Topic: Matchday Revenue

[xerxes1]

Not really. I said they could but they've haven't chosen to. There's a world of difference between the potential and the commitment (ie investment) to doing something about it.

The most recent naming rights example in the UK (Arsenal) suggests that the UK and US markets are quite different. Nevertheless the point about it being a lousy way of paying for a stadium remains. It kills return - as said elsewhere.

Indeed and that’s the rub. Paying for the new stadium puts the existing income at great risk potentially at the expense of investment in the team. Concrete and steel instead of star and youth players.

Of course there is always a break even point or perhaps a range (or ‘elasticity of demand model’) that satisfies the targeted return beyond which is ‘bunce’, but that figure is considerably in excess of our historic attendances even when we had the bigger capacity (and lower prices). I’ll take your bet!

You are losing ground fast here. Your suggestion is that other clubs will somehow be less committed to gaining proprotionate increases in commercial revenue than us ? Nonsense.

Fenway seek to market Liverpool Fc as a global commercial brand in a way that exceeds the narrow appeal of US stadium naming. Who knows what the level may be? Factually the best deal in the world to date has been worth around £192m. Your "point" that it is a lousy way of paying for a stadium is nonsense. It facilitates, rather than kills, return as the debt burden is significantly reduced.

Any stadium development, be it redevelopment or new build is predicated on two things. Firstly an ability to remain competitive on the field, and secondly on the greater long term benefits that result. If both criteria are not satisfied- you don't do it.

Factually we are the second best supported English Football Club by cumulative, then average, attendance of all time.

[Peter McGurk]

But will you make the bet?

[Corcaigh]

We must have a bigger stadium, with better corporate facilities, if we are to keep pace with mu, chelsea and arsenal. Although the Emirates has only 15000 more seats than Anfield it generates £57 million more per year in matchday revenue (£100 million). Much of this additional income is generated by 150 executive boxes, enabling the Emirates to generate £1600 per seat per year compared with £900 per seat per year at Anfield. Unfortunately it won't take NESV too long to realise that our average ticket price is much lower than the other big four clubs  - Chelsea, with a smaller ground generates £30 million more per year than Anfield. So don't be surprised if prices jump by 20% or more (as they did when NESV took over the Red Sox)Whether your average supporter will be prepared to pay the higher ticket prices, much less be capable of affording them, remains to be seen, especially if, as has been reported, we can forget any big money signings. It may be prudent not to spend big in the transfer market and to curtail the wage bill (as per the American sports model) but unfortunately while other clubs continue to splash the cash we will be unable to compete.

[xerxes1]

But will you make the bet?

Of course - easy money.

[Peter McGurk]

Of course - easy money.

I'll take a cheque 

[redpirate]

London prices and Liverpool prices are very different. Just because Chelsea and Arsenal rake in so much via corporate sales, doesn't mean the we would. London is an international hub, a huge financial centre and any global company worth anything has a London branch. Thus it's a million times easier to attract the corporate clientele in London.

And truth be said, most corporate business in the North West would be drawn to Old Trafford rather than Anfield because United are seen to be a bigger attraction.

So building a new stadium with thousands of corporate seats seems a good idea on paper but is ultimately doomed to be a White elephant. Unless, of course, we start winning the League again. Nothing succeeds like success...

[CraigDS]

Although our corporate waiting list proves that we have the demand there currently iirc.

[xerxes1]

London prices and Liverpool prices are very different. Just because Chelsea and Arsenal rake in so much via corporate sales, doesn't mean the we would. London is an international hub, a huge financial centre and any global company worth anything has a London branch. Thus it's a million times easier to attract the corporate clientele in London.

And truth be said, most corporate business in the North West would be drawn to Old Trafford rather than Anfield because United are seen to be a bigger attraction.

So building a new stadium with thousands of corporate seats seems a good idea on paper but is ultimately doomed to be a White elephant. Unless, of course, we start winning the League again. Nothing succeeds like success...

It is true that the value per Corporate Customer in London is higher.

However there is nothing to suggest that the combination of the waiting list for Season Tickets ( a proportion of which will be bought Corporately) and the waiting list for Boxes would not fill an additional 6000 seats over and beyond our current 4000 premium seats to match Arsenal’s capacity ( which is massively over subscribed) and undershoot the Mancs by around 700 – at a discount on their price points.

You are right to say that Man U offer the premier NW proposition with the most capacity, best facilities, and success to match. Furthermore Man City have a premium capacity of 8,500 seats, with better facilities than us, a team which is performing on a par with us, but with no history or global tradition.

There are some who look at our embarrassing ranking as Anfield having the 64th largest capacity in Europe – and accept it. Maybe we can make 50th, they say. And maybe they are right. Maybe the caravan has moved on – and left us stranded. Maybe a lick of paint, and a few new leather chairs, some smart new uniforms even for match day hostesses will be all that we need.

But there are others who see LFC as one of the greatest names, and best supported clubs in Europe and the World. They see that goodwill and support having been ignored and squandered for 20 years and believe that we CAN compete at the top table again – I am one of them.

[revelationx]

This is our chance to move to a new stadium. Our very own super-stadium. Remember Anfield is only special because of the LFC fans. We bring the atmosphere - not the ground. People look at the Camp Nou and Bernabeu Stadia and marvel at these cathedrals of football - and yet both these stadia are not the original homes of Barca or Real Madrid. No doubt, in the 1940's some fans were against moving from Les Corts or Chamartin but long term it has definitely been of benefit to those clubs.

Getting this right is so important. We should not be thinking of the costs for the next 5 years or so, a new stadium will set up the club for the next 50 years and beyond.

There are more LFC fans then ever before - the demand is there. We can cater for many more match-goers. We have a chance to build our own Camp Nou - the architecture of stadia has come on leaps and bounds. We can build a stadium that is mindblowing to look at and one that multiplies the acoustics of the crowd. Although I disagree with their winning of the 2022 World Cup, Qatar have submitted stadium designs that are absolutely incredible. LFC should embrace this opportunity to create something truly amazing, so that rival clubs will covet our players, our fans and our Stadium.

The financial benefits of a new stadium are massive. Let's not waste this opportunity to secure the clubs future. We can build The Premium Football Stadium in all of Europe. A venue capable of hosting Champions League Finals and one that puts Liverpool FC at the very forefront of Europe's clubs. We just have to be ambitious and grasp this opportunity, I think we now have owners who are ambitious too and capable of making this happen. We were England's dominant club of the 20th Century, a new super-stadium will provide the platform to propel LFC into being England's dominant club of the 21st Century.

[Corcaigh]

Assuming NESV decides to build a new stadium, irrespective of which avenue they choose to follow, they will borrow the bulk of the money required. This is not the same as loading the club with acquisition debt as the new stadium itself will provide the collateral for the loan. Any interest paid on the loan will be tax deductible so it will be no bad thing.

[LiamG]

The thing is what G&H were trying to was get fans to go to the stadium early and stay after the game aswell to spend money

Arsenal do this because they have the facilities to, Difference with us is Fans would much rather go to the pubs around Anfield before going to the match and the same when its finished

The only way to try and get Fans to stay and head to the match earlier in a new stadium is to have the facilities there for them, Families would be the main market along with people coming over from other countries and dont know any pubs

Over a course of a season it would actually generate quite a lot of income, Also now how long do you have to queue for to get food and a beer at half time? Ageeees! New world class facilities less queues more people spending money!


Perhaps a combination of facilities in the ground and NESV buying a few units/pubs around Anfield to enhance the "experience"

[xerxes1]

Difference with us is Fans would much rather go to the pubs around Anfield before going to the match and the same when its finished.The only way to try and get Fans to stay and head to the match earlier in a new stadium is to have the facilities there for them, Families would be the main market along with people coming over from other countries and dont know any pubs

That's a bit of a circular argument. IF the facilities and attractions are sufficient, fans will come to the ground early, and stay later. If you can ( with exclusive player interviews etc) persuade 10,000 fans to stop for 15 minutes after the game to watch over a pie and a pint at say £5 - you have pulled in an extra £50,000, over 25 home games that is an additional £2.5m.................

[LiamG]

Not all fans, i still say alot would rather head to the pub unless they have a family etc

[xerxes1]

Not all fans, I still say a lot would rather head to the pub unless they have a family etc

The Pub, and some pubs in particular, are a  part of the matchday experience, no question.

My example provided for 1:6 in a 60k stadium.

[Corcaigh]

What ever avenue they decide to take NESV must get a move on the clock is ticking.
 LFC received full consent for the stadium project on 19 June 2008. However, LCC imposed a three year time limit as a condition of full permission for the stadium project. This they are quite entitled to do:

 

Duration of permission and consent

19. Section 51 of the 2004 Act [the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004] amends section 91 of the 1990 Act [the Town and Country Planning Act 1990] and section 18 of the Listed Buildings Act so that detailed planning permission, listed building consent and conservation area consent will normally be granted with the condition that the development or works must be begun within three years from the date on which the permission or consent was granted. Local planning authorities may agree longer or shorter durations of permission or consent where they consider it would be appropriate, but the timescale should be appropriate to the size and nature of the development or works.

 

The condition is itemised on page 297 of Agenda Item 374 [LFC Conditions] of the LCC Planning Committee minutes of 6 May 2008.

 

Conditions

1 - The development hereby permitted shall be commenced before the expiration of 3 years from the date of this permission. For the avoidance of doubt this condition is to be read together with

Condition 43.

REASON: As provided for by Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

 

[Condition 43 refers to timescales relating to the development of the Anfield Plaza]

 

So, this means that the works proper, and not just enabling works, must start before 19 June 2011 or planning consent will be revoked. Therefore NESV have just over SIX months to get building or it will be back to square one and they will have to re-apply for planning permission.

 

[annieroader]

We will be going down the redevelopment route mate.

[LiamG]

We will be going down the redevelopment route mate.

Proof?

[xerxes1]

Just picking up a few points over the past posts.

The consented stadium plans are now over three years old. Stadium design, and costs, move on. I would be surprised if FSG do not find the current plans obsolete, and require changes which themselves will require a new planning application.

If the current consent does lapse it is no big deal. No-one else is going to build a stadium in Stanley Park in the meantime.

The Council's interests lie in LFC building a new stadium. You can rest assured that if LFC consider the redevelopment route, planning officers will be "unsympathetic".

[campioni]

go on then, why would planning officers be unsympathetic to the redevelopment route?

[west_london_red]

go on then, why would planning officers be unsympathetic to the redevelopment route?

Without second guessing Xerxes, a new stadium will probably have better and larger facilities (bars, resturants, confrence rooms etc) that will benefit the local area more then a redeveloped Anfield with small facilities.

[Roy of the rovers]

We need at least 60,000, ideally 70,000

Whatever it takes...

[CraigDS]

Without second guessing Xerxes, a new stadium will probably have better and larger facilities (bars, resturants, confrence rooms etc) that will benefit the local area more then a redeveloped Anfield with small facilities.

Id also imagine theyd be much happier with the regen being sparked using the land Anfield is currently on rather than allowing a redevelopment of Anfield and giving up part of the park for associated building work.

[annieroader]

The houses behind the main stand is the stumbling block atm,once all residents are out we will start redevelopment route on the ground.

[woz92]

How do you know this mate?