New Everton Stadium Discussion

[ChrisPW75]

I've posted about this a few times. I wonder if Moshiri's way out is to sell the club but keep the stadium? That way he gets his money back. Sells the club for a sensible amount and then we are forced to rent from him. Far from what was promised but not beyond the realms of possibility. There again, if that did happen, the devil would be in the detail. A lot would depend on the numbers. At the risk of sounding ridiculously optimistic Man City were renting not too long ago.

We'll find out how it all pans out in the next 2 years, I guess. One thing is certain, Moshiri (if he pays for the stadium) will have us by the short and curlies once GP is demolished. And to think Kenwright scuppered the King's Dock deal for his own gain and vanity.

The thing is, who would buy a football club without a stadium? I don't think you can separate the the two.

 

[gazzaa2]

The thing is, who would buy a football club without a stadium? I don't think you can separate the the two.

It's happened to the likes of Oxford and Coventry whose new grounds are owned by an individual.

Man City stadium Council owned which is a bit different.

It's unlikely but a risk if Moshiri has to fund it all himself.

 

[Dddddd]

It obviously wasn't really a serious suggestion...... hence the "haha"

Just acknowledgement of the fact that if we don't own it, it's always a hypothetical possibility.... not massively dissimilar to what happened in 1892.

If history tells us anything I’ll be sticking with whatever team gets left in the stadium

 

[Thomasc]

Just checked forum properly for the first time in a while, wish I hadn’t bothered.

Just set fire to the club and let it die slowly ffs

Was in a good mood until I remembered Everton again 15 minutes ago.

 

[Dr Baxter]

The thing is, who would buy a football club without a stadium? I don't think you can separate the the two.

Bill Kenwright? Only kidding. Who knows? Somebody bought Man City. Twice, wasn't it?

 

[Dr Baxter]

If history tells us anything I’ll be sticking with whatever team gets left in the stadium

Just as well we're demolishing GP. Fast forward 100 years and Walton FC have won the Champions League 6 times.

Nah, only joking, LFC have only been bigger than us since the 70's. We'd been playing football for 100 years then.

 

[tommye]

Just checked forum properly for the first time in a while, wish I hadn’t bothered.

Just set fire to the club and let it die slowly ffs

Was in a good mood until I remembered Everton again 15 minutes ago.

We've had good times...

 

[James]

The thing is, who would buy a football club without a stadium? I don't think you can separate the the two.

Reality is if he sells the club without the stadium the club is worth much less. Any buyer would have to price in the annual rental cost when coming up with the valuation to buy.

Add to that that it leaves Moshiri with an illiquid £700m asset. How many years before the build cost is recovered by the annual rent front the club?

If he wants out of his investment in Everton with his cash back I’d guess he needs to sell the club with the stadium.

 

[adi dassler]

LoR and their subcontractors started manufacturing elements for the stadium a long time ago, well before they were ever needed on site. The cost of all major elements of the build would have been fixed so the club wouldn't be on the hook for any sudden jump in steel prices for instance. There might be other instances where things fluctuate in price but I can't think if anything really that would change so much that the club would need to fork out extra and even if they did it would likely be nominal in the grand scheme of things.

The club and LoR would have been through a period of Value Engineering before finalising/ signing the main contract so prices for everything, including any changes in spec, should have already been agreed.

There is always potential for unforseens and something might occur where the availaibility of a product changes which could mean a more expensive alternative is needed. However, this is unlikely and we wouldn't be talking huge sums anyway.

Therefore, the only potential significant changes in the contract price would come as a result of changes requested by the club. So whilst the contract sum won't be necessarilly 100% fixed, it is as close to being as it possibly could be. The main point being the club shouldn't be at the mercy of a huge increase in build cost because the price of steel or concrete suddenly jumps again.

Agree, but there could also be other instances of change not necessarily requested by the club but instead relating to how well the Contract has been put together. I’m sure LORs QS’s will be all over it looking for any angle for perceived extras.

 

[allen]

The thing is, who would buy a football club without a stadium? I don't think you can separate the the two.

Yes, the whole point of his venture to is increase the value of the club so he can make a profit. You don’t make a profit on Everton by removing the stadium from our possession.

 

[AndyRJ]

Agree, but there could also be other instances of change not necessarily requested by the club but instead relating to how well the Contract has been put together. I’m sure LORs QS’s will be all over it looking for any angle for perceived extras.

Absolutely, any contractor would be looking to claim back any potential overspend either from additional items or unforseens where they can. However, given the stage we are at I doubt there would be anything truly signficant that would add millions of additional spend to the project unless it was something specifically actioned by the club.

The vast majority of the project risk would have been 'in the ground' and the enabling works phase. We're well beyond that now and whilst there are more groundworks to complete e.g. the water basin and sub-structure elements for the western plaza LoR will be working in known ground so there shouldn't be any surprises.

 

[Brownie]

I'm sure this has been discussed before, but anyway: have the asymmetrical heights of the roof gone from the design? As in the "wave" element?

 

[AndyRJ]

I'm sure this has been discussed before, but anyway: have the asymmetrical heights of the roof gone from the design? As in the "wave" element?

The roof previously had a nominal slope upwards from north to south which has now been removed if that's what you mean?

 

[Look to the future]

I'm sure this has been discussed before, but anyway: have the asymmetrical heights of the roof gone from the design? As in the "wave" element?

This was the original design when the south stand blue wall capacity was larger

 

[maccavennie]

I'm sure this has been discussed before, but anyway: have the asymmetrical heights of the roof gone from the design? As in the "wave" element?

Yep. Makes the logo a bit silly like imo as they still use a slight curve/wave logo which isn't actually there anymore