BBC Home

Explore the BBC

Articles/ all comments

These 46 comments are related to an article called:

LFC - EFC STADIUM IDEA!

Page 1 of 1

posted Oct 5, 2008

It makes all the financial sense in the world.

But really it is a stupid idea, fans would never accept it, I know i wouldn't.

| complain about this comment

posted Oct 5, 2008

I would never accept it. Stupid idea in the first place.

| complain about this comment

posted Oct 5, 2008

This is the response I'd expect! Unless we get the option to expand Anfield, which ain't gonna happen, then there isn't going to be anything built, so the Mancs, Arsenal, and Chelsea dissappear off into the sunset!

Would you except it if it meant we could go out and try and buy the best players, or are we going to continue to shop at Woollies.

Face it, Utd bring in 2million more per game just in gate receipts alone, thats roughly 60 million per year, we've got to wake up!

| complain about this comment

posted Oct 5, 2008

I agree with you steviegwearsacape. Don't think that EFC could be expected to put in extra from occasional high gate though. Another major factor is that if we share a ground it would be considered a City Facility (especially if it also incorporated Athletics facilities) and would be eligible for European grant money.

| complain about this comment

posted Oct 5, 2008

I don't want to be asscociated with Everton. We need our own identity and a joint stadium takes that away.

It will no longer be Anfield because there will have to be half blue half red.

Why don't you accept that we will find a way eventually to build the stadium. Just be patient.

| complain about this comment

posted Oct 5, 2008

"he did claim that despite the credit crunch, the new stadium will be built as the underlying business reasons still exist!"

Seems sensible to me, since Liverpool earn the least of the 'big 4' and I believe earn something like 1.5m less than Man Utd. for every home game.

"Sorry, Rick but that is garbage, the cost of steel, the cost of money, inflation, the costs continue to rise every month"

Inflation isn't a new thing, and since the club will be borrowing to fund the construction of a new stadium it's actually a good thing since it erodes the effective interest paid on it (assuming the club raise their prices in line with inflation). Of course, the club have put the construction of the stadium on hold due to the current global financial situation, so I don't understand the point - I'm sure Rick Parry is aware of the things you mention.

"so the spectre of the groundshare raise its ugly head."

Not likely - the club have said it won't happen many times and are probably much too far down the road with their own plans to go back now.

"It is clear, we have a choice, do we "pool" our resources with Everton and share a new stadium, or do both wait around hoping to be bought by some foreign billionaire"

Or the third option - build our own stadium. The club are already owned by rich men any way, they just aren't rich enough to do it for fun.

| complain about this comment

posted Oct 5, 2008

i think the whole identity arguement is nonsence, we are still liverpool, we still have our history and will still make more history in a new stadium whether everton share or not. Does anybody think AC Milan have no identity because they share with inter? no. they are 2 massive, great, individual clubs. Ground sharing would not only put us on a par with the income of arsenal and chelsea, it would actually give us an advantage as we could share the running costs. I personally do not want to see Everton leave the city as it would have a negative effect on the derby. this wouldnt. In the current climate, im all for it. Parry keeps saying the fans don't want it but things have changed since oppinion poles were taken.

| complain about this comment

posted Oct 5, 2008

we've got to wake up!
------------------------
We do have to wake up; English football is going to disappear up its own back passage with all the money and billionaires. UEFA will not stand for clubs dominating Europe will Billionaire owners or on un-servicable debt for too long. Rules will be changed, and the game will change. IMO, we should stay and Anfield for the next few years and see what happens.

| complain about this comment

posted Oct 5, 2008

The club are not owned by rich men, they are skint, before the latest announcement about the stadium delay RBS wanted our owners to put up 25% of the initial cost, they were then going on a desperate attempt to BORROW the deposit money from another bank, you couldn't make it up!

This ground is gonna hold 60,000, 15,000 more than Anfield, every seat brings in around 1000 per seat with additional merchandising, food etc... thats an additional 15million per year, and that would not even cover the interest on a loan of 300m let alone start paying it back, and then you've got to fund transfers! THIS GROUND AIN'T GONNA GET BUILT!

| complain about this comment

posted Oct 5, 2008

I think actually we should follow the Bayern Munich/1860 Munich model, where the stadium is owned by and run as a third party company, who (at the start) are owned 50-50 by the clubs, and any procedes are divided between them.

This has the major advantage as it solves any issues about who pays for improvements (the stadium company) and what happens if one club is relegated or goes bankrupt (their share can be sold to the other club or a third party).

| complain about this comment

posted Oct 5, 2008

"The club are not owned by rich men, they are skint, before the latest announcement about the stadium delay RBS wanted our owners to put up 25% of the initial cost, they were then going on a desperate attempt to BORROW the deposit money from another bank, you couldn't make it up!"

Well of course they aren't going to put their own money into it, because I strongly doubt they have anything like 60-80m lying around in cash (well between them they might but they aren't going to put all their working capital into one venture). That doesn't mean they are broke, it means they are doing what most businesses do to fund expansion. Surely no-one thought they were going to produce 300m in cash and buy the club a new stadium...

| complain about this comment

posted Oct 5, 2008

Face facts, Everton are skint.
Liverpool are skint.
The yanks are skint.
Royal bank of Scotland is skint.
Wachovia bank is skint.
The ground cannot be built by using debt.
However the Arabs are not skint and would not have to use debt.

| complain about this comment

posted Oct 5, 2008

jrphayes

That sounds interesting!

As for staying at Anfield for a few more years, and see what happens, blimey I'll tell you what will happen both Man Utd and Arsenal financially will zoom further away in money terms!

As for being patient, the area is desperate for this investment now, how many more years are we willing to wait!

| complain about this comment

posted Oct 5, 2008

It's just not a good idea. We are LIVERPOOL. Would there have been any point in starting ideas for OUR stadium in stanley park if we thought "oh we could share with everton"

| complain about this comment

posted Oct 5, 2008

"It's just not a good idea. We are LIVERPOOL."

What does that actually mean in real terms though (and don't give me some rubbish about me not being a proper fan if I don't know it).

If we share a stadium we are still LiVERPOOL. When we play away in other stadia we are still LIVERPOOL.

It just sounds to me like you are trying avoid good business reasons by hiding behind hyperbole.

| complain about this comment

posted Oct 5, 2008

I know the area is desperate for investment, I live not too far away from the ground. However, investment in the local area should be the priority of LCC, NW development agency and the Government. The people of L4/6 should not have to be relying on a stadium build for regeneration.

I doubt Arsenal and Utd would zoom away in financial terms; Utd's debt is ridiculous, the levels of debt on clubs cannot be sustained indefinately, Utd cannot simply afford to keep spending. They may make a working profit but AIG are not immune to the global money worries.

| complain about this comment

posted Oct 5, 2008

Would those who are against any potential groundshare change their minds if Rogan Taylors idea of a fans buyout of the club would be possible only with this solution?

| complain about this comment

posted Oct 5, 2008

How would the pitch cope? possible champs league game wednesdat, uefa cup thursday, match saturday, peeing down rain. Milan share a stadium because they have to not because they want to.

Shareliverpool scheme could still mean a stadium is built. How do you think Barca are refunding their redevelopment, with outside investment.

| complain about this comment

posted Oct 5, 2008

Absolutely and utterly totally against Ground-sharing with Everton , how could any true Red (or true blue) even contemplate such a thought .
I shudder just at the very thought of such a move .
I suspect you are not a Scouser as you have obviously no idea about what you are suggesting , I do not know a single fellow scouser in this great city who would want a ground-share and these two great clubs belong to us the local people.
It always seems to be out of town fans who think this is a palatable move .
I do not pretend to have the answers to the current dilemma and I respect your opinion (and your support) BUT sharing is a massive NO from both sides of the park .
Please don't throw in the old "but Milan teams can do it" . We are not Inter or AC we are Liverpool & Everton .

YNWA

| complain about this comment

posted Oct 5, 2008

Scottish scouser, that problem is avoided by organising the fixtures (like in Milan either one team plays away when the other plays at home, or one european fixture is delayed by a week). Milan is always the example trotted out, as it doesn't work so well, but positive shares, such as my Munich example above have worked very well, in their case so well they are now sharing their second stadium together.

| complain about this comment

posted Oct 5, 2008

Scottish Scouser they just don't understand , I pity them.

| complain about this comment

posted Oct 5, 2008

@BillyLiddellsBoots,

you haven't said though why you don't like the idea, only that you don't.

Surely you can see that from a purely financial point of view it would make sense.

So with that we could use the money elsewhere, such as improving the team. I understand from a fans point of view it wouldn't be ideal, and clearly it would be nice for each club to have their own stadium, but for the sake of having a bigger stadium at half the cost, it surely has to make sense?

| complain about this comment

posted Oct 5, 2008

Jrphayes,

The thing is, I suspect, with the FA cup and Carling Cup, we have more fixtures than the Italians or Germans. The weather is also a factor. While I appreciate both Mnnich and Milan experience snowfall in the winter,their weather is generally dryer and they have a mid-winter break.

| complain about this comment

posted Oct 5, 2008

BillyLiddellsBoots,

I know what you mean but I think it's a bit harsh to say fans from other areas don't understand. Many probably do but I would agree that it may be less of a wrench for fans from other areas to share a stadium.

| complain about this comment

posted Oct 5, 2008

I'm sorry but it's a matter of Identity , our stadium is OUR home not Theirs , I dont want any blue plastic seats in our ground , I don't want to see Chang Beer adverts , I don't want to sit in a seat that a Toffee also thinks belongs to him !
I know we aren't talking Celtic & Rangers sharing here but in terms of tradition , history , etc its on a par .
I think it boils down to if you live in the city you understand and if you don't there is a possibility that you misunderstand the feeling of pride that both the blues and ourselves have with our own separate identities .
I could easily cut and paste my comments onto the Everton forum and they would 99% all agree .
I mean for goodness sake 1860 Munich who the hell are they ! I only heard of them about 7-8 years ago !
I would rather stay at Anfield and wait it out for some billionaire .

| complain about this comment

posted Oct 5, 2008

I'm sorry if my comments about out of town fans caused offence to anybody , I do appreciate your support of LFC .
I should point out I don't think all of them want to share just a teeny amount , in fact the ones I have met after games etc certainly don't.
Its such an explosive subject I think I got a bit carried away !!

| complain about this comment

posted Oct 5, 2008

Billyliddellsboots

What would you say to a fan who is on the current season ticket waiting list? You say wouldn't like a toffee sitting in your seat, but at least you have one!

I don't like the idea, in fact I hate it, but what I hate more is the prospect of our club falling further behind you know who! I have come to the conclusion that watching the best quality football in a shared stadium, is more preferable than watching LFC fighting for 3rd or 4th at Anfield!

The status quo in not an option any longer!

| complain about this comment

posted Oct 5, 2008

As for the pitch, with modern technology the pitch can be lifted on large trays and moved outside. This years Superbowl in Arizona has this technology, it allows the stadium to be used for more than football matches, its this kind of investment that will regenerate the surrounding area.

| complain about this comment

posted Oct 5, 2008

Stevie,

How big do you think Stanley Park is? How often do American football teams play, once a fortnight. Its not a matter of lifting the pitch out for other events, its a matter of leaving it in there and getting knackered because a match will be played on it every 4 days for nine months.

And yes, the stadium would bring regeneration but Anfield and Kenny should have been a priority for the Capital of Culture. The City Centre looks great, walk ten mins up the road to Kenny Fields and Kensington and it doesn't look so good. That regeneration should not have to be part of stadium plans.

| complain about this comment

posted Oct 5, 2008

I'm afraid you Scousers have got to smell the coffee and agree to groundshare. Otherwise I fear that both clubs will slowly ebb away into mid-table mediocrity forever, which is where Everton are anyway. 'Pool' resources and build a ground like Munich's, like someone else said. Its the supporters who make the atmosphere not the colour of a plastic seat. If the ground is rendered with the panels used on the Allianz arena it can be blue or red depending on who's playing.
Swallow your pride and remember that Preston , Wolves and Spurs were big clubs once.

| complain about this comment

comment by phil (U10587633)

posted Oct 5, 2008

buy up a couple of rows of houses behind the main stand, knock em and the main stand, build a new 3 tier main stand in its place like the north stand in old trafford

cost approx 80-90m max, capacity now would be 60,000, problem solved everyone happy

| complain about this comment

comment by phil (U10587633)

posted Oct 5, 2008

basingcherry (U7643386)
posted Just Now

I'm afraid you Scousers have got to smell the coffee and agree to groundshare. Otherwise I fear that both clubs will slowly ebb away into mid-table mediocrity forever, which is where Everton are anyway. 'Pool' resources and build a ground like Munich's, like someone else said. Its the supporters who make the atmosphere not the colour of a plastic seat. If the ground is rendered with the panels used on the Allianz arena it can be blue or red depending on who's playing.
Swallow your pride and remember that Preston , Wolves and Spurs were big clubs once.

____________________

i remember this exact same argument was made by an everton fan writing into the echo in 1997, he was wrong then you are wrong now

| complain about this comment

posted Oct 5, 2008

I can fully understand the financial benefits but I do agree with BillyLidellsBoots on this. The fans don't think about the finances or we wouldn't be wanting the club to put 30mill offers in for every tom dick and Harry every summer. We think about club identity, tribalism (in a good way) a sense of pride in our club's home. I'm not saying that over time a shared stadium could't give us these things bit I just wouldn't feel at home.

| complain about this comment

posted Oct 5, 2008

Scottishscouser

How big do you think Stanley Park is?

Why not place the pitch where the current pitch is now? And re-develop the area around it, like what is proposed?

As for knocking down a few rows of houses and build a new stand, that is the obvious option, however the residents have fought a campaign, and the council have ruled out this possibilty of compulsary purchase of these homes, something to do with human rights!

| complain about this comment

posted Oct 5, 2008

Shall we buy a new ground for you? Shall we buy a new ground for you?

| complain about this comment

posted Oct 5, 2008

reading these comments reminds me of how away with the fairies Liverpool fans are, much like newcastle fans you seem to think that you deserve to be the biggest team in the although i spose at least your reasoning for it is more than that one time when Newcastle beat Man U.....

I dont see how a new stadium is going to turn things around for you or make you able to compete with Utd and Chelsea especially. I find it somewhat naive in fact that you believe just by building a new ground you will be a better team.

Perhaps you need to take a look inside and sort out your internal bitching, i mean it is quite amusing you are run more of less like a kids playground. And that is probably part of the reason your stadium isnt being built.

It does also make me laugh how if i remember rightly it was all the liverpool fans who were excited about their american owners and how they were going to be so much better than the galziers, well im not being funny but it seems to have been the other way round, the glaziers have stayed in the background and appreciated that the people at the club knew hoe to run it properly so they left them to it and just kept an eye on them. The way your owners have gone about running things is frankly like watching a carry on film.

Get over yourselves you are not a title contending team.

| complain about this comment

comment by jro786 (U4511949)

posted Oct 5, 2008

i'm afraid that rick parry is desperate man looking at desperate measures

| complain about this comment

posted Oct 5, 2008

leesharpuk1984 (U9663528)

mate, arsenal having moved to the Emirates stadium take in about 2-3 million pounds- a game. Taking into account Liverpool will play about 30 home games, which with a 70,000 capacity will increase revenue by almost 1million pounds- a game. An extra 30 million pounds to be spent on players is not the kind of money that any team would turn down- especially a club as good as Liverpool.

As to your other comments, Liverpool have been one of the top teams in Europe for years now- there isnt a team that would willingly play us in Europe now. I think that defines us as a big club with title aspirations.

| complain about this comment

posted Oct 5, 2008

I never said you didnt have title aspirations, im sure every team in the league has title aspirations. What i said is that you are not title contenders.

As for the money thing, you have spent quite a bit over the last few years and i dont see you any closer to winning the league. I admit that in europe you are quite formidable but cup competitions are different from a league one off day and you are out one good day and you can put a good team out. They rely a lot more on "luck". League tables dont lie at the end of the season.

As for the extra income, dont you think that will be going to pay back what the stadium cost. Arsenal do indeed rake in a fair amount extra in gate receipts but i dont see Arsene either needing or having that to spend every year.

Run the club properly and perhaps you will be on your way.

| complain about this comment

posted Oct 5, 2008

This idea is as bad, if not worse than the stupid idea of Liverpool re-signing Michael Owen. Some Scouse hating cockney or manc must keep regurgitating this story, as no-one with the slightest comprehension of football on Merseyside would think there is the slightest merit to this stupid idea. Anyone who thinks this idea could work has never been to a match in their lives.

| complain about this comment

posted Oct 5, 2008

How many times do Liverpool have to say they have no interest in ground-sharing. The alternative to Stanley Park is staying at a redeveloped Anfield. I hear Spurs are after a new ground. I don't hear anyone suggesting they should share The Emirates with Arsenal. Why not? It makes as much sense as Liverpool sharing with Everton.People who don't support either club need to stop interfering in matters that don't concern them.

| complain about this comment

posted Oct 5, 2008

Basically this is just an unfortunate situation due to the current financial climate. Two years ago this wouldn't have been an issue. Iam not a Liverpudlian nor a fan of either team, but i can appriciate both sides of the arguement.
Unfortunately i don't agree to references about the Man Utd debt issue. As a business they are sustainable and therefore are not really in debt, if AIG go bust Man Utd will simply find a new sponsor.
I think Liverpool too a a fairly sustainable team however the credit crunch has just made it that little bit too risky to press ahead. As things stand it is not viable to build a stadium whatever the circumstances, groundshare or not!
The only thing to do is wait until then, and then assess this issue. This argument is only worthwhile if the building work can take place, as things stand even a joint venture would bo too risky to invest in, so lets wait until the world sorts itself out and then have this discussion?

| complain about this comment

posted Oct 5, 2008

A ground sharing deal with Everton makes so much sense. By working together, the two clubs could have a really magnificent stadium, the best in England, but instead they're both going to end up with decent stadiums - that is, if they ever get built at all. By combining resources they could probably get started very quickly, rather than waiting for the credit crunch to end. Just look at Lazio and Roma, Inter and AC Milan - it CAN work. I guess both sets of fans are just too stubborn to contemplate the idea in this case.

| complain about this comment

comment by DB (U8257466)

posted Oct 6, 2008

Groundshare needs to happen, and now. Already, it is probably the only way Liverpool and Everton can solve their stadium problems, particularly in the current financial crisis, and in a few years the price of steel and building materials will have flown the coop and they'll be stuck where they are.

Groundshare is also an economic no-brainer because the economics of stadiums have changed. In the 1970s when Rangers rebuilt Ibrox, game-day revenues (meat pies, prawn sandwiches, executive boxes, tickets) were terrible, and the key to financing the deal was the convention centre and office space generating cash all through the week. Now, game-day revenues are front and center, meaning that the question of two teams worrying about how to share Ibrox-style revenues does not apply. It really is a two-for-the-price of one situation, and if the two sets of fans turn it down, they'll get what they deserve -- mid-table mediocrity.

If Bayern and TSV 1860 can do this with a privately-financed stadium in Munich, and if Inter and AC Milan can do it in a situation where there's so much enmity that they can't even agree on the name of the stadium, why not Liverpool and Everton?

| complain about this comment

comment by DB (U8257466)

posted Oct 6, 2008

Re: anyoldusername -- Spurs and Arsenal are at least four miles apart -- not four blocks apart like Everton and Liverpool. Bit of a difference on groundshare when the ground to be shared is within sight and hearing range of both existing stadiums. It's not like expecting people in Enfield to trek almost all the way into central London every home game. Besides, Arsenal were able to pay for it themselves without an outside investor. Good for them. Liverpool and Everton can't do that.

| complain about this comment

posted Mar 17, 2009

Hello the past

| complain about this comment

Page 1 of 1

HINTS & TIPS

Deleting comments

You are in charge of your own space - if you see an offensive comment, you can delete it

Reasonable debate is allowed - please don't delete a comment just because you don't agree with it

If you are not sure, or feel a comment warrants further attention, you can refer it to a moderator instead