New Everton Stadium - Hill Dickinson Stadium

[anton66]

What capacity was the Kings Dock meant to be?

I was only a wee one back when I first witness Everton shatter dreams

Think it was 50,000 but we would have expanded it by now to 80,000, after winning the C/L 12 times.

 

[Sir Alan]

Think it was 50,000 but we would have expanded it by now to 80,000, after winning the C/L 12 times.

So 50,000 over 15 years ago with a sporting brand which is increasing in popularity.

Well done Everton, I hate you.

 

[roydo]

Just find it mad that the top 6 clubs stadiums will all be superior to ours in capacity don’t we want to challenge them?

Sounds like a cost cutting exercise but Moshiri doesn’t care because his share price will still increase.

I just dont get that arguement.

Cos by that logic, if we have a 70000 seater, that means we challenge them? IMO, we build the best, biggest, stadium that suits Everton. Success, or not, will not be determined by the number of seats we have.

 

[Sir Alan]

I just dont get that arguement.

Cos by that logic, if we have a 70000 seater, that means we challenge them? IMO, we build the best, biggest, stadium that suits Everton. Success, or not, will not be determined by the number of seats we have.

Think you’re thinking very much inside the box stadium we nearly moved to in Kirkby, think bigger.

Match day revenue increased, footfall around the stadium increases which means the retail and leisure leases we will be giving out will gain which in theory will increase the asking price psf to stronger covenants for example.

 

[Brisan123]

Ban this man for being sensible!!!!! :/

Dave has him on ignore

 

[Amw79]

I remember everyone moaning about getting a bowl.

“We just want 4 stands. Steep and close to the pitch”.

Now it’s “too small and square - an outrage. We want modern, traditional, iconic, never seen before design in a rhombus configuration”.

This whole process is useful as shows you’ll never please everyone, and if you actually get 50% fans liking it, you’ve done well.

 

[Boss_Rarkley]

What capacity was the Kings Dock meant to be?

I was only a wee one back when I first witness Everton shatter dreams

Think it was 55k.

Would be a disgrace if BMD is less than that - I've said from day one I would be happy with 55k-58k.

Im not daft enough to believe the club has the ambition nor the finances to go for a 60k ground - I would be happy with 55k but anything less is massively disappointing and a waste of club finance.

 

[roydo]

Think you’re thinking very much inside the box stadium we nearly moved to in Kirkby, think bigger.

Match day revenue increased, footfall around the stadium increases which means the retail and leisure leases we will be giving out will gain which in theory will increase the asking price psf to stronger covenants for example.

Of course. But that will happen with a 55k, 58k, or 60k ground. Dont see why us building a hopefully ace ground, with a few thousand less seats thab a few other teams is such an issue.

 

[bluestevon]

Here's the thing, everyone getting in a twist about needing 60k+ seen some arguing we need 70k eventually.

Question, why do we?

We all want to keep the atmosphere that Goodison can have/had at its best.

Show me one 50k+ stadium that has that.

Old Trafford doesn't, the pit doesn't, whl and Highbury and the bowlyn, all had it, two now have a echo chamber atmosphere, spurs at Wembley are seeing the sort of crowds they'll be having in the new ground, people going as part of a holiday or day out etc, not fans of Tottenham in lots of cases.

We build a 60k ground, do people suddenly think it's gonna be Jan packed with blues creating a boss and intimidating effect.

It won't, 5-10k of those tickets will be bought but empty most weeks and only occupied for big games, the extra away seats will be empty for about a dozen aways per year, and we will have a shockingly empty looking stadium for most cup or European games.

There's a reason a lot of clubs building new stadiums abroad have gone away from the bigger is better model and have gone for design, and for what works for then as a club.

Far too many have fallen for the myth we need to go bigger than the rs and try to emulate city, arsenal and spurs new grounds etc.

We'd be better served following the Porto or juve model, and 50k imo is already reaching the point where it will lose us more than it gains.

 

[LouReedwalkonthewildside]

4th wasnt it?

Capacity, stands, and getting to it would feature higher for me.

The architect is the one who lives or dies if the design is Iconic. Or not.

Away skiing in France at the moment mate, so doing everything on my phone, so trying to keep up is so slow, no WiFi in the apartment we’ve rented,feels being back in the dark ages!

 

[Sir Alan]

Here's the thing, everyone getting in a twist about needing 60k+ seen some arguing we need 70k eventually.

Question, why do we?

We all want to keep the atmosphere that Goodison can have/had at its best.

Show me one 50k+ stadium that has that.

Old Trafford doesn't, the pit doesn't, whl and Highbury and the bowlyn, all had it, two now have a echo chamber atmosphere, spurs at Wembley are seeing the sort of crowds they'll be having in the new ground, people going as part of a holiday or day out etc, not fans of Tottenham in lots of cases.

We build a 60k ground, do people suddenly think it's gonna be Jan packed with blues creating a boss and intimidating effect.

It won't, 5-10k of those tickets will be bought but empty most weeks and only occupied for big games, the extra away seats will be empty for about a dozen aways per year, and we will have a shockingly empty looking stadium for most cup or European games.

There's a reason a lot of clubs building new stadiums abroad have gone away from the bigger is better model and have gone for design, and for what works for then as a club.

Far too many have fallen for the myth we need to go bigger than the rs and try to emulate city, arsenal and spurs new grounds etc.

We'd be better served following the Porto or juve model, and 50k imo is already reaching the point where it will lose us more than it gains.

What’s Dortmund’s?

They don’t suffer.

 

[LouReedwalkonthewildside]

I remember everyone moaning about getting a bowl.

“We just want 4 stands. Steep and close to the pitch”.

Now it’s “too small and square - an outrage. We want modern, traditional, iconic, never seen before design in a rhombus configuration”.

This whole process is useful as shows you’ll never please everyone, and if you actually get 50% fans liking it, you’ve done well.

As long as the acoustics are boss mate, got to have the atmosphere.

 

[Boss_Rarkley]

Yeah I would hate to have a stadium lacking atmosphere -

Old Trafford God that lack of atmosphere has killed their trophy cabinet

Emirates - Arsenal lucky to have won 3 cups in 5 years

Analfield - done nothing getting opposition teams to not turn up there

Meanwhile fortress Goodison, the Britannia, Upton Park etc. Have won us, Stoke and West Ham loads of pots lately oh wait...

 

[Jokerdan]

Here's the thing, everyone getting in a twist about needing 60k+ seen some arguing we need 70k eventually.

Question, why do we?

We all want to keep the atmosphere that Goodison can have/had at its best.

Show me one 50k+ stadium that has that.

Old Trafford doesn't, the pit doesn't, whl and Highbury and the bowlyn, all had it, two now have a echo chamber atmosphere, spurs at Wembley are seeing the sort of crowds they'll be having in the new ground, people going as part of a holiday or day out etc, not fans of Tottenham in lots of cases.

We build a 60k ground, do people suddenly think it's gonna be Jan packed with blues creating a boss and intimidating effect.

It won't, 5-10k of those tickets will be bought but empty most weeks and only occupied for big games, the extra away seats will be empty for about a dozen aways per year, and we will have a shockingly empty looking stadium for most cup or European games.

There's a reason a lot of clubs building new stadiums abroad have gone away from the bigger is better model and have gone for design, and for what works for then as a club.

Far too many have fallen for the myth we need to go bigger than the rs and try to emulate city, arsenal and spurs new grounds etc.

We'd be better served following the Porto or juve model, and 50k imo is already reaching the point where it will lose us more than it gains.

Would rather a 50k-55k capacity and one with an atmosphere which scares the shoite out of the opposition than a larger one that is soul-less and comprises 'tourists' wearing half and half scarves. Personally.

 

[Achilles Heel]

So via the survey "...99 per cent of respondents wanted the new stadium’s capacity to be 50,000 or more."

I'm sorry but I don't buy that. Looks like spin to me - massaging the results to engineer the preferred (& more affordable) outcome. If all 10,000 fans said 60,000 capacity, they could still use that statement because they all stated a number no less than 50,000. Looks increasingly like the club are preparing us for a lower number than West Ham and Newcastle. Jeez - hardly a trophy between them.

I will be shocked if we build a stadium that small in the current stadium building climate, especially knowing that later development is costly. However, I acknowledge that even if it was just 45,000, we have to move from Goodison.

Meis will probably argue that his new stadium for Roma is only 52,000 and let's face it, Rome and Roma are more instantly recognisable than the city of Liverpool & Everton. All in all it would be disappointing but that location and a breathtaking design should soften the blow.