Topic: FSG (*)

[Alan_X]

We'd not be in the second tier in terms of capacity as we'll still be some way short of 60k.  There was a period under Hodgson over Christmas where a few league games were well short of capacity.  But those are isolated examples and certainly not the norm.  I guess the evidence will only become clear one way or the other once the extension has taken place and we'll see if we sell out regularly or not with the additional 8000 or so seats.  Half of these I think are corporates too, so 4,000 will be the additional seats to meet whatever demand there currently is for the average non corporate punter.  Of course there is potential scope to increase this should they decide to do likewise with Anfield Rd which I think will add another 4k.

Which is fair comment. The first phase is about half premium seats and half general admission. The second Phase will go ahead if the first phase is sold out, so as there is absolute confidence that there is a massive demand it's safe to assume that the final figure will be just under 59,000. That puts us up with Arsenal and Shalke and considerably clear of most other teams around Europe.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Average_attendances_of_European_football_clubs

There is so much bollocks spoken about football grounds and it mostly seems to be about green-eyed envy of United, wet-dreams about Dortmund (in which case the argument should be for safe standing not arguing the toss about the financial strategy of the owners), and cloud-cuckoo land fantasies about what it would be like with a 'massive Kop' with 30,000 scousers in it and no corporates...

[Kopenhagen]

To all those posters that are so adamant about this (and i didn't link to the OP of this, because I didn't believe this poster was actually one of them), I'd really like to understand why you are so sure about this, and continue to state it as fact and a stick to beat the club with.

I really want to empathise with you, I really do. I really want to understand why you feel it more suitable to antagonise and inflame rather than question and offer solutions. Early on this thread I wrote a plea to the antagonisers requesting that instead of making this a thread about what you see the problem as (i.e. FSG are evil - we get it, you believe that), that you post what motivates you to make this claim so that we (I?) can try to empathise with your point of view. I never posted it - but I wish I had. It's still as relevant now.

I do have a real fear that LFC fans have become bloodthirsty, and after H&G think every problem has to be solved with pitchforks. That one did - without a shadow of a doubt. But be careful not to destroy whatever is left by continuing to treat every problem as pitchfork-worthy. We're already seeing in this short threads supporters turning on each other with alarming abandon... just imagine how destructive it could be if the floodgates truly open?

There are definitely some things that haven't worked as well as everyone involved would have liked. I just can't understand this constant desire to state as fact that these poor outcomes are what the current owners want. It just doesnt make one iota of sense to me.

I know that the hard edge has been taken off football clubs, and ours in particular, and in it's place a bubblegum overcommercialised alternative - more apparent now then ever. If so, yeah that's a real problem. And there does need to be more effort by all involved to help avoid that. But, I reckon that's the responsibilities of supporters. And I don't think it has been caused by the ownership. And i don't believe it's intentional.

I don't believe that is occurring so those evil men in Boston can sit around rolling in more money. I think they honestly believe that more commercial success is the best way to catch up to their rivals. I don't believe they are buying under the radar (often younger) talent so they can keep the rest of the money to roll around in. I think they honestly believe it's the best way to outsmart and overtake their rivals. I don't believe that they view Liverpool as part of a hedge fund... I believe they view Liverpool as a legend that can, with the right care and management, return to the top. I also reckon they want that as much for the joy (which is all we want as well) as they do the solidification of the investment.

I reckon that the way we'll be truly successful, in every dimension, is trying to pull everyone together to contribute to the solution - and hopefully successful outcome - rather than trying to divide and dilute.

I don't imagine you're throwing me in with the "antagonizers," because I'm certainly not one of them.  In terms of "profit-turning," I only meant that FSG see Liverpool, above all else, as a business proposition - they didn't become one of the biggest sports investment groups in North America without caring about profit margins; that's all I meant. After the turmoil of H&G, FSG's vision was to a) manage the debt; b) make us self-sufficient and stable; c) expand the stadium to help (b); d) grow us commercially to help (b); and e) invest in youth, coaching, and player development. I never meant to say FSG aren't winners or anything like that - their track record with the Red Sox speaks to that, and I grew up an Expos fan, so I know a bit about MLB & the Sox torrid history - but they're not going to sacrifice financial stability - for instance, throwing massive wages at someone like Di Maria - if it doesn't fit a sustainable model. Of course, spending money on such players might help us in the short term, but could hurt us in the long term. We're trying to live within our means, that's all. By "Arsenal model," it's not that they want us to be losers, per se, just a stable club with a nice turnover, capable of winning in the future rather than right now.

Again, I like that they're about being cleverer than everyone else - the only problem is that, so far, we haven't proven to be.

[Alan_X]

Think he just wants the ticket ?

But it's a premium ticket with a travel package. Every club, Liverpool included has a range of seat prices included premium packages (corporates) that include a ticket with other things like food/drinks, hospitality and/or accommodation. If all of those tickets were made available to everyone at a flat price then the cheapest ticket prices would go up massively.

[walshys_mullet]

As someone said earlier, where is the research and numbers that shows that there is in fact demand and infrastructure to sell out a Barcelona-esque stadium that you want?

Is that a serious question? My mates been on the season ticket waiting list for 20 years and only recently got one.

[GregCharrua]

Is that a serious question? My mates been on the season ticket waiting list for 20 years and only recently got one.

That's an anecdote, not evidence.

[CraigDS]

Is that a serious question? My mates been on the season ticket waiting list for 20 years and only recently got one.

Has he gone to any games during the last 20 years?

[Alan_X]

Is that a serious question? My mates been on the season ticket waiting list for 20 years and only recently got one.

So what was his first game in 20 years? He's missed a lot.

[rickardinho1]

Is that a serious question? My mates been on the season ticket waiting list for 20 years and only recently got one.

Yes, it is a serious question. Would prefer answers not starting with "my mate..." ideally

[penga]

I don't imagine you're throwing me in with the "antagonizers," because I'm certainly not one of them.  In terms of "profit-turning," I only meant that FSG see Liverpool, above all else, as a business proposition - they didn't become one of the biggest sports investment groups in North America without caring about profit margins; that's all I meant. After the turmoil of H&G, FSG's vision was to a) manage the debt; b) make us self-sufficient and stable; c) expand the stadium to help (b); d) grow us commercially to help (b); and e) invest in youth, coaching, and player development. I never meant to say FSG aren't winners or anything like that - their track record with the Red Sox speaks to that, and I grew up an Expos fan, so I know a bit about MLB & the Sox torrid history - but they're not going to sacrifice financial stability - for instance, throwing massive wages at someone like Di Maria - if it doesn't fit a sustainable model. Of course, spending money on such players might help us in the short term, but could hurt us in the long term. We're trying to live within our means, that's all. By "Arsenal model," it's not that they want us to be losers, per se, just a stable club with a nice turnover, capable of winning in the future rather than right now.

Again, I like that they're about being cleverer than everyone else - the only problem is that, so far, we haven't proven to be.

Ye so we will just have to wait and hope they get cleverer. Arsenal's model is a good and sensible model. They've suffered for years during building their new stadium and have had to increase commerce, develop youth and lose their top players but remained in the top 4 and now they have an extremely good financial base in order to go on and compete with the heavy hitters again regularly.

[richmiller1]

Do you consider FSG's interests align completely with LFC's? And if not, shouldn't owners have them completely aligned?

And who exactly would that be true of?

SOS? Share Liverpool?

We couldn't cobble enough together to buy a stake when the club was being sold for relative peanuts let alone buy it at current market value and fund a £500m super stadium and world record transfer spending that people seem to crave.

The chances of this club having an owner you would be satisfied with are pretty much zero

[Pistolero]

Just to buck a trend of members of the "FSG Praetorian Guard",

 

[soxfan]

It worries me though that there are so many on here who appear totally blind to the fact that the local support, that is the heart and soul of LFC, is being priced out of the game.

I didn't mention it in my earlier "pro-FSG" posts but this certainly is a valid concern. I'm not a local so it doesn't affect me directly, but I see the same thing happening in the States with the sports clubs here. The working class is being priced out. I hardly go to games anymore myself. I can't afford it. I've become a TV fan. 

I think you locals have a legitimate gripe with FSG over ticket pricing, but I think this is a sport-wide problem, not just an LFC or Premier League problem. Liverpool is not in a vacuum. Revenue must increase to compete with the other big clubs for talent. Even if the Premier League miraculously capped ticket prices, agents would move player talent to other leagues around the world that could meet their salary demands. Which eventually would cause the Premier League to become a weaker league.

It must absolutely suck to be a lifelong Liverpool supporter watching tickets prices move inexorably upward. I don't know what the magic solution is though. I'm not sure there's any way to have affordable ticket prices and Liverpool as a top 10 world power.   

 

[scouse and proud plc.]

If you're a local why would you want to buy hotel accommodation?

That's the point I'm making. The club talks about not prioritising window sales as it's unfair on non-locals yet by giving tickets to Thomas Cook it's discriminating against local fans as they aren't going to be buying hotel accommodation therefore making the pool of tickets locals can access smaller than non-locals.

[John C]

Tickets are available for Newcastle both from the club and here on RAWK. I think Alan is correct.

[Alan_X]

That's the point I'm making. The club talks about not prioritising window sales as it's unfair on non-locals yet by giving tickets to Thomas Cook it's discriminating against local fans as they aren't going to be buying hotel accommodation therefore making the pool of tickets locals can access smaller than non-locals.

The tickets that go to Thomas Cook are, unless I'm missing something, part of the hospitality tickets like the ones that are sold with Reds Bar, Boot Room, Isla Gladstone dining packages. It's a fixed pot of 3,500 tickets allocated a premium prices that goes to build up the overall income for the ground. As I said, if you allocate those 3,500 tickets (7,000 in the redeveloped ground) for sale at general admission prices then the cost for every other seat will go up.

If you want to buy hospitality tickets there are options without accommodation. The George Edward package in the Sandon is just over £100 and I'm sure it's available to locals. You get a seat in the Centenary and some grub.

[KiNki]

I hardly go to games anymore myself. I can't afford it. I've become a TV fan. 

Just had a fleeting glance at the boston redsox ticket prices.  10 dollars the cheapest for a single adult?  Meanwhile on the otherside of the pond.  59quid for a champions league match.

All down to inflation, must keep up with inflation.  Inflation must be low in boston and in germany and most other european leagues.

[DonkeyWan]

100,000 members and 20,000 ST waiting list people - and leave aside those that have given up trying to get into the ground and haven't opted into the membership scam or can't get on a closed ST waiting list.

The evidence is there.

As noted, 20,000 of those waiting for season tickets will be match day goers. Of the 100,000 looking to access tickets, how many of those will be going to every game all season long? I'm an OOTer with a fan card and I can only attend a few games each year because

A] Every trip is rotten expensive, with travel and whatnot
B] Midweek games require accomodation since the last train back clashes with end of the game

I'm one of the 100,000 and there is no way I could make all those games.

More to the point, its not like FSG have done anything different than any of the previous plans for expansion or new builds. And its also not like they can't consider a new build at some point in the future. What they have done, for now, is improved the capacity of Anfield for a reasonable price and with almost no impact on the transfers of players.

The alternative as far as I can see is to spend a decade building a new stadium, with all the costs that entails for the sole purpose of building a 55,000-60,000 seater stadium with the potential for expansion at some later date to 70,000. Because that's what all the previous plans that failed entailed. As it is Liverpool are going to have the joint second largest capacity in the league.

All this criticism of the new owners would be a lot more understandable if the club had come out of an extended period of success with some of the best and most generous owners ever. But it comes after a bunch of cowboys and before that a well-meaning but limited owner. The complaints to my mind seem to be that the new owners aren't as good as they could be, which seems an unreasonable level of expectation.

[redmark]

Just had a fleeting glance at the boston redsox ticket prices.  10 dollars the cheapest for a single adult?  Meanwhile on the otherside of the pond.  59quid for a champions league match.

All down to inflation, must keep up with inflation.  Inflation must be low in boston and in germany and most other european leagues.

Baseball - 81 (guaranteed) home games a season
Football - 19 (guaranteed) home games a season

[BigRedOne]

I didn't mention it in my earlier "pro-FSG" posts but this certainly is a valid concern. I'm not a local so it doesn't affect me directly, but I see the same thing happening in the States with the sports clubs here. The working class is being priced out. I hardly go to games anymore myself. I can't afford it. I've become a TV fan. 

I think you locals have a legitimate gripe with FSG over ticket pricing, but I think this is a sport-wide problem, not just an LFC or Premier League problem. Liverpool is not in a vacuum. Revenue must increase to compete with the other big clubs for talent. Even if the Premier League miraculously capped ticket prices, agents would move player talent to other leagues around the world that could meet their salary demands. Which eventually would cause the Premier League to become a weaker league.

It must absolutely suck to be a lifelong Liverpool supporter watching tickets prices move inexorably upward. I don't know what the magic solution is though. I'm not sure there's any way to have affordable ticket prices and Liverpool as a top 10 world power.   

 

This is not an inevitable outcome though mate. The size of TV and sponsorship deals means that ticket sales are no longer as important  in the overall scheme of things. Football clubs are rooted within communities and as Liverpool tends to be a bit of a bolshy left wing community the idea of having our club turned into a capitalist global franchise that excludes the type of people to which owes it's success is fucking infuriating.

In the short term if FSG genuinely engage with supporters and facilitate affordable access, for the same banner waving locals that they use to market LFC globally, they might be more appreciated locally while making them selves a few more quid by having a passionate crowd helping the team to more success.

In the longer term I look forward to a worldwide democratic socialist revolution and when we get that sorted I'll guarantee you affordable a Red Sox tickets

[KiNki]

Baseball - 81 (guaranteed) home games a season
Football - 19 (guaranteed) home games a season

Price for a day tripper for one game?

[CraigDS]

This is not an inevitable outcome though mate. The size of TV and sponsorship deals means that ticket sales are no longer as important  in the overall scheme of things.

This is often said, but it's just not true.

For us, once the Main Stand is expanded, Match Day income will be something like £70-75m a season. For the likes of United and Arsenal it's £100-110m a season.

Not it may well be dropping as a % of overall income, but in no way, shape or form are those sorts of figures 'no longer as important'.

[redmark]

Price for a day tripper for one game?

If you're comparing prices for CL games, you should be comparing to prices for playoff games.

[DonkeyWan]

This is often said, but it's just not true.

For us, once the Main Stand is expanded, Match Day income will be something like £70-75m a season. For the likes of United and Arsenal it's £100-110m a season.

Not it may well be dropping as a % of overall income, but in no way, shape or form are those sorts of figures 'no longer as important'.

Its the equivalent of adding a £15-20m player to the squad every year.

[Jay_Mc]

This is often said, but it's just not true.

For us, once the Main Stand is expanded, Match Day income will be something like £70-75m a season. For the likes of United and Arsenal it's £100-110m a season.

Not it may well be dropping as a % of overall income, but in no way, shape or form are those sorts of figures 'no longer as important'.

Where's the 70-75 million figure from? You've just plucked that from the air or you know something others don't?

However, your problem is match day income isn't just ticket sales. Season tickets and match day tickets are just a part of it.

Secondly, no one is asking them to suddenly wave the millions they make in ticket prices. Just asking that when they make ever more millions elsewhere, make a few millions less off supporters in the way of ticket prices.

Literally a few million pound can make the biggest of differences in ticket price affordability and accessibility.

[CraigDS]

Where's the 70-75 million figure from? You've just plucked that from the air or you know something others don't?

Mix of sources to make an educated guess, including comments from Ayre and Henry, plus plenty of discussion in the various stadium threads on here.

Certainly not just plucked from the air.

However, your problem is match day income isn't just ticket sales. Season tickets and match day tickets are just a part of it.

Secondly, no one is asking them to suddenly wave the millions they make in ticket prices. Just asking that when they make ever more millions elsewhere, make a few millions less off supporters in the way of ticket prices.

Literally a few million pound can make the biggest of differences in ticket price affordability and accessibility.

I wasn't really commenting on the ability to use the TV income to lower prices, I simply wanted to correct the phrase that just because something may be lowering as a % of overall income compared to what it once was, it doesn't make it in any way less important to the clubs income.

[redmark]

Where's the 70-75 million figure from? You've just plucked that from the air or you know something others don't?

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/news-and-comment/liverpool-stadium-anfield-club-expect-to-match-chelsea-in-matchday-revenue-when-their-expanded-new-stand-opens-next-year-9978575.html

(First Google result - 'Liverpool matchday revenue').

[BigRedOne]

This is often said, but it's just not true.

For us, once the Main Stand is expanded, Match Day income will be something like £70-75m a season. For the likes of United and Arsenal it's £100-110m a season.

Not it may well be dropping as a % of overall income, but in no way, shape or form are those sorts of figures 'no longer as important'.

I apologise if you're one of our global family with Engllish as your second language but as gate income drops as a % of Overall income it becomes by definition less important than it was for fuck's sake! You may need to return to the mothership to have your programming debugged.

[Jay_Mc]

Mix of sources to make an educated guess, including comments from Ayre and Henry, plus plenty of discussion in the various stadium threads on here.

Certainly not just plucked from the air.

I wasn't really commenting on the ability to use the TV income to lower prices, I simply wanted to correct the phrase that just because something may be lowering as a % of overall income compared to what it once was, it doesn't make it in any way less important to the clubs income.

Well seeing as the clubs own staff tell us members of the Ticket Working Group that they are still finalising plans for how much tickets will cost etc, then it is surely? But the point still stands - increased revenues are likely to come mainly from corporate facilities.

Interesting phrase you've used there on it not being in any way less important. But I won't be conspiracy theorist.

Question - Do you think LFC should, and could, lower ticket prices for general admission (ST and Matchday tickets) if this amounts to just a few million pound?

[CraigDS]

I apologise if you're one of our global family with Engllish as your second language

You'll find it is spelt English.

but as gate income drops as a % of Overall income it becomes by definition less important than it was for fuck's sake! You may need to return to the mothership to have your programming debugged.

It isn't any less important, finance doesn't work in those simplistic terms unfortunately.

[CraigDS]

Well seeing as the clubs own staff tell us members of the Ticket Working Group that they are still finalising plans for how much tickets will cost etc, then it is surely?

Yes, of course final prices are not set. Do you not think they will have a very good idea of what ranges these figures are likely to be - or do you think they completed a whole feasibility study into the potential of an expanded Main Stand without considering this?

Someone posted a link above, there is a much more in depth article in which Ayre speak about it. There are also comments from Henry floating about somewhere too. It's also not too hard to use the current corp seating prices at Anfield, the roughly known figures for the increased corp seating, and then working this out over a 19 games season to get the possible additional income - those figures have been done somewhere too.

I did also say 'something like' and gave a pretty wide range without nearly a 10% variance, so was hardly setting a number in stone.

But the point still stands - increased revenues are likely to come mainly from corporate facilities.

Interesting phrase you've used there on it not being in any way less important. But I won't be conspiracy theorist.

I've actually no idea what you mean.

Question - Do you think LFC should, and could, lower ticket prices for general admission (ST and Matchday tickets) if this amounts to just a few million pound?

I think all clubs should. Do I think one club is likely to do it on their own whilst the others do not - probably not.


Also, as you're on the Ticket Working Group - here is an idea I posted up a while ago, you may be in a much better position than I am to bring up the idea with the powers that be - http://www.redandwhitekop.com/forum/index.php?topic=318916.msg13478071

[nozza]

fuckin money the players are on, they should each donate at least 50 tix each game to local schools/clubs, if the owners matched it for every home game it would be a start.

[KiNki]

As noted, 20,000 of those waiting for season tickets will be match day goers. Of the 100,000 looking to access tickets, how many of those will be going to every game all season long? 

we have 20k s.t holders, we have another 20k that turn up every week, we have several hundred milling around on a match day, we offer just 3k to away fans. 

we have a s.t waiting list of 20k and we have 100k members.  Out of those figures, some will already be regularly attending, some a few games a season, some would go every game a season, with each year their individual situations change. Some will have grown up and got jobs, kids and mortgages and cant afford to go, some will be flush and desperate to go, some will probably have died before the chance of them to go regular will appear, speaking anecdotaley, i know several who cant be arsed with all the hassle of phones, well the ten minute all our operators are busy you are number 7.......hundred in the queue, memberships, internet, changing dates, paying weeks in advance, they want to be able to waltz up and pay on the gate.   Until it changes and its easy, to go, they'll jib it off.

we also have a number of tourists who come to the city, who perhaps, would fancy going, just for something to do.   


 
Manchester united in the late 1980s had an average crowd of 48k.  When they had to demolish the terraces they had sell out seated crowds of just 44k.  They didnt say well we only average 48k, lets build a 48-50k stadium.   They built a 55k stadium.  Beyond season ticket waiting lists.  That was there first expansion plan.  And when that sold out.  They could have stuck with that figure but they decided to up it again, and again.

Our plan is to increase the number of corporate seats.  Keep the antagonisers quiet, well we are building an expansion, what more do you want.

Well, id like to see a bigger ground, with a far more flexible pricing scheme, kids, young adults 18-21, oaps, adults, prawns, tourists.   Twenty is plenty for any adult.  And a fiver for kids.  I'd like to see a real incentive to get the young local kids back into the ground.   Those with money who want to jump the queue of loyalty well there are corporate facilites, you get a soggy sarnie or a dodgey curry, a programme and there's 7k of these magnificent options.  For the tourists, well there's row double zz, hope you dont mind the swearing, and if you do, tough shit, they swear at the races, at the theater, and other forms of 'nights out' options.

Most of all stop taking us for fools and acting like we are a cow to be milked. 

[Jay_Mc]

But should Liverpool - regardless of what others do?

As for the fans sponsor - it's something that's been mentioned several times and something we have mentioned to the club. Where it may go is different and as you might have read in our response to the price freeze on season tickets, it's early days still and getting agreement on things, if it can happen, will take time.

[BigRedOne]

You'll find it is spelt English.

It isn't any less important, finance doesn't work in those simplistic terms unfortunately.

Haha soz lad I'm Scouse so ingerlish is my second language but I do have a degree in economics so I do have a basic understanding of finance.

As Jay has said it wouldn't cost that much to show a commitment in making tickets affordable for local supporters but you FSG propagandists (official?) have to try and muddy the waters with your condescending deflection.

[KiNki]

If you're comparing prices for CL games, you should be comparing to prices for playoff games.

Category a games, champions league games against ludo was 59 quid, they were on a first come first served basis. St, members, 1st time tourist, that is the price.  The cheapest ticket at redsox for the next match and the match against, arch rival yankees, is 10 dollars.  Cheapest ticket in germany is about 10 quid, doesnt matter if its a derby, or a small match, is 10quid.

[houkura]

I don't imagine you're throwing me in with the "antagonizers," because I'm certainly not one of them.  In terms of "profit-turning," I only meant that FSG see Liverpool, above all else, as a business proposition - they didn't become one of the biggest sports investment groups in North America without caring about profit margins; that's all I meant. After the turmoil of H&G, FSG's vision was to a) manage the debt; b) make us self-sufficient and stable; c) expand the stadium to help (b); d) grow us commercially to help (b); and e) invest in youth, coaching, and player development. I never meant to say FSG aren't winners or anything like that - their track record with the Red Sox speaks to that, and I grew up an Expos fan, so I know a bit about MLB & the Sox torrid history - but they're not going to sacrifice financial stability - for instance, throwing massive wages at someone like Di Maria - if it doesn't fit a sustainable model. Of course, spending money on such players might help us in the short term, but could hurt us in the long term. We're trying to live within our means, that's all. By "Arsenal model," it's not that they want us to be losers, per se, just a stable club with a nice turnover, capable of winning in the future rather than right now.

Again, I like that they're about being cleverer than everyone else - the only problem is that, so far, we haven't proven to be.

Actually we have proven to be. We are the 5th wealthiest team in England and we finished second last season. That is exactly the FSG model working.

[KiNki]

we finished 2nd under the last set of owners, it was an achievement despite the model.

[DonkeyWan]

Well, id like to see a bigger ground, with a far more flexible pricing scheme, kids, young adults 18-21, oaps, adults, prawns, tourists.   Twenty is plenty for any adult.  And a fiver for kids.  I'd like to see a real incentive to get the young local kids back into the ground.   Those with money who want to jump the queue of loyalty well there are corporate facilites, you get a soggy sarnie or a dodgey curry, a programme and there's 7k of these magnificent options.  For the tourists, well there's row double zz,

Everybody could get behind that. But that could be achieved in a 60,000 seater stadium too. The ultimate plan is to increase capacity by about 33%. Yes, yes a lot of that will be corporate, but that will still leave 7,000-8,000 to alleviate demand and allow some room to do what you suggest.

My problem with the alternative proposals above is that a new stadium build would take years, impoverish the club and still only get you to around 60,000 as a first step. The actual expansion to a 70,000 seater could be decades away, depending on how long it would take to recoup the cost of the new build.

For all we know, in a few years if the current expansion still hasn't met demand they might figure out a way to add in some more seats, or perhaps they will consider another new expansion.

More to the point 60,000 is a massive number for an all seater stadium by European standards. Even United, with their behemoth, took years and a number of expansions to get to their current capacity.

If its just about access, then should the focus of SOS not be on trying to campaign get safe standing for the kop etc. (since that would lead to cheaper tickets, greater numbers and more access for all those groups mentioned) rather than criticising the owners for not building a 70,000 seater stadium?

That would also fit in with their stated desire to improve the atmosphere at the game. If you have been to any all-seater stadiums you will know the bigger they get the shitter the atmosphere (the Nou Camp is an exception of course, but then that goes 5 stories into the ground and is like a cauldron - even then, I have been there at midweek games and you feel miles away from the action )

[Eeyore]

Actually we have proven to be. We are the 5th wealthiest team in England and we finished second last season. That is exactly the FSG model working.

I long for the days when we a Football club who existed to win trophies and not a Hedge Funds business model.

[John C]

i know several who cant be arsed with all the hassle of phones, well the ten minute all our operators are busy you are number 7.......hundred in the queue, memberships, internet, changing dates, paying weeks in advance, they want to be able to waltz up and pay on the gate.   Until it changes and its easy, to go, they'll jib it off.

we also have a number of tourists who come to the city, who perhaps, would fancy going, just for something to do.   

Completely agree that that would be an ideal scenario, but I worry that until the football bubble bursts we wouldn't fill a 70k stadium until prices tumble. If prices tumble, could that £180k/week salary be demanded by players and I some cases to demonstrate ambition the fans?
Old photos of Anfield in the 70's that appear on Twitter etc of young faces, groups of people between 15 and 20 is heart-breaking - I'd love the youth of Liverpool to experience what I did. But football industry fucked them over imo.