New Everton Stadium

That's why I'm glad Dan Meis is back on board, and I know some people won't agree on that. At the moment Dan is very happy with the standard of the build itself, which reassures me.
I'd imagine it won't be big structural elements that are cheaped out on. The steel rakers, concrete cores etc are what they are, so I can't think of any reason why he'd be unhappy atm. My guess would be if arguments happen it'll be once you get to the internal fit-out and external cladding. Hopefully all goes well and it won't come to that.
 
Well, it's going great guns atm. You have to say that. Who knows whether Laing O'Rourke have clauses in the contract? It's always seemed a bit too good to be true that they take the whole hit on inflation for this project.
It’s not in Laing O’Rourke’s interests to botch this job.

It’ll be one of the most spectacular stadia in the world when it’s finished, a fantastic entry in their portfolio. They’ll want to show it off.
 
It’s not in Laing O’Rourke’s interests to botch this job.

It’ll be one of the most spectacular stadia in the world when it’s finished, a fantastic entry in their portfolio. They’ll want to show it off.
That's true.

They have enough bad publicity for their on-site conditions they provide so they could do with a boost.
 

Shouldn’t do as the fit and finishes will have been specified in the lump sum fixed price - provided that contract with LOR wasn’t just for the ‘Shell and Core or Cat A fit out.
The Spurs fan above pretty much came to that conclusion too.

No idea about any of this tbh, but wouldn't these big building firms sub-contract out the internal stuff to samller outfits and make them take the financial pain?
 
The Spurs fan above pretty much came to that conclusion too.

No idea about any of this tbh, but wouldn't these big building firms sub-contract out the internal stuff to samller outfits and make them take the financial pain?
Could do but they still have to complete the fit out to the agreed standards and using specified or otherwise agreed materials. If for example they tried to greatly reduce the quality of something for a cheaper alternative, pretty much everything has to be submitted to the consultants before it’s installed, they can veto it if it’s not up to scratch. Basically they can’t simply put what ever old tat in they can get for cheap. Likewise with a site of this nature pretty much every archetectural or MEP ‘system’ will be benchmarked and signed off before they can proceed or they risk having to rip it out and start again.
The client could ask for changes still to reduce cost but with this type of contract it’s generally as expensive to implement a change of that nature as to stick with the spec. Client lead changes are a money spinner for these construction companies.
 
The Spurs fan above pretty much came to that conclusion too.

No idea about any of this tbh, but wouldn't these big building firms sub-contract out the internal stuff to samller outfits and make them take the financial pain?
Yeah I’m sure some of the internal stuff will go to smaller firms, but LOR will be cautious, too much financial pain for small firms leads to them walking away / declaring bankruptcy. Equally , as has been said for LOR , it’s a chance for smaller firms to showcase their business, involvement in a successful BMD will look good on everybody‘s CV.
 

73EBBD07-67A8-4828-83B9-020F1C8FDE82.webp



….I wonder if there’s a shot of BMD from Rupert Tower. That would be iconic.
 

Welcome to GrandOldTeam

Get involved. Registration is simple and free.

Back
Top