New Everton Stadium

[Manx Blue]

As I understand it the safe standing can only increase capacity exponentially to the amount of seats added.

So if the stadium was built with 52,000 seats & we wanted to increase capacity & add another 10,000 people standing we’d need to build another 10,000 seats.

Or you have 10,000 allocated for standing & 42,000 seated if the stadium is built as they are alluding, ie 52,000.

Looking at the North South orientation of the stadium on the site we are squeezed for room & parking in particular. I really hate the idea of a multi-storey on the riverside apron ....

 

[Brennan]

If we have a fantastic new stadium on the side of the Mersey and our biggest thing to moan about is that we could do with more seats I’ll live with that.

Those extra 10,000 non corporate seats would add such a small percentage to the total club revenues it’s really not worth worrying about at this point. That’s ignoring the large additional investment that would be required to build those 10,000 seats to begin with.

 

[Eggs]

....if we are successful we will continually fill a stadium circa 52k, if we are successful we will attract global/tourist support. We need to be successful, the aim is to be the best team in the City.

 

[LouReedwalkonthewildside]

....if we are successful we will continually fill a stadium circa 52k, if we are successful we will attract global/tourist support. We need to be successful, the aim is to be the best team in the City.

Mulls over selfie stick stall.

 

[maccavennie]

Mulls over selfie stick stall.

Difference between us and that lot is they use them for pics but we'd use them for jousting events during games where we are getting stuffed

 

[Davideeyore]

As I understand it the safe standing can only increase capacity exponentially to the amount of seats added.

So if the stadium was built with 52,000 seats & we wanted to increase capacity & add another 10,000 people standing we’d need to build another 10,000 seats.

Or you have 10,000 allocated for standing & 42,000 seated if the stadium is built as they are alluding, ie 52,000.

Looking at the North South orientation of the stadium on the site we are squeezed for room & parking in particular. I really hate the idea of a multi-storey on the riverside apron ....

The club are theoretically (based on previous disclosures) using a change in the safe standing ratio to increase the capacity level from 52,000. That alone is on the basis legislation is changed to allow safe standing. It's not a given and a bit risky in my opinion. We should do exactly what Tottenham have done build 62000 seats and convert a proportion to safe standing at a 1:1 ratio. If it can be more, even better.

To the earlier poster saying "Seems to me all this talk of a 60k+ stadium is ott. I'd prefer 55ish but settle for 52 as it's a vast improvement on what we have". Couldn't disagree more. I reckon hypothetically right now if Goodison was magically 52,000 with all the usual obstructed views and facilities to boot, we'd fill it. Of course just my opinion. Just think then a waterfront stadium, brand new, with all the trimmings, commercial, corporate and tourist increases, and then with a bit of luck a successful team, you think 52-55k is enough? What if 60k was only filled a few games, a few empty seats can be managed. Seems to me 60,000 plus is a capacity base level that 'big' clubs aspire to. Are we a big club or are we Newcastle?

My opinion on City is Everton have a bigger fan base I think people underestimate our support.

 

[Toast]

Mayor of Liverpool, Joe Anderson, has said that he hopes Liverpool City Council and Everton Football Club will be able to make an announcement on a new stadium for the club within the next few months.

Speaking to our Everton Podcast, lifelong Evertonian Anderson said that the club and the council had been working hard together in order to develop a scheme that would suit both council and club.

“We’re looking at a number of offers from the club, and we’ve made offers to them as to how we can help progress things,” said Mayor Anderson.

“There are a number of sites that we’ve been considering and we’re doing all we can.

“I’m sure that reasonably shortly there’ll be a discussion and a debate taking place between ourselves and people of the city about something that we’ve been working on.

“I’m optimistic that we’ll be able to put forward a suitable solution within the next couple of months.

“The council will work with the club to look at how we can support them, not necessarily in a financial investment in the club, but perhaps in the same way that we’ve done with Liverpool.

“We’ve invested quite a substantial amount of money around the area [of Anfield] and I’m sure Liverpool Football Club would be the first to admit that.

“We’re working with Everton and I’m confident that we’ll be able to put a proposal forward shortly.”

No Groundshare

When asked about the potential for a ground share with Liverpool Football Club, Anderson was determined that both clubs have their own proposals that are so far advanced that the idea of a share is now dead in the water.

Adding that he would have been behind such a scheme, he said, “I think it could have worked, it’s not going to work, but the thing that I want is for both clubs to be successful and have money coming out of their ears and buy the top players without worrying about a groundshare or whatever.

“But if it saves you tens of millions of pounds a year and you can work together then I would have been supportive of it.

“But it’s not going to happen. The proposals from both clubs are so far advanced now that it’s academic, so let’s move on from that.”

Happy 5th birthday to this thread.

This was the original post on this day in 2014.

Talking Heads 'Road to nowhere' popped into my head for some reason...

 

[blue76]

Safe standing. And 4 separate stands. If it's curved all the way round like Arsenal's or Spurs then no thanks.

 

[Manx Blue]

The club are theoretically (based on previous disclosures) using a change in the safe standing ratio to increase the capacity level from 52,000. That alone is on the basis legislation is changed to allow safe standing. It's not a given and a bit risky in my opinion. We should do exactly what Tottenham have done build 62000 seats and convert a proportion to safe standing at a 1:1 ratio. If it can be more, even better.

To the earlier poster saying "Seems to me all this talk of a 60k+ stadium is ott. I'd prefer 55ish but settle for 52 as it's a vast improvement on what we have". Couldn't disagree more. I reckon hypothetically right now if Goodison was magically 52,000 with all the usual obstructed views and facilities to boot, we'd fill it. Of course just my opinion. Just think then a waterfront stadium, brand new, with all the trimmings, commercial, corporate and tourist increases, and then with a bit of luck a successful team, you think 52-55k is enough? What if 60k was only filled a few games, a few empty seats can be managed. Seems to me 60,000 plus is a capacity base level that 'big' clubs aspire to. Are we a big club or are we Newcastle?

My opinion on City is Everton have a bigger fan base I think people underestimate our support.

Agree entirely but I’m concerned that the site itself confines us to a certain capacity all seater stadium - it’s very, very tight if Meis is going down the North South (home end) orientation.

 

[Amw79]

Agree entirely but I’m concerned that the site itself confines us to a certain capacity all seater stadium - it’s very, very tight if Meis is going down the North South (home end) orientation.

Think this is the key point in the capacity issue. The site just doesn’t seem big enough for 60,000, it looks very tight on the 52,000 plan pictures to add more seats at each end.

 

[mickefc]

Remember the rumours we'd bought Nelson Dock along with Bramley Moore. Good times.

 

[BunnerJnr]

Think this is the key point in the capacity issue. The site just doesn’t seem big enough for 60,000, it looks very tight on the 52,000 plan pictures to add more seats at each end.

View attachment 56798

Dan Meis has said on record that the site will take a 60k seat stadium. He also said that once stadium is built that there is no possibility to increase is size.

 

[TheSecondComing]

Dan Meis has said on record that the site will take a 60k seat stadium. He also said that once stadium is built that there is no possibility to increase is size.

So whatever we get is what we are stuck with for 100 years +

But yeah lads 52,000 is sound because safe standing will increase it to a whopping 52,000.

Meffs

 

[Amw79]

Dan Meis has said on record that the site will take a 60k seat stadium. He also said that once stadium is built that there is no possibility to increase is size.

Fair enough, hadn’t seen Meis’s quote on the ability to get 60k in there. That planning picture shows the tightness of the North/South orientation though.

For the record, I want 55k - 60k as the starting point, and think 52k undercooks it, but would be interesting to see what the trade off is between cost/facilities/capacity if we pushed to 60k versus 52k.

 

[Lanolin]

So whatever we get is what we are stuck with for 100 years +

But yeah lads 52,000 is sound because safe standing will increase it to a whopping 52,000.

Meffs

But if you go down that road of argument the issue becomes the site, not the capacity. If your worry is what might happen 50 years down the line there's nothing to say 60,000 would be enough either, so the question would have to be whether we should be building somewhere where we wouldn't be able to expand regardless of the size of the original stadium.