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


brieverton said:
There must be viable concerns about financing in the context of the sanctions, and Usmanov acting as a guarantor of loans, but what makes Evertons position so unique that we cannot/could not secure private financing if it is presumably going to be repaid over a period of decades?

I expect net costs will exceed the £500m quoted, but Moshiri had committed £100m IIRC, and presumably that was locked-in already for the project to get this far. Even if not, and I'm not discounting its a significant sum of money, £500m, is roughly a whole teams worth of our record signing, a certain Icelandic international.

Is this not just a mortgage but for a football club?

For me the problem was always to secure a decent site and get planning permission and those hurdles have been overcome. What makes Everton different to a club like Sunderland for example in a difficulty attracting a funding partner or partners, for a period of 30-40 years? Virtually every club in the top tiers in the UK and Europe has either had a new stadium or stadium overhaul in the last 30 years. Even the Italian clubs are now getting around to upgrades and stadium moves, I accept there is a large degree of municipality support there.

I'd accept things like the potential for relegation and more significantly, the prospect of a European Super League could be likely to detract from funding, but I'd imagine all those scenarios have already been worked through in detail.

If private funding is already in place, then would any lender have been foolhardy enough to completely overlook, the possibility that funding guaranteed through a Kremlin oligarch (if that is indeed the case) might not be the best horse to back, or has the situation in Ukraine come as a total and complete shock to that part of the corporate world whose job it is to be conservative and risk-aware? Perhaps it actually has but if it was that badly thought through, then we really are in trouble and the development is no better than a house of cards then.

And even then, why can't / couldn't we attract funding over a 30-40 year period based on our 144 year existence and record tenure in the top-flight? Even if on terms more onerous than might have been available to say, Spurs? And with local government support? And potentially that of a new owner and board, should Moshiri need to sell? It's not like we have to pay it all back in 12 months.

Just playing devils advocate.
Click to expand...

Comes down to modern building costs as well. Sunderland built Stadium of Light for about 20 million 25 years ago and it was still bigger than Anfield until the new stand went up and just that stand cost them north of 100 mill.

We missed the boat with the Kings Dock.
 
The binman chronicles said:
Back of a fag packet math I know, but if we can finance the stadium for say 30 million a year and we get 15 million more matchday income per season and we get a 15 million p/a naming sponsor then the stadium has effectively cost us nothing too.
Click to expand...

Arsenal and Spurs could justify the huge building costs because their matchday revenue went up enormously.

Not sure 15 mill a year extra could justify the stadium costs. A lavish sponsor on board would help but it's unlikely to be USM now.
 
gazzaa2 said:
Arsenal and Spurs could justify the huge building costs because their matchday revenue went up enormously.

Not sure 15 mill a year extra could justify the stadium costs. A lavish sponsor on board would help but it's unlikely to be USM now.
Click to expand...

As I say it all depends on how much the loan per year costs even if the stadium ends up costing us 5 million a year - which I doubt as I think with the extra general sponsorship, non match day income before we get to having 14000 more boots on the ground, buying drinks etc. - it would be worth it.
 
gazzaa2 said:
Comes down to modern building costs as well. Sunderland built Stadium of Light for about 20 million 25 years ago and it was still bigger than Anfield until the new stand went up and just that stand cost them north of 100 mill.

We missed the boat with the Kings Dock.
Click to expand...
A shame yes but not sure that stadium would have been much better than the reebok stadium or the stadium of light in todays view
 

davek said:
The larger point being that something 'nailed on' is less than that in reality.

If anyone can say the stadium finances are sorted right now and are unaffected by this sanctioning of Usmanov and Moshiri's obvious connection to him Ild be relieved.

We really should be hearing something from the club on this. They know Evertonians everywhere are at their wits end over it.
Click to expand...

If they released a statement stating that though mate, its defacto a public admission that Usminov has a subversive influential role at Everton - which he may - but for official acknowledgement purposes making an announcement mat not be the clever play.

From an official point of view all we have lost or rather "suspended", is a preferred bidder naming rights and training ground, saying anything else is acknowledgment publicly of a whole lot more.
 
Neiler said:
If they released a statement stating that though mate, its defacto a public admission that Usminov has a subversive influential role at Everton - which he may - but for official acknowledgement purposes making an announcement mat not be the clever play.

From an official point of view all we have lost or rather "suspended", is a preferred bidder naming rights and training ground, saying anything else is acknowledgment publicly of a whole lot more.
Click to expand...
I dont think so.

The reality is that we have football club publicly being slated by politicians for its associations and now forced into making a statement to the media about ending it's sponsorship. How would making a brief statement to its own fans reassuring them that the club's stadium plans are unaffected be a bad thing...something Laings have even done?
 
davek said:
I dont think so.

The reality is that we have football club publicly being slated by politicians for its associations and now forced into making a statement to the media about ending it's sponsorship. How would making a brief statement to its own fans reassuring them that the club's stadium plans are unaffected be a bad thing...something Laings have even done?
Click to expand...

I think its just as i said mate, no one not even politicians have said that he owns or is funding the club or stadium, to the best of my knowledge all that has been said is he is associated and the most stringent was inferred in Westminster were they are protected by privilege. If you asked the same politician outside Westminster he wouldn't say anything as he's not protected by privilege and is open to legal action. So bar the whole programme for government in the UK being about Usminov and Everton sponsorship - i dont really think there is, has or will be a slating especially because now we have suspended any credible acknowledged links.

Any other statement or acknowledgement particularly around the stadium to my mind is a public acknowledgement of a more subversive influential role then is officially stated as currently at best officially he (or rather a company he's involved with is a sponsor, all be it a suspended one currently.
 

Welcome

Join Grand Old Team to get involved in the Everton discussion. Signing up is quick, easy, and completely free.

Register
Back
Top