Dan Meis Workshop

[CRIMHEAD]

Me. Id rather that. Something brick, old/historical looking. I don't want no globe/rounded/glass monstrosity.

But it’s not historic looking. It’s a massive brick barn in the middle of nothing. And it’s flat out ugly. I understand blending it into the environment and get the Camden yards comparison. That’s not Lucas Oil.

 

[CRIMHEAD]

Meis’ frame of reference here is US sport and specifically football and basketball (baseball is often played in half empty stadia in day games!). American Football has inherent scarcity (only 8 regular season home games). Basketball played indoors automatically means smaller capacities. Both sports (& Ice Hockey)/sell a high proportion of their seats to above median wealth individuals at eyewatering price points (I paid $140 for a pretty standard ticket for a regular season Chicago Bulls game vs. Detroit). All these sports have aggressive secondary ticketing markets supported by scarcity. The Knicks/Rangers prices at Madison Sq Garden are astronomical even though both suck!

Everton sell two thirds of our tickets as either concession or to individuals who identify as at or below national media income (extrapolating from club surveys). To drive up income we need both to expand the supply to this group (where there is untapped demand) and drive up availability of premium tickets, where we are severely limited. Capacity matters for the first, design for the latter. Nobody wants a half-empty stadium but EFC cannot afford to turn away business every week either. Scarcity will not let us drive up the majority of seat prices due to fan demographics unless we want to be Anfield/OT filled with tourists.

Having ‘excess’ capacity in football is often important for capturing and hooking new fans/youngsters by having a couple of thousand tickets in corners, backs of stands available at shorter notice and cheaper price points. This also helps to cater for the significant local fan base who can not justify/afford a season ticket but want to attend a few games and often decide late. We have lost this in recent years with tickets at Goodison like gold dust. Culturally I think most of us would rather have 2-3k empty seats scattered around unobtrusively for Stoke at home rather than getting ripped off on StubHub!! I think Meis would be genuinely shocked if someone sat him down and explained this.

If we still had e.g. Alan Myers at the club he could explain this to Meis and adjust his reference points. Kenyon/Elstone won’t because ‘scarcity’ makes their jobs easy. I think the bombardment on twitter and at the forums is making Meis rethink. Is suspect we will ultimately settle at c.56k which might not be terrible as the site footprint is constrained and I think many of us also want the quality to be spot on rather than feeling cramped.

We should be just as concerned at making sure they go for c.5-6k premium seats rather than say 2-3k as that is where the money is. That would put the club’s commercial team firmly in the spotlight to fill them but that is the really critical aspect to making this pay.

Oh I think Meis is aware. I think the bigger issue is the secondary ticket market. Why clubs use Stub Hub I’ll never know. Season ticket holders could in conjunction with the club, cheaply operate an internal ticket exchange.

 

[roydo]

Oh I think Meis is aware. I think the bigger issue is the secondary ticket market. Why clubs use Stub Hub I’ll never know. Season ticket holders could in conjunction with the club, cheaply operate an internal ticket exchange.

We do that pretty well on here.

 

[Jacko93]

Which I understand, I mean 55k for example is still an upgrade of around 30% for us. I did originally want 60 because of where we hope to be by the time it's opened, but if its 55 and then one stand is altered for safe standing, a couple of thousand will be added. Seeing as it will be four years min before completion and the seats will be the last to be put in its not beyond the realms that that aspect can be altered.

Anyway, for the design, I would like a white cut out going around the roof in the shape of our crest, which turns blue via led lights at night.

Imagine flying over the top of the stadium and seeing a giant cut out of our badge from a birdseye view.

The rail seating is based upon a ratio of 1:1 which means that there will be no increase in capacity with its introduction. From what Meis was saying last night, what we get is what we get, no expansion past the opening day capacity, or certainly not by design.

 

[cardno4]

If we still had e.g. Alan Myers at the club he could explain this to Meis and adjust his reference points. Kenyon/Elstone won’t because ‘scarcity’ makes their jobs easy. I think the bombardment on twitter and at the forums is making Meis rethink. Is suspect we will ultimately settle at c.56k which might not be terrible as the site footprint is constrained and I think many of us also want the quality to be spot on rather than feeling cramped.

We should be just as concerned at making sure they go for c.5-6k premium seats rather than say 2-3k as that is where the money is. That would put the club’s commercial team firmly in the spotlight to fill them but that is the really critical aspect to making this pay.

Meis has little or nothing to do with the end capacity. He gets told what size stadium Everton FC want. He can make recommendations based on the area given to build a stadium on and how size would affect other things but ultimately it’s the owners decision.

 

[Onwards Evertonians]

Meis has little or nothing to do with the end capacity. He gets told what size stadium Everton FC want. He can make recommendations based on the area given to build a stadium on and how size would affect other things but ultimately it’s the owners decision.

The site could accommodate 60k but when asked his personal preference today, he said he'd prefer between 52-55k. As you say, he doesn't call the shots but I'd hate them to be listening to him, 55k minimum for me.

 

[Davideeyore]

The site could accommodate 60k but when asked his personal preference today, he said he'd prefer between 52-55k. As you say, he doesn't call the shots but I'd hate them to be listening to him, 55k minimum for me.

Was there yesterday he clearly pointed out as others have stated that fans have been driving this more to 60k than 50k. Oddly I think it's the CEO that's dictating to Meis about a lower capacity and the need to not have empty seats.

For me 60k (or 61878) simply has to be our capacity. Not everyone agrees it's what we're all debating.

 

[Boss_Rarkley]

55k-57k is ideal- anything lower smacks of Elstone and 0 ambition.

 

[Boss_Rarkley]

Just got back from today's workshop. 5 things....
1) Full renders of the stadium will be released very soon, within weeks
2) Hearing him talk I'd say he is about 80% confident it will go ahead
3) He wants it to be 52-55k capacity
4) Our layout pisses over most other clubs and the 'blue wall' will be boss. I feel sorry for West Ham, the difference between theirs and ours is shocking
5) I hope the seating is more comfortable in BMD than St Luke's. 2 hrs sitting on them wooden chairs has numbed my ass

Full renders of the stadium - does that mean complete images of the stadium design itself?

 

[Toffeeslam]

55k-57k is ideal- anything lower smacks of Elstone and 0 ambition.

I agree mate

About 58k with room for expansion to 60k would be great.....what Dan Meis fails to understand that not all of us live in Liverpool and I would travel up from London much more often it weren’t sold out apart from sitting behind a post.

Reckon there are loads like me who would go more often if it weren’t virtually sold out

 

[Jamiednm]

I’d definitely go to a few more games a season if I could get tickets with a good view, rather than behind a post.

I’d be disappointed by anything less than 55k, especially if it has no further scope for adding capacity.

 

[toffeejack]

The rail seating is based upon a ratio of 1:1 which means that there will be no increase in capacity with its introduction. From what Meis was saying last night, what we get is what we get, no expansion past the opening day capacity, or certainly not by design.

ah, i knew about the no expansion, just hadn't properly read up on the safe standing. Seems a bit pointless if it's a 1:1 ratio to me, i thought it would help maximise attendance v space in a controlled manner.

 

[The binman chronicles]

ah, i knew about the no expansion, just hadn't properly read up on the safe standing. Seems a bit pointless if it's a 1:1 ratio to me, i thought it would help maximise attendance v space in a controlled manner.

I'm sure the ratio will be dictated by legislation. If after a few years at 1:1 it's deemed a success I could see pressure being added to up that, but I doubt it would ever go past 1.3 persons per seat.

 

[toffeejack]

I'm sure the ratio will be dictated by legislation. If after a few years at 1:1 it's deemed a success I could see pressure being added to up that, but I doubt it would ever go past 1.3 persons per seat.

Yeah true, I'm all for safe standing, I've spent most of my life standing at a match, It feels unnatural to sit.

 

[toffee-boy]

I’d definitely go to a few more games a season if I could get tickets with a good view, rather than behind a post.

I’d be disappointed by anything less than 55k, especially if it has no further scope for adding capacity.

Absolutely correct, I mentioned in the everton fans questionnaires that they should speak with a train company and have a joint train / match ticket as it costs me about 120 quid for travel and match ticket to watch one game.