Liverpool and Everton 'must' share new stadium, council says
-
*Liverpool and Everton 'must' share new ground, council says* • Liverpool might not be included on World Cup bid • Everton condemn comments as 'utter nonsense . . . Liverpool and Everton must share a new stadium if they are to thrive in future, the leader of Liverpool City Council has said. If they do not, the city will not be included within England's 2018 World Cup bid because "Anfield and Goodison Park do not fit Fifa's Âcriteria". Warren Bradley, also head of the city's 2018 bid committee, has brought the groundshare debate to the fore again after Liverpool's accounts showed the club lost £42.6m last year. Bradley, who says he has "seen the books of both clubs", told The Observer: "We've got to do something if we are serious about being a bidding city for the World Cup. I don't want to see everything migrate down the M62 to Manchester where there are two fabulous stadiums," he said, refering to Old Trafford and ÂEastlands. "There is a need for a 60,000 fit-for-purpose, 21st-century stadium in ÂLiverpool. It would cost around £300m. Sure, we still have the tribalistic Âsupporters in the city who would say, 'I won't sit in it after a Liverpudlian or Evertonian has.' But that's not the Âargument, is it? I don't see any reason why it can't work – it does so across the southern hemisphere, and in Germany, Italy and America." The prospective stadium would be situated between the two clubs on Stanley Park, where Liverpool have said they would like to build their own new ground. Both clubs are dismissive of ÂBradley's claims, but Bradley is confident he has support across Liverpool. "What I've said is absolutely right and is now being amplified in the city in Âbusiness, at the clubs privately, and with the supporters. When you speak privately to different people at the clubs – at director level – they tell you what they think, but will never publicly go on record. "There is a groundswell of support now that it is the only way forward for both football clubs." Bradley's views are backed by the Northwest Regional Development Agency, a major stakeholder in the city's bid, which said: "The Agency was Âsupportive of the idea of a groundshare between Liverpool and Everton due to the economic sense this made. However, we accept that any decision has always been a matter for the two clubs." Bradley accepts that they must be on board, but believes that there is now no other choice. "We recognise the Fifa Âcriteria that both clubs must have 40,000-plus seats available to the paying public that doesn't include VIPs. I don't believe either club is in a position to satisfy that criteria, so therefore something needs to be done quickly." Goodison Park is Âdefinitely too small, while Anfield's capacity of 45,000-plus may also fall short of Ârequirements. The struggle of Liverpool owners Bill Hicks and George Gillet to refinance their £350m debt facility by the end of next month would seem to threaten the club's plans to build its own stadium on Stanley Park. Liverpool declined to comment, but it is understood they maintain it is business as usual. Everton, meanwhile, will find out by the autumn if their proposed Âcontroversial move outside the city to a new stadium at Kirkby – in partnership with Tesco – will be agreed by the Âgovernment. Bradley is sceptical. "The longer it goes on the less likelihood it can be delivered financially by the club. I firmly believe Everton is taking the wrong step by moving out of the city," he said. "This is raw economics. I've had a Âseason ticket at Everton for 30 years, so this is not about which way the wind is Âblowing. "I firmly believe the economic Âviability of both clubs, not only in the present climate, but, in the future, has got to be the ability to invest on the field, not in hard infrastructure. ÂHaving looked at the books of both clubs, at the moment about 70% of the bottom line goes to hard infrastructure. If they shared a stadium they could cut that down to about 30 to 35 per cent and the rest could go on footballers." While Liverpool would not comment on the record, Everton spokesman Ian Ross was explicit in voicing the club's anger at Bradley. "Yes, the Everton directors have one view and that view is that we should push ahead with the destination project. For Warren Bradley to suggest that the directors have one view and that is [to have] a shared stadium is the usual utter nonsense. "We have spent nearly three years working on destination Kirkby and are giving absolutely no consideration to any other scheme. Perhaps Âcouncillor Bradley should have fought somewhat harder to keep Everton inside the ÂLiverpool city boundary if he is that intent on a joint stadium. "We would have welcomed more help from our city council – that never Âhappened, which is why we pursued Kirkby. For councillor ÂBradley to now claim there is a weight of Âopinion to Âsuggest we should now have a joint Âstadium would appear to be Âopportunism of the first order." Bradley said he will chair a meeting over the coming fortnight of the stakeholders involved in the city's bid to be part of England 2018. It will include the directors of Liverpool and Everton and the idea of a joint stadium is bound to be discussed ahead of the first visit to the city by the 2018 committee next month. By then Liverpool's financial situation may also be clearer. If RBS, one of the two main creditors, does not wish to refinance its part of the debt the bank could countenance actually running the club itself. As the credit crisis has made the government and taxpayer a sizeable owner of RBS this would be Âunprecedented in English football and would have major implications for the Premier League as a global brand. The Premier League was unavailable for comment.
-
i would rather stay in Anfield .
-
but i wouldn't mind to share a massive 120,000 capacity stadium .
120,000 capacity means good generation of gates money and member ship , season tickets sales .
-
NO
i wont be happy abt this, sharing is not going to happen
-
the design of the stadium must be 2 sides .
2 Grand Stand areas , 2 Fans Lounges , 2 different merchandise outlets .
1 big carpark .
Just 2 sides , 2 different facilities .
Unless 2 clubs can come into terms , to share all .
-
two faces ... north side for everton , south extrance for Liverpool .
that was in terms of local derby games .
-
Liverton?
-
if Inter and AC can share a San Siro , Liverpool and Everton must send delegation go check out how they run the show there .
Also can come Jalan Besar Stadium , share by many S-league teams .
A few S-League teams got no Home stadium .
-
Originally posted by youyayu:
Liverton?
share stadium la , not teams . Teams ? Over my body !!! -
u must well say : " Anfieldison Park " ???
-
sound not bad
-
Originally posted by Poolman:
if Inter and AC can share a San Siro , Liverpool and Everton must send delegation go check out how they run the show there .
Also can come Jalan Besar Stadium , share by many S-league teams .
A few S-League teams got no Home stadium .
Don't forget Stadio Olimpico is shared between Roma and Lazio!
-
Sharing a bigger stadium is actually a much better way to go for both clubs... Both are intent on building a new stadium but can't seem to see pass traditional rivalry... The fans don't realise that while Everton's current plans could only build a 50,000 stadium, joining with Pool will allow them to build a 70,000 stadium straight away... Liverpool on the other hand, don't even have the money to build a new stadium... They need to borrow 100% of it... We can just take a look at Arsenal... After borrowing to built their stadium, they are now so in debt that it has effected their squad... But they are still a success story considering they have a good policy of bringing in youth players over the years that are quite comparable to the star players... Everton, most likely won't have as much problems as their plans for a new stadium isn't as costly as the one Pool have in mind... Everton's plans is for a low budget stadium and they have a sponsor willing to pay 40% of it also... Anyway, they are not expected to be challenging for the title, so they can continue to rely on average players on lower salary and a modest yearly transfer budget as well... Liverpool cannot, their fans expect them to be challenging for the title and at least a top 4 finish every year... These would require not only a yearly $30 to $40 million of transfer fees, it would also mean a good portion is needed for star players salary as well... It seems to me like Liverpool can't keep up with these... Even if the current owners get their loans refinanced, it would only prolong their problems... And if they do get another loan to build their own new stadium... It would only mean a bigger debt to repay... and a bigger yearly interest repayment as well... So, sharing a stadium could make a better economic Âsense for both clubs... More for Liverpool than Everton actually but it will still help Everton's cause i guess... I see Liverpool in serious trouble... Cos if they do go ahead with building a new expensive stadium, it would mean... whatever generate from the pitch will go into paying for it and servicing their loans interest... with little left for yearly team improvements I guess... But all these could suddenly go away if the 2 owners suddenly sells it to a rich guy... But a more near future problems awaits... If they fail to get a refinance... The club could be taken over by the bank, what the bank does with it is anybodies guess... But the bank itself was recently taken over by the government... So they can actually become the first club to be taken over by the government instead of a private company...
-
yea.. and can split the cost.. not a bad idea
-
Originally posted by zocoss:
Sharing a bigger stadium is actually a much better way to go for both clubs… Both are intent on building a new stadium but can’t seem to see pass traditional rivalry…
The fans don’t realise that while Everton’s current plans could only build a 50,000 stadium, joining with Pool will allow them to build a 70,000 stadium straight away… Liverpool on the other hand, don’t even have the money to build a new stadium… They need to borrow 100% of it…
We can just take a look at Arsenal… After borrowing to built their stadium, they are now so in debt that it has effected their squad… But they are still a success story considering they have a good policy of bringing in youth players over the years that are quite comparable to the star players… Everton, most likely won’t have as much problems as their plans for a new stadium isn’t as costly as the one Pool have in mind… Everton’s plans is for a low budget stadium and they have a sponsor willing to pay 40% of it also… Anyway, they are not expected to be challenging for the title, so they can continue to rely on average players on lower salary and a modest yearly transfer budget as well…
Liverpool cannot, their fans expect them to be challenging for the title and at least a top 4 finish every year… These would require not only a yearly $30 to $40 million of transfer fees, it would also mean a good portion is needed for star players salary as well…
It seems to me like Liverpool can’t keep up with these… Even if the current owners get their loans refinanced, it would only prolong their problems… And if they do get another loan to build their own new stadium… It would only mean a bigger debt to repay… and a bigger yearly interest repayment as well…
So, sharing a stadium could make a better economic sense for both clubs… More for Liverpool than Everton actually but it will still help Everton’s cause i guess…
I see Liverpool in serious trouble… Cos if they do go ahead with building a new expensive stadium, it would mean… whatever generate from the pitch will go into paying for it and servicing their loans interest… with little left for yearly team improvements I guess… But all these could suddenly go away if the 2 owners suddenly sells it to a rich guy…
But a more near future problems awaits… If they fail to get a refinance… The club could be taken over by the bank, what the bank does with it is anybodies guess… But the bank itself was recently taken over by the government… So they can actually become the first club to be taken over by the government instead of a private company…
This guy very own opinion la ...... many Liverpool fans would think our very own stadium is meant for Long Terms Liverpool success .But at the mean time , the situation from the 2 American Owners just don't allowed us to do it .
Long term is the 2 words .
-
Originally posted by youyayu:
yea.. and can split the cost.. not a bad idea
not easy la ...... -
Originally posted by zocoss:
Sharing a bigger stadium is actually a much better way to go for both clubs… Both are intent on building a new stadium but can’t seem to see pass traditional rivalry…
The fans don’t realise that while Everton’s current plans could only build a 50,000 stadium, joining with Pool will allow them to build a 70,000 stadium straight away… Liverpool on the other hand, don’t even have the money to build a new stadium… They need to borrow 100% of it…
We can just take a look at Arsenal… After borrowing to built their stadium, they are now so in debt that it has effected their squad… But they are still a success story considering they have a good policy of bringing in youth players over the years that are quite comparable to the star players… Everton, most likely won’t have as much problems as their plans for a new stadium isn’t as costly as the one Pool have in mind… Everton’s plans is for a low budget stadium and they have a sponsor willing to pay 40% of it also… Anyway, they are not expected to be challenging for the title, so they can continue to rely on average players on lower salary and a modest yearly transfer budget as well…
Liverpool cannot, their fans expect them to be challenging for the title and at least a top 4 finish every year… These would require not only a yearly $30 to $40 million of transfer fees, it would also mean a good portion is needed for star players salary as well…
It seems to me like Liverpool can’t keep up with these… Even if the current owners get their loans refinanced, it would only prolong their problems… And if they do get another loan to build their own new stadium… It would only mean a bigger debt to repay… and a bigger yearly interest repayment as well…
So, sharing a stadium could make a better economic sense for both clubs… More for Liverpool than Everton actually but it will still help Everton’s cause i guess…
I see Liverpool in serious trouble… Cos if they do go ahead with building a new expensive stadium, it would mean… whatever generate from the pitch will go into paying for it and servicing their loans interest… with little left for yearly team improvements I guess… But all these could suddenly go away if the 2 owners suddenly sells it to a rich guy…
But a more near future problems awaits… If they fail to get a refinance… The club could be taken over by the bank, what the bank does with it is anybodies guess… But the bank itself was recently taken over by the government… So they can actually become the first club to be taken over by the government instead of a private company…
yo,
U forget the key element that made Liverpool what it is - their passionate supporters.
I do believe if the call goes out, many, I meant many will come forth and do a "barcelona" and "buy" the club.. never, never underestimate this passion...
-
He is just giving them some advice as a leader of Liverpool City Council... He said there is a need for a 60,000 fit-for-purpose, 21st-century stadium in ÂLiverpool and he has “seen the books of both clubsâ€�... Therefore he was just advising on a more economic Âsense plan for both clubs... Everton's plans is only for a 50 to 55, 000 stadium only... The earlier the stadium is built, the earlier it will benefit both clubs... Larger capacity, means more weekly gate collections too... Sharing means lesser layout needed and also lesser loans required, which transpire into lesser interest repayment as well... I can't see any long term benefits for Liverpool having their own stadium when they can't even afford it right now... Sharing a stadium would be better for them... Cos at the rate they are going... I don't see their stadium up even in 5 year from now... That is how many years of lost profits?
-
[yo, U forget the key element that made Liverpool what it is - their passionate supporters. I do believe if the call goes out, many, I meant many will come forth and do a "barcelona" and "buy" the club.. never, never underestimate this passion...] I think you are mistaken here... The 2 American businessman are there to make a killing in profits... They are not going to suddenly become nice and call out to the fans and "give" share away on the cheap... Anyway, it wouldn't solve the problems... A lot of money is required if you add the new stadium... And I also doubt the fans can afford it... They would have probably listed themselves on the stock market first before coming to this like what Arsenal are presently... But doing so they risk losing control of the club... So its a too simplistic way of thinking... What happen in Spain doesn't mean it will work in England too... There are different conditions or Newcastle would have done it long ago already or even today when their onwer have officially put them up for cheap sale... Their fans are as passionate as any others don't to agree? How about Leeds United? Weren't they even more passionate? They are top of the premier league, then suddenly had money problems... Did any or could any come forward? No... Therefore, we have to look at the more realistic means rather than Barcelona, Barcelona... Cos Real Madrid and Barcelona enjoys special treatment in Spain... Real don't even need to pay interest on the bank loans... They are said to be more than $200 million in debts but can still expect to spend $100 to $200 million on new players this season... Can Liverpool do that? I don't think so...
-
i will nvr agree to sharing, nvr
-
*Liverpool: Loyal Supporters? Casualties of Greed* *This morning the new Liverpool Commercial Director, Ian Ayre, sent a letter out to all 10,000 Liverpool fans that have signed up to the Priority Ticket Scheme (PTS) informing them that the scheme is to be disbanded for next season. This is a scheme that costs each fan £55 each year to join for the "privilege" of having access to 5,000 tickets for each game at Anfield. In theory, giving each PTS member a 50% chance of a ticket for each game.* This scheme has been in place for a number of years now, with the reasons given for disbanding as being: 1. 25% of the PTS membership didn't purchase a single ticket last season 2. 50% of the PTS membership purchased tickets for 3 games or less last season What he failed to mention in his letter or consider in his decision making, is that means 5,000 of the membership attended 3 games or less; therefore the remaining 5,000 must be purchasing the 5,000 tickets every single week. Those 5,000 fans have been turning up every week for years for midweek games against Fulham and Portsmouth, as well as the bigger and more glamorous fixtures. Their reward for that loyalty? Having the scheme scrapped and being told they are now being placed into a new "Belong" scheme which already has 50,000 signed up members; so are now going to be fighting with over 50,000 other fans for those same 5,000 tickets. The "Belong" scheme is open to anybody, as long as you pay the £29 subscription fee every year. So any of you reading this could sign up and stand an equal chance of a ticket as somebody who hasn't missed a game at Anfield in years. It stinks. Ian Ayre even signed off his letter with "thank you for your loyalty and support". Oh the irony. A few calculations. 10,000 members paying £55 each = £550,000 60,000 members paying £29 each = £1,740,000 That's an extra £1.2m in additional revenue for the club each season just for giving fans the right to apply for a ticket. Anfield currently has around 27,000 season ticket holders in a ground that holds 45,000. Take away 3,000 for away fans and that leaves around 15,000 tickets on sale for every game. The club don't want the same 40,000 turning up every week. They want outsiders that'll turn up once or twice a season and empty their wallets in the club shop. 5,000 of those remaining 15,000 are put aside for the PTS scheme, thousands more allocated to supporters clubs all over the country, with whatever is left going on general sale to fancard holders. How the ticket / touting agencies all over Europe get their tickets is for another time. Liverpool linked up with Thomas Cook last season to offer fans "packages" including match tickets and a hotel at a vastly inflated price. Booking the hotel yourself and buying your own ticket would cost you around £80. Book the same hotel and be supplied your match ticket through Thomas Cook and you'll be charged over £150. One rule for one... Year upon year we see the make up of the fan base change. More and more corporates. More and more "new fans" wanting to sample the Anfield experience. More and more of those fans that create that atmosphere and experience being driven from the ground. This is yet another kick in the teeth for those 5,000 fans that have been going to Anfield week in, week out for the past few years, who'll now have around a 1 in 10 chance of a ticket for a home game next season. A lot just won't bother. But what do the club care? They have 50,000 fans signed up to that scheme and will sell those tickets regardless. Sooner or later Anfield will just be another football ground. Anfield is famous worldwide for it's unique atmosphere and support. "We are the famous Kopites". Well those Kopites will soon be gone and replaced with yet more "spectators" turning up to be entertained. Only there'll be nobody left to entertain them but the 11 men on the pitch. Maybe then the club will have to revert to mascots, whipping up the crowd over the PA and handing out plastic flags to manufacture that atmosphere like has happened at other clubs all over the country. Anfield still has an identity. It still has a soul. Is an extra £1.2m a year worth losing that? Someone seems to think so.
-
keep anfield and goodison park.
-
some fans will complaint .... but genuine fans , who already paid so much , will be alright to pay a little bit more , to be able to do a part , to build a new stadium or to help LFC solve their financial debt . OK la .