Install the app
How to install the app on iOS

Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.

Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.

 

New Everton Stadium

Zezti said:
Just for comparison's sake; 52k would be 10k more than Juve's stadium, 3k more than PSG's stadium but 10k less than Schalke's stadium.
Click to expand...
I'm not personally having a go at you here, but I don't really see the logic behind the whole comparison thing: oh, our stadium must be larger than your stadium etc.

Spurs could have made a hundred-thousand seater stadium to outdo Man United, but they didn't. Why? They've built a stadium that suited their own criteria.

Same with Chelsea's plans even though they've been shelved for the meantime. Ultimately, you build a stadium that fulfils your demand and within your budget.

While I do feel that the capacity could be slightly larger, I would prefer a consistently full 52k, with suitably priced tickets, rather than spaces in the ground.

Even more so if the prices were to be suitably hiked up to pay for the extra seats in the stadium or reduced to a point where it becomes a financial burden.

It is easy for people to say it's undervaluing the club or lacking ambition, but surely they will have done rigorous studies and it is what they feel is most viable.

If the expansion plans are genuine, which I expect they are, then surely we will expand if we regularly sell out and a larger enough waiting list.

Yes it could be galling that those lot over the park will probably have a higher attendance along with other clubs, however in reality they currently have a bigger draw.
 
roydo said:
Grab a bucket and a pair of wellies I reckon.

But being serious. I dont know. PP I guess.
Click to expand...

Planning permission due to do in by the end of the year depending on the outcome of the consultations.

Assuming there is no nasties there then PP then if/when that’s approved it’s the build stage which is slated to take 3 years
 
PhilM said:
I'm not personally having a go at you here, but I don't really see the logic behind the whole comparison thing: oh, our stadium must be larger than your stadium etc.

Spurs could have made a hundred-thousand seater stadium to outdo Man United, but they didn't. Why? They've built a stadium that suited their own criteria.

Same with Chelsea's plans even though they've been shelved for the meantime. Ultimately, you build a stadium that fulfils your demand and within your budget.

While I do feel that the capacity could be slightly larger, I would prefer a consistently full 52k, with suitably priced tickets, rather than spaces in the ground.

Even more so if the prices were to be suitably hiked up to pay for the extra seats in the stadium or reduced to a point where it becomes a financial burden.

It is easy for people to say it's undervaluing the club or lacking ambition, but surely they will have done rigorous studies and it is what they feel is most viable.

If the expansion plans are genuine, which I expect they are, then surely we will expand if we regularly sell out and a larger enough waiting list.

Yes it could be galling that those lot over the park will probably have a higher attendance along with other clubs, however in reality they currently have a bigger draw.
Click to expand...

That's actually what I was hinting at. Nobody would claim that Juve or PSG lack ambition because of their stadiums' capacity, and nobody would claim Schalke are part of europe's best. Its not just about numbers, its about having a stadium that suits the club playing in it and making it special every time fans go there.
 

Toffeeslam said:
Planning permission due to do in by the end of the year depending on the outcome of the consultations.

Assuming there is no nasties there then PP then if/when that’s approved it’s the build stage which is slated to take 3 years
Click to expand...
Toffeeslam said:
Planning permission due to do in by the end of the year depending on the outcome of the consultations.

Assuming there is no nasties there then PP then if/when that’s approved it’s the build stage which is slated to take 3 years
Click to expand...

I have said for a while, with no ITK in the slightest, that the bulk of PP will already have been seen, as it were.

That said, it still takes a huge leap of faith or imagination to see that desolate dock that Tom Davies was booting a ball around on turned into that thing of beauty that Meis unveiled.
 
BNJ1878 said:
52k is a sizable increase.

We have what, 40k now? Almost half have some sort of obstructed view of the playing area. I'd guess maybe 8/10k have a terrible view.

That's an increase of AT LEAST 22k seats with unobstructed views and better facilities.

Saying that, I'd love at least the west stand to be a 3 tier, and said as much on the consultation feedback.
Click to expand...

There's no reason why either side stands aren't 3 tiers. Like some other stadiums Meis has worked on.

You say 52k is a sizeable increase but is it? Tottenham was 36k at WHL Arsenal was 38k at Highbury West Ham albeit a different story was in the 30's. All at 60k now. With others it's getting there..

If we were to incrementally increase BMD, fair enough. I don't believe for a minute it will be safe standing.

I reckon if Goodison was around 52k now we'd fill it. Just my opinion. At BMD that precludes the increase that may occur with the move to a new stadium (new stadium bounce) and tourists never mind any success. Come on sold out the last few seasons? Martinez? Koeman? Allardyce?? 52 will do for now. Kinda short term I think.

I don't see a reason why we don't start off at 60,000 plus. Then I think the only reason not to is a lack of confidence that we would fill it. 'Fear of empty seats'.

Going to contradict myself I do watch EFL on Quest banks of empty seats is soul destroying. I'd rather we had the capacity than enforce sell outs all the time again limiting the infrequent supporter.
 
Davideeyore said:
There's no reason why either side stands aren't 3 tiers. Like some other stadiums Meis has worked on.

You say 52k is a sizeable increase but is it? Tottenham was 36k at WHL Arsenal was 38k at Highbury West Ham albeit a different story was in the 30's. All at 60k now. With others it's getting there..

If we were to incrementally increase BMD, fair enough. I don't believe for a minute it will be safe standing.

I reckon if Goodison was around 52k now we'd fill it. Just my opinion. At BMD that precludes the increase that may occur with the move to a new stadium (new stadium bounce) and tourists never mind any success. Come on sold out the last few seasons? Martinez? Koeman? Allardyce?? 52 will do for now. Kinda short term I think.

I don't see a reason why we don't start off at 60,000 plus. Then I think the only reason not to is a lack of confidence that we would fill it. 'Fear of empty seats'.

Going to contradict myself I do watch EFL on Quest banks of empty seats is soul destroying. I'd rather we had the capacity than enforce sell outs all the time again limiting the infrequent supporter.
Click to expand...
If it didn't have all the obstructed views I think you're right. And that's with 25 years of average to mediocre football without any silverware.
I don't understand anyone who is happy to put aesthetics above optimal capacity. And I laugh when I hear comments that experts will have undertaken a full study to determine the required capacity. It doesn't take any 'expert' to tell you that 52,000 is very much at the low end of the spectrum short of the arse falling out of the EPL in the next decade eg through the formation of a breakaway Euro League.
 
Eggs said:
...I doubt they mean an extra 1m per week.
Click to expand...
I wasn't talking per week. But given that the overwhelming majority of the additional quarter million tickets would be taken up locally, there won't, short of the middlemen getting involved in ticket distribution to visitors, be many left for the once a season visitor or impromptu ticket seeker.
 

Blue Roo said:
Has there been swing in favour of 52k since the presentation?

If the priorities are the atmosphere, and keeping it Goodison within a newer design, then surely 52K seems right.
Or about as big as it can get.
Surely an extra 12k in that design is going to give more noise and atmosphere than 22k+ in a bigger one.
Obviously the bigger you go the more it detracts from the design principles.
And well, its not about how big the dog in the fight is, its the fight in the dog that counts.

Not easy to get tickets for us living across the sea, but would rather it be slightly less difficult, then getting there, and knowing its still Everton.
Click to expand...
Some strange statements here. Why are size and atmosphere incompatible? The old GP held up to 78,000 and in later decades still held over 60,000, without ever averaging more than than around the 50,000 mark. Don't recall Goodison ever being described as a library then. Also why would design principles necessarily be compromised by a bigger capacity?
How it looks to me is that financial and infrastructural restrictions have been at play, not optimal capacity considerations.
 
Zezti said:
Just for comparison's sake; 52k would be 10k more than Juve's stadium, 3k more than PSG's stadium but 10k less than Schalke's stadium.
Click to expand...
Why are you using comparisons outside of the Premier League? More relevant comparisons would be using clubs that are in our league.

We play in the Premier League and you’re comparing it to clubs who play in leagues that have massive corruption, racism, violence, in the case of Serie A, or a league that has never been popular, in Ligue 1.

Compare it to our peers who we’re trying to compete with and you’ll see why it is too small.
 
As the stadium pretty much covers the entire width of the site (N/S), I think it’s fair to assume that additional seats can’t be added behind the goals - at least not many.

That means the only way to increase capacity would be in the west and east, which would undermine the design of the stadium.

Despite initially saying the site would be able to fit 60k, I suspect that when the designs and plans evolved they were limited to 52k.
 
GwladysBlue said:
Why are you using comparisons outside of the Premier League? More relevant comparisons would be using clubs that are in our league.

We play in the Premier League and you’re comparing it to clubs who play in leagues that have massive corruption, racism, violence, in the case of Serie A, or a league that has never been popular, in Ligue 1.

Compare it to our peers who we’re trying to compete with and you’ll see why it is too small.
Click to expand...

Meis does this comparion too. Is it Roma he's been involved in. (52,000...........)
 

Welcome to GrandOldTeam

Get involved. Registration is simple and free.

Register
Back
Top