Do We Need A New Stadium?

[chicoazul]

Yer mars jam rag looks like a massive Japan flag lad

 

[Goat]

ERM WHAT??

No but its stupid to say Goodison cant be done up, only a 2bit Suntanned weapon would maintain that a Stadium cant be rebuilt.

Cost wise we clearly dont have the folding, but its wrong to say it cant be done, even Hamper Man managed it, but not this Kenwrong weapon, oh no.

 

[GraemeS1980]

Incidentally, Brighton have a superb new stadium and are doing very well. If you could have seen there old stadium it was awful. This new one is boss, got all the corporate garb every seat is cushioned so no numb ass. great atmosphere and has been built to expand, if we could get something like that but on a slightly bigger scale it would do us.

 

[McBain]

From what i can garner, the Stadium was built in various stages from 1892 to 1926.

The only thing that's going to get any of you to finally agree to build a NEW stadium, or redevelop, stand by stand, the old one, is if someone blows the bloody thing up.

That'll finally get you moving to build a new one, won't it eh?

 

[Jamo Martinez]

From what i can garner, the Stadium was built in various stages from 1892 to 1926.

The only thing that's going to get any of you to finally agree to build a NEW stadium, or redevelop, stand by stand, the old one, is if someone blows the bloody thing up.

That'll finally get you moving to build a new one, won't it eh?

Yer mar's with Bundy.

 

[bluejock]

Yer mar's with Bundy.

Hahahahaha

On ya Bundz

 

[ToffeeBlueNose]

If attendances are dropping anyway won't be much of a prob will it??



And the correlation is? Did all the clubs with their same old stadium win something, avoid relegation, increase their attendances??

what a strange response, of course its a problem we should be looking to raising the fans confidence and attendances not losing even more. Say it took a full season to do any one side thats 4 full seasons of revenue lost, do you not think that would impact our finances at all?

 

[McBain]

what a strange response, of course its a problem we should be looking to raising the fans confidence and attendances not losing even more. Say it took a full season to do any one side thats 4 full seasons of revenue lost, do you not think that would impact our finances at all?

It's a hit you have to take in order to get a better product.

The longer it takes for any decisions to get made, the more it will cost.

I'm sure Goodison was revolutionary in 1892, but it ain't 1892. It's now mates.

Houlding explained why this situation arose in a match programme against Cliftonville in April 1893. He pointed out that he had given Everton a rent free loan until the club started to make money. If the club had gone bust he would have lost it all.
Despite making no profit in this respect, the issue that upset the members at Everton most was his plan to sell Anfield and the land adjoining, with Houlding himself profiting. He felt it was a reasonable reward for the risk he had ventured in the club for nine years. Houlding, as the ambitious businessman he was, saw a great future for the club. He wanted the club to have its own home ground and wanted them to buy land so the club could expand in due course.
Unfortunately most of the Everton FC board members failed to share his forward thinking and lacked confidence. They wanted instead a long term rent deal on all the land, but for this to be acceptable to Houlding, he wanted a rent at a price considered too high for the Club. The members reacted to that by "offering" Houlding less rent. Houlding unsurprisingly refused to accept this stating that he did not want to be dictated: "I cannot understand why a gentleman that has done so much for the club (Everton) and its members should be given such treatment".

"Another potential suitor has apparently thought better of Everton, walking away on Tuesday from the sagging Grand Old Lady of English football, leaving her still in desperate need of a makeover."

 

[deliverance]

I don't usually put to much stock in things written on Blue Kipper, but the articles regarding Goodison Park are spot on:


For Evertonians it is time to abandon the sheer nonsense that we can obtain a modern, symmetrical, redeveloped stadium of sufficient capacity within the existing site boundaries. The idea is fantasy. Any building within that site cannot fulfill our needs if we want to get serious about our future. If we stay we might as well accept we have lower aspirations. In which case, there is no point whingeing about playing fortunes because we will never have sufficient money to improve them. Furthermore, no player or manager of ambition will want to join us and no sane financier is going to consider anything more than a horse laugh if asked to invest. Where at present we are just about holding our own, we could be looking instead at a slow decline into the lower divisions.

â€￾[/I]

I can't stand people who flounce like this getting on their high horse without facts.

What capacity is the leather talking about?

This is absolutely fundamental - without placing a figure on it (with reasons why) every anguished breast beating proclamation is just a rant - absolutely meaningless.

What a woeful piece.

 

[Jamo Martinez]

I can't stand people who flounce like this getting on their high horse without facts.

What capacity is the leather talking about?

This is absolutely fundamental - without placing a figure on it (with reasons why) every anguished breast beating proclamation is just a rant - absolutely meaningless.

What a woeful piece.

Good post. People saying there's no proof that Goodison can be redeveloped. Well I've seen no proof that it can't either.

 

[Brennan]

Good post. People saying there's no proof that Goodison can be redeveloped. Well I've seen no proof that it can't either.

http://www.vintagebluekipper.com/mbe/ground.htm

Ward McHugh, the creators of the original plans for a new Goodison, actually admitted that sufficient increase in capacity would require the purchase of land surrounding the current plot, which would cost untold amounts of money and could be held up for years if just one person refused to sell.

 

[Brennan]

I can't stand people who flounce like this getting on their high horse without facts.

What capacity is the leather talking about?

This is absolutely fundamental - without placing a figure on it (with reasons why) every anguished breast beating proclamation is just a rant - absolutely meaningless.

What a woeful piece.

This fact is clear: Even to make this plan work it is necessary to annex a total of 12 houses, Bullens Road and some other adjoining property. THEREFORE, AGAIN, THE SCHEME IS NOT FOR A STADIUM WITHIN THE EXISTING SITE BOUNDARIES.

And if the scheme as drawn was adapted and squeezed between the existing boundaries it would result in a loss of about fifty percent of the proposed new Bullens Road stand, as shown in Illustration 4. According to Appendix 3 “Assumptionsâ€￾ of the internet report this comprises an Upper Tier of 5,175, a Middle Tier of 1,475 and a Lower Tier of 7,600, total 14,250. A loss of, say, 7,000 from this stand therefore reduces the proposed capacity to 50,000 minus 7,000 = 43,000. Thus, the gain would be a mere 3,000 seats for all the disruption and capital expenditure. Seat prices would have to reflect that since the lower the capacity, the greater the increase required to meet revenue requirements.

Nor is there anything to be gained by simply moving the Bullens Road stand further towards the Goodison Road side as it would merely reduce the Goodison Road stand capacity in proportion. You end up with the same figure of about 43,000.

Also:

(e) By Ward McHugh’s own report it would take a total of four years to rebuild one stand at a time while still using the ground, though they do say the merging of two phases might save a little over a year (and reduce ongoing capacity in proportion). Merging two phases would mean going without two stands for that period.

4 years with only three stands. Not sure the season ticket holders would be happy with that.

 

[Degs62]

Good post. People saying there's no proof that Goodison can be redeveloped. Well I've seen no proof that it can't either.

It's all about what capacity we should be aiming for, having a plan to do it in a staged manner with disruption effectively managed and get plans/approvals in place to attract a buyer.

 

[Connor]

Lets move to Kirkby lads.

This. Its a boss place like.





Not.

 

[Rook]

Goodison has seen better days but I love the place and I'm all for phased improvement.

I don't get the mysterious "cure all ills" that some attach to building a brand new stadium, look at Arsenal they've got worse if anything. Goodison doesn't reach capacity anymore and the 50k+ capacity stadium oft quoted seems ludicrous given the past couple of decades.

We are in decline on and off the pitch our average attendance will be circa 33k this year showing a steady decline from 39k at 2004, and recent derby capers care of Moyes ensures a further trenche of supporters saying "thanks but no thanks you clown".

The idea not building one prevents the sale of the club is a red herring from Kenwright and his primates, Man City don't even OWN a stadium.The truth is the retail park consortium desperately desired by him and his mafia gives THEM more profit, which I understand that's business, as long as the interests of the club are looked after.

look at this list have any of them really changed because of having a new stadium?

Leicester
Sunderland
Middlesbrough
Bolton
Derby
Southampton
Coventry
Cardiff
Hull
Arsenal

It is cart before the horse, a complete fallacy.

Goodison needs improving but a new stadium? Just a mill stone round the neck.

We need a new stadium but only becuase the ground is old. You win in England with a shiek or Russian oil mafioso. Not with a new stadium. In 10-15 years the money rolling in from TV revenue will make the extra 10K seats that your new stadium has look like spare change.