Kenwright will, so long as you tell him he can be in charge for ever and ever.
Kenwright will, so long as you tell him he can be in charge for ever and ever.
Tom Hughes
Player Valuation: £10m
DB.... apologies, I missed your reply. I am merely responding to some slightly misinformed points being made by some that I believe are the lasting legacy of the Wyness/Elstone destination Kirkby years. I don't believe BMD needs that Hobson's choice level of hardsell.... but if it does, there is something seriously wrong.
I chose those particular famous stadia just as two glaring examples of continously redeveloped structures that would never be considered poor quality or crap stadiums.... and that "redevelopment" was demonstrably also the best financial option for their respective clubs. I could've chose any number of similar examples to illustrate the same point, and basically used the broadbrush German example because again, there are numerous examples were they chose redevelopment of older stadia ahead of relocation, but I agree yes, spacial concerns are generally not as prevalent there.
As regards age of stadia being redeveloped, it can have some effect, but not always. The San Siro for instance was started in the mid-20s, at the same time as the Bullens Rd was turned into a double-decker by Leitch. It has been expanded over the decades by adding new tiers, and again is considered one of the most iconic football stadiums in the world. Glasgow Rangers added a new tier to their similarly aged historic Leitch mainstand. Even though it was within a listed structure and therefore an expensive operation, it was still much cheaper than building an equivalent capacity stand from scratch. This stand is still the centrepiece of Ibrox. Liverpool's Mainstand is roughly the same size as the stands at Wembley, but cost a fraction of their cost because the original bottom 7k Leitch stand (plus 1970s extension) was retained and remodelled. That stand is much older than any at GP, and dates from 1906 and has more boxes and corporate than the whole of BMD. Newcastle had grand plans to move in the adjacent park to a 60-70k stadium. Again, this was soon dropped when it was shown that it was far cheaper to expand in situ even with listed buildings nearby. When the Gallowgate end is expanded they will have a large horseshoe stadium at 60k+ capacity, for a fraction of our outlay.
The main reason relocation was chosen for us at the time of PJ, Kings Dock, Kirkby and Walton Park was that the club was skint and required third party enabling funding that it didn't feel it could get at GP. That was their model.... and probably partially the initial prompt for BMD too, with the promise of Commonwealth games funding, which could've built most of the stadium. That is no longer the case and we will have to fund it in its entirety, but the momentum (Moshiri) has still carried it over the start line.
As I've said previously, I'm not one bit against moving per se, and happily voted for the Kings Dock. I was also part of a group who looked at and campaigned for a stadium on central docks and BMD at the time of Destination Kirkby, even approaching Peel and generating outline concepts for those sites. I am therefore as excited by the prospects of the new stadium as the next blue. However, I have some slight reservations and concerns about some aspects and outstanding issues, and don't feel it is helpful nor necessary to overhype BMD while slagging off the redevelopment option, especially when no-one has seen professionally produced concept designs for that option since Ward McHugh was approached by the GFE lads over 20yrs ago.
The binman chronicles
Player Valuation: £80m
And both clubs are spending the same amount as our stadium in total to add a few seats. Yes we could redevelop Goodison for less money but it never be as good, it won't have the commercial benefits (it will always be 'Goodison') and the sooner you start the quicker that build will seem like a bargain, in 20 years clubs will be paying 1.5 billion etc.
Tom Hughes
Player Valuation: £10m
Real Madrid are completely remodelling/rebuilding the lower tiers which has roughly the same capacity as BMD on its own, and adding major new facilities elsewhere. This will greatly increase their corporate capacity and the quality will be high-end. They will also have new parking facilities underneath and a closing roof. The main point being: to do the same from scratch would probably cost double their outlay and the end result is on a whole higher level compared to BMD if we're honest:
The basic equation is the same and the same principles could also apply to GP. Which for a reduced outlay could quite easily match or be bigger than BMD (capacity-future-proofed), with more corporate offer and closing roof etc. It might not offer the same opportunities for the owners to increase their development portfolio on a supposedly lucrative site, and it wouldn't have waterfront views, but what has any of that really got to do with the stadium, its quality and how it functions for us?
If commercial (or selling) opportunities for the owner are the true driver, then fair enough.... but that doesn't require us to make stuff up about redevelopment that multiple real-world examples seem to readily disprove.
I thought there was an image showing GP on the BMD site to show the difference in size? BMD footprint looked like it dwarfed GP.
The likes of the Bernabeau are already at a starting point of 80k, Barcelona are at a starting point of 100k.
Ours is 40k in a very penned in area so that's going to severely limit what we can or can't do.
I've never been against developing GP, in fact it will have always been my preferred choice. But I understand the reasoning of moving elsewhere.
toffee66
Player Valuation: £8m
One way or another we are committed so our focus should probably be on keeping the pressure on the club to deliver BMD to the highest standard within their budget.
The probable outcome likely sits somewhere between a crap new build like St. Mary’s and a smaller, budget Spurs stadium. It will probably be better than a redeveloped Goodison in concourse size & facilities, but not much different in views to a Goodison without posts/letter box and probably inferior on access/egress.
We do need to have realistic expectations of BMD because a lot of the cost is purely site acquisition and preparation (in the £120-150m range) and another £50m on heritage/site preservation leaving a c. £300m stadium. I think Tom is right to sound some cautious notes on what that will deliver.
The probable outcome likely sits somewhere between a crap new build like St. Mary’s and a smaller, budget Spurs stadium. It will probably be better than a redeveloped Goodison in concourse size & facilities, but not much different in views to a Goodison without posts/letter box and probably inferior on access/egress.
We do need to have realistic expectations of BMD because a lot of the cost is purely site acquisition and preparation (in the £120-150m range) and another £50m on heritage/site preservation leaving a c. £300m stadium. I think Tom is right to sound some cautious notes on what that will deliver.
Mods,can you please start a new thread for people who wish to talk about how we might have redeveloped Goodison. This thread is for those of us who want to talk about the new stadium, the one that is currently being built at the bottom of Boundary Street, the one I am really looking forward to seeing being constructed and where I will be enjoying my football in a couple of years time. Thanks. 
I think a degree of caution is merited, but you're talking as if they are going to whip the designs we've all seen away and drop Middlesbrough's stadium in the dock. That's not going to happen.
The risk I'd probably be more worried about - which is hopefully small - is for construction to stall for financial reasons.
MickA
Player Valuation: £10m
If I remember correctly I think the site overall does, but if you measure the distance between the back row of the Park End to the back row of the Gwladys it is roughly similar to the back row of the north stand to the back row of the south stand at BMD.
Tom Hughes
Player Valuation: £10m
Yes, but they are completely rebuilding a large proportion of that capacity at the Bernabeu to improve sightlines and add corporate. Similar at the Nou Camp where the upper tier is going to be extended all around with a new roof.
BMD is quite a large footprint because it has no overlapping tiers. The same capacity can be achieved elsewhere on a much smaller footprint if overlapping tiers were used.
Yes, to go much beyond 50k at GP would require a small footprint expansion on the Bullens side. That is hardly beyond precedent nor prohibitively costly. Before BMD the planning office was not only entirely receptive to that option, they were pushing it. The cost implications are especially brought into focus when you consider that we're spending over £100m just to prep and lease a new site. LFC constructed one of the biggest stands in the world, adding 9k, roughly for that amount, and are now adding a further 8k seats to the Anfield Rd end for just over half that. All with a ROI of just a few years, releasing more funds for new players and much sooner.
The binman chronicles
Player Valuation: £80m
The cost was just to show what can be done with upgrading and what can be done with a fresh start. RM were lucky that during covid they could reprofile without doing it piecemeal having to shut each area during the season. That would have significantly increased costs. Expect Barca's to be a lot more by the time/if they get around to it as well.
No one is debating that Goodison couldn't be redeveloped, it's just an almighty pain in the backside. If them and City paid 60 million each to build upon what was already there and both increasing capacity by only 6,000 shows you give or take to upgrade Goodison will cost the best part of 300 million. And that's at the point the ground is cleared and there is space to build. In our case that could be another 5/6 years and building costs may have increased and the will to continue may have ceased. It would be at best a 10 year project where we lose income as we shut down each stand and a lot could happen in that tineframe.
Then on top you have the holy trinity of problems where if you were to build a stadium in Liverpool afresh you wouldn't put it where Goodison is. Fact. Doesn't matter how many boxes we put in it we are not getting thousands more than who already pay for it now. They can get away with it due to their elevated status. You also have the issue regarding space around the ground, I know you champion that it only takes a few houses to knock down to get the extra stand width, but what about the space around the stands? Modern stadiums let people mill around with space much like we'll be able to at BMD especially important in this covid world. To get that sort of landscape you will have to flattern a whole lot more, again more time and money. Then commercially - a point you keep ignoring we aren't getting naming rights at Goodison and this is what effectively pays for the loan to build BMD. At goodison we would be using the extra capacity to pay off the costs instead of putting that money into the team. See the difference?
As I said previously, if in the 90's we had built a two tier PE holding 12k and the club had started making a real effort in buying up property along GR so the main stand could be squared off then we could and should have stayed. Their inaction has brought us to a point that forced us into this position of having to leave. It is far better now to make that harder decisive decision to go instead of skip along like a stone on a beach being bashed around by outside factors. By the time the land has cleared we might not have a TV deal to back up the costs, who knows. You have to strike while you can and we've been 15/20 years behind in that respect. When you add and subtract everything the two methods (rebuild or move) would come out very similar so it is 100% the right thing to do.
If they want to redevelop the area then a Merseyrail station would be vital between Moorfields and Sandhills.
They're trying to build one between Brunswick and Liverpool Central (Baltic Triangle) as all the development deems it worthwhile.
It's basically the same distance (Moorfields-Sandhills or Brunswick-Central). It comes down to cost but it proves worthwhile. I remember Brunswick being built in the 90s and there wasn't much there, but you've got the business park there and loads of new flats etc and it's a busy station now.
Moorfields and Sandhills aren't particularly well located either. The Old Hall Street entrance for Moorfields isn't even open half the time.
Johnnytotal
Player Valuation: £10m
Yep it's really off putting seeing people deliberately slagging off BMD and going on and on about what we should have done and how the whole world would be doing a better job than we are......kopites im sureMods,can you please start a new thread for people who wish to talk about how we might have redeveloped Goodison. This thread is for those of us who want to talk about the new stadium, the one that is currently being built at the bottom of Boundary Street, the one I am really looking forward to seeing being constructed and where I will be enjoying my football in a couple of years time. Thanks.
Johnnytotal
Player Valuation: £10m
Must be off for more sand
I think you mean the old St.James station which closed in 1917 but still exists. If you look over the wall in Stanhope St. you can see the remains of the platform etc. I think some funding is already in place ,no idea of cost.. Maghull North cost about £10m a few years ago and was a relatively simple build in a cutting. I'd love to see a new station near BMD but it's on an elevated section ,the cost would be enormous.
Welcome
Join Grand Old Team to get involved in the Everton discussion. Signing up is quick, easy, and completely free.
Shop
