Topic: anfield road stand

[CHOPPER]

The other thing is... that the more season tickets (and people who can afford a whole season) there are, the fewer kids (who can only afford a few games a season) can get to the match.

Also, farming out tickets stops the natural churn and unlimited numbers of season tickets are both a bad thing for new blood, enthusiasm and the atmosphere that comes with it.

Just like those who keep their away credits but don't go the aways and more so now its gone to 30 notes. The system needs a re-think, not a overhaul, but a re-think.

[andy07]

Whilst there are many who can only afford to attend the odd game each season there are also many who would be happy to fork out £800 quid for a ST even if they don't attend many of the matches.  This happens already with the resale to members through the late availability but frustratingly there are still empty seats at many games, possibly around 500-1000 dotted around the ground.  United have 55000 ST holders but their top league attendance (through the turnstiles not ticket sales) was 71000 for the Liverpool game indicating 4000 empty seats.   Point here is that there will be thousands of fans who will buy a ST if offered one, because they can afford it, and it doesn't matter to them if they leave their seat vacant for many of the games.

[Peter McGurk]

Whilst there are many who can only afford to attend the odd game each season there are also many who would be happy to fork out £800 quid for a ST even if they don't attend many of the matches.  This happens already with the resale to members through the late availability but frustratingly there are still empty seats at many games, possibly around 500-1000 dotted around the ground.  United have 55000 ST holders but their top league attendance (through the turnstiles not ticket sales) was 71000 for the Liverpool game indicating 4000 empty seats.   Point here is that there will be thousands of fans who will buy a ST if offered one, because they can afford it, and it doesn't matter to them if they leave their seat vacant for many of the games.

You could well be right but thousands? Really? How do you know? Nobody knows (although the club should have an idea). And nobody else can say we'll fill this or fill that because 'we will' or because it's our right and proper due as a member of a 'European elite'.

People who say that and all that kind of talk is all so much complete and utter nonsense. By all sensible account and with just a little bit of logic, we might fill an extended ARE enough times to make it viable to a capacity just under 60,000. More, maybe, at lower prices and safe standing but that's it.

[whiteboots]

The other thing is... that the more season tickets (and people who can afford a whole season) there are, the fewer kids (who can only afford a few games a season) can get to the match.

Also, farming out tickets stops the natural churn and unlimited numbers of season tickets are both a bad thing for new blood, enthusiasm and the atmosphere that comes with it.

Quite reasonable points.

This is about supply, and demand.

The Club, by design and default, have been able to take the cheap option for a quarter of a century of charging more and more for existing seats as demand, driven by population and PL popularity, more than our signal success, has increased.

FSG want to maximise  stadium income, that means ideally a full stadium for games against Bournemouth and Palace as much as those against Chelsea and Dortmund. Seth Klarman sleeps easy.

Constantly full stadia are a PL phenomena. When attendances boomed post War and post 66, capacity reflected demand for the biggest games, not the smallest.

You are right to argue, as you have elsewhere, that a 60k capacity feels optimum for FSG at the moment. The limitations of redevelopment mean that is where it will stay anyway. LFC, and the PL, is awash with cash in a low interest rate era. History will rightly judge the club harshly for failing to look to the next fifty years rather than paying homage to:Margin of Safety: Risk-Averse Value Investing Strategies for the Thoughtful Investor.

[Peter McGurk]

Quite reasonable points.

This is about supply, and demand.

The Club, by design and default, have been able to take the cheap option for a quarter of a century of charging more and more for existing seats as demand, driven by population and PL popularity, more than our signal success, has increased.

FSG want to maximise  stadium income, that means ideally a full stadium for games against Bournemouth and Palace as much as those against Chelsea and Dortmund. Seth Klarman sleeps easy.

Constantly full stadia are a PL phenomena. When attendances boomed post War and post 66, capacity reflected demand for the biggest games, not the smallest.

You are right to argue, as you have elsewhere, that a 60k capacity feels optimum for FSG at the moment. The limitations of redevelopment mean that is where it will stay anyway. LFC, and the PL, is awash with cash in a low interest rate era. History will rightly judge the club harshly for failing to look to the next fifty years rather than paying homage to:Margin of Safety: Risk-Averse Value Investing Strategies for the Thoughtful Investor.

Where's my fiver?

[andy07]

You could well be right but thousands? Really? How do you know? Nobody knows (although the club should have an idea). And nobody else can say we'll fill this or fill that because 'we will' or because it's our right and proper due as a member of a 'European elite'.

People who say that and all that kind of talk is all so much complete and utter nonsense. By all sensible account and with just a little bit of logic, we might fill an extended ARE enough times to make it viable to a capacity just under 60,000. More, maybe, at lower prices and safe standing but that's it.

Your right, nobody knows but thousands is based on a reasonable inference that if we presently have 28000 ST holders (31000?) for the start of the new season, we are still 24000 fewer than Utd and at least 12000 fewer than City.  The number of empty seats at sell out Etihad games is a good indicator of how many have been prepared to buy a ticket and be prepared to miss loads of games.

[oojason]

As pointed out in the http://www.redandwhitekop.com/forum/index.php?topic=326024.80 thread:-

In 2014/15 we had 10,000 tickets for members.
In 2015/16 we had 8,500 tickets for members.
In 2016/17 we have 10,000 tickets for members.

http://members.liverpoolfc.com/ticket-information


There is a big new Main Stand this season - yet no increase in availability for tickets for the 115,000 Members overall compared to 2014/15 season (when we were at a 45,000-odd capacity).

Plus the high percentage take-up of those on the ST waiting list so far (2000-ish for the new Man Stand - possibly more STs offered in a new ARE).

Maybe a new Anfield Road End will give Members a higher number of available tickets? (and a good opportunity to give a decent number - was 1000 mentioned elsewhere? - to younger fans/ younger Members too)

[Alan_X]

As pointed out in the http://www.redandwhitekop.com/forum/index.php?topic=326024.80 thread:-

In 2014/15 we had 10,000 tickets for members.
In 2015/16 we had 8,500 tickets for members.
In 2016/17 we have 10,000 tickets for members.

http://members.liverpoolfc.com/ticket-information


There is a big new Main Stand this season - yet no increase in availability for tickets for the 115,000 Members overall compared to 2014/15 season (when we were at a 45,000-odd capacity).

Plus the high percentage take-up of those on the ST waiting list so far (2000-ish for the new Man Stand - possibly more STs offered in a new ARE).

Maybe a new Anfield Road End will give Members a higher number of available tickets? (and a good opportunity to give a decent number - was 1000 mentioned elsewhere? - to younger fans/ younger Members too)

It's more nuanced than that though.

There are more tickets available for members because as has been referred to above, a lot of members who go regularly will now have season tickets. I assume that those new season ticket holders are also members.

Secondly, of 115,000 members its only a proportion who go to 19 or even 14+ matches. I haven't used my members card for a couple of years for various reasons. The number of members tickets for league games is 10,000 x 19 league games = 190,000. Without knowing the actual numbers for those in the every game group, the 14+ group, 10 games, 5 games, occasional games or 'once in a blue moon' group it's difficult to know exactly what the difference between demand and supply is.

There will definitely be more tickets for members in the Anfield Road if they develop it.

Interestingly there's a comment in the 'Inside Anfield' booklet that came with this year's membership:


'When the club applied for planning permission for the Main Stand... it also received outline permission for 4,800 additional seats in the  Anfield Road stand.' There's a quote from Mike Gordon about focusing on the Main Stand and the difficulties involved with the ARE changes but it closes with: 'Watch this space...'
page 115

[CraigDS]

'When the club applied for planning permission for the Main Stand... it also received outline permission for 4,800 additional seats in the  Anfield Road stand.' There's a quote from Mike Gordon about focusing on the Main Stand and the difficulties involved with the ARE changes but it closes with: 'Watch this space...'
page 115

Any chance the numbers in the members sale is limited in anticipation of capacity being reduced at some point during the season for work to begin on the ARE?

[Anfield89]

It would be a nice surprise, they'd have to announce it before the members sale though.

[Uncle Ronnie]

Quite reasonable points.

This is about supply, and demand.

The Club, by design and default, have been able to take the cheap option for a quarter of a century of charging more and more for existing seats as demand, driven by population and PL popularity, more than our signal success, has increased.

FSG want to maximise  stadium income, that means ideally a full stadium for games against Bournemouth and Palace as much as those against Chelsea and Dortmund. Seth Klarman sleeps easy.

Constantly full stadia are a PL phenomena. When attendances boomed post War and post 66, capacity reflected demand for the biggest games, not the smallest.

You are right to argue, as you have elsewhere, that a 60k capacity feels optimum for FSG at the moment. The limitations of redevelopment mean that is where it will stay anyway. LFC, and the PL, is awash with cash in a low interest rate era. History will rightly judge the club harshly for failing to look to the next fifty years rather than paying homage to:Margin of Safety: Risk-Averse Value Investing Strategies for the Thoughtful Investor.

Have you not been studying the diagram again!?

[Peter McGurk]

Any chance the numbers in the members sale is limited in anticipation of capacity being reduced at some point during the season for work to begin on the ARE?

As previously discussed, there's no obvious reason to reduce capacity while the ARE is extended. The new bit will simply be built behind the old built as with the main stand.

The existing upper tier and its roof will be removed in the closed season when the new bit is finished.

[TepidT2O]

As previously discussed, there's no obvious reason to reduce capacity while the ARE is extended. The new bit will simply be built behind the old built as with the main stand.

The existing upper tier and its roof will be removed in the closed season when the new bit is finished.

Do you expect them to be removing the pillars that are currently in the ARE Peter? 

[JohnOK]

Has there ever been a picture of what a revised ARE would look like if they did increase its capacity?

[banjo]

Has there ever been a picture of what a revised ARE would look like if they did increase its capacity?

Have you seen this http://m.imgur.com/7VwBQtG?r

[Peter McGurk]

Do you expect them to be removing the pillars that are currently in the ARE Peter?

Since they're holding up the upper tier and the upper tier won't be there....

[TepidT2O]

Since they're holding up the upper tier and the upper tier won't be there....

Ahh, right...

I just wondered, as they were never supposed to be there in the first place were they? 

[whiteboots]

Interestingly there's a comment in the 'Inside Anfield' booklet that came with this year's membership:


'When the club applied for planning permission for the Main Stand... it also received outline permission for 4,800 additional seats in the  Anfield Road stand.' There's a quote from Mike Gordon about focusing on the Main Stand and the difficulties involved with the ARE changes but it closes with: 'Watch this space...'
page 115

I  believe the ARE will be redeveloped.

The problem with the redevelopment is that it was presented as the only option, and now fans are being asked to be grateful for the certainty of one new stand, and the prospect of another, leaving half a stadium over a quarter of a century old, and a capacity which will still not meet demand.

As Peter McGurk's post illustrates, having accepted a premise, we are now supposed to nod our heads in acceptance that a stadium, modestly increased works. Of course it does. It reminds me of the husband who proudly presents the new conservatory as a sop to a wife who pointed out that they needed a new, bigger house.

I am not aware of any re-costing exercise to implement the consented new stadium, or a revamp of it. That was negligent. Why was it not done? Because FSG had neither the desire, nor expertise to do so, Ayre less so. The former were more comfortable with the Fenway revamp in Boston, Ayre with commercial deals, and understandably so. This was no balanced judgement about the future interests of LFC.

[CraigDS]

The problem with the redevelopment is that it was presented as the only option

Erm, no it wasn't.

Did you have your head under a rock for the decade (more?) prior to FSG coming in and reopening the redev option?

[Nessy76]

I  believe the ARE will be redeveloped.

The problem with the redevelopment is that it was presented as the only option, and now fans are being asked to be grateful for the certainty of one new stand, and the prospect of another, leaving half a stadium over a quarter of a century old, and a capacity which will still not meet demand.

You are fond of this gibberish, aren't you? When was your house built?

As Peter McGurk's post illustrates, having accepted a premise, we are now supposed to nod our heads in acceptance that a stadium, modestly increased works. Of course it does. It reminds me of the husband who proudly presents the new conservatory as a sop to a wife who pointed out that they needed a new, bigger house.

You mean a new build bigger house, surely? Nobody could possibly expect a building to last more than twenty years and still be fit for purpose, could they!

[CraigDS]

You mean a new build bigger house, surely? Nobody could possibly expect a building to last more than twenty years and still be fit for purpose, could they!

Last house I just sold was over 400 years old, and it was more solid and in better condition than some of the new build shite I've been seen recently.

[Nessy76]

Last house I just sold was over 400 years old, and it was more solid and in better condition than some of the new build shite I've been seen recently.

But that's sixteen quarters of a century!

[CraigDS]

But that's sixteen quarters of a century!

I must have been taking my life into my own hands every time I entered it 

[CentenaryBoy]

Has there ever been a picture of what a revised ARE would look like if they did increase its capacity?

I don't remember seeing any. I'd be interested to see a picture if it exists.

[Ratboy3G]

I don't remember seeing any. I'd be interested to see a picture if it exists.

I'm pretty sure there are some within the previous 10 pages of this thread

[meady1981]

I'm pretty sure there are some within the previous 10 pages of this thread

At the top of this skyscrapercity thread is pretty much all relating images that have been floating about. Nothing concrete though
http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=210414&page=151

[whiteboots]

You are fond of this gibberish, aren't you? When was your house built?

You mean a new build bigger house, surely? Nobody could possibly expect a building to last more than twenty years and still be fit for purpose, could they!

When my house was built is irrelevant.

You are wrong to suggest a building may not be fit for purpose after twenty years.

You would be right to question whether the Kop offers the facilities it should now, and to bemoan the pitiful facilities in the Centenary lower tier as well as the cramped legroom which results from retaining he profiling of the much older Kemlyn Rd stand.

The new Main Stand will undoubtedly be first class, a new ARE has the potential to emulate it. The cost is having to retain the other two stands well into the future.

[Ratboy3G]

At the top of this skyscrapercity thread is pretty much all relating images that have been floating about. Nothing concrete though
http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=210414&page=151

A few of those images have been posted in here, not seen anything official by the club though if that's what was meant. I can't see how/why they would unless the work was confirmed to be going ahead (which it isn't). 

[banjo]

At the top of this skyscrapercity thread is pretty much all relating images that have been floating about. Nothing concrete though
http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=210414&page=151

It looks like to existing top tier gets removed, to be replaced by a much larger tier. This in theory could still be built whilst the exiting stand was in full use.

[CraigDS]

It looks like to existing top tier gets removed, to be replaced by a much larger tier. This in theory could still be built whilst the exiting stand was in full use.

The outline plans are available to download, and that is what it does regarding the top tier.

[Alan_X]

At the top of this skyscrapercity thread is pretty much all relating images that have been floating about. Nothing concrete though
http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=210414&page=151

Those are from the planning application. The section shows the old upper tier being removed and a new tier built behind, similar in principle to the Main Stand development. The difference is that the facilities in the ARE would be for general admission rather than hospitality.

The blue model was for wind tests.

The views from the park are 'massing' models used to show the visual impact from keys views. There are existing and proposed views in the planning application. The material finishes and detail will be similar thi the main stand.

[PeterTheRed ...]

Those are from the planning application. The section shows the old upper tier being removed and a new tier built behind, similar in principle to the Main Stand development. The difference is that the facilities in the ARE would be for general admission rather than hospitality.

The blue model was for wind tests.

The views from the park are 'massing' models used to show the visual impact from keys views. There are existing and proposed views in the planning application. The material finishes and detail will be similar thi the main stand.

It looks like the upgraded Anfield Road Stand would be massive. Almost as high as the upgraded Main Stand.

[Anfield89]

When my house was built is irrelevant.

You are wrong to suggest a building may not be fit for purpose after twenty years.

You would be right to question whether the Kop offers the facilities it should now, and to bemoan the pitiful facilities in the Centenary lower tier as well as the cramped legroom which results from retaining he profiling of the much older Kemlyn Rd stand.

The new Main Stand will undoubtedly be first class, a new ARE has the potential to emulate it. The cost is having to retain the other two stands well into the future.

Facilities in the Centenary and Kop are more than good enough. What else do you expect in a concourse?

[YNWAArkAngel]

Facilities in the Centenary and Kop are more than good enough. What else do you expect in a concourse?

am sorry to burst ur bubbles but the facilities in centenary is not up to standard as it only stand that does not have disabled spaces so think about it say in 15 years time all top football stadium have to meet the requirement of level playing field and there would be an huge uproar if part of centenary seats rip out at the end of anfield lower and kop end for more disabled spaces it not worth hassle ripping out the seat, let say build identical main stand to replace centenary that will give disabled and able bodies more state of art facilities today but it damn crying shame the houses behind is up to date today so let do 1 a time get the main stand finish and see how it fair then do anfield lower and for the kop is ok it just need higher the walkway for us disabled see better onto the pitch but for now it good as it get...............

[Anfield89]

am sorry to burst ur bubbles but the facilities in centenary is not up to standard as it only stand that does not have disabled spaces so think about it say in 15 years time all top football stadium have to meet the requirement of level playing field and there would be an huge uproar if part of centenary seats rip out at the end of anfield lower and kop end for more disabled spaces it not worth hassle ripping out the seat, let say build identical main stand to replace centenary that will give disabled and able bodies more state of art facilities today but it damn crying shame the houses behind is up to date today so let do 1 a time get the main stand finish and see how it fair then do anfield lower and for the kop is ok it just need higher the walkway for us disabled see better onto the pitch but for now it good as it get...............

It doesn't matter if there is no disabled space in the Centenary if there is enough elsewhere.

[YNWAArkAngel]

It doesn't matter if there is no disabled space in the Centenary if there is enough elsewhere.

it does matter the demand for tickets for disabled are great too

[Anfield89]

it does matter the demand for tickets for disabled are great too

Do you know these numbers? When the new stand is complete and say Anfield road is complete do you know if that demand would be satisfied?

[YNWAArkAngel]

Do you know these numbers? When the new stand is complete and say Anfield road is complete do you know if that demand would be satisfied?

with new main stand complete there will be slight increased space both end of the paddock and middle tier and for anfield lower having seen the plan look like there will be lower walkway disabled space and middle tier too where the top tier over hang so basically u is under covered like emirate stadium and it be good for away disabled fans sit with there fans rather sitting with home fans in anfield lower, every home games is sold out and i were only lucky to get some on return or away disabled doesnt take all 8 tickets given them and i cant put a figure on the number i know the demand is there not just able bodies dont single out the disabled fans thank you

[Anfield89]

with new main stand complete there will be slight increased space both end of the paddock and middle tier and for anfield lower having seen the plan look like there will be lower walkway disabled space and middle tier too where the top tier over hang so basically u is under covered like emirate stadium and it be good for away disabled fans sit with there fans rather sitting with home fans in anfield lower, every home games is sold out and i were only lucky to get some on return or away disabled doesnt take all 8 tickets given them and i cant put a figure on the number i know the demand is there not just able bodies dont single out the disabled fans thank you

I have not singled out disabled fans, Once the stands are complete then you can say if there is enough or not every stand does not have to accommodate disabled fans if there is enough elsewhere.

[CraigDS]

think about it say in 15 years time all top football stadium have to meet the requirement of level playing field

29,250 able bodied spaces, 29,250 disabled spaces?