New Everton Stadium Discussion

[alvinh]

I keep on seeing the debate on the capacity coming up and I understand wanting to get the number right, not least because it could help keep prices down for the average matchgoer, but If I've understood Dan Meis correctly the additional seats are the most expensive to build. So it's not just a case of building a 60 or even 65k capacity and adjusting the ticket prices to fill it, it's that the club would pay a hefty premium to build those additional seats, which could impact on how profitable BMD turns out to be?

I'm also guessing there's a theoretical number which the site can safely handle, not just the space for seats, toilets, snack bars etc, but constraints around entrances and exits, transport capacity etc. So if they add another 13k to the capacity will they have to also upgrade the roads, transport links etc? All of which could be expensive.

Given those factors I have to say I thought the 52k rising to 60k with safe standing was a good compromise. It offers a big leap in capacity from the 18th to the 12th largest in the country, lots of premium lounge type seats for those that want them and all in an amazing location with what looks to me and pretty much everyone I've spoken to as a wonderful design. To be honest it's exceeded my expectations.

So my question to those who are asking for 65k is would you be happy with the club taking on a lot more debt in order to finance a bigger design? If so, are you confident that it will be money well spent?

 

[matty1878]

I keep on seeing the debate on the capacity coming up and I understand wanting to get the number right, not least because it could help keep prices down for the average matchgoer, but If I've understood Dan Meis correctly the additional seats are the most expensive to build. So it's not just a case of building a 60 or even 65k capacity and adjusting the ticket prices to fill it, it's that the club would pay a hefty premium to build those additional seats, which could impact on how profitable BMD turns out to be?

I'm also guessing there's a theoretical number which the site can safely handle, not just the space for seats, toilets, snack bars etc, but constraints around entrances and exits, transport capacity etc. So if they add another 13k to the capacity will they have to also upgrade the roads, transport links etc? All of which could be expensive.

Given those factors I have to say I thought the 52k rising to 60k with safe standing was a good compromise. It offers a big leap in capacity from the 18th to the 12th largest in the country, lots of premium lounge type seats for those that want them and all in an amazing location with what looks to me and pretty much everyone I've spoken to as a wonderful design. To be honest it's exceeded my expectations.

So my question to those who are asking for 65k is would you be happy with the club taking on a lot more debt in order to finance a bigger design? If so, are you confident that it will be money well spent?

If (IF) usmanov really is coming on board the finance side shouldn’t be a problem

 

[matty1878]

I don’t. You telling me that if Usmanov came, we’d suddenly become the 2nd most supported club in the league and would regularly fill 65k? All because a rich fella had come in, just like one did 3 years ago.

Yep city did it that way

 

[royalbalou]

I keep on seeing the debate on the capacity coming up and I understand wanting to get the number right, not least because it could help keep prices down for the average matchgoer, but If I've understood Dan Meis correctly the additional seats are the most expensive to build. So it's not just a case of building a 60 or even 65k capacity and adjusting the ticket prices to fill it, it's that the club would pay a hefty premium to build those additional seats, which could impact on how profitable BMD turns out to be?

I'm also guessing there's a theoretical number which the site can safely handle, not just the space for seats, toilets, snack bars etc, but constraints around entrances and exits, transport capacity etc. So if they add another 13k to the capacity will they have to also upgrade the roads, transport links etc? All of which could be expensive.

Given those factors I have to say I thought the 52k rising to 60k with safe standing was a good compromise. It offers a big leap in capacity from the 18th to the 12th largest in the country, lots of premium lounge type seats for those that want them and all in an amazing location with what looks to me and pretty much everyone I've spoken to as a wonderful design. To be honest it's exceeded my expectations.

So my question to those who are asking for 65k is would you be happy with the club taking on a lot more debt in order to finance a bigger design? If so, are you confident that it will be money well spent?

Just to answer your last question:

The way I look at it is that if this stadium is built to last anywhere near as long as Goodison then that is well over 100 years.

If you look at the past 100 years then the attendances have fluctuated between 20k - 78k.

Nobody can predict what the future of football is...but you can predict that we won't have another chance in the long term of another stadium after this.
so we have to get it right...that includes the size.

Regarding the finance - what seems expensive now will seem like a drop in the ocean(scuse the pun) in a few years...take a look at player prices.

We failed to modernize Goodison and fell behind...don't fall behind before the new place is even built!

 

[maccavennie]

If (IF) usmanov really is coming on board the finance side shouldn’t be a problem

I don't think we'll be getting a 65k stadium mate. I think it'll be 52k (at a push 53/54k if any kind of tweak is possible) with the option of it increasing if ever standing comes back on a 1.1 ratio.

Whether 52k is too small remains to be seen mate, but I think 65k would be far far too big, far too costly for us.

Now, if we started to actually win some bloody trophies then things may be different

55k would be great imo

 

[davek]

When this build begins @davek ,
Can we all look forward to a brand new thread from you describing the taste of that humble pie?
I'm not sure which of the two I'm most looking forward too!

I'd enjoy nothing more than to eat that mate.

Sadly....

 

[Barry Rathbone]

I don't think the "larger" capacity is as important as it once was with TV money making gate receipts not incidental but not as vital as in times past. Also judging by Utd, Arsenal and the RS their additional fans tend to be 6 toed tourists and cross dressers who wear barbed wire undies for lent. Better a lesser number of fanatics fuelling a ravenous bear pit than an overblown library filled with mute freaks

 

[Everton1970]

Yep city did it that way

No, they didn’t. City’s average in 2007, before the takeover was just under 40k, gradually rising over the 10 years to 54k. Their capacity is 55k. There are Many reports that the figures City make public are very different to the GMP figures by upto 10k. They are supposed to average 10k empty seats each week. There are empty seats everywhere when they play hence, The Emptyhad. Also, even Pep himself has complained about the lack of atmosphere. And you think we could sell 65k

 

[LEONARD]

 

[jaycee]

No, they didn’t. City’s average in 2007, before the takeover was just under 40k, gradually rising over the 10 years to 54k. Their capacity is 55k. There are Many reports that the figures City make public are very different to the GMP figures by upto 10k. They are supposed to average 10k empty seats each week. There are empty seats everywhere when they play hence, The Emptyhad. Also, even Pep himself has complained about the lack of atmosphere. And you think we could sell 65k

Say something nice about Everton I dare you

 

[Big Sams Little Pecker]

I imagine the people who think we'd fill a 65k seater are the same people that think we could attract Mourinho or Simeone

 

[LEONARD]

No, they didn’t. City’s average in 2007, before the takeover was just under 40k, gradually rising over the 10 years to 54k. Their capacity is 55k. There are Many reports that the figures City make public are very different to the GMP figures by upto 10k. They are supposed to average 10k empty seats each week. There are empty seats everywhere when they play hence, The Emptyhad. Also, even Pep himself has complained about the lack of atmosphere. And you think we could sell 65k

 

[alvinh]

I imagine the people who think we'd fill a 65k seater are the same people that think we could attract Mourinho or Simeone

I think with a winning team we'd potentially fill it, for some games at least, but there would need to be very aggressive pricing. Which I'd be all in favour of, but it may not be cost effective?

 

[Everton1970]

I don't think the "larger" capacity is as important as it once was with TV money making gate receipts not incidental but not as vital as in times past. Also judging by Utd, Arsenal and the RS their additional fans tend to be 6 toed tourists and cross dressers who wear barbed wire undies for lent. Better a lesser number of fanatics fuelling a ravenous bear pit than an overblown library filled with mute freaks

And we’re wanting to attract these football touristS too, why would they want to come to our new Stadium when a large portion of our support, it seems, don’t like these ’tourists’.

 

[canuckblue]

And we’re wanting to attract these football touristS too, why would they want to come to our new Stadium when a large portion of our support, it seems, don’t like these ’tourists’.

A large portion of your support ARE tourists.