Homepage Update: Mayor's Bramley Moore Dock Open Letter To Evertonians

[Trueblue1878]

IT. WON'T. HAVE. A. TRACK.

A temporary track will be built on a PLATFORM, into the stand, taking out at least the first 10 rows and maybe more of each stand, reducing the capacity from 58000 to circa 40000.

Wrong again.......unless row 1 is about 15 metres from the goal line.

 

[degsy]

Fair enough if it all turns out 'just so' but we won't know until it's too late will we

...at the end of 21-22 season eh. They're going to have to go some to do that. Can they do it in under 50 months.

Where's the new shovel money Bill?

 

[nsno-chris]

The reason I raise Bill and Moshiri and the architect is because people are saying we should have faith in them, and not to worry. I am pointing out that in my view two out of those three people stand to benefit hugely in a financial sense from this stadium going ahead, whilst the third is the hired help of the first two

They would have made a profit by going for the cheaper option of dumping us in Stonebridge cross, lot less outlay, lot less hassle with regards to infrastructure.

It's about legacies, the same applies for the architect. He won't want his work criticised by future generations by building a complete balloon of a stadium that the fans hate.

 

[davek]

No. They have publicly stated it will NOT affect the atmosphere if that is an untruth they will have exposed themselves as untrustworthy. To be regarded as someone not worthy of trust is a serious millstone to carry around in your career. Nobody would willingly expose themselves to that accusation.
Releasing the plans will obviously not occur until the architect is satisfied and presented them to the board who will then scrutinise them. After any possible modifications and when it is ready to be go to planning application then they will be revealed to the public . They will still be open to revision and alteration throughout and until approval is granted. What purpose would it achieve to release incomplete plans.? There will be plenty of time to complain and object during the planning process.

And how is that measured, precisely?!

It's as long as a piece of string that claim.

We can still have provisional illustrations of the idea this lot have for a stadium. To say they cant is just making excuses for them./

Ever cross your mind that they haven't so far because they dont want to scare the horses?

 

[davek]

They would have made a profit by going for the cheaper option of dumping us in Stonebridge cross, lot less outlay, lot less hassle with regards to infrastructure.

It's about legacies, the same applies for the architect. He won't want his work criticised by future generations by building a complete balloon of a stadium that the fans hate.

Cheaper doesn't come into it when the major shareholder is not paying any of it and will have scarpered in a decade or so and left the club to continue to pay off the leveraged cash made on his watch.

What does it matter to Moshiri if the club are paying off over 40 years £400M rather than £280M? He still gets his sale and frigs off regardless.

 

[nsno-chris]

Cheaper doesn't come into it when the major shareholder is not paying any of it and will have scarpered in a decade or so and left the club to continue to pay off the leveraged cash made on his watch.

What does it matter to Moshiri if the club are paying off over 40 years £400M rather than £280M? He still gets his sale and frigs off regardless.

Of course it does. What is with this obsession of Moshiri personally funding the stadium; show me one example of a single shareholder using his own wealth to build a stadium

 

[Librarian]

put the track on the roof, make the roof glass

 

[CahillsCornerFlag]

Cheaper doesn't come into it when the major shareholder is not paying any of it and will have scarpered in a decade or so and left the club to continue to pay off the leveraged cash made on his watch.

What does it matter to Moshiri if the club are paying off over 40 years £400M rather than £280M? He still gets his sale and frigs off regardless.

Surely even you know this is a weak attempt at trolling, nobody pays for stadiums out of their own pocket.

 

[bicycleheader]

Fair point, I don't think though on the ground it will make a huge amount of difference, we will need to magic away a running track, and it's never been done before

No, we would need to magic it IN. The discussion is how the hell they are going to do that and provide a boss intimidating stadium.

 

[Kev50]

They would have made a profit by going for the cheaper option of dumping us in Stonebridge cross, lot less outlay, lot less hassle with regards to infrastructure.

It's about legacies, the same applies for the architect. He won't want his work criticised by future generations by building a complete balloon of a stadium that the fans hate.

You can believe that cold faced accountant is fighting for a legacy for a club he probably didn't know existed 10 years ago if you want, I say bet the other way.
And BMD knocks Crockie into a cocked hat whatever way you sell it, when you sell it.

 

[bicycleheader]

Loads of people some unhappy about something that might not happen.

What are you actually going to do about it other than post furiously on here about it?

I know @GrandOldTeam feels strongly about this so is trying to get Dan Meis to speak to @Adam-GOTTV about the whole thing. A fantastic move.

What is everyone else doing about it if they're not happy?

Ijjy you'd either be really crap in a revolution, or really useful to those in power

 

[ianefc]

Fair enough if it all turns out 'just so' but we won't know until it's too late will we

...at the end of 21-22 season eh. They're going to have to go some to do that. Can they do it in under 50 months.

Where's the new shovel money Bill?

Spurs started work in the busy area of north London in autum 2015 and have a stadium to remove and are going to be open within 3 years. As long as the building work has started by next winter I think we can do it.

 

[bicycleheader]

Forget about what Anderson says, he chats bubbles.

The architect is different, he knows the heritage and what the fans want. The club won't risk a kick off and the way moshiri operates I cannot see him wanting a black mark on his tenure, and a cocked up stadium would be

Kev is talking about BK making millions from this deal and it's all about having the club off. I'll debate with rationale people, not someone who is cry arsing

ok, but your post didnt really seem aimed at just Kev. More a complaint about all complainers. So I complained about it. Its the circle of complain

 

[davek]

Of course it does. What is with this obsession of Moshiri personally funding the stadium; show me one example of a single shareholder using his own wealth to build a stadium

You cant answer my question.

Why does a more costly stadium ensure that the owners of the club will be more concerned with making sure this is atmospherically right?

 

[nsno-chris]

You can believe that cold faced accountant is fighting for a legacy for a club he probably didn't know existed 10 years ago if you want, I say bet the other way.
And BMD knocks Crockie into a cocked hat whatever way you sell it, when you sell it.

Lol, because I'm sure roman knew who Chelsea where or the city owners. You're argument is awful, "the cold faced accountant"; you don't even know who he his, you're literally typing garbage.

And newsflash. BMD is a better location for us, but it's not for your point. A future investor, considering you're implying that bill and moshiri are swilling up for profit, won't be care where the stadium is, only what the figures say. And a club with a lower outlay (i.e building costs) versus an increase in revenue has a better chance of making an investor more money.

Business, innit