New Everton Stadium Discussion


Not sure if this has been posted.

Not very professional from LANG o'ROUKE
Construction is a dangerous industry. LoR and their subcontractors will go to great lengths in an attempt to minimise accidents but regardless, they will and do still occur.

There were 45 recorded deaths in the industry during 22/23, the five year average is 37. In addition there were something like 60,000(!) non-fatal injuries.

The number of incidents at Bramley Moore falls well below the industry average.

The Mirror are just trying to be sensationalist and, like most other rags, have a dig at the club.
 

Not sure if this has been posted.

Not very professional from LANG o'ROUKE

Construction is a dangerous industry. LoR and their subcontractors will go to great lengths in an attempt to minimise accidents but regardless, they will and do still occur.

There were 45 recorded deaths in the industry during 22/23, the five year average is 37. In addition there were something like 60,000(!) non-fatal injuries.

The number of incidents at Bramley Moore falls well below the industry average.

The Mirror are just trying to be sensationalist and, like most other rags, have a dig at the club.
I was going to say the same, accidents will always happen in construction and one or two of the alone are unlikely to be able to lead you to a proper conclusion on the safety culture by LoR and/or their subcontractors.
 
Anyone know if there will be an increase in total number of general admission season tickets at BMD compared to GP, since there will be a lot more hospitality on offer for 3 stands and feel like there will be less 'cheap' seats to purchase
 
Construction is a dangerous industry. LoR and their subcontractors will go to great lengths in an attempt to minimise accidents but regardless, they will and do still occur.

There were 45 recorded deaths in the industry during 22/23, the five year average is 37. In addition there were something like 60,000(!) non-fatal injuries.

The number of incidents at Bramley Moore falls well below the industry average.

The Mirror are just trying to be sensationalist and, like most other rags, have a dig at the club.
Construction industry & The Farming industry are the worst two industry's for accidents & fatalities
 

Anyone know if there will be an increase in total number of general admission season tickets at BMD compared to GP, since there will be a lot more hospitality on offer for 3 stands and feel like there will be less 'cheap' seats to purchase

Would doubt it. We are already way up in terms of percentage of season ticket numbers against other clubs.

The only way I can see it increasing if there is a half way house between premium and standard and they try and get a few thousand in that category.
 

I've been through this with you more times than I can count Tom. So again...

The plan would have to go something like this, years dot to 3 we build a massive Park End upper tier similar to what they have across the park and as we don't have an upper tier to rip out it will be cheaper but still probably at least 70 million if we bake in some better hospitality sections. Great we now have a 49k capacity and even if the extras all pay an adult ticket price (this won't happen of course) that's an extra 550k per match. To repay that loan to be able to take on the next phase means almost all of that income would go on repayment.

We would lose almost all of the car park and fan plaza which will decrease income - how much I don't know but it will be something. Supporters still stick to their habits of drinking in pubs and getting into the stadium as late as possible, so not much change there. People who are currently sat behind posts in the other stands may move to the new upper tier as the demand would decrease dramatically now there isn't a countdown on Goodison remaining. This might mean we are paying for the redevelopment out of the club's pocket or we need to repay over a longer term.

Years 3 to 10 (possibly even 13-15) we've payed off enough of the 70 million and increased income through TV deals to think about redeveloping another stand. Only this time the business case is looking ropey as we have a 49k stadium that is regularly only filled by 45-47k. It is decided rightly this is due to poor facilities and restricted views so we push on regardless but whatever stand you pick it isn't going to be easy and will need the footprint expanded substantially and time and inflation means this stand is going to cost at least 150 million but probably a lot more. At this point if we target a total capacity of 60k we can rebuild say the main stand by straightening the road and adding 8 to 10k seats to make the extra seats pay the debt you are taking on and we'll run into the fact we'll lose capacity while it is being rebuilt. If in a hypothetical world we've paid off the PE development by this point would all go to pay for the extra cost the new stand would cost. Years 11-15 to 29-31 would be spent building and repaying that.

This also means redevelopment of the GS and BR would be entirely just to modernise as adding seats would take us beyond 60k which we probably wouldn't fill as in all this time we haven't added income to go back into the team.

No tournaments, no concerts, increases in stadium tours, little publicity. I love Goodison but by knocking down the quaintness it would stop being what is anyhow. If our board had been forward thinking and rebuilt at least two of the stands to what is now required it would have been great to stay and complete the job. They unfortunately didn't.

Yes BM is currently a problem to be resolved but as long as the new owners can sort out the build costs into a respectable bank loan, with half decent naming rights it will make us money to invest into the team and a hell of a lot sooner than what we could have achieved at Goodison. It's done anyhow it's pointless going around in circles, difficult or brilliant we have to get on with it.
Unfortunately I'm too busy to reply fully at the moment. So just a couple of things:

There could've been multiple options tbh. You have to also remember that we spent £100-150m just to acquire and site prep BMD. If LFC had done both their new stands at the same time, it would've cost roughly the same as that. That's the crux of the disparity in cost. In our case it would've been much cheaper, as the Lower Bullens is far lower than Anfield's old mainstand and could'vebeen reprofiled and extended quite cheaply. Therefore, the volume of construction required to place a new 10k upper tier on top of a slightly extended lower would've been significantly less than Anfield's new extensions. The Park end could've literally been the biggest end stand in Europe. 40-50 rows could've been added to make it an 80-90 row single tier, blended around the corner into a new upper Bullens to add 15-20k net capacity. There would be no need to lose the car park as this wouldn't be completely covered and even that area taken, would be built above it. One or two rows of boxes fitted beneath the top balcony to eliminate all obstructed views.... could easily yield 35-70 boxes on its own. They would also be better placed than those at BMD in terms of viewing distance and viewing aspect. Keep or replace Gwladys Street upper.... 3 stands all the same height. 55-60k capacity. Monster home end..... all for a fraction of our outlay at BMD. An outlay that has the potential to sink the club without trace.

Anfield has staged concerts, why not a properly redeveloped GP?
 
Contractors are responsible for H&S on site not the actual clients
Individuals are ultimately responsible for their own safety.
Principal contractors are obliged to provide a safe site and safe systems of work.

There’s nothing (yet) to suggest a failing of a safe system of work or LoR being negligent in providing a safe workplace.

The HSE will be looking at the records in relation to the unfortunate recent fatality, if there’s anything untoward going on it will soon become common knowledge.
 
Individuals are ultimately responsible for their own safety.
Principal contractors are obliged to provide a safe site and safe systems of work.

There’s nothing (yet) to suggest a failing of a safe system of work or LoR being negligent in providing a safe workplace.

The HSE will be looking at the records in relation to the unfortunate recent fatality, if there’s anything untoward going on it will soon become common knowledge.
100% it will be human error it wont be any procedures by the contactor. (Their arse is always covered)

Seen it a million times that why there is so much paperwork with risk assessments permits, inductions and basic training etc...they will find an T not crossed somewhere, or an TBT not signed.
 

Top