Stadium Expansion...?

[davieG]

You could tell by the survey they put out for us that the owners are looking to appeal to anyone but the average common rabble, I suspect it'll be 2 tier in more sense than the build. The common rabble will get their normal basic amenities  perhaps with a bit more space and easier food selling points. Then the here today gone tomorrow fans with their surplus cash and their need to be seen with success will have high grade expensive looking facilities that will be beyond the reach of the common rabble not that they'll be wanting it so I guess everyone will be satisfied.

[worth_the_wait]

I think there have been a few examples of "over spec'd" stadia recently ... the worst example being the £800 million spent (at the time), for re-doing Wembley.  

 

I appreciate that some of that money was spent on local infrastructure and not just the stadium, but that's got to rate as the biggest waste of money ever.    For the average football fan, Wembley is absolutely s h i t e.    It's basically been designed around the 17,000 or so corporate hospitality seats.    It's not a football ground; it's an corporate entertainment arena.    Probably good for pop concerts.

 

I reckon the best example of a stadium revamp was Notts County.   They stuck up 3 new decent stands in the 1992 close season.   Surely the fastest and cheapest ever upgrade.   Sorted!

[dynamark]

Davie thats a bit of a sweeping comment .Needs to be a mix the club can see a lot of income from the boxes etc  whilst majority of the stadium is your regular footy fan

[davieG]

1 minute ago, dynamark said:

Needs to be a mix the club can see a lot of income from the boxes etc  whilst majority of the stadium is your regular footy fan

Surely that's what I said and finished with everyone being satisfied?

[Heymister2015]

Wembley needs re doing! Sun blazing in my face at the charity shield and stuck outside for 2 hours after the game trying to get out. 

[Collymore]

There seems to be this scale where a stadium/ground can be so bad it's almost good because it's so ridiculously bad. Think of the old Wembley or even Filbert Street to a certain extent. People seem to only get critical when something new is built it seems. 

[Sol thewall Bamba]

17 minutes ago, davieG said:

You could tell by the survey they put out for us that the owners are looking to appeal to anyone but the average common rabble, I suspect it'll be 2 tier in more sense than the build. The common rabble will get their normal basic amenities  perhaps with a bit more space and easier food selling points. Then the here today gone tomorrow fans with their surplus cash and their need to be seen with success will have high grade expensive looking facilities that will be beyond the reach of the common rabble not that they'll be wanting it so I guess everyone will be satisfied.

I don't think anyone would be bothered about more exec boxes etc and "premium" seating, as long as there is also a dedicated area for us scum to wallow in our own filth and grunt in crude language. 

 

The ground will be large enough for everyone to share, premium seating, family stand, standing section etc.

[Finnegan]

25 minutes ago, StanSP said:

Mainly the first paragraph, thought it was directed at me. 

 

It wasn't directed at anyone specifically. 

[davieG]

7 minutes ago, Sol thewall Bamba said:

I don't think anyone would be bothered about more exec boxes etc and "premium" seating, as long as there is also a dedicated area for us scum to wallow in our own filth and grunt in crude language. 

 

The ground will be large enough for everyone to share, premium seating, family stand, standing section etc.

Aye that's why i said everyone would be satisfied.

[CosbehFox]

32 minutes ago, worth_the_wait said:

I think there have been a few examples of "over spec'd" stadia recently ... the worst example being the £800 million spent (at the time), for re-doing Wembley.  

 

I appreciate that some of that money was spent on local infrastructure and not just the stadium, but that's got to rate as the biggest waste of money ever.    For the average football fan, Wembley is absolutely s h i t e.    It's basically been designed around the 17,000 or so corporate hospitality seats.    It's not a football ground; it's an corporate entertainment arena.    Probably good for pop concerts.

 

I reckon the best example of a stadium revamp was Notts County.   They stuck up 3 new decent stands in the 1992 close season.   Surely the fastest and cheapest ever upgrade.   Sorted!

Aye that Notts County ground which can’t hold a capacity crowd due to fire escape issues 🤣

 

When the cost gets split out for Wembley, it’s not as eye watering as it may seem. The demo of the old place cost a fortune because of asbestos etc and then they had issues with the sewers under the old gaff.
 

I bloody hope no one here has seen the new American NFL stadiums with all their add on’s 

Edited 28 March 2021 by Cardiff_Fox

[oldbluefox]

22 hours ago, FoyleFox said:

 

If you're not fussed where you sit and only want a single ticket, not for a Cat A game, tickets aren't an issue. I live away and never had a problem getting a ticket for a match when I'm back.

 

I'm certainly in favour of the expansion but it's definitely not impossible to get tickets. Not as easy as it was but not that difficult.

Thanks. I will certainly give it another try but in the past whenever I have enquired I am asked if I have a season ticket, do I have a members card etc etc  (not worth getting either just for the odd occasions I can go) only then to be told there is no availability. Perhaps I get the wrong character on the phone!!! 

[dynamark]

Foyle you have been lucky .I am fortunate now to have a friend who usually gets me a couple of tickets but prior to that it was almost impossible.They used to release a few last minute in the semi private areas centre of the main stand but that seemed to stop and you can often see a few empty seats there which seems odd.

Davie I didnt see your post in that way you added ,it seemed you were saying the loyal fan(not always a rabble) was being ignored in favour of the corporates.

[wattolcfc]

No matter what the design they come up with to upgrade our stadium, I’m pretty sure we’re all unanimous in the fact that they should be installing rail seating at the same time.

[PhillippaT]

1 hour ago, Cardiff_Fox said:

I bloody hope no one here has seen the new American NFL stadiums with all their add on’s 

It's not a stadium without a load of big screens hanging over the middle, right?

[Finnegan]

1 hour ago, Cardiff_Fox said:

 

I bloody hope no one here has seen the new American NFL stadiums with all their add on’s 

 

But they don't really need to worry about finances in the same way. 

 

For a start, US states are pretty much like decent sized European countries and NFL stadia are practically national stadiums. There's never a risk they won't fill them and they can charge extraordinary amounts for tickets with the average nfl fan never actually even making it inside a stadium. 

 

There's guaranteed mountains of revenue from television money, they negotiate their merchandising as a collective league, the entire sport is designed to make fat stacks in advertising. 

 

Plus its a closed shop, financial security is less of a drama because clubs aren't spending with a risk of relegation or missing out on Europe and being frozen out of large sums of the net wealth to be made back, plus they don't need that money for transfers so much to stay competitive. 

 

Their whole sport is built around show, spectacle and dazzle, so having something insane like the Merc Benz arena in Atlanta makes a bit more sense than building an equivalent for the fourth biggest club of one small area of a country the size of a single state. 

 

Edited 28 March 2021 by Finnegan

[CosbehFox]

15 minutes ago, Finnegan said:

 

But they don't really need to worry about finances in the same way. 

 

For a start, US states are pretty much like decent sized European countries and NFL stadia are practically national stadiums. There's never a risk they won't fill them and they can charge extraordinary amounts for tickets with the average nfl fan never actually even making it inside a stadium. 

 

There's guaranteed mountains of revenue from television money, they negotiate their merchandising as a collective league, the entire sport is designed to make fat stacks in advertising. 

 

Plus its a closed shop, financial security is less of a drama because clubs aren't spending with a risk of relegation or missing out on Europe and being frozen out of large sums of the net wealth to be made back, plus they don't need that money for transfers so much to stay competitive. 

 

Their whole sport is built around show, spectacle and dazzle, so having something insane like the Merc Benz arena in Atlanta makes a bit more sense than building an equivalent for the fourth biggest club of one small area of a country the size of a single state. 

 

Totally agree on the majority of that and it’s largely backed by the state’s tax schemes which means they aren’t holding the cost for it. Goes under the radar that a lot of NFL teams don’t actually play in the city of their name, eg Arlington for Dallas Cowboys. The towns and cities compete to be the host. 
 

Was more observation at comments regards ‘providing’ more than a football stadium.
 

Why don’t NFL stadium provide just enough for the eight home games they have? Just like Spurs they are multi use - these next couple of weeks Lucas Oil Stadium hosts college basketball. Merc Benz hosts Atlanta United for example too. Spurs is the first out and out example in this country of providing something more than just a football ground. Others have done it but not to the point the stadium is built with it in mind (longer playing areas - famously Old Trafford is downright dangerous for the Super League Grand Final and the tiny try areas) 

[SpacedX]

28 minutes ago, Finnegan said:

For a start, US states are pretty much like decent sized European countries and NFL stadia are practically national stadiums. There's never a risk they won't fill them and they can charge extraordinary amounts for tickets with the average nfl fan never actually even making it inside a stadium. 

I was in New York in 2003 and I called some ticket line to try to get to a Jets game. As of today, they were sharing with the Giants in New Jersey. Being less popular and with the capacity of the then Giants Stadium being in excess of 82,000 I didn't anticipate any issue obtaining tickets. I was told that it was completely sold out. When asked how long this had been the case, the reply was " since 1984".

[KingsX]

On 27/03/2021 at 07:02, sacreblueits442 said:

  We are lucky to be in this position where we can have an innovatively designed stadium to add to the landscape and a team at the forefront of the Premier League. 

 

We are decidedly not in a financial position where we can have a stadium that adds to the landscape and a team at the forefront of the PL.

 

Even a club with as the income of Arsenal found they couldn’t have their (stadium) cake and eat it too.  15 years on, the lingering debt is still reflected in their squad.  Unlike their peers, they can no longer afford many recruitment mistakes.

 

LCFC already can’t afford recruitment mistakes.  Running a top-end squad on our budget is a feat of derring-do.  We have the highest wages-to-turnover ratio in the league, and want to enhance several contracts to keep our stars.  We have to establish ourselves in the European places or all this comes to an end.  Even without stadium debt.

 

Servicing, say, another ₤100M in debt for a KP expansion will be reflected in the squad.  It’s that much less for transfers and/or wages, without adding much to the top line.  This year’s modest EL run is estimated to bring in more (₤17M) than doubling our pre-COVID matchday revenue would do.  The squad and the manager are everything.  KP’s investments (training ground, recruitment, analysis, Rodgers) sagely reflect this.

 

Servicing a much larger debt to build an innovative stadium would take a club our size straight out of the game. 

 

Invest in the team first, foremost and always.  Improve the stadium just enough to satisfy season ticket demand, allow more friends and family to attend together, and have up-to-date amenities (not to include an LED-wrapped exterior or cheese room).

 

By the time you've been to a season's worth of matches, you won't even notice a "wow" roof-line anymore.  You will never stop noticing the quality of the players.

[sacreblueits442]

4 minutes ago, KingsX said:

 

We are decidedly not in a financial position where we can have a stadium that adds to the landscape and a team at the forefront of the PL.

 

Even a club with as the income of Arsenal found they couldn’t have their (stadium) cake and eat it too.  15 years on, the lingering debt is still reflected in their squad.  Unlike their peers, they can no longer afford many recruitment mistakes.

 

LCFC already can’t afford recruitment mistakes.  Running a top-end squad on our budget is a feat of derring-do.  We have the highest wages-to-turnover ratio in the league, and want to enhance several contracts to keep our stars.  We have to establish ourselves in the European places or all this comes to an end.  Even without stadium debt.

 

Servicing, say, another ₤100M in debt for a KP expansion will be reflected in the squad.  It’s that much less for transfers and/or wages, without adding much to the top line.  This year’s modest EL run is estimated to bring in more (₤17M) than doubling our pre-COVID matchday revenue would do.  The squad and the manager are everything.  KP’s investments (training ground, recruitment, analysis, Rodgers) sagely reflect this.

 

Servicing a much larger debt to build an innovative stadium would take a club our size straight out of the game. 

 

Invest in the team first, foremost and always.  Improve the stadium just enough to satisfy season ticket demand, allow more friends and family to attend together, and have up-to-date amenities (not to include an LED-wrapped exterior or cheese room).

 

By the time you've been to a season's worth of matches, you won't even notice a "wow" roof-line anymore.  You will never stop noticing the quality of the players.

....Arsenal were hampered by the investment in their stadium and had to watch as other teams invested in their own on field assets!!!

They have for the last few seasons spent heavily like £72m for Pepe, Lacazette and Aubamayang nearly £200m for three players, so they are no longer suffering from their previous visionary investment.

  The owners feeling at this time we have the opportunity to develop the stadium into one that is future proof and can be viewed with some pride in the next 10 years. A lot of supporters take a great deal of pride in their stadium and just sticking a bit of a shed on to the existing building is not going to cut it with other teams improving their own.

[Spudulike]

9 minutes ago, KingsX said:

 

We are decidedly not in a financial position where we can have a stadium that adds to the landscape and a team at the forefront of the PL.

 

Even a club with as the income of Arsenal found they couldn’t have their (stadium) cake and eat it too.  15 years on, the lingering debt is still reflected in their squad.  Unlike their peers, they can no longer afford many recruitment mistakes.

 

LCFC already can’t afford recruitment mistakes.  Running a top-end squad on our budget is a feat of derring-do.  We have the highest wages-to-turnover ratio in the league, and want to enhance several contracts to keep our stars.  We have to establish ourselves in the European places or all this comes to an end.  Even without stadium debt.

 

Servicing, say, another ₤100M in debt for a KP expansion will be reflected in the squad.  It’s that much less for transfers and/or wages, without adding much to the top line.  This year’s modest EL run is estimated to bring in more (₤17M) than doubling our pre-COVID matchday revenue would do.  The squad and the manager are everything.  KP’s investments (training ground, recruitment, analysis, Rodgers) sagely reflect this.

 

Servicing a much larger debt to build an innovative stadium would take a club our size straight out of the game. 

 

Invest in the team first, foremost and always.  Improve the stadium just enough to satisfy season ticket demand, allow more friends and family to attend together, and have up-to-date amenities (not to include an LED-wrapped exterior or cheese room).

 

By the time you've been to a season's worth of matches, you won't even notice a "wow" roof-line anymore.  You will never stop noticing the quality of the players.

Not sure that final paragraph is true. I often take a moment to look around our packed out stadium and marvel at how far we have come since the Filbo days. Loved the old place but would never want to go back given what's happened since moving over the road.

 

Granted the wow factor will fade for regulars to a certain extent but not for visitors, TV audiences and those that King Power want to impress and be associated with. 

 

Other than increased capacity to accommodate all those currently missing out, all I want is something unique that any observer can identify as being LCFC. 

[KingsX]

30 minutes ago, sacreblueits442 said:

....Arsenal were hampered by the investment in their stadium and had to watch as other teams invested in their own on field assets!!!

They have for the last few seasons spent heavily like £72m for Pepe, Lacazette and Aubamayang nearly £200m for three players, so they are no longer suffering from their previous visionary investment.

  The owners feeling at this time we have the opportunity to develop the stadium into one that is future proof and can be viewed with some pride in the next 10 years. A lot of supporters take a great deal of pride in their stadium and just sticking a bit of a shed on to the existing building is not going to cut it with other teams improving their own.

 

27 minutes ago, Spudulike said:

Not sure that final paragraph is true. I often take a moment to look around our packed out stadium and marvel at how far we have come since the Filbo days. Loved the old place but would never want to go back given what's happened since moving over the road.

 

Granted the wow factor will fade for regulars to a certain extent but not for visitors, TV audiences and those that King Power want to impress and be associated with. 

 

Other than increased capacity to accommodate all those currently missing out, all I want is something unique that any observer can identify as being LCFC. 

 

I post about stadium finances to try to make more people aware of the trade-offs.  Finances define the ceiling for every club, no matter how brilliantly LCFC push against that ceiling.

 

For a pay-your-own-way club, servicing debt is a big constraint on building the squad.  We’ve seen it powerfully with Arsenal and Spurs, who have more than twice our income.

 

Some (the two of you probably) are aware of the trade-offs and differ on the priorities … fair enough.

 

Moshiri seems to be operating Everton on an Abramovitch-style Sugar Daddy model of endless “loans” from the owner.  So maybe they can have a world-class stadium and still maximize investment in the squad.

[Finnegan]

2 hours ago, Cardiff_Fox said:

Why don’t NFL stadium provide just enough for the eight home games they have? Just like Spurs they are multi use - these next couple of weeks Lucas Oil Stadium hosts college basketball. Merc Benz hosts Atlanta United for example too. Spurs is the first out and out example in this country of providing something more than just a football ground. Others have done it but not to the point the stadium is built with it in mind (longer playing areas - famously Old Trafford is downright dangerous for the Super League Grand Final and the tiny try areas) 

 

But this is where I come back to my first post and the questions poised, what do Everton think they're going to be hosting? 

 

Spurs built the most glamorous stadium in the capital city and had a deal to host NFL games in place before it was even finished (or started?) 

 

Even then I personally think its a white elephant and I never understood the optics at that point but they did have some projected value for the stadium beyond football. 

 

What's the equivalent for Everton? What major revenue are they hoping to generate with an average sized "large" stadium in Britain's like, whatever it is, sixth biggest urban area? In spitting distance of Old Trafford? 

 

 

 

Edited 28 March 2021 by Finnegan

[davieG]

I think there's a middle ground it wont be a stick on shed nor will it be an all singing all dancing best 40k ish stadium in the country. It'll be classy without being gaudy or ostentatious. It'll increase capacity for the common bloke whilst enhancing the commercial revenue production.  

[Paninistickers]

36 minutes ago, KingsX said:

 

 

I post about stadium finances to try to make more people aware of the trade-offs.  Finances define the ceiling for every club, no matter how brilliantly LCFC push against that ceiling.

 

For a pay-your-own-way club, servicing debt is a big constraint on building the squad.  We’ve seen it powerfully with Arsenal and Spurs, who have more than twice our income.

 

Some (the two of you probably) are aware of the trade-offs and differ on the priorities … fair enough.

 

Moshiri seems to be operating Everton on an Abramovitch-style Sugar Daddy model of endless “loans” from the owner.  So maybe they can have a world-class stadium and still maximize investment in the squad.

Surely the logical way would be for the family to sell a, say 33%, stake in the club. Perhaps raising 150m in doing so. 

 

The gamble - for both financier and the family who've given up a third - is t whether the club's value can be, thanks to an enhanced stadium, increased by way over the 450m value at point of raising capital

[Lesta Legend]

The current owners will have spunked more on the team than it’ll cost to build such a stadium. A team that’ll be far inferior to the stadium they’ll end up play in.