Author Topic: Liverpool confirm decision to redevelop Anfield  (Read 178095 times)

Offline geoffstrong

  • A Right Drama Queen, (actually leans more to the left) but enjoys a good flounce.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 17,219
  • fi am bob amser yn iawn
Re: Liverpool have decided to redevelop Anfield?
« Reply #520 on: July 22, 2012, 08:39:41 PM »
I agree.

As Peter pointed out, not wasting a load of room with boxes and having way more premium seats in the space of them would bring in a lot more £ per sqft. That would free up more space around the ground for a larger range a seat prices, hopefully including some sorts boys pen of old.

Still not sure how anyone running the tours, etc would have a clue what £ is brought in from boxes, how many premium seats could get in the space of a box, etc.

Without labouring the point he quoted the annual revenue from a box, so lets leave it there

 to be honest though i was more interested with my chat with Jimmy
JFT 96 R.I.P
Hillsborough Independent Panel, thank you for revealing the 23 years of lies and corruption by the establishment.
http://hillsborough.independent.gov.uk/repository/report/HIP_report.pdf

12-September-2012 the day the rest of the world discovered the truth and caught up with the rest us.

Online CraigDS

  • lite. Well lite in certain depts. AKA Nintendo
  • Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,180
  • YNWA
Re: Liverpool have decided to redevelop Anfield?
« Reply #521 on: July 22, 2012, 08:49:19 PM »
Without labouring the point he quoted the annual revenue from a box, so lets leave it there

 to be honest though i was more interested with my chat with Jimmy

This was his post which started this discussion, it's with regards to needing more premium seating rather than boxes as they make more money per sqft, which in a limited space of a stadium is much more important.

I thought it had been shown that corporate boxes don't make more money than premium seats using up the same space?  Am hopeful that we won't need lots of boxes.
Watch out, I'm and FSG mole. No really I am - they planned my existence on here over a year before they bought the club.

Online helmboy_nige

  • A diplomat... except in the face of total morons
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 5,254
Re: Liverpool have decided to redevelop Anfield?
« Reply #522 on: July 22, 2012, 09:58:18 PM »
not what one of the Anfield tour guides said , he was quite definite about the revenue they generate and how we needed more of them. Without a bigger ground more boxes has to mean less seats for the plebs.

tbf, I went on one of the legends tours and the guide then said that Anfield was far behind the others because of the lack of corporate boxes and he was 'sure' they'd be building more.  Granted this was 18+ months ago and he also said that he was 'sure' Roy Hodgsons picture would join the other greats in time.

I reckon they probably will add more boxes, but only as they expand the stadium (if they expand it).  If they build onto the Main Stand I could see them adding a row of boxes.

Offline ttnbd

  • RAWK Chief Financial Officer
  • Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 18,996
  • ANFIELD4EVER
Re: Liverpool have decided to redevelop Anfield?
« Reply #523 on: July 23, 2012, 07:36:44 AM »
whether it's a box or normal stand seat hospitality, the revenue per person is approx the same, maybe a little more for a box to compensate for probably higher costs.
So all say thanks to the Shanks

He never walked alone

Lets sing our song for all the world

From this his Liverpool home

Online CraigDS

  • lite. Well lite in certain depts. AKA Nintendo
  • Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,180
  • YNWA
Re: Liverpool have decided to redevelop Anfield?
« Reply #524 on: July 23, 2012, 07:39:16 AM »
whether it's a box or normal stand seat hospitality, the revenue per person is approx the same, maybe a little more for a box to compensate for probably higher costs.

Yeah but I think the point is you can fit more than 10-15 premium seats (capacity of a box) in the space of a box so you'd make more overall.
Watch out, I'm and FSG mole. No really I am - they planned my existence on here over a year before they bought the club.

Offline ttnbd

  • RAWK Chief Financial Officer
  • Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 18,996
  • ANFIELD4EVER
Re: Liverpool have decided to redevelop Anfield?
« Reply #525 on: July 23, 2012, 07:45:37 AM »
Yeah but I think the point is you can fit more than 10-15 premium seats (capacity of a box) in the space of a box so you'd make more overall.

Can you though?  Look at how most stands with boxes are built.  You can increase the capaicty with a box and create more floor space for other hospitality suites.  Just look at the Kemlyn.
So all say thanks to the Shanks

He never walked alone

Lets sing our song for all the world

From this his Liverpool home

Online CraigDS

  • lite. Well lite in certain depts. AKA Nintendo
  • Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,180
  • YNWA
Re: Liverpool have decided to redevelop Anfield?
« Reply #526 on: July 23, 2012, 07:46:53 AM »
Can you though?  Look at how most stands with boxes are built.  You can increase the capaicty with a box and create more floor space for other hospitality suites.  Just look at the Kemlyn.

I've no idea mate, definitely no architect so trusted what Peter said to be true as think he definitely looked into it properly.
Watch out, I'm and FSG mole. No really I am - they planned my existence on here over a year before they bought the club.

Offline ttnbd

  • RAWK Chief Financial Officer
  • Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 18,996
  • ANFIELD4EVER
Re: Liverpool have decided to redevelop Anfield?
« Reply #527 on: July 23, 2012, 08:04:25 AM »
Not the greatest picture, but look at how the tiers over the boxes overhang, creating extra capacity space over and above the numbers in the boxes.  You could easily match capacity of a box with extra stand seats.
So all say thanks to the Shanks

He never walked alone

Lets sing our song for all the world

From this his Liverpool home

Offline Peter McGurk

  • Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,014
Re: Liverpool have decided to redevelop Anfield?
« Reply #528 on: July 23, 2012, 11:19:53 AM »
As if LFC would let you bring yer own in.  It'll be usual £3.60 or whatever for a small bottle of Carlsberg.

Just either redevelop or build a fucking ground fsg eh.  It's only been now what 2 years since they ousted H&G?  And fuck all of note has happened except we've purchased a big tent for the corporates.

Love to have some inkling of what the medium term strategy is.  Never mind long term.  It all appears to be done on the 'hoof'.

In two years FSG have effectively started from scratch (who's advice do you want to trust? Moores and Parry or H&G?) and fully evaluated two options - one of which was 'impossible'. They've exposed the false economics of a new stadium and have been turning around entrenched opinion based on over a decade of mis-information.

Simultaneously and in parallel, council have done a turn-around from a complete 'no way' to helpful and ongoing 'working together'. They have produced and presented three options to local residents which will rebuild the Rockfield Triangle (266 homes) after more than a decade of neglect by the previous administration and they will restore the 'Anfield Village' (over 600 homes). Prior to this, the Rockfield Traingle wasn't even on the regeneration map. Now it is 'priority'.

Yeah, sounds like a lot of people have been sitting on their hands doing SFA.

.

« Last Edit: July 23, 2012, 11:31:01 AM by Peter McGurk »

Online CraigDS

  • lite. Well lite in certain depts. AKA Nintendo
  • Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,180
  • YNWA
Re: Liverpool have decided to redevelop Anfield?
« Reply #529 on: July 23, 2012, 11:22:08 AM »
You not been getting internet connection in Boston, Peter?
Watch out, I'm and FSG mole. No really I am - they planned my existence on here over a year before they bought the club.

Offline Peter McGurk

  • Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,014
Re: Liverpool have decided to redevelop Anfield?
« Reply #530 on: July 23, 2012, 11:29:59 AM »
Not the greatest picture, but look at how the tiers over the boxes overhang, creating extra capacity space over and above the numbers in the boxes.  You could easily match capacity of a box with extra stand seats.

It is not a question of reduced or increased capacity either way (although ultimately you can get in more with premium seats because of sightlines and angle issues above). The income per head is about the same (although, some premium seats for some games are more expensive). The issue is one of cost and flexibility.

As that section drawing shows, the construction cost of building boxes with overhangs and an extra floor and toilets and increased height and walls, floors and ceilings to a better finish and special lifts for relatively few people is higher than building premium seats (essentially but not necessarily a bigger seat) with shared hospitality suite behind (under the stand). So although the income might be roughly the same, what you make from boxes is less after taking off all those extra costs of building them.

And... if you put in 140 boxes, you have to sell 140 boxes. If you don't, they're empty and you're stuffed for the cost. But if you built premium seats instead and some don't sell, you can still sell them as 'standard' seats (without the wine & roses) and still make money.

And... the nice little executive tier there splits the ground up with old farts who don't make noise - the 'ring of silence'

.
« Last Edit: July 23, 2012, 11:46:50 AM by Peter McGurk »

Online Tepid water

  • Folically-challenged monkey-rubber.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 15,194
  • Humongous D. Back of the net.
Re: Liverpool have decided to redevelop Anfield?
« Reply #531 on: July 23, 2012, 03:59:05 PM »
Peter hits a home run.

I TOLD YOU WE WEREN'T SIGNING HUNTELAAR.

Offline No666

  • RAWK Scribe
  • Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 10,880
Re: Liverpool have decided to redevelop Anfield?
« Reply #532 on: July 23, 2012, 04:09:26 PM »
sorry should have been clearer he runs the legends tours, he was proud to make that point nobody asked he just commented on it, am i wrong but are some people now being asked to move to accomodate another one or two?
if they really want to look for the future they need an affordable boys pen, for the next generation of match going fans and future st holders.

It's not to fit in more boxes, mate. It's to improve the 'links' between the lounges and the boxes.
Liverpool is a special place because they make their own players into gods extraordinarily, recklessly quickly.

Offline ttnbd

  • RAWK Chief Financial Officer
  • Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 18,996
  • ANFIELD4EVER
Re: Liverpool have decided to redevelop Anfield?
« Reply #533 on: July 23, 2012, 04:11:57 PM »
It is not a question of reduced or increased capacity either way (although ultimately you can get in more with premium seats because of sightlines and angle issues above). The income per head is about the same (although, some premium seats for some games are more expensive). The issue is one of cost and flexibility.

As that section drawing shows, the construction cost of building boxes with overhangs and an extra floor and toilets and increased height and walls, floors and ceilings to a better finish and special lifts for relatively few people is higher than building premium seats (essentially but not necessarily a bigger seat) with shared hospitality suite behind (under the stand). So although the income might be roughly the same, what you make from boxes is less after taking off all those extra costs of building them.

And... if you put in 140 boxes, you have to sell 140 boxes. If you don't, they're empty and you're stuffed for the cost. But if you built premium seats instead and some don't sell, you can still sell them as 'standard' seats (without the wine & roses) and still make money.

And... the nice little executive tier there splits the ground up with old farts who don't make noise - the 'ring of silence'

.

When was the last time you heard noise coming from the kemlyn or main stands?

Also it wouldn't be a ring, ala the emirates or wembley.  It'd be 3 sides at most, but most likely 2.  As for the outlay, short term it may be a detriment to profit, but having those extra boxes gives you options.  Given the way the boxes in the Kemlyn are now there's nothing to stop there still being seats outside such that if the boxes aren't sold (and the boxes tend to be sold on a 3 year basis, except the TV studio) they can be sold to "normal" fans if the access is available.

Remember that the premium seats in the upper kemlyn have their own access point.  You don't go through the normal turnstiles and just take up your seat.  You go through the main entrance of the kemlyn, and through the suites before going up to your seat.

There's been complaints in the past that the club was just short sighted, that it didn't figure in the future.  Well why not ensure that if there is demand for boxes that it's available.  It's a case of if you price it right you'll sell them.  If it takes an extra few years to pay extra off then that may have to be the case, but don't just rule it out because in the short term it may not be cost effective.

The NPV of a project is not based on just the next 5 years, it's the entire life of the capital investment.

Example, the club spends £80m upgrading the road end and main stand.  It adds 15,000 seats but no additional boxes.  The annual revenue increase from tickets is £12m (at a very conservative £42 per ticket per match average for 19 games).  That takes 7 seasons of revenue to cover the initial cost.

Or the club spends £110m to upgrade the road end and main stand it adds 15,000 normal seats and 32 boxes.  The 15,000 normal seats still adds £12m in ticket revenue whilst the boxes adds £2m a season.  That means it takes 8 years of revenue to cover the initial cost of the works.

Just because it takes a few extra years to pay for something to have a better facility doesn't mean it isn't the right choice.

The club over the last couple of years has spent in excess of £3m upgrading hospitality facilities but there isn't a hope in hell of getting that money back in the short term.  Price rises won't cover it in the short term and there's few extra seats to do it.  But in the long term the club will reap the benefits from a better and varied offering.
So all say thanks to the Shanks

He never walked alone

Lets sing our song for all the world

From this his Liverpool home

Online CraigDS

  • lite. Well lite in certain depts. AKA Nintendo
  • Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,180
  • YNWA
Re: Liverpool have decided to redevelop Anfield?
« Reply #534 on: July 23, 2012, 05:02:14 PM »
You may not go through the main turnstyles to get to them (premium seats in the upper) but you could do. Infact the lounges fr those seats are accessed via the stairs for the 'plebs'. I've sat behind those seats since the stand was built!
Watch out, I'm and FSG mole. No really I am - they planned my existence on here over a year before they bought the club.

Online Alan_X

  • 'twatito' - The Cat Herding Firm But Fair Voice Of Reason (Except when he's got a plank up his arse). Gimme some skin, priest! Has a general dislike for Elijah Wood.
  • RAWK Staff
  • Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 27,484
  • Come on you fucking red men!!!
Re: Liverpool have decided to redevelop Anfield?
« Reply #535 on: July 23, 2012, 05:16:22 PM »
Temporary structures are grim, they are tacky, they smell and age quickly. It'll be a mess after 3 months.

We've just designed the fit-out for one of the Olymp[ic Hospitality Centres and the temporary buildings (marquees) are really high quality.
Sid Lowe (@sidlowe)
09/03/2011 08:04
Give a man a mask and he will tell the truth, Give a man a user name and he will act like a total twat.
Its all about winning shiny things.

Offline rafathegaffa83

  • Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 14,836
  • Dutch Class
Re: Liverpool have decided to redevelop Anfield?
« Reply #536 on: July 23, 2012, 05:44:17 PM »
Am I reading a bit too much in to this? 

Is there a chance the marquee could be used to facilitate existing corporate clients whilst an expansion of the stadium is taking place, and chunks of the stadium are closed?   The planning permission has been applied for for 2 years, which is probably about the time it would take to start and finish an expansion of Anfield... 

That's what I thought might be the case

Offline No666

  • RAWK Scribe
  • Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 10,880
Re: Liverpool have decided to redevelop Anfield?
« Reply #537 on: July 24, 2012, 08:33:35 AM »
But in the long term the club will reap the benefits from a better and varied offering.

This presupposes the owners are certain they are 'in it' for eight to ten years. If not, the other route would make more sense for them.
Liverpool is a special place because they make their own players into gods extraordinarily, recklessly quickly.

Offline AKABillyGee

  • Main Stander
  • **
  • Posts: 190
Re: Liverpool have decided to redevelop Anfield?
« Reply #538 on: July 24, 2012, 08:50:29 AM »
Some here are a little too quick and a little too eager to support FSG.  Dear me I'm getting cynical.

Online CraigDS

  • lite. Well lite in certain depts. AKA Nintendo
  • Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,180
  • YNWA
Re: Liverpool have decided to redevelop Anfield?
« Reply #539 on: July 24, 2012, 08:59:29 AM »
Some here are a little too quick and a little too eager to support FSG.  Dear me I'm getting cynical.

With regards to the stadium there are enough sources from outside the club (LCC, residents, etc) which suggest movement is being made.
Watch out, I'm and FSG mole. No really I am - they planned my existence on here over a year before they bought the club.

Offline AKABillyGee

  • Main Stander
  • **
  • Posts: 190
Re: Liverpool have decided to redevelop Anfield?
« Reply #540 on: July 24, 2012, 09:33:53 AM »
With regards to the stadium there are enough sources from outside the club (LCC, residents, etc) which suggest movement is being made.

The other sources may be correct in their assumptions.  My problem is that FSG have allegedly ditched a new stadium build when all previous owners including the bank appointed chairman who engineered the sale to FSG have espoused the absolute need for the project.

Support for the FSG stance is loud and interestingly detailed - but it does not make it right. My earlier predictions were that FSG would go ahead with a 'low-cost' Anfield extention adding maybe six thousand seats (mostly premium) to two sides of the ground.  I would love to see the actual figures that support that decision.

Offline HELLRAZOR

  • Chronicler of seasons past. Cares more than Prelude Nr 5, or does he?
  • Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 11,391
  • Dont Fuck with the Buck! © me 7/6/12
Re: Liverpool have decided to redevelop Anfield?
« Reply #541 on: July 24, 2012, 09:38:38 AM »
The New Stadium is what everyone wanted but i dont see the logic in spending 350m on it when you have the chance to extend the capacity of Anfield to something near what a new stadium would hold for a fraction of the cost.

In my view previous owners and Parry and Moores didnt explore this avenue enough.

follow me @dmmmurray7 on twitter

yer ma should have called you Paolo Zico Gerry Socrates HELLRAZOR

Ingerland 13 Ireland 19 (2004)
and its gonna stay here for 37 years til 2041 so you know how it feels

Online CraigDS

  • lite. Well lite in certain depts. AKA Nintendo
  • Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,180
  • YNWA
Re: Liverpool have decided to redevelop Anfield?
« Reply #542 on: July 24, 2012, 09:45:10 AM »
The other sources may be correct in their assumptions.  My problem is that FSG have allegedly ditched a new stadium build when all previous owners including the bank appointed chairman who engineered the sale to FSG have espoused the absolute need for the project.

Support for the FSG stance is loud and interestingly detailed - but it does not make it right. My earlier predictions were that FSG would go ahead with a 'low-cost' Anfield extention adding maybe six thousand seats (mostly premium) to two sides of the ground.  I would love to see the actual figures that support that decision.

I was always in favour of a new stadium, because that's what I'd be told was the only option for the last 10-15yrs, and to be honest it was the only option for a large period of it because LCC just wouldn't help us with the expansion behind the Main Stand.

My opinion changed because of Peters (and Alan's) posts on here, long before FSG even bought the club. They saw that a new stadium was a ridiculously expensive option which offered little extra over a redevelopment. FSG have since come in and done the homework themselves and see this is the only sensible option too.

If all FSG wanted to do is add approx 6k seats they could probably do this with just the Anny Rd expansion and changing the seats in the Main to Premium - but it appears they are going the whole hog and looking to totally redo the Main going by the councils and local residents comments in recent months.
Watch out, I'm and FSG mole. No really I am - they planned my existence on here over a year before they bought the club.

Online CraigDS

  • lite. Well lite in certain depts. AKA Nintendo
  • Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,180
  • YNWA
Re: Liverpool have decided to redevelop Anfield?
« Reply #543 on: July 24, 2012, 09:46:12 AM »
The New Stadium is what everyone wanted but i dont see the logic in spending 350m on it when you have the chance to extend the capacity of Anfield to something near what a new stadium would hold for a fraction of the cost.

In my view previous owners and Parry and Moores didnt explore this avenue enough.

What makes me laugh is when Hicks and Gillett wanted a new stadium a hell of a lot of people wanted to stay at Anfield. Now FSG want to stay at Anfield a lot of those members now want to go to a new stadium!
Watch out, I'm and FSG mole. No really I am - they planned my existence on here over a year before they bought the club.

Offline HELLRAZOR

  • Chronicler of seasons past. Cares more than Prelude Nr 5, or does he?
  • Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 11,391
  • Dont Fuck with the Buck! © me 7/6/12
Re: Liverpool have decided to redevelop Anfield?
« Reply #544 on: July 24, 2012, 09:49:42 AM »
What makes me laugh is when Hicks and Gillett wanted a new stadium a hell of a lot of people wanted to stay at Anfield. Now FSG want to stay at Anfield a lot of those members now want to go to a new stadium!
haha very true

its like when they complain about leaks to the media then when thats shored up they complain theres no rumours

moaners!
follow me @dmmmurray7 on twitter

yer ma should have called you Paolo Zico Gerry Socrates HELLRAZOR

Ingerland 13 Ireland 19 (2004)
and its gonna stay here for 37 years til 2041 so you know how it feels

Offline Peter McGurk

  • Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,014
Re: Liverpool have decided to redevelop Anfield?
« Reply #545 on: July 24, 2012, 10:23:46 AM »
When was the last time you heard noise coming from the kemlyn or main stands?

Also it wouldn't be a ring, ala the emirates or wembley.  It'd be 3 sides at most, but most likely 2.  As for the outlay, short term it may be a detriment to profit, but having those extra boxes gives you options.  Given the way the boxes in the Kemlyn are now there's nothing to stop there still being seats outside such that if the boxes aren't sold (and the boxes tend to be sold on a 3 year basis, except the TV studio) they can be sold to "normal" fans if the access is available.

Remember that the premium seats in the upper kemlyn have their own access point.  You don't go through the normal turnstiles and just take up your seat.  You go through the main entrance of the kemlyn, and through the suites before going up to your seat.

There's been complaints in the past that the club was just short sighted, that it didn't figure in the future.  Well why not ensure that if there is demand for boxes that it's available.  It's a case of if you price it right you'll sell them.  If it takes an extra few years to pay extra off then that may have to be the case, but don't just rule it out because in the short term it may not be cost effective.

The NPV of a project is not based on just the next 5 years, it's the entire life of the capital investment.

Example, the club spends £80m upgrading the road end and main stand.  It adds 15,000 seats but no additional boxes.  The annual revenue increase from tickets is £12m (at a very conservative £42 per ticket per match average for 19 games).  That takes 7 seasons of revenue to cover the initial cost.

Or the club spends £110m to upgrade the road end and main stand it adds 15,000 normal seats and 32 boxes.  The 15,000 normal seats still adds £12m in ticket revenue whilst the boxes adds £2m a season.  That means it takes 8 years of revenue to cover the initial cost of the works.

Just because it takes a few extra years to pay for something to have a better facility doesn't mean it isn't the right choice.

The club over the last couple of years has spent in excess of £3m upgrading hospitality facilities but there isn't a hope in hell of getting that money back in the short term.  Price rises won't cover it in the short term and there's few extra seats to do it.  But in the long term the club will reap the benefits from a better and varied offering.

The point is not to pay more for longer for ‘better’ facilities. The point is to have facilities that are better at making more money.

That’s for now, tomorrow and for the distant and foreseeable future. And in the short, medium and long term, premium seats clearly return more after costs than boxes. Even ignoring the knock-on effect on the cost of the stadium itself, it’s a much better proposition.

‘Pricing it right’ (ie., lowering the price) clearly goes the wrong way in terms of increased cost. Lower revenue, higher cost, mmmm...

***

Some use ’pay back’ as a short-hand to compare cost benefit but it is in fact irrelevant. The ‘value’ is averaged out over the whole life of the stadium and is effectively the same on the first day as it is on the last. To do otherwise is to gamble on the state of the economy and the game for the next 30 years or so. No thanks.

The premium seats at Wembley have been sold for up to 15 years in advance. That’s every single premium seat for every single game has been pre-sold for years in advance. This isn’t Wembley but we can manage to pre-sell premium seats just as much as we can pre-sell boxes. Perhaps better...

...As FSG have suggested, in Liverpool there isn’t that strong a market for groups of 10 at £65k a go as there might be for individuals or smaller groups at £6.5k a head.

***

About 600 upgraded seats from standard to premium would cover the £3m costs with a nice, healthy surplus over 5 years. They’ll do ok.

***

The atmosphere comes from all four sides of the ground theses days (such as it is - other than high feast and holidays). The Kop could and should be louder. The problem is the old farts who sit on their hands are the ones who can afford it http://petermcgurk.blogspot.co.uk/2012/07/money-means-and-menaces.html

.
« Last Edit: July 24, 2012, 10:34:06 AM by Peter McGurk »

Offline Peter McGurk

  • Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,014
Re: Liverpool have decided to redevelop Anfield?
« Reply #546 on: July 24, 2012, 10:33:02 AM »
Some here are a little too quick and a little too eager to support FSG.  Dear me I'm getting cynical.

It's about supporting what's best for the club and deciding whether you think FSG are doing it.

.

Offline AKABillyGee

  • Main Stander
  • **
  • Posts: 190
Re: Liverpool have decided to redevelop Anfield?
« Reply #547 on: July 24, 2012, 11:04:26 AM »
It's about supporting what's best for the club and deciding whether you think FSG are doing it.

.


Peter - I think the jury is out.  Broughton, an experienced financier appointed by the bank and with very close links to them shouted long and hard about the need for a new stadium and attempted to have this included as a condition of sale. Take from that what you will.

Offline No666

  • RAWK Scribe
  • Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 10,880
Re: Liverpool have decided to redevelop Anfield?
« Reply #548 on: July 24, 2012, 11:18:46 AM »
Do we know that Broughton was actually in favour of a new stadium or that he was simply in favour of increased capacity as the key to future success? Even as the sale was being finalised, the press was pointing out that FSG had refurbished Fenway and might try that route with Anfield, so it's unlikely Broughton missed that correlation.

(The phrase 'new stadium' is simply a handy title for all the options. After all, we're discussing redevelopment in a board entitled 'The New Stadium.')
« Last Edit: July 24, 2012, 11:20:42 AM by No666 »
Liverpool is a special place because they make their own players into gods extraordinarily, recklessly quickly.

Offline eirwen

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 6,546
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Liverpool have decided to redevelop Anfield?
« Reply #549 on: July 24, 2012, 12:38:31 PM »
Was everyone in favor of a new stadium? I was under the impression that we only supported it because we were told expanding Anfield was not an option. But now it seems like the council might relent on their stance, isn't staying the better option? I know there might not be as many seats, but it's our history and we should try our best to preserve it IMO.

to be honest I never thought FSG would build a new stadium with their own money. They have been clear in the beginning that they intend to use the club's revenue. That would mean we probably would have to take on huge debt if we build a new stadium, and that is not something we can afford to do considering our position in the league.

Offline oojason

  • Official Biscan fan #23
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,298
Re: Liverpool have decided to redevelop Anfield?
« Reply #550 on: July 24, 2012, 12:49:42 PM »
On the exec boxes - there is a long waiting list to get one of them, and a few well-to-do families (and their friends, and friends of friends etc) I sub-contract for would love to get their hands on at least one each - and have been trying for years. They want the seclusion for their families, as well as inviting guests, friends, workers and potential clients into the more communal parts of the hospitality areas.

In the past they've gone to other clubs for this - Derby, Leicester, City, Utd, Villa, Arsenal etc.

It's not just a case of 'it's cheaper/more cost-effective to build premium seats' - it's a case of losing out on money to your competitors for not providing a large enough service.

The fact there's been that long waiting list for many years now suggests - there is demand there, and it's a fact the club haven't even been actively pushing the exec box side of things (a bit like the season ticket waiting list for us regular-paying fans), simply because they haven't needed to in the past.

The AFC Liverpool website - www.afcliverpool.tv
A grassroots football club - owned and run by Liverpool fans - for Liverpool fans.

Offline incredibleL4ever

  • Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,960
Re: Liverpool have decided to redevelop Anfield?
« Reply #551 on: July 24, 2012, 01:02:54 PM »
Werner briefly discussed the stadium situation with the media, the club is currently in a state of decision over extending Anfield or building a new ground at Stanley Park. Werner wants to make sure progress is certain before revealing details to fans “There’s actually a call later this afternoon to try and move the ball forward but until we are sure of a solution we don’t want to make any announcements and people have been disappointed before.” Fans have been let down before by previous owners and Werner asked fans for patience ”There’s no-one who would like to put this question behind us more than me but until we are clear about the solution and how it’s going to unfold we’re going to just say please exercise a bit of patience”

http://www.lfcts.com/werner-interview/

I get the feeling an announcement is getting closer....but may be a few months off still.

Offline Peter McGurk

  • Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,014
Re: Liverpool have decided to redevelop Anfield?
« Reply #552 on: July 24, 2012, 01:39:59 PM »
Do we know that Broughton was actually in favour of a new stadium or that he was simply in favour of increased capacity as the key to future success? Even as the sale was being finalised, the press was pointing out that FSG had refurbished Fenway and might try that route with Anfield, so it's unlikely Broughton missed that correlation.

(The phrase 'new stadium' is simply a handy title for all the options. After all, we're discussing redevelopment in a board entitled 'The New Stadium.')

Broughton was well aware of the options and I'm sure he would know that FSG were aware of them also.

The issue at his level was one of selling the club at greatest advantage for the club itself. That would have included improving the future viability of the club by capitalising on a clear potential to increase matchday revenue.

He would have left the 'detail' of new versus redevelopment to the buyer. To force one or another on the buyer would have required him to carry out the evaluation exercise that FSG have completed, delayed the sale (which was not possible) and compromised the club (and his personal liability).

It simply wasn't his job to get involved at stadium decision level.

Offline AKABillyGee

  • Main Stander
  • **
  • Posts: 190
Re: Liverpool have decided to redevelop Anfield?
« Reply #553 on: July 24, 2012, 03:32:37 PM »
Boy there is some clutching at straws here in order to justify personal stances. The following quotation is by David Conn in the Guardian on 31st May 2012:

"When RBS in effect installed Martin Broughton as the Liverpool chairman in April 2010 to sell the club, he said explicitly that he would seek new owners who would build that new stadium: "We want to do the right thing for Liverpool and a new stadium is doing the right thing," he said. "It will add long-term value to the club and, if we are looking for a new owner, that is something they will have to accept."

Clarity and no doubt.

Online CraigDS

  • lite. Well lite in certain depts. AKA Nintendo
  • Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,180
  • YNWA
Re: Liverpool have decided to redevelop Anfield?
« Reply #554 on: July 24, 2012, 04:03:43 PM »
Boy there is some clutching at straws here in order to justify personal stances. The following quotation is by David Conn in the Guardian on 31st May 2012:

"When RBS in effect installed Martin Broughton as the Liverpool chairman in April 2010 to sell the club, he said explicitly that he would seek new owners who would build that new stadium: "We want to do the right thing for Liverpool and a new stadium is doing the right thing," he said. "It will add long-term value to the club and, if we are looking for a new owner, that is something they will have to accept."

Clarity and no doubt.

I like how Broughton was able to fully assess all the options open to the club at the time within the space of what - a few days between being appointed and that quote?

The fact is just because Broughton said so still doesn't make it the best option.
Watch out, I'm and FSG mole. No really I am - they planned my existence on here over a year before they bought the club.

Online timmyonions

  • Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,043
  • What do I know eh ??
    • timmyonions@gmail.com
Re: Liverpool have decided to redevelop Anfield?
« Reply #555 on: July 24, 2012, 05:12:50 PM »
All they`ve done is yap yap yap on about the stadium/redevelopment since they`ve come.They`re here nearly 22 months now.Talk is cheap and i`m sick to me teeth of hearing it.

Excuse me for being so cynical but could anybody blame me?
That right peg hits it and you see the future arc of the ball and time goes al gluey like a Dali painting, and for a second there's a 20yr old StevenGerrard and your young self cheering him on through the prism. His big smile fades in an the net is shivering and J.Hart's trying not to look grateful for the privilege of being that close to greatness

Offline Coady

  • Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,656
  • ★ ★ ★ ★ ★
Re: Liverpool have decided to redevelop Anfield?
« Reply #556 on: July 24, 2012, 05:15:51 PM »
Boy there is some clutching at straws here in order to justify personal stances. The following quotation is by David Conn in the Guardian on 31st May 2012:

"When RBS in effect installed Martin Broughton as the Liverpool chairman in April 2010 to sell the club, he said explicitly that he would seek new owners who would build that new stadium: "We want to do the right thing for Liverpool and a new stadium is doing the right thing," he said. "It will add long-term value to the club and, if we are looking for a new owner, that is something they will have to accept."

Clarity and no doubt.

Broughton also said.

Broughton insisted the prospective takeover would see a revamp of the club on and off the pitch.

"They [NESV] are all about winning. At Boston, they have spent a lot of money on players and have committed to the necessary investment in players at Liverpool," he told Sky Sports News.

"At Fenway Park they spent £200m on stadium very effectively. One of the members built the Baltimore stadium, so they've built stadiums and restored stadiums.

"They want to be sure they're going to do the right thing. They haven't committed to what that is yet but we will have a stadium of more than 60,000 whether it is the new stadium as designed.

"There is a short-time table for that."
"When you hear the noise of the Bill Shankly boys,
We'll be coming down the road"

Offline HELLRAZOR

  • Chronicler of seasons past. Cares more than Prelude Nr 5, or does he?
  • Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 11,391
  • Dont Fuck with the Buck! © me 7/6/12
Re: Liverpool have decided to redevelop Anfield?
« Reply #557 on: July 24, 2012, 05:16:20 PM »
im sure they looked at avenues with the new stadium, the big thing with that was naming rights. id say they spent a lot of time looking into that.

Id prefer Anfield anyway, cost effective and we dont lose this ground.

THats not to say im happy about the delay but once they get it right. its dragged on way too long
follow me @dmmmurray7 on twitter

yer ma should have called you Paolo Zico Gerry Socrates HELLRAZOR

Ingerland 13 Ireland 19 (2004)
and its gonna stay here for 37 years til 2041 so you know how it feels

Online CraigDS

  • lite. Well lite in certain depts. AKA Nintendo
  • Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,180
  • YNWA
Re: Liverpool have decided to redevelop Anfield?
« Reply #558 on: July 24, 2012, 05:50:21 PM »
All they`ve done is yap yap yap on about the stadium/redevelopment since they`ve come.They`re here nearly 22 months now.Talk is cheap and i`m sick to me teeth of hearing it.

Excuse me for being so cynical but could anybody blame me?

Damned if they say too much, damned if they say too little.
Watch out, I'm and FSG mole. No really I am - they planned my existence on here over a year before they bought the club.

Offline BIGdavalad

  • Major Malfunction. Yearns To Be A Crab! MOD Agony Aunt. Dulldream Believer. Is the proud owner of a one year old login time.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 28,345
Re: Liverpool have decided to redevelop Anfield?
« Reply #559 on: July 24, 2012, 05:59:44 PM »
Boy there is some clutching at straws here in order to justify personal stances. The following quotation is by David Conn in the Guardian on 31st May 2012:

"When RBS in effect installed Martin Broughton as the Liverpool chairman in April 2010 to sell the club, he said explicitly that he would seek new owners who would build that new stadium: "We want to do the right thing for Liverpool and a new stadium is doing the right thing," he said. "It will add long-term value to the club and, if we are looking for a new owner, that is something they will have to accept."

Clarity and no doubt.

Do you happen to have £300m sitting round doing fuck all that you could send to John Henry to pay for a stadium?
Joining Betfair? Use the referral code UHHFL6VHG and we'll both get some extra cash.

All of the above came from my head unless otherwise stated. If you have been affected by the issues raised by my post, please feel free to contact us on 0800 1234567 and we will send you an information pack on manning the fuck up.