We are not investor friendly

Neiler · September 3, 2008

Dont City rent their stadium though!

Bundy · September 3, 2008

Sorry i meant the [Poor language removed].

-------
The Manchester club was the choice because Arsenal's major shareholders have collectively agreed not to sell to anybody in the near future, Newcastle were quoted at £400m and Liverpool were deemed poor value because of the need for a new stadium.

The Esk · September 3, 2008

The bid for the RS hot up....

Liverpool the subject of fresh Dubai bid - Football - Telegraph

Liverpool the subject of fresh Dubai bid

Sheikh Mohammed, the ruler of Dubai, has reportedly sanctioned an increased offer of £500 million to buy Liverpool.

With the global banking crisis leaving Liverpool’s American owners unable to finance plans for a new stadium in Stanley Park, the club are in danger of treading water.

Cash flow is not a concern for Dubai International Capital, one of Sheikh Mohammed’s investment arms, who are now optimistic that this renewed bid will be accepted.

A report in this morning’s Sun claims the new offer would clear the club’s debt and see Hicks and Gillett both walk away with a profit of £75 million.
Manchester City’s takeover by the Abu Dhabi United group makes the situation of Liverpool’s ownership all the more critical.

With such financial muscle, City can now realistically expect to mount a serious challenge for one of four Champions League places.

Liverpool and Arsenal are most at risk, but the impact of failure to qualify for the Champions League would be much greater at Anfield, where matchday revenues are dwarfed by those raised at the larger and more corporate-friendly Emirates Stadium.

It is estimated Arsenal generate £50 million more than Liverpool every year simply through this means, making the need to leave Anfield all the more pressing.

When they bought the club in 2007, Hicks and Gillett promised work on the new stadium would begin almost immediately.

But with annual interest payments of £30 million and the current financial climate as it is, there are fears on Merseyside that the Texan pair are simply incapable of fulfilling their pledges.

Blue Ray · September 3, 2008

Interesting

sotnas · September 3, 2008

BlackToffee said:
Without getting into the Kirkby debate per say;

1. THe old one is, well, old
2. 4,000 obstructed view
3. Can't hold more people which would equal more match day income
4. Not enough corporate seats (not enough income)
5. As new building regulations come in, more expensive to maintain
6. New stadia would allow us to hold more non match day income events

This is not a Kirkby argument, it is an upgrade / rebuild / new stadia argument. The status quo cannot remain.

The old one is old....can't it be refreshed?

Obstructed view...is it impossible to fix this?

More people + corporate seats.... ok, we'll spend the next 20 years paying all that and someday someone might tell us that we have to sell our best players because of loans and interests related to the new stadium.

More non match day income events...like what? music concerts? Well, what about the grass quality?

Believe me I've seen what a big mistake a new stadium could be.

Keep the money, sign good players. I would watch these exciting new players standing if there were no seats.

SuitsBlue · September 3, 2008

sotnas said:
The old one is old....can't it be refreshed?

Obstructed view...is it impossible to fix this?

More people + corporate seats.... ok, we'll spend the next 20 years paying all that and someday someone might tell us that we have to sell our best players because of loans and interests related to the new stadium.

More non match day income events...like what? music concerts? Well, what about the grass quality?

Believe me I've seen what a big mistake a new stadium could be.

Keep the money, sign good players. I would watch these exciting new players standing if there were no seats.

not if you were stood behind a great big pillar you wouldn't.

sotnas · September 3, 2008

SuitsBlue said:
not if you were stood behind a great big pillar you wouldn't.

Mate, that litte thing can surely be fixed at a reasonable price. It's just engineering.

SuitsBlue · September 3, 2008

sotnas said:
Mate, that litte thing can surely be fixed at a reasonable price. It's just engineering.

i agree, hopefully all the pillars can be removed and god will take the weight of the stadia + all the people with his invisible hands.

goodison isnt up to a reasonable standard. it needs bulldozing and rebuilding entirely.

but everton dont own enough land around goodison to increase the stadium footprint.

so its a no goer.

Makis · September 3, 2008

SuitsBlue said:
i agree, hopefully all the pillars can be removed and god will take the weight of the stadia + all the people with his invisible hands.

Honestly, another message from you that show you don't have a clue.

The roof can be built with modern materials in a way that no supporting pillars are needed. You would have noticed this if you had had a look at about any modern roofed stadium.

SuitsBlue said:
but everton dont own enough land around goodison to increase the stadium footprint.

LCC has already said the school is available if Everton want it.

SuitsBlue · September 3, 2008

Makis said:
Honestly, another message from you that show you don't have a clue.

The roof can be built with modern materials in a way that no supporting pillars are needed. You would have noticed this if you had had a look at about any modern roofed stadium.

LCC has already said the school is available if Everton want it.

L shaped stadium and pitch sounds like a laugh.

as for the roof, where do you think the weight is in the gwladys? that floor thing that people stand on when they sit in the upper gwladys might look like a roof from the perspective of the lower gwladys but it is so very much more.

ToffeeDan · September 3, 2008

Goodison can be redeveloped but it requires vision and funding - the footprint has some potential for a compact say 44,000 seater - there is potential to build a circular, enclosed ground utilising the excess space on the Park End car park.

I believe this would require more corporate options and perhaps "affordable executive boxes" - for the likes of you and me! Decent catering would be a good start. Selling more merchandise in and around the ground (instead of hawkers, well don't stop them but do it yourself INSIDE AND OUTSIDE the ground!) would help.

The average fan spends money in and around the ground on food beer programme, ticket, merchandise, fanzine etc. - so something like £50 a game (including the ticket of course) - that's a lot of opportunity wasted.

Makis · September 3, 2008

SuitsBlue said:
L shaped stadium and pitch sounds like a laugh.

How about expanding towards Bullen's Road?

SuitsBlue said:
as for the roof, where do you think the weight is in the gwladys? that floor thing that people stand on when they sit in the upper gwladys might look like a roof from the perspective of the lower gwladys but it is so very much more.

You must be realblue or one of the other wacko's from Kipper? There are numerous examples of buildings that carry much more weight than that, but you still insist on arguing. Just like someone who argued that building a plinth in the Loop is impossible or too expensive.

SuitsBlue · September 3, 2008

Makis said:
How about expanding towards Bullen's Road?

You must be realblue or one of the other wacko's from Kipper? There are numerous examples of buildings that carry much more weight than that, but you still insist on arguing. Just like someone who argued that building a plinth in the Loop is impossible or too expensive.

houses.

''must be'' :blink:

lets have a look at these numerous examples then...

Nebbiolo · September 3, 2008

GP can be redeveloped. The point is whether it could match our desire for a good quality stadium with a capacity approaching the 50,000 mark. Then there is the problem with the housing surrounding the ground. Surely we would need to look at getting hold of some of this and expanding the footprint somewhat. I think it can be done but I agree with Suits in the sense that it is by no means straightforwardly obvious about how it is actually done. Also the club has done pretty much everything in its power to avoid putting this up as an option. If it was taken seriously, and professionals were employed to come up with plans, then we might see exactly how easy, or hard, the proposal would be.

But I'd sooner GP as our home than Kirkby. But maybe I'm just an old romantic.