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

The True Cost of Kirkby / Redeveloping Goodison

By Roy Warne :  25/09/2007 :  Comments (109) :

After going through the information issued by Everton Football Club regarding the proposed relocation to Kirkby with the proverbial fine tooth comb, I am in no doubt that we, the fans, have been misled. I work in the commercial and financial field of the Construction Industry and therefore declare that I am in a better position than most to (try to) understand the costs the club have tabled to date. I will try to keep this simple.

The purpose of ascertaining the true build costs of the proposed Kirkby relocation is so we can use these figures as a ?yardstick? to assess the quality of the finished product and make a comparison to other stadia. The build cost can be split into three: the stadium itself, the fit-out of the stadium and the infrastructure. For the purpose of this exercise I will leave the infrastructure costs out of the equation, as these costs do not necessarily relate to the quality of the product, but are more relative to the individual location of the site.

The first thing to dispel is claims by the club and Tesco that the development is subject to huge savings from which Everton FC will benefit. The claim that Everton Football Club will get £75m worth of building costs for £50m is an insult to anyone with even the slightest knowledge of Construction Industry finances: The large contractors tender around the 5% profit mark; Building work is predominantly carried out by a ?Main Contractor? through his ?sub-contractors?; Material costs are dominated by steel prices which are in a continual spiral upwards due to the economic boom in China.

For Barr Construction to be able to knock £25m off their price, this would mean that they work to a ridiculous 50% profit margin and would be able to knock market prices for steel and sub-contractors down by 33%. Put bluntly, this is just plain nonsense; I trust you can see this is just a completely misleading statement to make you think you are getting a better deal than you actually are. To add some facts: Barr Construction?s annual report for 2006 tell us that they turned over £211m with group operating profits being just £3.7m (or 1.7%). Do they sound like they are in a position to give away their margin?

Tesco have also been quoted as saying that they are foregoing their development profit of £15m. Good old Tesco, eh? Don?t be fooled? this is a misleading sales ploy, because if the club were procuring a stadium directly, this figure wouldn?t even be in the equation. This figure should therefore be ignored for the purpose of ascertaining the true cost of the proposed Kirkby ground. Unless of course Tesco are contributing an additional £15m to the reported £50m, but they are not, are they?

So, bar the fit out costs, it appears that we are getting a football stadium built for the cost of £50m which is being paid for by Tesco through their ?£50m contribution?. To put this into perspective, this is roughly a quarter of the stadium build cost of the proposed Liverpool FC stadium and a third of the new Emirates stadium. This would put us in the same bracket in terms of product as Coventry City?s Ricoh Arena.

Notwithstanding this, and to a large degree of conflict, Terry Leahy states clearly in his open letter that the build cost of this particular stadium design is £110m. This is a decent sum of money. Granted it wouldn?t give us anything anywhere near as good in terms of quality as the Emirates Stadium or the ?New Anfield sponsored by McDonalds?, but we could probably live with it. But if the cost is £110m and Tesco are contributing £50m, then where is the other £60m coming from? Are the fit-out costs a disproportionate £60m alone?

It has been stated that the sale of Goodison Park will be used to bridge the gap at a very generous £15m. That equates to over £2m per acre. Very optimistic I would say when compared to land values in the L4/L5 area. The only way I suggest they could get near that figure would be after planning permission for a very attractive development was given, thus requiring the help and cooperation from LCC, who themselves will be under pressure from the local community to promote a development to cater for their needs. Not a very likely scenario, I suggest.

So the club would still have to find another c.£50m in addition to the ground sale. A Naming Rights deal, believed to be around £20m, has been mentioned, but this usually involves staged payments over a short-medium term, meaning the club would have to take on debt to cover this. A Naming Rights deal is obviously not restricted to Kirkby either, this type of deal could also be used to help finance a redevelopment of Goodison scheme, for example. 

To surmise, I suggest the proposed Kirkby relocation will leave us with only one of two scenarios:

  1. A very poor stadium of Reebok or Riverside quality that has cost c.£70m and left us with little debt
  2. An average stadium (compared with the top premiership grounds) costing over £100m  that has left us with at least £50m of debt

If it is scenario (1) then I think all fans who voted ?yes? to Kirkby will be disgusted with the club and feel duped as we have been guaranteed by the club and Terry Leahy that we will receive a ground worthy of our unique stature and history.

If it is scenario (2) then I feel most fans will feel that they have been misled regarding the club?s debt. I?d guess most fans who reluctantly voted ?yes? would have preferred to see the £50m of debt pumped into redeveloping Goodison. You can do a heck of a lot with £50m in terms of overhauling and redeveloping an existing structure. The fact that this same sum of money can allegedly build a brand new 50,000 seat stadium should make that clear enough to any sceptics.

But Everton Football Club have told us, categorically, that you can?t redevelop Goodison? or was this just a lie to pressure you to vote ?yes? for Kirkby? We have all seen the drawings and models produced by Tom Hughes and aided by Trevor Skempton, who was the guy behind Newcastle United redeveloping St James Park in lieu of moving outside the city to a new ground in a retail park (St James Park is the best stadium in the premiership in terms of quality, location and history, in my humble opinion). The club have arrogantly dismissed these works through a very cloudy and completely unsubstantiated press release referencing comments from a so called ?expert?.

Why should you disbelieve the club though? Well, this same club went to great lengths not so long ago to show you how you can redevelop Goodison. Not just one option either, they gave you a second option as well. Anyone who has forgotten, not seen or mislaid the brochure that accompanied the Kings Dock vote [1.2MB PDF] should take a look ? it makes very interesting reading. Can you get better proof that the club has blatantly misled about being able to redevelop Goodison?

To add weight to the redevelopment of Goodison, Gwladys Street Primary School is now part of LCC?s ?Building Schools for the Future? project. Everton FC obtaining this site for redevelopment would be a formality, if they wanted it.

Furthermore, our red cousins down the road are already commissioning a multi-million pound infrastructure upgrade in the city which will include, amongst a host of other things, several park and ride sites across the city, pedestrian walk routes and coach parks near Stanley Park. Likely to follow is an upgrade of the rail service to the L4 area. If Everton redeveloped Goodison they could use all this without spending a penny.

I don?t know about you, but I want some real answers?

Editor's note: If you are tired of the stadium debate but read this far, then please don't bleat about "another article by a 'no' voter". There are Evertonians who are deeply concerned by every aspect of the Kirkby Project ? no other issue is more intrinsic to the club's long-term future ? not least the muddy financial one, so please enter into discussion on this article with that in mind.

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

1   Posted 25/09/2007 at 22:41:17

Report abuse

I dont believe anything the club or Tesco says.

Everton havent got the organisation skills to manage ticket sales or the ability to push through complicated the Fernandes deal never mind understanding major financial proposals such as a new ground.

Tesco ARE NOT doing this out of the goodness of their own heart. This is purely going to benefit them and lumber Everton with a large debt. They will then fall foul of this and have to sell the ground and go on a leasing basis which would cost even more in the long term.

I still dont understand why we dont push for a ground share surely this would bring an even cheaper option even if construction costs would be comparable the on-going ground costs would be halved and we would have a bigger stadium.

What company in the world holds such a major asset and uses it for just 90mins every 2 weeks?
Gerard Madden
2   Posted 25/09/2007 at 22:36:04

Report abuse

I suppose Roy that i’ll simply HAVE to accept that you ’work in the commercial and financial field of the Construction Industry’ and that i’ll simply HAVE to accept that you’re ’in a better position than most to (try to) understand the costs the club have tabled to date’. Problem is that the whole issue is an issue of trust, a very successful businessman (and evertonian) Sir Terry Leahy paints a compellingly positive business case for the club in its arguments for Kirkby - Now let me see who’s view shall I plump for - hmmm for me it’s not difficult - i’ll side with Sir Terry rather than the ramblings (oop’s - sorry ed) of another article by a ’no’ voter.

Judging by the non-protest the other week and of course the ballot it appears most blues have come down on the side of the club and Sir Terry - some people simply have to accept that and get over it.
Kevin Mitchell
3   Posted 25/09/2007 at 22:41:38

Report abuse

Well done Roy, absolutly spot on.
It’s reading posts like this that give me hope we can make Bill Kenwright come to his senses and look at rebuilding our own home. The thought of moving to Kirkby sends shivers down my spine.
Paul w. Byrne
4   Posted 25/09/2007 at 22:53:19

Report abuse

I think if we leave Goodison we might as well drop down a division also. I truly cannot believe we cannot redevelop Goodison Park. I now live in Canada but i do look forward to coming home and going to Goodison Park. It would not be the same to come home and to go to Kirkby instead. I held season tickets many years ago in the main stand when it was almost new. That stand was added whilst we continued to watch football. So with todays technology why not do it again 4 times and rebiuld the whole stadium. If i had a vote i would definately vote to find a way to stay at Goodison Park. In my humble opinion i think it is the duty of our board of diectors to find the money to rebiuld one of the best stadiums in the country GOODISON PARK. If they cannot do it, then maybe it is time for a new board of directors.

Paul B.
Steve Ferns
5   Posted 25/09/2007 at 23:25:47

Report abuse

Good article Roy. In your scenerio’s you omitted option 3: An poor stadium (compared with the championship grounds such as Southampton) costing over £150m (after costs inevitablely spiral out of control) and that leaves with astronomical debts as we take out further high interest loans to meet existing creditors and to pay off existing loans and we have nothing else to sell without admitting the true debt to the fans.
Carl Cole
6   Posted 25/09/2007 at 23:31:45

Report abuse

Let me guess you voted NO! But if we dont have the cash for this then we dont have anywhere near the cash to stay in the City. The tesco deal is the best on the table. As for redevelop Goodison Park, now that really would cost untold millions!!!
Markus Steinbauer
7   Posted 25/09/2007 at 23:15:22

Report abuse

I have never understood why it should not be possible to redevelop Goodison. They let a man walk on moon in the middle of last century, so why shouldnt you be able to redevelop Goodison. Why should a club with such a rich tradition and one of the most traditional and adored stadiums in the world sell out to a supermarket chain. It makes no sense. Your article shows that even Tesco fanboys know that Goodison can remain home of the Blues. Its all politics and finances after all, the Tesco deal is the fast and easy way out but surely a mistake in the long run and LCC seem to absoloute Reds fans as they easily can make a site for the reds available but not for Everton.
I am living in Bavaria and am a Bayern fan as long as i can think, and i can tell you a new stadium outside of town is nothing but a big concession stand, and thats what i have to say about Allianz Arena which is even one of the better ones. But you are only a customer there , no fan.
My biggest football dream would be to see Everton in Goodison Park one day , which is THE blueprint of football stadium for me , even if i have never been there. The church, the houses right next to the stadium, thats what German football fans always admired about english stadiums, they are part of the city community and pour tradition out of every corner.
A redeveloped Goddison would be a unique thing in the football world.
Some things you cant buy with money.
Goodison surely is the financially more challenging option by far, but Everton should be worth some effort.
I am sure I could find an investor these days for a football club to build a new stadium. The task for the board should be to keep Everton independent, because that is the real value once russian billionaires and companies loose interest.
If i would have a choice to watch Everton in Goodison (even the actual one) in League 1 or in a soulless stadium in Kirkby playing CL i would surely take Goodison, because the atmosphere surely would be much better.
Romantic talk with no business mind? Only to some degree, as said before , bigger is not always better. Why not establish Everton as a "premium product" with style , history and the good old time touch? It could be a brand with a lot o worth.
They surely have a reason why they dont sell Gucci in Tesco, because if they would it would be nothing special anymore.

Sorry for having said things that have been said before but i am still mad Everton is giving itself away so cheap, and i think it might be interesting to see some perspective from the continent.

Oh and i just had a look at the plans for the new Reds stadium...a soulless monster...and i saw a few games in Emirates on TV...disgusting atmosphere that came across, and most people leaving in the middle of the second half when they where loosing in CL last season...if thats the spirit these new stadiums provide then...f*ck them...comfort is only for sissies anyway and not for real fans, but real fans are not wanted in football any more anyway..customers are prefferred.
Obstructed views i know...come on...Camp NOU does barely have a roof and its alright for one of the best teams in the world.

Editorial Team
8   Posted 25/09/2007 at 23:24:45

Report abuse

Gerard, you don?t have to accept Roy?s credentials because you don?t have to work in the construction industry to doubt the shifting figures we?ve been given. From David Prentice in the Echo to Colin Fitz on this very website and numerous concerned Blues in between, for many fans the numbers simply don?t stack up.

And to take the lack of interest in KEOIC?s after-match protest the other week as a sign that "most blues have come down on the side of the club and Sir Terry" is spurious at best. I?m sure the vast majority who voted "no" still remained highly dubious of the whole proposal but don?t now know what they can do about it.

With a complicit local media, the organ of their official website and Sir Terry Leahy?s business credentials, the club hold all the power, as they have throughout. Not even a series of mis-steps by Keith Wyness could whittle enough confidence away from the Board to bring about a "no" majority because the majority of fans, when offered Hobson?s Choice, felt that they had no option but to say "yes".

I suspect many questioned what a demonstration outside the player?s entrance would achieve. The club know that there is deep-seated opposition to Kirkby among the core of the supporter base but they don?t care. Big Keith?s all gung-ho at the helm of the Kirkby Express heading straight for Secondbestville, with no scheduled stops at Nilsatisnisioptimum, and screw anyone who tries to put forward an alternative.

Darren Cowzer
9   Posted 25/09/2007 at 23:37:24

Report abuse

This IS another article by a ’no’ voter.
It’s a joke to tag a line at the end of your post which trys to bar Evertonians from pointing this out.
The vote has been completed and we are moving to Kirkby.
You want to complain every which way.
Decent stadium with reasonable debts or Basic stadium with tiny debts.
People who voted yes aren’t Idiots and people who voted no aren’t necessarily the enlightened people these articles keep bleating on about.
The fact is that there are intellegent people on both sides of the debate and their votes have been counted and published.
We will find out in 4 short years how great or mediocre the Kirkby Stadium will be.
Constant propoganda pre-empting a mediocre stadium and sky high debts is a waste of everybodies energy and time.
Get over it and move on !
10   Posted 26/09/2007 at 00:01:16

Report abuse

Nice one for taking the time to use your knowledge and expertise to point on the inconsistencies of the costings published by the club.

Can you tell me if the pies will be nice, the chang cold and team playing ace footie as thats all Im arsed about.

We’ve voted, we’re moving. If it turns out to be a let down (invariably all things Everton do) then lots of people can say told you so.

If, just maybe, it gives us a platform to move forward and start buying some decent players from the income generated (see the report published about the effect on Arsenal’s income from their new stadium this week) then all will be sound and this all will be forgotten.

Dont forget that everyone agrees that the move to the Kings Dock would have been utopia but at the time there was a load of blues, Goodison for Ever-ton, who protested against it.

We’re Everton, we’re never happy and Im boring myself with this teddish response.
11   Posted 25/09/2007 at 23:51:46

Report abuse

What Roy is saying is spot on. I didn’t have the pleasure of receiving that leaflet about the options of redeveloping Goodison, but it sounds like the Everton management were very upbeat about its prospects. It almost sounds too good to be true.

It would be interesting to look at the dimensions of some of the larger stadiums in the country and see whether its possible to build a similar structure on the existing land at Goodison.

The plans at Kirkby seem to be consisting of a stadium with steep sides, and only 2 tiers each. Moreover, I would rather stay at Goodison with a 48,000 stadium than a 55,000 seater stadium in Kirkby!

In the light of the accounts published by Arsenal, i am sure Big Bill and Wicked Wyness are licking their chops at the prospect of Kirkby. I for one am not giving in to this plan until i can do no more.
Editorial Team
12   Posted 26/09/2007 at 00:07:49

Report abuse

Darren: And if it is horribly mediocre and saddles the club with an extra £50m in debt it?ll be too bloody late!.

There is no turning back after ground is broken in Kirkby. No chance for alternatives, no opportunity to ask questions or demand more clarity. We?ll be stuck with what the CEO of your club has openly admitted will be a "nice" stadium, not the "world class" stadium our name deserves or we were initially promised.

And all for "up to £10m" in extra revenue (no guarantees, mind). Wouldn?t you want to at least turn around and ask the club why they weren?t a little more up front about it all? And might you ruefully shake your head and say, "why didn?t we ask more questions when we had the chance to vote?"

It?s not a question of all those voting "yes" being idiots ? although the person who did solely on the basis that they don?t like Warren Bradley certainly qualifies ? because a good many felt they simply had no choice (would you have voted for Kirkby if a viable alternative at Goodison or somewhere else nearby had been on the ballot?). It?s about asking perfectly valid questions about what adds up to millions of pounds of discrepancy between actual costs and those being proposed.
Michael Tracey
13   Posted 26/09/2007 at 00:18:47

Report abuse

Maybe it is over and we are going to Kirkby. Its the "get over it" bit I think that really annoys a lot of people. Also its amazing that if a brochure like this existed that it hasnt seen the light of day until now. There are some however who will defend the board no matter what. It also seems that there will be about a 50million pound shortfall in The Kirkby proposal. Why can’t that be spent on Goodison? We will still have same debt as if we went to Kirkby and will be able to increase our match day revenue. We can still get a naming rights sponsor at Goodison. Maybe I just don’t get it and this is impossible but one thing I can guarantee is that I just won’t "GET OVER IT".
Darren Cowzer
14   Posted 26/09/2007 at 00:19:36

Report abuse

Lyndon - Everton simply aren’t in a position to give us an Emirates or New Analfield Stadium.
The time for voting has passed.
If it had been a No Vote - How much time would the KEIOC people give to Pro Kirkby Posts - None and rightly so.
Kirkby may turn out to be Great for Everton.
It may turn out to be distinctly Average.
My point is that we will find this out in 4 short years.
I Hope the KEIOC people turn out to be wrong in their predictions.
The Fans rightly or wrongly have put their faith in the Kirkby Stadium and Everton will Hopefully prosper from that decision.
I will hold my hand up and accept that my views were Naieve if we are sold a Lemon.
Anyway - Let’s move on and get behind the team. COYB !!!!
Tom Hughes
15   Posted 26/09/2007 at 00:19:25

Report abuse

I wish people would stop saying just get over it..... Read the points Roy has made in the simplest of terms, and respond to them directly. Gerard as failed to do that with every one of his posts....... "Terry Leahy" and issue of "trust" is all he can bring to the table..... what about the facts and figures? some even from Blue Terry himself. Markus from Bavaria has a greater grip of the situation and he’s never even been to Goodison. Markus is a Bayern fan who pines for the intimacy and intimating atmosphere of the British stadiums..... it’s quite ironic that if he had been at our place in 1985 against his team, he would have left in little doubt that his instincts were right, just as I believe are Roys.
Mark Gray
16   Posted 25/09/2007 at 23:51:10

Report abuse

Gerard Madden, please give it a rest, you?re making Comical Ali look trustworthy. Seriously, you are ridiculous. I wonder if you actually want the best for my club? In fact, I am convinced that you?re a kopite because I don?t know of any Evertonians who are as keen as you to take Everton FC to Kirkby. Please stop being so vociferous in your adoration for what could very seriously ruin Everton FC for ever.

Why don?t you have a holiday and come back in 2070?

Roy, cracking article mate.

It?s worth adding that even if we were to spend £100m on a 50,000 seater stadium in Kirkby would we actually be getting a better quality stadium in terms of cost per seat than a team like Brighton who will be spending something like £50m on their 22,000 seater stadium?

There are too many concerns with the Kirkby proposals, these are a few examples:

? The negative, half truth, PR campaign of the club and local media
? The lack of support for the move
? The blinkered outlook of Everton FC and derisory dismissal of alternatives
? The uncertainty over build cost
? The manageability of the subsequent debt
? The specification and build quality of the proposed stadium
? It?s location
? The likely problems with the transport infrastructure at Kirkby
? The lack of presence in a resurgent City of Liverpool.
? The effect it will have on our long term support
? The potential fall in attendances
? The failure to achieve targeted revenue streams through corporate sales
? The potential conflict of interest for Everton Directors to achieve personal gain from enabling finance from Tesco and Knowsley Council

I seriously hope that Bill Kenwright will take stock of the situation and withdraw from making what could very well be a calamitous decision for the club.
Tom Davies
17   Posted 26/09/2007 at 02:21:58

Report abuse

There has to be another way, Liverpool even bought out the surrounding houses to benefit there new stadium project which took years but they did do it in the end. We need to face the real issues, we are not in desperate need of a new stadium, why can’t we build up into the corners, only 1 corner in Goodison has seats in it which links the Bullens road side with the Gwladys street end.

I sat in the Lower Bullens for the Kharkiv game and wondered what people would think of an idea I came up with during that game.

Turn the lower bullens into boxes with the paddock as corporate seating, keeping the Upper Bullens.

Then in place of the old boxes have normal seats and turn the whole main stand into seats for the normal fans. The 2 corners either side of the Main stand could then be built up for even more seatin.

Surely this would rapidly improve corporate seating and at the same time increase the capacity with the possibility of even increasing the away seat allocations which could be altered when needed as currently done. This may upset many Bullens Road regulars but it’s either that or a new stadium which we all know Mr Wyness is somehow convinced has to be in Kirkby.
Bill Goodall
18   Posted 26/09/2007 at 04:53:28

Report abuse

Great Article!
I think putting the club in 50 mill debt is something we will end up doing whether we move or stay. One option would be to take out loans each year to pay for each stage of the redevelopment of Goodison while maintaining league position and income from TV rights. Within 4 or 5 years we have a 45 or 500000 seater stadium where we are now, our home. Full houses every week with the same great atmosphere is going to be a place where good players want to come. Simple i know but sometimes simple is Right?
Cormac Murphy
19   Posted 26/09/2007 at 06:50:04

Report abuse

Very good article. I have mentioned before on this site about redeveloping Goodison - but there didn’t seem to be any interest. I am glad this option is being raised again.
A move to Kirby will be the death of this great club. We owe it to the fans and the history of the club that we remain in the city.
Neil Pearse
20   Posted 26/09/2007 at 08:33:37

Report abuse

Given everything I know (still) I am in favour of the Kirkby move. But I am not a ’give it a rest now’ type - this is too important for our club for that, and, anyway, my fellow Evertonians have the absolute right to continue debating this.

Thanks Roy for your article, which did add some new things that I at least hadn’t heard before.

I have always believed that building Kirkby would add debt to Everton FC, and that, by the nature of these things (New Wembley anyone?), it is hard to predict what that debt will end up being.

I still voted YES because I believe that Kirkby will end up adding LESS debt than any other options in the City. And that we need a new stadium sooner rather than later to begin seeing new revenues, and that Kirkby is very likely to be our closest in option.

Whilst Roy helpfully indicates that the debt to the club from Kirkby may be reasonably high, I don’t see that he is saying anything to indicate that, RELATIVE to other options (and this is what counts), it is still not the best option that we have.

Kirkby only has to be better than the actually available options we have. It doesn’t have to be perfect. Assuming that we have to move from Goodison (of course I know this is contested), are there any other cheaper / better / sooner options for us in the city? I still don’t think so.
Roy P Warne
21   Posted 26/09/2007 at 08:55:23

Report abuse

Neil, read my article again...the crux of it is that if you agree that we are going to incur debt at kirkby, then this same debt can be used to redevelop goodison. At not one point do I mention a complete stadium rebuild elsewhere in the city.

Tom Davis - your are dead right. Take a walk up to anfield at the moment and take note that all of the grade 2 listed buildings on anfield road have already been knocked down to make way for the new stadium. A precedent has already been set by the city - we would have no problem creating extra space around goodison through CPOs if we wanted.

Gerard Madden - pick holes in the facts I have produced within the article by all means and I will gladly respond. If you have nothing constructive to add than please don’t bother.
Neil Pearse
22   Posted 26/09/2007 at 09:29:41

Report abuse

Roy, I do understand that you weren’t advocating a complete stadium rebuild elsewhere in the city. Since Kings Dock we haven’t found any viable options and, absent a rich new investor, couldn’t afford them if we did.

So then it comes down to rebuilding Goodison or moving to Kirkby. Which is essentially the option presented to voters by the club.

So why is the club advocating we go to Kirkby rather than stay at Goodison? (I mean this as a serious question. Please no silly reponses like ’Wyness is going to get a big bonus’.) I assume that the club believes that rebuilding Goodison would cost too much (including lost attendances for at least parts of the rebuild), and that the revenue potential of a rebuilt Goodison is still not up to that of a brand new Kirkby .

And it seems to me that they might well be right. After all, why would they go to all the trouble of moving to Kirkby if rebuilding GP was just as good?
ryan crest
23   Posted 26/09/2007 at 09:26:50

Report abuse

Excellent work Roy!

Utterly futile, mind, but you know what they say - you can’t keep a good man down.
arthur jones
24   Posted 26/09/2007 at 09:23:26

Report abuse

Just a small addition to the above but I went to Villa park on Sunday and one thing that really struck me was after the game it took us over an hour to get onto the M6 from Villa Park and only a further 1 1/2 hours to get back to Liverpool , now those of you ho know villa will know its only about 2 miles from the ground to the motorway , traffic management by the police has long been established here so I don’t think it could have been done any quicker , now what is it going to be like trying to get out of Kirkby ? What if there’s a major incident needing the emergency services ? there is going to be chaos , and knowing Everton’s track record of organisation and penny pinching cost cutting it’s a calamity waiting to happen .
Brian Wolf
25   Posted 26/09/2007 at 10:12:51

Report abuse

Why did I vote Yes to Kirkby?

1. I believed it was the best way forward for the club.

2. Despite what everyone says I do believe there are no other options that are viable.

3. Warren Bradley is only interested in furthering his political agenda and is playing both sides and sitting on the fence at the same time.

4. Despite what everyone says about Bill and Keith, why would they want to ruin the club, what would the club be worth to them if it went under?

5. The no voters were so venomous in their opinions that it made me sick to my stomach that they were Everton fans.

At the end of the day, again this is another article by a no voter, looking at reasons why the club can’t move to Kirkby, instead of looking at why the club can’t move to Kirkby why don’t we all look at why the club can’t move to the Bestway site, or why the club can’t redevelop Goodison, their figures and timescales don’t add up either.

But that doesn’t suit their agenda or argument, It’s like banging your head against a brick wall trying to make this lot see reason.
Michael Tracey
26   Posted 26/09/2007 at 10:12:19

Report abuse

I couldn’t agree with you more Tony! It certainly seems that way. He is probably employed by the club already to be there chief website auditor. Anything that is said against there methods and good old Madden is on like a flash.
Andy Pike
27   Posted 26/09/2007 at 10:47:47

Report abuse

Just remember one thing: Wyness said Mr Robert Earl helped us secure the finance needed to purchase Baines, Yakuba etc... He may well have done but all it has done is increase our loan from £14m to £25m to fund them. So with spiralling construction costs we could end up being up to £70-£80m in debt? Who can you believe?
Roy P Warne
28   Posted 26/09/2007 at 11:16:53

Report abuse

Neil, You can look at it cynically and say things like: Wyness will get a big bonus for achieving his ground move target, Kenwright will sell up at a much bigger personal profit or Terry Leahy in his personal advisor capacity has talked the board into Kirkby, ensuring that Tesco get their £50m a week ?biggest store in Britain?.

Whilst not discounting any of these, my personal opinion (for what it is worth) is that the club have become obsessed with finding a new home and see Tesco and Kirkby as the quickest and easiest way of doing this. Tesco step in and take care of everything whilst Keith and Bill sit back and let it happen. Problem Solved with minimum fuss. Redeveloping Goodison on the other hand would require a far greater input from the board and Wyness and quite frankly, I don?t think they have the inclination to get involved in ?hassle?. I just don?t think they have the vision and capacity to go it alone without the help of Terry Leahy?which is a bl**dy disgrace.

Let us not forget that these are all opinions and are therefore meaningless, the article I have written is based on the facts as we have seen them, and it is a fact that if you can build a new 50,000 seat stadium for £50m then you can certainly redevelop Goodison for that same sum.

Brian Wolf - why do you believe there are no other options? is it becasue the club told you that goodison can’t be redeveloped? did you therefore not believe the club when they told you it could be developed 6 years ago?
Brian Wolf
29   Posted 26/09/2007 at 11:24:07

Report abuse

Roy, I’ve never believed that Goodison can be redeveloped to a satisfactory standard and add the capacity that the club is talking about.

My bugbear is with the fact that everyone is talking about Kirkby’s shortcomings and neglect to mention the same shortcomings with the other sites that have been mooted.
Roy P Warne
30   Posted 26/09/2007 at 11:39:24

Report abuse

Brian ? Don?t forget that Kirkby?s biggest negative is its location. The point is that the club have asked us to accept the shortcoming of the location because the supposed positives make it worthwhile. It therefore stands that if there are further negatives in terms of the quality of the stadium and the club?s debt then the positives clearly won?t outweigh the negatives. Redeveloping Goodison has one huge positive that cannot be argued with ? the location.
If you are an architect or a structural engineer who has scientific reasons for disbelieving Goodison can be redeveloped then please let us know. I know enough about construction to make my own mind, however you don?t get a bigger expert than the likes of Trevor Skempton who pioneered the St James Park redevelopment about football stadia, it is simply arrogant and ignorant to dismiss someone like him.
Brian Wolf
31   Posted 26/09/2007 at 11:57:19

Report abuse

I am not an architect, but I do know enough about it. I did three years on a BA Honours degree learning about construction and technology at Cambridge but had to miss the last two years due to personal reasons (something I can pick up again later). I have to disagree with Trevor Skempton on a few of his proposals for redevelopment as I just don’t think they are feasible. The problem with designers are if you tell them that you want to do it, they will tell you that you can do it (whether they can or not).
Roy P Warne
32   Posted 26/09/2007 at 12:03:26

Report abuse

Brian - specifically what do you disagree with and we’ll try and address it
33   Posted 26/09/2007 at 12:02:49

Report abuse

good article for me. I think most fans whoe said yes did so becuase they did not see a viable other option on the table. I agree with most points about LCC playing a game and redeveloping goodison being a logistical nightmare to plan. But the key to all this is the current board do not have a clue, and are now going cap in hand to a supermarket retailer to bail thenm out. Don’t forget our Chief X spent 18 months begging Liverpool to share a stadium with them!!! now is this a person that is in touch with the soul of this club. If LFC had said yes was he going to sanction such a deal? Quick fix is what you voted for and that is what all the fans will not get.

Brian Wolf
34   Posted 26/09/2007 at 12:25:47

Report abuse

"We’ll try to address it."

How very good of you. I’ll leave that to the experts thanks.
Jayne Crofts
35   Posted 26/09/2007 at 12:01:43

Report abuse

How do any of you know what will or will not be best for our club.Its all crystal ball gazing.
Andy Rannard
36   Posted 26/09/2007 at 12:09:20

Report abuse

Gerard Madden...
you are an arse my friend.
What type of a response is ’get over it’? how old are you, 13? ’I’ll side with Sir Terry’ know him personally do you?
Have a bit of respect for other BLUES opinions eh, and if you don’t agree then fair enough, say so and state your reasons for it. What really bugs me is why you (and your not alone) feel the need to resort to a ’hah-hah, we won the vote, tough shit’ retort? I agree with yuou in part on one aspect...that the vote was a matter of trust. Either trust the spin and constantly changing ’facts’ coming from BK, KW and ’sir’ Tel or trust your OWN judgement...if you want to close your eyes and hope that uncle Terry is/was telling the truth than that is your perogative, but why mock those who feel that there is still room for debate on the issue? especially with such a condescending ’get over it attitude’
Lee Spargo
37   Posted 26/09/2007 at 12:38:10

Report abuse


You ask that we (thye ’yes voters) dont ’bleat’ on about the ramblings of another ’no’ voter.

You then proceed to jump in whenever anybody (usually a ’yes’ voter) shares an opinion that is in opposition to your own.

If this is supposed to be a forum where a plain and open discussion on the topic can take place then you have failed miserably. If you want to achieve success in that regard then I would suggest that the editors cease from forcing one side of the argument all of the time.
Mark Welsh
38   Posted 26/09/2007 at 12:37:32

Report abuse

Excellent article Roy. Basically, with similar knowledge, working commercially in the same industry, you basically wrote the article that summed up my thoughts on the matter.

Like you my vote was "No", not just because I dont want to go to Kirby, but because of the "Smoke and Mirrors", "Confusion Reigns" approach not just be Everton but also by Terry Leahy, in respect of the Finances of the Scheme. The cost changed from day to day, the debt we would be subjected to changed, the financing of it continually changed - basically their lies were inconsistent.

Of course, as you said, with inflation, cost of steel, labour rates, etc all being so unpredictable in the Construction Industry to ascertain a fixed price so early on is almost impossible, but the varying figures provided by Everton were so diverse, it was not possible (in my opinion) to place a "yes" vote on a pack of lies.

There are many further obstacles for Everton to overcome yet. And lets just hope they fall at one of these hurdles, otherwise we’ll end up in a souless stadium which looks like four sheds, and we’ll be up to our eyes in debt. And the people who voted yes will be wandering why!
39   Posted 26/09/2007 at 12:47:33

Report abuse

Excellent reading. There’s no doubt there’s something amiss with the numbers we’ve been given. I will say this though, My uncle has worked at Goodison for about 30 years. Gateman, and for the last 15 or so years, in the counting house.

I was talking to him just after the Kirkby move was announced and all he would say was Goodison is a deathtrap. Falling apart, and very close to failing the safety regulations. Put simply, it would need to be completely torn down and rebuilt.

Goodison is no longer an ooption.

Don’t blame Kenwright, it’s gone on for years. Carter and the rest of them sat back and watched our once magnificent stadium be left behind as others kept on top of theirs.

Remember Stamford Bridge with the fans painted on wooden boards behind the goal? Oh how we all laughed...

Who’s laughing now?
Danny Mullally
40   Posted 26/09/2007 at 12:48:06

Report abuse

Point one for me, I love the motive of the post-I am a no voter-BUT
We have got to put all of this bollocks into some form of organised alternative proposal. How many different ways can you call a spade a spade. If we (No voters) concentrated efforts like that seen in the post above into one unified direction then this is surely a better use of time and will not leave us exasperated with yet more ramblings about what we COULD do. It s what we SHOULD do that is important FFS.
That aside, I have to say Roy Warne - you did not do your credibility any favours when you announced that due to your background in the construction industry you were better placed than most to air your views-If you are in the construction industry then you should surely Know that the VAST majority of Steel comes into us from India and is NOT affected by price hikes currently affecting manufacturing in China....but hey, I aint in the construction industry........
Neil Pearse
41   Posted 26/09/2007 at 13:00:06

Report abuse

So we tend to come to the same place in the end all the time. If Goodison IS no longer an option (at least per Nick’s uncle!), and we don’t want to ground share, what ARE the other affordable options apart from Kirkby? That, like it or not, in the end is the essence of the Kirkby case.

The only way to change all the calculations is to get a major new rich owner to pump a couple of hundred million in to find somewhere in the city for us. I don’t think it’s going to happen.

Everton are hardly a secret, want to be owners usually are not a secret (see Arsenal, Newcastle and a host of others), and there is no evidence of anyone even sniffing around.

The numbers may keep moving around on Kirkby, but that’s because the numbers tend to move around on all major construction projects. It’s still the best / cheapest / soonest option we have.
Andy McNabb
42   Posted 26/09/2007 at 12:51:10

Report abuse

Great article Roy.
What worries me is that people can be so easily led by the nose to destruction, by the promise of better toilets and cold beer.
As Evertonians, I thought we were natural cynics and suspicious of the easy fix. Do people simply not care any more or have we reached the situation where genuine consideration of an obviously complicated issue is simply too dfficult?
Maybe it’s because I am now in my 40’s and have seen a bit more of life but I really wouldn’t believe the board at Everton if they told me the pitch was green.
As far as I am concerned, that is the saddest part of this whole debacle.
43   Posted 26/09/2007 at 13:00:18

Report abuse

Maybe the figures dont add up for Kirby but neither will they for attendances when we play all our home games at Halton stadium while Goodison is developed.You could spend a fortune on Goodison and it will still look like a shed compared with Liverpools new stadium. Total no goer, but LCC are not putting forward any alternative sites or means of finance are they, and until they do there is nothing for the fans to throw at the Everton board. All this hot air would be better directed at the council, go and lobby them to do their jobs.We want a site in the City and they must find a way and means
Peter Kennedy
44   Posted 26/09/2007 at 12:40:39

Report abuse

Roy Warne’s article is spot on and clearly indicates the flaws in the ’Grand Plan’....However it will ultimately make no difference as the deal is done and we are off to Kirkby. Goodison will be demolished and the Board will move to the ’Promised Land’ without a backward glance.

The leaving of Liverpool will enable those across the park to trumpet the marketing message of ’One Club, One Team, One City - Liverpool’..For those who went to the Derby at Anfield last season, you will recall the huge banner at the front of the Kop, proclaiming this. Their American owners are smart businessman and Liverpool have been biding their time plotting this whilst we have been tearing ourselves apart over Kirkby. They’ve never forgiven us for the adoption of the ’Peoples Club’ message - We’ve got Reds in our family and that really winds them up, so they are rubbing their hands at us going off to Kirkby on the back of Tesco’s ’generosity’.

We are delivering such a negative message - it may only be 4 miles, but we are handing over the City of Liverpool to our greatest rivals.

There is however now a crushing inevitability and the Tesco Club Card Arena awaits us.

I’m quite philosophical, resigned even relaxed about it now - The Board will not lose face by reversing the decision and 100+ years of history will be tossed away like an old newspaper.

In 10 years time it will be Everton? Didn’t they used to be from Liverpool - says it all really!
45   Posted 26/09/2007 at 13:29:24

Report abuse

I would be grateful if you kept my name off for proffesional reasons.

I work in transport planning and to be quick a few things above.

Virtually no chance of Bootle Railway being used for LFC. Too expensive and too many issues in rail industry/local government to deliever in next 10-15yrs.

Biggest scandal is not stanley park being built on, but how another 15k are going to be handled transport-wise in local area for LFC games. 80k seems unfeasible for LFC without spending tens of millions.

Kirkby, a few things need doing-longer trains, pedestrain routes at motorway junctions etc.. but can’t see it being much different than goodison. its a much better location than many other new grounds.
Roy P Warne
46   Posted 26/09/2007 at 13:49:49

Report abuse

Brian ? in one post you say you don?t agree that some of Trevor Skempton?s plans would work, then I ask you to expand on this after you tell me that you have studied construction in Cambridge, and you choose to ignore this. I ask you again to air your technical query. If you choose to ignore this direct request again, then this will confirm my current thoughts that you don?t really know what you are talking about.

Nick ? redeveloping goodison would obviously include bringing the ground up to health and safety standards, this isn?t an issue.

Danny Mullally ? construction costs is the one thing in life that I spend everyday working on, am trained in and have 17 of experience in. I am not trying to sound arrogant, and am not claiming to be an industry leader in this field, but clearly I am better placed to comment on this subject than, say, someone who hasn?t got my experience and training.
Before calling my credibility into question, you should have read my post more carefully?at no point do I say where the bulk of steel comes from. What I have said is that the unprecedented level of construction in China due to their economic boom is putting huge demands on the supply of steel which in turn is having a big effect on prices.

Neil ? Talk of other sites in the city has not been mentioned in this article. You keep saying that redeveloping goodison is not an option. The club told us it was an option not that long ago. Stick to facts and tell us why it isn?t? Or are you saying that you would rather move to Kirkby in lieu of staying at a redeveloped Goodison?

M - upgrade of train network is not necessarily just about bootle you know that work has already been commisioned to upgrade Sandhills access with dedicated pedestrian route up to Goodison Road? LFC have laready commissioned work to solve the transport issue - 7 park and ride sites at strategic locations across the city, dedicated coach park, widening of Priory Road etc etc. So in answer to your question LFC are spending tens of millions (already).
47   Posted 26/09/2007 at 13:45:13

Report abuse

A good thoughtful article. Those who voted yes appear to think it is valid to sneer at any attempt to keep the debate open. As for Gerard comments regarding Sir Terry I would prompt him to read Andrew Simms book ’Tescopoly’ for a more critical analysis of TESCO’s antics including their flagrant disregard for the law, local communities and employment rights at home and abroad. The book does however highlight how some local communitites have fought and beaten TESCO so those Evertonians who are opposed to the move should keep shouting and fighting. I have contact with some of the officers at KBC and some of their ideas and philosophy are crazy.Sharing the site with TESCO and the new academy (an amalgam of two of Kirkby’s secondary schools) does not fill me with glee. Let’s not give up.
Chris Dottie
48   Posted 26/09/2007 at 14:00:40

Report abuse

Spot on Roy, my main reason for voting no was that even in the best case scenario, Kirkby has very little to offer Everton. According to the board we would invest a minimum of 50M, the stadium will open in 2010 at the earliest and produce increased income of 10M per year (or less than 1 Yakubu). Allow 6 years to pay off the debt and interest we are talking about an optimistic maximum of 10M extra income per year from 2016. If the board can find not other way of increasing revenue so minimally in the next 9 years then we really do need a new board.

I know that it is the only way the current board feel they can move, but when this is the best case scenario (and an arguably unlikely one at that) I would rather hold our nerve and see where we are 2 years down the line.
Neil Pearse
49   Posted 26/09/2007 at 14:01:37

Report abuse

Roy, on Goodison you ask a good and fair question. The PDF you sent on Goodison was fascinating, but here’s still my problem: I don’t really know who to believe. Can Goodison be satisfactorily redeveloped or not? What would it cost? What would its revenue potential be once redeveloped? Different people say different things.

In the end, my gut tells me that, in the modern Premiership, Everton really would be better off with a brand new stadium, purpose built for the modern era. That, as the saying goes, you can’t make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear. I take your point that BK / KW may be being lazy in going for the easier (Kirkby) option. But you could also argue that moving to Kirkby is riskier, and is causing them quite a lot of hassle! It just is hard for me to believe that they wouldn’t redevelop Goodison if it was such a good option.

Personally, I don’t believe that Kirkby would be a disaster in terms of location (although people obviously disagree on this). And I still see no reason that a very good stadium cannot be built there (I suspect that some new investment will be coming into Everton in the next few years, as the Premiership continues to boom). So in the end I still go for Kirkby over a redeveloped Goodison.
Christine in Blue
50   Posted 26/09/2007 at 14:06:26

Report abuse

Excellent article Roy. I think you made some excellent points that need answering by the club. As I have said before, a yes vote did not mean that Kirby is right for the club but gave the club the choice to review it as a best option.

Fact is the truth will out.. watching this develop is a bit like watching the government put spin on a poor decision.

What can we take out of this?
1. That the club and its execs actually believe the hype they are being sold?
2. That its a cynical business opportunity by Tesco to tie the club into a financial situation whereby they get ongoing business and association with Everton FC?
3. Someone has an agenda other than the best interests of Everton FC in ensuring that Kirby spin is bought by fans and club management.

There isn;t any other conclusion to be made. Business deals are NOT done with kindness, as the adage says, if something loooks to good to be true then it probably is.

And to all those self smug Yes voters who keep harping on about the vote being a mandate and those who don’t agree should just shut up.. debate is the cornerstone of democracy. Access to Information is the best form of ensuring it happens.
So..lets cut the crap and ask Bill Kenwright to answer the numbers once and for all. Put it to an INDEPENDENT consultant who has neither the interests of the clubs fans, nor big business. Let them assess teh Kirby project adn any other options placed on the table that THEY see fit.

We all have vested interests but we don’t have facts only conjecture. When facts are given they are discredited and the messengers are abused. Its too big a deal to just accept the spin. Its not just the club its us, we are as much the club as the players on the park. Without us there is no club.
51   Posted 26/09/2007 at 14:17:58

Report abuse


Don’t want to come into a long debate not on my afternoon off, but sandhills station has been a long time scheme by Merseytravel the money is coming from the LTP (look at their press relase from 18/5/06), LFC have nowt to do with it. A ped route from the station would be a long walk outside the reccomended 800m, not very attractive (hence soccerbus now, which only took 56k fans for all of LFC and EFC games last season)and Goodison Road is out of the way between Sandhills and Anfield are you mistaken ?. New ped routes are usually nothing more than improved dropping crossings and signs (not big bucks)

The ped routes, P+R (are this LFC or Merseytravel), road widening etc shouldn’t be tens of millions to deliever if they are, LFC have been ripped off.

Most people will still come by car, (only 30% of LFC season ticket holders live within a 1hr bus ride of Anfield) and the majority of the extra 15k at anfield will do the same. It gonna be worse than it is now, if the ground was any bigger it would bring the area to a halt, hence the limit at 60k and the need for other ways to bring in fans.

If you can link me to LFC travel plan than I can comment on it fully as i can’t find it online, but my comments are based on what ive found in the public domain and what i’ve heard from within my industry.

PS I would prefer to stay at goodison from a transport and fan persepctive, but I don’t think Kirkby should be rubbished on transport as I think if they get the basic rights it will be OK. (A big if with the EFC board I know)

52   Posted 26/09/2007 at 15:16:18

Report abuse

One more thing, I did enjoy the article, it was well thought out, but as usual in these "anti Kirkby" articles. Theauthors bemoan the lack of proof, evidence, statistics, call it what you want, but neither do the authors back any of their conclusions with anything other than "I work in X sector, so I know better" comments. My Uncle DID work in the counting house, My dad worked the gates for years too, we knew everyone in the ground, and heard the ins and outs of goings on before they hit the back of the echo, but it’s not worth a bean really is it. Without anything to back up your tales of woe and doom, they’re as much fiction as the statements coming out of the boardroom.

In Moyes We Trust, In THE CLUB we trust.

Let them get on with their jobs and get us a stadium we can be proud of.

The school of science is falling down, like it or not.
danny smith
53   Posted 26/09/2007 at 14:47:30

Report abuse

If you do work in transport planning then heaven help us. You state Anfield will grind to a halt, with a extra 15k. Though it does still have a high local disppersal(people within walking distance home M), but a tinpot town of 30,000 soles just needs a few longer trains, and where are yout pedestian routes going exactly, in the sky right over kirkby golf course. Kirkby will have a tiny local dispersal rate(quite easlily the lowest of any ground)so there will be massive inferstucture problems. M there are reasons big football clubs have not jumped to locate in small towns, im afraid when we are having are weekly 2-3 hour fuck about journey home in a few years, we will know why.
Gerard Madden
54   Posted 26/09/2007 at 15:36:48

Report abuse

’nick’ - to quote your comment ’The authors bemoan the lack of proof, evidence, statistics, call it what you want, but neither do the authors back any of their conclusions with anything other than "I work in X sector, so I know better"

That is so so true, this ’article’ (if that’s the word) is just another typical last of the bedraggled ’no’ rant at the end of the day and why myself and others won’t treat it seriously when you look at it’s author - Colin Fitz and Tony Marsh have that problem too and I suspect if I did an enthusiastic pro-Kirkby article it would get ridiculed for the reason of it being an enthusiastic ’yes’ rant.

I suppose I should be a little more sensitive as maybe ’getting it down in writing’ will be of therapeutic use to some of these authors in their quest for getting over it (oops) after the failure of their side of argument in the vote and even more tellingly the pitiful ’protest’ the other week.
Gerard Madden
55   Posted 26/09/2007 at 15:36:48

Report abuse

’nick’ - to quote your comment ’The authors bemoan the lack of proof, evidence, statistics, call it what you want, but neither do the authors back any of their conclusions with anything other than "I work in X sector, so I know better"

That is so so true, this ’article’ (if that’s the word) is just another typical last of the bedraggled ’no’ rant at the end of the day and why myself and others won’t treat it seriously when you look at it’s author - Colin Fitz and Tony Marsh have that problem too and I suspect if I did an enthusiastic pro-Kirkby article it would get ridiculed for the reason of it being an enthusiastic ’yes’ rant.

I suppose I should be a little more sensitive as maybe ’getting it down in writing’ will be of therapeutic use to some of these authors in their quest for getting over it (oops) after the failure of their side of argument in the vote and even more tellingly the pitiful ’protest’ the other week.
Carlos Roberts
56   Posted 26/09/2007 at 15:40:27

Report abuse

Two questions.
I thought Barr’s pre-tax profit was £2.6m in 2006, not £3.6m. See

The second question is to anyone with financial knowledge.
Is a company like Tesco allowed to ’give’ £50m to a Council like Knowsley who will then ’give’ it to Everton? Very nice of them but is it ethical/legal?
Editorial Team
57   Posted 26/09/2007 at 15:40:15

Report abuse

Brian Wolf: "Instead of looking at why the club can?t move to Kirkby why don?t we all look at why the club can?t move to the Bestway site."

At the moment, the club can?t move to the Bestway site because it appears that Messers Kenwright and Wyness are refusing to sit down with Bestway to discuss it. And it?s not all that surprising, really ? having cynically ripped the Loop proposal apart with a blatantly misleading expert?s opinion and secured the vote for Kirkby, perhaps they?re concerned about the image they project if they now talk to Bestway and LCC.

Sorry, but for me, if that?s their approach to it then they deserve all the cynicism they?re getting from many on the "no" side because they?re not acting in the interests in the club if Kirkby is the only option they are prepared to consider.

Lee Spargo: You ask that we (the ?yes voters) don?t ?bleat? on about the ramblings of another ?no? voter. You then proceed to jump in whenever anybody (usually a ?yes? voter) shares an opinion that is in opposition to your own.

Lee, I said that because people like Gerard Madden usually take the first opportunity to shout everybody down with "you lost the vote, move on," (the BlueKipper "Everton to Relocate" forum was closed for the same reason) while others refuse to sit idly by while the club moves forward with a proposal that is based on shifting figures that don?t add up. Aren?t you in the least bit concerned by that?

As for jumping in when someone shares an opinion opposite to my own, it?s called engaging in a discussion with a counter argument which, as a fan, I am perfectly at liberty to do. Just because I?m one of the editors on the site doesn?t preclude me from getting involved in the debate.
58   Posted 26/09/2007 at 15:45:13

Report abuse

Its Kirkby, not Kirby. If you were scouse you would know that.

Even though Im a yes voter it will still gut me to leave Goodison and its memories. We’re all sceptical but theres no reason why the new gaff cant have the same intimidating atmosphere.

I would hope, foolish perhaps, that the club know they have to get it right with the new stadium due to the depth of feeling this has caused.

We will find out in four years time.
Brian Wolf
59   Posted 26/09/2007 at 16:10:47

Report abuse

Lyndon, thanks for your input but you’ve actually turned what I said round to suit your own thinking.

It’s not to do with whether Kenwright or Wyness will sit down with Bestway but more to do with whether the site is feasible or not, everyone have seen what LCC and Bestway and KEIOC put out about the site so why don’t we discuss the shortcomings of that proposal instead of the shortcomings of Kirkby all the time?
Someone did come up with a good comment before and that was if the vote turned out in favour of no instead of yes would the yes voters be getting as much space on this site post vote as the no voters have been lately. I seriously doubt so...
Editorial Team
60   Posted 26/09/2007 at 16:19:09

Report abuse

Brian, I?m not sure we can discuss the feasibility of the loop site anymore. It?s been established by Bestway and HOK that a stadium is possible at that location but discussion about it always descends into some people shouting that it?s just a red herring, it?s too small, it?s surrounded by roads, etc, etc.

If it?s not that, it?s people shouting "we can?t afford it! Where?s the money coming from?" Well, no one on this site (i.e. among the fan base) can answer that question anymore. Until the club sits down with Bestway to see what they have to offer, it?s now a non-starter.

So, while it would be great to talk intelligently and productively about the Bestway site, I don?t think there?s anything more we can say about it. Only the most hard-headed "yes" voter would deny that a stadium on that site is possible ? at the moment it doesn?t look like we?re ever going to find out whether between the LCC, Bestway and ourselves it would be financially viable.

The club have got the "no" voters and the doubters pinned under their thumb with nothing left to do but pick holes in the Kirkby numbers as it?s the only option on the table. Roy's article is trying to highlight the debts being taken on in some areas and how they might have been used to start a redevelopment project at Goodison along the lines the club itself outlined 5 years ago.
Roy P Warne
61   Posted 26/09/2007 at 16:36:12

Report abuse

M ? Ped route goes from Sandhills right through Walton Road to link up with the bottom of anfield road close to Goodison Road?you won?t find it on the internet, I have the information because I have an involvement with the scheme. The scale of the project may surprise you, but the number of junction improvements is way into double figures and most with completely new signal and lighting arrangements. This is a multi million pound aspect alone. As you say most people will travel by car anyway and that is addressed to some extent by the several park and ride sites. You are correct that LFC have/will have their work cut out to prove a 76,000 travel plan, but my point is that they HAVE to do this, and are doing so, and as such a redevelopment of goodison park to say 50-55k would benefit fully from this (for free) and certainly not be subject to any planning issues.

Gerard (/nick) ? you state ?The authors bemoan the lack of proof, evidence, statistics, call it what you want, but neither do the authors back any of their conclusions with anything other than "I work in X sector, so I know better?

You need to look further than the end of your nose if you want to take part in a constructive debate, the aim of which is to get the best for Everton Football Club. Tom Hughes and Trevor Skempton have gone to great lengths to ?prove? with ?evidence? that Goodison Park can be redeveloped. Have you not seen this? These are the exact experts in this field that the club would otherwise be paying big money for an input from were they not being driven by the Tesco developers. I have also produced ?facts? that the club have previously told us that Goodison can be redeveloped ? did you not click on this link? If all you have to add to this is sarcasm and meaningless generalisations whilst ignoring the crux of the article completely then please don?t bother?
62   Posted 26/09/2007 at 15:54:42

Report abuse


Kirkby has M58 close by and the M57 and A580 on its doorstep, Valley and County Road give it local high capacity roads just like Anfield and Goodison have.

Kirkby has a road system far larger than its population, roads aren’t provided pro ratia the population. With good traffic mgt from the main car park locations & main junctions for the new stadium it won’t be the diaster that people think. Its road access is way much better than the Boltons and Readings its been likened to.

A Ped crossing facility (pelican crossing or simlar to the layman) and footpaths at junction 6 will help fans who live or will park in that part of liverpool.

If you took the kirkby stadium and drew a circle with a radius of 1 mile (possibly 1.5miles), thats where people are gonna park for it

On the trains, 1 six car merseyrail train can move 1000 people (most standing). for kirkby station to be used for the stadium they need to run 6 car trains and more frequent than present, and that is a sticking point for me.

Not many liverpool fans walk to the ground and that is fact, (see my other comment and that is from LFC season ticket info provided for its first planning application (2nd hand info from someone who looked at it).

EFC is better and that is a big loss for the new ground, but so many of both clubs fans drive in from around merseyside, and the country as a whole, just look what some people are willing to pay to park now and compare the amount of cars in the area on match and non-matchdays.

I said Anfield will grind to a halt at anything over 60k hence the limit,at 60k it is pushed to capacity and its gonna take longer than it does now, a detriment to local residents & fans.

I’m not saying Kirkby perfect no ground is, if 000’s of people leave the same place at the same time anywhere it takes time, but I don’t think its gonna be much worse than goodison overall.

I haven’t sat down and done a proper study of anfield, goodison or kirkby (I would like to) i’m just making some comments with my experience on what info I can find, giving a view with my work hat on not my everton hat.
Andy Lynch
63   Posted 26/09/2007 at 17:05:52

Report abuse

This site has turned into a ’no voters’ mutual appreciation society.

It’s an important issue, but trying to deconstruct (sorry for the pun) the mechanations of it to cast doubt on the credibility of the project only causes further division and bitterness. Lets see the plans and numbers first, and until then we can have a much needed rest from the constant whinging. After the people said Yes!
64   Posted 26/09/2007 at 17:05:52

Report abuse

Fair enough Roy if you’ve got access to info that i haven’t, having worked on some schemes similar I know developers usually like to do as little as possible (and Councils usually don’t push in case they bugger off somewhere else) & I expect LFC to be the same.

Is it actually money from LFC or is it activating regeneration money ? I must admit I struggle to see anything more than 60k ever happening and think that their american take on a english ground might not get built anyway.

I think EFC would have to pretend to move out otherwise if they stay they would have to cough up some cash contribution for the work and we know what the clubs finances are like but your right we could piggyback on transport improvements for their ground if viable funding for goodison could be achieved.
Gareth Docherty
65   Posted 26/09/2007 at 17:16:39

Report abuse

The title of the article is The True Cost of Kirkby / Redeveloping Goodison. In all honesty, nobody knows what the true cost of Kirkby will be and to say that they do because "they are an expert in the field" is folly.
Gerry Morrison
66   Posted 26/09/2007 at 17:14:35

Report abuse

Have you seen the state of Tescos in The Strand? Do we want our ground run by these people?
67   Posted 26/09/2007 at 17:29:23

Report abuse

All the experts that the club have used have been classed as puppets working for the club or Tesco. Where as all the experts that have commented on the redevelopment of goodison or the loop site have been the best people to comment.

Again this is just a way for the no voters to try and rubbish what the club say.

no one has the right to say they care more about the club than any other blue. This has been said by both Yes and No voters

So why do so many people slate bill kenwright when surely as a Blue himself he must care for the club
Tom Hughes
68   Posted 26/09/2007 at 17:40:37

Report abuse

Nick says that according to his uncle who is a gateman that Goodison is falling down. I am researching this issue at the moment. I have found no evidence of this as yet. The old stands are massively over-engineered, ie they have lots of extra structural strength. There are various issues affecting them, but nothing that will stop them from functioning as they have for the past 70-80 years. The Guide to safety at footy grounds refers only to NEW stands. If a situation arises whereby the stands no longer comply, then the local authority can request remedial changes, there is nothing to suggest that this is the case for our old stands.
Gerard Madden
69   Posted 26/09/2007 at 17:58:04

Report abuse

mjbj - ’All the experts that the club have used have been classed as puppets working for the club or Tesco. Where as all the experts that have commented on the redevelopment of goodison or the loop site have been the best people to comment’.

LOL that is so true mjbj. In fact it’s even worse than that - some experts who’ve said the ’loop’ is viable for a stadium have never said any such thing, an 18 page ’report’ done by those same experts has never been seen by the public - apparantly only by Cllr Bradley, the small cash ’n carry Betterways and apparantly the greatest architect who’s ever walked this planet (and who happens to be a disciple of the ’no’ brigade). Draw your own conclusions from that but that tells me the report is either not favourable for a stadium on the ’loop’ or more likely the report does not exist and never existed.
Steve Taylor
70   Posted 26/09/2007 at 18:25:29

Report abuse

A couple of quick points - the "redevelop Goodison" option. When would this happen? in the 7 week summer break? Or over 3/4 years - losing a side of the ground per season?
It’s a none starter & always has been.

BTW L4 is a shite place to build a football stadia anyway - as the road network to L4 is gash.

A redeveloped Goodison - wouldn’t be Goodison anyway! Just on the same site! Why would anyone choose the land locked side streets of L4 to build a new stadia - if there was other options available that allowed for further expansion & more retail opportunity i.e. restaurants, bars, shops etc.???

As for the so called "costing analysis" of the "expert" - as you weren’t in posssesion of all the financial facts - you’re in no better position to judge Kirkby than anyone else!
Alan Ryder
71   Posted 26/09/2007 at 19:17:34

Report abuse

Note to Editor; No personal criticism is aimed at any of the Evertonians above, however, these submissions are losing their impact and are not changing opinion. Everybody is spurting their own view but nobody is listening or paying much regard to the views of others. I am not going to change my opinion. Most yes voters will switch off as soon as they read the first paragraph. No voters are just fuelling their frustrations. It’s a bit pointless. I have had a busy day I’m, tired, and emotional; I don’t know whether to sleep or cry. ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ...... oh there you go I’ve gone to sleep! Wake me up when we score I could do with a long lie in.
72   Posted 26/09/2007 at 19:08:08

Report abuse

why do the pro-kirkby people keep trying to pick holes in any alternatives,no Everton fan could ever opt for Kirkby ahead of a redeveloped Goodison Park,i just cant understand their motives?G.Madden you are a phoney,you must be getting some overtime from the Ian Ross department.
Stephen Turner
73   Posted 26/09/2007 at 20:47:26

Report abuse

For Carl Cole - I am also a no vote - But the vote is done, so lets move on and move. What this artical is about is the same thing I mentioned previously.Ok we are going - but we will be there for 20 years at least I would assume - SO LETS MAKE IT A QUALITY STADIUM THAT WILL LAST THE COURSE and not some piece of shite where the Directors make a mint and we - the important people dread to go. YOU PAY FOR WHAT YOU GET.
Gerard Madden
74   Posted 26/09/2007 at 22:52:19

Report abuse

Alan Ryder - I know what you mean - zzzzzzzzzzz....I betcha Mr. Fitz is busy tapping his keyboard as we speak with yet another World-In-Actionesque award winning incisive investigative article to be soon submitted - that will really just be yet another long winded way of doing a whine - LOL.
Gerard Madden
75   Posted 27/09/2007 at 00:08:47

Report abuse

Michael Gill - I refer you to the ’campaign group’ KEIOC - extending the Goodison Road stand over the East Lancs is better and more realistic than ANYTHING they’ve come up with - LOL.
Mark Gray
76   Posted 27/09/2007 at 00:42:10

Report abuse

Gerard Madden, I won’t bother responding to your wind up’s again but you really are one hell of a gobshite.
Tom Hughes
77   Posted 27/09/2007 at 00:40:20

Report abuse

GM: Counter the arguments with facts..... people have posted figures..... even figures the club themselves have released to show that they simply do not add up. You still have not responded likewise in ANY one of your posts, which are getting more and more colourful by the minute. Less flowery speeches and more facts please.
joe caulfield
78   Posted 27/09/2007 at 01:18:14

Report abuse

the nearest tesco is about 4mile away in bootle and i wonder if terry has influenced movement away from goodisoon maybe conned us cause of it being between 5 supermarkets in a 1mile radius.

i work in tesco and know if they where to make a tesco extra in dat area it would not take long to earn back the money invested and then evertons money ontop, it seems in favour of terry

Brian Wolf
79   Posted 27/09/2007 at 09:04:20

Report abuse

Tom, you ask GM to counter the arguments with facts and figures, where’s the facts and figures for the alternatives? Or ones that are actually workable at least.
Lee Spargo
80   Posted 27/09/2007 at 12:26:57

Report abuse

Lyndon,you’ve missed my point.

I’m not saying that you are not entitled to post an opinion. Of course you are.

However, you insertion of the footnote to the article and insistence upon jumping down the throat of anybody who dares to disagree is a little hypocritical. You simply cannot promote an open and frank discussion if the editor repeatedly pushes one side of the argument without giving credence to the other.

Before anybody had chance to respond to this article your viewpoint was made clear - in a partonising an annoying manner.

Thats the point.
Lee Spargo
81   Posted 27/09/2007 at 12:44:46

Report abuse

That’s supposed to read ’patronising’, before anybody picks up on it!!
Lee Kidd
82   Posted 27/09/2007 at 13:12:18

Report abuse

That footnote is ridiculous.

How about putting one on a pro-Kirkby one? Something like this.

"Editor’s note: If you are tired of the stadium debate but read this far, then please don’t bleat about "another article by a ’Yes’ voter". There are Evertonians who are deeply enthused by the prospect of the Kirkby Project ? no other issue is more intrinsic to the club’s long-term future ? not least the opportunity for long term stability for Everton Football Club, so please enter into discussion on this article with that in mind."

No? Thought not.
83   Posted 27/09/2007 at 13:26:58

Report abuse

Roy, sorry a bit late supporting your article, I was at Sheffield last night with the blue hoard; read it at half time and found it well thought out and written with clarity. The Kirkby project was promoted to those eligible to vote on one specific unique selling point: it would cost the club very little. Many were suspicious of this from day one and quite quickly several people working in the construction industry confirmed these suspicions, they explained that discounts of the nature mentioned just weren?t available. You have now presented a logical article once again questioning this financial information. Perhaps it would be useful for an equally qualified person working in a relevant area of the construction industry to post an article which explains just how these costings can be achieved, I for one would welcome this, not just a reiteration of the KW and TL propaganda but a genuine counter argument to your piece.

Roy, don?t be disheartened by those such as Madden et al and their frankly ridiculous commentary on every posting questioning the information offered by the board, it?s patently obvious that if Keith and Bill told them that the earth is flat they?d be on board. After reading Madden?s latest comment about me I?m simply going to ignore him, as I would implore others to do the same. That?s not to say there aren?t some decent debaters on here, Neil Pearse is one individual that springs to mind.

Looking forward to that article then.


Dave Randles
84   Posted 27/09/2007 at 13:03:16

Report abuse

Before I start I must say that I am firmly in the ’no’ camp. A move to Kirkby will, IMHO, ultimately be the death knell for our club. Anyway?

It appears to be that the general consensus (by those that profess to know these things) is that the figures for a new ground do not add up and that there will be a £50m shortfall for the construction of a new ground. If Goodison can be redeveloped for this amount (and I?ve no reason to disbelieve those that say it can) ? then what is in it for Bill Kenwright to sanction a move if the club is saddled with the same level of debt if we move or redevelop?

After all, love him or loathe him, he is clearly no muppet (Kenwright productions is proof of that) and surely he wants what he believes best for the club. If there was a £50m shortfall then surely this wouldn?t go un-noticed?!

Answers on a postcard please?
Tom hughes
85   Posted 27/09/2007 at 13:34:51

Report abuse

I think it is firstly important to establish the credibility of the figures that were presented to us upto and during the vote otherwise comparisons are impossible. These are the yardstick and the points that helped secure a YES vote. Unfortunately I’m working away at the moment, but I hope to be able to put some figures together, but in brief terms it should suffice to say that to bring GP upto 50k+ seats could cost less than £25m (ie replacing the park stand with 16,000 new seats and that’s working at a higher cost per seat than the Kirkby proposal). If an enabling development could be included at this end, this could be greatly reduced. Further costs for reroofing the other sides need not be greater than £10m, reprofiling paddock/lower Bullens £1-2m, all to reduce obstructed views to a few hundred. There are a multitude of variations on this theme. All this and staying at our historic home and getting the benefit of all the additional infrastructure planned for the new Anfield for free. Remove all the cladding off the old Leitch stands and show them as the classic and iconic structures that they are with the other sides redeveloped/remodelled to highlight their modernity. The result would be the most unique stadium in club football.... on the site of the world’s first purpose built football stadium.

Bit rushed I’m afraid.
Roy P Warne
86   Posted 27/09/2007 at 15:52:06

Report abuse

Steve Taylor ? was redeveloping ST James Park a non starter? Was redeveloping Old Trafford a non starter? When the RS redeveloped 3 sides of their ground was that a non starter? Take off your blinkers and realise that redeveloping goodison has never been a non starter?and I am stunned that any evertonian can?t understand the desire to stay at L4 4EL then

Brian Wolf ? my suspicions about you confirmed.

Colin ? thanks, and in ideal world the club or one of the board?s allied shareholders would issue a statement telling us how we are all misconstruing the financial information and spell it out simply and logically to put our minds at rest?I won?t be holding my breath though as they don?t need to do anything now they?ve won the vote

Dave Randles ? Neil Pearse asked the same question earlier so I?ll paste my previous response:

"You can look at it cynically and say things like: Wyness will get a big bonus for achieving his ground move target, Kenwright will sell up at a much bigger personal profit or Terry Leahy in his personal advisor capacity has talked the board into Kirkby, ensuring that Tesco get their £50m a week ?biggest store in Britain?.

Whilst not discounting any of these, my personal opinion (for what it is worth) is that the club have become obsessed with finding a new home and see Tesco and Kirkby as the quickest and easiest way of doing this. Tesco step in and take care of everything whilst Keith and Bill sit back and let it happen. Problem Solved with minimum fuss. Redeveloping Goodison on the other hand would require a far greater input from the board and Wyness and quite frankly, I don?t think they have the inclination to get involved in ?hassle?. I just don?t think they have the vision and capacity to go it alone without the help of Terry Leahy?which is a bl**dy disgrace.

Let us not forget that these are all opinions and are therefore meaningless, the article I have written is based on the facts as we have seen them, and it is a fact that if you can build a new 50,000 seat stadium for £50m then you can certainly redevelop Goodison for that same sum."
Michael Hackett
87   Posted 27/09/2007 at 19:09:49

Report abuse

Get over it. This’s fun.
Michael Hackett
88   Posted 27/09/2007 at 19:45:41

Report abuse

Also I think Gerard Madden is a Hero and was wondering if anyone would like to join my new Keith Wyness and Bill Kenwright fanclub.
I’m going to give you some facts now as well.
Kirby stadium will cost 250 million to Everton.
Goodison can be redeveloped for free with money from the council which Breadley has promised me. He said it to me the other day on the street.
Kirby stadiums is actually going to be made out of paper machier by local primary school. Terry Leahy told me that in a secret meeting which Bill and Keith, my great friends were also at. We all talked about how we were going to ruin Everton Football Club so that we could stop Everton from becoming the best team in England. We also talked about how it’s much better being a Liverpool supporter.
KEIOC are going to release a statement from Bestway saying they were going to donate their profits for the next two years to help build Everton’s stadium at the Loop. Bestway are doing this for the laugh and because KEIOC told them they’d be their friends if they did.
Pigs can actually fly. I saw it on simpsons.
I am a Liverpool fan.
I lost the figures and documents to prove all the above so your all gonna have to just trust me on this. They would be too complicated for all of ye to understand anyway. However, I do have a video of a pig flying and doing some other stuff if anyone wants to see it.
As I said they are facts. Whether you believe them or not is up to you.
Do you think I sounded serious.
danny smith
89   Posted 27/09/2007 at 20:00:12

Report abuse

M one question on your wonderfull parking circle, have you not heard of resident parking schemes, the whole fookin town will be covered by these, you will not be able to park anywere in kirkby except the car park at the ground (lets hope tescos are quiet that day). Mersey rail nice figures shame i have to wait 30-40 mins outside highbury (with large local dispersal rate) with tubes going every 5 mins, that are half a mile long. Motorways can you tell me the exact one i need, once im over the old pelican crossing for tuebrook many thanks, oh and i dont drive ! Dam i will get a cab, shame knowsley have only 300 hackneys compared to liverpools 1500
Sandy Wendlethorpe
90   Posted 27/09/2007 at 21:18:56

Report abuse


You right there will be parking restrictions around a kirkby stadium but they won?t cover the whole town, just like most streets within a mile or so of goodsion aren?t, only those right next to it. Bootle Town Centre is just over a mile from goodison does that have parking restrictions because of goodision ?

I?m sure the businesses/schools/etc won?t be charging £5+ in kirkby like they do now around goodison either>

If you actually READ what i?ve wrote, ive said I don?t think the transport for the new anfield is good and the 76k and new rail link will almost never happen. This is the main comment i made about roys article.

But I said kirkby has good road links comparable to goodision/anfield but there is work needed on public transport (trains and buses). Some fans will lose out (espcially those who live close to goodision)and some will gain from the move (I personally will lose out and youself by the sounds of it)

Until I read the clubs transport consultants (SDG) travel plan and what they reccomend (buses,trains,parking, taxis and all), i?ll know more but I?m only saying I think kirkby won?t be much different from goodision (more car-orientated admittily) with some work. What kirkby has now won?t what will be there IF we move.

In short, theres lots to critise about Kirkby (I?m concerned it won?t be blended into a town centre properly and be a retail park mess)but I don?t think transport should be a major issue its problems can be solved, the design, funding and can be a home for us are whats critical.

91   Posted 27/09/2007 at 23:10:19

Report abuse

Is this still going on?

Theres a whole world going on outside there.
Lee Spargo
92   Posted 28/09/2007 at 12:54:16

Report abuse

dont watch then Tony.
Rob F
93   Posted 28/09/2007 at 13:08:40

Report abuse

I’ll make my feelings known Tony: I’ll sing Moyes’ name load and clear. 5 great years, lets hope he signs up for 5 more.

oh, and as for kirkby - you can’t see how good this will be for everton can you? bring it on. woo hoo.
david j. fehily
94   Posted 28/09/2007 at 13:47:19

Report abuse

mate , loved your article . i admit , im a no voter , passionate about it . my ultimate question is , this , " onwards and upwards " , thing with a new ground . can anyone pls advise of 1 club this has actually happened to ?? moreover , foregoing the whole giving our history away to the rs dbate , i dont trust kenwright and wyness is a slimy financial gimp of the worst order . as to the article , and facts herein , is anybody really surprised?? tesco have no interest in football unless its dollars coming acoss their tills for merchandise . moreover , leahy is in his 60s , and may possibly not even be there when the move goes thru . whats our connection then , if , as has happened to most other " moving clubs " , we end up botto of the league , having to sell any quality we have , playing in a half full concrete bowl that we dont own ?? fucked . thats where . i pray to god it doesnt happen , also that we dont end up with the fantail being our crest instead of everton lock-up . anyway lad , well done on the article . i8 doubt any fucker will listen , but well done anyway . nil satis nisi optimum . david j fehily
Gareth Docherty.
95   Posted 28/09/2007 at 15:24:50

Report abuse

"Let us not forget that these are all opinions and are therefore meaningless, the article I have written is based on the facts as we have seen them, and it is a fact that if you can build a new 50,000 seat stadium for £50m then you can certainly redevelop Goodison for that same sum."

Nope, this is an opinion also, it certainly is not a fact. At a push, it is an assumption.
Brian Wolf
96   Posted 28/09/2007 at 17:04:31

Report abuse

"Derby day wont feel like a derby anymore if we move outside of Liverpool to Kirkby and the Red Shite will be laughing at us."

Good to see that your still churning out your cartoon catchphrases Tony. Your like one long sketch show lad, you’ve got more catchphrases than Roy Walker.
Lee Spargo
97   Posted 28/09/2007 at 19:16:01

Report abuse

Tony, if I were you I wouldn’t bother. It sounds like it affects your life too much mate. Why a grown man would pay the admission to a premiership game simply to voice his anger is beyond me. Grow up mate, how old are you?

Oh, and just out of curiosity, do you celebrate when we score and when we win - or do you simply continue to vent you life’s frustrations at DM?

PS - keep insulting us yes voters and telling us we are going to cause the death of our club - it makes you sound really intelligent and important.
Gerard Madden
98   Posted 28/09/2007 at 19:33:38

Report abuse

Tony you’re a mere voice in the wilderness, most of us have moved on now including most of your fellow ’no’ voters - that was clear from that protest the other week.

You only seem to care what the RS say but we’ve got a little ditty for that haven’t we - ’Oh we don’t care what the RS say...’. Stop thinking about that sad lot and think of the super future our club will have in its super 50,000 (expandable to 60,000) stadium - still in a very scouse area and only 4 miles from GP to boot!
Gavin Ramejkis
99   Posted 28/09/2007 at 20:25:47

Report abuse

Gerard Madden just who are you in reality? You constantly spout the same irrelevant "told you so" rubbish and goad the no voters, I take it you have a glance at one of your earlier replies saying
"Michael Gill - I refer you to the ?campaign group? KEIOC - extending the Goodison Road stand over the East Lancs is better and more realistic than ANYTHING they?ve come up with - LOL.", think you will find the East Lancs Road is miles away from the stadium and LOL? Are you a text obsessed school child? As for dispersal from the Kirkby stadium onto the very nearby motorway network I watched Rangers v VFB Stuttgart last week and Ibrox is right next to the M8 motorway, it took me over an hour to get from the Asda car park less than a mile from the M8 motorway onto it and that’s with a significant police presence controlling traffic a presence which is heavily paid for by that club.
Lee Spargo
100   Posted 28/09/2007 at 20:48:09

Report abuse

There’ll be traffic around any stadium of significant size - regardless of it’s location. Think about it.

One of the problems of GP is that it is surrounded by a maze of streets filled with run-down terraced houses - no disrespect intended to those who live there. So not only is it hard to find a parking space (resident permit holders only!) and not only is it poorly accessed, but it’s also in a run-down area.

Now think of the new stadium in the middle of a regenerated and enlarged town centre and which we are told by the consultants hired by the club will be the most easily accessible stadium in the North of England.

Gerard Madden
101   Posted 28/09/2007 at 20:51:47

Report abuse

Gavin - that earlier post you mention does not make sense because the post it was referring to by Michael Gill was deleted! He was suggesting extending the Goodison Road stand over the East Lancs which I thought was a hoot but the editor (I assume Lyndon) chose to make me look the fool by deleting his post but leaving mine alone.

By the way I find it highly ironic i’m accused of spouting ’the same irrelevant ’told you so’ rubbish and goad the no voters’ when in actual fact some of the remaining bedraggled ’no’s (IMO) spout the same old rubbish and goad the ’yes’ voters.
Tom Hughes
102   Posted 28/09/2007 at 20:45:37

Report abuse

"super future our club will have in its super 50,000 (expandable to 60,000) stadium"

’Super’ stadium..... subjective at best. You know nothing about the stadium except night-time computer renderings. You have no idea about such things as viewing quality and viewing angles and distances..... This is the cheapest structure that it could be for the capacity..... That’s a fact that nobody denies, not even the club judging by their figures. So I think "super" is another of GM’s truth-stretchers. Viewing distances given the absence of overlapped tiers and gaping corners look also to be excessive......apparently there’s lots of counter space though.

"- still in a very scouse area and only 4 miles from GP to boot!"

So the distance, and the scouseness IS an issue to you? I thought these were all trivial non-issues to beat the no-voters with? Why mention them now? Why the ethnic descriptor? You appear to have no awareness of the logistical effects of shifting an established venue with established infrastrucure and transport networks a few miles. These aren’t trivial at all. As an analogy.... Lewis’ and other businesses on Renshaw street suffered massively during their big-dig due to losing their bus stops and repaving for just a few months.... footfall fell dramatically and Lewis’ nearly had to shut..... 150 yrs nearly lost due to a proportion of their regular custom not bothering to walk just a few extra yards. You’re expecting thousands of inner city/South Liverpool/ Wirral blues with no direct transport links to Kirkby to endure the inevitable grid lock and inconvenience of all travelling in the same direction to and from Kirkby through only a couple of bottlenecks that pierce the M57, and everything will remain the same? Having been involved in the Merseytram project, I have seen transport figures for Kirkby and the differences in public transport capacities with Walton are very significant to say the least ..... That’s one of the reasons that we haven’t seen the transport report which was commissioned months before the vote as mentioned by Wyness in March. The initial outline several months ago, rightly alarmed the club and prompted them to immediately flag up the possibility of resurecting the tram proposals once more, such was the obvious shortfall. The lack of info since tells it’s own story.

Cliff McQueen
103   Posted 28/09/2007 at 21:08:17

Report abuse

I’m sorry lads but this argument is becoming the "dead parrot sketch" of football. We are in danger of becoming the Premiership laughing stock by continuing to argue as though the parrot is still alive. Whether the no voters like it or not democracy is here to stay. No referee has ever changed his mind because of protesting players and no-one is going to change this decision by pointing out that Kirkby is going cost gazillions. Of course it will. They all do.

Kirkby is going to happen lads. So let’s make it better by campaigning for the best possible stadium. It’s called positive thinking and it can change your life.
Tom Hughes
104   Posted 28/09/2007 at 21:31:37

Report abuse

Lee, I’m sure it’s unintentional on your part, but I think you you do the people of Walton and the place a terrible disservice there. It’s funny how terraced streets in Walton are considered run down in the likes of Walton yet are quaint character buildings in Woolton..... what a difference a couple of vowels make? Being close to a regenerated town centre or a regenerated major city? I think that’s a no-brainer. Accessible? I worked in Kirkby for 6 years. It can barely cope with a few thousand Industrial estate workers, and this in the city with the lowest car ownership and with only 1000 car spaces in anycase? Where these the same people employed to rubbish the Loop proposals.....? do they really know where the bulk of the fans will be travelling from or are we still talking about conversion of the lancashire country-folk? They’re knocking out of town stadia down all over the states precisely because of accessibilty issues..... some are only 30 odd years old.
Tom Hughes
105   Posted 28/09/2007 at 21:59:43

Report abuse

Cliff: they said Kirkby was going to happen once before..... they also said Kings Dock was, and they only needed £30m then. On both occasions I think the move secured over 80% of the vote.... I suppose it depends on your definition of democracy..
Tom Hughes
106   Posted 28/09/2007 at 22:05:32

Report abuse

GM: Bedragdled..... and KEIOC? Why this continued put-down and reference to this group......? none of them have posted on here. As far as being bedraggled.....?
Gavin Ramejkis
107   Posted 29/09/2007 at 15:46:11

Report abuse

Both Project Jennifer and the new stadium in Stanley Park will breathe new life into the whole area so to say it?s run down now doesn?t mean it will be much longer, remember how run down the entire docks looked before they were revamped, how much of a dump was Manchester City centre before the bombing and rebuild? We could and should be part of the regeneration of the city not running away from it to a much smaller location.
Tom Hughes
108   Posted 29/09/2007 at 19:59:13

Report abuse

Gavin, I agree. I quite like Walton, warts and all. I think there is something special in the way the stadium towers over the myriad of victorian streets and just hits you suddenly. I like the feel of the tight knit community that surrounds the stands. These are solid, well built houses not slums, and if people cared to look, most of them are immaculate. In fact it’s the area’s newer buildings that look the shabbiest IMO. Personally, I like the feeling of walking in the footsteps of 5 generations of my family and so many great former players. I also enjoy walking down a vibrant County Road on matchdays with dozens of pubs full of blues to chose from. It’s also great being so close to town and all the amenities there. This is all our backdrop and greatly adds to the experience IMO. It also can never be emulated in Kirkby.
James Kenyon
109   Posted 06/05/2008 at 13:37:20

Report abuse

Everton FC have been waiting for an oppurtunity like this for years, and now all you supposed Evertonians are just criticising. Goodison Park was fantastic in its day but now it is laughed at by most travelling supporters. The Lower Bullens for example has wooden seats and the seats are situated too close together.

I do realise that moving a football club to a different city is very rare in England but since when have Everton done things by the book! As far as I am concerned, people who are opposed to the Kirby Project are not true Evertonians because they would rather see the club rot in the ruins of a battered stadium!

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

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.