New Everton Stadium

[BunnerJnr]

What do you expect?
They have announced the dates of the 2nd public consultation which will for the first time officially show what is proposed.
This is an essential exersize that forms part of the planning application.
Their is absolutely nothing to announce until that consultation is over.

Is an 8-month gap in between the 2 consultations normal?

 

[GwladysPhil]

Just read that Atletico's stadium cost € 240 million!!!!

Just looking at it and it's looks a far better stadium than the billion pound albatross Spurs have.

The main stand was already built and left under utilised for over a decade - think they might have been given it for free?. But construction projects in Spain (and not in London) will generally be cheaper.

 

[jaycee]

Just read that Atletico's stadium cost € 240 million!!!!

Just looking at it and it's looks a far better stadium than the billion pound albatross Spurs have.

Certainly smashes FC Bigstand out the park

 

[MikeH72]

Just read that Atletico's stadium cost € 240 million!!!!

Just looking at it and it's looks a far better stadium than the billion pound albatross Spurs have.

lol

 

[Saint Domingo]

Just read that Atletico's stadium cost € 240 million!!!!

Just looking at it and it's looks a far better stadium than the billion pound albatross Spurs have.

Both are far better stadiums than Liverpool’s hole punch. Liverpool’s owners have prioritised short term ‘success’ over the long term benefit of the club by not moving to a new stadium.

 

[HongKongToffee]

Both are far better stadiums than Liverpool’s hole punch. Liverpool’s owners have prioritised short term ‘success’ over the long term benefit of the club by not moving to a new stadium.

What makes a better stadium being brand new??, is the Camp Nou one of the best stadiums in the world?, have you even been there on tour, its a crumbling mess ,outside exterior is an eyesore, the seats don't look great with hardly any leg room, and inside leaves a lot to be desired for a so called "temple of football", no wonder they are giving it a £600 million face lift, its shocking how they let that stadium rot for such an iconic club.

I think their owners across the park are following the Redsox example at developing their stadium bit by bit, so it doesn't harm player recruitment and their baseball team has had short term "success" with 4-5 World Series championships in the last 15 years doing just that, also can they replicate the intimidating factor they have in Europe with a new stadium, big teams visit there and lose their nerve as Barca were the most recent, that factor gets them deep in European competition, what is it 6 or 7 European finals this century?

Also United at OT , they have slowly added stands and grown capacity, look at the stadium before 1992 to the present day, they grew and modernised the stadium as the club grew organically and the new stands budgets never impacted their recruitment.

Any way on baseball, they are 30 teams in Baseball and 26 teams have modern stadiums built in the last 20 years and most don't spend big or get close to winning anything, Red Sox and Cubs have stadiums from the late 1800's, Dodgers and A's from the 1960's.

Cubs. Redsox, Dodgers with the Yankees have the biggest wage bills in Baseball, Yankees have always had the biggest wage bill and print money so their 2009 newly built $2.3 billion dollar stadium doesn't even put a dent in their finances before they moved, the old yankee stadium was built in the 1920's, they won 26 championships in that stadium and only one in their new 10 year old stadium which was in 2009 the first season they moved in.

The former chairman of Arsenal said if they had known tv money would go up the way it did in the late 00's onward they wouldn't have bothered leaving Highbury and not have that new stadium bill that impacted their player recruitment, around that time just before they left Highbury they had the invicibles in 2004 and were 10 mins away from winning the CL in 2006.

All the new stadiums of the last 15 years in europe all have the same design, Spurs just added a single tier but it's 75% of it still looks exactly like the new coporate bowl stadiums built in Russia Ukraine France Germany England Italy Spain this century.

Goodison is crumbling so the move has to happen ASAP, but clubs don't have to move for the sake of moving, why take out a loan for 100's of million when you can use your budget to strengthen on the pitch which is way more important than playing in a new stadium and having a team that is getting nowhere near winning things.

 

[Eggsyblueskin]

What makes a better stadium being brand new??, is the Camp Nou one of the best stadiums in the world?, have you even been there on tour, its a crumbling mess ,outside exterior is an eyesore, the seats don't look great with hardly any leg room, and inside leaves a lot to be desired for a so called "temple of football", no wonder they are giving it a £600 million face lift, its shocking how they let that stadium rot for such an iconic club.

I think their owners across the park are following the Redsox example at developing their stadium bit by bit, so it doesn't harm player recruitment and their baseball team has had short term "success" with 4-5 World Series championships in the last 15 years doing just that, also can they replicate the intimidating factor they have in Europe with a new stadium, big teams visit there and lose their nerve as Barca were the most recent, that factor gets them deep in European competition, what is it 6 or 7 European finals this century?

Also United at OT , they have slowly added stands and grown capacity, look at the stadium before 1992 to the present day, they grew and modernised the stadium as the club grew organically and the new stands budgets never impacted their recruitment.

Any way on baseball, they are 30 teams in Baseball and 26 teams have modern stadiums built in the last 20 years and most don't spend big or get close to winning anything, Red Sox and Cubs have stadiums from the late 1800's, Dodgers and A's from the 1960's.

Cubs. Redsox, Dodgers with the Yankees have the biggest wage bills in Baseball, Yankees have always had the biggest wage bill and print money so their 2009 newly built $2.3 billion dollar stadium doesn't even put a dent in their finances before they moved, the old yankee stadium was built in the 1920's, they won 26 championships in that stadium and only one in their new 10 year old stadium which was in 2009 the first season they moved in.

The former chairman of Arsenal said if they had known tv money would go up the way it did in the late 00's onward they wouldn't have bothered leaving Highbury and not have that new stadium bill that impacted their player recruitment, around that time just before they left Highbury they had the invicibles in 2004 and were 10 mins away from winning the CL in 2006.

All the new stadiums of the last 15 years in europe all have the same design, Spurs just added a single tier but it's 75% of it still looks exactly like the new coporate bowl stadiums built in Russia Ukraine France Germany England Italy Spain this century.

Goodison is crumbling so the move has to happen ASAP, but clubs don't have to move for the sake of moving, why take out a loan for 100's of million when you can use your budget to strengthen on the pitch which is way more important than playing in a new stadium and having a team that is getting nowhere near winning things.

Two points I’d like to raise, firstly you reference Old Trafford. In fact despite its impressive capacity it is increasingly coming to be regarded as a crumbling rat infested stadium, certainly not a fitting home for the self acclaimed ‘biggest club in the world’. Since the new owners took control, apart from overseeing the final stages of the build that was already in progress prior to their arrival, they have been unwilling to invest any further money into the rapidly ageing edifice they inherited. It is seen by many , rightly or wrongly,as symbolic of the ominous malaise that is seemingly strengthening its grip on the club year by year.
Secondly , you seem to be labouring under the illusion that the sole reason for building a new stadium is for prestige and better urinals.
Whilst this may have been the case some years ago the latest stadiums are being built to not only earn their keep on match days but to contribute significant funds to their club on non match days.
In this regard the Dock has major advantages over Goodison in terms of location being closer to the city centre and appearing slightly more desirable as venue for various events and functions. This is especially true when you consider the councils plans for regeneration of the area (which is already in progress).
It also distances us from competing closely with the more well known pit across the park.

 

[BNJ1878]

Is an 8-month gap in between the 2 consultations normal?

I have no idea, some posters on here are in a far better position than I on the planning process for complicated projects of this scale.

My point was the 2nd consultation has been announced, so to expect any more official news before that has at least started doesn't make too much sense.

 

[HongKongToffee]

Two points I’d like to raise, firstly you reference Old Trafford. In fact despite its impressive capacity it is increasingly coming to be regarded as a crumbling rat infested stadium, certainly not a fitting home for the self acclaimed ‘biggest club in the world’. Since the new owners took control, apart from overseeing the final stages of the build that was already in progress prior to their arrival, they have been unwilling to invest any further money into the rapidly ageing edifice they inherited. It is seen by many , rightly or wrongly,as symbolic of the ominous malaise that is seemingly strengthening its grip on the club year by year.
Secondly , you seem to be labouring under the illusion that the sole reason for building a new stadium is for prestige and better urinals.
Whilst this may have been the case some years ago the latest stadiums are being built to not only earn their keep on match days but to contribute significant funds to their club on non match days.
In this regard the Dock has major advantages over Goodison in terms of location being closer to the city centre and appearing slightly more desirable as venue for various events and functions. This is especially true when you consider the councils plans for regeneration of the area (which is already in progress).
It also distances us from competing closely with the more well known pit across the park.

A leaky roof at OT and 3 brand new stands built this century and it still gives them £115 million in match day revenue every season, how much would a brand spanking 76000 seater stadium have cost them, £1.5 billion easily.

So that shows adding capacity slowly to your current stadium increases matchday revenue and doesn't harm your recruitment as we have seen with United and them across the park who are ranked 1 & 3 in PL matchday revenues.

Only ones who have moved into new stadiums and seen continued success on and off the pitch is Bayern and Juve and it's nothing to be amazed at as both are the dominant team in those 1 horse weak AF joke leagues, Man City is another case but they are backed by a state.

And my post never highlighted any benefit " for prestige and better urinals", my comments on baseball and the ex Arsenal chairman regrets at moving to the Emirates showed how overrated moving into a new stadium is and how it stunts growth on the pitch because of loans paying off a stadium, Spurs will find that out and that is why Poch was pretty adamant he's worried about that with his comments beofre and after the Ajax match.

 

[blulouie]

A leaky roof at OT and 3 brand new stands built this century and it still gives them £115 million in match day revenue every season, how much would a brand spanking 76000 seater stadium have cost them, £1.5 billion easily.

So that shows adding capacity slowly to your current stadium increases matchday revenue and doesn't harm your recruitment as we have seen with United and them across the park who are ranked 1 & 3 in PL matchday revenues.

Only ones who have moved into new stadiums and seen continued success on and off the pitch is Bayern and Juve and it's nothing to be amazed at as both are the dominant team in those 1 horse weak AF joke leagues, Man City is another case but they are backed by a state.

And my post never highlighted any benefit " for prestige and better urinals", my comments on baseball and the ex Arsenal chairman regrets at moving to the Emirates showed how overrated moving into a new stadium is and how it stunts growth on the pitch because of loans paying off a stadium, Spurs will find that out and that is why Poch was pretty adamant he's worried about that with his comments beofre and after the Ajax match.

Absolutely pointless comparing Old Trafford to our planned new one.
One was built on unpresedented success , meanwhile we have won a big fat Zilch.

No comparison whatsoever.

 

[mrb85]

It's a no from me. Most Evertonians have asked for an arena as close to the action as possible, the Wanda is designed so that a running track can cover the lower tier thus compromising the upper tiers.

I think it's very good but it's not Everton.

Don't like that London Stadium (WHU) feature of a wide walkway interrupting the rows of seating behind the goal.

 

[mrb85]

What makes a better stadium being brand new??, is the Camp Nou one of the best stadiums in the world?, have you even been there on tour, its a crumbling mess ,outside exterior is an eyesore, the seats don't look great with hardly any leg room, and inside leaves a lot to be desired for a so called "temple of football", no wonder they are giving it a £600 million face lift, its shocking how they let that stadium rot for such an iconic club.

I think their owners across the park are following the Redsox example at developing their stadium bit by bit, so it doesn't harm player recruitment and their baseball team has had short term "success" with 4-5 World Series championships in the last 15 years doing just that, also can they replicate the intimidating factor they have in Europe with a new stadium, big teams visit there and lose their nerve as Barca were the most recent, that factor gets them deep in European competition, what is it 6 or 7 European finals this century?

Also United at OT , they have slowly added stands and grown capacity, look at the stadium before 1992 to the present day, they grew and modernised the stadium as the club grew organically and the new stands budgets never impacted their recruitment.

Any way on baseball, they are 30 teams in Baseball and 26 teams have modern stadiums built in the last 20 years and most don't spend big or get close to winning anything, Red Sox and Cubs have stadiums from the late 1800's, Dodgers and A's from the 1960's.

Cubs. Redsox, Dodgers with the Yankees have the biggest wage bills in Baseball, Yankees have always had the biggest wage bill and print money so their 2009 newly built $2.3 billion dollar stadium doesn't even put a dent in their finances before they moved, the old yankee stadium was built in the 1920's, they won 26 championships in that stadium and only one in their new 10 year old stadium which was in 2009 the first season they moved in.

The former chairman of Arsenal said if they had known tv money would go up the way it did in the late 00's onward they wouldn't have bothered leaving Highbury and not have that new stadium bill that impacted their player recruitment, around that time just before they left Highbury they had the invicibles in 2004 and were 10 mins away from winning the CL in 2006.

All the new stadiums of the last 15 years in europe all have the same design, Spurs just added a single tier but it's 75% of it still looks exactly like the new coporate bowl stadiums built in Russia Ukraine France Germany England Italy Spain this century.

Goodison is crumbling so the move has to happen ASAP, but clubs don't have to move for the sake of moving, why take out a loan for 100's of million when you can use your budget to strengthen on the pitch which is way more important than playing in a new stadium and having a team that is getting nowhere near winning things.

3, coming up 4.

 

[ForeverBlue92]

Funny how if Liverpool were moving into a brand new shiny stadium on the docks as part of a 5 billion regeneration scheme whilst we stayed redeveloping Goodison in our run down area im pretty sure @HongKongToffee would be singing a completely different tune lollollol

Can't wait for us to move into it / us to finally win something to see the Kopite lurkers self combust.

 

[orly]

What makes a better stadium being brand new??, is the Camp Nou one of the best stadiums in the world?, have you even been there on tour, its a crumbling mess ,outside exterior is an eyesore, the seats don't look great with hardly any leg room, and inside leaves a lot to be desired for a so called "temple of football", no wonder they are giving it a £600 million face lift, its shocking how they let that stadium rot for such an iconic club.

I think their owners across the park are following the Redsox example at developing their stadium bit by bit, so it doesn't harm player recruitment and their baseball team has had short term "success" with 4-5 World Series championships in the last 15 years doing just that, also can they replicate the intimidating factor they have in Europe with a new stadium, big teams visit there and lose their nerve as Barca were the most recent, that factor gets them deep in European competition, what is it 6 or 7 European finals this century?

Also United at OT , they have slowly added stands and grown capacity, look at the stadium before 1992 to the present day, they grew and modernised the stadium as the club grew organically and the new stands budgets never impacted their recruitment.

Any way on baseball, they are 30 teams in Baseball and 26 teams have modern stadiums built in the last 20 years and most don't spend big or get close to winning anything, Red Sox and Cubs have stadiums from the late 1800's, Dodgers and A's from the 1960's.

Cubs. Redsox, Dodgers with the Yankees have the biggest wage bills in Baseball, Yankees have always had the biggest wage bill and print money so their 2009 newly built $2.3 billion dollar stadium doesn't even put a dent in their finances before they moved, the old yankee stadium was built in the 1920's, they won 26 championships in that stadium and only one in their new 10 year old stadium which was in 2009 the first season they moved in.

The former chairman of Arsenal said if they had known tv money would go up the way it did in the late 00's onward they wouldn't have bothered leaving Highbury and not have that new stadium bill that impacted their player recruitment, around that time just before they left Highbury they had the invicibles in 2004 and were 10 mins away from winning the CL in 2006.

All the new stadiums of the last 15 years in europe all have the same design, Spurs just added a single tier but it's 75% of it still looks exactly like the new coporate bowl stadiums built in Russia Ukraine France Germany England Italy Spain this century.

Goodison is crumbling so the move has to happen ASAP, but clubs don't have to move for the sake of moving, why take out a loan for 100's of million when you can use your budget to strengthen on the pitch which is way more important than playing in a new stadium and having a team that is getting nowhere near winning things.

There's a lot there about the Boston Red Sox. What are their owners like?



.....ah right.

 

[H.H.]

Just read that Atletico's stadium cost € 240 million!!!!

Just looking at it and it's looks a far better stadium than the billion pound albatross Spurs have.

I will let you know a few days after the final.