Author Topic: Ground share rears its ugly head again  (Read 67042 times)

Offline willss

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 3,890
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Ground share rears its ugly head again
« Reply #320 on: June 22, 2012, 03:10:59 pm »
How much are everton worth?

Offline El Phes

  • Answers to Judith, but only on Thurdays.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 6,985
    • Portraits / Weddings / Commercial / Events
Re: Ground share rears its ugly head again
« Reply #321 on: June 22, 2012, 03:15:09 pm »
How much are everton worth?

Are we talking "how many chickens or cows in exchange?"

Online CraigDS

  • Lite. Smelt it and dealt it. Worrawhopper.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 61,515
  • YNWA
Re: Ground share rears its ugly head again
« Reply #322 on: June 22, 2012, 03:21:11 pm »
Are we talking "how many chickens or cows in exchange?"

Suppose I'd take 2 cows and a chicken in exchange for owning them.

Offline willss

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 3,890
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Ground share rears its ugly head again
« Reply #323 on: June 22, 2012, 03:24:53 pm »
Is it viable for us to buy them, burn down their ground (one match would do). Groundshare on whatever terms we see fit.

Online Barneylfc∗

  • Cross-dressing man-bag wielding golfer. Wannabe Mod. Coprophiliac. Would like to buy an airline seat if he could. Known 'grass'. Wants to go home to He-Man
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 60,223
Re: Ground share rears its ugly head again
« Reply #324 on: June 22, 2012, 04:00:48 pm »
Is it viable for us to buy them, burn down their ground (one match would do). Groundshare on whatever terms we see fit.

We could auction this privelige. Highest bidder wins obviously with the money going to charity. I'll start the bidding at £5000
Craig Burnley V West Ham - WEST HAM WIN - INCORRECT

Offline Zeb

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 18,571
  • Justice.
Re: Ground share rears its ugly head again
« Reply #325 on: June 22, 2012, 04:17:40 pm »
A ground share doesn't have to be 50/50.  It could be 70/30 with naming rights covering another big chunk.  If LFC did a deal to ensure that they also received 70% of all matchday revenue (up to a specific year) then you can see how financially it can work.  LFC making money from Everton fans.  38 guaranteed matchdays instead of 19.

But it isn't going to happen, and as I said, nor should it.  Feels like a last ditch attempt by Moyes to try to stir things up before we announce whatever we are doing.

It makes it viable from our perspective, assuming that Everton bring some value to the naming rights, but it makes it unviable for Everton if we take their Kirkby projections as a guide (and pretend they can fill a 60k stadium every home game). Everton will continue to mention groundshare but they need someone else to pay for it for them - usually, beneath all the bollocks they chat, that someone looks suspiciously like the taxpayer.
"And the voices of the standing Kop still whispering in the wind will salute the wee Scots redman and he will still walk on.
And your money will have bought you nothing."

Offline Peter McGurk

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,822
Re: Ground share rears its ugly head again
« Reply #326 on: June 22, 2012, 05:03:00 pm »
It makes it viable from our perspective, assuming that Everton bring some value to the naming rights, but it makes it unviable for Everton if we take their Kirkby projections as a guide (and pretend they can fill a 60k stadium every home game). Everton will continue to mention groundshare but they need someone else to pay for it for them - usually, beneath all the bollocks they chat, that someone looks suspiciously like the taxpayer.

That's good then because that's going to happen.

.

Offline redbyrdz

  • No to sub-optimal passing! Not content with one century, this girl does two together. Oh, and FUCK THE TORIES deh-deh-deh-deh!
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 24,325
Re: Ground share rears its ugly head again
« Reply #327 on: June 22, 2012, 05:12:50 pm »
Blue team wants ground share with richer red team? Where have I heard that one before. Note what happened to the blue team. ;)
"I want to build a team that's invincible, so that they have to send a team from bloody Mars to beat us." - Bill Shankly

Offline Zeb

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 18,571
  • Justice.
Re: Ground share rears its ugly head again
« Reply #328 on: June 22, 2012, 06:48:03 pm »
That's good then because that's going to happen.

.

If the taxpayer pays for it, a new stadium suddenly makes a lot of sense for everyone. You holding your breath for that too?
"And the voices of the standing Kop still whispering in the wind will salute the wee Scots redman and he will still walk on.
And your money will have bought you nothing."

Offline Peter McGurk

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,822
Re: Ground share rears its ugly head again
« Reply #329 on: June 22, 2012, 07:38:43 pm »
If the taxpayer pays for it, a new stadium suddenly makes a lot of sense for everyone. You holding your breath for that too?

No. I really think the whole country should re-engineer its post crunch rescue package to make sure EFC have got some comfier seats to sit on. That'll re-start the economy.

.



Offline RedPross

  • Main Stander
  • ***
  • Posts: 239
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Ground share rears its ugly head again
« Reply #330 on: June 22, 2012, 08:13:02 pm »
Sick of fans from other teams telling us we should share!!!! Fuck off!! It makes financial sense for all cities with 2 or more teams to share!!! Would Arsenal share with Spurs? Manchester City with the Mancs...Villa with Brum?  Celtic and Rangers? Chelsea and Fulham.... None of these fuckers would consider sharing so keep your fucking noses out of our business!!!!

Offline NOTBORNIN1982

  • and neither is he the best poster on here, not even close in fact. Maybe the 1982nd.
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 3,180
  • Those who believe in telekinetics, raise my hand
Re: Ground share rears its ugly head again
« Reply #331 on: June 22, 2012, 08:14:05 pm »
The day we share is the day I stop going to the games.
"How much do you smoke, sir? Two packs a day, is that right? Pussy. I go through two lighters a day. That's right, two lighters! You're a health nut compared to me."

Offline Zeb

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 18,571
  • Justice.
Re: Ground share rears its ugly head again
« Reply #332 on: June 22, 2012, 08:46:11 pm »
No. I really think the whole country should re-engineer its post crunch rescue package to make sure EFC have got some comfier seats to sit on. That'll re-start the economy.

.




Couldn't we just tell the taxpayer to buy them their own stadium, buy us one and pay for a new train line for us both? It'd be stimulating at least to float that one.
"And the voices of the standing Kop still whispering in the wind will salute the wee Scots redman and he will still walk on.
And your money will have bought you nothing."

Offline FlashingBlade

  • Organised a piss up in a brewery. Ended up in his pants with a KFC bucket. Future MP. Eats only Fish Heads and Tails. Can't spell 'DOMUM'. Now has no balls.
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 8,860
  • From a Shankly Boy to a Klopp Man
Re: Ground share rears its ugly head again
« Reply #333 on: June 23, 2012, 02:21:05 pm »
A note of warning, since FSG dismissed the 'option' there has been two major changes...FSG have declared their hand of 'potential' redevelopment over new ground...with a caveat ' unless public money was invloved' for a new stadium...and far more crucially LCC...Joe Anderson has far more power as Mayor than people generally realise...and crucially he will have millions of pounds at his disposal for 'infrastructure projects'...and think a very real possibilityy is he dangle the carrot of LCC providing all the infrastructure if LFC/EFC agree to build a joint stadium , nothwithstanding all the negative implications of such a venture ( and lets face it it would kill us , and reinvent the Blues) do not dismiss it. If we havent commenced a real project to rebuild Anfield within 18 months ( planning, contracts etc) I think this is a very real posibility.

Joe Anderson is an Everton season ticket holder.

Online CraigDS

  • Lite. Smelt it and dealt it. Worrawhopper.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 61,515
  • YNWA
Re: Ground share rears its ugly head again
« Reply #334 on: June 23, 2012, 02:24:53 pm »
There is no chance LCC will be able to fund a stadium build, not a chance.

Offline No666

  • Married to Macca.
  • RAWK Scribe
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 16,824
Re: Ground share rears its ugly head again
« Reply #335 on: June 23, 2012, 03:43:45 pm »
Even IF LCC had millions to plough into the infrastructure, how would Everton find half the cost of the stadium itself?

Offline FlashingBlade

  • Organised a piss up in a brewery. Ended up in his pants with a KFC bucket. Future MP. Eats only Fish Heads and Tails. Can't spell 'DOMUM'. Now has no balls.
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 8,860
  • From a Shankly Boy to a Klopp Man
Re: Ground share rears its ugly head again
« Reply #336 on: June 23, 2012, 03:56:50 pm »
There is no chance LCC will be able to fund a stadium build, not a chance.

read my post I said infrastructure

Infrastructure isnt the Ground..its roads improvements, transport links etc which if taken forward by a club alone are a substantial outlay therfore LCC funded infrastructure would reduce overall construction costs
« Last Edit: June 23, 2012, 03:59:17 pm by FlashingBlade »

Online CraigDS

  • Lite. Smelt it and dealt it. Worrawhopper.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 61,515
  • YNWA
Re: Ground share rears its ugly head again
« Reply #337 on: June 23, 2012, 04:11:15 pm »
read my post I said infrastructure

Infrastructure isnt the Ground..its roads improvements, transport links etc which if taken forward by a club alone are a substantial outlay therfore LCC funded infrastructure would reduce overall construction costs

Even still the same point stands, LCC don't have the money for that then!

Offline andy in warrington

  • ...wanking in the work bogs
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,667
Re: Ground share rears its ugly head again
« Reply #338 on: June 24, 2012, 02:31:11 pm »
I'd rather share a sleeping bag with John Inman on viagra, than share a ground with the blueshite.

Offline fudge

  • RAWK Gaylord
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 15,807
  • "I'm a swine, its my nature"
    • Fat man dancing
Re: Ground share rears its ugly head again
« Reply #339 on: June 24, 2012, 02:34:54 pm »
Suppose I'd take 2 cows and a chicken in exchange for Downing.
Rubber Dinghy Rapids....

Online TepidT2O

  • Deffo NOT 9"! MUFC bedwetter. Grass. Folically-challenged, God-piece-wearing, monkey-rubber. Jizz aroma expert. Operating at the lower end of the distribution curve...has the hots for Alan. Bastard. Fearless in transfer windows with lack of convicti
  • Lead Matchday Commentator
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 94,939
  • Dejan Lovren fan club member #1
Re: Ground share rears its ugly head again
« Reply #340 on: June 24, 2012, 11:00:47 pm »
Everton can't afford to share a Bovrill with us, let alone a ground.
“Happiness can be found in the darkest of times, if one only remembers to turn on the light.”
“Generosity always pays off. Generosity in your effort, in your work, in your kindness, in the way you look after people and take care of people. In the long run, if you are generous with a heart, and with humanity, it always pays off.”
W

Offline JohnHobbes

  • Resident Expert Paronomasian
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 6,358
Re: Ground share rears its ugly head again
« Reply #341 on: June 25, 2012, 12:00:33 am »
Everton can't afford to share a Bovrill with us, let alone a ground.

I doubt even that. It's scary, for them, just how bad it has become financially.

Offline BIGdavalad

  • Major Malfunction. Yearns To Be A Crab! MOD Agony Aunt. Dulldream Believer. Is the proud owner of a one year old login time.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 28,024
Re: Ground share rears its ugly head again
« Reply #342 on: June 25, 2012, 09:39:00 am »
I doubt even that. It's scary, for them, just how bad it has become financially.

An Everton supporting mate of mine was trying to tell how their debts weren't all that bad compared to some the other day.

I don't think it's sunk in yet with most of their fans that you can number how many players they've paid actual money for in the last few years on one hand and why that is.
Joining Betfair? Use the referral code UHHFL6VHG and we'll both get some extra cash.

All of the above came from my head unless otherwise stated. If you have been affected by the issues raised by my post, please feel free to contact us on 0800 1234567 and we will send you an information pack on manning the fuck up.

Online west_london_red

  • Knows his stuff - pull the udder one! RAWK's Dairy Queen.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 22,182
  • watching me? but whose watching you watching me?
Re: Ground share rears its ugly head again
« Reply #343 on: June 25, 2012, 10:25:04 am »
Slightly off topic, but why are Everton so skint?
Thinking is overrated.
The mind is a tool, it's not meant to be used that much.
Rest, love, observe. Laugh.

Offline Ginamos

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,311
Re: Ground share rears its ugly head again
« Reply #344 on: June 25, 2012, 10:37:23 am »
Slightly off topic, but why are Everton so skint?

Yeah, I've never understood that. Their average attendance is about 33,000 putting them in the middle of the league attendance figures,  lots of League clubs are getting a lot less.
« Last Edit: June 25, 2012, 10:40:10 am by Ginamos »

Offline Welshred

  • CBE. To be fair to him, he is a massive twat. Professional Ladies' Arse Fondler. Possibly......we're not sure any more......
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 34,608
  • JFT96
Re: Ground share rears its ugly head again
« Reply #345 on: June 25, 2012, 10:46:17 am »
Yeah, I've never understood that. Their average attendance is about 33,000 putting them in the middle of the league attendance figures,  lots of League clubs are getting a lot less.


I think player wages account for about 80% of their turnover, that's before all the maintenance costs and other staff wages they need to take out. Then you've got match day expenses, etc.

Online CraigDS

  • Lite. Smelt it and dealt it. Worrawhopper.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 61,515
  • YNWA
Re: Ground share rears its ugly head again
« Reply #346 on: June 25, 2012, 11:14:48 am »
Their turnover to May 11 was only £82m, which breaks down into £53m from the TV deal, just under £18.5m from match day and just over £10.5m from commercial activity. Match day revenue was down 9% this year, which is the second year in a row (dropped 11% year before).

Wages in the year were £58m.

They have £47.6m debt, which is in the form of £9m over draft, £14m bank loans and £24.6m loan from Bear Stearns.

Offline free_at_last

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,116
  • we all live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Ground share rears its ugly head again
« Reply #347 on: June 25, 2012, 03:01:46 pm »
Yeah, I've never understood that. Their average attendance is about 33,000 putting them in the middle of the league attendance figures,  lots of League clubs are getting a lot less.
Because they are not Norwegians. To think that when I started supporting the Reds we were the povvo team and they used to look down their noses at us. Hats off to Mr Shankly.

Offline incredibleL4ever

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,627
Re: Ground share rears its ugly head again
« Reply #348 on: June 25, 2012, 04:40:15 pm »
As an out-of-towner my attitude might be a bit different to the locals.  Just wonder whether it would make a difference if we built a new stadium and rented it to Everton compared to a shared stadium - So its a LFC stadium but a few blue flags are erected on Everton matchdays.

Offline larrikin

  • Main Stander
  • ***
  • Posts: 51
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Ground share rears its ugly head again
« Reply #349 on: June 25, 2012, 08:13:57 pm »
I've been waiting and waiting for a season ticket and I've known for years the best chance is if we build a new stadium in the park with 60,000-plus seats. But everything that's come out of the club has stressed a new ground can only happen if the naming rights are sold. Well, that possibility was kicked in the head when the Suarez saga did so much damage to our image and reputation. No multinational was going to tie its colours to our mast with all that poison and bile swilling around the place.
Now, of course, the owners are inclining towards Plan B, the redevelopment of Anfield, which sounds like a piecemeal, higgledy-piggedly revamp of a stadium that's way past its sell-by date.
Let's be frank: I have experienced more stunning, ecstatic moments at Anfield than any other place on earth apart from the marital bedroom. But just like I had to move on when the bedroom (and the rest of our house) became unfit for purpose, too cramped and damp and cold and old-fashioned, so I am desperate to move into a brand-new stadium worthy of the 21st Century. And if that means sharing with my Blue mates, so be it. At least then I should be able to watch my beloved Reds.
If that doesn't suit one or two people on here, that's fine by me. Let's leave them to choke on their bitterness. They won't change my mind and they won't shut me up, no matter how many "fook hims" they spew out.

Offline Zeb

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 18,571
  • Justice.
Re: Ground share rears its ugly head again
« Reply #350 on: June 25, 2012, 08:15:07 pm »
As an out-of-towner my attitude might be a bit different to the locals.  Just wonder whether it would make a difference if we built a new stadium and rented it to Everton compared to a shared stadium - So its a LFC stadium but a few blue flags are erected on Everton matchdays.


It's worse than a ground share because you'd have a lot of the issues of a ground share for us, and Everton wouldn't own even half of their own ground making it an impossible sell to their support.
"And the voices of the standing Kop still whispering in the wind will salute the wee Scots redman and he will still walk on.
And your money will have bought you nothing."

Online CraigDS

  • Lite. Smelt it and dealt it. Worrawhopper.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 61,515
  • YNWA
Re: Ground share rears its ugly head again
« Reply #351 on: June 25, 2012, 08:18:55 pm »
I've been waiting and waiting for a season ticket and I've known for years the best chance is if we build a new stadium in the park with 60,000-plus seats. But everything that's come out of the club has stressed a new ground can only happen if the naming rights are sold. Well, that possibility was kicked in the head when the Suarez saga did so much damage to our image and reputation. No multinational was going to tie its colours to our mast with all that poison and bile swilling around the place.
Now, of course, the owners are inclining towards Plan B, the redevelopment of Anfield, which sounds like a piecemeal, higgledy-piggedly revamp of a stadium that's way past its sell-by date.
Let's be frank: I have experienced more stunning, ecstatic moments at Anfield than any other place on earth apart from the marital bedroom. But just like I had to move on when the bedroom (and the rest of our house) became unfit for purpose, too cramped and damp and cold and old-fashioned, so I am desperate to move into a brand-new stadium worthy of the 21st Century. And if that means sharing with my Blue mates, so be it. At least then I should be able to watch my beloved Reds.
If that doesn't suit one or two people on here, that's fine by me. Let's leave them to choke on their bitterness. They won't change my mind and they won't shut me up, no matter how many "fook hims" they spew out.

Out of interest, how is a 60k new stadium going to give you a better chance to get a ST then a 60k redev Anfield?

Offline scouse29

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,821
  • Koppite
Re: Ground share rears its ugly head again
« Reply #352 on: June 25, 2012, 09:00:02 pm »
I've been waiting and waiting for a season ticket and I've known for years the best chance is if we build a new stadium in the park with 60,000-plus seats. But everything that's come out of the club has stressed a new ground can only happen if the naming rights are sold. Well, that possibility was kicked in the head when the Suarez saga did so much damage to our image and reputation. No multinational was going to tie its colours to our mast with all that poison and bile swilling around the place.
Now, of course, the owners are inclining towards Plan B, the redevelopment of Anfield, which sounds like a piecemeal, higgledy-piggedly revamp of a stadium that's way past its sell-by date.
Let's be frank: I have experienced more stunning, ecstatic moments at Anfield than any other place on earth apart from the marital bedroom. But just like I had to move on when the bedroom (and the rest of our house) became unfit for purpose, too cramped and damp and cold and old-fashioned, so I am desperate to move into a brand-new stadium worthy of the 21st Century. And if that means sharing with my Blue mates, so be it. At least then I should be able to watch my beloved Reds.
If that doesn't suit one or two people on here, that's fine by me. Let's leave them to choke on their bitterness. They won't change my mind and they won't shut me up, no matter how many "fook hims" they spew out.


Out of curiosity, where are you on the season ticket waiting list?
The Liverpool way!!!

Offline larrikin

  • Main Stander
  • ***
  • Posts: 51
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Ground share rears its ugly head again
« Reply #353 on: June 25, 2012, 09:10:00 pm »
Out of interest, how is a 60k new stadium going to give you a better chance to get a ST then a 60k redev Anfield?
A new ground would give at least 5,000 more chances of an ST. From what I've read about the revamped Anfield, the absolute max capacity is 55,000, whereas Stanley Park would be at least 60,000. But it's also about having facilities fit for the present day. I'm a fairly big bugger who's not quite as athletic as he used to be and sitting in the Centenary and other parts of the ground is a pain, with knees jammed against the seat in front. My son is an even bigger bugger, 6 foot 4 and 15 stone, and he can't enjoy games the way he should, especially when you are constantly standing up and down to let people past.
If a shared ground can give me and him comfortable specs, that's fine by me. But sticking new bits on top and in the corners and leaving
the present  stands as they are will not be good enough. You will just be condemning people to suffer the existing poor facilities for the next 40, 50 years.

Online CraigDS

  • Lite. Smelt it and dealt it. Worrawhopper.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 61,515
  • YNWA
Re: Ground share rears its ugly head again
« Reply #354 on: June 25, 2012, 09:23:48 pm »
A new ground would give at least 5,000 more chances of an ST. From what I've read about the revamped Anfield, the absolute max capacity is 55,000, whereas Stanley Park would be at least 60,000. But it's also about having facilities fit for the present day. I'm a fairly big bugger who's not quite as athletic as he used to be and sitting in the Centenary and other parts of the ground is a pain, with knees jammed against the seat in front. My son is an even bigger bugger, 6 foot 4 and 15 stone, and he can't enjoy games the way he should, especially when you are constantly standing up and down to let people past.
If a shared ground can give me and him comfortable specs, that's fine by me. But sticking new bits on top and in the corners and leaving
the present  stands as they are will not be good enough. You will just be condemning people to suffer the existing poor facilities for the next 40, 50 years.

A redev will add the same amount as a new stadium, for a hell of a lot cheaper. Argument that a redev will allow more to be added a lot easier too given the AFL design they would use.

And to be honest neither will allow shit loads of room for a big bugger, this isn't a huge monstrosity like Emirates or Wembley we'd build. I would imagine both would be built at min allowed sizes.

Offline mark82

  • Anny Roader
  • ****
  • Posts: 472
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Ground share rears its ugly head again
« Reply #355 on: June 26, 2012, 01:49:27 am »
Their turnover to May 11 was only £82m, which breaks down into £53m from the TV deal, just under £18.5m from match day and just over £10.5m from commercial activity. Match day revenue was down 9% this year, which is the second year in a row (dropped 11% year before).

Wages in the year were £58m.

They have £47.6m debt, which is in the form of £9m over draft, £14m bank loans and £24.6m loan from Bear Stearns.

Haven't they mortgaged future season ticket sales for a good few years?

Edit: it gets worse!

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2011/sep/19/everton-broadcast-income-mortgage
« Last Edit: June 26, 2012, 01:52:23 am by mark82 »

Offline GeCk0

  • Main Stander
  • ***
  • Posts: 52
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Ground share rears its ugly head again
« Reply #356 on: June 26, 2012, 05:01:56 am »
There's no way even with LCC paying to help revamp the infrastructure around the new ground that groundshare would be viable. FSG are not stupid enough to do the equivalent of stabbing themselves repeatedly in the abdomen with a samurai sword laced with arsenic and then jam a shotgun in their own face. Because that is basically what the fan and PR backlash would be like.

Offline Kopite1971

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,347
Re: Ground share rears its ugly head again
« Reply #357 on: June 26, 2012, 12:40:31 pm »
I've been waiting and waiting for a season ticket and I've known for years the best chance is if we build a new stadium in the park with 60,000-plus seats. But everything that's come out of the club has stressed a new ground can only happen if the naming rights are sold. Well, that possibility was kicked in the head when the Suarez saga did so much damage to our image and reputation. No multinational was going to tie its colours to our mast with all that poison and bile swilling around the place.
Now, of course, the owners are inclining towards Plan B, the redevelopment of Anfield, which sounds like a piecemeal, higgledy-piggedly revamp of a stadium that's way past its sell-by date.
Let's be frank: I have experienced more stunning, ecstatic moments at Anfield than any other place on earth apart from the marital bedroom. But just like I had to move on when the bedroom (and the rest of our house) became unfit for purpose, too cramped and damp and cold and old-fashioned, so I am desperate to move into a brand-new stadium worthy of the 21st Century. And if that means sharing with my Blue mates, so be it. At least then I should be able to watch my beloved Reds.
If that doesn't suit one or two people on here, that's fine by me. Let's leave them to choke on their bitterness. They won't change my mind and they won't shut me up, no matter how many "fook hims" they spew out.

1) I doubt the Suarez incident will have as big a long term effect as you imply, but reality is neither of us will know until the next round of major sponsorship renewals occur such as when Standard Chartered are offered the opportunity to renew.  I actually think our on field performances and success will play a much bigger part in the decision making process as to how much money LFC raise from sponsorship including naming rights.

2) I agree with you that some parts of Anfield are delapidated, for example I sat in the Main Stand for the FA Cup game versus Stoke last season and was actually shocked at the state of parts of that stand behind the scenes, although the seat itself wasn'too bad and I say that as a 6' 5" tall guying weighing a bit more than your son!  However, other parts of the ground such as The Kop and Centenary Stand including it's facilities are actually pretty good and work well both on match days and for non match day uses such as exhibitions, conferences etc.

3) While a brand new 21st Century stand has some appeal, I personally like the look and feel of a building with some history, and therefore if Anfield can be redeveloped to a 60,000 capacity that would be the perfect solution for me. When i walk into The Kop each match day whether it be a warm August afternoon as the season kicks off or a cold November night in a Legue Cup game versus a minnow, it never fails to hit the spot.

4) I certainly don't consider it to be a bitter point of view to say that I don't want Liverpool to share with Everton.  On an emotional level I enjoy the experience of the 2 seperate grounds watching LFC scoring in there back yard and all that goes with that.  But financially, the only benefit would be EFC stumping up half the building and ongoing maintenance costs, but this is equalled by the losses LFC would suffer by not being able to take full advantage of the commercial advantages of renting out conference rooms etc as all that would be shared with EFC too.  Anfield is iconic, it is Liverpool FC, and while I wouldn't object to LFC moving if theres a good financial argument that helps LFC move on, sharing with EFC to me is not and never will be a starter, except perhaps for a few people like yourself, who will be able to gain a season ticket easily, mainly because season ticket holders like me would give up as LFC sells the final remains of its soul down the river.
Proud to be "An Internet Terrorist"

SOS# 1159

Offline Peter McGurk

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,822
Re: Ground share rears its ugly head again
« Reply #358 on: June 26, 2012, 02:56:08 pm »
1) I doubt the Suarez incident will have as big a long term effect as you imply, but reality is neither of us will know until the next round of major sponsorship renewals occur such as when Standard Chartered are offered the opportunity to renew.  I actually think our on field performances and success will play a much bigger part in the decision making process as to how much money LFC raise from sponsorship including naming rights.

2) I agree with you that some parts of Anfield are delapidated, for example I sat in the Main Stand for the FA Cup game versus Stoke last season and was actually shocked at the state of parts of that stand behind the scenes, although the seat itself wasn'too bad and I say that as a 6' 5" tall guying weighing a bit more than your son!  However, other parts of the ground such as The Kop and Centenary Stand including it's facilities are actually pretty good and work well both on match days and for non match day uses such as exhibitions, conferences etc.

3) While a brand new 21st Century stand has some appeal, I personally like the look and feel of a building with some history, and therefore if Anfield can be redeveloped to a 60,000 capacity that would be the perfect solution for me. When i walk into The Kop each match day whether it be a warm August afternoon as the season kicks off or a cold November night in a Legue Cup game versus a minnow, it never fails to hit the spot.

4) I certainly don't consider it to be a bitter point of view to say that I don't want Liverpool to share with Everton.  On an emotional level I enjoy the experience of the 2 seperate grounds watching LFC scoring in there back yard and all that goes with that.  But financially, the only benefit would be EFC stumping up half the building and ongoing maintenance costs, but this is equalled by the losses LFC would suffer by not being able to take full advantage of the commercial advantages of renting out conference rooms etc as all that would be shared with EFC too.  Anfield is iconic, it is Liverpool FC, and while I wouldn't object to LFC moving if theres a good financial argument that helps LFC move on, sharing with EFC to me is not and never will be a starter, except perhaps for a few people like yourself, who will be able to gain a season ticket easily, mainly because season ticket holders like me would give up as LFC sells the final remains of its soul down the river.

I’m always going to agree with you on 2) and 3). At the end of the day Anfield will be superb on every level.

I would consider 1) and 4) together. What on earth would we be trying to sell from a shared stadium? This is xxx the home of the great LFC and everything that you all love so much. See how much it is like us, the similarly great yyy, the suppliers of widgets and wodgets to people just like you. No wait. It’s EFC too... well it’s a bit of both really. You see we thought that if you like this, well.... it’s confused, lacks identity. A brand and sponsorship nightmare.

.

Offline Paul Gardner

  • Terrace Artist
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,980
  • SOS Secretary
    • Spirit of Shankly
Re: Ground share rears its ugly head again
« Reply #359 on: June 26, 2012, 06:48:31 pm »
A note of warning, since FSG dismissed the 'option' there has been two major changes...FSG have declared their hand of 'potential' redevelopment over new ground...with a caveat ' unless public money was invloved' for a new stadium...and far more crucially LCC...Joe Anderson has far more power as Mayor than people generally realise...and crucially he will have millions of pounds at his disposal for 'infrastructure projects'...and think a very real possibilityy is he dangle the carrot of LCC providing all the infrastructure if LFC/EFC agree to build a joint stadium , nothwithstanding all the negative implications of such a venture ( and lets face it it would kill us , and reinvent the Blues) do not dismiss it. If we havent commenced a real project to rebuild Anfield within 18 months ( planning, contracts etc) I think this is a very real posibility.

Joe Anderson is an Everton season ticket holder.

Joe Anderson has publicly backed The Football Quarter concept driven by KEIOC and Spirit of Shankly which is not about a groundshare.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/local-government-network/2012/jan/26/regeneration-practice-liverpool-football-quarter

Quote
Regeneration in practice: Liverpool to create football quarter
Council leader explains his goals for the supporter-led sports regeneration scheme, as he tackles the challenges head-on

Joe Anderson

The idea of a football quarter – using the home of a revered sports club to spearhead regeneration in the area around its stadium – is not new. What is unique about our proposals for Liverpool's own quarter is that they are designed to regenerate an area that boasts not one international stadium, but two. It has the potential to spark more local change than ever before.

The credit for this plan must go to the fans themselves, whose determination and drive has brought the project this far. Under the collective All Together Now, supporters groups from each side of that famous Liverpudlian footballing divide have put aside their rivalries to push for progress that can't wait – both in terms of the futures of their clubs, and what those clubs can do for the community in which they are based.

Despite the world famous teams on the doorstep, the Anfield area has extremely high levels of deprivation, with nearly 90% of residents living in the most deprived 10% of neighbourhoods in the country.

Unemployment, a lack of available housing, and the sudden stalling of the government pathfinder regeneration scheme all blight the area. The changes a football quarter could make to the community, in terms of investment and regeneration, could transform the area past all recognition. The question of making the Anfield and Goodison stadia fit for purpose in the 21st century poses a problem yet to be solved.

When All Together Now (comprised of members of the Keeping Everton in Our City and Spirit of Shankly supporters' groups) asked for council support for a football quarter project, it was a huge opportunity to get behind. There's no doubt it could provide an economic boost to the city in an area that needs it most, create new jobs, become a tourist attraction and provide daily facilities for local residents.

All Together Now has put together a prospectus that puts forward a range of ideas for how the football quarter will take shape. These include: modernising the stadia; improving transport links; bringing in educational facilities; opening a football museum; creating public event area; community sporting facilities and encouraging commercial opportunities such as hotels, bars and restaurants.

This isn't something that will happen overnight. Raising finances in a recession is no easy task, but the benefits for Liverpool are potentially huge. We are an ambitious city. We have some massive regeneration projects in the pipeline, and the football quarter could be yet another part of the Liverpool of tomorrow.

The parties involved, from the football clubs to the council have never had a better relationship. It is one based on trust and understanding. If we harness this goodwill and find the investment needed to make this massive project a reality, we hope could inspire similar regeneration projects across the country.

Joe Anderson is leader of Liverpool city council