Player Valuation: £1m
The cost was just to show what can be done with upgrading and what can be done with a fresh start. RM were lucky that during covid they could reprofile without doing it piecemeal having to shut each area during the season. That would have significantly increased costs. Expect Barca's to be a lot more by the time/if they get around to it as well.
No one is debating that Goodison couldn't be redeveloped, it's just an almighty pain in the backside. If them and City paid 60 million each to build upon what was already there and both increasing capacity by only 6,000 shows you give or take to upgrade Goodison will cost the best part of 300 million. And that's at the point the ground is cleared and there is space to build. In our case that could be another 5/6 years and building costs may have increased and the will to continue may have ceased. It would be at best a 10 year project where we lose income as we shut down each stand and a lot could happen in that tineframe.
Then on top you have the holy trinity of problems where if you were to build a stadium in Liverpool afresh you wouldn't put it where Goodison is. Fact. Doesn't matter how many boxes we put in it we are not getting thousands more than who already pay for it now. They can get away with it due to their elevated status. You also have the issue regarding space around the ground, I know you champion that it only takes a few houses to knock down to get the extra stand width, but what about the space around the stands? Modern stadiums let people mill around with space much like we'll be able to at BMD especially important in this covid world. To get that sort of landscape you will have to flattern a whole lot more, again more time and money. Then commercially - a point you keep ignoring we aren't getting naming rights at Goodison and this is what effectively pays for the loan to build BMD. At goodison we would be using the extra capacity to pay off the costs instead of putting that money into the team. See the difference?
As I said previously, if in the 90's we had built a two tier PE holding 12k and the club had started making a real effort in buying up property along GR so the main stand could be squared off then we could and should have stayed. Their inaction has brought us to a point that forced us into this position of having to leave. It is far better now to make that harder decisive decision to go instead of skip along like a stone on a beach being bashed around by outside factors. By the time the land has cleared we might not have a TV deal to back up the costs, who knows. You have to strike while you can and we've been 15/20 years behind in that respect. When you add and subtract everything the two methods (rebuild or move) would come out very similar so it is 100% the right thing to do.
The fact is the costs rarely come out that similar, which is why so many of the bigger clubs redevelop as shown. Yes... it's a much simpler choice for small to medium clubs, building new stadiums at £1-2k per seat. The sale of the existing site alone might cover that.... but with that price per seat rising almost exponentially for every 10k of capacity, that balance can quickly shift, as demonstrated. That cost is dependent on several factors but is generally proportional to volume and complexity of construction. Putting new upper tiers above the Lower Bullens tier for instance would require significantly less construction volume than at City or Anfield where they were going up 4-6 storeys before even adding any capacity..... but even working at their cost per seat would be less than half that of BMD to achieve the same capacity.
Yes GP isn't the ideal location in many respects, but logistically it had one of the fastest dispersal rates in the UK when the football research unit did their studies a few years ago. Waterfront stadia are only viable if they are actually in the city centre and served by nearby mass transit systems and bus networks to all city region areas. The Northern Line is a life-line for BMD, but needs a closer station to really play its part.... and also needs extending as it only properly serves a small proportion of the main conurbation's population. Some of those things may well be in the pipeline, but they're not in place yet. Hopefully that will happen. When a transport modeller looked at some of the proposed sites at the time of destination Kirkby I think the Loop site did by far the best.
As regards naming rights the NWHL has yet to achieve a deal.... Usmanov has shown that he's prepared to sponsor fresh air if it's possible.... so I'm not sure that argument about sponsoring GP really stands.
I completely agree that if he has pledged to cover much of the cost via a sponsorship deal and that is BMD specific, then that is probably the way to go..... but we haven't heard anything solid about this, and as yet the club still haven't been able to secure the finance off the back of that pledge, which doesn't really add up.