jaycee
Player Valuation: £60m
I dont see how travel infaatructure could be a problem in a city centre compared to an exge of city site served by 2 bus routes
GwladysBlue
Player Valuation: £70m
I hope that we don't undersell ourselves and go for a 50k stadium, any new stadium needs to be st the very least 60k.
Why build smaller than the teams you want to be competing against?
Why build smaller than the teams you want to be competing against?
maverick94
Player Valuation: £1.5m
Limited options spatially with it being on the water front. If the new stadium was to the North of the city you'd have to build back towards the city centre, as thats where the majority of travelling fans would be coming from. Building transport infrastructure on the edge of the city is somewhat easier in a way, as you have a 'blank canvas' to start on
Onwards Evertonians
Player Valuation: £8m
We'd be doing the council a big favour building on Stonebridge Cross and that's why they're pushing it, they can't give it away, they redirected a river to attract Amazon and they still went elsewhere. The waterfront is in our interests, the council need to get this into their heads, it's our stadium and not an opportunity for the council to get rid of a problem site.
catcherintherye
Player Valuation: £80m
I respect the world UNESCO do but in all honesty they are a toothless operator. They have no legal power other than to moan. I trust Everton to not go out of their way to damage WHS locations. However a stadium would benefit it massively as a purpose built high class stadium will bring people to the area. I'd even give them a fop of having a little section of a megastore there linked to the WHS, history of Liverpool as a City as conjure up some tenuous links to Everton. (Maybe find a player who was a sailor). People may laugh at this, but this is the sort of nonsense alongside a healthy donation that will go a long way. Give them one of the discounted new boxes for some of the matches or whatever.
ToffeeDoug
Player Valuation: £35m
I'm hearing still no movement from the club on either site yet - but could be as much as 80/20 in favour of Stonebridge vs waterfront in terms of likelihood as it stands. (echo have just published an article suggesting SC more likely too: http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/could-new-everton-stadium-help-11344102)
Bit concern over Waterfront would be travel infrastructure. Whilst we do have a large 'walk up' fan base, there would still be a huge amount of parking required for a 50+k seat stadium, and would lead to massive congestion around the area.
Stonebridge would also require massive parking but there is the space out there to build purpose built parking, and it has good motorway links.
..QUOTE]
No doubt with the Croccy Crew or whoever 'minding your car mister'.
Jacko93
Player Valuation: £35m
The best way would be to build with further expansion in mind. A ground capable of 60-70k but currently at 50-55k. Means that there can be a maintenance of atmosphere while the fan base increases.
The Cowboy
Player Valuation: £60m
Eh? Bands are ALWAYS playing football stadiums. Comedians less so, sure.
maverick94
Player Valuation: £1.5m
Can't see both coexisting. Stadium or WHS it would have to be, but the council are practically about to jib the WHS status off anyway- maybe Joe sees that happening sooner rather than later
GwladysBlue
Player Valuation: £70m
We've already seen what clubs like West Ham can do if the pricing is correct.
They've sold 50,000 season tickets. We certainly have a bigger fan base than West Ham.
Did,nt we have a million people in the the city for the three graces.
Ha he club should never offer us a choice around there things - or rather control the leaking/media thing better, if they just came out and said we have a site, there wouldnt be half the hassle.
Now there will be protest groups at the most or general sense of inadequcy around this.
Fairly Everton.
Now there will be protest groups at the most or general sense of inadequcy around this.
Fairly Everton.
Jacko93
Player Valuation: £35m
Another thing on this is the effect that a huge capacity stadium will have on local infrastructure. we may be forced into building smaller at first to allow the further development of the locality to get better and better rather than wait 10 years till it can cope before we start. This would mean that we wouldn't all of a sudden become liable for the huge increase in infrastructure usage and if done over a number of years could feasibly argue that other factors have some into play and get help with the costs.
catcherintherye
Player Valuation: £80m
I think that's exactly what we are seeing. The Council and the new owners of the club will see things differently. The Council will struggle to find suitors for Stonebridge Cross and know the advantage Everton could make to the area. The 3 years announcement will be linked closely to this, sort of "well you could have been in Croxteth in 3 years while you waste your time negotiating the waterfront" type of argument.
They will have no difficulty filling the Waterfront. We will have to fight them and the other partners to get in their but we do have a lot to offer commercial partners.
I appreciate it is 80-20% towards Croxteth but I hope and think that this is very much tied to the previous ownership. The Council new they had no money, no plans and no hope and could essentially push them around. A promise of discounted land may have been the best they could hope for. Stonebridge Park though is the equivalent of being sold stale milk at a discounted price. They can't shift it and while they convince you it's a bargain you knew if you had more money you would avoid it.
I hope with the new ownership we can stand firm. I think we will and show we have the vision and opportunity to be more picky.
jaycee
Player Valuation: £60m
A city centre is more than capable of coping compared to a edge of city site I cant believe travel problems would be uswd as an excuse
Welcome
Join Grand Old Team to get involved in the Everton discussion. Signing up is quick, easy, and completely free.
Shop
