Meanwhile, Hicks has assured Liverpool fans that arrangements for a new stadium in Stanley Park have not been shelved, although a date has not been set for construction either.

Planning permission and designs have been agreed, but the project has been put on hold due to the current worldwide economic crisis.

Hicks insists he is still committed to the building process, but the Texas-based businessman confesses he is unable to set a timescale for completion.

"I am hesitant to pick a date because I can't predict the capital markets," he continued.

"It is important for the fans to know that it is still something that we plan to do. We work on it every week.

"It continues to progress. It is not being mothballed. It is going to happen."

http://www.skysports.com/story/0,19528,11095_5072715,00.html

What's the actual process involved from going to a sleek,light,airy and spacious design to a bulky shopping centre with seating squeezed in the centre ?

It looks UGLY.

Do you like anything kevin?

To be honest he has a point with most of his comments, that one I don't agree with though.

I don't know whether anyone else has seen these designs, they're Ian Ritchie Architects (http://www.ianritchiearchitects.co.uk/index.html) alternative to the Liverpool stadium design.

http://www.ianritchiearchitects.co.uk/images/anfield/anfield01.jpg

http://www.ianritchiearchitects.co.uk/images/anfield/anfield03.jpg

http://www.ianritchiearchitects.co.uk/images/anfield/anfield04.jpg

http://www.ianritchiearchitects.co.uk/images/anfield/anfield08.jpg

looks very like the millennium stadium except the tiers are reversed!

dont think its a bad design, roof looks crap tho.

It's shite.

Looking at the top render it's obvious you wouldn't be able to see at least 50% of the pitch from parts of the Kop.

dont think its a bad design, roof looks crap tho.

piff please even my design (http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=583110) is better than this one :D

http://i55.photobucket.com/albums/g160/amgosai/Sky%20Scrapercity/Anfield_Redesign_21Large.jpg

Carlsberg Hoping To Earn Naming Rights For New Liverpool Stadium
Press reports suggest that the long-time shirt sponsor is interested in having their name of the Reds' new stadium.
13 May 2009 23:38:46



The longest serving Premier League sponsor, Carlsberg, has been linked with Liverpool since 1991, but with the current contract between the enterprises expiring at the end of next season, the Danish beer company is said to be making a bid to extend the tie and gain naming rights over the club's new stadium.

Gareth Roberts - head of sponsorship at Carlsberg - revealed on Thursday that the company would be looking to help Liverpool out with the financing of the recently halted building of the new stadium at Stanley Park, the construction stopped by the current club owners George Gillett and Tom Hicks due to worries regarding the current economical climate.

The tense relationship between the club's owners had raised the concerns of Roberts, but seeing the pair seated together in Liverpool's recent 4-4 thriller with Arsenal relieved some of the worries and bolstered the bid to extend the contract and name the new site.

"[The financial situation] would have to come into it - we need to understand where they are going with the stadium, what is the next step," Roberts said to the Associated Press.

"[The ownership situation] is a distraction, the best thing is they seem to have resolved the internal issues and they are going to take the next step. If it's done in the right way and they take the next step then absolutely.

"The ownership issue is also about the stadium and the financial setup. The stadium is a big step of their progression in the future and we want to be part of that.''

Meanwhile, Tom Hicks' response was somewhat limited in comparison to that of Roberts.

"They have been a great partner for many years,'' was all the American had to offer.

http://www.goal.com/en/news/9/england/2009/05/14/1265768/carlsberg-hopes-to-earn-naming-rights-for-new-liverpool

Rising debt delays Liverpool stadium until 2012

http://www.building.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=284&storycode=3142157&c=1

5 June, 2009

By Alex Smith

Liverpool FC says construction will be delayed by three years in light of mounting debts

Construction work on Liverpool FC's new stadium will be delayed until 2012 because of mounting debts at the club.

The club was planning to start construction on the 73,000-seat stadium in 2009.

The company formed to run the football club, Kop Football (Holdings), revealed that its debts almost doubled from £43.9m to £86m despite a record turnover of £159.1m and a pre-tax profit of £30.2m for the year ended 31 July 2008.

Debt rose despite the club paying £36.5 million in interest over the year.

Liverpool's auditor KPMG warned of a “material uncertainty which may cast significant doubt upon the group’s ability to continue as a going concern”.

The club owners Tom Hicks and George Gillett must negotiate their existing £350m loan with Royal Bank of Scotlan by July 24. They are continuing to seek outside investment.



What an absolute farce this project has been :ohno:

The only way this will go ahead is if the current owners aren't there,don't be taken in by the headlines,that's old news,they haven't got a pot too piss in.

If & when Liverpool FC do get a new stadium the most important thing will be to get the balance right between over-all capacity and atmosphere. Would Liverpool be able to sell out every game in a 60K seater stadium? Almost certainly. 73K? Probably 80% of PL & CL games and cup games against the bigger teams. 80K+? Only the biggest PL & CL games. So is it technically possible to design an 'iconic' stadium with variable seating capacity so that for Wednesday night Carling Cup games against Div1 teams it's a 60K stadium with few if any empty seats but by Sunday for the top-of-the-table PL game it's a sold-out 80K stadium? Does such a stadium exist? I feel that with the number of new stadia already built or in the works (especially with a possible WC in 2018) Liverpool deserves something a touch apart from everyone else (funds allowing, ofcourse).

we should break the mould and do a US-style college football stadium: 90,000, cheap tickets to students (in liverpool's case locals, kids and long-time season ticket holders), pack them in. no thrills, just a massive intimidating stadium. no bars or ladbrokes, bare bones, just stick some corporate boxes on top to keep the idiots happy.

NEBRASKA HUSKERS:

http://www.or4ne.com/images/MemorialStadium-2006.jpg

no bullshit, just a massive, angry stadium that belongs to the community. let utd fcuk around with quadrants and prices, prawn bagels and corporate days out. let's be different and hand it back to the people. we'll still make money and the city will feel it's theirs (the red half anyway).

someone forward this to dumb and dumber. they know how to do this in america, on a college level anyway. and it's a beautiful working thing.

no bullshit, just a massive, angry stadium that belongs to the community. let utd fcuk around with quadrants and prices, prawn bagels and corporate days out. let's be different and hand it back to the people. we'll still make money and the city will feel it's theirs (the red half anyway).

The ironic thing is that right now just the opposite is true, the devolpments Man Utd made in the 90's while not as basic as a collage stadium were mostly focused on cheap seating for normal fans( even with the recent rises there still one of the cheaper prem clubs to see)while your the ones planning on building a stadium focused heavly on luxury income.

I've held that view for ages, why are building 'small' stadiums and spending all the money on fancy fit outs and external cladding? bizarre.

Why not have a fancy main stand, an artisan opposite stand and 2 loon filled ends?

In my opinion as much as i love the idea of having a KOP in the new stadium, i cant help but think we would have a much better all round ground had a KOP not been included,

What do you lot reckon?

I've always thought so too.

It depends what you mean by a Kop.

Man City's ground, for example, is a great football stadium but not a great football ground if you know what I mean. good views all round, spectator comfort, mix of facilities. But the tiers and a lack of a 'home' end cause the place to be more theatre than ampitheatre. I suspect Arsenal is the same.

From the plans produced Liverpool are at least trying to create a football ground, from scratch on a virgin site and not a generic CAD stadium with optimised all round view and symetry. If we do go down that route I'd prefer something like the US college bowls or something like Napoli rather than Benfica/Arsenal/Man city/Lisbon/Hamburg etc.

Ye im all for being different to the generic "bowl" stadiums, i just cant help but think the rest of the ground will suffer because of the KOP, the away end for example, just dosent look right to me from the outside, its an odd shape!

we should break the mould and do a US-style college football stadium: 90,000, cheap tickets to students (in liverpool's case locals, kids and long-time season ticket holders), pack them in. no thrills, just a massive intimidating stadium. no bars or ladbrokes, bare bones, just stick some corporate boxes on top to keep the idiots happy.
This is exactly the opposite of what developers have in mind for any stadium project these days, especially this one which is under enormous financial strain. They will be looking to pack as many corporate seats/boxes/areas into the new Anfield as possible, because these will reap the most money during games, just like Wembley where people pay huge sums of money for 10 year corporate hospitality boxes, it's what they will be looking to do with this one. They will of course say they want to make it a fans' stadium with a Kop and everything, but ultimately the Kop idea is an annoyance to the developers because it complicates the design, raises costs, reduces seating capacity and reduces spaces for corporate/media boxes, and they have only complied with it so far because they are aware of a potential backlash from some fans if they don't, but I suspect at some point, if things keep at a stalemate, they will reel back the plans to just make it more simple to construct, and just have one side of the stadium seating spelling out 'the Kop' or something/

Its not developer who develop clubs but the clubs themselves so i'm not sure what point your making. Why would Liverpool cheapen the design to spend more on executive boxes?

Its not developer who develop clubs but the clubs themselves so i'm not sure what point your making. Why would Liverpool cheapen the design to spend more on executive boxes?

Liverpool would 'cheapen' the design for two reasons:

1. To make it affordable in the new financial climate. It's no good having a fantastic design that will never get built.
2. To maximise the revenue the new stadium will generate for the club in order for us to compete with other top European clubs financially. As much as we dislike the idea, corporate boxes and the supporting hospitality facilities generate far more revenue per sq. m of space within the stadia than basic seating.

If the club feel they have to keep a Kop stand unsullied by hospitality boxes etc... then the comprimise will probably be that the other three sides of the stadium are heavy in these facilities. It will make for a very unballanced design and also more expensive to build. At present the club can't afford such luxuries so we either have to wait for better times and risk either never getting the new stadium or leaving it too late to be included in any successful WC bid for 2018, or we comprimise, lose the Kop, and get a design we can afford.

the kop is the most inportent part, 100 years of history, the kop is liverpool.

NO KOP -NO NEW GROUND.

This lis lifted from the Icliverpool forum.....Very true.....

Liverpool has a rapid-transit rail network called Merseyrail. No stadium should be built unless a high throughput station is incorporated in the plan. How LFC got planning permission is mind-boggling. They have been told a rapid-transit rail link is mandatory for above 60,000. It should have been mandatory full stop!!! No rapid-transit rail link no stadium, as is the case in London and other major cities.

Walton Hall Park is run down and not as used as much as it should. It is a decent choice for a stadium without the Merseyrail links. With them it just sings!!!! It is a win, win all around.

Liverpool has two north end of the city rail loops:


The inner, the Canada Dock Branch (proposed fro passenger use for LFC)
The outer loop from Hunts X to Aintree or using the curves, Hunts X to the centre via Kirkdale. This can form a complete Merseyrail circle.


For passenger use the outer loop is by far the best if a stadium is involved as one way there is South Parkway interchange and the city centre the other. This gives excellent connections to most of Merseyside, entailing most fans would use Merseyrail to attend a football game, keeping people off the roads. This line is easy to recommission. The only problem, but small is, redirecting the tunnel at the Rice Lane flyover a few yards into Walton Hall Park.

Whoever at the council allowed building onto the disused trackbed curves at Walton Hall Park should be shot. Was it Henshaw? Rail trackbed and tunnels should be left in place "in case", and this is a clear case of "in case". The curves at Halewood have not been built on, neither has the outer loop complete with bridges intact. The case is not lost, as just a part of the trackbed curve at Walton is built on. The city is projected to be one of the UK's 5 super-cities by HSBC, so all this disused rail infrastructure is essential for future city growth. Excellent rail transportation is essential to attract investment.

Even if no stadium is proposed for Walton Hall Park, a new curve can be built adjacent to the old curve and some short section of tunnelling into the tunnel at Rice lane will bring the outer loop onto Merseyrail at this point.

The Canada Dock Branch (Inner Loop) only has the advantage of having lines on it. It will be difficult to branch the Canada Dock Branch line onto the Northern Line at Kirkdale as you have mentioned because the two lines are at different levels. The line does not run through station platforms at Kirkdale. It can be merged by running the line after it emerges from under Kirkdale and Bankhall stations on the way to adjacent Canada Dock, and swinging south in a tight curve and merging into the Northern Line south of Kirkdale station. Light-rail trains would need to be used to negotiate tight curves.

At the other end of the Canada Dock Branch Line is Edge Hill junction with no Merseyrail electric connections. So, this line will run into Mainline Lime Street only. I can't see them electrifying this line and only slow diesel trains used, and maybe only on matchdays with only one three stations used: Anfield, Edge Hill and Lime Street. Then how many would this station at Cherry Lane shift per hour? It will only take you to Edge Hill or Lime Street and give city-wide coverage.

It is possible to have an interchange station at Kirkdale in the deep cutting, and steps to the higher level Merseyrail platforms. The Kirkdale platforms would make the line feasible for everyday use, so some hope. It would be run by slow Northern Rail diesels. It is a point to point line, Kirkdale to Lime Street only, unless the line is merged into the Northern Line at Kirkdale or the tunnel branch from Central station is bored and merged into the Wapping tunnel, which is unlikely for a mainly 30 day a year football line.

It is easy to see that the outer loop is the by far the better option and stadium(s) should be located "over" this line:


The two grounds can be seen below the two red stars.
It merges into Merseyrail easily and forms a complete loop.
On matchdays trains just need to stay on the loop and run in and out of the stadium station. This make matters very easy for Merseyrail operation in getting the trains in and out of the stadium and shifts people fast.
Also two ways into the city centre and Wirral connections
Two ways to South Parkway for away fans.
Easy change at Sandhills to Southport and Ormskirk
Easy changes at Kirkdale for Kirkby (and Skem when that comes on-line)
Easy change to the airport when that comes on line
It brings onto line many districts that really need a rapid transit rail connection.
It eliminates the need for slow lumbering trams.


Remember, the outer loop was a part of the original 1970's plan, maybe why it is kept intact inc' bridges. The curves to Rice Lane were not, neither was the Kirkdale tunnel either. Now it looks like a great enhancement to the city's transport and to a footy club as well.

Below: Canada Dock Branch Line in Blue. Northern Line in black, Kirkdale in the North, Lime Street in the South. A point to point line at the mo'. The tunnel can be seen and WHP is at the top where it says Walton.
http://i29.tinypic.com/68dm6e.jpg

LFC and EFC could both have a stadium at Walton Hall Park and the station serve both. Walton Hall Park is not far from both clubs. The park is by far the better solution to Stanley Park being on the other side of Queens Drive and better road access..

The map below

The red is the proposed recommissioned Outer-Loop line - still with trackbed and bridges intact. This brings on-line: Walton Hall Park, Norris Green, Clubmoor, West Derby, Knotty Ash, Broad Green, Childwall, Gateacre, Woolton & Halewood - eventually. The catchment area of the line is substantial.
The red star at the top at the end of the red line is Kirkdale station.
The red star at the bottom of the red line is Hunts X station.
The red/blue line is the Kirkdale-Rice Lane tunnel.
The red/blue star at the top is Walton Hall Park where an Everton FC or a shared stadium could be built with a high throughput station. Trains leave the stadium both ways.
The green dotted line is the existing Northern line that creates a full city loop with the Outer-Loop - trains can just go around the loop, as they partially do on the Wirral Line. Or just around the loop on matchdays to shift fans.
The pink lines are existing Northern Lines to: Southport, Ormskirk and Kirkby.
The light blue line is Edge Hill to the west and where it meets the red line is Broad Green. This could be made into a junction, as was planned to be so in the 1970's. That means the north and southern sections of the Outer-Loop can be two separate loops and will run right into Edge Hill junction and onto Lime St, or into Central if the Wapping tunnel is branched into Central. Or down the Waterloo tunnel and onto the Northern
Line at Waterloo Dock. All in the future, but would make the loop quickly accessible to the city centre.
The light blue star at the bottom is Liverpool South Parkway station with connections to London and Manchester and beyond.
The rails already bought for collapsed Merseytram scheme are stored in Hull and can be used for the loop offsetting some costs.


The setup covers much of what trams were to cover and shifts people fast with connections all over Merseyside. If a shared stadium, then Walton Hall Park is the ideal choice as the fans can be shifted in and out very fast and en-mass. It is cheap to implement as well. It is cheap to implement as most is actually in place. This gives a big bang-for-buck.

http://i32.tinypic.com/209leo1.jpg

Entire species have evolved and become extinct since these plans were first discussed but at least here's a vague update of sorts from today's papers:

In June, however, Liverpool announced a record turnover, of £159m, which was still £97m behind Manchester United. Arsenal and Chelsea have also broken the £200m mark. Anfield has 32 private boxes – Old Trafford can seat 9,000 corporate clients. That imbalance will not change without a new stadium, but Liverpool's Stanley Park project has been mothballed by the credit crunch and, according to Hicks, it will not begin again until financial markets improve. Even if the new stadium is finished in time for the 2018 World Cup, it will be six years late on original plans.

Purslow is optimistic that Liverpool can compete while playing at Anfield.

"Our year-end results have just been completed and profits [£44m before tax] were up substantially and substantially ahead of budgeted profits, so even without a new stadium Liverpool is growing and growing fast. But there is no doubt about it, when we have a new stadium it will be the single biggest quantum leap forward in revenue that I can see ahead of me. When we can secure sensible and affordable funding that doesn't burden the club unnecessarily, then we'll do the stadium."

Entire species have evolved and become extinct since these plans were first discussed but at least here's a vague update of sorts from today's papers:

In June, however, Liverpool announced a record turnover, of £159m, which was still £97m behind Manchester United. Arsenal and Chelsea have also broken the £200m mark. Anfield has 32 private boxes – Old Trafford can seat 9,000 corporate clients. That imbalance will not change without a new stadium, but Liverpool's Stanley Park project has been mothballed by the credit crunch and, according to Hicks, it will not begin again until financial markets improve. Even if the new stadium is finished in time for the 2018 World Cup, it will be six years late on original plans.

Purslow is optimistic that Liverpool can compete while playing at Anfield.

"Our year-end results have just been completed and profits [£44m before tax] were up substantially and substantially ahead of budgeted profits, so even without a new stadium Liverpool is growing and growing fast. But there is no doubt about it, when we have a new stadium it will be the single biggest quantum leap forward in revenue that I can see ahead of me. When we can secure sensible and affordable funding that doesn't burden the club unnecessarily, then we'll do the stadium."

Just posted about this on the WC2018 thread. If England win the bid I think banks will look at the new stadium as a more realistic proposition. H&G seem to have sorted their finances out over the summer so in 18 months or so when the markets have properly recovered and banks are feeling a bit more generous funding should be available. I'd expect to see us in a new stadium around 2015/16. Still a hugely long way off, though. Shame there's nothing thay can do with Anfield in the mean time.

Does the new sponsorship deal from that bank make this any more likely?

No. The leverage is still way too high, the club needs cash for a big scheme like that. Or bags of equity, like it had before some carpet baggers raped it.

Liverpool's American owners are ready to put up to 25 per cent of the club up for sale to raise £100m that can be used to build a new stadium.

Investment experts Merrill Lynch have been appointed to explore ways in which the Anfield club can raise funds to help cut the debt and get the stadium project off the ground.

They have been told to go to potential investors in the Middle East to offer a quarter stake in the club, or even raise a new share issue to bring funds in Liverpool.

Owners Tom Hicks and George Gillett want to retain overall control at Anfield, but after announcing a new £80million shirt sponsorship deal with Standard Chartered Bank, they now want to move swiftly on the stadium project which has been mothballed for the past two years.

^^ Well, at least it's good news that these two muppets are still looking at ways to get the new stadium built.

They're not, they're looking at reducing the debt with other peoples money and increasing the value of the club. We're in the fattening of the calf phase.

There was enough equity in Liverpool FC to have built this by now.

Source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/l/liverpool/8261975.stm

Liverpool stadium 'will be built'

Liverpool co-owner Tom Hicks is adamant that the club's proposed new £350m stadium will be built once the global financial crisis stabilises.
Construction on the new site in Stanley Park, next to the Reds' current Anfield Stadium, was frozen in August 2008 due to the financial conditions.
"We've spent lots of money and we have a fully designed stadium," said Hicks.
"We have every permit in place, the council's approval, everything is done. Certainly it will happen."
He added: "When we get to the point where the global market settles down, we can bring pieces together to finance the stadium.
"I don't know about the dates because of the global financial markets, but I know the markets will settle down and get better."
Hicks bought Liverpool in 2007 with George Gillett Jr. and they wrote off £10m by ditching existing plans to replace Anfield so architects from his native Texas could design a new stadium in the adjacent Stanley Park.
It is expected to hold 60,000 fans, 15,000 more than Anfield, with more scope to generate commercial revenues.
Liverpool received a financial boost this week with the announcement of a new sponsorship deal with Standard Chartered.

LIVERPOOL are pursuing a £240million naming rights deal to finally kickstart their troubled move to Stanley Park.

Carlsberg's 18-year shirt sponsorship with the Reds ends next year.


But the Danish beer brewers are prepared to match the £100m Arsenal received for a 15-year deal with Emirates.


Yet Liverpool owners Tom Hicks and George Gillett want to smash existing records, asking far more than the Gunners got in 2004.


Hicks and Gillett see the numerous examples of US stadium sponsorship deals as the blueprint for the new Anfield.


The New York Mets baseball team and New Jersey Nets Basketball side currently claim the most lucrative naming rights deals.


They both secured a 20-year contract with Citi Group and Barclays worth £240m respectively.


Both Dallas Cowboys and the New York Giants are negotiating similar returns for their new arenas. Liverpool are confident they can at least match the £12m-a-year which the top US franchises have secured, and will be looking to top them.


The club wants new partners on board well before completion of the arena, which is on hold due to the recession, but which the owners insist is merely delayed rather than cancelled.


New Reds managing director Christian Purslow sealed a record- breaking £80m shirt deal with Standard Charterd - and Hicks and Gillett know such lucrative deals are key to restoring stability at Liverpool.


The underfire Kop owners have launched a serious charm offensive over the last few days to try to win back the trust of the supporters.


Until the levels of debt at the club are reduced, they will continue to be perceived cynically for the broken promises of the past.

I'm not sure how well a naming rights deal will go down with die-hard fans. We've all got used to calling it New Anfield I think. I remember back when The Emirates deal was announced and all the Arsenal fans dismissed it claiming the new stadium would be known by them and across the media as Ashburton Grove, but Emirates has well and truely stuck, hasn't it. I'm not overjoyed by the idea of Liverpool playing at the Carlsberg Stadium for instance. Whether it's a price worth paying to get the stadium going...?

It'll still be Anfield, it's next door, it's world famous so a sponsor will want the association and football people will always refer to Anfield.

I call The Emirates 'Arsenals ground'.

im a liverpool fan and they can call the stadium "Everton Mints" for all i care if it means 240 million in the kitty!

ok maybe Trebor :s

as for the yanks they do more for the club than people realise, they wasted no time in redoing the new stadium and if it wasn't for the credit crunch it would probably be up and running already.
shame to see the end of carlsberg as sponsors but with beer throwned upon on sports wear these days could be a good thing, end up being banned altogether from shirts and could see carlsberg trying to win naming rights on the stadium because it will be the only thing their name is allowed on, so the bidding war on naming rights could easilly pass 300 million in my opinion.

as for the yanks they do more for the club than people realise, they wasted no time in redoing the new stadium and if it wasn't for the credit crunch it would probably be up and running already.
shame to see the end of carlsberg as sponsors but with beer throwned upon on sports wear these days could be a good thing, end up being banned altogether from shirts and could see carlsberg trying to win naming rights on the stadium because it will be the only thing their name is allowed on, so the bidding war on naming rights could easilly pass 300 million in my opinion.

Carlsberg are still sponsors, just not on the shirt. Having alcohol as a shirt sponsor has always been a problem with regards to shirt sales in muslim countries.

im a liverpool fan and they can call the stadium "Everton Mints" for all i care if it means 240 million in the kitty!

ok maybe Trebor :s

ye well thats what coming from surrey dose for you.

ye well thats what coming from surrey dose for you.

:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

Yanks Out

THEY HAVE CLAIMED MORE ON EXPENSES FROM OUR CLUB IN 18 MONTHS THAN RAFA HAS AVAILABLE TO HIM FOR TRANSFERS THIS SEASON.

THE MONEY FROM THE SALE OF XABI ALONSO HAS ALL BUT GONE ON INTEREST PAYMENTS

LIVERPOOL FOOTBALL CLUB PAY £1,000,000 IN INTEREST PAYMENTS EVERY NINE DAYS

More - yanksout.com (http://www.yanksout.com/)

Yanks Out

THEY HAVE CLAIMED MORE ON EXPENSES FROM OUR CLUB IN 18 MONTHS THAN RAFA HAS AVAILABLE TO HIM FOR TRANSFERS THIS SEASON.

THE MONEY FROM THE SALE OF XABI ALONSO HAS ALL BUT GONE ON INTEREST PAYMENTS

LIVERPOOL FOOTBALL CLUB PAY £1,000,000 IN INTEREST PAYMENTS EVERY NINE DAYS

More - yanksout.com (http://www.yanksout.com/)

Dont worry this time next year they will be long gone:yes:

http://admin.clickliverpool.class-media.co.uk/admin/article/articleimages/1254067046-pic2.jpg


http://admin.clickliverpool.class-media.co.uk/admin/article/articleimages/1254067046-mainstand.jpg

slightly off the subject but still in Liverpool general are, has anyone got any photographs of the old Brighton Towers Football Ground. Aparently it once held 80,000. Heres a link about the Tower which was a replica of the Eiffel Tower.
http://www.merseyside.net/newbrighton/Pages/tower.htm

slightly off the subject but still in Liverpool general are, has anyone got any photographs of the old Brighton Towers Football Ground. Aparently it once held 80,000. Heres a link about the Tower which was a replica of the Eiffel Tower.
http://www.merseyside.net/newbrighton/Pages/tower.htm

It never held 80,000. It was very small with a small stand behind the tower. Non-league.

The council are stating that LFC could start in April on the 60,000 version. To get to 75,000 they need the adjacent Bootle line running passenger trains and new staion built.

The council are meeting Everton on the 11th Jan to talk about sites they have short listed. One being on the Bootle Line meaning the line would be viable for both clubs.

Tesco and Kirkby are still trying to get the Kirkby stadium plan through although amended.

The Tower Athletic Grounds was a big landscaped bowl that never developed as a proper stadium, although someone did plan something once upion a time.

The Tower Athletic Grounds was a big landscaped bowl that never developed as a proper stadium, although someone did plan something once upion a time.

any more pics. i have one from 1950s when they had it as a stock car track

April start?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/l/liverpool/8435122.stm

I'm not familiar with English football ticket prices, what is the average ticket price for Anfield? Is there a seating chart with different price levels for different areas of the stadium? Not knowing these facts I will assume the average ticket price is near 30 pounds a seat, whether this is accurate or not is beside the point. Whatever the average price is isn't important, but the additional revenues of a new stadium can be factored in with this model.

45k x 30= 1.35 milion per home game.
60k x 30= 1.80 million per home game. 60k x 40= 2.4 million per game.
75k x 30= 2.25 milion per home game. 75k x 40= 3.0 million per game.

You can see why the club wants a new stadium. This figure is low with the average ticket price, but the new stadium will generate much more, possibly up to 40 pounds average ticket prices. The new stadium will also have more luxury suites and club seats with overpriced drinks and meals included at some luxury club as well.

If the average ticket price is now 27 million for 20 home games at 30, it will be 36 million at 60k, and 45 million at 75k. Lets add the premium average ticket price for a new stadium. Revenues could increase to 48 million at 60k and 60 million at 75k with only a ten pound average increase in ticket prices or revenues. I know some fish that drink alcohol. They will spend more than ten pounds a game for drinks easy.

I can't see how a new stadium won't pay for itself, but if a corporate sponsor paid for half the price of a new stadium, its a deal, never mind the debt. Investors will be more than happy to buy a quarter of the club.... Sufficient transfer funds will be generated as well.

Gillett and Hicks are used to high risks. But even they understand the importance of a new stadium generating more revenues...

Many complain about Gillett and Hicks didn't provide one lump sum of cash when they bought the club. Any corporate stadium sponsor will also wish to stretch out the payments as well. Don't expect a 240 million lump sum up front. They have every intentions of building a new stadium for the increased revenues, otherwise they would not have bought the team with players salaries and transfers in a league going through the roof. Some think they are going to add 15k cheaper seats. Wrong, they will add 15k more expensive seats.

The first stadium design they bought was capped at 61k, as I understand. That won't be near enough over the long term... As they are able to increase attendance into the 60k stadium, just looking at the figures above the club could build and pay for a new railroad station itself to increase the seating capacity to 75k at a later date. What is a few million compared to increased revenues over the long haul.

Of course, there are some who don't want a new stadium, preferring not to be a top four club....

Gillett and Hicks are used to high risks.

Arf, if only, this must be the most risk free 'investment' they've ever had dropped in their laps.

And tickets are £36.

This is on a few Everton and Liverpool forums.................

Everton-Liverpool and trains (http://tinyurl.com/26rfyy6)

Shit, isn't it John?

Shit, it is.

The Premier league needs to flex its muscles and get the goverment to do something about Gillett and Hicks; if they can do what they have done, whats to stop the next tw** from doing the same

The Premier league needs to flex its muscles and get the goverment to do something about Gillett and Hicks; if they can do what they have done, whats to stop the next tw** from doing the same

What have Gillett and Hicks actually done? With good management the club would of still been top 4 but Rafa did a poor job. If they didn't do anything about Pomopey then they shouldn't do anything about Liverpool, There will always be people lining up to buy Liverpool with it's history they'll never be in danger.

What have Gillett and Hicks actually done? With good management the club would of still been top 4 but Rafa did a poor job. If they didn't do anything about Pomopey then they shouldn't do anything about Liverpool, There will always be people lining up to buy Liverpool with it's history they'll never be in danger.

Crank.

The Premier league needs to flex its muscles and get the goverment to do something about Gillett and Hicks; if they can do what they have done, whats to stop the next tw** from doing the same

with scudamore in charge? not a chance with that clueless money orientated tosser!! he actually thinks foreign owners are a good thing!!:nuts:

What have Gillett and Hicks actually done? With good management the club would of still been top 4 but Rafa did a poor job. If they didn't do anything about Pomopey then they shouldn't do anything about Liverpool, There will always be people lining up to buy Liverpool with it's history they'll never be in danger.

Rafa certainly has to take alot of the blame for last reason but its pretty obvious what Hicks and Gillet have done, bought Liverpool in a shadey leveraged deal that put the club heavly into debt. They'd likely been paying themselves and there cronies excessive amounts the same way the Glaziers have aswell.

I suspect something will happen soon to ban such takeovers, scudamore certainly cares about money more than football but neither set of yanks have put any money into the game.

Will thickos, please stop having digs at Rafa. He was blameless in all this and you dullards are showing your complete and utter ignorance of the situation.

You people are showing your pathetic dependence on the wankers of fleet street/sky to do your "thinking" for you.

Not seen MoreOrLess in aaaaaages!

The secret to Arsenal's great business success is:


A top quality stadium.
Rapid-transit rail access to get the fans in and out fast and comfortable.


The above has given Arsenal a 98% plus occupancy rate since the stadium was built. Yet Arsenal have won few silver pots yet the place is full to 60,000 every game and will pay off the stadium loan in 6 weeks time.

Having a top quality stadium:

In a location that has no rapid-transit rail access,
in a poor district
Poor parking
Takes hours in traffic jams to get to and from


The above will not be a success. Anyone with half a brain can see that. The secret is understanding Arsenal's formula which is simple.

The city of Liverpool can emulate Arsenal's success by insisting that both clubs build their new stadia on a Merseyrail metro rapid-transit rail line with a 4 to 6 platform stations. Very simple. You do not need to be a PHD to understand that.

Prem Table bottom 6 today

15. Liverpool
16. Wolverhampton
17. Wigan
18. Stoke
19. West Ham
20. Everton

Arsenal are out of debt with a cash cow stadium, so expect big signings by them in the next 18 months. They will be flying at the top and Everton slipping into, or in, the Championship with a ground that brings in a few quid. Liverpool struggle until they get a decent stadium to Arsenal's formula.

Look at this:
Rapid Transit Rail in Liverpool for stadium (http://tinyurl.com/26rfyy6)

Actually Arsenal are not out of debt, they are sill over 200m in debt to be paid off over 10 years. They are in the black though, having sold off much of the residential they have built. They are far better at financing than ManU and Liverpool though.

Actually Arsenal are not out of debt, they are sill over 200m in debt to be paid off over 10 years. They are in the black though, having sold off much of the residential they have built. They are far better at financing than ManU and Liverpool though.

The stadium debt is being paid off in Nov.

The stadium debt is being paid off in Nov.

http://www.plusmarketsgroup.com/PLUS_news_story.shtml?NewsID=3377141&ISIN=GB0030895238/GBX/PLUS-exn

The Property depts for highbury residential projects are paid off, not the stadium yet. Overall debts for Arsenal holdings are 136 million as of sept 2010. That wont be paid off in a few weeks.

Do you lot think any potential new owners will re-design the stadium?

Will Liverpool be better off with a different design?

Just to chuck my twopenneth in....

Arsenal's results, as stated above, show that the property company debts are gone.
The football club does indeed owe a lot.

Of more interest was the admission that current turnover (now the property sales will disappear) will mean zero profit on current overheads.

So, Arsenal are in an `ok' position but to fund trophy winning players and salaries the club will run at a loss.

That is a surprise.

Good, but certainly no cigar.

Arsenal Property? Done well, despite the crash.
Arsenal football club? No. No profit and no sight of a trophy...5 years and counting.

Do you lot think any potential new owners will re-design the stadium?

Will Liverpool be better off with a different design?

Interesting point.

H&G have completely screwed Liverpool's finances, but this stadium design was well received when it was revealed wasn't it? Can this, at least, be salvaged from the H&G reign of comedy error, rather than starting from Square 1 with yet another new set of designs?

Would Liverpool fans want this design still, a new one, or an expanded Anfield?

If the answer is no to sticking with this design, is that because of real architectrual/financial concerns, or because of an (understandable) desire to rid the club of anything to do with the two Americans?

Just interested to know what the thoughts are now Liverpool's finances (and therefore the prospect of stadium development) are looking like they might take a positive turn....

I used to like the G&H design but ive grown to hate it, to me just dosent look and probably wont feel like a football ground

Anfield is all about being enclosed and intimidating no fancy glasswork no open corners just all closed in, The G&H is the opposite all 4 corners of the ground will be open and the KOP is just too big and steep!

So would you prefer to stay at Anfield and expand, or create a third (!) set of new designs for Stanley Park?

If possible stay at Anfield, If not then yes i would like to see a re-design of the new stadium

Arsenal Property? Done well, despite the crash.
Arsenal football club? No. No profit and no sight of a trophy...5 years and counting.

No profit? We generated £56M (up from £35M 2008) profit last year. Despite our 'mortgage', we can easily afford a few decent players each season. In fact, we'll probably be one of the only clubs that can afford any decent new players once the new transfer rules come into place. It looks pretty decent for the future, which is why Liverpool would want to emulate the Emirates' financial success.

-------

No profit? We generated £56M (up from £35M 2008) profit last year. Despite our 'mortgage', we can easily afford a few decent players each season. In fact, we'll probably be one of the only clubs that can afford any decent new players once the new transfer rules come into place. It looks pretty decent for the future, which is why Liverpool would want to emulate the Emirates' financial success.

How much of a loan did Arsenal get for there ground and how much are the interest payments a month/year? Just out of curiosity :)

The new owners are cagey about the new stadium. They want to look at the options. They're not going to build a new stadium just because there is planning permission for a fancy design; they want to look at all the costs and benefits.

They are aware of the massive potential for English football and, especially, the big brands in the global emerging super-economies, most immediately China and its region of economic influence. Liverpool has the brand profile (of the 3 or 4 most known clubs in the world) to make masses of money in the opportunities for sponsorship, mobile telephony and other commercial income in those markets. Look at the Standard Chartered deal, signed in a fallow period; think of the potential when the club becomes successful again in ever-expanding markets. I've heard one or two people call these new sources of revenue 'Football 2.0', and we are at a relatively early stage in this new era.

A level-headed approach to 'growing the business' will take one look at these new opportunities and then wonder whether the increased revenues from a new stadium are worth it. This will take into account the fact that the beneficial effects of those revenues will be blunted by managing the debt associated with financing a new stadium. They will want to avoid the Arsenal problem discussed here (they don't need five to ten more years of standstill). If a smaller investment using the global potential of Liverpool substantially to increase commercial revenue can do a lot more than building a new stadium, they will put the project on the back burner.

It would also make more sense to build a new stadium at a later date when the club are significantly richer and can organise the financing in such a way that doesn't blunt spending power as much as it might do now.

I'm a supporter of another Premier League club, but, despite rivalries, am relieved that Liverpool are rid of the LBO merchants. I wouldn't want people like that anywhere near my own well-run club.

I think Liverpool have done very well out of the new deal and will thrive under the new owners. NESV have a bargain and they know it. Given the potential, to acquire this massive 'brand' for such a (relatively) small amount of money is a coup. Leaving aside clearing the debt, they bought the club for peanuts. No wonder G&H are hopping mad. They've made a big loss on a good business.

Given the low price they paid, owners of NESV will be prepared to invest some more of their own money into the club to make the best use of their new asset. In clearing the acquisition debt, they've transformed the financial position overnight, and with the debt interest no longer a burden, money is freed for player salaries and transfers again. I think they will pump-prime this process with some of their own money. All this means that Liverpool FC will invest in new players in January and be able to attract them with good wages. Squad strengthening will come before anything else.

The virtuous circle will be put into motion. And NESV are in it for the long term.

Among the many aspects of the business they'll be scrutinising with a magnifying glass, will be the figures relevant to match day income. These are immediately relevant to the business model of the new stadium. They'll be asking questions such as...

- How big is the membership scheme?
- How long is the season ticket waiting list?
- What is the occupancy for all matches across a season?
- What is the difference in prices between the 'big' matches and the average matches?
- How much is to be gained in raising prices for the big matches (once the club recovers a decent position in the League and is playing much better)?

In relation to these figures, they'll ask three key questions.

First, they'll want to know how these figures have varied according to the economic climate. If the 'boom time' (of the last two decades before the financial crisis) was associated with greater demand, then don't use this as a benchmark because those times will never return in the foreseeable future. They'll also want to know the likely effects of this long-term economic sluggishness on the NW region.

Second, and factoring the economic situation in to account, they'll want to know the extent to which they vary according to Liverpool success on the pitch.

Third, and most difficult, they'll be looking at any evidence of the increase in match day attendance in top-flight football topping out and even declining as a long term trend.

All of these calculations will be taken into account. They'll consider refurbishing and adding a small amount of extra capacity to Anfield, as well as increasing associated match-day revenue. They'll be looking at what happens when success comes again. If local demand only increases moderately due to various other factors (see above), then a new stadium will not make sense. If demand increases significantly only for the big matches, then they'll put prices up accordingly. If the rising profile of the global Liverpool brand means that tourist income is relevant, then they'll look at that selectively (special packages, etc.), using an improved version of the current facilities.

But a new stadium? The new owners will think long and hard.

There's a 25 year waiting list on Season Tickets so expanding or a total new build makes sense,great post btw.

While it would be possible to expand the capacity of Anfiled to 50K - 55K, it would be seats only. Where Anfield lags way behind is corporate facilities, and those are the big revenue earners. It would take a massive re-build to bring Anfield up to a standard similar to the Emirates and once you factor in the lost revenue during the re-build, building a new stadium starts to look attractive.

I don't for one second think NESV would consider using the previous design. For one thing, who owns it, LFC or Kop Holdings? If the latter then NESV couldn't use the design anyway. I suspect in the short term NESV may look to expand Anfield by 2012/13 season with a second plan to build a new stadium ready for 2018 if England win the WC bid.

According to the accounts Liverpool Football Club have paid out about £60 million for the new stadium so far. So they'd better own the design!

Or is it fraud?

I really hope Liverpool do build a new stadium, and the ground designed for Stanley Park IMO is a really great looking stadium. They deserve a 60,000 - 72,000+ ground and I am sure they could fill it each week.

But it has been reported in the press that NESV might prefer to expand Anfield due to the costs of a new stadium. Its worth pointing out that the new owner John W Henry redeveloped the Boston Red Sox stadium Fenway park instead of moving them into a new ground. And when he owned the baseball team the Florida Marlins from 1999-2002 the stadium the Pro Player Stadium now called the Sun Life Stadium, John W Henry did not build them a new baseball specific stadium but allowed them to play in this American football stadium which converts into the baseball dimensions. So going from these 2 cases it seems Henry does not like to build new stadiums. He may see Liverpool's case differently, I guess we will have to see.

It would be interesting to hear what Liverpool supporters would want. A redeveloped Anfield, or a new stadium?

Going from an England 2018 bid perspective. I think it would be a real shame if Liverpool don't have a new stadium for this. It would add another huge stadium to our bid (assuming it is 72,000+) and it would allow a big stadium to be in another city besides London and Manchester.

There is a need for extra capacity, better and more media facilities and corporates.

Ideally Anfield can be expanded and we'll keep the tight dimensions, awkward corners and proper football ground feel. If we build I'm all for the plans for Stanley Park, but not for a tin shed or souless bowl.

any news on this one? timescheduale, new planns?

No.

:cripes:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/liverpool/9019171/Liverpool-opt-for-original-Stanley-Park-stadium-plan-to-replace-Anfield-after-rejecting-futuristic-design.html

:cripes:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/liverpool/9019171/Liverpool-opt-for-original-Stanley-Park-stadium-plan-to-replace-Anfield-after-rejecting-futuristic-design.html

No word from the club on this yet.

So they opt for the boring lego stadium.

Shock!

So they opt for the boring lego stadium.

Shock!

The club have denied this,they still haven't publicly decided yet.

You replace something iconic with something iconic.

The current Kop is decent enough, but the rest of the stands at Anfield are just average.

The deadline is Midnight on Thursday.


http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/19149k

Kevin Williams was 15 when he died at Hillsborough. He has never had a proper inquiry. According to the official verdict everyone was dead by 3.15. Kevin died in a police woman's arms asking for his mum at 4.00. There were 43 ambulances less than 400 yards away and yet he received no medical assistance.

First AFL design to now include a Kop:

http://img171.imageshack.us/img171/769/anfielde.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/171/anfielde.jpg/)

http://www.liverpooldailypost.co.uk/sport/liverpool-fc/liverpool-fc-news/2012/01/19/new-liverpool-fc-stadium-would-include-single-tier-kop-99623-30151994/