New Everton Stadium

[Lee Smith]

Yeah I think I'd love a season in the South lower, a lot easier to kick off and boo when your standing up I reckon

Yeah that’s the main reason, the atmosphere (hopefully!). My lads love our away days and being able to stand up for 90 mins (their Dad, with my knees, not so much ), especially when it’s rail seating

 

[Lowste]

For me it does reinforce those who said the capacity should have been larger.

East upper is now pretty much entirely ‘club view’ hospitality.

Probably the most popular area in the East Stand. Doesn’t seem right to me to give such a large area to it.

Prices overall seem fair though. Just think
East upper should not be so widely corporate. Pretty much spreads from one pen spot to the other.

The view doesn’t look corporate to me
A concourse where yo can have a drink, in someways feels like anywhere in the ground… unless it is more than a concourse

Do you think the bar area would be open after the game… be decent to have a pint in there after the game and let the crowds die down

 

[Tom Hughes]

Was a big concern though wasn't it? Taking money out of the city etc. Yes, from an insider POV it's the a catchy slogan to get your foot in the door to get a voice heard.

Everyone outside of it took it as face value that created a divide in the fanbase and ridicule from across the park of who are the "proper" scousers.

Found that whole angle distasteful at the time regardless of the underlying cause of concerns.

Not really a concern, as I said some of the main members of the campaign were from Kirkby. I think the divide in the fanbase was entirely instigated by the club and it was underpinned by the now well-documented lies and nothing really to do with concerns of "scouseness". That divide was nurtured at every opportunity by the club.... from accusations of Ludite, subversive attitudes, right through to "one man and his dog" statements much later. The club even attempted to inundate various threads on fan websites with multiple new false-identity accounts (all with the same address) spouting endless comments in support of Kirkby and against KEIOC, before and after the ballot.

The fact that it was termed a "destination" alone, implied distance.... Kirkby is actually outside the Liverpool boundary, and therefore could've led to some changes in perception/identity (warranted or not) that was jumped on by our rivals, as is the nature of location-led footy tribalism. By leaving LFC holding the centre ground and pushing the club to the periphery in a neighbouring borough, further marginalising us on a simple geographical basis.... which has never been a source of differentiation in the Everton-Liverpool duopoly of North Liverpool, as mentioned by Simon Inglis, the famous Stadium History/Design writer, who commented for KEIOC on what he saw as the dangers of such a move away. Those dangers of change of perception could have been similarly/partially valid for say a move to Speke or Gillmoss, again leaving the bulk of central and our core north Liverpool base, to our neighbours.... potentially creating a North/South of city identity-divide in the case of Speke......

However, the over-riding issue was always that the Kirkby project and its whole motivation was contrived and fundamentally flawed on several levels, and some of those issues would've equally applied to the other peripheral sites within the city boundary.

The fact is, within months of the Hobson's choice ballot, support had dramatically fallen for Kirkby as the message of the KEIOC campaigners began to finally seep through, and moreso as they revealed and highlighted the multiple lies, falsehoods and deficiencies surrounding it. There were several polls running on various Evertonian websites over the following months. By the time of the public inquiry, support for Kirkby had fallen to almost nothing in all of those polls, and the anti-KEIOC posters on those threads fell to a whimper long before Ian Ross' army of alter-egos were rumbled. The Public Inquiry only served to fully vindicate KEIOC's stance. They were commended by the officials for presenting easily the largest body of evidence of all parties involved, with some of it pivotal and decisive in the final decision, (with no-one mentioning or questioning Kirkby resident's scouse credentials).

 

[Noggsy blue]

Am I right in thinking that’s three different bars next to each other across the road now?

The pottery / ceramic place, the David Rollo building and now this?

Superb.

Yep

 

[Tom Hughes]

The view doesn’t look corporate to me
A concourse where yo can have a drink, in someways feels like anywhere in the ground… unless it is more than a concourse

Do you think the bar area would be open after the game… be decent to have a pint in there after the game and let the crowds die down

It's probably less Corporate-lite and more General-Admission-Extra. The central side-stand location should make this area highly sort-after anyway. This simply adds some value by incorporating an exclusive concourse, that may be slightly roomier and marginally better served than other general addmission concourses. Therefore the club will feel that it can justifiably squeeze a little more income from there, without the need to add further trimmings. Of course, if the demand for corporate/hospitality increases, that "squeeze" may increase in the future..... so maybe that will also need to be considered by those currently enticed by the come-get-me £1200 price.

 

[kenada_blue]

Not really a concern, as I said some of the main members of the campaign were from Kirkby. I think the divide in the fanbase was entirely instigated by the club and it was underpinned by the now well-documented lies and nothing really to do with concerns of "scouseness". That divide was nurtured at every opportunity by the club.... from accusations of Ludite, subversive attitudes, right through to "one man and his dog" statements much later. The club even attempted to inundate various threads on fan websites with multiple new false-identity accounts (all with the same address) spouting endless comments in support of Kirkby and against KEIOC, before and after the ballot.

The fact that it was termed a "destination" alone, implied distance.... Kirkby is actually outside the Liverpool boundary, and therefore could've led to some changes in perception/identity (warranted or not) that was jumped on by our rivals, as is the nature of location-led footy tribalism. By leaving LFC holding the centre ground and pushing the club to the periphery in a neighbouring borough, further marginalising us on a simple geographical basis.... which has never been a source of differentiation in the Everton-Liverpool duopoly of North Liverpool, as mentioned by Simon Inglis, the famous Stadium History/Design writer, who commented for KEIOC on what he saw as the dangers of such a move away. Those dangers of change of perception could have been similarly/partially valid for say a move to Speke or Gillmoss, again leaving the bulk of central and our core north Liverpool base, to our neighbours.... potentially creating a North/South of city identity-divide in the case of Speke......

However, the over-riding issue was always that the Kirkby project and its whole motivation was contrived and fundamentally flawed on several levels, and some of those issues would've equally applied to the other peripheral sites within the city boundary.

The fact is, within months of the Hobson's choice ballot, support had dramatically fallen for Kirkby as the message of the KEIOC campaigners began to finally seep through, and moreso as they revealed and highlighted the multiple lies, falsehoods and deficiencies surrounding it. There were several polls running on various Evertonian websites over the following months. By the time of the public inquiry, support for Kirkby had fallen to almost nothing in all of those polls, and the anti-KEIOC posters on those threads fell to a whimper long before Ian Ross' army of alter-egos were rumbled. The Public Inquiry only served to fully vindicate KEIOC's stance. They were commended by the officials for presenting easily the largest body of evidence of all parties involved, with some of it pivotal and decisive in the final decision, (with no-one mentioning or questioning Kirkby resident's scouse credentials).

So we can agree that it was a sensationalist tool to get the main message across then? The spin or any fallout of a blunt slogan at stages overtook the message on a surface level.

It's separate from the cause which was valid. But it was a similar propaganda tool such as "Ban the Small Boats" to use a crude recent "movement" to summarise a wider issue. Created a division but I get it.

Again, while the group were correct and won the fight, I personally always felt its branding created more hostility in the fanbase (shouts of long term season ticket holders say they'd never go to it, "City is ours" etc)

So the main point of "Kirkby as a destination was never the issue" wasn't entirely true, which is what I said.

 

[Noggsy blue]

Are they going to open it as a bar?

Looking at that side of the road, there are a few derelict buildings with the facade of an old pub.

Further along Ten Streets Social will do well. They should open the Invisible Wind Factory matchdays as well.

It’s going to be called the Terrace Bar, I’ve been in there and had a chat with one of the lads behind it.
Going to be 3 floors with a rooftop terrace. Huge inside, stretches right back to Fulton st.
So the Terrace Bar, Hot Wok/Bierkellar and St Domingo’s right next door to each other. Plus throw in the proposed 80 bedroom hotel on the corner of Regent Road and Blackstone Street and that area looks totally different

 

[Neiler]

So we can agree that it was a sensationalist tool to get the main message across then? The spin or any fallout of a blunt slogan at stages overtook the message on a surface level.

It's separate from the cause which was valid. But it was a similar propaganda tool such as "Ban the Small Boats" to use a crude recent "movement" to summarise a wider issue. Created a division but I get it.

Again, while the group were correct and won the fight, I personally always felt its branding created more hostility in the fanbase.

So the main point of "Kirkby as a destination was never the issue" wasn't entirely true, which is what I said.

A lot of folklore has sprung up about our former stadium moves.

You have to look at it in context - Kings Dock, was a great facility, but the model was flawed in my opinion we only would have owned part of the development a shared the revenue.

At the time, we were on our backsides and DK would have improved the clubs ability to compete - i said at the time if it didnt go ahead it would consign Everton to a decade or more of at best threading water and at worst regression and that has come to pass. Thats not to say as we sit here today it wasnt the correct decision given we will be walking into a dockside new ground. But there has been a fair bit of blood letting and pain to get to this point.

I feel much of the above gets lost by the folklore around both projects over the years and complex multi faceted issues have become very binary and simplified.

To bring it back to your point - Kirkby was defo an issue, if the project had been in the City less people would have been arsed, the group were called keep Everton in our City after all.

Also remember the whole thing was a cluster........think the enquiry cost the club 10 mill in fees when we didn't have it. Back then that would get you a Baines and a Jags. How much was Arteta sold for again!

 

[Lowste]

It's probably less Corporate-lite and more General-Admission-Extra. The central side-stand location should make this area highly sort-after anyway. This simply adds some value by incorporating an exclusive concourse, that may be slightly roomier and marginally better served than other general addmission concourses. Therefore the club will feel that it can justifiably squeeze a little more income from there, without the need to add further trimmings. Of course, if the demand for corporate/hospitality increases, that "squeeze" may increase in the future..... so maybe that will also need to be considered by those currently enticed by the come-get-me £1200 price.

It does look decent…

And something a fair few will consider, as ever cost will always be a factor

I sit in the Upper Bullens and never go downstairs at half time, simply as it is rammed

It would be good to go down at half time and have a quick pint

 

[Bez2k2k]

It does look decent…

And something a fair few will consider, as ever cost will always be a factor

I sit in the Upper Bullens and never go downstairs at half time, simply as it is rammed

It would be good to go down at half time and have a quick pint

Last time I went down. I had a quick wee then queued for a drink. The second half kicked off and I went back to my seat and I remember thinking the money they must lose by people like myself doing this all the time is crazy.

 

[davek]

Destination Kirkby was the baby of friends of Everton like Kenwright, Green, Earl and Leahy.

Thank the Lord there was a Secretary of State in office at the time who looked at all the countervailing evidence amassed by Evertonians against the suicide bid.

There are still plenty of mugs knocking about who'd have backed that 'facility-led solution'. Every time they see this new stadium and its location they should hang their heads in shame.

 

[kenada_blue]

A lot of folklore has sprung up about our former stadium moves.

You have to look at it in context - Kings Dock, was a great facility, but the model was flawed in my opinion we only would have owned part of the development a shared the revenue.

At the time, we were on our backsides and DK would have improved the clubs ability to compete - i said at the time if it didnt go ahead it would consign Everton to a decade or more of at best threading water and at worst regression and that has come to pass. Thats not to say as we sit here today it wasnt the correct decision given we will be walking into a dockside new ground. But there has been a fair bit of blood letting and pain to get to this point.

I feel much of the above gets lost by the folklore around both projects over the years and complex multi faceted issues have become very binary and simplified.

To bring it back to your point - Kirkby was defo an issue, if the project had been in the City less people would have been arsed, the group were called keep Everton in our City after all.

Also remember the whole thing was a cluster........think the enquiry cost the club 10 mill in fees when we didn't have it. Back then that would get you a Baines and a Jags. How much was Arteta sold for again!

I just remember fans at each others throats about it.

In comparison to now where it's about the football on the pitch.

It's taken about 18 years for another ground move to actually happen since.

 

[gazzaa2]

It’s going to be called the Terrace Bar, I’ve been in there and had a chat with one of the lads behind it.
Going to be 3 floors with a rooftop terrace. Huge inside, stretches right back to Fulton st.
So the Terrace Bar, Hot Wok/Bierkellar and St Domingo’s right next door to each other. Plus throw in the proposed 80 bedroom hotel on the corner of Regent Road and Blackstone Street and that area looks totally different

The Dock Road will be buzzing in a few years once the north/central docks development gets going.

 

[Aries]

For me it does reinforce those who said the capacity should have been larger.

East upper is now pretty much entirely ‘club view’ hospitality.

Probably the most popular area in the East Stand. Doesn’t seem right to me to give such a large area to it.

Prices overall seem fair though. Just think
East upper should not be so widely corporate. Pretty much spreads from one pen spot to the other.

I agree it’s disappointing. That’s my preference for a seat but I only get up to Goodison from Ipswich about three times a season and it’ll be the same for BMD. Wonder if the same system will be in place i.e the resale platform to purchase tickets on an individual basis off of those in that area who can’t make it?

 

[kiss the crest]

The club view, for a season ticket in that section am I reading it as £1200?