Topic: Bye Bye Anfield you shall be missed

[Gromit]

There was an architect with a working proposal for a redevelopment at the SoS general meeting. It is possible to enlarge Anfield to increase revenue up to what the mancs make. It would only take two years (opposed to building new, which would take three) and it would be a lot cheaper. The architect said they can even build it so that the building work doesn't interfere with playing there, so there wouldn't be any reduction in capacity during the re-development.

Its really good stuff. Go the SoS website, there should be something on it in the stuff from the last GM.

Can't see how that can be possible.  No reduction in capacity?  The Annie Road end was shut for a season while a 2nd tier was built on it.  There was a very old thread discussing rebuilding Anfield.  If I recall correctly, then using the existing footprint of Anfield would limit us to something like 55000, anything bigger and we'd have to start tearing it down and rebuilding virtually from scratch.

[Alan_X]

There was an architect with a working proposal for a redevelopment at the SoS general meeting. It is possible to enlarge Anfield to increase revenue up to what the mancs make. It would only take two years (opposed to building new, which would take three) and it would be a lot cheaper. The architect said they can even build it so that the building work doesn't interfere with playing there, so there wouldn't be any reduction in capacity during the re-development.

Its really good stuff. Go the SoS website, there should be something on it in the stuff from the last GM.

I'd love to see those plans. The main stand would need to be completely re-built as it's fundamentally still the old Archi Lietch stand. Not sure where he would stick all the corporate boxes.

[redbyrdz]

I've had a look at the SoS website, it's mentioned in the AGM minutes and in the Q&A to the Football Quarter proposal. It ties in with the whole football quarter idea. I've no idea why there aren't any more details on it to be honest, i think its fantastic. Could be that they have to keep it "secret" because SoS are not in a position to actually redevelop the stadium. (I'm just a member that was at the meeting, i don't know what the commitee's plan is with this.)

He was a bit cloudy about the concrete design of the refurbished stadium, probably so nobody would nick it. But i remember those financial details (which were part of a presentation), and also the questions and answers about the building time and if capacity would be reduced during refurbishment. It looked like they had a pretty good idea that it would work.

[Alan_X]

From the FAQ:

"There are two options for Liverpool. Spirit of Shankly have been shown it is possible to redevelop Anfield into a 70,000 plus super stadium, with corporate facilities capable of maximising the potential of their fanbase and corporate draw; their architect has been developing a plan that would see a phased redevelopment with no loss of capacity during the season. The other option would see Liverpool build a new stadium in the park; both options can be accommodated within the concept of the Football Quarter".

70,000 on the current Anfield footprint, maximised corporate facilities and no loss of capacity during construction! Sounds like a magician not an architect. Given the importance of the stadium to the fanbase I'm surprised this hasn't been more widely promoted. No-one will "nick" the idea as the architect will have copyright in the designs.

If it's a goer there is a massive potential for promotion and increasing membership that's being missed.

[redbyrdz]

70,000 on the current Anfield footprint, maximised corporate facilities and no loss of capacity during construction! Sounds like a magician not an architect. Given the importance of the stadium to the fanbase I'm surprised this hasn't been more widely promoted. No-one will "nick" the idea as the architect will have copyright in the designs.

If it's a goer there is a massive potential for promotion and increasing membership that's being missed.

Agree with the potential for promotion, think it would be the one point that'd kick off support for the Football Quarter thing as well.

Don't know about the copyright issue, they'll be copyrighted ok, but what about making money off them? Didn't the club pay something like £30 million for the plans for a new stadium already? Bit of a difference if SoS have someone who's just drawn them up for them.

[Alan_X]

Agree with the potential for promotion, think it would be the one point that'd kick off support for the Football Quarter thing as well.

Don't know about the copyright issue, they'll be copyrighted ok, but what about making money off them? Didn't the club pay something like £30 million for the plans for a new stadium already? Bit of a difference if SoS have someone who's just drawn them up for them.

SOS's architect will have done what's called a feasibility study no more than that. I doubt if there's more than say £20K to £50K worth of work involved - basic massing studies and maybe a bit of structural input. If a scheme to re-develop Anfield went ahead the club would be looking at a minimum of £10 million in fees and new planning applications before it could be built.

I can't see any need for secrecy.

[RJH]

SOS's architect will have done what's called a feasibility study no more than that. I doubt if there's more than say £20K to £50K worth of work involved - basic massing studies and maybe a bit of structural input. If a scheme to re-develop Anfield went ahead the club would be looking at a minimum of £10 million in fees and new planning applications before it could be built.

I can't see any need for secrecy.

Especially since you'd have to ask when they plan to reveal the details.
If they leave until work actually started on a new stadium, it would be far too late.
Surely, if these plans are actually feasible, these plans should be being put forward now before it's too late to do anything with them?

[Niru Red4ever]

From the FAQ:

"There are two options for Liverpool. Spirit of Shankly have been shown it is possible to redevelop Anfield into a 70,000 plus super stadium, with corporate facilities capable of maximising the potential of their fanbase and corporate draw; their architect has been developing a plan that would see a phased redevelopment with no loss of capacity during the season. The other option would see Liverpool build a new stadium in the park; both options can be accommodated within the concept of the Football Quarter".

70,000 on the current Anfield footprint, maximised corporate facilities and no loss of capacity during construction! Sounds like a magician not an architect. Given the importance of the stadium to the fanbase I'm surprised this hasn't been more widely promoted. No-one will "nick" the idea as the architect will have copyright in the designs.

If it's a goer there is a massive potential for promotion and increasing membership that's being missed.

I will be more than happy to have a new stadium at Anfield which can hold 60k. But I don't get it how they can manage it.

If we do stay at Anfield what will happen to Stanley Park land? Surely, we will make some neat money from there.

[Alan_X]

I will be more than happy to have a new stadium at Anfield which can hold 60k. But I don't get it how they can manage it.

If we do stay at Anfield what will happen to Stanley Park land? Surely, we will make some neat money from there.

We don't own the Stanley Park land. If we don't build on it it stays with the council.

[Niru Red4ever]

We don't own the Stanley Park land. If we don't build on it it stays with the council.

So if we do build, we will have to pay money for the land? Or is it exchanged with Anfield? I believe the land at Stanley Park is bigger; in that case won't swapping cause a loss to the council?

[Alan_X]

So if we do build, we will have to pay money for the land? Or is it exchanged with Anfield? I believe the land at Stanley Park is bigger; in that case won't swapping cause a loss to the council?

Not exactly - one of the planning requirements is that the Anfield pitch is retained as green space.

[redbyrdz]

Asked a question about the refurbishing plans in the SOS Q&A thread on the main board, cheers to Paul for answering so quickly!
http://www.redandwhitekop.com/forum/index.php?topic=252180.msg6860691#msg6860691

[Paul Gardner]

Asked a question about the refurbishing plans in the SOS Q&A thread on the main board, cheers to Paul for answering so quickly!
http://www.redandwhitekop.com/forum/index.php?topic=252180.msg6860691#msg6860691

To add to that after seeing some of the comments here in relation to Football Quarter. Its important that the Football Quarter can incorporate a new anfield or a refurbished anfield and a feasibility into the Football Quarter will examine both in the Quarter.

[Paul Gardner]

Peter McGurk, Architect who spoke at SOS AGM talked about it tonight on Radio Merseyside. Can be listened back to here for the next week from 1 hr 27 in.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/p007fz0v/Merseyside_Sport_27_04_2010/

[rutlandred]

Peter McGurk, Architect who spoke at SOS AGM talked about it tonight on Radio Merseyside. Can be listened back to here for the next week from 1 hr 27 in.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/p007fz0v/Merseyside_Sport_27_04_2010/

Really interesting listen that Paul, cheers for posting it up.  Hopefully the questions will be asked again as to why the idea of regenerating Anfield has been binned... maybe new owners would re-look at all the options..

[Stussy]

In that interview, unless I missed it, Peter McGurk doesn't mention whether corporate hospitality facilities, which are intended to be the main driver of an increase in matchday revenue, could be increased in number under his feasability study.

To my mind, under a sane ownership, were it possible to increase that side of things in the redevelopment of Anfield to levels that would allow us to seriously compete for matchday revenuse with our direct rivals, under a sane ownership, the case for staying would be self evident.

[Paul Gardner]

In that interview, unless I missed it, Peter McGurk doesn't mention whether corporate hospitality facilities, which are intended to be the main driver of an increase in matchday revenue, could be increased in number under his feasability study.

To my mind, under a sane ownership, were it possible to increase that side of things in the redevelopment of Anfield to levels that would allow us to seriously compete for matchday revenuse with our direct rivals, under a sane ownership, the case for staying would be self evident.

Enough corporate boxes can be included in the redevelopment. It would be pointless otherwise.

[Stussy]

Enough corporate boxes can be included in the redevelopment. It would be pointless otherwise.

Good. It would be great to see the designs.

[Niru Red4ever]

Enough corporate boxes can be included in the redevelopment. It would be pointless otherwise.

Since the designs quoted a figure of upto 70k capacity; we can assume that there will be enough space for corporate seats with a 56-60k capacity. We really won't need more than that.

[Alan_X]

Since the designs quoted a figure of upto 70k capacity; we can assume that there will be enough space for corporate seats with a 56-60k capacity. We really won't need more than that.

Going by the limited description on the radio, I can't see how that works. He said we'd keep the existing stands in place and build behind and cantilever? over for the new capacity. Extra seats to be sold as part of a low to mid range corporate package is one thing, what we need to attract the premium corporate market are more boxes and they would need to be at a lower level  - probably half way up the main stand. I don't see where they'd go unless you do some significant cutting and carving on the mains stand.

Some drawings would be nice

[danwms]

Would like to see these designs.

[Niru Red4ever]

Going by the limited description on the radio, I can't see how that works. He said we'd keep the existing stands in place and build behind and cantilever? over for the new capacity. Extra seats to be sold as part of a low to mid range corporate package is one thing, what we need to attract the premium corporate market are more boxes and they would need to be at a lower level  - probably half way up the main stand. I don't see where they'd go unless you do some significant cutting and carving on the mains stand.

Some drawings would be nice

How about rebuilding a stand? There seems to be space since we have bought some nearby houses.

[Alan_X]

I'm just repeating what McGurk said on the radio. Personally I'd say that if you were redeveloping Anfield you'd demolish the Main Stand and probably the Annie Road and start again on both of those. The Main stand is over a hundred years old and is essentially the old Archibald Leitch stand with a bit of tarting up over the years.

[You'll Never Walk Alone]

Can we not build INTO the ground at Anfield? Don't think it'd harm the footprint too much and would allow an increased capacity... I suppose its a similar idea to how the Nou Camp is designed...

[davenorthwales]

doesn't building 'into' the ground mean lowering the pitch level?

it's interesting reading all these old threads and posts from 2002.

didn't someone say that the present kop grandstand roof interferes with a main stand rebuild?

if it is feasible, do a rebuild on mainstand and kop. redo the centenary then anfield road end. might take 2 years but worth it.

do we really need corporate boxes in the main stand? is it that essential?  i always thought the corporate culture was frowned upon?

[ds2190]

Can we not build INTO the ground at Anfield? Don't think it'd harm the footprint too much and would allow an increased capacity... I suppose its a similar idea to how the Nou Camp is designed...

You still need pretty much the same footprint regardless of whether you build on the ground or dig into it. The size of the pitch remains the same so the base of the stadium will be roughly the same regardless.

[Wabaloolah]

doesn't building 'into' the ground mean lowering the pitch level?

it's interesting reading all these old threads and posts from 2002.

didn't someone say that the present kop grandstand roof interferes with a main stand rebuild?

if it is feasible, do a rebuild on mainstand and kop. redo the centenary then anfield road end. might take 2 years but worth it.

do we really need corporate boxes in the main stand? is it that essential?  i always thought the corporate culture was frowned upon?

Corporate culture may be frowned upon but it brings in big money

[davenorthwales]

would they need so many? if the boxes in the centenary got used to, the same amount wouldn't go a miss at a new stadium.  would it 'spoil' a new stadium if boxes were wrapped around three stands?

it looks like the debate about moving or staying is alive and well in the site

[RJH]

would they need so many? if the boxes in the centenary got used to, the same amount wouldn't go a miss at a new stadium.  would it 'spoil' a new stadium if boxes were wrapped around three stands?

it looks like the debate about moving or staying is alive and well in the site

The new stadium (or a rebuilt Anfield) needs more boxes than we have now, purely for financial reasons.
I can't find the exact numbers now, but from memory Anfield has about 30-40 boxes, while the likes of Arsenal and Man United have over 100 each.

Boxes and corporate hospitality stuff are big revenue generators, and whatever people think of them, we need more if we want to compete financially with the top clubs.

[davenorthwales]

commadeer the police room, put some in there. i didn't realise there were that many at anfield. 'never bothered counting them. would have thought it was around 25-30. after all these years they have been there, should know by now how many boxes there are.

'could build some new ones, 5ft high to minimise the height between tiers. could put some old wembley style seats at the very top of the centenary underneath the roof.  panorama view or whatever they called them lol.

all jokes aside, doesn't these executive boxes weaken the structure when adding on. the only way to get them in at anfield is by completely taking down anfield road. probably the same with the main stand.
i'm not sure that for each row of boxes equals around 4 rows of normal seats in a continuous elevation.

if there's a waiting list for boxes, and they got built, would a new waiting list be created.. perish the thought of building too many boxes.. ah heck to it, the main stand where it is now would look kak with boxes

[davenorthwales]

competing financially is the same as keeping up with the jonses - a dangerous game. it just gets repetative over a period and starts all over again.

one reason why barcelona, madrid, milan get more revenue is by charging 120/200 euros or more for some of their seats.  think there would be uproar if liverpool started charging £100 a match.  nice seat next to the half way line in the centenary cost you £200 thank you very much, cos that's what could happen.

football has always been accessable to the people and at a reasonable price.  god knows what kind of jobs supporters have got to be able to afford 200euro seats. i doubt if they are on minumum wage.
no wonder they say people are being squeezed out of the game

so, how come bayern munich have got cheaper seats than us? actually, standing 15euros for members.
madrid have got a good system in having price bands and i can see that the best seats prop up the lower prices, so it's hardly democratic.  do i get a cheaper bus/train fare if i have to stand up cos all the seats have been taken?
then again, there isn't a reduction at anfield for a obscured view such as the main stand.  and god knows what this restricted view is at the kop underneath the police hut.

madrid have got 4 different price bands. we have got category A and B. madrid have got category A and A plus. B and C

[paul j]

I'd love to see those plans. The main stand would need to be completely re-built as it's fundamentally still the old Archi Lietch stand. Not sure where he would stick all the corporate boxes.

the present main stand was built in the early 70s,the old one was demolished.

[davenorthwales]

was the main stand completely rebuilt or was just the roof removed and the roof rebuilt? it's in one of my old programmes somewhere. and there's a picture of duke of kent re-opening the anfield rd end in another. when i get some time, i'll look them up... just trying to remember what i read from years ago

[davenorthwales]

[paul j]

was the main stand completely rebuilt or was just the roof removed and the roof rebuilt? it's in one of my old programmes somewhere. and there's a picture of duke of kent re-opening the anfield rd end in another. when i get some time, i'll look them up... just trying to remember what i read from years ago

from what i read it said the old main stand was demolished.

[davenorthwales]

i haven't had a chance to look at my programmes yet.
funny how there aren't that many photos of the main stand on the net.
interesting stand tho. i liked it when there was a red and white stripe on the paddock wall..
looking at the angle of elevation between the man city pic and the others, it's steeper and acute.
looking at the last but one compared to the other newer mainstands, it looks a different angle again.

[davenorthwales]

alun evans was signed 1968, and i spotted larry lloyd which suggests this is a 1969 pic.

my 1970 programmes have a pencil sketch on the covers, so you are right. 1970

[davenorthwales]

1922

jeez, the main stand looks bad and it wasn't long built. so, the old anfield road end stand lasted until 1973 as well

[davenorthwales]

1903

[davenorthwales]

do you know the red adidas seats in the main stand?  they are still the original wooden ones?