New Everton Stadium - Hill Dickinson Stadium

[mrb85]

The city is a big place.

I'm not arguing UNESCO's case for them, btw. I'm just amused that such a massive stumbling block that they represent is being blithely written off as no big deal. I can assure you the council dont think so. They'd forever be known as the philistine bellends who lost a coveted status for the City of Liverpool.

Since when has the Council bothered about this sort of thing? Take another look at the Pier Head/Waterfront area - what a total mix of the old and the new, the big and the small, the architecturally beautiful and the downright bland. And all passed through the planning process.

 

[MickA]

Not sure how going from 40 to 50000 is ridiculous when no one even knows what the demand is. There is a demand but no one knows what it is. I read somewhere the waiting list for seasons tickets is 7000. So going from 7000 extra where's the other 13000 going to come from


If theres no logical basis for the capacity lets go for 100000.

There is a logical basis.

We have, as you say, a ST waiting list. That is for a stadium with the poorest facilities in the league. Very often the only spare seats at GP are for single, obstructed views and they still sell so imagine a decent view, first rate facilities and the chance to buy ticket(s) next to family or friends. Then there is the new stadium bounce that every single club that has moved grounds has experienced. Add in the most accessible stadium in our history within walking distance of town, with a dedicated Merseyrail station and city centre connections.

Let's be pessimistic. 40k now plus half the ST waiting list and we're at 44k. Add in an additional 3k (low estimate corp) we're at 47k. Let's say 3k turn up just cos it's dead easy to get to the ground and you're at 50k without barely trying. Those estimates are all low ones and we haven't even talked about decent pricing structures and the usual new stadium bounce (which is quite large on average if I recall).

Add in the history we have of 60k+ and even 70k+ we should never be settling for 50k. It serves zero purpose.

 

[ham2]

If you build it they will come

 

[havrey0123]

There is a logical basis.

We have, as you say, a ST waiting list. That is for a stadium with the poorest facilities in the league. Very often the only spare seats at GP are for single, obstructed views and they still sell so imagine a decent view, first rate facilities and the chance to buy ticket(s) next to family or friends. Then there is the new stadium bounce that every single club that has moved grounds has experienced. Add in the most accessible stadium in our history within walking distance of town, with a dedicated Merseyrail station and city centre connections.

Let's be pessimistic. 40k now plus half the ST waiting list and we're at 44k. Add in an additional 3k (low estimate corp) we're at 47k. Let's say 3k turn up just cos it's dead easy to get to the ground and you're at 50k without barely trying. Those estimates are all low ones and we haven't even talked about decent pricing structures and the usual new stadium bounce (which is quite large on average if I recall).

Add in the history we have of 60k+ and even 70k+ we should never be settling for 50k. It serves zero purpose.

But using that logic Manchester united should easily be able to build a 150000+ stadium and fill it.

Stadium capacities are set for a reason

So 50,000 would leave us smaller than

United
Spurs
Arsenal
Liverpool
West Ham
Man City
Newcastle

And Chelsea soon enough

Even Villa are looking at going to 60,000

If we settle for potentially the 10th biggest ground in the country what ambition does that show?

There is a logical basis.

We have, as you say, a ST waiting list. That is for a stadium with the poorest facilities in the league. Very often the only spare seats at GP are for single, obstructed views and they still sell so imagine a decent view, first rate facilities and the chance to buy ticket(s) next to family or friends. Then there is the new stadium bounce that every single club that has moved grounds has experienced. Add in the most accessible stadium in our history within walking distance of town, with a dedicated Merseyrail station and city centre connections.

Let's be pessimistic. 40k now plus half the ST waiting list and we're at 44k. Add in an additional 3k (low estimate corp) we're at 47k. Let's say 3k turn up just cos it's dead easy to get to the ground and you're at 50k without barely trying. Those estimates are all low ones and we haven't even talked about decent pricing structures and the usual new stadium bounce (which is quite large on average if I recall).

Add in the history we have of 60k+ and even 70k+ we should never be settling for 50k. It serves zero purpose.

It will also look silly if there are 10000 seats empty.
You can't just say thousands of people will come because it's easy to get to.

Same reason why bellew Vs haye is at the 02 and not wembley.

 

[roydo]

But using that logic Manchester united should easily be able to build a 150000+ stadium and fill it.

They probably would if they could.

But anyrate, a brand new ground with a capacity just slightly more than our current capacity plus ST waiting list is just a nonsense idea. (when framed in the basis of the club moving forward with vision and ambition).

Will we fill a 60000 ground every single match? Doubt it. Will 60000 folk turn up when we play the bigger games? Certainly. (IMO).

Will 60000 turn up to watch a good/challenging/successful side? Deffo.

Which ever way its is copied and pasted, Everton are one of the biggest clubs, in the most watched league in the world . By any metric.

About time we remembered that, and work on getting back there with a ground befitting our status.

 

[MickA]

But using that logic Manchester united should easily be able to build a 150000+ stadium and fill it.

Stadium capacities are set for a reason

It will also look silly if there are 10000 seats empty.
You can't just say thousands of people will come because it's easy to get to.

Same reason why bellew Vs haye is at the 02 and not wembley.

Pretty much all PL clubs (past and present) have moved or redeveloped in the last 20 years, all of whom from Man U at 78k to Bournemouth at 11k have researched, identified and acted accordingly in terms of demand for tickets. There is one notable exception, a club who have sat on their arses and have come up with no feasible plan to do either, a club who's last *don't laugh* investment was a League One standard Park End a quarter of a century ago.

Would your advice to Sunderland have been stay at Roker Park or move to a modestly increased 30k stadium? West Ham's highest ever attendance at their old ground was just 43k and now you're advocating us building a ground with significantly smaller capacity than theirs?

We haven't moved with the times, we certainly haven't acted on demand but now we have a real opportunity to do so.

 

[davek]

Since when has the Council bothered about this sort of thing? Take another look at the Pier Head/Waterfront area - what a total mix of the old and the new, the big and the small, the architecturally beautiful and the downright bland. And all passed through the planning process.

...because they never had an ultimatum on their table to deal with. They have now.

 

[Connor]

Nothing happening, they said.

 

[roydo]

...because they never had an ultimatum on their table to deal with. They have now.

You make it sound like a declaration of war they are facing. Its a certificate on the wall, that no one cares about.

 

[davek]

You make it sound like a declaration of war they are facing. Its a certificate on the wall, that no one cares about.

They cared about it before the stadium scheme occurred. It's nonsense to suggest this was just a nothing honour. Why would cities around the world seek to retain theirs?

 

[roydo]

They cared about it before the stadium scheme occurred. It's nonsense to suggest this was just a nothing honour. Why would cities around the world seek to retain theirs?

Well I will not pretend to be an expert on UNESCO WHS sites and the benefits therein to a city or a site, (Stonehenge isnt a city, pretty sure its a WHS though)

My amateur understanding is they are in place to protect said sites from being demolished/built on, etc etc. Not a clue if they get cash from UNESCO in return. Preservation if you like.

So, it comes back to the old record; what, exactly does Liverpool gain from a wasteland having WHS status? If its billions in tourism/cash, then sound.

And the flip side is, what, exactly does Liverpool gain from the redevelopment of said wasteland? If its more, in ££££, I think LCC would be in dereliction of their duty to the city to hang onto their certificate

 

[Sir Alan]

Imagine being a total numpty and putting anything below 60,000

 

[roydo]

They cared about it before the stadium scheme occurred. It's nonsense to suggest this was just a nothing honour. Why would cities around the world seek to retain theirs?

Anyrate, a quick search shows these are the provisos UNESCO lay down as their desired things not to lose the status.

At the time of inscription, the World Heritage Committee requested that the height of any new construction in the property should not exceed that of structures in the immediate surroundings; the character of any new construction should respect the qualities of the historic area, and new construction at the Pier Head should not dominate, but complement the historic Pier Head buildings. There is a need for conservation and development to be based on an analysis of townscape characteristics and to be constrained by clear regulations establishing prescribed heights of buildings.

Pretty sure we could dance round that. Or rather, we have.

 

[kev]

1. 
   danmeis‏ @Meisarch 31m31 minutes ago
   PS...I will know if you are a Liverpool fan...we were just hacked by the Russians, we aren’t going to let a random Liverpool fan fool us! ; )
   
   
   

Ha Ha

 

[joey_macmo]

Not sure how going from 40 to 50000 is ridiculous when no one even knows what the demand is. There is a demand but no one knows what it is. I read somewhere the waiting list for seasons tickets is 7000. So going from 7000 extra where's the other 13000 going to come from


If theres no logical basis for the capacity lets go for 100000.

Going to 50k would still leave people on the waiting list once you take into account extra corporates.


That’s why it’s ridiculous