Skip to Main Content
Members:   Log In Sign Up
Text:  A  A  A

The answer my friend....

By Steve McBride :  21/07/2007 :  Comments (39) :
...is blowing in the wind.
Then - Stadium cost £50M (£75M).
Now - £150M.

Then - £10M to fit it out.
Now - £30-35M plus '£15M contingency fund'

Then - We will 'consider' the outcome of the vote.
Now - If 51% vote 'no' we won't go.
It seems to me that every time they feel a strong reaction to part of the 'Deal of the Century' it changes to a more positive message, except for our 'contribution' of course which has increased dramatically but that has been revealed only to convince us we aren't getting a cheapo stadium. Don't you think that, for someone who was trying to 'sell' this deal to us, that the PR would have been more professional? Or was the plan to actually make it look so cheap that we would be fools to resist?

Bully today explains how the stadium is actually now worth £150M, Tesco are contributing £50M towards work which would normally cost £75M and we have to find £30-35M to kit it out etc. Total £100-£105M? Nice one Bully, maths not a strong point mate?

So, £30-35M covered by the sale of GP, £15m, and naming rights, (£20M+?) "plus the club would 'create' a contingency fund of £15m to cover unexpected costs - this might involve taking on a small amount of debt"(?)

Bully tells us we can 'obtain' £50M of cash with only a small amount of debt. We can generate an additional £10M a year in revenue.

Well, just a bit of brainstorming here guys; what if we took a little bit more of a gamble based on our 'potential new income stream' and borrowed, say £25-30M, and LCC 'donated' a piece of land on a 199-year lease? Obviously not Stanley Park as it's already sorted, we found a few retail partner(s) willing to cough a measly £30M between them; shouldn't be impossible... we would have £105M ?now there's a coincidence ? and if Barr decided to allow us Big Tel's discount anyway we wouldn't have to borrow much at all.

Just about everybody would be happy (except Tel); in the city, no fan erosion fears, manageable debt payable like our current 'mortgage'.

Just a thought... but then what do I know?

Reader Comments

Note: the following content is not moderated or vetted by the site owners at the time of submission. Comments are the responsibility of the poster. Disclaimer


Tony Ainscough
1   Posted 21/07/2007 at 21:30:59

Report abuse

Just a thought... but then what do I know? EXACTLY
Steve McBride
2   Posted 22/07/2007 at 08:17:01

Report abuse

Tell you what I do know Tony, you’re just blind to any other options. You don’t care that the board are accepting this deal without even considering an alternative. Even though the goalposts keep moving you don’t question anything, sad mate. Our ’free’ stadium is now costing us around £50m so the ’we’ve got no money’ argument is weakened a bit don’t you think? Getting a £100m stadium when you’ve got FA looks great but when we are saying we can get half of that then it must be easier to at least look at making up the difference.
People like you is why the board run roughshod over the feelings and concerns of a lot of fans because you just accept everything without question, very dangerous stance mate. Let’s see what is available and if it’s no good then Kirkby it is, where’s your problem?
John Aldo
3   Posted 22/07/2007 at 08:27:10

Report abuse

Ok...let’s looak at it then...

’Borrow £25-£30M’ - Mmmm...nice debt to saddle the club with.

’LCC donated a piece of land..’ - Where? Gillmoss? Nice.

’new retail partner’ - but there won’t be any retail partner unless there’s something in it for them!

’Barr give us the Tel discount’ - They wouldn’t do that - they work closely with Tesco, not Everton or LCC.

What is it with this constant clutching at straws? Everton move out of the ’official’ city boundaries....so what? What is the big deal? It’s a good deal, a good move and I’m all for it.
Mike
4   Posted 22/07/2007 at 09:34:45

Report abuse

One of the frightening things about the proposal is that many of the fans DO seem to know as much or more than Wyness.

And, putting it into a historical context, this isn?t being too unfair on KW, who is just the latest in a very long line of affable club officials who have let the club slide to this position through a series of poor decisions over God knows how many years.

"Clutching at straws" is perhaps more justly aimed at the ?yes? lobby, who seem to glide over two important questions: can we gain an extra seven or eight thousand fans to maintain the atmosphere and provide some of the extra revenue? Secondly, IF Moyes gets the extra £10 million (and how this will be generated seems to be based on a wing and a prayer), what exactly will he be able to buy with it in three or four years time? The cost of players isn?t going down any time soon!

I capitalised the ?if? because I?m still none the wiser where the cash from the TV rights has gone. Those of us with memories a little longer than goldfish will remember Kenwright?s equally,"hand on heart I?m blue through and through" blunt assertion that he would support Moyes in the transfer market this summer.

The point is NOT about city limits. It?s about transparancy, trust and good financial management. The fact that Wyness is now swaying in the wind and changing his story after every meal should be a real alarm for the ?yes? voters.
Thomas
5   Posted 22/07/2007 at 10:09:24

Report abuse

It is a really good deal who care’s if it is out of the offical city bountry’s as far as i’m concerned Kirkby is Liverpool just like Bootle is are you telling me Allan Stubb’s is a wooly back?
Andy Mac
6   Posted 22/07/2007 at 10:17:09

Report abuse

The only real argument I have seen to consider voting against the Kirkby proposal has been based on the niggling doubt about whether LCC actually DO have a deliverable alternative. Bradley kept bleating about the exclusivity agreement, but that was always a complete red herring. If LCC had any alternative offers, they could have made them public at any time - THEY were not bound by any exclusivity agreement. Now the cat is finally out of the bag. All that has ever been on offer, and quite rightly dismissed by the Everton Board, is (1) a landlocked industrial estate in Fazakerley (anyone else experienced the gridlock in Stopgate Lane / Walton Vale / The Crown lately, without any stadium being nereby?) (2) Some wasteland in far away Speke (no disrespect, but Kirkby seems nearer to our roots than Speke) or (3) in the middle of a roundabout surrounded by the Wallasey Tunnel entrance and Scotland Road. Oh yes, the latter is with a "possible" partner who have a "cash and carry" shed on the site at the moment. AND Bradley has already publically declared that he could not authorise land being"donated" by LCC to any scheme. All half baked wishfull thinking. Sorry Guys. I realy am now persuaded that the Board have done their homework properly , and professionally discharged their duties in doing so despite intense rumour and criticism. Kirkby is the way forward.
Steve Mc
7   Posted 22/07/2007 at 10:09:25

Report abuse

Yes let’s look at it John,
£25-30m debt spread, as our current debt is, over a ’mortgage’ style period, with an ’estimated’ extra £10m this is called manageable debt.

LCC land, four on offer, none in Gillmoss, and what’s wrong with Gillmoss anyway, closer to GP and in the city? A city location, especially the Scotland Road loop, would IMO be a better LONG TERM investment opportunity for many reasons, higher profile for the stadium ’sponsor(s)’, retail park will have much more passing trade, for non match events, conferences etc. there is an abundance of hotels, tourist attractions, theatres etc. to ’add’ to the package.


No retail partner because there’s got to be something in it for them? Duh. Well why wouldn’t a new location include retail? One company has already expressed an interest in being a financial partner on one of the proposed sites, so there’s a start mate.
The discount bit is irrelevant, and unlikely, which is why it was basically an after thought.

That any better for you?
As Mike says, it’s about transparency and if all options are explored and found to be unfeasible then more would change to ’yes’, not just because we are told it’s a great deal.
Your ’argument’ is based on the information supplied by the ’salesman’, which has already changed since the announcement. Wanna buy a time share?
steve lyth
8   Posted 22/07/2007 at 10:44:33

Report abuse

Keep it going Stevie Mc, these yes voters are really blind to the reality of the situation. No alternatives should really be everyones wake up call to a No vote.
Kin Lemmings
Andy Mac
9   Posted 22/07/2007 at 11:03:50

Report abuse

Just one other issue about alternative locations. Mention was made of Gillmoss. Now, if LCC had been serious about keeping Everton in the "City" they had the perfect opportunity to offer land in the Gillmoss "corridor" off the East Lancs. EU money might have been available for a scheme that incorporated a Stadium within a Retail Park and regeneration of the Croxteth area on the opposite side of the Lancs. Tesco might even have been interested. However, all of the land is apparently earmarked for alternative development, even though it is stil owned by LCC. Now if THAT was put in as a counter offer (which it hasn’t been) it would be just about the only alternative that would make me pause over Kirkby.
ben
10   Posted 22/07/2007 at 11:02:38

Report abuse

Firstly if we look at retail partners, they want a site with little competition around them, that rules out several sites for them within liverpool.

Free land is part of the deal at Kirkby, you haven’t factored that in to your sums, LCC would charge for the land.

Gilmoss is no closer to Goodison, at least not where the ground is being placed in Kirkby, but for everyone moaning about lack of transport,at least Gilmoss does have a bus depot.

Speke is to far away, and is just a retail park, (for all those complaining that is all Kirkby will be).

As far as i can see, all these arguments for not going suggest that you want goodison or nothing else. I don’t understand the desire to stay within the city boundaries, kirkby has a motorway between Knowsley and LCC. Besides which Knowsly council obviously want Everton, whereas LCC do not.
Jip Foster
11   Posted 22/07/2007 at 11:17:38

Report abuse

Transparency is the key here. If the board showed us that they have considered alternatives, say the Executive Summary from a report that concludes that there are no viable sites in Liverpool then that would be a start. The problem is that nobody is sure how seriously they have looked, or if Tesco one day turned up and the no other sites is just a convenient cover. Let us see what work has been done - otherwise it just cries conspiracy!!!!
Bob Turner
12   Posted 22/07/2007 at 11:06:27

Report abuse

Did I miss something, or was the land donated by Knowsley "worth" £50m? Is that then not the £150m price tag currently being bandied about? Land £50m, Building Costs £75m, Kitting Out etc £25m? In which case, Steve Mc, there’s a gap in your finances, because you’re still looking at £100m without the land, covered by £15m for the sale of Goodison, £30m from "assorted retail partners" and £55m from "somewhere else".

My memory might not be right, but I’m sure the land was being valued at £50m in the Kirkby Project, which is something Bradley’s not prepared to match. So if we go elsewhere in the city, which I would rather do myself to be honest, we need to pay for the land too. If LCC want to keep us in Liverpool, they’re going to have to match Knowsley with this land offer, because on paper, moving to Kirkby makes financial sense. (We’d be getting £125m worth of land and building costs for £25m.) Emotional sense, no, but pragmatism dictates otherwise, much as it pains us all.

PS I’m still hoping that LCC pulls its finger out and does something soon!
Alan Hampson
13   Posted 22/07/2007 at 11:14:25

Report abuse

Has everybody seem to have forgotten that we are still paying off a debt at the moment? That debt coupled with the proposed extra debt incurred by a move to Kirkby will cripple our finances and chances of financial stability and sustainability in the transfer market in the future.

I still believe that there are a lot of things that we don’t know about what happened with Kings Dock deal and I think the fans "Deserve to know the truth" at what happened.

When the plans for the new stadium came out they were saying it would be a "55,000" all seater, yet only 24 hours later that has gone down to "50,000".....what is the real truth KW.

I DEMAND TO KNOW AND I THINK THE FANS DESERVE TO KNOW.

Dave
14   Posted 22/07/2007 at 10:34:09

Report abuse

The economics of the Kirkby deal could be debated all day, but whats the point ? The costs KW has spoken about - take ya pick - are about as clear as a foggy night, in a dense forest. wearing shades, Surely even the most trusting on KW’s bandwaggon will feel unease at the unconvincing manner he has presented "the deal of the century"

Until someone gives me figures that add up and the we have exhausted all possibilities of staying in the city I for one will be voting a very definite no

This is our club we are talking about,going to Kirkby is a monumental step. How could any of us even contemplate taking it without being absolutely certain we are doing the right thing
robert carney
15   Posted 22/07/2007 at 11:58:57

Report abuse

Who needs conspiracy theories when you have KW bullhitting us daily.

Wake up out of towners, face the reality , the deal stinks or it is totally half baked.
Steve Mc
16   Posted 22/07/2007 at 12:07:02

Report abuse

Ben, from what we have been told the land is being leased not given. Stanley Park wasn’t given, it’s being ’rented’.

I can assure you mate that Gillmoss, which is no longer relevant, is closer than any part of Kirkby to GP and closer to the M57 by the way.
And your last paragraph just highlights that you don’t even read what’s being said by the anti- move fans, try taking note of our arguments, whether you agree or not, and you will see that the majority accept GP to no longer be an option and, regardless of the past, LCC do appear to have realised EFC mean business and are at least making an attempt, better late than never.

Perhaps someone could help answer a question? Does KMB own Kirkby Golf Course, if so, did they not fuck us off when we looked at the site originally? Genuine question, not sarcasm ’cos I don’t know but it may end that particular ’who wants who ’argument’.
EFCWeAreEvil
17   Posted 22/07/2007 at 12:42:00

Report abuse

It doesn’t matter if Barr/Tesco are offering us "the deal of the century". It doesn’t matter if they are offering us all the tea in China. The deal is a great deal, but its the WORNG deal. Everyone agreeing to this, have you forgotten the motto? About time we started demanding the board stuck to it, not giving us PR spin to try and get a few people to agree to the move, (most of which are probably are ex pats who dont live around here anyway. Liverpool is BLUE.
Brian Waring
18   Posted 22/07/2007 at 12:39:43

Report abuse

The way the club have dealt with the Kirkby debate over the last week,has been nothing short of shambolic.Do these guys actually know what they are doing?It seems everyday Wyness seems to contradict himself.Kitting out the stadium went from £10-£15m to £35m.That is a big difference from the lowest quote at £10m.I actually don’t think they know the full costing yet and are just putting out figures because there is a vote coming up.It also seems the ground design never had much thought put into it.As some one said,the Kirkby move has gone from being debt free to us having a small debt.Funny how they don’t say what the debt could be.Surley all the pro-Kirkby fans must be now feeling a little un-easy about this deal.As I say,there seems a contradiction every step of the way.It as if these fans have been brainwashed.How would you all feel if we ended up with £20m debt on top of our debts now?Where would the money come from for transfers then,because at the moment we can’t spend much because we are skint.So if we have more debt from the Kirkby move we are going to be even more skint.The pro fans say we are clutching at straws.Well can anyone tell me why the club seem to be changing the figures every day?
Alan Hampson
19   Posted 22/07/2007 at 13:10:30

Report abuse

Well said Brian, that is exactly what I was getting at in my post a few above. Someone said that the LCC have now realised that EFC are a business now and are doing something about it, can you tell me exactly what they are doing as from what I can see they have nothing to do with the proposed move to Kirkby and don’t seem to be doing anything about giving the club any alternatives.

KW to me does not know what good business sense is and should get a grip of what the "TRUE BLUES" want and that is certainly not mounting debts and not a move to Kirkby.

KW, listen to the real fans and give us the bloody truth about "OUR" club...."THE PEOPLE’S CLUB"
Mike
20   Posted 22/07/2007 at 13:09:22

Report abuse

Perhaps the motto might, very sadly, be changed to, Nothing But The Mediocre Is Possible.

And, in a game based on hopes, it’s worth remembering that dreams are a currency of equal value to Tescos dosh.

By the way, how are THEY going to sell this £50 million to their shareholders? "Well, it was either the blind kids or Everton ..." ?
bob patterson
21   Posted 22/07/2007 at 14:31:30

Report abuse

all you land owner’s out there’IF YOU ARE EVERTONIAN’S? you will watch your team where ever
(been watching since 1951)
Brian Waring
22   Posted 22/07/2007 at 17:21:31

Report abuse

Bob,I;ve been watching everton for 34 yrs,and would still go and watch them in Kirkby.I,m against the move because Kirkby is not the right place for us.I am originally from Huyton,which is not far from Kirkby,and Huyton is a nicer place( not by much though)and take it from me Huyton is a shithole.Apologies to those fans still living in Huyton,and to the people of kirkby.I just can’t see how it makes good business sense to move there.
Dave Brierley
23   Posted 22/07/2007 at 17:51:40

Report abuse

Get a grip Brian. There’s no bigger shithole than where GP is currently located. Who are you to say Kirkby is not the right place for us? I’ve been going to GP for almost as long as Bob and the Kirkby deal is the best on offer.
Brian Waring
24   Posted 22/07/2007 at 19:14:37

Report abuse

Dave,I have just as much right to say"Kirkby is not the right place for us"Just as you had the right to say "There’s no bigger shithole than where GP is currently located".
Ste Brad
25   Posted 22/07/2007 at 19:24:59

Report abuse

Some goods points above chaps for and against the move to Kirkby .I would just like to ask one question . Once the whistle goes at 3pm (sorry 4pm on a Sunday most of the time)will we all really care where the match is being played ?. I cannot understand so called Evertonians quoting that they will never go and watch Everton again if we move to Kirkby. Sure we all have to accept the fact that people have differences in opinion but IF (and thats a big IF) it makes more finiacial sense to move to Kirkby, shouldnt we a little more positive towards the move ? Remember chaps its all about the paper these days, history and city boundaries may prove seriously insignificant if we stay in the city for a lesser deal and sink further into debt . Bottom line though is "come on you blues "!
Justin Lang
26   Posted 22/07/2007 at 22:53:43

Report abuse

My guess:

£75m - value placed on build although actual cost £50m "because Tesco’s have got a good deal from the contractors" - Tesco sourced
£15m - maximum debt entered into by club - EFC sourced
£15m - sale of goodison park - EFC sourced
£25m - naming rights (are we really going to get that all upfront?) - EFC sourced
£20m value of the land being given to us. - Knowsley BC sourced.

LCC sourced: apart from suggestions of "potential sites" - zip

Total £150m
Derek Thomas
27   Posted 23/07/2007 at 07:10:28

Report abuse

Is it the best deal or the best deal we are going to get, with the rider that is the ONLY DEAL WE ARE GOING TO GET.

There is too much obfustication and ’lying’ by not telling the all the truth. The old saying is still true...If it SEEMS too good to be true, it usually is.

Also, never forget the power of the rationalisation and that people will put up with and believe all sorts of silly things to justify one point or another.

Theres another saying that nearly fits the bill..’marry in haste, repent at leasure’...once it’s done it’s over, finished, kaput, no going back.

I think it’s all a done deal, so I hope to Christ ’they’ are all right and it’s me thats wrong
Steve Mc
28   Posted 23/07/2007 at 09:02:34

Report abuse

Justin, I don’t think you can include the name of the stadium as being part of the cost mate, it adds no value whatsoever.

You quote £20m for the cost of the land, please advise the ’route’ to this info, which still leaves it some way short of Bully’s valuation, (do you not question these inconsistencies?), but is that the value of the land on which the stadium will stand or the value of all the land which will include a massive Tesco?
Dave Thompson
29   Posted 23/07/2007 at 11:04:01

Report abuse

From the first article in the Echo....

"The land in Kirkby is currently regarded as worthless, but with planning permission for a Tesco store and shopping complex, which will be half the size of the Trafford Centre, the value will rocket to £50m.


The supermarket giant will pay that price to Knowsley Council and the money will be made as a contribution towards the cost of the stadium."

So the value of the land is already taken into account in the calculations. It’s the £50M Tesco are paying towards the cost. Tesco verified this themsleves in a statment the following day.

You cannot then add back the £50M for the stadium and make it £100M because it’s the same money!


Please, all of you people in favour of a move to Kirkby, wake up and start to question the figures being bandied around!
Mark P
30   Posted 23/07/2007 at 12:24:23

Report abuse

Dear Lord, am I glad Steve is not on the board. As someone with a Degree in Economics and someone who actualy works in Economics, I have to say the deal we have at the moment from Tesco and Kirkby is a fantastic deal. LCC is has not been able to find us a new peace of land since the Kings Dock fiasco, what makes you think they will do so now?

Raising £30 million in debt added to the clubs existing 20 to 30 mill debt would be a sure way to follow Leeds to financial oblivion.

We get brand new stadium with dedicated transport links, extra revenue from the increased capacity, and no more terrable views.
Brian Waring
31   Posted 23/07/2007 at 13:07:09

Report abuse

Mark P.Thing is,even moving to Kirkby,the club say we are going to incurr a small debt.Funny they don’t say how much that debt will be though.
Dave Thompson
32   Posted 23/07/2007 at 13:32:10

Report abuse

Mark P,

As "someone with a degree in Economics and ....who actually works in Economics" you state that adding to the clubs debt would be a sure way to follow Leeds to financial oblivion.

Our CEO has already stated that the club will be forced to take a debt, and depending on which day and which statement you chose to accept as true (if any) it will be between £10M and £35M



If it’s going to force us into oblivion, how is it a "fantastic deal"

Which of your statements is correct?

Have you read ANY of the financial data which has been output by Everton in the past week?

Where will the extra fans come from to provide the additional revenue?

If you do indeed have a degree in Economics, could you please tell me how the valuation of £150M was arrived at without creative accounting and upon which of our CEO’s statements we should make up our minds to vote?
Mark P
33   Posted 23/07/2007 at 17:33:52

Report abuse

No Dave I suggest you read all my post, and not quote selective parts. I said getting a new stadium at Kirkby is a great deal as we get the land for free, and get 50 million towards the cost, plus what ever we get for the naming rights.

The debt would be less than staying in Liverpool as I cant see anyone giving us a decent plot of land, or giving us 50 million towards the cost. If we were forced to cover the cost ourselves we would be saddled with debt of around 60 to 70 million, which sounds alamingly familiar to Leeds fans.

If we move to Kirkby the cost to us would be I estimate 15 to 20 million, We would have 3 years before we move in to put money asside for the cost, and
the increased capacity would generate extra revenue for the club, as would the directors box’s, and the sale of Goodison.

Staying at Goodison is not an option, its falling appart, and the views are not the best. It will cost more and more to keep it up to scratch and we lose out on this deal.



Dave Thompson
34   Posted 23/07/2007 at 17:52:59

Report abuse

Mark,

Given that the club took out a mortgage for £14M on 18th April (for what?) total debt, with overdraft and Bear Stearns loan is already close to £50M.

Wyness himself admits that the club may have to take out debt to meet it’s share of the development. That already puts us way into the Leeds bracket.

If we put money aside for the next three years, where does that come from? Team development? There hasn’t been too much activity already this summer, and if we’re to drain £5M a season for the next 3 seasons, where does that leave us? In the Championship going into our new home?



Which party will be responsible for the over-run costs, as they will happen, and if it’s Everton, where will that money come from? The figures don’t stack up, whichever way you slice them. There is no evidence to support Wyness’s claims that revenue will increase to provide Moyes with £10M per season and pay the debts, nor for the claim that attendances at Goodison will fall if we don’t move now.

Can you tell me which bits of Goodison are falling apart, and how many people have been hurt? I can honestly say that I haven’t seen anywhere in Goodison in that state.
Steve Mc
35   Posted 23/07/2007 at 18:00:06

Report abuse

Mark, degree or not, you cannot work out if it’s a great deal without knowing all of the facts, the cost of the land, £50m, I would hazard an uneducated guess, is for the entire plot would you not agree? As you state the Tesco ’bit’ would be half the size of TC, which, again with an uneducated guess, would be much larger than the footprint of the stadium, so how much of the £50m is actually in the ’mix’ of our £150m? This is why I asked Justin to clarify. The plot is on a 199 year lease, do you know if we pay ’rent’ or not? It all makes a difference to what may or may not be achievable but the fact that it is unclear should be questioned until it is clear.
As I’ve said many, many times now, what is the harm in actually listening to LCC’s proposals and, if they aren’t viable we can knock that ’argument’ safely on the head, otherwise it will niggle forever and persist as a major wedge between many fans and the club. This deal was apparently done and dusted within 7-8 months so I am sure it wouldn’t take to long to suss out Bradley’s ’offers’.


As for Leeds, I believe their debt was created by purchasing a sizeable number of high value, highly paid players over a period of about 2 seasons combined with the reported extravagance of the chairman and budgeting on CL, they had to sell many of those players at a loss but were still contributing to the wages of around ten players who thay had already sold even last year, some are still owed money now after the administration.
al reddish
36   Posted 23/07/2007 at 18:51:05

Report abuse

i love my parents and have always supported them
when my parents move house i see them in their new place.........after all they are still my parents and i will always love them [they just live a few more miles away but in a posher house with better toilets!!!!! get what i’m saying?]
vin bleu
37   Posted 23/07/2007 at 21:38:50

Report abuse

How long have LCC known EFC are looking for a new site and a commercial package to support a new stadium? 3 years? And what have they come up with? Nada! Absolutely pathetic. Where’s the free site? Where’s the lump of money to build with? Everyone knows they don’t exist. EFC certainly don’t have the money. How much longer can we wait? I know - till Tesco and Knowsley pull out of the deal? Then what are we left with. No money and a house that due to be condemned ’cause it’s made of wood.
Cost of a notional stadium project in Liverpool - Land with planning permission £50 million. Stadium £75 million. Fit out £25 million. Here’s the Kirkby deal: we get the land and the stadium for free, we sell Goodison (£15 million) and naming rights (£10 million) to fit the stadium out. Estimated project cost £150 million. After 3 years of waiting, are LCC jumping up and down waving their £150 million in the air? No. And the best objections I’ve heard to the move to date? It’s four miles away. It’s half a mile outside the city boundary. Enough said.
Dave Thompson
38   Posted 24/07/2007 at 08:48:49

Report abuse

vin bleu,

The land is free - it is considered worthless.

Tesco are paying Knowsley £50M for it, and Knowsley will use that to build the stadium.

You estimate above counts the same money twice.

If, and it’s a very big if, the stadium came in on budget, it would have cost somewhere between £60M and and £85M, depending on Everton’s costs to fit out, which have been quoted by Wyness as £10M and subsequently as upto £35M.

Forgetting the crap about what something is "worth", given that it’s only worth anything if someone will buy it off you for that price, what kind of stadium do you get for £85M?

Furthemore, if Barr are really prepared to build a stadium for no profit - if it would normally cost £75M for that work, we have to assume they will still have to buy in materials and pay labour, so the only piece they can reduce is their profit - who will be responsible for any over-run costs?

Will it be Knowsley or Everton. Tesco are not building the stadium - they are just partners in the project.

I can’t imagine the residents of Knowsley being too impressed that they might be the ones paying any additional costs, and if it’s Everton, where is the money coming from?

vin bleu
39   Posted 24/07/2007 at 12:55:24

Report abuse

Dave,
Land with planning permission, situated at the centre of a multi-million pound development led by a blue chip company is certainly not worthless. My figures are notional and correct. EFC get a £150 million pound project - they just need the sale of Goodison and naming rights for £25 million to provide their share.
You are right about "worth" also known as "value". It’s what someone is willing to pay for something. I’m talking cost to EFC if they wish develope.
Barr’s profit will come from the whole Tesco development not EFC’s stadium package. Over-run costs will be absorbed by Barr who will construct the stadium shell under a Design and Build contract.

Add Your Comments

In order to post a comment to Column articles, you need to be logged in as a registered user of the site.

Log in now

Or Sign up as a ToffeeWeb Member — it's free, takes just a few minutes and will allow you to post your comments on articles and MailBag submissions across the site.



© ToffeeWeb
Menu
OK

We use cookies to enhance your experience on ToffeeWeb and to enable certain features. By using the website you are consenting to our use of cookies in accordance with our cookie policy.