New Everton Stadium Discussion

[Brisan123]

The world's biggest naming rights deal was signed last year for the monster 70k SoFi Stadium in Los Angeles. It'll be home to two NFL teams, cost $2bn as part of a wider $5bn development, will host the Superbowl in a couple of years as well as the Olympic opening and closing ceremonies in 2028, and of course it's in America, the biggest naming rights market in the world.

They got $20m p/a over 20 years.

No, I don't reckon you'll be getting £40m a year unless it's a helluva FFP fiddle.

TBH, I don't get why Usmanov doesn't just become part owner and be done with it. Stadium construction costs are outside of FFP. Naming rights aren't; they're subject to FFP tests around market value etc. If he really wanted to show Arse*** up he could plough a load of money into the build itself rather than all these convoluted, 'risky' sponsorships. It just seems a weird setup looking in from the outside, unless I'm missing something.

The world's biggest naming rights deal was signed last year for the monster 70k SoFi Stadium in Los Angeles. It'll be home to two NFL teams, cost $2bn as part of a wider $5bn development, will host the Superbowl in a couple of years as well as the Olympic opening and closing ceremonies in 2028, and of course it's in America, the biggest naming rights market in the world.

They got $20m p/a over 20 years.

No, I don't reckon you'll be getting £40m a year unless it's a helluva FFP fiddle.

TBH, I don't get why Usmanov doesn't just become part owner and be done with it. Stadium construction costs are outside of FFP. Naming rights aren't; they're subject to FFP tests around market value etc. If he really wanted to show Arse*** up he could plough a load of money into the build itself rather than all these convoluted, 'risky' sponsorships. It just seems a weird setup looking in from the outside, unless I'm missing something.

as for why Usmanov does not get involved personally and just pay for the stadium , lads here explained earlier in the week
It’s all to do with ROCE
If he builds a stadium with 500 m of his own money after 20 years he has a stadium and no 500m
If he puts the 500 m to work and invests it and gets say an 8%pa return that’s 40 m
Payments on a 500m loan are about 34m a year over 20 years at 3.5 %interest
So he uses the profit on his investment to pay the loan off and ends up with the stadium and the 500m

 

[Tom Hughes]

The world's biggest naming rights deal was signed last year for the monster 70k SoFi Stadium in Los Angeles. It'll be home to two NFL teams, cost $2bn as part of a wider $5bn development, will host the Superbowl in a couple of years as well as the Olympic opening and closing ceremonies in 2028, and of course it's in America, the biggest naming rights market in the world.

They got $20m p/a over 20 years.

No, I don't reckon you'll be getting £40m a year unless it's a helluva FFP fiddle.

TBH, I don't get why Usmanov doesn't just become part owner and be done with it. Stadium construction costs are outside of FFP. Naming rights aren't; they're subject to FFP tests around market value etc. If he really wanted to show Arse*** up he could plough a load of money into the build itself rather than all these convoluted, 'risky' sponsorships. It just seems a weird setup looking in from the outside, unless I'm missing something.

Precisely......

 

[The binman chronicles]

The world's biggest naming rights deal was signed last year for the monster 70k SoFi Stadium in Los Angeles. It'll be home to two NFL teams, cost $2bn as part of a wider $5bn development, will host the Superbowl in a couple of years as well as the Olympic opening and closing ceremonies in 2028, and of course it's in America, the biggest naming rights market in the world.

They got $20m p/a over 20 years.

No, I don't reckon you'll be getting £40m a year unless it's a helluva FFP fiddle.

TBH, I don't get why Usmanov doesn't just become part owner and be done with it. Stadium construction costs are outside of FFP. Naming rights aren't; they're subject to FFP tests around market value etc. If he really wanted to show Arse*** up he could plough a load of money into the build itself rather than all these convoluted, 'risky' sponsorships. It just seems a weird setup looking in from the outside, unless I'm missing something.

As @Brisan123 said if we are getting 12 million for a training ground then 20 is not a stretch seeing the public awareness of names of stadiums far outreach those of training grounds.

The question would be whether USM would commit to 20 years or would it be a shorter term contract. At the end of the day it is a fiddle as USM is the company that owns other companies so any advertising for it is a waste of cash.

 

[degsy]

With respect, the time to redevelop Goodison passed when the PE went up, and was only 1 tier
The atmosphere at the match in those days was awful to say the least so an approach similar to Ashton Gate wouldn’t work for us.
We also need to face the reality, we’re never going to get revenue with other events when you’ve got the other place so close and bigger, with newer facilities
I believe it’s time to stop being whimsical and realise the redevelop option has gone by.
It’s not just me saying that, business men more successful and business minded are doing it.

From Kenwright's mouth to your reply
The atmosphere had nothing to do do with poor football and thus not much to shout about then??
I seem to remember it got a tad animated Vs Wimbledon - when we did have something to shout about.

 

[degsy]

Some thoughts for consideration, despite it being about West Ham it's actually heart breaking to think of a club so bereft of its soul now.

Btw I'm not comparing BMD with the London Stadium

I have a lot of symathy for that, the hot dog stands, the pubs, the chippys, the houses, the people etc.

But I'm happy to move in to BMD, because Goodison, My Goodison - A Goodison of red brick, The Old Main Stand and Gable, Police Horse poo, Woodbine smoke, piss, sweat and damp overcoats, Old Style green double deckers, the 500 to and from Speke, the 46 to Penny Lane, 4 pylons, 2 Sq clocks...even the johnny come lately curves behind the goals, started disappearing 50yrs ago...one piece at a time, you turn around and before you know it Sandy Brown's OG was 50yrs ago and its all gone (gone with the wind like the antibellum south) or behind fancy cladding and muriels

 

[RobSpurs]

Precisely......

Don't get me wrong, I'm not siding with the cautious who are worried the the SKY is going to fall in. If debt is manageable and leaves you in a much better position than before* then it's worth taking on imo, even large debts. This isn't like the Glazers.

But some of the posts effectively saying 'we'll be getting this stadium for free when you factor in xyz' are...errrr....wildly optimistic I think is the best way of putting it. Last we heard with the finances for this place you've got JP Morgan etc on the case.

---

* and even while the debt is being repaid the extra revenue a new stadium generates should more than cover it!

 

[Brisan123]

Don't get me wrong, I'm not siding with the cautious who are worried the the SKY is going to fall in. If debt is manageable and leaves you in a much better position than before* then it's worth taking on imo, even large debts. This isn't like the Glazers.

But some of the posts effectively saying 'we'll be getting this stadium for free when you factor in xyz' are...errrr....wildly optimistic I think is the best way of putting it. Last we heard with the finances for this place you've got JP Morgan etc on the case.

---

* and even while the debt is being repaid the extra revenue a new stadium generates should more than cover it!

Usmanov said in the financial times interview
Why not the USM arena

 

[peteblue]

I have a lot of symathy for that, the hot dog stands, the pubs, the chippys, the houses, the people etc.

But I'm happy to move in to BMD, because Goodison, My Goodison - A Goodison of red brick, The Old Main Stand and Gable, Police Horse poo, Woodbine smoke, piss, sweat and damp overcoats, Old Style green double deckers, the 500 to and from Speke, the 46 to Penny Lane, 4 pylons, 2 Sq clocks...even the johnny come lately curves behind the goals, started disappearing 50yrs ago...one piece at a time, you turn around and before you know it Sandy Brown's OG was 50yrs ago and its all gone (gone with the wind like the antibellum south) or behind fancy cladding and muriels

Murals. Muriel does the pies....

 

[mahermi1]

Usmanov said in the financial times interview
Why not the USM arena

Without having a go at Rob, ar'nt Spurs having a bit of trouble, getting the naming rights for their new ground ? Or have I read that wrong and they don't want naming rights at all ?

 

[Tom Hughes]

Don't get me wrong, I'm not siding with the cautious who are worried the the SKY is going to fall in. If debt is manageable and leaves you in a much better position than before* then it's worth taking on imo, even large debts. This isn't like the Glazers.

But some of the posts effectively saying 'we'll be getting this stadium for free when you factor in xyz' are...errrr....wildly optimistic I think is the best way of putting it. Last we heard with the finances for this place you've got JP Morgan etc on the case.

---

* and even while the debt is being repaid the extra revenue a new stadium generates should more than cover it!

I agree that Debt is ok (inevitable)if you can service it and/or if the sugar daddies will cover it, or remain equally generous throughout its full term.

We haven't yet had a breakdown of how that works at BMD. Paul (the esk) over on Toffeeweb wrote an article recently, where he seemed to conclude that at 52k capacity and that amount of debt, we would still be at best standing still. I'm not sure how accurate that assessment is..... but he at least tried to throw some numbers at it.

As regards West Ham, I'm not sure if their matchday income rose significantly when they moved..... so significant extra revenue might not be a given.

 

[Brisan123]

Murals. Muriel does the pies....

Does more than the pies or so I am reliably informed

 

[Brisan123]

I agree that Debt is ok (inevitable)if you can service it and/or if the sugar daddies will cover it, or remain equally generous throughout its full term.

We haven't yet had a breakdown of how that works at BMD. Paul (the esk) over on Toffeeweb wrote an article recently, where he seemed to conclude that at 52k capacity and that amount of debt, we would still be at best standing still. I'm not sure how accurate that assessment is..... but he at least tried to throw some numbers at it.

As regards West Ham, I'm not sure if their matchday income rose significantly when they moved..... so significant extra revenue might not be a given.

The esk has been proved on that many occasions now he is a parody of himself.
Still has a bit of financial background but also has an agenda from I can see

 

[Brisan123]

Does more than the pies or so I am reliably informed

@AndyC
I was talking about the tea,coffee and ham sandwiches.
I have no idea where your mind was wandering to

 

[RobSpurs]

Without having a go at Rob, ar'nt Spurs having a bit of trouble, getting the naming rights for their new ground ?

https://www.grandoldteam.com/forum/threads/new-stadium-discussion.66451/post-7616571

As regards West Ham, I'm not sure if their matchday income rose significantly when they moved..... so significant extra revenue might not be a given.

It didn't, it's pretty much the same, which is incredible. They've got to be the exception that proves the rule though. Nothing about that stadium move is typical. I'd be very surprised if you could find another stadium move like West Ham's where revenue stayed the same!!

I've just read we're going to have 9 capacity non-football events at NWHL in the summer. West Ham don't get any revenue from other events at the Olympic stadium. Even as a sceptic, you've got to admit BMD is much closer to what we've done than West Ham's model. And on top of that, I hate to point out, you're starting from a lower base than West Ham were ever at with stadium revenue. So I'd expect a significant difference between GP and BMD.

 

[mahermi1]

https://www.grandoldteam.com/forum/threads/new-stadium-discussion.66451/post-7616571



It didn't, it's pretty much the same, which is incredible. They've got to be the exception that proves the rule though. Nothing about that stadium move is typical. I'd be very surprised if you could find another stadium move like West Ham's where revenue stayed the same!!

I've just read we're going to have 9 capacity non-football events at NWHL in the summer. West Ham don't get any revenue from other events at the Olympic stadium. Even as a sceptic, you've got to admit BMD is much closer to what we've done than West Ham's model. And on top of that, I hate to point out, you're starting from a lower base than West Ham were ever at with stadium revenue. So I'd expect a significant difference between GP and BMD.

Cheers Rob.