Ed: Will you please edit my submission of yesterday and add it to this thread.
Ta,
Richard

It’s always kick the council with Everton’s CEO. It’s just an attempt to deflect from the piss poor record of infrastructure investment by a succession of boards and directors. Any properly run business would be investing in their assets to increase the worth off their investments.
The council is not there to give money or build staduims for private companies-thats the job of the company and its investors. As far as i know the council, from the top down, has always been available to meet with directors and CEO’s of EFC and has done everything asked of them and dont throw up the council rejecting an application to build on Stanley Park because that never happened as the lazy bastards who run the club never got around to actually making a formal application.
It’s time the directors stopped putting their hands out begging for charity from the council and started grafting,

With a decade of fuck-ups from this clown Kenwright and his cronies on the board, who can blame them for having little faith we’d have a new stadium by 2018?

If the club have done what most fans wanted them to do and put a plan B in place when Kirkby was being proposed instead of arrogantly thinking they’d get the green light for the doomed project then could have put the plan B forward so its their own fault.

And with yet another attack on Liverpool CC this CEO gets more embarrassing by the day, its always everyone elses fault with him.

The first phase of a modernisation of Goodison, the rebuilding of the Park End coupled with a hotel and multi-storey car park, could have made Goodison ’FIFA compliant’ with a capacity of over 46,000. Subsequent phases would require a modest increase of the footprint behind Bullens Road, which would get Council support. This could lead to a superb stadium with 56,000 seats, excellent facilities and much of the unique history retained, all delivered over time in affordable phases. All it needed was a sensible Plan B to back-up the undeliverable and unattractive Kirkby proposal. But its surely not too late....

Unfortunately Trevor, both your words and those of Tom Hughes have been ignored by the club for too long. Without a will there isn’t a way. The obvious is staring the club in the face and with some investigation into enabling agreements such as the hotel or whatever bolt on that could be developed using the rear of the existing Park End. I suggested an underground car park there too to retain the parking capabilities but replace it with a secured version. The hotel would also service the new stadium on Stanley Park should it take over providing even higher capabilities of room occupancy and profit.

I went over to Portugal for the Euros in 2004 and watched a couple of games at Porto’s stadium. Didn’t Portugal get a load of funding from Uefa to build new stadiums and update some old ones to stage the tournament? I’m sure Germany got funding from FIFA as have South Africa for the world cup.

In which case, can’t we ask FIFA for some money to do up Goodison? Thanks Sepp.

Sorry Louis but the redevelopment of Goodison is never going to happen pie in the sky forget all about Everton building a new stadium they will probably rent the NEW Anfield when it is built if Liverpool let them. With regards to Liverpool council they never have and never will support Everton, don’t believe it is embarrasing to call them for what they are . I am still waiting for all the objectionists to come up with an alternative to redevelop Goodison.

All it neded was a Plan B, which as Trevor rightly points out would not have needed anything too radical and 8 / 12 years in which to do it.

BK has vanished all of a sudden and Elstone keeps complaining about everybody else. Whilst we expect Bill to let others take the flak, Elstone is barking up the wrong tree again. Only a matter of weeks ago he was saying they must now consider all options after DK got the bullet.

Now, he has already effectively written off anything other than a move to a new stadium. Not much consideration has gone on here, has it Robert?

The answer is staring them in the face. Redevelop what you have and get the footprint only slightly increased just like Manure, Villa, Newcastle, Spurs etc, etc. THiS IS NOT RADICAL OR HARD TO UNDERSTAND! It has worked for plenty of other Clubs. Commit to redevelopment and if a shared or new stadium opportunity arises in the future ( like it did for Arsenal after developing Highbury ) give it due consideration and switch horses if it’s the right move. So bleeding simple even our Board of Village Idiots should be able to understand it....

Hitherto as an opponent of Kirkby I was reasonably happy with the idea of a joint venture with the RS. Equally I have not yet seen an argument which persuades me that GP redevelopment is a non-starter.

I’ve often thought that the Park End offers a lot of scope though I admit I hadn’t envisaged a hotel. Still if you can make the space why not? It would help to make the scheme pay. My only query is how many extra seats would we get and is it actually possible to extend on Bullens Road? It goes without saying that a new cantilever roof is necessary on the main stand to enable obstruction-free views of the game.

One final question. Is it a fact that no plan looking into this redevelopment possibility has ever been published? If the answer is NO it beggars belief .!

Just a quick, genuine, question: Lots of noise being made about a hotel as part of Noveau Goodison. Strikes me that the immediate Goodison environs aren’t really the areas tourists flock to in Liverpool. Certainly I’ve never really seen the clusters of Japanese tourists photographing their way round Stanley Park etc?

With the city centre already well provided for in terms of hotel beds and an increase marked down for the city already what is the market for a hotel as part of the Goodison complex? Has a business model been prepared that validates the build?

Elstone has shown a total lack of leadership since DK was knocked back and by now he should have announced plans for a forum of all the talents to include LCC and the more positive elements of KEIOC.

This would have demonstated that the Club meant action as well as a genuine desire to heal the rift that the proposed move to Kirkby brought about. Instead, he — and presumably, Chairman Kenwright — have seemed rudderless without the Tesco crutch to lean on and are more involved in casting blame than working towards a meaningful solution.

Once again, Everton FC has been found woefully lacking in PR skills.

So, build a hotel at the back of the Park End — and just exactly where do you put the required additional parking and other infrastructure requirements without ditching all the existing parking for directors, players, staff, TV etc. Do they get shifted onto Stanley Park so that all the extra users of the hotel (whole point of them being there) can park?

A modest change on the Bullens Road!!! So get rid of part or all of a primary school and everyone will agree — get real!!! Can you name any local primary school anywhere in the country, let alone in Liverpool, that has been allowed to close or has freely given up space without an almighty public campaign against the proposals?!? Even tiny rural schools that have no economic viability stay open because politicians won’t become the devils that made the decisions — and that’s without factoring in any RS parents.

Wonderful plans in a eutopian ’blue world’ but sadly not in the one we all inhabit.

I agree with Steve.....who the fuck would wanna stay in a hotel overlooking the derelict Blue House or Goodison Autos???
People seem to forget EXACTLY where Goodison is!!!! It certainly isn't someplace where you’d build a hotel... unless it's a shitty Premier Inn!!!

Steve, Jim and Sean... Do you remember what the Albert Dock and, more recently Liverpool One, were like before they were restored and redeveloped respectively? And have you been into the restored Stanley Park recently?

With a reasonable amount of imagination and a sensible business plan, Goodison Park could be made into the Albert Dock of World football.

So, Trevor, you are saying that the hotel would be predominantly expected to generate revenue off football tourists coming to see the redeveloped Goodison and the new Anfield?

So an as-yet unfunded hotel would be contingent on an as-yet unfunded footballing tourist attraction... itself contingent on an as-yet unfunded pair of stadiums.

Looked at purely from a business standpoint, I’ve seen more solid proposals. Has the business model been explored professionally? Is there a concept ’football village’ with projected visitor numbers etc?

If not, how can you know what kind of size/facilities arrangement is required for the hotel without it being a potential funds drain?

Trevor — Liverpool 1 and Albert Dock have the advantage of location, location, location!!! Slap bang in the middle of the City. Stanley Park may have had the old palm house redeveloped but its still full of dog shit — try walking through it on match days in the dark!! And as for Goodison Road/County Road... a real tourist trap!!!!

If Everton and Liverpool were to have put direct competition with the likes of Milan as their top priority, a joint stadium would already be under construction in the City Centre. That would be an out-and-out money-spinner which could be offered free of charge to the clubs (in return for the developer taking a slice of corporate income and naming rights and a third partner running major events).

However, as it seems to be impossible to get the key players to talk to each other, redevelopment of the two existing stadia seems to be the best option. The sense of history around Stanley Park is a tangible asset which should benefit both clubs, along with the economy of sharing an improved transport and tourist infrastructure.

For Everton, the overwhelming advantage of redeveloping Goodison is that it can be done in increments without disruption and hand-in-hand with a developing business plan, making the most of history and continuity and working in cooperation with the City Council and the community of Walton.

What we need to do is to get the club facing the right way. Then the sensible planning can begin...

The first point there overlooks the inherent problems of a joint stadium, Trevor. The San Siro offers a terrible playing surface as the pitch never has chance to recover.

Is it worth mentioning fixture clashes when we’ve just found out we have to play a Europa match at 5:45pm — and we don't seem to have found a spot to go play City in the fixture list yet!?

In operational terms, a joint stadium is an utter non-starter — however good the business model looks.

The sense of history around Stanley Park is tangible to few outside Liverpool unless they already happen to be fanatical football devotees. Are there enough of those to fill a couple of hundred hotel beds with regularity? LFC have a museum at Anfield already; what are visitor numbers there like month to month? If there are no studies to quantify the market potential, how can we even look at adding a hotel in to the scheme?

Redeveloping Goodison with a ’developing business plan’ sounds terrifying to me. It's far too little too late and leaving the development ’open ended’ just gives everyone the ability to fudge and redefine the project to their concept of what is deliverable, regardless of the needs of the club.

We need a fixed and deliverable solution to the revenue generation issue now — not in fifteen years time after we’ve expensively redeveloped the Park End and, because we are paying that off, aren’t able to do anything about the other three stands. Leaving the obstructed-view seats that are holding us back, in revenue terms, and doing nothing to address the question of ageing structures and elevating maintenance costs.

I know you are deeply involved with this redevelopment, Trevor, but I wonder if you realise how insubstantial the whole thing looks as a scheme. I do hope the club does start facing the right way soon, but it isn't, given the easy escape of fantasy redevelopments based on ’imaginitive’ and ’developing’ project planning.

Steve.... Two points:

Firstly, the latest sketches for a joint stadium include twin retractable pitches, each sitting within the adjoining red or blue ’compound’ when not in use in the stadium. The default position for the stadium would be a concrete floor suitable for a wide range of events. Each club would look after their own pitch. The technology (albeit for a single sliding pitch) is proven and in use in several venues.

Secondly, I take your point about the danger of a long-term approach allowing an ’escape’ from reality. Thus, I would expect the first phase to be dependent on securing the long-term footprint, and the securing of the footprint to be dependent on a firm long-term plan.

Twin retractable pitches hey?. Complete with irrigation channels, undersoil heating elements and all the necessary connections? A whole pitch in a box — its not just a football stadium its a Transformer!.

I suppose it would solve the problem of who was playing at ’home’ on derby’s. The first match could be on ’our’ pitch so we’d be the home team and the second could be on theirs so we’d be ’away’!!! I am being flippant here of course, but, it's such an absurd idea!.

I’m sorry but I think the mere fact that someone has actually, sincerely, proposed that as a solution proves how unworkable the joint stadium actually is! We get through all that fannying around, complete with the need to have ’pitch parking’ on the stadium footprint, and we still have fixture congestion that is proving a hideous challenge with two stadiums let alone just the one!.

I agree with what you say on the footprint completely. Once you have that its the enabler for doing more ’easily’ than just bolting on a shiny new Park End. Again though the problem is time isnt it.

Getting that footprint secured is very likely to be a miserable task for whoever is charged with it. Bottom line is that there is no real guarantee that the requisite footprint will ever be available unless we can get LCC onboard to start banging out CPO’s on our behalf. If we go down that route we are years tied up in court hearings etc.

We need revenue generation now or, at least, a plan that allows us to predict a revenue uplift within a defined time window. Redevelopment of Goodison just isn't going to provide that certainty.