Topic: Staying at Anfield?

[Discipline]

Liverpool owner John Henry has hinted the club could be set to redevelop Anfield, saying it is a "myth" that a new stadium will improve the Reds' financial fortunes.

The feasibility of building a new ground on Stanley Park has long been mooted by Fenway Sports Group (FSG).

But Henry says a new stadium is not vital for Liverpool's long-term future.

"A long-term myth has existed about the financial impact of a new stadium," he said in an email to theanfieldwrap.com. 

"A belief has grown that Liverpool FC must have a new stadium to compete with [Manchester] United, Arsenal and others.

"No-one has ever addressed whether or not a new stadium is rational."

FSG is believed to have long favoured the remodelling of Anfield and was faced with a similar situation with one of their other clubs, the Boston Red Sox.

• LFC stadium: Timeline of events
2002: Plans announced to build a 55,000-seater stadium on Stanley Park
2004: Planning permission approved for Stanley Park
2005: Groundshare ideas with Everton rejected
2006: Council give go-ahead to proceed with new stadium
2006: European Regional Development Fund awards grant towards Stanley Park improvements
2007: Redevelopment statement issued that new stadium work will begin in May
2007: New Reds owners George Gillett and Tom Hicks order stadium redesign
2007: Reds reveal plans for 60,000-seater stadium on Stanley Park
2008: Liverpool confirm building of new stadium will be subject to a delay
2009: Liverpool announce new stadium plans could start in April 2010
2010: Groundshare ideas with Everton discussed
2011: News that planning obstacles could affect redevelopment of Anfield
2012: Liverpool announce plans to continue with new stadium at Stanley Park
2012: Discussions over redeveloping Anfield announced
After conducting a feasibility study for around a year, FSG opted to redevelop the 100-year-old Fenway Park and Henry hinted last year he was keen to do something similar with Anfield, stating that it would be hard to replicate the atmosphere generated at the stadium.

The American also believes moving to Stanley Park would likely result in higher ticket prices and feels the best method for the club to compete financially with the Premier League's leading sides would be to increase their worldwide commercial revenue streams instead.

"New stadiums increase revenues primarily by raising ticket prices - especially premium seating," added Henry.

"While a new stadium or an expansion of Anfield is beneficial over the long term for the club, the financial impact of adding seats and amenities should be put into perspective.

"That's why I say that it is a myth that stadium issues are going to magically transform LFC's fortunes.

"Building new or refurbishing Anfield is going to lead to an increase from £40m of match-day revenue to perhaps £60-70m if you don't factor in debt service.

"That would certainly help but it's just one component of LFC's long-term fortunes.

"Our future is based not on a stadium issue but on building a strong football club that can compete with anyone in Europe. This will be principally driven financially by our commercial strengths globally."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/18461597

[CraigDS]

Already being discussed in about 3 threads mate!

[Discipline]

Mods, close the thread. Didn't know that.

[Red Beret]

Seeing as it's not been closed yet I just want to add a little aside that's not related to current developments.

It was Parry who decided we needed a new stadium and it was Moores - clueless businessman that he was - who agreed.  If LFC had had the kind of commercial development back in 1999 that we have now, like we'd have been generating so much money Moores would never had needed to sell in the first place.  It was his and Parry's inertia that brought us to this point.  Moores said we needed a new stadium because Parry said so.  Parry said it because he said to expand Anfield would take years of fiddly negotiations that were not practical - never mind the fact that if they had been arsed doing those negotiations a new stadium would likely have been up and running 6 years ago.

It all comes down to the money.  Get us winning on the pitch and give the commercial arm something it can exploit and sell to raise the money we need.  Everything else should flow from there.

[djphal]

Mods, close the thread. Didn't know that.

you need more Discipline

[CraigDS]

Seeing as it's not been closed yet I just want to add a little aside that's not related to current developments.

It was Parry who decided we needed a new stadium and it was Moores - clueless businessman that he was - who agreed.  If LFC had had the kind of commercial development back in 1999 that we have now, like we'd have been generating so much money Moores would never had needed to sell in the first place.  It was his and Parry's inertia that brought us to this point.  Moores said we needed a new stadium because Parry said so.  Parry said it because he said to expand Anfield would take years of fiddly negotiations that were not practical - never mind the fact that if they had been arsed doing those negotiations a new stadium would likely have been up and running 6 years ago.

It all comes down to the money.  Get us winning on the pitch and give the commercial arm something it can exploit and sell to raise the money we need.  Everything else should flow from there.

A lot has changed in 10+ years though. I'm not going to say back then it was the right decision but...

The council really didn't seem too arsed to help us expand, and with the land readily available on Stanley Park (and a nice £300k a year input to the council from the club for it), plus the land Anfield was on, plus the promised cash from the Govt and other places for the regen of the surrounding areas, forcing people out of houses wasn't the top of their agenda.

Fast forward 10 years, houses have been sat there boarded up for years, the area values have plummeted (both due to economy crash and area being dilapidated), cash that was promised has been taken away, the club never took up the option to build new when they had the land and planning, etc. and helping the club with some sort of option is better than none.

Plus in the last 10+ years how many more of the owners have given up and sold to LFC, Arena or the Council? We are in a position now where only 8 houses in Lothair Rd are left lived in, but how many were lived in 10+ years ago?

However, you're totally right about Moores and Parry. The club is basically in the same position now as it was back then, in fact beyond then, probably all the way back to the start of the PL era. It had at the time a history and reputation unmatched by anyone in England and if Moores had got the right people in to run the club, and dare I say it, commercialise our history, then we'd be where United are now in terms of revenue. Even going back to 2005 when we won the CL, that was the perfect stepping stone to start on but he didn't have the drive, determination or ability to get the right people in.

[Peter McGurk]

A lot has changed in 10+ years though. I'm not going to say back then it was the right decision but...

The finances of a new stadium were always fanciful - when money was cheap and flowed like toxic honey. Thank God we're not stuck with that debt now. Stuck like Arsenal with nothing to spend on the team but without the city corporate budgets and the millions from apartment sales.

We didn't need that then. We don't need it now. Meanwhile, no-one is getting forced out of anywhere.

And BTW the 'government aid' was for the restoration of the park and nothing else. No housing regeneration. Not even a real commitment to an Anfield Plaza.

[CraigDS]

The finances of a new stadium were always fanciful - when money was cheap and flowed like toxic honey. Thank God we're not stuck with that debt now. Stuck like Arsenal with nothing to spend on the team but without the city corporate budgets and the millions from apartment sales.

We didn't need that then. We don't need it now. Meanwhile, no-one is getting forced out of anywhere.

And BTW the 'government aid' was for the restoration of the park and nothing else. No housing regeneration. Not even a real commitment to an Anfield Plaza.

I was talking more council having funding from the Govt rather than the club. Didn't they have a fairly decent wedge taken off them that was ear marked for the regen of Anfield area?

Agreed though about the finances never stacking up, which is true. Just pointing out that certain things have changed which have also made a redev much more attractive/possible these days than 10yrs ago.

[Peter McGurk]

I was talking more council having funding from the Govt rather than the club. Didn't they have a fairly decent wedge taken off them that was ear marked for the regen of Anfield area?

Agreed though about the finances never stacking up, which is true. Just pointing out that certain things have changed which have also made a redev much more attractive/possible these days than 10yrs ago.

But the HMRI government funding for houses had SFA to do with the stadium.

.

[Alf]

We've spent 10 years talking about building a new stadium that would have taken 3 years to build leaving us years behind. No doubt if we increase the capacity at Anfield now the 1st area FSG will target is corporate tickets to bridge the gap between us and the teams ahead of our revenue.

[RedPross]

The finances of a new stadium were always fanciful - when money was cheap and flowed like toxic honey. Thank God we're not stuck with that debt now. Stuck like Arsenal with nothing to spend on the team but without the city corporate budgets and the millions from apartment sales.

We didn't need that then. We don't need it now. Meanwhile, no-one is getting forced out of anywhere.

And BTW the 'government aid' was for the restoration of the park and nothing else. No housing regeneration. Not even a real commitment to an Anfield Plaza.

If we had built a new stadium 10 years ago then we would've been brought by Roman or the arabs because we would've had the infrastructure in place as Manchester City do now.....

Not saying that would've been a good idea but the likes of the bitters that are bigger than Manchester City  have not got investment because of the ground costs.

[Tepid water]

If we had built a new stadium 10 years ago then we would've been brought by Roman or the arabs because we would've had the infrastructure in place as Manchester City do now.....

Not saying that would've been a good idea but the likes of the bitters that are bigger than Manchester City  have not got investment because of the ground costs.

Please delete the post.

It's so depressing it hurts, so utterly true.

[CraigDS]

But the HMRI government funding for houses had SFA to do with the stadium.

.

But it will of helped sway council opinion to help the club obtain land around the ground to redev.

[CraigDS]

If we had built a new stadium 10 years ago then we would've been brought by Roman or the arabs because we would've had the infrastructure in place as Manchester City do now.....

Not saying that would've been a good idea but the likes of the bitters that are bigger than Manchester City  have not got investment because of the ground costs.

Yet both Chelsea and City are looking at spending a hell of a lot of money on or around their grounds so surely wouldn't of been an issue at all. Plus if we'd of had the infrastructure the cost (£185m when G&H bought us) would of been higher to actually purchase us.

[Robert_B]

The whole stadium issue can be summarised by one Carmella Soprano quote: "indecision is worse than wrong decision".

[Peter McGurk]

If we had built a new stadium 10 years ago then we would've been brought by Roman or the arabs because we would've had the infrastructure in place as Manchester City do now.....

Not saying that would've been a good idea but the likes of the bitters that are bigger than Manchester City  have not got investment because of the ground costs.

Do you really think Abramovitch or Sheik Mansour would have said well here's a club with several hundred million pounds of debt in a new stadium that the fans can't afford to go to, I think I'll buy that? I don't think so.

The Sheik bought City because they were cheap as chips, on their footballing uppers and had a 'free' (council rent) stadium thrown in from the Commonwealth Games. As for Abramovitch, re-run script but throw in massive supporting development completed prior to his arrival to boot (hotels, offices, shopping mall...).

Please delete the post.

It's so depressing it hurts, so utterly true.

Give up the myth. Let it rest in peace.

The whole stadium issue can be summarised by one Carmella Soprano quote: "indecision is worse than wrong decision".

Right... Carmella Soprano... Guru

.

[Robert_B]

Right... Carmella Soprano... Guru

Not sure where I called her that. just a quote that came to mind.

And it's true, if we had done one thing or the other - with 10 years and tens of millions put towards either a new stadium or redeveloping Anfield, we'd be a long way there.

As things are, we're all just 10 years older with nothing to show for it.

[CraigDS]

Not sure where I called her that. just a quote that came to mind.

And it's true, if we had done one thing or the other - with 10 years and tens of millions put towards either a new stadium or redeveloping Anfield, we'd be a long way there.

As things are, we're all just 10 years older with nothing to show for it.

At the same time, we'd of had 10yrs of a lead brick around our necks if a new stadium was built and, possibly, in a much worse place than we are now.

So it's not always worse than the wrong decisions (when £300m+ is on the line!).

[Greyfox]

John W. Henry‏@John_W_Henry

it's Liverpool: Anfield http://petermcgurk.blogspot.com/search/label/Anfield


 
Collapse Reply
Retweet

Favorite



Today's twitter

[scouse29]

John W. Henry‏@John_W_Henry

it's Liverpool: Anfield http://petermcgurk.blogspot.com/search/label/Anfield


 
Collapse Reply
Retweet

Favorite



Today's twitter

Just spotted this myself. You see it Peter?

[Easy]

Peter's famous now. Recognised by the big cheese himself. Great blog too.

[Tepid water]

Just spotted this myself. You see it Peter?

Xerxes1 must feel a bit of a tit after that, final nail in the coffin of his arguments against Peter!

[pheel]

came on to post and saw this,  Peter you had any contact?

[Liamski-la]

Interesting.

Hints at the obvious, that we will stay at Anfield but also perhaps that it will NOT be an over night process.

[The Lord Admiral]

Well if he's read Peter's stuff I'm quietly encouraged.

[CraigDS]

Peter must be buzzing right now!

[gorgepir]

I wonder if he (Peter) will still continue posting here? He might be busy in the upcoming months....

[CraigDS]

I wonder if he (Peter) will still continue posting here? He might be busy in the upcoming months....

I can only hope they at least talk to him and get his ideas as would worry if they left it up to someone like AFL.

[Tepid water]

Ha ha....

Peter's a bright guy, but FSG are bright to and have come to the same conclusions all by themselves...

Shame parry and moores couldn't listen to a guy like peter years ago though

[Ryan M]

Haha had to laugh at that my self. Been reading Peter's posts for years now, well it feels like years . Hopefully, and it seems like, that John Henry's tweet is the biggest indication of redeveloping Anfield. Whether you agree with it or not, hopefully we hear more information soon.

[shelovesyou]

If you listen really carefully you can hear Xerxes kicking his cat up the arse.


Nice one Peter.

[NorthamptonKopite]

Just saw this. Amazing! Seems John Henry's mind is made up.

[eirwen]

Ha brilliant. I feel encouraged that he read Peter's stuff.

[shelovesyou]

Ha brilliant. I feel encouraged that he read Peter's stuff.

Me too.

[west_london_red]

Just saw this. Amazing! Seems John Henry's mind is made up.

I think his mind was made up ages ago - its just getting the permissions, buying the houses etc thats slowing things down.

[peterb17]

I come into this thread mainly to read and be educated on the issues surrounding the stadium and Peter's explanations, information and conclusions have been really helpful in allowing me (an accountant by profession and so consider myself an intelligent layman) to form a rational view on this emotive subject.

I would like to thank Peter for all his hard work and hope that he gets on this thread again soon so he can see what he has took time to post has been appreciated.

thanks Peter

[Peter McGurk]

came on to post and saw this,  Peter you had any contact?

If you listen really carefully you can hear Xerxes kicking his cat up the arse.


Nice one Peter.

))

Nothing to add. Just a tweet out of the 'blue'.

.

[CraigDS]

Peter can you please incorporate some extra leg room and a private toilet near my seat please when you're designing the redev.

Ta 

[Tepid water]

Peter can you please incorporate some extra leg room and a private toilet near my seat please when you're designing the redev.

Ta 

Godison park do you?

[Gifted Right Foot]

haha that's brilliant.  well in mate.