New Everton Stadium

[Yarrgh]

I'm watching you.

My eyebrow raised a couple of milimetres on reading that post.

 

[joey_macmo]

City have gone from being a generally unsuccessful club over a long period of time to a European super power in a just a few short seasons. They were always going to get a huge lift in support with the players they were signing and the money they were spending. I don't think any club could use them as an example.

They finished 16th their first season in the new stadium yet experienced a 40% bump in attendances, their biggest signing was Claudio Reyna for £2.5m. They went 16th, 8th, 15th, 14th, 9th & 10th in their first 6 seasons in the new stadium, people seem to have got the timescale of events at city totally wrong.

So yes they are a perfectly good example to use, again especially when you consider that they've had to expand twice since moving (at a much higher cost than an initial build) due to their recent success.

 

[mccole]

I think it will be 55k but unsure on corp seats so it could top 60K

Bear in mind it will be build for 2022/23 season, in that time we will know a more precise number in terms of season ticket and demand.

So if we are selling 31K with 7K, reportedly, you are looking at minimal 40k season tickets.

So would be getting an extra 20k fan from daytrippers, away fans and corporate?

55k will do me with room to expand.

I have a feeling they will announce around the last home game 5th May

 

[Titus Bramble]

Saw this poll on Twitter a few days ago. If we go for the ‘headline result’ from it like the official Everton one, 97% of people voted for 50k+.

Granted a lot fewer people voted on it but the trend is still there. I’m sure at these events with dan Meis the specifics will be presented, but it wouldn’t surprise me if the percentages are similar to that above.

Just because the ‘headline’ is 50k+, that doesn’t mean the majority voted for the low end, the club are purposefully making it look like they did or that’s what the final capacity would be.

Yall need to calm down

 

[bluestevon]

Then why do you think Spurs are now going for a 62,000 stadium? Their board clearly think that having a bigger stadium is going to help them be more successful.

Commercially so ofc they do, why else install a meet and greet tunnel, then again they are in London, a media favourite club and will attract the prawn sandwich brigade a plenty, dies it show ambition to go and win things, depends really, if you offered them ten years of 4th placed right now and no cups I'd guarantee their owners would happily accept that.

Spurs true ambition can maybe be seen in their rigid wage structure that effectively limits them hugely and the new stadium much like at arsenal will be trotted out as a reason they don't push on.

Thing us with arsenal it just masked owners whose ambition wasn't winning titles, but rather making a good profit.

 

[ToffeeTim]

you leave Rachel Stevens alone

No pics Orlyfrand???

 

[allen]

Yet the opinion on another thread concerning preferred stadium size has 60,000 - 64,000 running at a big lead.

Most on here have wanted a stadium > 60,000 that's for sure.

Which is the upper bound of the upper bound - and you'll notice it's still not 65,000.

I want a stadium around 60,000. My point is that 65,000 has never been on the cards.

Pretending we were heading for 65,000 just so you can inflate your outrage about 55,000 is a bit daft.

 

[gorgeousgeorgeEFC]

Man City finished 16th in their first season in the new stadium yet experienced a 40% bump in attendances, their biggest signing was Claudio Reyna for £2.5m. They went 16th, 8th, 15th, 14th, 9th & 10th in their first 6 seasons in the new stadium, people seem to have got the timescale of events at city totally wrong.

So yes they are a perfectly good example to use, again especially when you consider that they've had to expand twice since moving (at a much higher cost than an initial build) due to their recent success.

Excellent point.

A new stadium always increases the average attendance dramatically.

 

[RobC]

A new stadium AND successful football is the key to increased averages not simply a new stadium. We will inevitably have to watch our spending when we eventually get BMD this limitation did not and does not apply to City as they have the wealth of an oil nation behind then, we have a dodgy minor billionaire.

 

[davek]

Which is the upper bound of the upper bound - and you'll notice it's still not 65,000.

I want a stadium around 60,000. My point is that 65,000 has never been on the cards.

Pretending we were heading for 65,000 just so you can inflate your outrage about 55,000 is a bit daft.

I'm not outraged at a 55,000 figure. And I've never said I was.

 

[Frang]

I'm not outraged at a 55,000 figure. And I've never said I was.

its almost like we are trying to back out of this stadium build.

our eyes were much bigger than our stomachs on this so it seems

 

[Brisan123]

I'm watching you.

And so are the rest of us

 

[davek]

View attachment 44987 Saw this poll on Twitter a few days ago. If we go for the ‘headline result’ from it like the official Everton one, 97% of people voted for 50k+.

Granted a lot fewer people voted on it but the trend is still there. I’m sure at these events with dan Meis the specifics will be presented, but it wouldn’t surprise me if the percentages are similar to that above.

Just because the ‘headline’ is 50k+, that doesn’t mean the majority voted for the low end, the club are purposefully making it look like they did or that’s what the final capacity would be.

Yall need to calm down

There's just no support for a stadium with a capacity of anything less than 55,000. The club are playing with fire over this issue and they'll get a severe backlash.

I understand their need to box clever and not promise stuff they cant defo deliver on - and (spiralling)costs will be an issue determining matters - but I doubt very much their own questionnaire they just outlined the results of showed anything like a majority for a sub-55,000 capacity.

55,000 has to be the floor in terms of how low the capacity can be. That was always the case with DK and made it palatable for so many as a move. That hasn't changed, no matter how fantastic the location.

 

[Brisan123]

The spurs stadium has been in development for a decade mate. You don't design a stadium, or any building for that matter for the position you are in now, you build one for where you want to be. We're going to be there for another 100 years. Where do you see Everton in 10 years? 20 years?

What Everton should also have is a view of the larger scale project on the North docks. The transport improvements, if they go as planned will potentially make our stadium among the most accessible in the country, that will go a long way to selling a few more tickets, certainly in the away section, and highly likely for Everton supporters across the country.

IMO, showing ambition isn't building to the best of what we can do now, ambition is building to the best of what we feel we can be. For me, it needs to be ~60k, not as a statement to the rest of the Premier League, but as a statement to me that my ambitions as a 20+ years STH and the ambitions of the club I support are still aligned. Nil Satis Nisi Optimum.

Everybody has their own reason for what they feel will suit us, and we'll find out in due course what the reasons for Everton are.

Just as an aside, I can appreciate Everton trying to include the supporters in the process, but most supporters know jack all about any of the processes involved. I'm not sure the capacity question should ever have been asked in the survey, your just asking for trouble.

Agree on your last point
A camel is a horse designed by a committee , as someone said earlier.
1) What size stadium do we need for now and the future
2) What size stadium can we afford.
Those are questions the board should be asking themselves and not us.
Plenty of real experts out there to advise them

 

[davek]

its almost like we are trying to back out of this stadium build.

our eyes were much bigger than our stomachs on this so it seems

I think there's going to be a massive push from the club in social media to make anything in the 50,000+ range acceptable. They want that wriggle room. IMO though that sends a poor message out to supporters. They needed to state that the lowest the club would ever contemplate would be 55,000 with a build that will offer options in the future to raise the capacity. That would settle matters down.