With just a week to go before the close of the ballot on the Kirkby proposal, there are three main options facing the club in its need to make long overdue investment in a larger and more modern stadium.
The three main possibilities for stadium development are  out-of-town, being considered in partnership with Tesco and Knowsley Council,  expansion and modernisation of Goodison Park, and  central, represented by the Bestway site, off Scotland Road in Everton. The Club should investigate all three, yet they have been locked into an ?exclusivity agreement? with Tesco and Knowsley for many months. A ?no? vote to Kirkby is necessary to guarantee a full and proper appraisal of the options.
No English club of Everton?s size and stature have ever taken the out-of-town option. It was considered and rejected by Newcastle in favour of redeveloping their city centre site. Chelsea and Tottenham remain firmly rooted in their inner London boroughs. Arsenal have built a new stadium close to their old ground. Manchester City have moved to a new stadium close to the city centre. Aston Villa and Manchester United have developed their inner-city sites.
The nearest comparison to the Kirkby proposal is Bolton Wanderers? Reebok Stadium, but can anyone seriously argue that they are better placed as a regional attraction than, say, Manchester City? In terms of accessibility for supporters from the Liverpool City Region and North Wales, as well as trains from elsewhere, the city centre cannot be beaten.
That is why Grosvenor are developing there, and the Theatres, the Cathedrals, the Museums and the Universities have no plans to move out of town. The Kirkby option seems to me to be both short-sighted and reckless, removing the club from a historic inner-city rivalry that is unique in World Football.
Misgivings over the location have been compounded by the images being used by the club to promote the move. The proposal seems to be a cross between Ewood Park [Blackburn] and Ibrox [Glasgow Rangers, but without their fine old main stand, designed by Archibald Leitch, the architect of the historic stands at Goodison]. Most new stadia are lacking character and atmosphere, when they should be designed with the skill and care that would be applied to a great theatre or opera house. However, even by the standards of other new grounds, the Kirkby proposal looks bland.
The above sketches give an indication of how a phased development would work in principle. Most construction would be behind the existing structures, allowing the initial 48,000 capacity to be maintained as a minimum during subsequent phases of construction, up to an eventual maximum of 72,000, subject to appropriate transport arrangements being made, in conjunction with the development of the New Anfield.
Goodison Park could be redeveloped into a large modern stadium, whilst retaining its most historic elements. This could make it once again one of the finest grounds in the world, and a source of pilgrimage for football fans. The club would need the support of the local community in Walton and the City Council to make modest extensions of the site across Bullens Road and Goodison Road, but with this cooperation, the process need not be anything like as difficult as the club have stated. Development would be by incremental stages, in accordance with a proper business development plan, without waiting for one-off hand-outs.
The first phase, at the Park End, would increase the capacity to 48,000 and be largely financed by associated commercial development, including a hotel and apartments overlooking the Park Lake. While it is hard to understand the synergy between a retail development and a football ground [apart from short-term financial gain, exploiting quirks and loopholes in the planning system], the links with a hotel are more obvious and sustainable and, for many, the associated apartments would be a valuable and unique attraction.
The Bestway Site
The ?tunnel trumpet? site was suggested in my article ?Rebuilding Goodison? posted on Toffeeweb in March, but it only became a live possibility as a result of meetings between Bestway and the City Council in the last three months. Work is proceeding on detailed architectural and financial proposals for the site, but the early concept sketch below shows how a stadium could fit ?like a glove?.
The first stage is a stadium seating over 48,000 within the loop. A second phase bridges the loop road with a further 12,000 seats linked to a hotel tower on Great Homer Street. The whole scheme would be closely linked to ?Project Jennifer? and the combination would provide a solid future for the community of Everton after years of decline.
Keep Everton in the Heart of the City! Stand your Ground!
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
1 Posted 16/08/2007 at 16:32:08
Goodison getting revamped would be subject to numerous lengthy planning applications and protests no doubt.
The loop does not look like a viable alternative. Funding with Bestway maybe but the logisitcs nighmare of having to build bridges over main roads and parking etc is a non starter in my eyes.
Funding wise there is no PLan B outside of Kirkby sadly but to reject it would mean another 5-10 years of new proposals searches for backing........
10 years in this money driven era is a long time to lag behind.
2 Posted 16/08/2007 at 16:37:15
3 Posted 16/08/2007 at 16:37:30
4 Posted 16/08/2007 at 16:39:43
There has been little thought out into the financing of these alternative proposals. The way i see this, everything is being done last minute purely to sway peoples voting decisions. If there was an alternative in the city with guaranteed backing like kirkby, i would be all for it too, but time is money in this day and age. Goodison cannot be re-developed, thats a pipe dream and we all know it.
5 Posted 16/08/2007 at 16:39:43
That is just being picky though as the others are all fair examples.
I would love to explore all the current options, and more, but time is not on our side. As Paulo says, 5-10 years is a long time in the Premiership. Look at Leeds (admittedly mismanaged by every crook that could get their hands on them).
6 Posted 16/08/2007 at 16:36:53
Choice 2: Not an option. We have no money
Choice 3:A nice idea in a great location. But again we have no money
7 Posted 16/08/2007 at 16:47:27
I see that while I was writing, Dom already made the point about Trafford.
8 Posted 16/08/2007 at 16:47:02
What if it allows a proper consultation and financial package to be sorted for the Loop site, and then a fresh vote with TWO proper alternatives in a few months time?
9 Posted 16/08/2007 at 16:44:25
Liverpool Council Don’t care enough to deliver anything close to what Knowsley Council and Tesco are offering.
10 Posted 16/08/2007 at 16:51:44
11 Posted 16/08/2007 at 16:49:09
Constraints - whether the roads around the loop or the residential constrain the build and increase costs.
It may be possible to build over roads creating tunnels and to have large bridges creating access but these things cost more money.
The advantage of Kirkby is that Everton would not be paying for the additional infrastructure costs and would have more freedom on stadium design.
Part of the reason for the move to modern stadia throughout the premiership is the benefit of additional revenues not just from corporate boxes but also the chance create facilities to sell more of you own food/drink and make money out of bookies and merchandising shops.
I’m not convinced such facilities can easily be created at Goodison and even less convinced that the suggestion of redevelopment here could be "largely financed by associated commercial development, including a hotel and apartments overlooking the Park Lake". There is barely enough room for more build let alone profitable development of sufficient size to pay for it.
In Kirkby there is a retail partner who stands to gain a lot with Everton able to get a small share of this benefit - this leads to cost savings. The ability for this to happen on other sites appears lower but even if it is the same would have not offset larger build costs.
There is a lot of optimism regarding the benefits of commercial development on alternative sites but it seems to me there is less potential benefit.
This is not to say that Kirkby is a must. I think the choice is simply is it worth investing an additional £50-£150 million for an alternative rather than take the Kirkby option. Or to put it another way a difference of £5m-£15m transfer revenue each year for 30 years(based on debt repayment estimates from our current loan)
12 Posted 16/08/2007 at 16:49:21
13 Posted 16/08/2007 at 16:48:56
I also think that if the NO vote is successful then expect Choice C to be grounded due to Grosvenor threatening legal action or other infrastructure issues.
Choice B is nul and void in my eyes. As much as i’d love to stay at my beloved Goodison Park, it would cost an absolute fortune (nobody has given an exact figure) to redevelop.
14 Posted 16/08/2007 at 16:52:18
15 Posted 16/08/2007 at 16:51:03
16 Posted 16/08/2007 at 16:35:59
17 Posted 16/08/2007 at 16:50:51
18 Posted 16/08/2007 at 16:45:00
I’m also far from convinced by the funding suggestion for GP or the loop. Build a hotel and everything will be sorted! Really?
19 Posted 16/08/2007 at 16:56:56
20 Posted 16/08/2007 at 16:37:30
21 Posted 16/08/2007 at 16:58:15
The only objections to moving to Kirkby seem to be that it is marginally outside of the city boundary and that something better may come along.
Get this; being offerred a brand new stadium for a fraction of the build cost if we go it alone is the something better; by going with the yes vote it means that we can invest in playing staff not bricks and reap the rewards of not having to spend £100m on a new stadium ourselves.
Voting no is to vote for fear of change; for holding on to the past and not taking the opportunity of the future; and to allow mistrust to prevail.
The proposal to move is truly an excellent deal and we will not see better. Vote no and the current alternatives will slowly disappear and we will be left to rue the failure to take the best option available.
Be bold. Be brave. Vote Yes.
22 Posted 16/08/2007 at 16:56:42
23 Posted 16/08/2007 at 17:04:12
Now you want to talk about the Kirkby Cowshed?
24 Posted 16/08/2007 at 16:58:24
25 Posted 16/08/2007 at 17:05:07
26 Posted 16/08/2007 at 17:19:55
A little research would tell you that Man Utd do NOT play in Trafford.
They play in Salford.
But don’t let the truth get in the way, eh?
The geography of Greater Manchester is entirely different to Merseyside, and Old Trafford is closer to Manchester City Centre than Goodison is to Liverpool City Centre. Furthermore, when they moved there, they had no history or heritage to consider.
27 Posted 16/08/2007 at 17:15:00
28 Posted 16/08/2007 at 17:27:27
Further to that, Greater Manchester geography is different to Merseyside? Well that’s not even an argument, that’s pathetic!
29 Posted 16/08/2007 at 17:12:57
30 Posted 16/08/2007 at 17:28:45
31 Posted 16/08/2007 at 17:40:56
32 Posted 16/08/2007 at 17:37:28
What is your suggestion then? Which of the many options do you prefer?
If we are to accept that redevelopment of GP is not an option, and that GP is not up to standard and holding us back, what are the alternatives.
Would you prefer that we just got rid of the stadium all together and just go watch the game in The Wilmslow?
This smacks of "shut my eyes and it will all be ok when I wake up"!
33 Posted 16/08/2007 at 17:33:06
hey problem solved!
34 Posted 16/08/2007 at 17:42:32
35 Posted 16/08/2007 at 17:45:54
36 Posted 16/08/2007 at 17:51:42
Have you even researched this?
Tesco already looked at the loop, and many other inner-city sites. Due to CPOs, transport restraints and opposition from the very people who are undertaking the mass development in the city which you refer to, they have ended up with Kirkby!
Read up on it!
37 Posted 16/08/2007 at 17:55:43
38 Posted 16/08/2007 at 17:51:42
39 Posted 16/08/2007 at 17:59:23
Who do you think is going to invest in Everton without getting something out of it? Unless we nail down another Abramovich, nobody’s just going to give us money.
Not being able to driink at your local before/after the game doesn’t really address the issue of finance or viability. If you don’t want to go to Kirkby, ok. However, we do need to move from GP and this is an option to be considered. Just harping on about the big corporate monster Tesco doesn’t solve anything. We need partners and partners (investors) are going to want something out of it.
40 Posted 16/08/2007 at 17:44:25
41 Posted 16/08/2007 at 18:05:57
Manchester, Glasgow, Turin, Milan, Dundee, Edinburgh, Madrid etc, etc, etc.
Stick to the facts Trevor (and your valid opinions) and avoid the hyperbole and you’ll be OK.
42 Posted 16/08/2007 at 18:06:20
I dont have a vote.
I’m from the wirral, and would love to have a site by the wallasey tunnel, just for pure selfish reasons like getting to the ground, and having a pint before and after the game in town.
However, having been to the site and around it, I just cannot see how the space can accomodate what we need and just cant get myself excited about this site, now matter how hard i try. For me kirkby is the only option available.
43 Posted 16/08/2007 at 18:36:02
andymac wrote : "The visual presentations have all the hallmarks of a student playing round on an Apple Mac. Amateur, devoid of any engineering basis, not to scale, and, quite frankly, embarassing" - sorry are you talking about the Kirkby plans or those in this article ?
Martin wrote : "even dodgier stadium "designs" that a 4-year old could have drawn and use some common sense" - sorry are you talking about the Kirkby plans or those in this article ?
I contend that EVERY argument that has been levelled at these alternative plans could be levelled at the Kirkby plan as well - the amount of actual SOLID information provided has been virtually non-existent. There are a few night-time renderings of a generic stadium with no detail whatsoever and the financial figures quoted have ALL been either "could be" or "may be" (e.g. how much we’d get from the sale of Goodison/naming rights) and any seemingly definitive figures (e.g. "Tesco will buy the land for £50million then give it to us") have later been denied (by Tesco) or changed (first Everton’s slice was only £10-15m, then it rose to £50m, and it now seems to be completely unknown as we’ll seemingly have to pay any extra costs if the project over-runs and/or costs rise).
I can understand why people have felt the need to come up with alternatives, given Mr Wyness’ inital "There is no Plan B" statement (which in itself I find outrageous - I thought he was PAID to find alternatives ???) and I take my hat off to them for doing so - but these proposals have, in a way, providing something of a cover for the lack of any real solid figures in the Kirkby proposal.
I urge anyone who is still undecided to look again purely at the Kirkby proposal and try to find some SOLID answers in there for the way things WILL be if this plan is carried out. For any argument or potential problem you can find with the alternatives proposed, look for solid answers why the Kirkby plan won’t be the same. And when you find the solid ansers, can you please post them on here ?
Tony Bell : Can you please provide me with "an exact figure" for Everton’s input to the Kirbky project ?
andymac or Martin : Can you show me the full designs and the "engineering" version of the pretty pictures in the Kirkby brochure, along with the scale etc. ?
Just because this is the only option the board could find (AT THE MOMENT) it doesn’t mean it is the RIGHT option folks. If you don’t have all the facts about Kirkby then you are voting Yes based on what you HOPE it will be - and, as I’m sure we all know as Evertonians - hoping just isn’t enough.
I can’t vote for this at the moment, because I haven’t been provided with enough SOLID information about it to convince me that it is the right move. I will wait until the last moment for such information to be provided, but without it, I just can’t vote based purely on hope - it’s far too important a decision, and it’s one we can only make once.
44 Posted 16/08/2007 at 18:38:54
45 Posted 16/08/2007 at 18:49:56
Vote NO, please
46 Posted 16/08/2007 at 19:11:33
So im going for the loop still - just go have a drive around and see what you think. thats what i did today.
47 Posted 16/08/2007 at 19:29:26
48 Posted 16/08/2007 at 19:38:17
49 Posted 16/08/2007 at 20:04:26
50 Posted 16/08/2007 at 20:17:07
51 Posted 16/08/2007 at 20:18:23
52 Posted 16/08/2007 at 19:45:04
The stadium architects who are being commisioned to generate the final scheme are HOK. These are the biggest stadium design group in the world with unrivalled experience. Those doubting LCC, saying they should have done more before now should also realise that they are not obliged to do anything. However, the custodians of our club are certainly obliged to look at all the options, that is what they said they had done.
Modern stadium planning strategy worldwide has been towards downtown stadia not out of town ones. The latter was tried en masse in the US in the 50?s-70?s. These are now being knocked down in favour of new inner city stadia. The success of these new venues has prompted the biggest stadium building boom in over 80yrs in the states. Some have even got next to no parking with the stress on public transport use, often shoehorning them into tight city blocks.
Kirkby can never match the city centre for this provision. In the city centre every Evertonian in Merseyside will be able to get to the match by taking one bus, or one train. This can never be the case in Kirkby. The city centre copes with over 100,000 commuters every rush hour. Kirkby chokes on a couple of thousand industrial estate workers (I worked there for over 6 years, up till last year).
Finances: We still haven?t had the definitive costs for the Kirkby proposals, yet you?re demanding such for everything else which has had only weeks to be put together. Bestway are a private company who?s owner has considerable wealth, and more able to invest in the club than Tesco PLC.
The planning Department putting together these proposals have been instrumental in generating massive redevelopments across the city centre, with many more in the pipeline. These are not small players, and the fact that this project is currently harnessing a major proportion of their attention at the moment points to this being a very serious option, If allowed to develop properly (and why should we be constrained by this artificial deadline?)
The Loop option will eclipse anything Kirkby has to offer. The whole finance /land release/planning gain process can be just as readily achieved at the loop site as it can in Kirkby. These people are doing this all the time around town..... and the skyline is proof of that. Keep the faith blues we needn?t settle for second best!
53 Posted 16/08/2007 at 19:03:01
Looking at Kirkby from another perspective, forgetting boundaries etc., the ’extra’ revenue, £10m supposedly, will not all come from increased gates and corporate, (simple sum - assuming we get 10,000 extra fans every game LONG term at average £30 = £5.7m, 39 boxes at a ’generous’ £50k per season = £1.9m total £7.6m before tax), the off field revenue i.e. conferences, weddings etc, would have to be a major long term source.
Accessibility is one ’yes’ plus for going to Kirkby for out of town fans and not such a major problem for locals but if you were a company arranging a conference or other activity for people/family who are from other towns and cities then things would be very different. The only easy access for these ’visitors’ would be via car as there are no direct rail links to Kirkby that I am aware of, There are no hotels, no theatres, no nightlife, making events requiring overnight accomodation very unattractive to business visitors. We mightn’t be able to choose but they certainly can. The city is booming and is set to do so for many a year and any business who would take the first route away from the hub and a potential revenue source without exploring every option to stay is a business taking a major risk. Maximising the long term benefits are more important than a short term cash fix.
I don’t know where the 5 or 10 year comments come from either as the Kirkby deal has taken only 18 months, Bestway say they can have a feasibility study done in 3 months, and most other requirements in 9, so I’m sure Kirkby will still be there in December if the Loop turns out not to be viable.
Too much to ask?
54 Posted 16/08/2007 at 20:15:05
However, like you I don’t believe the club will countenace the loop as the Tesco option presents the quickest and cheapest way of fattening up Kenwright et als share value ( He will sell for a fast profit the second the stadium is built if not before)
As I said before, it may be that kirkby is the best and only viable option but I would like to at least make the statement to the club that if a better option may be available (and the loop is a million times better site than an out of town retail park)they should give it all due consideration an let us the fans, have a proper choice rather than the bullying "kirkby or death" nonsense on offer now.
But you’re right lets get on with the vote although I do think it is ultimately an irrelevance.
55 Posted 16/08/2007 at 20:35:37
56 Posted 16/08/2007 at 21:02:59
I agree it does fit like a glove. Can you just see those luxury hotel rooms selling? Personally I don’t.
Also can you see the position of where all those other commercial opportunities will sit on the loop? I certainly don’t.
Finally if for any reason the ground had to be evacuated can you see it happening safely? I certainly don’t.
We will all be standing on a main road. It will never get permission. Forget the loop the whole idea is pointless. Have you ever wondered why Bestway don’t want the land? Probably for the same reasons why a football stadium will never be built on it.
57 Posted 16/08/2007 at 21:08:00
For once, at least try to present a balanced view without your KEIOC tinted glasses on.
It is almost like you are wishing for the club to fail so your negative viewpoint on all things blue will the order of the day.
58 Posted 16/08/2007 at 21:21:06
Sir terry and tesco are building the biggest tesco in the country and why are they building it in Kirkby,because the town is going through major changes with private investment only second to Liverpool 08 and Tesco and knowsley council are investing £400 million in phase one then £200million in phase two.
Sir Terry and his advisors dont just say here is a plot of land "lets build a tesco there" a full study is done and believe me tesco will prosper and we will too and I will be quite proud to be linked to a major brand name in the top 100 ftse ........as for the guy who said he is mixing business with pleasure!! this is not Sir Terrys little toy......it is a major investment by the board who know how to make money.
It means I will have to travel further to get there but I cannot wait.
59 Posted 16/08/2007 at 21:19:44
60 Posted 16/08/2007 at 22:44:15
It would only cost about 2 billion, but fcking hell Kenwright -Nil Satis Nisi Optimum!! sort it!!
61 Posted 16/08/2007 at 22:53:46
tesco are my soiled hoop...
vote NO to tinpot kirkby...
62 Posted 16/08/2007 at 22:54:38
63 Posted 16/08/2007 at 23:16:00
64 Posted 16/08/2007 at 22:30:11
A great reply to all those who believe a move to Kirkby is the only option available. In reality It is the only option that the board are willing to look at. But we must stand firm on this most crucial decison. We must fight the board to make them investigate all options in the city. There are people out there with vision, like Trevor Skempton moving heaven and earth doing what efc should have been doing instead of going underground with Tescos for the last 12 months. I can’t believe that every idea to keep everton where it belongs gets slated by the very people who are supposed to support the club. For me Kirkby would be a quick fix for not only Kenwright but those who just want to go to a new stadium no matter where it is.
65 Posted 16/08/2007 at 23:34:34
66 Posted 16/08/2007 at 22:51:50
I have been travelling 220 miles round trip to each home game for 22 Years. I wasn’t born in liverpool or merseyside for that matter, however I was a born an Evertonian my two sons were born evertonians and they now travel to the match with me.
To all those who voted no because Kirkby is outside of the city boundary that is absolute bullshit if your reasons are future generations will be reds. Again I state Evertonians are born were are not manufactured.
I have enjoyed a drink on county road for the past 20 years as much as anyone but this must not be a reason to stay at goodison.It’s time to move on.
I was lucky enough to be in Rotterdam, Wembley twice a year for 5 years(near enough) and watch 2 championships teams. I also realise this is the best team we have had since then so to all those still to vote i plead with you all SUPPORT THE MANAGER SUPPORT THE CHAIRMAN BUT MOST OF ALL SUPPORT OUR CLUB AND VOTE YES
I believe we can again become the greatest team in the country but we must have a stadium to do this and we have the chance to have one with this deal. We must all realise Moyes won’t stay if we carry on as we are but if we move he will stay and carry on building a young and talented squad to bring us the trophies we so desperately want.
Remember Once a blue always a blue NO MATTER WHERE YOU COME FROM!!!!!
67 Posted 16/08/2007 at 23:30:23
All i’ll say is, to all the people who are saying Old Trafford is only 5 minutes from Manchester city centre ,then you’re more than welcome to walk it with me next season when you can’t get on a bus or find a taxi after the game.You’ll soon change your tune.The ground is still full though.
And to Blue Mersey, i’m a five minute walk from the proposed site for the new stadium, and i live in Liverpool.Unlike the recently resigned woolyback leader of KEIOC.;-)
68 Posted 16/08/2007 at 23:52:27
69 Posted 16/08/2007 at 23:55:15
70 Posted 17/08/2007 at 00:00:57
2. I have nothing against Kirkby...except...the stadium is dire and cheap. Four stands that only meet at pitch level with the corners not used. Give us a break...if we are to move out of the city at least let’s have decent stadium with the corners used.
They say it can expand to 60,000. Sure it will the corners will be used for police boxes and executive boxes making the stadium crap for atmosphere.
71 Posted 17/08/2007 at 01:39:29
72 Posted 17/08/2007 at 03:03:21
Here is a plan, not necessarily in this order, but based on local regulations, neighbors, etc.
Obtain all permits (approvals);
Acquire required neghboring property;
Negotiate TEMPORARY ground share agreement with the Red half [Ugh!];
Remove and rebuild Goodison as a state of the art facility;
Qualify for and win the Champions League [As I said - NOT necessarily in this order}
If everybody isn’t on board, move to Kirby.
Let start with the next match and grab another 3 points!
73 Posted 17/08/2007 at 04:26:26
i’m sad to leave the city centre but lets not harp on about a boundary line on a map and get fully behind the clubs decision. everton will be better for it. and as for goodison, great memories but time to move on. things change.
good luck to moyesie and the boys against reading
74 Posted 17/08/2007 at 07:47:34
JOEY - Get your vomit bag out (again) because I voted "yes" and I dont want to leave the city. Your emotional counter argument just simplifies a complex debate beyond reason. Resorting to insults weakens the "no" vote campaign which is disappointing because there is much to respect about the KEOIC position. But therein lies the problem. For many people the KEOIC stance is too heavily reliant upon the "leaving of Liverpool" argument.
Late arriving Loop site images and those daunting "redevelop Goodison" drawings must surely be worth a second glance but neither relied on waiting for the infamous "exclusivity" agreement to end ? Why are they so late ? Why would Mr Bradley wait so long before acting ? He hasnt really talked to EFC about either of the new alternatives so that shouldnt have stopped him offering up these important options a long long time ago ? But a bit like the fiasco around the Matthew St festival Mr Bradley has "reacted" too late with too little and he knows it.
TOM and co....the Loop site option feels like a spoiler but im sure it has to be better than that. Yet you can read on here the genuine reaction from fans who are not stupid and despite your excellent attempts and those of Colin to explain the hugely complex financial elements of the debate there is.....a simple gut feeling that the Loop site is too small, too costly and will be too likely to attract years of planning objections before even a debate is had about bridge building and health & safety which are both crucial considerations.
Gut feeling is a funny thing and very irritating to experts in any domain. But you know what, gut feeling tells me that there are big doubts about LCC’s sudden evangelical conversion to KEOIC. And gut feeling leads me to believe that the risks of the do-nothing-for-10-years outcome which may well result from a no-vote, far outweigh those associated with the very reasonable doubts expressed about the Kirkby project.
The no voters seem so certain about their position. So trusting of LCC who in my view have had no time for EFC for years and I believe that we will always be second best in this city as far as LCC is concerned. I do not accept the emotive but clearly genuinely held view that moving to Kirkby will finish the club and destroy the supporter base. Just because it hasnt been done before does not mean it will fail. I am amazed by those life-long blues saying they will never watch us in Kirkby ? How sad is that....to give up your lifelong obsession because you lost out in a democratic process ? If its "no" and we stay in Lpl Ive no intention of ending my support for my second great love because "I lost an argument"......nonsense....im a bluenose and proud of it and this bloody debate about a stadium isnt going to stop me supporting my team....wherever they play.
cheers, Mark (Rusty Man)
75 Posted 17/08/2007 at 08:39:19
Rusty: I too respect people’s decision, I just want all the options to get an equal hearing. Nothing like that is happening at the moment. I also believe that if these other options had had a chance to be fully developed, then there certainly wouldn’t be any clamouring for Kirkby at all. The comparisons of Tesco and Bestway are an irrelevance to me. Personally, as a season ticket holder (30+yrs)/shareholder I just want what’s best for Evertonians like all here. I am, believe it or not prepared to be persuaded about Kirkby, but I just can’t see it, even given the hype that has accompanied it so far.
76 Posted 17/08/2007 at 08:38:24
77 Posted 17/08/2007 at 10:16:42
78 Posted 17/08/2007 at 10:19:45
Option 2 - Twickenham architect says it can be redeveloped to 50,000 on current footprint (Note - NO PLANNING PERMISSION ISSUES)and aquiring of land on Bullens Road in future would increase this - Council has promised co-operation - with more TV income than ever and the ability of a redeveloped Cathedral of Football (Alex Ferguson’s words) providing more income streams (Wyness’s favourite phrase) plus huge potential for financial input from business partners regading hotels, leisure etc., Goodison is a real option. Intimidating, historic, unique - it has the X Factor.
3 - Imaginative and bold, organisers deserve praise - keeps Everton in the area they belong and fair’s fair, business plan worries can only be addressed given time. Surely a better optio than Kirkby but it ain’t Goodison...
79 Posted 17/08/2007 at 10:32:51
I am an intelligent professional who has been supporting Everton for 35 years and worked in football finance for much of my professional life. I AM using my head and my head says GOODISON. Look beyond the glossy brochure and soundbites from footballers who know bugger all about the game’s administration and instead think what drives fans to attend matches... You need to realise that Everton’s niche market is that we are just about the only ’old school’ Club in the top flight - and that has MASSIVE marketing potential, much like LA Raiders in USA.
As for the finances, it’s not as simple as "we have no money". We have huge turnover and how it is handled dictates what options we have. Goodison is a very real option and in the long run will make us more money than sharing a car park with Saturday afternoon shoppers on an industrial site in an anonymous town with no kudos nationally whatsoever. Who do you want to be, Bolton?
80 Posted 17/08/2007 at 10:42:32
81 Posted 17/08/2007 at 10:46:27
82 Posted 17/08/2007 at 10:48:15
Get real - of course it could.
Think about this - what happens to Goodison if it goes - could Tesco be first to snap up a huge site in the middle of the most densley populated area of Liverpool, an area where no other hypermarket currently exists? Parasites and nothing but.
Mark my words - it will happen and Bully will be on the board at Tesco in no time.
83 Posted 17/08/2007 at 10:54:24
We degenerated on the pitch due to bad management, bad players (even when we had top dollar buying power) and appalling management in the boardroom. We became second rate due to human factors, NOT BECAUSE OF GOODISON PARK.
Goodison has proven itself. Liverpool (makes me sick to say it) have won trophies for years in a ground far worse than Goodison. Successive Boards have tried to cover up their own ineptitude by blaming Goodison.
Don’t fall for it. There’s nothing wrong with Goodison when the team is winning. Where would you rather be on derby day, Goodison - or a souless mechano ediface outside the city which looks like every other ground that’s been built in the last fifteen years?
Derby, Middlesbrough, Bolton, Sunderland, Millwall, Leicester, Southampton, Coventry, Man City, Doncaster, Darlington, Hull - all got nice new grounds to "Propell us into the next Century" - all still crap. BE WARNED.
84 Posted 17/08/2007 at 11:07:27
85 Posted 17/08/2007 at 10:25:42
86 Posted 17/08/2007 at 10:50:42
87 Posted 17/08/2007 at 11:24:23
88 Posted 17/08/2007 at 11:22:05
Tom Hughes you have my total respect; do you sometimes feel that you are pissing in the wind mate?
89 Posted 17/08/2007 at 11:34:36
90 Posted 17/08/2007 at 09:10:47
Tesco’s cash contribution is £0.
Knowsley’s cash contribution is £0
We pay overrun costs.
We pay rent to Knowsley.
Also some may find this interesting reading if you wish. It is part of Brighton’s Planning Applicationfor the Falmer Stadium and includes an article from Building magazine which demonstrates cost analasys for building football stadia and is used by the architect as a guide to the figures.
and this from the FSIF on improving football stadia.
They should get some meat on the debate
91 Posted 17/08/2007 at 11:27:38
92 Posted 17/08/2007 at 11:36:06
You may have only just heard about alternatives John but they have been around for years. Unfortunately, fans do not have the media power that the Club has - therefore getting information out is not that easy. Don’t be "infuriated" - just be informed.
93 Posted 17/08/2007 at 11:29:28
You make a solid argument about success on the pitch not being directly comparable to the stadium and I agree totally.
However, your insistance on stating that all the honours we have were won at Goodison Park confuses me. Where else were we likely to have won them? That’s been our ground for the last 100+ years so that doesn’t prove anything. Just because we have had both good and bad times at Goodison does not mean that the stadium is fit for purpose. Like anything, buildings need maintaining and modernising. Times change and with it so must the club and stadium.
"There?s nothing wrong with Goodison when the team is winning" you say. Well I am sure that there are many that would argue against this. The Old Lady is looking exactly that! Obstructed views, poor concourses and food/drink outlets, putrid toilets. Add to this the fact that maintenance is not just about what you can see on the surface and it’s not a case of just stick in some more seats and give it a lick of paint.
I do agree with your statements about souless stadia and lack of history, but I think you are only skirting the issue. We definitely need to move from Goodison in my opinion (reluctant as it may be) but maybe not to Kirkby and maybe not right this minute.
94 Posted 17/08/2007 at 11:49:08
Speaking to dozens of aquaintances on Saturday, only found one who’s voted to move!
Note to Kenwright - before proudly crowing that "This is the only Club which would vote on such an issue", consider this - offering a vote whilst providing information which seeks to influence voters one way only is not democracy - it is patronisation. Shame on you.
95 Posted 17/08/2007 at 11:00:58
Suddenly all the fervour and support for redeveloping Goodison seems to have largely evaporated and the Loop is now the Holy Grail...promoted in part by the idiots who brought you the 4th Grace and the Mathew Street debacle, supported by pretty(ish) pictures supplied by paid consultants!
I respect Trevor Skempton, his drawings are beautiful (at least I assume they are his) and it would be a wonderful thing indeed if we and Everton Football Club were in a position to make that kind of a choice, with everything on the table acheivable. But we are not and that is the problem. I have no truck with the ’we will die if we go to Kirkby’ brigade,because football clubs, especially football clubs like Everton do not depend for their survival merely on the location of their stadium. Kirkby is gift, maybe not a gift we would have chosen if we would have been in the enviable position I describe, but a gift nevertheless because it is the only affordable option we have. Plan B is to stay at Goodison and to finacially stagnate. A financial stagnation accelerated by what will soon be happening on the other side of the park. Not only will we be the skint neighbours that we know we are, it will be ever more bloody obvious as The Grand Old Lady deteriorates over time, scuppering any potential for significant investment in the future.
This king (the Loop) has no clothes. It is in its altogether. It is a political tactic par-excellence, designed to elicit a No vote which will neuter Everton FC. And everyone will be happy except those of us, I think the majority, who want to see this club progress.
96 Posted 17/08/2007 at 12:22:53
Forgetting insults if you were offered a similar propostion in central Liverpool vs Kirkby which one would you go for, then ask why arent we exploring the options now. Dont jump at the gift on the table because it is seen as the only option - there are more, exclusivity has prevented this, as we have seen in past 4 weeks alone.
97 Posted 17/08/2007 at 12:15:19
I personally want Everton to have the best stadium in the country and believe that independent evidence in the form of Terry Ward’s proposal in 1998 suggests very strongly that that can, both physically and financially, be at Goodison. Until that is investigated properly and openly, I genuinely believe we need to hold our horses before we destroy something special.
There is also however an argument which many hold with, and I can entirely see their point, for keeping Goodison largely as is.
Your anemic analogy of Goodison as a placid ’grand old lady’ is in my view entirely misplaced; I believe Alex Ferguson’s description of it as the "snarling pitbull of a stadium, waiting to devour any who dare to stray into it’s territory" is more apt. Anyone who was at the Beyern Munich game, the Cup derby in ’81, the ’78 Andy King derby, the Wimbledon and Coventry games - cannot possibly believe that Goodison and the unique, irreplaceable atmosphere and raw power it generated had nothing to do with those successes. Kevin Ratcliffe acknowledges this.
In my opinion, a new ground simply would destroy this and weaken us as a Club and a force.
Do you really want your children and grandchildren never to experience atmosphere’s like the above? A new stadium with none of Goodison’s drama and atmosphere would be a watered-down experience for all. And no, I don’t think that the special atmosphere that Goodison generates on the big occasion could be reproduced even though the same fans would be present in a new stadium.
Away fans who once mocked Goodison’s facilities recently voted it the 2nd best away ground in an Observer poll. Quite simply they are starting to appreciate its unique qualities, qualities increasingly rare and valued in this day and age. It is a proper blue collar football ground.
Any Tom, Dick and Harriet Club can have a new ground in Kirkby. Leicester have one. Southampton too. And Coventry. Don’t forget Middlesbrough and Derby. Only Everton can call on the raw passion generated by Goodison Park.
A mate of mine put it like this - "If all I want is nice toilets, perfect views, spacious concourses, nice refreshment areas and a car parking space, the local Showcase cinema suits me fine. Personally, I have sampled what Goodison gives me as a fan over the years and no matter how many times I have felt betrayed by the board and the team, kicked in the teeth by money grabbers and had to endure the taunts of fans of other Clubs who possess a tenth of my passion yet win ten times the silverware that I do, what keeps me coming back, what makes me an Evertonian, is knowing that on those special occasions at Goodison, as a Club, no-one can touch us, no-one even gets close."
98 Posted 17/08/2007 at 12:28:14
99 Posted 17/08/2007 at 12:52:10
And as for the Taj Mahal, now there’s a dump...
100 Posted 17/08/2007 at 12:47:03
101 Posted 17/08/2007 at 12:57:36
Some good points in that eloquent response and I agree with most of it.
I want to believe that Goodison is an option but most of the feedback suggests that it is not viable, even if we had the money. I have read many suggestions that Goodison would cost as much to redevelop as building a new stadium. Then, most of the comeback to that argument just expects me to take things for granted and trust people in the same way that I would be called an idiot and a traitor if I trust the board. Nothing’s ever as good as it is first billed.
One thing that worries me from reading all the comments from fans on this topic is that I feel that any future option/site would be subjected to the same efforts to derail or rubbish it as this one. A lot of the reasons that certain people give for not trusting the Kirkby proposal, can and will be applied by others to any future alternatives. See my point?
I fear that even with a NO vote, this will trundle on forever, with no agreement ever reached. If GP can be developed it would require a larger footprint. Say what you want but I am sure of that. Not sure this can be achieved and no idea how it would be funded. Luxury Hotel, come on. I prefer the retail option.
Also, we are taking the attitude that no new stadia can provide the atmosphere of which Goodison is currently home. So what are we saying? Moving ground is never an option for us? I feel that people (not directed at you) are not appreciating all sides of the issue. Everyone seems to focus on whatever part of the argument they feel best gets their point across.
As I have said before, I am glad I don’t have a vote, because to be quite honest, I still don’t have a clue!!
One thing I will say though, Alex Ferguson and other managers are talking about how difficult it is for their team to come there and win. It’s not really a reference to how good the stadium is. That would be measured by a number of different factors, including atmosphere and facilities.
I am very proud of GP and what it stands for but I have yet to see anything that gives me any hope of a viable redevelopment. Suppose that’s another argument for more time, but do we have it?
102 Posted 17/08/2007 at 13:22:54
WHY ARE YOU WRITING, IN CAPITALS ARE YOU SHOUTING?
I see what you are saying, you obviously do not trust the board. Ok, they haven’t given you a great deal of reason to. However, the club/board (people who run the business) have obviously decided that Kirkby is the right option and are therefore backing it. I don’t really see that it is particularly underhand, bias maybe but not underhand. As many fans on here have proved, they are too intelligent to just be taken in by comments from Cahill and Moyes. I have confidence that a lot of them will look at as much info as poss before making a decision and let’s face it there is an organised counter campaign (with just as much propaganda) in place.
Anyway, GOODBYE FOR NOW.
103 Posted 17/08/2007 at 14:02:19
To take the next step in returning Everton to the top we need a stadium which will facilitate increased revenues and investment. I trust Kenwright to complete the job. That’s why I voted yes.
104 Posted 17/08/2007 at 14:21:24
105 Posted 17/08/2007 at 14:37:22
106 Posted 17/08/2007 at 14:35:07
What a lot of the naysayers are forgetting is that the only reason we are even getting a sniff at a new stadium is because it will be partly funded by Tesco. Tesco already have a bazillion stores in Liverpool and they don’t need another but they do need one in Kirkby. Simple as that.
The bestway "graphics" (if they can be called that) look rubbish anyway - it looks like some kind of weird toilet from one angle.
Liverpool City Council can suck my balls quite frankly, they’ve had years to sort something out for us yet they’ve been too busy helping out the red shite. It’s their loss when this great club leaves the city boundaries and kirkby gets a massive boost from the thousands that will flock through its town centre every saturday.
As for redeveloping Goodison, I would LOVE that to happen, then everybody wins but there is literally no money to do that. We must accept this with a heavy heart and move on.
Voting no will mean NOTHING will happen, the other "options" have already been discredited. Voting no won’t mean they will be explored because they are already being dismisssed. We will stay and rot at an aging stadium, fall further behind other clubs financially and then NEVER have a realistic chance of becoming a trophy challenging team like we where 20 years ago.
That can simply not be an option.
We’ll fade into obscurity. We all know our history but to cling to it with no foresight is foolish.
There can be new glories at kirkby, it can be a fortress, home to a team that can get investment to buy great players. 10million a season is, in my opinion, only the start. There will surely be more investment coming in to an attractive proposition such as Everton.
Arteta and Cahill signed new deals because they see that if we move to a new ground soon we can have a bright future. If we vote no to kirkby we are voting no to progress.
The plans for the kirkby ground look amazing, not many people can deny that. A modern home befitting the great Everton in the modern world of Football.
107 Posted 17/08/2007 at 15:37:09
All Stadiums look like weird toilets. Dont believe for one minute tesco dont want another store in Liverpool.
Voting No means a kick up the arse for our board to do what they should have done in first place and look at all options. The Kirkby option is the only one simply because Tesco wanted this not the board. Further investment in Everton at Kirkby us surely a joke if you consider the alternative investment in Everton at the heart of the greatest city.
Using players as bait is rediculous they signed because we are in Europe and for the wages not a promise of a new stadium in 3 years time. Somebody has already stated this is for the long term for EFC and not necessarily the current crop of players. How many players have joined EFC because of the passsion of the city, the people, the ground. See who is attracted by a tin funny shaped toilet in a field in Kirkby.
The plans for Kirkby to be honest remind me of Blackburn and Warrington RLC (also a tesco site)and this is not so great.
Not sure anything will change peoples minds now anyway you are either for it because you have to be or you have been convinced by the glossy brochure, or you are aginst it because you have a heart and a head which can see past the hype.
108 Posted 17/08/2007 at 15:37:09
109 Posted 17/08/2007 at 15:45:33
110 Posted 17/08/2007 at 16:09:40
This also looks like a funny shaped toilet.
111 Posted 17/08/2007 at 16:35:51
112 Posted 17/08/2007 at 17:07:00
Our tools in the toolbox cant see other options like many of our fans, that is not to blame it is simply to say they dont know how or cant think outside the box.
If my job was running a football club I would not be experienced enough to seek partnership and property deals that we need.
If i was a housebuilder I can build great houses but not a hotel.
If I was running Tesco I would be looking within.
We need a brighter spanner who knows what they are doing. Peel holdings for example take a derelict piece of land next to a sewarage farm and transform to the largest shopping centre in Europe.
They take docklands from Mersey Docks and propose £5bn development.
They dont have money under the matress they use their knowledge, the markets and invest.
We have apathy what else is there, we have no money, were going to struggle.
Think big and you will win big. If you aim for the stars and land on the moon at least you got to the moon. Believe in Kirkby and you will end up in Kirkby.
113 Posted 17/08/2007 at 17:49:30
Perhaps we should just forget the stadium vote and have a vote of (no) confidence in the board?
It seems to me that the majority (not all granted) of people against the move wouldn’t trust BK & Co as far as they could spit into a gale force wind. They base a lot of their argument on the poor handling of the club, lies and propaganda that the board are apparently spewing.
According to some there is no decision to be made as the Kirkby option is all lies, smoke and mirrors.
Whether you believe any of that or not, from reading the posts following various articles on this issue (page after page after page) I am beginning to feel that the trust issue is the major player here.
114 Posted 17/08/2007 at 17:57:25
115 Posted 17/08/2007 at 18:05:13
Fair point well made. Not so sure that everyone’s thinking that way though (too many posts to refer you to).
I am concerned though at where we keep finding the funds each year to give Moyes to help keep the improvement/progression going. I think we need to get something sorted within the next 5 years to secure our financial position. We’re just begging and borrowing at the moment based on future revenues. What future revenues and what are we going to borrow against next time we need £15-20m for players. Man Utd just spent £50m improving a championship winning side!
I concede that many have offered good arguments for both sides, but I feel we need to address our money making and ’investment inviting’ prowess. Whether it be Kirkby or another site. Can we find somewhere else in 5 years, considering we will then need to build the place, taking even longer.
116 Posted 17/08/2007 at 17:28:21
Written by Andrew Floyd Webhead
Produced by Bill Kenwright Directed by Keith Wyness
The Plot:A poor family is conned into leaving their historical home in a fruitless search for a better life away from their spiritual homeland.The promise of riches inevitably is pie in the sky and left with the crippling debt of their new residence drift aimlessly for years eventually losing track of their roots and dying an unfulfilled and premature death.
VERDICT-A dire story should never have been given birth to.
117 Posted 17/08/2007 at 18:17:23
My point is I dont know either, I know our board dont know and I see other clubs , property co, asset mgt companies making huge investments and returns. I see us making small token gestures to get a ground where lots of people dont want to go and no evidence of real growth.
118 Posted 17/08/2007 at 19:37:47
Staying at Goodison.. though a wonderful thought..would be suicide.
Kirby is the Best option , and the more i hear about the so called alternatives..the more i believe it.
119 Posted 17/08/2007 at 20:16:03
120 Posted 17/08/2007 at 20:53:57
i emplore you to take the core of the vast majority of your thoughts / arguments posted on this website over the past few weeks and inject them into the various other EFC websites (both unofficial and particalry official). we need to at least try and provide some sort of balance to the information available to the voting fans out there even though the hierarchy at Everton seem not to share this view
121 Posted 17/08/2007 at 21:14:36
Earlier this summer the Blues announced plans to move to a brand new 50,000 seater stadium in Kirkby, as well as confirming that a fans’ vote over the move would take place before any move is agreed.
Earlier this month, following the distribution of ballot papers, Liverpool City Council released a joint statement with cash & carry business Bestway detailing plans for a potential development at the Scotland Road site.
Tim Spencer, Director at Steer Davies Gleave - the company responsible for transport, crowd flow and evacuation capacity analysis for the Emirates Stadium, Croke Park, New Wembley and Stamford Bridge has dismissed the feasibility of the ’loop’ site on Scotland Road as a possible site for a high specification 50,000 seat stadium.
After closely studying the site setting and current accessibility, Mr Spencer is quite adamant that the circa. 11-acre site could only safely house a stadium of around 30,000, although that figure could be stretched to a limit of 35,000.Mr Spencer said: "It has been stated in the press that the Emirates Stadium occupies an 8-acre site. Ashburton Grove is in fact a 25-acre site with the stadium building itself taking up some 9-acres with a further 8 acres allocated to crowd circulation and access routes - with the remainder being given over to mostly residential development. The full and safe stadium operation therefore occupies 17 acres not the said 8.
"Owing to the onerous requirements regarding emergency vehicle access and the exact evacuation requirements for major sporting facilities, any stadium design must include large external circulation areas around the stadium to achieve a safety certificate - the licence to operate.
"Should the vast majority (i.e. enough land to accommodate a 50,000 capacity building) of the ’loop’ site be developed out into a stadium, it could not meet the key criteria to receive its safety licence and it could not be opened to the public."
"The requirements are black and white on this subject. The site would only be, at best, suitable for a stadium of around 35,000 seats.
"To make the design revealed today operate in a safe fashion would prove to be prohibitively expensive for Everton Football Club because of the necessary and perhaps extensive ’air right’ building construction over highways and the need to provide connecting bridges to adjacent ’place of safety’ areas and adequate pedestrian circulation and emergency vehicle access routes.
"All of this would have to be funded at great cost without the benefit of any large retail-led development that would, in the case of Kirkby, enable the development of a stadium with no operating/licensing risk to the club.
"Despite the very wide roads that surround the loop site on all sides the local transport links to the area are not very good - especially when compared to Kirkby given the raft of local transport improvements that would come forward with the new stadium there.
"In short, the loop site is a complete non-starter for Everton FC unless they were seeking a site to accommodate 35,000 fans and no more."
122 Posted 17/08/2007 at 22:06:07
"To make the design revealed today operate in a safe fashion would prove to be prohibitively expensive for Everton Football Club"
so basically this means that it can be done, but at an astronomical price. do you really think that Bestway are completely oblivious to EFC’s financial plight and wont incorporate into their business proposals to finance this? it’s hardly in their best interests to come up with something that just simply can’t be worked or afforded by EFC now is it? surely that would just be an exercise in how to waste your time in an incredibly expensive fashion?
123 Posted 17/08/2007 at 22:10:14
124 Posted 17/08/2007 at 22:14:09
125 Posted 17/08/2007 at 22:22:43
126 Posted 17/08/2007 at 22:18:40
127 Posted 18/08/2007 at 00:08:12
128 Posted 18/08/2007 at 10:40:11
We’ll get a stadium we will struggle to fill.
No opprtunity for additional revenue streams.
We can no longer leverage being a Liverpool club in a world heritage site.
We still have to fork out a massive amount of cash, and what for? better sight lines?
Kirby is an expensive mistake, and remember the reason the Loop was discounted by Tesco was because they would not be able to fit ab uber-tesco store on the site.
129 Posted 18/08/2007 at 11:18:18
What chance have supporters got of reaching a fair conclusion on the debate when respected professional, experts, and consultants seem to be spending most of their time rubbishing each others statements ?
Tim Spencer has little detail to go on, I will accept that. Not sure Tom that you have any more detail about the Loop Site than he does. My reading suggests that Tim Spencers "credentials" are as sound as yours or any of the professionals called upon to comment. All of you are voicing opinions based on relatively little concrete information.
Tom you must be right however about Tim Spencers lack of local knowledge and frankly I think this is underscored by his comments on the transport argument. But the Loop Site, which seems a genuine if difficult to assess option, has one glaring drawback. It really does feel like a small site for this scale of development and surely Tim Spencers critique is not total nonsense when he talks about the footprint of the Emirates stadium taking nearly 9 acres and virtually the same again being required for access and large scale supporter flows to and from the stadium ?
Tom, the Arsenal site is 25 acres and the Loop Site is....well...not ! I can agree with your views on transport but when it comes to building not just a stadium but a commercial complex on the site as well......I just think you are not being fair in your argument unless you accept that to do this must surely require very significant enabling construction.....and heres the question....No ESF1 money in the city and NWDA funds already promised to Liverpool FC.....who will pay for the millions needed to build bridges etc at the Loop Site ?
Tom, I meant what I said about "respect". You and KEOIC etc are doing us a service with informed comment that helps us see the alternatives in a more reasoned way. Frankly I expect EFC to try to win the argument and why shouldnt they......it is their position that the move to Kirkby is THE deal....so why shouldnt they be allowed the same right to counter-argue points about the Loop Site ?
But crumbs...its very hard to pick the reasoned from the biased, the emotional from the pragmatic and.....right from wrong in this debate.
I made my judgement and it was "yes" and I have seen some comments that make me look closely at the argument again, but still nothing that changes my mind. But then I still think a yes vote is not the end of the issue......unless the Loop Site is genuinely not an option ? Because if it is then there is still time before contracts are signed for a change of stance but LCC and others have to continue to develop the idea and prove it can work.
Anyways.......the boys are at Reading later this afternoon and perhaps we can suspend the argument for a few hours to direct our "spirit" in a southernly direction !
cheers, Mark (Rusty Man)
130 Posted 18/08/2007 at 12:07:09
131 Posted 18/08/2007 at 11:44:29
132 Posted 18/08/2007 at 12:38:45
133 Posted 18/08/2007 at 12:20:33
134 Posted 18/08/2007 at 12:57:11
The club has been offered the chance to have a stadium built for next to nothing and ur all moaning because its not in the city.
Wel lets face it we all know it is in the city really even though thats not official.
I think the only reason that ur all moaning is the face that u may have to travel a little further.
Well thats life and im afraid u mite just have to consider the train or the bus!!!!
This is typical of evertonians and the people of Liverpool. The fact that people wont go along with things means that nothing gets done.
And im afraid this is a criticism of the board too. Which other football club in the league has a ballot?????????????? U have go to be kiddin me.......U r the board....the ones who are paid a lot of money to make big decisions.
If u want me to make the decisions pay me ur wages!!!! Lack of leadership on this one and a typical Kenwright plan of action!!!
Dont give us the choice give us the solution which i believe is Kirkby.
135 Posted 18/08/2007 at 13:03:16
WE SHOULD NOT BE MAKING THE DECISION....WE ARE THE SUPPORTERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
SO ALL GET A GRIP
136 Posted 18/08/2007 at 12:59:00
137 Posted 18/08/2007 at 13:08:00
138 Posted 18/08/2007 at 13:16:58
Really no disrespect but do u not see wot im saying here.
The board are being paid to make the decisions and instead they are passing the buck to us.
The reason for this is because there are that many different oppinions they cannott please everyone.
The fans need to put up or shut up!!!
Thats wot im sayin this kirkby thing is a massive opportunity and as a share holder u should be ashamed of urself
139 Posted 18/08/2007 at 14:12:19
The board are paid to run a football club and need to recognise they have zero knowledge about property dealing, investment mgt etc. They are borrowing money from high st banks as if it was a mortgage on a house and paying rediculous interest rates. They have no clue whatsoever. They produce a glossy borchure and convince you sheep they know what they are doing. They dont and the deal on the table proves this. Why are we letting Tesco take the lions share of the profit, they need us and if they dont why are we dealing with them. The boardroom at Tesco apart from 1 dont give a ff about EFC they simply want profit and they are getting it from us.
Work with better property investors not a supermarket chain for gods sake leverage the council who are bending over backwards, leverage Bestway who want to make a name for themselves, leverag Peel Holdings who seen to know how to do this sort of thing. Dont put your faith in a playwright, CE who is acting like a spoilt child, a supermarket chain they dont make the sort of team you would have erecting a tent let alone a super stadium. There you go just said it super stadium that is what we need not simply a stadium in Kirkby. Pompey have proved they can do it have a look why cant we.
My votes are in all 3 (family)say NO so noone to convince me otherwise. If a yes vote is carried gurantee this will not rest it is the wrong decision and I cant watch us fail again. It is too important.
140 Posted 18/08/2007 at 14:34:23
No emotion - just simple observation. If there is a chain of investors behind Pompey ask yourself again why we cant get this.
Ask yourself why people invest in other clubs and how much personal money they put in - they dont, they use other peoples money -why cant we do this.
Then ask yourself is kirkby best for the club nil satis nisi optimum.
Then why are you accepting 2nd best.
141 Posted 18/08/2007 at 14:51:14
142 Posted 18/08/2007 at 17:17:41
143 Posted 18/08/2007 at 18:19:15
does anybody have any idea when bestway plan to release the next stage of their proposal?
144 Posted 18/08/2007 at 19:35:21
The board are paid to make the decisions and all we are doing is making it near impossible for us to get a new stadium.
We need to learn, the only way forward is by co operation and we never give that which is why most things dont happen.
The supporters should do the supporting and the board should be making the decisions!!!!!!
145 Posted 18/08/2007 at 20:28:21
146 Posted 18/08/2007 at 22:34:27
In the case that they make the wrong decision then we should have something to say.
However, the fact that people might have to travel a little further, which if people are honest is the only problem, then im afraid thats life and the board should be praised for making the right decision for the club as a whole instead of pleasing a few of the lazier fans.
They are making the club more successful so i say.... go ahead make the decisions until u cause a problem.
And if you are one of them lazy fans then im sorry but it really hasnt got anything to do with cranberry sauce...and if u want to insult someones view point come up with ur own joke!!! Gimp! His was lame anyway!
147 Posted 19/08/2007 at 00:43:36
so you honestly think that the only problem anybody actually has with the whole kirkby move is how far they have to travel? nothing perhaps to do with the somewhat limted commercial opportunities we will have at that site as opposed to a city centre site?
i’ve said this previously that if we do end with a yes vote that kirkby wont be the end of EFC, but it will NOT allow us to reach our maximum potential given the limited opportunities for generating revenue in addition to gate receipts. you do want the best for EFC don’t you? what’s that motto again .......... nil satis ........
148 Posted 19/08/2007 at 10:58:58
149 Posted 19/08/2007 at 21:17:14
150 Posted 20/08/2007 at 11:08:27
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.
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.