New Everton Stadium

[orly]

We seem to have moved on a step here regarding the stadium.

The fact that the stadium is going ahead seems to have at last finally been conceded and the next battleground is capacity.
Anything less than 60k will be seized on by some as a lack of ambition, lack of investment by Moshiri, lack of ....

If the stadium does hit the 60k mark, the argument in my opinion will then move to lack of imagination in design, lack of funding....and repeat.

The stadium will eventually open and then we will move onto.. lack of atmosphere.

For this reason, I generally only read the posts of people who appear to have some knowledge and understanding of what is happening.

How do you check your own work then?

 

[CrustySack]

A cheap and cheerful stadium wont be allowed on that site, hence bringing in Meis.

 

[EFC78]

?????

There have been far more developments come out over the past year since I probably posted that, and opinions can also change over time when other things become apparent. The figure that has always come to mind in the past when considering a sensible starting size for our stadium is around 55K, even if we weren't fully selling out each week. However, previously there was a lot of uncertainty around whether we would move to BMD and little suggestion that we would aim for 60K. We also went a whole season last time round of selling out 39.5K which we hadn't done before in the PL era, now have a waiting list, and in July we sold out a reduced Capacity 32K against some Slovakian no marks, so the demand is clearly higher than in previous times. I stand by the comment that 65K is deluded.

As the months have gone on I have come round to the idea of us having closer to 60K in order for the club to make more of a statement. Although I am still not convinced we would fill 60K regularly, but West Ham have surprised me in the past year so who knows, and everyone seems to get a big increase initially. However, what the Capacity should be and what attendances we would get are 2 different things and it is always better to build more seats (a sensible number obviously) for potential growth rather than to build it too small at say 50K.

Elstone has repeatedly come out in the past year and stated we would be aiming for an ambitious Capacity which to me sounds far more like 60K than 50K which is around the Newcastle/Sunderland category. So after all that has come out in the past 12 months, I am baffled as to how the Echo Podcast can conclude that 45-50K would be suitable.

 

[blueblue]

How do you check your own work then?

The clue is in the word "generally".

 

[RobSpurs]

It would have been a concrete jungle. Barr who was the contractor took it on as a design and build job.

Lets just say they got things done at a saving.

At least currently we have a renowned architect doing the design so a cheap and cheerful stadium should not be the case like the Kirkby one.

Just wondering, with the recent talk of rising costs etc we would look to make a saving by having a reduced capacity as to what was originally planned. The original scheme might have been for 60k but we will reduce that due to spiralling costs to the region of 50k.

A cheap and cheerful stadium wont be allowed on that site, hence bringing in Meis.

I'm guessing this is why Meis was hired in the first place. My guess is that it won't be cheap and cheerful but nor will it be full of all the bells and whistles some modern stadiums have (Meis has pretty much said this is his design philosophy anyway - he's often saying modern NFL stadiums in particular are costly because they're overbloated, and he signed off his blog post about the EFC stadium by saying "A designer knows he has achieved perfection not when there is nothing left to add, but when there is nothing left to take away" - http://www.meisarchitects.com/blog/).

Again, I'm only guessing, but I can't believe a difference between 50-60k capacity would be the big factor in hiking up the costs. Surely it's going to be the amount of internal fit-out and how complex the architecture is, and again that's going to relate to how "bloated" the stadium is. RE: the architecture, Chelsea's new stadium with it's 200+ brick columns of different shapes and sizes is already sounding like it'll be £1bn+. But something simpler can be just as high build quality. I hope so anyway.

 

[Moomin]

We seem to have moved on a step here regarding the stadium.

The fact that the stadium is going ahead seems to have at last finally been conceded and the next battleground is capacity.
Anything less than 60k will be seized on by some as a lack of ambition, lack of investment by Moshiri, lack of ....

If the stadium does hit the 60k mark, the argument in my opinion will then move to lack of imagination in design, lack of funding....and repeat.

The stadium will eventually open and then we will move onto.. lack of atmosphere.

For this reason, I generally only read the posts of people who appear to have some knowledge and understanding of what is happening.

Can you highlight the people you think appear to have some knowledge please.

We have had a few charlatans claim stuff, like one of fave crackpots @DerbyshireAndHarper

 

[Boss_Blue]

Dave,
I suggested to you the other day to hold your water on this kind of nonsense statement - you're making yourself look increasingly daft and next week will see that opinion confirmed.

I hope I don't have to Andy, but I intend to vault this into oblivion next week x

 

[Achilles Heel]

It matters because the (apparent) reason for building this stadium was to use it as a facility-led recovery of the club to commercial success again.

Quite obviously more capacity can earn more. The club aren't Juventus or other elite clubs choosing to build small-to-medium who can charge sky high pricing for corporate seats.

Yes but wouldn't those extra seats have to be occupied regularly to actually generate revenue? I would love us to be ambitious and go for 60k but not at the risk of the stadium derailing or proving too expensive to build. City are around 50k and it would still be a decent number. Newcastle, a one club city, the same. From what I hear, LFC are not selling out the Big Stand. More about creating a brilliant design in a future defining location for me.

 

[AndyC]

I hope I don't have to Andy, but I intend to vault this into oblivion next week x

I'm more than happy to take that chance mate...
Methinks you would be better off served and have much more fun vaulting all the negative tosh from you-know-who

 

[AndyC]

Did you listen to the recent podcast from the Echo? The capacity was discussed there. And I can easily see the figures they mention of around 50,000 to be the case. that last Elstone statement prepared the ground for a decision on that basis.

I'm sure when/if it is announced there will be plenty of talk of "upwards of 55,000" like...what with the (whispered at this stage) possibility of safe standing areas to come.

I take it you are nailing your colours to the mast on a 60,000 seat stadium announcement in the future then?

Ah, the Echo.
Nope, never listened to one of their podcasts mate.
And I stand by my assertion Dave.

 

[Eggsyblueskin]

If costs keep on spiralling and we continue prevaricating , we could end up utilising the existing industrial units as our main stand and changing rooms.

 

[Jacko93]

The Kirkby debacle also had a main contractor appointed. It was way further down the line than the Bramley Moore move.

The procurement route for DK was different than it is for BM.

 

[Jacko93]

Could it be that any perceived delay is due to finding the extra funding required over and above what is already secured, rather than slimming out the delivery? Just a thought.

 

[Moomin]

The procurement route for DK was different than it is for BM.

Barr did the design for it as well.

It would have been awful.

 

[Moomin]

Could it be that any perceived delay is due to finding the extra funding required over and above what is already secured, rather than slimming out the delivery? Just a thought.

Could be, I'm hoping it will be a bit more clearer after the AGM.

With a few drawings to wet the appetite.