Topic: expanding anfield ideas

[No Way José]

?

Do you think they will ever or ever had wanted to build a new stadium

Surely they knew it would take years like the gunners to see the benefits

I think they showed their intentions when they ordered the review of the season ticket Liszt...

[oojason]

I think they showed their intentions when they ordered the review of the season ticket Liszt...

Maybe so mate, though that ST waiting list hasn't been open to anyone wanting to join for a while now, and fans outside the original 25,000 on the list are still waiting (now 6 months late) for info on their position on the ST waiting list.

For all the talk of 'sweet spots', costs, new ground or - redevelopment, traditions, delays, sponsored named ground, improvements to infrastructure... the club do not know - or seemingly want to know - how many 'new' fans would like a season ticket to watch Liverpool play - nor any info from those people who may wish to do so in the future.

In essence they'll be making a decision involving massive amounts of money without very useful information that could be easily acquired.

Seems to me they'll be using the limited info out there to justify whatever decision they eventually do make - but it won't be a fully considered or informed one.



On a separate note, on the redevelopment side of things, has there been scope into getting more legroom, wider seats, improved viewing angles, more toilets, more drink n food kiosks, more tv's in concourses etc into the stands that won't be redeveloped - or will the fans be expected to pay the same price tickets as fans sitting in the newer redeveloped stands who'd benefit from these additions?

[CraigDS]

Maybe so mate, though that ST waiting list hasn't been open to anyone wanting to join for a while now, and fans outside the original 25,000 on the list are still waiting (now 6 months late) for info on their position on the ST waiting list.

For all the talk of 'sweet spots', costs, new ground or - redevelopment, traditions, delays, sponsored named ground, improvements to infrastructure... the club do not know - or seemingly want to know - how many 'new' fans would like a season ticket to watch Liverpool play - nor any info from those people who may wish to do so in the future.

In essence they'll be making a decision involving massive amounts of money without very useful information that could be easily acquired.

Seems to me they'll be using the limited info out there to justify whatever decision they eventually do make - but it won't be a fully considered or informed one.

Fairly certain the club will have the numbers they need before making any decision - if they release these to the public or not. With 10,000 out of the original 25,000 taking up the option, plus the figure they will know from the following 40-50,000 on the list, they really don't need to go to the hassle yet of reopening the list to see what more want to do.

On a separate note, on the redevelopment side of things, has there been scope into getting more legroom, wider seats, improved viewing angles, more toilets, more drink n food kiosks, more tv's in concourses etc into the stands that won't be redeveloped - or will the fans be expected to pay the same price tickets as fans sitting in the newer redeveloped stands who'd benefit from these additions?

I'm sure they will, but it'll be very restricted due to the space available on the current concourse in each stand. And can't see them changing anything to do with the seating as would decrease capacity if they improved the size/spacing.

[oojason]

^ for now and the next few years I'd agree, though shouldn't the club have the numbers and info of fans (including young fans needed to replace the average aged 48 (?) year old STH) who want to have a season ticket in 5, 10, 15 or 20 years time? That free and easy information could well have an effect in just a few years time. It seems shortterm-ism not to re-open that list.


Re the redevelopment side of things - I'd hope the club would take into account offsetting loss of seats from the undeveloped stands and adding seats to what is required to make up the numbers for the newly developed stands. Unless, we're have a 2-tier type of ground - 1 with the shit seats and less facilities, 1 with all the legroom and amenities - but we'll all be paying the same premium price?


I know it's playing devil's advocate a bit - but feel these are questions worth asking, and may give us an insight into just how committed (or good) these owners actually are to us - and what effect the decision they choose now will affect our future after they've gone.

[CraigDS]

^ for now and the next few years I'd agree, though shouldn't the club have the numbers and info of fans (including young fans needed to replace the average aged 48 (?) year old STH) who want to have a season ticket in 5, 10, 15 or 20 years time? That free and easy information could well have an effect in just a few years time. It seems shortterm-ism not to re-open that list.

The problem is they currently have about (at best guess given they haven't released numbers) 30,000 on a cleaned up waiting list. Even in a new ground they wouldn't add 30,000 STs. And even knowing this I cant see them being interesting in building anything larger than a 65k given the huge costs (and considerable risk) involved in making that step.

I do however see them reopening it in the near future, however I can't see even a rapid increase in sign ups having any effect on their choice for stadium design/redev/size/etc.

Re the redevelopment side of things - I'd hope the club would take into account offsetting loss of seats from the undeveloped stands and adding seats to what is required to make up the numbers for the newly developed stands. Unless, we're have a 2-tier type of ground - 1 with the shit seats and less facilities, 1 with all the legroom and amenities - but we'll all be paying the same premium price?

But what is the point. Decreasing, for example, a perfectly fine Upper Centenary down a few 1000 only to have to find these seats once again elsewhere.

And isn't that what we have at the moment, as parts of the ground have much better seating and leg room than elsewhere.

I know it's playing devil's advocate a bit - but feel these are questions worth asking, and may give us an insight into just how committed (or good) these owners actually are to us - and what effect the decision they choose now will affect our future after they've gone.

Any decision to increase capacity at Anfield or build a new ground will show commitment, be it just doing the main stand and Anny Rd or the whole ground.

[Peter McGurk]

For all the talk of 'sweet spots', costs, new ground or - redevelopment, traditions, delays, sponsored named ground, improvements to infrastructure... the club do not know - or seemingly want to know - how many 'new' fans would like a season ticket to watch Liverpool play - nor any info from those people who may wish to do so in the future.
On a separate note, on the redevelopment side of things, has there been scope into getting more legroom, wider seats, improved viewing angles, more toilets, more drink n food kiosks, more tv's in concourses etc into the stands that won't be redeveloped - or will the fans be expected to pay the same price tickets as fans sitting in the newer redeveloped stands who'd benefit from these additions?

Seems to me the club has done its assessment and the 60k-65k is their answer to capacity.

How many of them will be season tickets would be down to a balance of guaranteed income to support the financial feasibility and having general and other tickets on sale to get the most out of the seats they can and have a bit of leeway for new blood and cheaper seats.

All they need to know is that they are more than needed on the list and that they will actually take up the offered season ticket at the required price.

***

I’m sure the club will be aware that there’ll be some resistance to any price increases and affordability will be part of their ‘sweet-spot’ calculation. No-one is going to want to pay more for the same seat.

Every seat in the place could be made bigger (with more toilets etc etc ) but the opposite is, anyone who gets a better seat/facilities will have to pay more to cover the cost.

I'm 6' 1" but personally, I’d forego the extra legroom when it might cost me £60 for the privilege.

[oojason]

Seems to me the club has done its assessment and the 60k-65k is their answer to capacity.

How many of them will be season tickets would be down to a balance of guaranteed income to support the financial feasibility and having general and other tickets on sale to get the most out of the seats they can and have a bit of leeway for new blood and cheaper seats.

All they need to know is that they are more than needed on the list and that they will actually take up the offered season ticket at the required price.

***

I’m sure the club will be aware that there’ll be some resistance to any price increases and affordability will be part of their ‘sweet-spot’ calculation. No-one is going to want to pay more for the same seat.

Every seat in the place could be made bigger (with more toilets etc etc ) but the opposite is, anyone who gets a better seat/facilities will have to pay more to cover the cost.

I'm 6' 1" but personally, I’d forego the extra legroom when it might cost me £60 for the privilege.

I'm 6' 5" and reasonably wide - unless I wear shin and knee pads my legs are a right state after if we have to sit down during games - let alone the people sitting next to me and the poor lad in front who no doubt can feel every movement of my knee banging into the back of his seat as I try and restart the bloodflow to my feet

If we do redevelop Anfield I'd like it to not be done on the quick/cheap - meaning more leg room all round. The way prices have gone, and are going, as well as people being taller and bigger on average than even 20 years ago I'd like to sit at the ground in relative comfort (or at least not in pain afterwards) - especially if they'll be charging us all £60+ by then anyway

[Lolo]

Cheers

Have felt from day one , we have gof the right owners at last but honestly I am wondering have they taken on a lot more than they can Handel ?

But surely their bite is no worse than their Bach?

.

I think they showed their intentions when they ordered the review of the season ticket Liszt...

Maybe we should take note that it's sometimes wasted effort composing subtle replies......

Coat on.........etc.

[CraigDS]

I'm 6' 5" and reasonably wide - unless I wear shin and knee pads my legs are a right state after if we have to sit down during games - let alone the people sitting next to me and the poor lad in front who no doubt can feel every movement of my knee banging into the back of his seat as I try and restart the bloodflow to my feet

If we do redevelop Anfield I'd like it to not be done on the quick/cheap - meaning more leg room all round. The way prices have gone, and are going, as well as people being taller and bigger on average than even 20 years ago I'd like to sit at the ground in relative comfort (or at least not in pain afterwards) - especially if they'll be charging us all £60+ by then anyway

to be honest the average height is no where near yours and you are certainly an 'abnormal' case rather than the norm.

As long as the seats can handle a 6ft or just over guy then see no reason to increase them - and they can.

[Peter McGurk]

I'm 6' 5" and reasonably wide - unless I wear shin and knee pads my legs are a right state after if we have to sit down during games - let alone the people sitting next to me and the poor lad in front who no doubt can feel every movement of my knee banging into the back of his seat as I try and restart the bloodflow to my feet

If we do redevelop Anfield I'd like it to not be done on the quick/cheap - meaning more leg room all round. The way prices have gone, and are going, as well as people being taller and bigger on average than even 20 years ago I'd like to sit at the ground in relative comfort (or at least not in pain afterwards) - especially if they'll be charging us all £60+ by then anyway

People are bigger. The guideline seat sizes increase almost every time they are published. But in fact it's not particularly anyone's height that matters - it is their width! (because of the distance from knee to back of backside). What we (both) need is a nice new big seat. But we would have to pay for it (and maybe there wouldn't be many of us who really need it).

The latest regs are probably 10cm more than what you sit in now. Would that really make enough difference?

We should not pay any more if the seats stay as they are. I really cannot see the club trying to increase the price on any seat unless it's better, or there's more toilets, or more of something to justify the cost. I can see prices go up because there's the demand and people can afford it. But there's a point when it's taking the mick and people start thinking - I'll watch it in the pub.

And I've been in nice new big seats and it's like watching it on the telly anyway

.

[Big Red Richie]

From todays Oldham Echo.


LIVERPOOL city bosses plan to demolish houses left derelict by Liverpool Football Club in order to speed up the regeneration of the Anfield area.
 
The ECHO has learned that council chiefs are hoping to get the properties the club owns in Lothair Road for free, rather than have to spend upwards of £1m to buy them.
 
The club would not indicate to the ECHO whether it intended to sell the properties to the council or hand them over.
 
Plans seen by the ECHO suggest that the land will be grassed over as part of the wider regeneration of the Rockfield residential area which will cost around £6m and create around 3,000 ‘construction weeks’ of work for local labourers.
 

The council is intending to press ahead with the refurbishment or demolition of around 250 properties in the area – more than half of which are empty. Loans of up to £40,000 will be available to homeowners to revamp their homes.
 
City housing cabinet member Cllr Ann O’Byrne said the regeneration would go ahead whether LFC stayed or went.
 
Cllr O’Byrne added: “We have stated that Anfield is our number one priority.
 
“The club is one of the key stakeholders in the area and we are confident that they will work with us.”
 
Residents who live in refurbished properties in nearby Tancred Road said they were pleased something would be done to improve the area.
 
They said their homes had lost up to £50,000 in value because of the dereliction they lived amongst.
 
John Nolan, chair of the Rockfield Residents Association, said: “We are happy they’re going to make progress.
 
“The state of the area has not only been depressing house prices but people’s lives as well.”
 
An LFC spokesman said: “We have been consulted on the regeneration plans by Liverpool council.
 
“As always we remain collaborative and supportive of any initiatives to improve our local area, but discussions at this stage would be far too preliminary to comment further.
 
“We remain committed to supporting our local community in all areas.”
 
Liverpool council’s £750,000 debt because of fall in Anfield land values

LIVERPOOL council must pay around £750,000 to an Anfield developer because of a slump in the value of land in the area.
 
The Keepmoat Group bought land from the council for £1,246,000 in order to build new homes.
 
But its worth has now plummeted to £494,829.
 
City bosses have negotiated an agreement with Keepmoat so that in future the council will not have to make up the difference if land values fall further.
 

A council memo obtained by the ECHO states “this is of significant benefit to the council because current low land values will be a risk to the developer from now on”.
 
Housing committee chairman Cllr Steve Radford said the slow pace of the HMRI scheme was to blame adding: “It proves it has been one of the most expensive programmes for the taxpayer with the least proven value.”


Read More http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/liverpool-news/local-news/2012/04/18/liverpool-council-plans-to-demolish-derelict-homes-in-anfield-owned-by-liverpool-fc-100252-30782014/#ixzz1sONpIKtO