Topic: *Poll* Redevelop Anfield or a new stadium ?

[kesey]

Consider new stadium but groundshare with Everton 1 (1.1%)

Didn't know Bill Kenwright has a user on RAWK.

Its just gone up.

[foreverred1983]

Like every other fan I would love the current stadium to stay

but new stadium means

naming rights of about 15-20m per season extra per season

new advertising spots worth 5-10m per season extra

new increased sponsors who would want to sponsor the new stadium will increase revenue as well...

for the business side of things a new stadium may be best

I think this is where football is going wrong. People are being sucked into the notion that money is more important than history and tradition.

Sure the money would be great for naming rights and all that malarkey but staying at Anfield would be something you could not put a price on. Sentimentalty is been eroded by people who see sport as a business and supporters as customers. People over the last few years just concentrated on dollar signs rather than what was in front of them. David Moores would be the perfect example of this. Shit the whole of the western world went crazy in a sea of money for a while.

For me staying at Anfield even if it wasnt redeveloped would be the best option. Arsenal have their shiny new stadium and they are making more money than us from every match. But the atmosphere is shit according to a gooner i know who goes to every game and who regulalarly complains about supporters leaving with 10 minutes to go in games and who moan constantly.

If all we talked about was how much money could we generate  then i guarantee that Liverpool would not be the club it is today. Liverpool was built on playing good football for the people. Nowadays its "do we have money to compete with Man City?". My answer is who cares? City will have it good for a while but they have no soul. I would rather we played for the history and tradition of the club than sell ourselves for a quick buck.

[smicer07]

But the atmosphere is shit according to a gooner i know who goes to every game and who regulalarly complains about supporters leaving with 10 minutes to go in games and who moan constantly.

Sounds like the current Anfield, if you ask me.

[Billy1561]

For me if at all possible, i would love to see Anfield redeveloped conditional on increased capacity to make tickets easier to get hold of. On top of that it really must include the money making corporate boxes. It ticks so many boxes to stay that it has to be the first option that NESV look at.
Having said that i voted for 2nd option as i think a new blueprint stadium built for purpose would see us financially sound for the foreseeable future, but building something that has the atmosphere capability that the current stadium has would be a feat in itself.
Pretty sure NESV would conduct a study into both options almost immediately. But not before sorting out the playing side as we need a competitive team to fill the thing first of all.

[foreverred1983]

Sounds like the current Anfield, if you ask me.

And it will only get worse if you another 20000 expecting to see good football because "we paid good money for this".

[Tomrock]

It's a re de for me

[dom lfc]

Redevlopment Anfield!

[andy in warrington]

Knock down the Main and Anfield Road stands, and build a fucking massive stand like they did at Newcastle, and put the away fans right in the very top corner miles away.

[AriGold]

Redevelop. I don't want to move, this is our home. It just wouldn't feel the same.

[Rafa_La]

Redevelope once would've been ok, but three times? 

I'd redevelope too Dont matter how many times, redevelope !!!;)

[Alan_X]

I think this is where football is going wrong. People are being sucked into the notion that money is more important than history and tradition.

Sure the money would be great for naming rights and all that malarkey but staying at Anfield would be something you could not put a price on. Sentimentalty is been eroded by people who see sport as a business and supporters as customers. People over the last few years just concentrated on dollar signs rather than what was in front of them. David Moores would be the perfect example of this. Shit the whole of the western world went crazy in a sea of money for a while.

For me staying at Anfield even if it wasnt redeveloped would be the best option. Arsenal have their shiny new stadium and they are making more money than us from every match. But the atmosphere is shit according to a gooner i know who goes to every game and who regulalarly complains about supporters leaving with 10 minutes to go in games and who moan constantly.

If all we talked about was how much money could we generate  then i guarantee that Liverpool would not be the club it is today. Liverpool was built on playing good football for the people. Nowadays its "do we have money to compete with Man City?". My answer is who cares? City will have it good for a while but they have no soul. I would rather we played for the history and tradition of the club than sell ourselves for a quick buck.

Today's Anfield is very different from the ground I first went to back in the 1970s:



And that's after the Main Stand redevlopment:



The only original part of the ground that Bill Shankly knew is the central section of the Main Stand.

But I suppose it's a bit like Trigger's broom. He'd had it for years - just with 7 new handles and 5 new heads. Over the years it's been taken down and rebuilt but has still remained "Anfield".

I'd love to stay at Anfield but I'm not sure of the feasibility. What I don't want is that bastard of a stadium that Hicks had designed. It has nothing to do with Anfield.

[electricghost]

I want to wait and see what the proposals are for both a new stadium and redevelopment before I could answer the question.

What I will say though is that I would rather keep Hicks and Gillett as owners than share a ground with the bitters. 

[silver 5 star]

Everyone would prefer to redevelop Anfield if possible, but at the end of the day I think the stadium's role in sustaining the club's long term future means whichever course gives the club most financial stability, while keeping ticket prices reasonable has to be the best one.

This. If we stay at Anfield ticket prices will go up and up as we try and compete with the Utd's and Arsenal's.

The new stadium was always about securing the club's future now and for decades to come.

NO WAY would I ever groundshare with the blueshite.

[silver 5 star]

What would your vote be ?
Redevelop Anfield
98 (67.6%) Continue with proposals for new stadium in Stanley Park
44 (30.3%) Consider new stadium but groundshare with Everton
3 (2.1%)
Total Members Voted: 145



These numbers seem to mirror the Echo's poll.

I also think those opting for redevelopment are often voting for that as there is a view that voting for a new stadium opens the door wider for the blueshite to sneak in.

[firing squad]

redevelop. Anfield is a cathedral of football.

[MrWes]

Redevelop Anfield.

It can be just as profitable in the long term as building a new stadium if the capacity is similar and the corporate facilities are there.  And if they really wanted to they could make some money by re naming the stadium for 15-20 years to pay a chunk of the initial cost, bit like shirt sponsorship.

What I think should be done is a newcastle style wrap around with the main stand and anfield road.  3 tier, executive boxes all the way round, restaurants ,bars all the other shit that can make the club the same sort of money that united and arsenal make on match day.  Anfield Rd is already cleared behind the goal (road can either go under the stand or around it) and most of the houses are unoccupied behind the main stand.

When we want to we can still create a great atmosphere at anfield and that has got us through big games- without the atmosphere against olympiakos, juve and chelsea we would not have had a 5th european cup- we couldn't create that atmosphere at a new stadium because the building regulations have changed so you can't build so close to the ground- I don't know one ground built post 1990 that can create a great atmosphere. 

[djschembri]

Really depends on the feasability of each option ... and neither of the options have been thoroughly studied ... I would love it if we could remain at Anfield and redevelop so that we could compete with other teams in terms of matchday revenue.

Regarding redevlopment some are suggesting knocking down 2 or 3 stands to make it work .... Will Anfield even be the same after knocking down half the ground? I'm not so sure

[GODS LEFT BOOT]

I dont think in any other country this would be in question - tearing down Anfield is sacrilege - build up

[Ginamos]

Until we see what their ideas for both options would be, it's surely too early to say?

 If it can be pulled off though, redevelopment it is.

[ConnieLFC]

Heart says Anfield, head says new stadium.

Voted for new stadium.

[scouse neapolitan]

When I go to Anfield (and these days, with living abroad, it's rare) it's a time capsule of memories. It's me (on a home-made fold-up stool) with the old man and Uncles in the Anfield Road end through the 60s and early seventies. Then it's me and my mates on the Kop and the various laughs and episodes that every one us has had over the years.
I can see the logic of building a bigger more supporter friendly stadium, but if there's any small way of keeping the existing ground we've got to go for it. It's might have lost a lot with the seated Kop but the big European nights are still worth a goal start......I've lived in Italy for nearly 25 years and take it from me, Italian TV and the press are always going on about the disadvantage their teams have when they're playing at Anfield (and I'm sure it's the same in Spain, Germany etc.) .I reckon if we up and go we might just lose that advantage when we get back into the Champions League...The advantages of staying (in a bigger Anfield) far outweight the disadvantages.

[redprodigal]

Will wait to see what the actual options are, like what sort of design there will be for a new stadium and what sort of redevelopment plans there are for Anfield. I don't see how anybody can make up their minds before they see what is on offer so in my opinion this thread is too early.

[Alan_X]

Regarding redevlopment some are suggesting knocking down 2 or 3 stands to make it work .... Will Anfield even be the same after knocking down half the ground? I'm not so sure

Err...



Anfield has been knocked down and rebuilt for the last hundred years. Every stand has been rebuilt or altered in some way in the last 40-50 years.

[Spongebob Redpants]

Will wait to see what the actual options are, like what sort of design there will be for a new stadium and what sort of redevelopment plans there are for Anfield. I don't see how anybody can make up their minds before they see what is on offer so in my opinion this thread is too early.

I'd hazard a guess that NESV have already decided that redevelopment is the preferred option subject to council approval . Don't really think they will do a cost comparison of both options unless it's rudimentary. If a new stadium was a viable option in their plans I would think they would have stated this .

[Alan_X]

I'd hazard a guess that NESV have already decided that redevelopment is the preferred option subject to council approval . Don't really think they will do a cost comparison of both options unless it's rudimentary. If a new stadium was a viable option in their plans I would think they would have stated this .

I don't think it's safe to make any assumptions like that. I sincerely hope they will do a proper study.

[redprodigal]

I'd hazard a guess that NESV have already decided that redevelopment is the preferred option subject to council approval . Don't really think they will do a cost comparison of both options unless it's rudimentary. If a new stadium was a viable option in their plans I would think they would have stated this .

Not a very intelligent guess there my friend.

[Spongebob Redpants]

I don't think it's safe to make any assumptions like that. I sincerely hope they will do a proper study.

Possibly so . I just think that the finance required for a new stadium may sway their intentions at the moment . This'll become more transparent though when the deal finally goes through.

[Spongebob Redpants]

Not a very intelligent guess there my friend.

Just my opinion - will be interesting to see how it pans out.

[bobapcoed]

I go as far back as Ajax in the 60's, St Etienne (cold shiver) in the 70' s. At the Chelse semi, in the Kop my lad turned to me and said "how could we leave this place?" In that moment I'd decided.

[Billy1561]

I go as far back as Ajax in the 60's, St Etienne (cold shiver) in the 70' s. At the Chelse semi, in the Kop my lad turned to me and said "how could we leave this place?" In that moment I'd decided.

That's where most guys are coming from Bob. It's a special special place is our ground.
Just have to wait and see what NESV do.

[MazzaRed]

I think this is where football is going wrong. People are being sucked into the notion that money is more important than history and tradition.

Sure the money would be great for naming rights and all that malarkey but staying at Anfield would be something you could not put a price on. Sentimentalty is been eroded by people who see sport as a business and supporters as customers. People over the last few years just concentrated on dollar signs rather than what was in front of them. David Moores would be the perfect example of this. Shit the whole of the western world went crazy in a sea of money for a while.

For me staying at Anfield even if it wasnt redeveloped would be the best option. Arsenal have their shiny new stadium and they are making more money than us from every match. But the atmosphere is shit according to a gooner i know who goes to every game and who regulalarly complains about supporters leaving with 10 minutes to go in games and who moan constantly.

If all we talked about was how much money could we generate  then i guarantee that Liverpool would not be the club it is today. Liverpool was built on playing good football for the people. Nowadays its "do we have money to compete with Man City?". My answer is who cares? City will have it good for a while but they have no soul. I would rather we played for the history and tradition of the club than sell ourselves for a quick buck.

Got to be staying at Anfield....without question...far too many emotional ties for me, games wise and family wise...first went with me Mum and Dad..30 odd years ago..and they've both gone to heaven...feel a 'special' link with them every time we go! It just wouldn't seem right sitting 100 yds away in a shiny new seat too far away from the pitch!

And totally agree with foreverred...have been to the Emirates....a few times...full of corporate and mixture of fans...no core 'kop' area, and most important ...SHIT atmosphere...they can keep it. Anfield over that EVERY time.

Theres still room for development!

[TMOI]

I think this is where football is going wrong. People are being sucked into the notion that money is more important than history and tradition.

Sure the money would be great for naming rights and all that malarkey but staying at Anfield would be something you could not put a price on. Sentimentalty is been eroded by people who see sport as a business and supporters as customers. People over the last few years just concentrated on dollar signs rather than what was in front of them. David Moores would be the perfect example of this. Shit the whole of the western world went crazy in a sea of money for a while.

For me staying at Anfield even if it wasnt redeveloped would be the best option. Arsenal have their shiny new stadium and they are making more money than us from every match. But the atmosphere is shit according to a gooner i know who goes to every game and who regulalarly complains about supporters leaving with 10 minutes to go in games and who moan constantly.

If all we talked about was how much money could we generate  then i guarantee that Liverpool would not be the club it is today. Liverpool was built on playing good football for the people. Nowadays its "do we have money to compete with Man City?". My answer is who cares? City will have it good for a while but they have no soul. I would rather we played for the history and tradition of the club than sell ourselves for a quick buck.

Putting football first is the key. Being able to expand Anfield (or not) - today, tomorrow or next year and as form and cash allows with little or no debt will mean we WILL survive any coming football financial crunch. Chelsea will because the man has put his cash in, Arsenal will because they've been funded by the value of land, Manchester City might not because they've got dud finances and Man U won't because they're up to their necks in debt and fickle support.

Redevelop Anfield

More money for the team; less on debt

[Les Willis]

If it's feasible I'd be inclined to try to re-delevop Anfield in phases. It's probably the cheapest and most sensible option, although the Council are probably against it.

[Vulmea]

dont like the options

we cannot, definately must not, can't even contemplate building a stadium designed by the two twats - there can be no lasting legacy of those two shysters

if there is to be a new stadium it must not be the shite metal crap that the texans designed

we can only redevelop if we also regenerate the whole anfield area - the people of anfield deserve that regeneration

if we dont build a new stadium do Everton get the opportunity to use Stanley Park?

there are plans in place that could take capacity to 58,000 without redeveloping the anfield road end - and maintaining a capacity of 40,000 through the season but such a redevelopment will completely change the atmosphere at the ground - if we stay and redevelop it still will not feel like anfield does now - already the changing kick off times and current design mean in half our games we should actually kick into the Kop in the first half -

I'm not against a new ground - I'm against Hicks new ground

I'm not against groundshare but I dont think it would work - the economic argument is bogus when one club is huge and the other merely big - the economic arguments would also say we should merge clubs and just have one club in the City at what point do you draw the line?

naming rights can be sold for anfield - you dont need a new build for that

I believe the future stadium (redeveloped or otherwise) should be built by the fans - its where fan ownership comes in - we raise the money via shares and take ownership of a large % of our club and get a seat on the board

the fans would never vote for groundshare - either blue or red 

[Dardinhio]

I am not to pushed if we redevolop or build a new ground but no groundshare. S no option for me in the 3.

[Red_Rich]

Of course, there's a good arguement for building a entirely brand new stadium as it will give us extra revenue etc.  But it will cost something like £300m to build and would come in at no bigger than 70,000.

I'd rather spend a quarter of that and redevelop the existing Anfield into a 59-60,000 stadium by rebuilding the main stand (7,000 extra), adding a 3rd tier to the kemlin (4,500 extra) and a larger top tier on the Anny Road (3,000 extra).

[kavah]

do up Anfield, it will be boss

[alfonso]

A quote from a rival fan:

why is it not possible to upgrade Anfield? having been there a few times as an away fan many houses are boarded up or I would guess could be bought up at a reasonable even if over market value rate, and the history and tradition could be retained, and that is important otherwise Liverpool FC and English football will get another souless legoland charmless football ground

[Veinticinco de Mayo]

Depends on the plans really - not the third option though

[Buzz Killington]

redevelop, don't wanna move out of anfield