Author Topic: Bascombe Story - let's wait for confirmation before discussing it ok?  (Read 150363 times)

Offline AKABillyGee

  • AKA Le Pétomane... hasn't read the rules
  • Main Stander
  • ***
  • Posts: 204
  • Being suspicious served me well
Re: Bascombe Story - let's wait for confirmation before discussing it ok?
« Reply #560 on: February 9, 2012, 11:07:08 am »
Look at today's European Football Income League figures released by Deloittes (LFC in 9th place) and you will see why a new stadium is vital to LFC's long term success (and survival) even now Tottenham generate £8m a year more match day revenue with Chelsea beating us by a massive £26.5m, both with smaller capacities. Old Trafford and the Emirates are of course out of sight.

Low Anfield capacity combined with low income per seat and poor commercial returns mean that matchday income at just over £40m per annum constitutes only 22% of total turnover. A 60k new stadium with appropriate commercial and premium facilities could generate season long matchday revenue in excess of £66m a year compared to a refurbished Anfield with a 55k capacity cap bringing in an estimated additional revenue of £10m.

Offline Peter McGurk

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,822
Re: Bascombe Story - let's wait for confirmation before discussing it ok?
« Reply #561 on: February 9, 2012, 11:14:38 am »
Look at today's European Football Income League figures released by Deloittes (LFC in 9th place) and you will see why a new stadium is vital to LFC's long term success (and survival) even now Tottenham generate £8m a year more match day revenue with Chelsea beating us by a massive £26.5m, both with smaller capacities. Old Trafford and the Emirates are of course out of sight.

Low Anfield capacity combined with low income per seat and poor commercial returns mean that matchday income at just over £40m per annum constitutes only 22% of total turnover. A 60k new stadium with appropriate commercial and premium facilities could generate season long matchday revenue in excess of £66m a year compared to a refurbished Anfield with a 55k capacity cap bringing in an estimated additional revenue of £10m.

There is no 55k capacity cap. The potential revenue from a new stadium and a redevelopment 'are (roughly) the same' - Ian Ayre.

Our money league position is under threat from Spurs and Man City, one with a 'similar' matchday revenue (Spurs £48m from a lower, 36k capacity ie., higher prices) and one with a lower matchday revenue (City, £30m from 48k capacity) - but who are both in the CL. That and affordability are the difference.

Angels. Devils. Detail.

« Last Edit: February 9, 2012, 07:18:00 pm by Peter McGurk »

Offline ultimatewarrior

  • Main Stander
  • ***
  • Posts: 238
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Bascombe Story - let's wait for confirmation before discussing it ok?
« Reply #562 on: February 10, 2012, 01:28:12 am »
Very late night post from me but just to point out that both Spurs an Chelsea ARE both behind us in terms of support as are City. Whilst every moment i think about it, LFC can and would out number the afore mentioned, we as supporters can not give in to mediocrity and should always remember that every head can count. The club are anouncing new sponsorship partners every other week and i think that we should remember just how strong LFC is as a brand and also as big club with millions of followers.

Please dont tell me that most of uniteds fans are within a 10 mile radius.

Offline Peter McGurk

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,822
Re: Bascombe Story - let's wait for confirmation before discussing it ok?
« Reply #563 on: February 10, 2012, 10:40:22 am »
Very late night post from me but just to point out that both Spurs an Chelsea ARE both behind us in terms of support as are City. Whilst every moment i think about it, LFC can and would out number the afore mentioned, we as supporters can not give in to mediocrity and should always remember that every head can count. The club are anouncing new sponsorship partners every other week and i think that we should remember just how strong LFC is as a brand and also as big club with millions of followers.

Please dont tell me that most of uniteds fans are within a 10 mile radius.

A new stadium is second best financially. I don't want anyone to settle for second best. We are not a second best club.

Millions around the world boosts commercial income and sponsorships. It doesn't materially affect attendance (what? two a game? ten? a party of 20?)

Personally, I can't tell you where most United fans live or how many of them go to the match. I don't have their names and addresses. I can tell you that their is strong evidence and research that indicates that attendance is related to population within a 10-mile radius. Query the research if you like. Call up the guy if you must but don't pull 'facts' out of your backside.




« Last Edit: February 10, 2012, 10:49:59 am by Peter McGurk »

Offline west_london_red

  • Knows his stuff - pull the udder one! RAWK's Dairy Queen.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 22,197
  • watching me? but whose watching you watching me?
Re: Bascombe Story - let's wait for confirmation before discussing it ok?
« Reply #564 on: February 10, 2012, 10:52:08 am »
A new stadium is second best financially. I don't want anyone to settle for second best. We are not a second best club.

Millions around the world boosts commercial income and sponsorships. It doesn't materially affect attendance (what? two a game? ten? a party of 20?)

Personally, I can't tell you where most United fans live. I don't have their names and addresses. I can tell you that their is strong evidence and research that indicates that attendance is related to population within a 10-mile radius. Query the research if you like. Call up the guy if you must but don't pull 'facts' out of your backside.


Second best might well be better then do nothing (yes I know all about Shanks's quote about 'first is first if you are second you are nothing'!!!)

As pointed out previously, that 10 mile radius is an average, its not specific to us, and also does it include PL clubs or all league clubs?
« Last Edit: February 10, 2012, 10:53:52 am by west_london_red »
Thinking is overrated.
The mind is a tool, it's not meant to be used that much.
Rest, love, observe. Laugh.

Offline AKABillyGee

  • AKA Le Pétomane... hasn't read the rules
  • Main Stander
  • ***
  • Posts: 204
  • Being suspicious served me well
Re: Bascombe Story - let's wait for confirmation before discussing it ok?
« Reply #565 on: February 10, 2012, 11:06:45 am »
There is no 55k capacity cap. The potential revenue from a new stadium and a redevelopment 'are (roughly) the same' - Ian Ayre.

Our money league position is under threat from Spurs and Man City, one with a 'similar' matchday revenue (Spurs £48m from a lower, 36k capacity ie., higher prices) and one with a lower matchday revenue (City, £30m from 48k capacity) - but who are both in the CL. That and affordability are the difference.

Angels. Devils. Detail.



There is a capacity cap. This has been pointed out to you before, it was reported by Rick Parry when the original design for a new stadium only had a capacity of 55,000.

Offline Peter McGurk

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,822
Re: Bascombe Story - let's wait for confirmation before discussing it ok?
« Reply #566 on: February 10, 2012, 11:32:48 am »
There is a capacity cap. This has been pointed out to you before, it was reported by Rick Parry when the original design for a new stadium only had a capacity of 55,000.

Right. Rick Parry. ok.

Planning policy can only tell you what is 'acceptable'. If you make an application that is 'unacceptable', you can make it 'acceptable' by fixing whatever it is that 'breaks the rules'.

For example, if a 60,000 seat stadium produces more traffic than the local parking and public transport can handle, this is 'unacceptable' and would be refused. If you provide more parking and more buses, that can make it 'acceptable' and would be allowed.

The existing planning permission is 'capped' at 60k. if you want to make it any more than that - you can't, unless you provide more public transport and parking (and whatever else). And then you can.

That's how the planning system works. Don't like it? Write to your MP.

There may well have been an indication that the local roads etc can handle 55k only. But the consent for 60k provides additional parking and buses and was thus acceptable. The test is a planning application. None has been made for a redeveloped Anfield. There is no capacity cap.

« Last Edit: February 10, 2012, 11:49:37 am by Peter McGurk »

Offline mark82

  • Anny Roader
  • ****
  • Posts: 472
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Bascombe Story - let's wait for confirmation before discussing it ok?
« Reply #567 on: February 10, 2012, 05:08:13 pm »
There is a capacity cap. This has been pointed out to you before, it was reported by Rick Parry when the original design for a new stadium only had a capacity of 55,000.

I think that was just the capacity they worked out they could get to at that stage, so not needing to buy houses etc, likely just filling the corners and maybe other not full blown redevelopment.

Offline LiamG

  • He's loving angels instead. Cos through it all they offer him protection.
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 12,176
  • Y.N.W.A
Re: Bascombe Story - let's wait for confirmation before discussing it ok?
« Reply #568 on: February 10, 2012, 09:08:59 pm »
A new stadium is second best financially. I don't want anyone to settle for second best. We are not a second best club.

Millions around the world boosts commercial income and sponsorships. It doesn't materially affect attendance (what? two a game? ten? a party of 20?)

Personally, I can't tell you where most United fans live or how many of them go to the match. I don't have their names and addresses. I can tell you that their is strong evidence and research that indicates that attendance is related to population within a 10-mile radius. Query the research if you like. Call up the guy if you must but don't pull 'facts' out of your backside.






dunno yaknow, London Euston is quite bust when united are at home lol

Offline AKABillyGee

  • AKA Le Pétomane... hasn't read the rules
  • Main Stander
  • ***
  • Posts: 204
  • Being suspicious served me well
Re: Bascombe Story - let's wait for confirmation before discussing it ok?
« Reply #569 on: February 11, 2012, 09:37:29 am »
I think that was just the capacity they worked out they could get to at that stage, so not needing to buy houses etc, likely just filling the corners and maybe other not full blown redevelopment.

When the original 'new stadium' design was promoted by LFC and Rick Parry on behalf of the board, the capacity was 55,000. When questioned why it was so low RP stated that they had matched the maximum capacity they could achieve at a refurbished Anfield. A cap that had been agreed in consultation with LCC based not on availability of land purchase. This is well recorded and documented (including the official LFC site) and the source has been quoted here some time ago. This of course does not fit the agenda of others here so it is dismissed and ridiculed, however, that does not change the facts. The 55,000 capacity cap for a refurbished Anfield was agreed between LCC and LFC and no flights of fancy can alter that fact.

The joint agreement could be reviewed however at this stage that has not happened therefore the original decision holds.

Offline CraigDS

  • Lite. Smelt it and dealt it. Worrawhopper.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 61,519
  • YNWA
Re: Bascombe Story - let's wait for confirmation before discussing it ok?
« Reply #570 on: February 11, 2012, 10:16:44 am »
If they allowed 60k a few feet away then not sure why they would impose a limit of 55k for a refurb.

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: 94,972
  • Dejan Lovren fan club member #1
Re: Bascombe Story - let's wait for confirmation before discussing it ok?
« Reply #571 on: February 11, 2012, 10:23:41 am »
If they allowed 60k a few feet away then not sure why they would impose a limit of 55k for a refurb.
There is no sensible argument why not.

55k 60k?

The argument is somewhat pointless
“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 CraigDS

  • Lite. Smelt it and dealt it. Worrawhopper.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 61,519
  • YNWA
Re: Bascombe Story - let's wait for confirmation before discussing it ok?
« Reply #572 on: February 11, 2012, 10:26:23 am »
Plus a lot has changed since way back when that was all looked at (refurb/original new stadium design) so EVEN if they imposed it back then its highly unlikely that things would be the same now.

Offline Peter McGurk

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,822
Re: Bascombe Story - let's wait for confirmation before discussing it ok?
« Reply #573 on: February 11, 2012, 10:26:56 am »
When the original 'new stadium' design was promoted by LFC and Rick Parry on behalf of the board, the capacity was 55,000. When questioned why it was so low RP stated that they had matched the maximum capacity they could achieve at a refurbished Anfield. A cap that had been agreed in consultation with LCC based not on availability of land purchase. This is well recorded and documented (including the official LFC site) and the source has been quoted here some time ago. This of course does not fit the agenda of others here so it is dismissed and ridiculed, however, that does not change the facts. The 55,000 capacity cap for a refurbished Anfield was agreed between LCC and LFC and no flights of fancy can alter that fact.

The joint agreement could be reviewed however at this stage that has not happened therefore the original decision holds.

There's no agenda here and no flights of fancy. If you don't understand the process, don't knock it. And this is not about proving anybody 'wrong'.

If a 'cap' is based on the 'availability of land purchase', what would happen if the that availability of land purchase changes? How do you know that any agreement or informal guidance (there are no formal design guidelines or policy for the site) has not been reviewed informally or formally? One thing you do know is that no application has been made, which is as I said the ultimate test. Guidance, agreements, chats, meetings do not constitute a formal approach to the planning acts via an application (with all the environmental impact statements and actions taken to make them better)

Anybody who wants to find limits to what can be done can find them if they try hard enough but you can trust this... if the club says it can get as much revenue from a redevelopment as a 60k new stadium, do you think that's with a 55k capacity?



If they allowed 60k a few feet away then not sure why they would impose a limit of 55k for a refurb.

Quite so. Much of the impact of a 60k stadium would be the same - at a new stadium or at Anfield.



« Last Edit: February 11, 2012, 10:30:36 am by Peter McGurk »

Offline ultimatewarrior

  • Main Stander
  • ***
  • Posts: 238
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Bascombe Story - let's wait for confirmation before discussing it ok?
« Reply #574 on: February 11, 2012, 11:44:51 am »
A new stadium is second best financially. I don't want anyone to settle for second best. We are not a second best club.

Millions around the world boosts commercial income and sponsorships. It doesn't materially affect attendance (what? two a game? ten? a party of 20?)

Personally, I can't tell you where most United fans live or how many of them go to the match. I don't have their names and addresses. I can tell you that their is strong evidence and research that indicates that attendance is related to population within a 10-mile radius. Query the research if you like. Call up the guy if you must but don't pull 'facts' out of your backside.
Peter, I know it would be cheaper to redevelope Anfield.  Its also cheaper to buy used cars but some people decide that a new car is more suitable.

2, 10, 20. If they are your educated guesses as to how many fans from over seas attend our games then I worry for your sanity.

What facts are you refering to?

Offline mark82

  • Anny Roader
  • ****
  • Posts: 472
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Bascombe Story - let's wait for confirmation before discussing it ok?
« Reply #575 on: February 11, 2012, 11:54:39 am »
There's no agenda here and no flights of fancy. If you don't understand the process, don't knock it. And this is not about proving anybody 'wrong'.

If a 'cap' is based on the 'availability of land purchase', what would happen if the that availability of land purchase changes? How do you know that any agreement or informal guidance (there are no formal design guidelines or policy for the site) has not been reviewed informally or formally? One thing you do know is that no application has been made, which is as I said the ultimate test. Guidance, agreements, chats, meetings do not constitute a formal approach to the planning acts via an application (with all the environmental impact statements and actions taken to make them better)

Anybody who wants to find limits to what can be done can find them if they try hard enough but you can trust this... if the club says it can get as much revenue from a redevelopment as a 60k new stadium, do you think that's with a 55k capacity?



Quite so. Much of the impact of a 60k stadium would be the same - at a new stadium or at Anfield.

Where did the club say this? I know they said a new stadium wouldn't make sense for only 15k extra seats but no mention of redevelopment?

Offline Peter McGurk

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,822
Re: Bascombe Story - let's wait for confirmation before discussing it ok?
« Reply #576 on: February 11, 2012, 04:27:31 pm »
Peter, I know it would be cheaper to redevelope Anfield.  Its also cheaper to buy used cars but some people decide that a new car is more suitable.

2, 10, 20. If they are your educated guesses as to how many fans from over seas attend our games then I worry for your sanity.

What facts are you refering to?

You implied that it is nonsense to tell you that most United fans come from within 10 miles as a matter of fact.

You're barmy if you think I'm talking about fans from Norway and Ireland. I'm talking about the 'millions' in the Far East only very few of whom get to the game. Do keep up FFS.

I'd like a Bentley but it won't get the bricks to site.


Where did the club say this? I know they said a new stadium wouldn't make sense for only 15k extra seats but no mention of redevelopment?

Ian Ayre said it last year in an interview which appeared on the LFC site (if you remember, a few days after JWH said the fans were 'due an update').

The club didn't say a new stadium was only worth doing if you could build more. They actually said it wasn't worth paying £300m for only 15,000 seats extra . The distinction is important.

« Last Edit: February 11, 2012, 04:32:54 pm by Peter McGurk »

Online exiledintheUSA

  • Not to be confused with Darren from Thetford. Or Phil Dowd.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 27,419
  • Justice HAS come. YNWA 97
Re: Bascombe Story - let's wait for confirmation before discussing it ok?
« Reply #577 on: February 13, 2012, 10:23:10 pm »
FSG in town later this week - wonder if we will get that 'update'.
Been all over the world but Anfield is still my home.

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: 94,972
  • Dejan Lovren fan club member #1
Re: Bascombe Story - let's wait for confirmation before discussing it ok?
« Reply #578 on: February 13, 2012, 10:26:35 pm »
FSG in town later this week - wonder if we will get that 'update'.
I think that they may have other reasons to be over..
“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

Online exiledintheUSA

  • Not to be confused with Darren from Thetford. Or Phil Dowd.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 27,419
  • Justice HAS come. YNWA 97
Re: Bascombe Story - let's wait for confirmation before discussing it ok?
« Reply #579 on: February 13, 2012, 10:40:22 pm »
I think that they may have other reasons to be over..

I was taking the 'good day to bury bad news' stance......
Been all over the world but Anfield is still my home.

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: 94,972
  • Dejan Lovren fan club member #1
Re: Bascombe Story - let's wait for confirmation before discussing it ok?
« Reply #580 on: February 13, 2012, 10:45:54 pm »
I was taking the 'good day to bury bad news' stance......
Bad news?

I don't know what would constitute bad news.....

The bad news would be that there is nothing new, we're leaving anfield as it is.... I just can't see that happening.
“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

Online exiledintheUSA

  • Not to be confused with Darren from Thetford. Or Phil Dowd.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 27,419
  • Justice HAS come. YNWA 97
Re: Bascombe Story - let's wait for confirmation before discussing it ok?
« Reply #581 on: February 13, 2012, 11:07:24 pm »
Bad news?

I don't know what would constitute bad news.....

The bad news would be that there is nothing new, we're leaving anfield as it is.... I just can't see that happening.

Think you may have grasped the wrong end of the stick fella, 'burying the bad news' meaninig we come out all guns blazing with some positive news i.e. stadium or stadium redevelopment and leave this past weekends mess deep in the past.
Been all over the world but Anfield is still my home.

Offline Peter McGurk

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,822
Re: Bascombe Story - let's wait for confirmation before discussing it ok?
« Reply #582 on: February 13, 2012, 11:36:11 pm »
FSG in town later this week - wonder if we will get that 'update'.

We had the 'update' last year.

I don't particularly want to be a smart arse just now but I've mentioned the difficulties of sponsorship before. There's already a few here saying that SC will be picking the team next (for £20m a year). You could imagine what say anyone would have if they 'owned' half the stadium... or rather paid annual instalments for the privilege.

Anyways, I can't see any big news on sponsorship at the moment. Can you?
« Last Edit: February 14, 2012, 10:56:23 am by Peter McGurk »

Online exiledintheUSA

  • Not to be confused with Darren from Thetford. Or Phil Dowd.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 27,419
  • Justice HAS come. YNWA 97
Re: Bascombe Story - let's wait for confirmation before discussing it ok?
« Reply #583 on: February 13, 2012, 11:41:34 pm »

Anyways, I can't see any big news on sponsorship at the moment. Can you?

No but the club is as tight as a ducks arse at the moment, nobody really saw FSG coming out of the pack to buy us - everybody followed The Times and waited for Kenny Huang to buy us on China's behalf and no one saw thw Warrior kit deal coming either..........you never know.......hopefully FSG will come over with something positive, anything, just to spin the club back in the right direction.  Hearts and Minds.
Been all over the world but Anfield is still my home.

Offline Peter McGurk

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,822
Re: Bascombe Story - let's wait for confirmation before discussing it ok?
« Reply #584 on: February 13, 2012, 11:54:58 pm »
No but the club is as tight as a ducks arse at the moment, nobody really saw FSG coming out of the pack to buy us - everybody followed The Times and waited for Kenny Huang to buy us on China's behalf and no one saw thw Warrior kit deal coming either..........you never know.......hopefully FSG will come over with something positive, anything, just to spin the club back in the right direction.  Hearts and Minds.

It would be quite a coup. The battle for hearts and minds is not looking too good for them just now.


Offline The Lord Admiral

  • Anny Roader
  • ****
  • Posts: 351
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Bascombe Story - let's wait for confirmation before discussing it ok?
« Reply #585 on: February 14, 2012, 10:01:11 am »
Peter out of interest what would it take to get an Anfield rennovation going now in terms of ticking all the administrative boxes and what would be the time lines?

Presemably planning permission 8-12 weeks.

Is there anything else that couldn't have been lined up before hand, building regs drawings/transport data, infrastructure etc could all be done and ready to go couldn't it?


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: 94,972
  • Dejan Lovren fan club member #1
Re: Bascombe Story - let's wait for confirmation before discussing it ok?
« Reply #586 on: February 14, 2012, 10:37:34 am »
Think you may have grasped the wrong end of the stick fella, 'burying the bad news' meaninig we come out all guns blazing with some positive news i.e. stadium or stadium redevelopment and leave this past weekends mess deep in the past.
Sorry, see what you meant now... I thought you meant burying bad news about the stadium in the handshake fiasco.
“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 Peter McGurk

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,822
Re: Bascombe Story - let's wait for confirmation before discussing it ok?
« Reply #587 on: February 14, 2012, 10:49:56 am »
Peter out of interest what would it take to get an Anfield rennovation going now in terms of ticking all the administrative boxes and what would be the time lines?

Presemably planning permission 8-12 weeks.

Is there anything else that couldn't have been lined up before hand, building regs drawings/transport data, infrastructure etc could all be done and ready to go couldn't it?

Replacing seats (with bigger ones/more legroom), putting in boxes, maybe even more hospitality suites, bars and the like could start on a 48 hour notice to building control under certain circumstances. But to to be honest, not many contractors/consultants would take on a 48-hour notice with such a high profile project.

The club could prepare and submit a building regs submission at least in part, to get the ball rolling but at their own cost and risk. It's not a public process but it would leak like a sieve. There's a lot of people and council departments involved.

As for planning, 8-12weeks is pretty optimistic and for council to offer any meaningful advice they would need to go to public consultation. I believe this was done before (I was overseas) when the two options were considered. However, new story no doubt new process. Certainly all the prep work can be done and I'm sure drafts will have been done to consider the issues and options again now.

I'm sure that council and club have talked about little else other than land acquisition in all the meetings they've had. It's the issue. Without the land you can't make the application. Given the ground already covered, you could say the rest really is ticking (time-consuming) boxes, maybe.

***

In short, you could start almost immediately (like they did with the Centenary box changes) but at the very significant risk of not being able to finish where you want to.

« Last Edit: February 14, 2012, 12:23:19 pm by Peter McGurk »

Offline The Lord Admiral

  • Anny Roader
  • ****
  • Posts: 351
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Bascombe Story - let's wait for confirmation before discussing it ok?
« Reply #588 on: February 14, 2012, 11:06:47 am »
Interesting, thanks.

So the only thing really standing in the way is those 8 houses on Lothair road and a planning process/public consultation. Is that correct?

Could the club already have a planning application ready to go that had been discussed in detail with the council and only required a rubber stamp from their side, bar the public consultation/usual time frames? Or would that be subject tot the same leaks?

Or do you think we're still a long way off that?


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: 94,972
  • Dejan Lovren fan club member #1
Re: Bascombe Story - let's wait for confirmation before discussing it ok?
« Reply #589 on: February 14, 2012, 11:09:32 am »
I would imagine that there would be no point I applying for planning permission unles you already had an informal agreement with the council/planning dept.

That doesn't mean it will happen though.
“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 Peter McGurk

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,822
Re: Bascombe Story - let's wait for confirmation before discussing it ok?
« Reply #590 on: February 14, 2012, 11:53:40 am »
Interesting, thanks.

So the only thing really standing in the way is those 8 houses on Lothair road and a planning process/public consultation. Is that correct?

Could the club already have a planning application ready to go that had been discussed in detail with the council and only required a rubber stamp from their side, bar the public consultation/usual time frames? Or would that be subject tot the same leaks?

Or do you think we're still a long way off that?

You could say that about the 8 houses but would that life were so simple... the club may be looking at a design to demolish and rebuild rather than just extend - that's going to take up more than Lothair Road. The council route to ownership is also complicated by housing allowances and government.

Sure, you could have a full and detail submission in the 'can'. It's entirely normal to get pre-planning advice from senior planning/council officers (generally leak-free). This is still informal in the sense that it is subject to the formal application process.

So, no rubber stamps but to speed things up a little more, council may accept an outline application but the big issues would probably still have to be included - so all still pretty heavy stuff (even though similar to ground already covered).


« Last Edit: February 14, 2012, 06:52:55 pm by Peter McGurk »

Offline ashleyrose-66

  • RAWK Scribe
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 4,889
  • Back on our perch!
Re: Bascombe Story - let's wait for confirmation before discussing it ok?
« Reply #591 on: February 14, 2012, 04:54:01 pm »
I've been reading this thread with interest, and have a question that maybe Peter or someone else can help me out with.

I do obviously understand when Ian Ayre states an investment of around £300m for a new-build for just 14,000 extra seats makes little financial sense, and that they are obviously looking towards naming rights partners.

Let's assume (and I am not an expert and will just throw out a ball-park figure here) Standard Chartered (or any other company who LFC agree terms with) agree a deal with Liverpool for a £100m naming rights deal over 10 years.

What is to stop the club re-selling naming rights to the stadium in 10 years time, when the existing deal has run it's course?
Have another tendering process and offer the naming rights to the best fit for the club and secure another 10 years for say £100m (or possibly more) whether that be Standard Chartered again or someone else?

I know it's thinking very long-term, but in terms of maximising the potential revenue on a new stadium, surely we can sell naming rights over and over again, which in the long term further reduces the cost of FSG (or whoever owns us by that stage) actually funding the stadium.

Realistically, if the stadium debt was cleared in 10 years time, a new naming rights deal could add, say, £10m per year to the balance sheet.

As I say, I probably haven't thought it through and haven't articulated very well here, but I'd be interested to hear people's views about off-setting the cost of the stadium by re-selling naming rights after the initial 10 years (or whatever is agreed.)

Offline CraigDS

  • Lite. Smelt it and dealt it. Worrawhopper.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 61,519
  • YNWA
Re: Bascombe Story - let's wait for confirmation before discussing it ok?
« Reply #592 on: February 14, 2012, 04:57:22 pm »
It's possible, and very probable that any club that has sold the naming rights once could do so once that deal ends.

However it's been pointed out that selling naming rights to previously named stadiums brings in less than a new stadium for various reasons.

Offline Peter McGurk

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,822
Re: Bascombe Story - let's wait for confirmation before discussing it ok?
« Reply #593 on: February 14, 2012, 05:28:51 pm »
I've been reading this thread with interest, and have a question that maybe Peter or someone else can help me out with...

There is nothing to stop the club selling them again and again and again and again (although their value will diminished over time).

The real issues are that whatever they might be sold for would not be enough to match the reduced cost of a redevelopment and, that the income is annual. It doesn’t come in a lump sum.

So yes, it’s great to have the extra income after 10 - 15 years but you’ll still have to wait that 10 - 15 years to pay off the stadium.

« Last Edit: February 14, 2012, 05:31:23 pm by Peter McGurk »

Offline ashleyrose-66

  • RAWK Scribe
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 4,889
  • Back on our perch!
Re: Bascombe Story - let's wait for confirmation before discussing it ok?
« Reply #594 on: February 14, 2012, 05:58:32 pm »
There is nothing to stop the club selling them again and again and again and again (although their value will diminished over time).

The real issues are that whatever they might be sold for would not be enough to match the reduced cost of a redevelopment and, that the income is annual. It doesn’t come in a lump sum.

So yes, it’s great to have the extra income after 10 - 15 years but you’ll still have to wait that 10 - 15 years to pay off the stadium.



Thanks for clearing that up. I wasn't thinking about naming rights solely paying off the cost of building the stadium. 

But I was thinking of longer term budgeting, and knowing that when the stadium is built, and fully paid off in say 10-15 years time (via a combination of naming rights, increased revenue and borrowed money!) that you could possibly gain an additional £7, £8, £9, £10m per year (as an example) from re-selling naming rights.  That additional money (despite being a long way down the track) would eventually off-set some of the money you borrowed in the first place!

Offline Peter McGurk

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,822
Re: Bascombe Story - let's wait for confirmation before discussing it ok?
« Reply #595 on: February 14, 2012, 06:44:32 pm »
Thanks for clearing that up. I wasn't thinking about naming rights solely paying off the cost of building the stadium. 

But I was thinking of longer term budgeting, and knowing that when the stadium is built, and fully paid off in say 10-15 years time (via a combination of naming rights, increased revenue and borrowed money!) that you could possibly gain an additional £7, £8, £9, £10m per year (as an example) from re-selling naming rights.  That additional money (despite being a long way down the track) would eventually off-set some of the money you borrowed in the first place!

No mate - jam tomorrow doesn't pay for bread today - or some such...


Offline aerorossi29

  • Anny Roader
  • ****
  • Posts: 385
Re: Bascombe Story - let's wait for confirmation before discussing it ok?
« Reply #596 on: February 15, 2012, 12:24:32 am »
I am not a money man or have no clue about stadium design or cost or such. I just want to say that as a lifelong fan i would love it if in my lifetime if the club had a state of the art stadium befitting of all our traditions. Ideally that would be staying at Anfield, but as we all know, it is hardly modern and is not the kind of stadium any longer that in my view will attract any new fans to it. The concourses are cramped, the facilities are adequate at best and for those who have been on the tour, or have seen around the ground, it is clear that a lot of money is needed to bring it up to scratch.

I was originally one of the "cant leave Anfield at any cost" brigade, but my mind has been changed due to how far we seem to be falling behind the top 4 or 5 teams now, both on and off the field. There is a lot to be said that get things right off the field and the onfield stuff will come with it, i used to look at it the other way round. There is a real nagging concern though, that should we start to perform on the pitch are we ready to maximise that potential off it. I believe in terms of getting people into the ground and learning about the club, it is a resounding no. There is argument that we could have a bigger stadium as we stand now, with relative little success at the club compared to our pomp.

If Anfield as a whole can be completely updated and modernised, and the capacity raised to whatever the threshold is, 55k or 60k then of course the majority would go for that. However, IF the current ground is going to cost a lot of money and hassle to update then maybe it is worth spending 300 mill on a brand new ground that will stand us in good stead for decades to come.  Again, i am not clued up with the costing of these things, but with a naming rights partner and other sponsorship funding the bulk of any potential new stadium, would it therefore not be prudent, and more practical to build new? What would be the ongoing impact and cost of updating Main Stand and Anfield Road, as well as adding the necessary corporate boxes, seats?

I would class myself as a "traditional" fan, i would love to stay at Anfield but the more time moves on, more and more emphasis is placed on football stadiums being more than just for football. People want to use it for other events, concerts etc and other sporting occasions. Anfield is currently falling way behind in that, as well as being quite a fair way down on matchday revenue. The Bootroom cafe and one or two other things are a sign of what i think we can expect, what we need, but in a new ground that will attract visitors for other reasons than football.

I appreciate it is not as black and white as i make it,  but,  for me, if the correct people can be brought on board to partly finance it then a new stadium would be my choice, purely to help us catch up off the field and to allow the next generation of young reds to watch football in a decent environment.
« Last Edit: February 15, 2012, 12:27:59 am by aerorossi29 »

Offline Peter McGurk

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,822
Re: Bascombe Story - let's wait for confirmation before discussing it ok?
« Reply #597 on: February 15, 2012, 10:16:36 am »
I appreciate it is not as black and white as i make it,  but,  for me, if the correct people can be brought on board to partly finance it then a new stadium would be my choice, purely to help us catch up off the field and to allow the next generation of young reds to watch football in a decent environment.

This seems no reason to prefer one over the other to me.

The costs of a redevelopment, including all that hard work to the concourses and facilities, the removal of the problem views and cramped seats, is half that of a new stadium. The income would be the same as a new stadium but the profit or surplus for the team would be that much greater. Only truly massive naming rights can change that equation and we would then be beholden to our sponsors.

The capacity would be the same too, albeit with scope for slightly lower ticket prices. Something the next generation would welcome for sure.

And the pitch at Anfield can be used for other events. A new stadium pitch cannot (planning conditions)

And no one will be attracted to a stadium because it’s new or refurbished. Apart from a few anoraks and architecture students (maybe), no one’s going to come to see the stadium. It’s the team winning we want to see.

And the team will have greater scope for investment and have a better chance of winning if we stay at an extended Anfield.

« Last Edit: February 15, 2012, 11:47:29 am by Peter McGurk »

Offline AKABillyGee

  • AKA Le Pétomane... hasn't read the rules
  • Main Stander
  • ***
  • Posts: 204
  • Being suspicious served me well
Re: Bascombe Story - let's wait for confirmation before discussing it ok?
« Reply #598 on: February 15, 2012, 10:28:31 am »
There is no sensible argument why not.

55k 60k?

The argument is somewhat pointless

Whether it is pointless or not, or whether planning permission has been given on a different close proximity site is irrelevant. The cap as set by LCC applies to a redeveloped Anfield not to a new build stadium.

Offline CraigDS

  • Lite. Smelt it and dealt it. Worrawhopper.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 61,519
  • YNWA
Re: Bascombe Story - let's wait for confirmation before discussing it ok?
« Reply #599 on: February 15, 2012, 11:36:39 am »
And the pitch at Anfield can be used for other events. A new stadium pitch cannot (planning conditions)

Can it? I didn't think it could.