 10% extra noise(ignoring the jokes) and
around an extra 1000 fans get to experience the Kop. I don't think every part of Liverpool's business should make money - the large projects yes but I don't think the accountants should rule everything. If Jurgen likes his Bratwurst I'll bet the canteen will
get it in rather than the cheaper pork sausages down the local butchers. 16 million pissed away on Balotelli on a whim - 7 million on the owl. I don't see why every minor project should be ruled by the spreadsheets when there are intangibles like atmosphere and fan unity to be taken into account.

[sminp]

I don't see why every minor project should be ruled by the spreadsheets when there are intangibles like atmosphere and fan unity to be taken into account.

Sadly football is a business these days whether we like it or not. Even going back to before Sky and the Premier League I doubt something like this would have been considered due to it not making sense in a cost/benefit analysis

[free_at_last]

Sadly football is a business these days whether we like it or not. Even going back to before Sky and the Premier League I doubt something like this would have been considered due to it not making sense in a cost/benefit analysis

I just don't see why wasting 16 million on Balotelli(and all kinds of other players) is treated differently to making a small loss on some infrastructure that will be there for perpetuity. A bit like going on a world cruise for a year but not wanting to spend a few
thousand on a conservatory that you can enjoy every year.

[CraigDS]

You can't use hind sight like that though, as failures in the transfer market aren't planned, they are bought expecting to be successes. It's just sometimes they don't work out, but they are still an asset to sell on (in most cases).

So taking hind sight out of it, would you accept getting Gary Monk as the new manager on £2m a season over Klopp on £8m or whatever it is? Not signing Coutinho for £8m?

There are of course times where it may make sense for the club to spend on the stadium where the return may be slightly longer to see than normal, expanding the Kop could be just that sort of thing, but I doubt it when the costs involved will not be cheap by any means. In fact, looking at the complexities mentioned above by Peter and Alan it looks like it would be a pretty huge job which I doubt would even get permission to be done (not only because it would involve overhanging the road, but the concourse areas are bad enough at the back/top of the Kop as they are, adding more seats back there isn't going to help and would no doubt require a lot of work.

[free_at_last]

You can't use hind sight like that though, as failures in the transfer market aren't planned, they are bought expecting to be successes. It's just sometimes they don't work out, but they are still an asset to sell on (in most cases).

So taking hind sight out of it, would you accept getting Gary Monk as the new manager on £2m a season over Klopp on £8m or whatever it is? Not signing Coutinho for £8m?

There are of course times where it may make sense for the club to spend on the stadium where the return may be slightly longer to see than normal, expanding the Kop could be just that sort of thing, but I doubt it when the costs involved will not be cheap by any means. In fact, looking at the complexities mentioned above by Peter and Alan it looks like it would be a pretty huge job which I doubt would even get permission to be done (not only because it would involve overhanging the road, but the concourse areas are bad enough at the back/top of the Kop as they are, adding more seats back there isn't going to help and would no doubt require a lot of work.

  That's why I asking how much it would really cost. Peter mentioned that the pink shaded areas could be done without moving the roof supports.
  My comparisons to losses on players was just making a point. Say we could extend the Kop by 10% for 20 million but we would take 30 years to get it back should the accountant gods have to be appeased if it made a loss of a few millions while we are getting other benefits to atmosphere and an additional piece of infrastructure. Once again I'm not talking about major infrastructure that could threaten our financial viability as in redevelopment versus new ground but I don't think there are many places to extend the ground after the ARE redevelopment and 1000 extra in the kop is not to be sneezed at if the sums are not massive.

[CraigDS]

  That's why I asking how much it would really cost. Peter mentioned that the pink shaded areas could be done without moving the roof supports.

Moving the roof supports aren't the only things that would make it expensive. As said, if you've ever been in the upper concourses in the Kop, there would need to be extensive work to expand these to handle even a small increase in numbers. You'd also need more exits from the seats to the concourse which will eat into the number of seats added. It would need to go over the road on the Centenary side as it's already right up to the road there.

That's before any potential issues with having to rework other areas of the Kop to handle the added numbers (more entrances/exits, etc).

  My comparisons to losses on players was just making a point.

There is no point to be made there though, as you're using hind sight to do so. The club doesn't sign players with the intention to make a loss, on any player what so ever.

You may as well say we should not bother signing anything next summer and spend the £30m on expanding the ground.

Say we could extend the Kop by 10% for 20 million but we would take 30 years to get it back should the accountant gods have to be appeased if it made a loss of a few millions while we are getting other benefits to atmosphere and an additional piece of infrastructure. Once again I'm not talking about major infrastructure that could threaten our financial viability as in redevelopment versus new ground but I don't think there are many places to extend the ground after the ARE redevelopment and 1000 extra in the kop is not to be sneezed at if the sums are not massive.

How would adding more people in to the Kop increase the atmosphere? Are the 12k currently in there making the maximum amount of atmosphere possible?

You'd create more by taking that £20m over the next 30 years and using it to subsidise tickets for local youth to go in the Kop. You could knock nearly £20 off 2000 tickets for every home league game for the next 30 years for that much.

[free_at_last]

Moving the roof supports aren't the only things that would make it expensive. As said, if you've ever been in the upper concourses in the Kop, there would need to be extensive work to expand these to handle even a small increase in numbers. You'd also need more exits from the seats to the concourse which will eat into the number of seats added. It would need to go over the road on the Centenary side as it's already right up to the road there.

That's before any potential issues with having to rework other areas of the Kop to handle the added numbers (more entrances/exits, etc).


There is no point to be made there though, as you're using hind sight to do so. The club doesn't sign players with the intention to make a loss, on any player what so ever.

You may as well say we should not bother signing anything next summer and spend the £30m on expanding the ground.


How would adding more people in to the Kop increase the atmosphere? Are the 12k currently in there making the maximum amount of atmosphere possible?

You'd create more by taking that £20m over the next 30 years and using it to subsidise tickets for local youth to go in the Kop. You could knock nearly £20 off 2000 tickets for every home league game for the next 30 years for that much.

  That's why I was asking how much it would cost.  I pulled 20 million out of the air.  How much do you think it would cost?
  I made the point about player losses to show that we lose money(and lots of it) as a matter of course so we shouldn't be afraid of losing a relatively small amount on a piece of infrastucture that would benefit the fans.
 I did say ignore the jokes about the noise from the Kop() but I'm sure we'd get some extra noise but the main thing is there would be an extra 1000 fans in an important part of the ground(the young fans tickets is a different matter). I'm sure fans are looking at the redeveloped main stand as an extra chance of tickets(not whether it makes money or not).

[CraigDS]

  That's why I was asking how much it would cost.  I pulled 20 million out of the air.  How much do you think it would cost?

I've no idea. I just know it's a big job, with a lot of complications.

  I made the point about player losses to show that we lose money(and lots of it) as a matter of course so we shouldn't be afraid of losing a relatively small amount on a piece of infrastucture that would benefit the fans.

Again, those losses aren't planned. You can't point to bad signings after that's been found out as examples.

If we decided to add these relatively few seats to the Kop at great expense but were then told it would be at the cost of not getting Klopp as the manager and having someone much cheaper would you of been so happy? As that's an identical example, just without the hindsight.

I did say ignore the jokes about the noise from the Kop() but I'm sure we'd get some extra noise but the main thing is there would be an extra 1000 fans in an important part of the ground(the young fans tickets is a different matter). I'm sure fans are looking at the redeveloped main stand as an extra chance of tickets(not whether it makes money or not).

I'm sure there are millions of fans who are looking at both, that the expanded ground doesn't cost the club the chance to sign players/managers that the coaching staff want, whilst also offering an increased chance of tickets.

As said, if you're looking at this as some sort of giving back to the fans or chance to increase the atmosphere then the money would be better spent elsewhere (to see more gains that is).

[free_at_last]

I've no idea. I just know it's a big job, with a lot of complications.

Again, those losses aren't planned. You can't point to bad signings after that's been found out as examples.

If we decided to add these relatively few seats to the Kop at great expense but were then told it would be at the cost of not getting Klopp as the manager and having someone much cheaper would you of been so happy? As that's an identical example, just without the hindsight.

I'm sure there are millions of fans who are looking at both, that the expanded ground doesn't cost the club the chance to sign players/managers that the coaching staff want, whilst also offering an increased chance of tickets.

As said, if you're looking at this as some sort of giving back to the fans or chance to increase the atmosphere then the money would be better spent elsewhere (to see more gains that is).

  Hopefully Peter can give an estimate then. We are discussing one of the topics about extending Anfield Stadium. Cost obviously
comes into it but I maintain that we shouldn't have to break even if the costs are not massive and there are not a lot of alternatives for extending the stadium.

[Peter McGurk]

  Hopefully Peter can give an estimate then. We are discussing one of the topics about extending Anfield Stadium. Cost obviously
comes into it but I maintain that we shouldn't have to break even if the costs are not massive and there are not a lot of alternatives for extending the stadium.

No cost estimates I'm afraid but you can be sure it's not as cost effective as adding to the Main Stand or Anfield Road End and the total cost-effective capacity is 58k (apparently), so why add more? With such a low terrace angle, there are also technical issues with sightlines into the corner flags at the kop end and other littles wobbles like escapes.

All of which can be overcome if a different view is taken on what is and what is not cost effective or what is and what is not beneficial to the club. You could lift the existing roof and add 3 or 4,000 if it was going to be useful.

It would be great to have a mega Kop visible from Mars if you like (and regardless of the cost) but the question will be what does adding an extra capacity above the optimum ("sweet spot") capacity add to the club?

Not money for sure. Atmosphere? Or would spending the money on cheaper seats do that as Craig suggests or standing together with your mates like the good old days? Or are 'atmosphere' and the good old days gone forever?

Personally, I'd love to see a 26,000 standing Kop but could the club sustain a 70k stadium at the price? Perhaps it doesn't matter. Perhaps a 'Red Wall' and a 'massive' club (and the effect on global commercial and TV income) matters more.

[readybreck]

Wasn't there something about a restriction on going over the 60k mark with reference to traffic improvements and the like?

[Peter McGurk]

Wasn't there something about a restriction on going over the 60k mark with reference to traffic improvements and the like?

With all due respect, we've done that to death.

[readybreck]

Fair Dos! 

[Lolo]

OK. It's been discussed on here before somewhere. You're right you could square it off on that side and get some extra seats in. You could also square off the other side if it cantilevered over the road. I did a bit of modelling to show how that might work a while back.

I don't know what the cost would be but it's probably one of the easier options for squeezing a few more seats in if there's demand after the current redevelopment. It's a standalone piece of work though so there's no great benefit in doing if now and complicating the logistics of a tight site that has tens of thousands of supporters walking through it on a regular basis.

I'm assuming that we are talking about this corner at the back?

How many extra seats are we likely to add? I'm guessing no more than a few hundred, so with all the expense of changing the roof and the structural support work, I can't see how it could be financially viable.

I suppose it was originally designed this way to provide some visual 'balance' when viewed from inside the ground.

[Snaily]

Is possible safe standing a game changer when considering the cost of a relatively small kop extension (such as peter suggests) which would require a higher roof, new roof supports and much larger concourses? 

a 14000 seated kop could mean a 20000 plus standing kop and while a season ticket price would reduce, I still think the overall income would increase greatly and potentially enough to make the development financially viable.

I just bring this up as many people seem to want a mega kop and diverted WBR, while I think it wouldn't be necessary and is very doable on the current footprint.

[Durlmints]

Is possible safe standing a game changer when considering the cost of a relatively small kop extension (such as peter suggests) which would require a higher roof, new roof supports and much larger concourses? 

a 14000 seated kop could mean a 20000 plus standing kop and while a season ticket price would reduce, I still think the overall income would increase greatly and potentially enough to make the development financially viable.

I just bring this up as many people seem to want a mega kop and diverted WBR, while I think it wouldn't be necessary and is very doable on the current footprint.

A diverted WBR would be a good thing either way though, because it would give breathing space from the stand back right corner to the road at the very least. You could also have an extra lane for taxi and bus drop offs, rather than just pulling up at the side of the road as is the case at the minute.

It would also mean that if the circumstances demanded, Kop work COULD be done, where as at present it's just not even possible.

There is a lot of empty space behind the buildings on the opposite side of WBR now and once that's built on, it would confirm that WBR wouldn't be altered. It just feels like there is enough space behind to push those buildings back a bit and straighten the road out.

That's my view at least.

[The Lord Admiral]

I can't seem to embed them at work, but there's a couple of suggested pics for the rerouting here http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=210414&page=228

There's also a very nice idea here likening the stadium development to what has been done to the MCG at Yarra park http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=210414&page=229

[Peter McGurk]

I can't seem to embed them at work, but there's a couple of suggested pics for the rerouting here http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=210414&page=228

There's also a very nice idea here likening the stadium development to what has been done to the MCG at Yarra park http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=210414&page=229

None of these will fly but it isn't actually necessary if you consider:
a) safe standing would be plenty
b) the modest extension otherwise needed could be accommodated with WBR in place as is.

The kop can't be taken back much further because of sight distances.

[The Lord Admiral]

None of these will fly but it isn't actually necessary if you consider:
a) safe standing would be plenty
b) the modest extension otherwise needed could be accommodated with WBR in place as is.

The kop can't be taken back much further because of sight distances.

I think i've read something you wrote on this before Peter, so had heard the above before, all fair points. I'd be interested in what you think re the below though

1) Would the potential re-routing of the WBR do anything in terms of helping the 'transport infrastructure' issues that the stadium has over around 65K (which would be a hurdle to safe standing)
2) could there be further commercial potential, either for the area/council or the club if it were rerouted? I'm thinking hotels, restaurants, shopping or even property.
3) Could a reformed Kop have the same and therefore could it be made to 'pay' for itself in some way?

4) Dortmund have made their 'Yellow Wall' a real selling point the last few years. If, and it's a big if at this point, safe standing is introduced, I could see a commercial argument for Liverpool having 'the biggest Kop in Europe' or the World. Don't get me wrong, it's already iconic, but is there potential to make it more iconic in some way? I suspect there's some serious kudos could be earned by the owners with a bit of creativity and the flexibility of the council.

I do really like that Yara park idea, having the stadium sit in woodland, maybe with public sports facilities etc dotted around like you see in the US. Whether it's feasible I don't know.

I think we are years off them touching the Kop to be honest, if at all, there'd be a lot more financial sense it trying to do the Kemlyn. Incidentally I saw a poster on Skyscraper city mention that the club were working with housing association that owned the houses on the skerries to potentially allow expanding there to be an option. I've never read that anywhere else, have my doubts if it's true.
 



 

[Alan_X]

Rerouting the road to make the Kop bigger would reduce the land available for anything else.
The land belongs to other people.
The Kop would be big enough with safe standing.