Kieran and all the rest calling for a groundshare, don't bother as it won't happen. LFC don't want us and that's that. Even if they did, our fans would be lost in a 75/80,000-seater stadium.

The Shite have a waiting list as long as Phil Thompson's nose for season tickets and would fill these seats easily most games. We on the other hand can't fill Goodison once a season at 40,000 capacity.

Imagine Everton vs Wigan in a 80,000-seater stadium. Less atmosphere than the moon...

Even if we did come to some sort of groundshare agreement, they’re obviously going to have more money to put into it than we are. So I’d imagine there would be a corresponding income distribution.

If a hypothetical Mersey/Purple ground was built and they put in 50%, us 25% and LCC 25%, they could reasonably claim half of all income (apart from matchday revenues), us a quarter and LCC a quarter (as a sort of tax to recoup their outlay.) To me, this is good for Everton- 25% of the revenue from concerts, naming rights, non-matchday corporate events and so forth would still be more that what we’d get otherwise. Think about it....a band coming through Liverpool on a stadium tour (say Coldplay) would only want to play at one venue....they’d choose their larger stadium than ours, so 25% would be better than nothing. Similarly, anyone who thinks 100% naming rights of a 45,000-50,000 second rate Everton stadium would even come close to 25% of a world class one shared with Liverpool are fools (to illustrate, I’m sure Coventry get less than a quarter from Ricoh what Arsenal get off Emirates.)

Groundshare could realistically work. Even if they got more profits from it, this would still be better for Everton F.C. than the alternative: staying at Goodison tumbling down the table and eventually, divisions, or loading ourselves with debt for a second-rate DK style stadium and probably coming to same end.

Groundshare and share the costs and benefits with them for 10-15 years, then let them buy us out so that we can use to money to knock down GP and start again.

Tony’s point, as things stand, is right. But that should not stop sense trying to prevail.

A stadium need be no more than 70,000. A stadium of such proportions, especially if it is something special, will always generate more attendance just because of the place itself. That alone will attract people to the city and the games, for both teams. The sum is greater than the parts, because as well as each club having its own marketing & promotional operation, the stadium itself could add a third element, promoting games & trips regardless of who’s playing.

Such a stadium will offer orders of magnitude better facilities for corporate fans (everyone need them), it may also offer some form of debenture in much the way Wembley has, entitling holders to attend the games of both teams.

In the unlikely event that the Yankee Kopites sanctioned at least initial dialogue, there would be a myriad of things to explore. Naming rights, commercial sponsorships, concessions and all else could be astronomical at ONE stadium used EVERY week rather than TWO inferior models used 25 times a year.

This is too important not to be looked at deeply seriously by all concerned. Less is more. On this subject, in this city, one stadium is so much more than two.

25% of a rather big (and expanding) number would still be better than 100% of a small (and decreasing) one. Especially if it brings in a new owner attracted by being part of such an exciting development.

Unless the White Knight appears out of nowhere, this is the only affordable option we have. The other delusions are about to be revealed for what they always were.

Unfortunately the RS will not bite unless things get even worse for them. However, given their own problems and the crash in Dubai - they might very well do so.

As Alan said, "Such a stadium will offer orders of magnitude better facilities for corporate fans (everyone need them), it may also offer some form of debenture in much the way Wembley has, entitling holders to attend the games of both teams."

At Wembley it costs from £2250 for 12 "Events" a season (England, Finals, Rugby!) per person and you are tied in for 9 years. Obviously, most tickets are sold in at least pairs. So for 2 tickets is £4500 x 9 guaranteed income.

I posted an article the day after the FA Cup final called Club Everton. In a ground share, the corporates could buy into a "Club Merseyside" fixed fee per season so that they get their entry to every single match at the stadium. In any event, is it not the case that the people who attend these things are neither Blue or Red anyway and is a perk of their job? Don’t know really but it would be good to have a guaranteed income for 9 years for both us and them.

Obviously this is all irrelevant theorising as nobody expects a shared stadium to come to fruition - however, if it were to proceed I’d have thought it would be because LFC realise that they also are rather heavily in debt & want to cut their costs. I’m no expert but I’d have thought that the 2 clubs would be equal partners in a stadium development & management company (LCC might also have a slice) & it would be this company that would be charged with the task of rasing sufficient funds for the stadium development & then running the stadium once complete. If built I’d have thought each club would keep it’s own matchday profits & would share the profits from the other events put on by the stadium management company. But I’m sure it’s all of no consequence anyway.

I just need to say first, that I’m overjoyed that we look like we’re not going to Kirkby. I don’t want to offend anyone who voted for a move to Kirkby, it is just an emotional response. I think it would have killed us as a premiership club...a purely emotional and personal view.

Now though, we have to wake up to what other alternatives are available. The most unlikely option to me is sharing a stadium with Liverpool. It might happen... just like I might win the lottery. Liverpool have a waiting list of around 20,000, we dont.

Liverpool’s capacity restricts the numbers of fans/corporates, whoever, who want to see them. We get about 35000 and we have no waiting list for season tickets. Do you not think it would look a bit daft to be in a 60 odd thousand seater stadium with a crowd around the 35000 mark?

Whatever option we look at, this would seem to be the most disadvantageous to us. We would be contributing to a bloody big and expensive stadium and we’d get peanuts back. It would take us decades to pay for it...even if we could afford to enter into such an arrangement.

According to Robert Elstone, the club has the money for our share of the stadium in Kirkby, reputedly £78 million.
It seems to me we have two options; one is to explore all avenues of land/investment with Liverpool City Council but after our buggering about with the King’s Dock, why should they take us seriously. The other option is to look at Goodison Park with LCC. If we have £78 million (which I seriously doubt but that’s what the club says they have, then the money’s available to build on our own site. We would need to enter talks with the council and with architects to see if it is feasible. From what I understand a 50000 seater stadium could be built on the footprint of GP.

I’ll lay my cards on the table. I don’t think Bill Kenwright gives a tinkers toss about further investment if it means he doesn’t control the club, so I don’t see a takeover in the near future. If anything is going to improve our lot it can only come from us all. I think he has to become a leader. I think he has to unify the club and he has to consider a share option that would be open to fans. He should be open to all ideas and sign up to no more exclusivity deals. We’ve got our ground and not much else but at least it’s ours....I hope. It can be redeveloped, it doesnt have to be all at once and we would still have money to our manager for some players.

We lost the Kings Dock for a measly £30 million. Thank the gods we didnt end up in Kirkby. Until some someone comes along and fulfills all Kenwright’s conditions for investment, in my humble opinion, Goodison is all we have.

Tony Marsh nailed it.

But ask yourself this Kieran, hypothetically, if you put up the lion’s share of funding, would you give 50% of your business away to a minority investor? I wouldn’t....

Matt: Absolutely agree with you. I’ve read Ollies’s piece above and it does make sense in terms of the extra revenue that this type of stadium would bring in. Perhaps not getting the eqaul share of profits would nor be all that bad.

It makes my blood boil how The Shite always (or appear) to get the backing of the city council.

In the 90’s when we had the rejection of a new stadium in Stanley Park, then Liverpool suprise surprise have plans past. Then the Kings Dock fiasco. Would the Shite have had the plans for their old training ground to be made into new residential homes rejected? (I think not!)

Until now I have always been against the thought of sharing a ground with The Shite, but now can see no other way of going forward. We desperately need the extra income that comes with the prawn sandwich brigade (corporate).

At Goodison we have 12 corporate boxes. Man Ure have 172 of which 8 are charged at £187k per season, the 8 boxes alone generate per season nearly as much revenue as a one full house at Goodison.

I’m not daft enough to think that Everton at present would be able to charge £187k for one box per season, but we would be able to generate considerably more than at present. I also know that corporate business is what’s caused the game to no longer be the working man’s game, but if we don’t do something soon we will be fighting off relegation season after season again and I for one do not want to go back to those days.

Even Arsenal’s brilliantly executed move to The Emirates will hamper them for years with regards to funding new players. If Liverpool FC want to minimize the cost of their new stadium and maximize funding for players, they’d be mad not to jump at the chance of a shared ground with Everton.

One thing’s for certain – the ball is in Liverpool FC’s court. The only way the shared ground option would work is for it to be truly 50-50. With planning permission already in place, such an offer can only come from them. Everton shouldn’t be forced to go cap in hand to Liverpool, as then it wouldn’t be 50-50.

Be honest, can you see Liverpool FC fans being magnanimous?

Go on to Google and you will find that Liverpool's current waiting list for season tickets is 60,000 plus. If they built a stadium with 100,000 capacity they would fill it, just as Man Utd would. Everton's current waiting list for season tickets is ZERO, they are currently advertising Half-Season Tickets!!!

We cannot compete with Liverpool in the present situation, a shared ground looks very attractive, but all it would do would be that Liverpool earn more and more revenue while Everton would struggle to keep up their interest payments.

The cost of season tickets would go up by at least 25% and Liverpool would still sell out if they went up by 50%, whereas I am sure we would struggle to maintain our current 26,000 if there was a significant price hike.

Have a look at the Allianz Arena in Munich, currently shared by Bayern and 1860, and be careful what you wish for... 1860 almost going out of business; Bayern buying out the stadium shares of 1860 to prevent them becoming insolvent.

The only way we could ever compete with Liverpool, Man Utd etc is if a zillionaire takes over the "franchise". You can just see us playing Barnsley in the 3rd round of the League Cup in front of 18,000 fans while the following week Liverpool play Barcelona in front of a packed 100,000 crowd.

The way forward, in my opinion, is to revamp Goodison until the situation changes or the owners change... The dawning of a European Superleague is near and will happen when there are too many rich clubs to fit into the Champions League format. Look at the Premier League now, one of the so called Big 4 will miss out this year, triggering a rethink on the CL format and a breakaway from domestic leagues back on the agenda.

Further to my post above Bayerns AVERAGE attendance for season 2008-09 was 69,622; Munich 1860's average at the same venue was 28,112.

Man Utd had a higher average than Real Madrid or Barcelona at 75,304 and are the top supported side in Europe.

Liverpool are stymied with their current capacity of just under 44,000 and are in 23rd place in the table.Everton are in 40th place with an average approx 4,000 under their capacity (35,710).

Larry, perhaps the 4,000 empty seats are obstructed views caused by prehistoric pillars etc.

60,000 stadium with good views and facilities would fill up most games. Even if you disagree that this is the case now, surely we should plan ahead for the future when its definitely the case.

Tony Marsh,

The Shite have a 65,000 long waiting list for season tickets... a lot of those names are duplicates,(triplicates) and foreigners that have no intention of coming good.

20,000 extra is closer to the number when all analysis is done. Hence the reason the new Anfield was to be around 60,000 capacity.

What should happen is that we should share — it makes financial sense — and we should run schemes across the city for cheap tickets etc. for kids, visitors etc. to get bums on seats. This has two advantages... it attracts more people to Everton FC and makes the stadium look busier. In the future, some of those visitors may become full time fans... increasing attendances (naturally).

This could be pie in the sky... but it could be, with the correct marketing, viable.

Cheap tickets for kids (ie, free to local schools and football teams) and visitors may piss season ticket holders off in the short term but surely the long-term effect will be acceptable (as a season ticket holder, I would be happy to let visitors (foreigners) and kids in for free - or as near as we can get it!