New Everton Stadium Discussion

[AndyC]

Why would the architect need or want to sell the cub the notion that a smaller stadium would guarantee ticket demand. Obviously it would, but why would that matter to Meis? His job is to design the stadium, and he would do so from a client brief surely. I would have thought it's no skin off his nose whether it's 50k or 100k capacity and it certainly doesn't matter to him whether EFC manages to fill it or not.

Maybe I'm missing something

At one of the St.Lukes meetings, he moreorless admitted that he thought 60,000 wouldn't be filled and to build it smaller would ensure full houses and optimum utilisation. He was under no illusion that the vast, vast majority of the fans in that meeting were all in favour of 60,000+ and in particular the 61,878 that @tommye championed from Day One.

 

[AndyC]

As city are demonstrating with the Etihad, these things can always be expanded.
Imagine the even bigger pickle we would be in now if there was another £200m to find to complete the stadium on top of anything we already need.
Eventually if there’s demand, the economics work and a serious board / ownership group in charge I’m sure it will grow.
Personally I think safe standing ratios will change once they’re proven to be a safe as they’re supposed to be.

I'm no architect or construction/structural engineer but, I would expect the size of the site for BMD might be a limiting factor on potential for future expansion.

 

[The binman chronicles]

Why would the architect need or want to sell the cub the notion that a smaller stadium would guarantee ticket demand. Obviously it would, but why would that matter to Meis? His job is to design the stadium, and he would do so from a client brief surely. I would have thought it's no skin off his nose whether it's 50k or 100k capacity and it certainly doesn't matter to him whether EFC manages to fill it or not.

Maybe I'm missing something

Meis' job is to design something that is actually deliverable. Pointless doing a 70k stadium with all the bells and whistles if you have a budget of £6.50 and a freddo bar.

If we flip it, would he be happy putting his name to a 60+k stadium that is basic enough to be in budget, but because of that it won't have any real architectural merit?

It's in his interests to sell the one that sits on the dock now.

 

[Goat]

I'm no architect or construction/structural engineer but, I would expect the size of the site for BMD might be a limiting factor on potential for future expansion.

People keep forgetting this.

We could have had a 100k Stadium next to a dirt path in the middle of nowhere, but instead we have a beautiful Stadium on the banks of the Mersey.

 

[McKindrick Blue]

At one of the St.Lukes meetings, he moreorless admitted that he thought 60,000 wouldn't be filled and to build it smaller would ensure full houses and optimum utilisation. He was under no illusion that the vast, vast majority of the fans in that meeting were all in favour of 60,000+ and in particular the 61,878 that @tommye championed from Day One.

I don't doubt that. However, I think it's more likely that the club had already decided the position on capacity and as the engaged architect he would be expected not only to work to the brief but to publicly support it. What I'm questioning is your assertion that Meis sold the notion to the club. Maybe you're right, but I fail to see what his motivation would be to do that.

I think the job for Meis was to design a stadium that met the brief and I think he's done a pretty good job looking at what's standing there now.

 

[Bedfordblue]

I'm no architect or construction/structural engineer but, I would expect the size of the site for BMD might be a limiting factor on potential for future expansion.

East and west stands are the only unconstrained ones I guess, probably the most cost effective too as they’re the most expensive seats.
City’s extra 7900 is costing £300m apparently, albeit there’s a hotel attached iirc.

 

[The binman chronicles]

I'm no architect or construction/structural engineer but, I would expect the size of the site for BMD might be a limiting factor on potential for future expansion.

There is enough space behind the east stand to add an extra tier and with a bit of negotiation you could imagine a deal to be able to bring the North to full height.

We won't do any of the above though as it will be far too expensive against the return it will bring in, especially seeing we'll be paying off what we have for the next 40 years. We'd have to have ridiculously rich owners in the future to even consider it.

 

[Blue Smoke]

I thought the footprint of the build site disctated the 52k we ended with.?

 

[Dr Baxter]

Based on nothing other than a guess and blind optimism, I think the legal safe standing ratios will change with the first decade or so of moving in and the capacity will increase to 60,000.

 

[maccavennie]

There is enough space behind the east stand to add an extra tier and with a bit of negotiation you could imagine a deal to be able to bring the North to full height.

We won't do any of the above though as it will be far too expensive against the return it will bring in, especially seeing we'll be paying off what we have for the next 40 years. We'd have to have ridiculously rich owners in the future to even consider it.

Meis alluded to this, that the last 6-8k seats are always the most expensive.

I've no doubt he believes that the 53k is the magic number, but I definitely don't think he was pushing for that figure and telling Everton to think smaller than 60k like Andy is saying.

His initial design was a 16k South Stand with a 3 tier East Stand and that was the original 60k design ( that the Echo still use pictures from )

There was the height restriction due to the WHS issue and that had an effect for sure.

 

[Captain Bligh]

I thought the footprint of the build site disctated the 52k we ended with.?

I could see a situation where the government decides that waste water no longer needs to be cleaned before people drink it and United Utilities quickly becomes unnecessary. They then quickly come knocking on Josh Wander’s door offering the land to Everton.

 

[arch stanton]

Sorry if this has been discussed. Do we know how the increase in capacity to 62000 would be achieved. Is it from safe standing or some structure changes?

magic

 

[Ruairi77]

I read somewhere about the cost/return on the extra 8k seats. They are the most expensive to construct and yield the least return.
Sure, it would be nice if it was bigger but I'm alright with the fact that someones run the numbers and settled on 52k.
When it comes to the stadium, they seem to have got everything right so far which is strange for Everton.
Long may it last.

 

[Bez2k2k]

People keep forgetting this.

We could have had a 100k Stadium next to a dirt path in the middle of nowhere, but instead we have a beautiful Stadium on the banks of the Mersey.

Yeah you see this is great but in 50 years people will say it was a mistake that we build a stadium with no future hindsight about expansion. When teams will go out and build 100k seater stadiums I’m worried ours will be seen at the small one, we haven’t future proofed ourselves at all.

I love the stadium but from the start I have said it needed to be 60k at least. The actual numbers have changed, at one point it was 55k and now it’s 52 or whatever. I think it’s a shame we are leaving Goodison for another 14k’s worth of seats. It’s rubbish. The stadium looks great but we have built a new stadium and St James’ Park in the same size.

We have 20k now of season tickets, we have 40k season ticket waiting list (apparently) and we sell out most games. The reason to make it 53k just baffles me.

 

[Exeter_Gently]

Can't vault the people that where saying the pitch wouldn't fit?

The need to be brought forth into the light.