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

Who's Who and What's In It For Whom?

By Louis Platt :  14/12/2007 :  Comments (19) :

In the wake of the recent AGM, Louis Platt presents his analysis of who stands to benefit ? or not ? from each of the three stadium solutions that are currently open to Everton FC.

Beneficiary/Deprivee Kirkby Stadium
(Plan A)
Goodison Park
(Plan B?)
Scotland Road
(Plan C?)
Tesco Tesco will benefit from a move to Kirkby as they will be granted permission to be the sole supermarket in a town with a population of 40,000 and the nearest competitor over three miles away. If Everton decided on this option then Tesco will not be granted permission for a store in Kirkby. (However Tesco currently own land for a new store nearby. See Project Jennifer link below for more information.)
ASDA ASDA will not benefit as the permission will have been granted to Tesco for a new store at the site. ASDA will either be unaffected or they will have a new store in Kirkby town centre as part of Development Securities plan.
Kirkby Residents
Action Group
Pressure group will be upset at the prospect of a new football stadium in their town. Pressure group will be happy that an alternative site for Everton FC has been found.
Keep Everton
In Our City
Pressure group will be upset at the prospect of Everton FC playing outside of council boundaries. Pressure group will be happy that an alternative site within city boundaries has been constructed
Walton businesses Fans will be less inclined to use Walton businesses before and after the match if the club is four miles away. Increase in profits due to a larger number of fans attending the game. The businesses may see an improvement in fortunes due to increased number of supporters at the club due to redevelopment of stadium. Some changes to current habits.Fans traveling from south Liverpool or Wirral are less likely to travel to Walton before and after a game due to the location of the stadium.
Kirkby businesses Business earnings are likely to increase as the volume of visitors increases. Unknown. Kirkby will be regenerated by Development Securities, trade may increase as more people will be brought to the area thanks to the regeneration and introduction of new retail stores.
City centre businesses Fans are more unlikely to make use of city centre facilities before games as it is 7 miles away No changes to current habits Increase in profits due to a larger number of fans attending the game. Fans will be more likely to use city centre facilities due to location of the club.
Liverpool City Council They will incur a loss of revenue as the club will no longer be within their boundary. They will need to find funds to regenerate the Walton area due to absence of Everton FC. No change as the Liverpool City Council will still receive revenue from the club. Liverpool City council may have a stake in the stadium and revenue from the club (plus rent) may increase. They will need to find funds to regenerate the Walton area due to absence of Everton FC. (Architect Trevor Skempton is arguably under the Grosvenor umbrella as well as LCC as he is a Liverpool Urban Development Consultant. Mr Skempton will be given the Kudos of bringing Everton to Everton district)
Knowsley County Council Increase in revenue as they will have at least two new major businesses to the area (Everton and Tesco) . KCC will be given Kudos for attracting such large companies to the area in such a short period of time. KCC are likely to see an increase in revenue as the improvement of public facilities and new retail stores in Kirkby are opened. (Security Developments plan) but not as high an increase as a football ground would bring in.
Everton Board They will have brought a new stadium to Everton almost single handedly, their reputation will improve as a direct consequence. They, like all shareholders may benefit financially from the stadium move due to the rise in the value of club shares. Keith Wyness may lose respect from some fans for stating there is no plan B and having to back track on his comments. Although he is likely to be applauded for making a u-turn by others. They, like all shareholders may benefit financially from the stadium move due to the rise of increase in club share value.
Robert Earl Allegedly owns the naming rights for any new stadium so will benefit financially from a new stadium where naming rights can be sold. He is not likely to receive a high fee selling Goodison Park name to a corporate brand . Allegedly owns the naming rights for any new stadium so will benefit financially from a new stadium at Scotland Road. This is likely to be a larger amount than could be earned at Kirkby due to it's city centre location.
Local MPs Peter Kilfoyle of Walton will be quite rightly vilified for allowing Everton to leave Walton without passing comment. George Howarth and co will received a mixed response where ever the stadium is built. No change
Bestway No change to their circumstances. Liverpool City Council may offer alternative land to company. Liverpool City Council will perform a 'land swap' with Bestway. This means that Bestway will be given another strip of land in the council's boundary and LCC will become owners of the existing plot.
St. Modwen's Developments No change No change St. Modwen's Developments will benefit as their Project Jennifer site will be linked to city centre via the stadium and fans bringing more revenue into the area.
Kirkby Town Centre Kirkby town centre will be regenerated with a retail park, supermarket and a 50,000 capacity football stadium. Kirkby town centre will be regenerated with a retail park, supermarket and leisure facilities but without the football stadium. For more information on Security Developments plan see
Merseytravel Merseytravel are likely to see an increase in customers on match days due to semi-remote location of ground and the park and ride scheme. Merseytravel are likely to see an increase in customers on match days due to increased attendances Merseytravel are likely to see an increase in customers on match days due to increased attendances although existing transport links are excellent from city centre.
Steer Davies Gleave Steer Davies Gleave are not likely to be affected by any of the choices. Allegedly commissioned by Tesco for the Kirkby stadium site, they are likely to be involved with any other Everton plans due to their experience and the club have now established a good relationship with them.
Savills Same scenario as Steer Davies Gleave.
BARR Barr will construct stadium in Kirkby. No change - unless commissioned to help redevelop Goodison No change - unless commissioned to build Scotland Road stadium.
HOK No change No change - unless commissioned to help redevelop Goodison Will benefit from a stadium being at Scotland Road as it was based on their report. They were originally commissioned by Bestway.
Commuting Spectators Spectators will be expected to use a park and ride scheme two miles away from the site of the stadium. No change to existing transport habits. If attendances significantly increase, the club may have to look at a similar park and ride scheme to that planned at the Kirkby stadium. Some change to existing transport habits. The city centre offers a greater number of parking facilities and better public transport facilities than Kirkby and Walton.
Biggest Flaw The contribution required from Everton is unknown and seemingly doubles each month. Current estimate is around £150million. The cost of redeveloping Goodison Park is presently unknown and a lack of corporate stadium sponsor will lead to a larger shortfall when looking to finance the site. The costings of Scotland Road are unknown and the club believe the site is too small. The wallasey tunnel may need closing temporarily if several new bridges to be constructed over the tunnel road.

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

Derek Thomas
1   Posted 14/12/2007 at 04:03:41

Report abuse

Great post in a technical sense. Short version; Some of the winners will win, some of the losers will lose out and some won’t be affected.

Erik Dols
2   Posted 14/12/2007 at 08:03:51

Report abuse

Great who’s who in the Stadium-debate.

The last row is really disturbing to me: For all three options, the real costs are practically unknown, while it obviously is a big factor in making the right choice.
Terry Maddock
3   Posted 14/12/2007 at 10:49:20

Report abuse

Nice presentation.....BUT..

The last column is the only one that matters..while we all believe in location, location, location...what it will come down to is ££££££££££££££££££££££

If I have £80,000 I will be,maybe buying a house with a view of Bootle golf course...not Royal matter how much i would prefer the latter
Tom Hughes
4   Posted 14/12/2007 at 11:21:57

Report abuse

Using your analogy, you can get a great extension to your current home for £80,000 though, and if your location is already good (ie central with good public transport, and with lots of great personal memories and family ties), then why downgrade without the benefits?
Brian Donnelly
5   Posted 14/12/2007 at 11:59:20

Report abuse

Terry Maddock.
The only way we will get £££?s is by virtually filling the new stadium every game ? ie an average of 45 - 47,500 (90% - 95% capacity). Goodison is currently about 90% capacity.

Spectators will not turn up in those numbers with the 2 mile ban on match day parking which is being proposed by Kirkby council.

The train station can apparently only deal with about 4000 people per hour.

This results in 30 ? 40,000 having the following choice:
- Walking 2 miles
- Staying in the ground after the game for a considerable amount of time
- Queuing for busses ? one hell of a queue, even if the busses exist!

I suspect there are quite a number of current season ticket holders who will not renew their season tickets when we go to Kirkby - I won?t.

So where will all these new match going supporters come from? How many evening kick-off games will they attend, before they realise it is too much hassle?
Terry Maddock
6   Posted 14/12/2007 at 15:24:48

Report abuse

OH DEAR...have i touched a nerve..

I,ll make it will all come down to money...(my own preference , would be a state of the art 75,000 seater stadium..right next to the new Primark)..we will will go where we can afford to...planning permission allowing..

And especially for Tom..

Nobody has come up with a properly costed breakdown of how much it would cost to redevelop Goodison..that includes you. Although I do suspect the board have..But hey what do I know. after all , I trusted David Moyes to build us a successful team that plays attractive football.
Louis Platt
7   Posted 14/12/2007 at 15:46:54

Report abuse

Corrections -

KRAG is an acronym for Kirkby Residents Action Group and not Kirkby Residents Against Groundmove as I typed.

Also, I mistakenly stated that Grosvenor are responsible for Project Jennifer. I should have stated St. Modwen Developments. If one of the Toffeeweb team read this, can they please correct it?

Thank You
Colm Kavanagh
8   Posted 14/12/2007 at 16:19:37

Report abuse

Sorted, Louis.
Tom Hughes
9   Posted 14/12/2007 at 16:17:26

Report abuse

You haven’y touched a nerve at all, you also don’t own the copyright on trusting Mr Moyes as if that’s got anything to do with trusting the board with our stadium’s future. But for a start, 75,000 hasn’t been planned for at all in Kirkby. Regardless of KW’s soundbite which he hasn’t been allowed to repeat since. The transport consultants and Knowsely Council are very specific about that much. As far as costings are concerned, the club (BK himself) recently stated that it would cost £200m to redevelop Goodison which should suggest how much they have researched that particular option. Personally, I don’t believe it is all about cost at all. I have said before, even if this was to cost absolutely nothing, if we can’t get there easily and the design doesn’t do us justice then it will fail to be a better option than redeveloping GP. Meanwhile, there are a few extrapolated cost figures for redevelopment knocking about, you should know that GFE had a fully costed plan produced a few years ago. This could be readily updated. Mine has been roughly costed actually, however since there are several variations on the theme, including several optional phases that can return the required capacity this would require further decisions on the type of redevelopment to follow. For instance, 50,000 capacity can be generated by simply replacing the park end with a 15,000 seater stand (£20-30m dependent on format and trimmings)..... this cannot ever cost the same as Kirkby. There are options to preserve one or two of the Leitch stands, and/or replace/modify the stands in phases as and when demand requires, or funds become available. Therefore, I would have to cost each to give a full comparison. Suffice to say that Kirkby is looking like getting a new stadium for the cost 2-3 new stands. 2-3 new stands at GP would completely transform it, and all without the ridiculous transport baggage of Kirkby. As far touching a nerve, the recent AGM exposed plenty of raw nerves, most notably when the board were incapable of answering lots of concerned shareholder’s questions about the Kirkby project. The Cost figure for this is rising all the time, with nothing definitive released even now. I have worked on much larger construction jobs were the client has had a final cost in a fraction of the time that this has taken. "Practically nothing" is now edging towards £100m cost to the club. You could achieve almost anything at GP for that amount!!
Robert Carney
10   Posted 14/12/2007 at 17:34:45

Report abuse

Maddocks , it has nothing to do with how much money is swilling about.

Did not BK say this week that he met a so called mad Evertonian (called mr tesco) at the man shitty game five years ago. That is when the Kirkby deal was done. Bill has bought it hook line and sinker and all other interested parties have been fucked off. If we take his comments(bk) and analyse them over the last eighteen months the truth becomes clear. One day a book will be written, I wonder if you will still be apologising for the so called super blue.

The deal of exclusivity was just one big smokescreen among others.
Rob Hollis
11   Posted 15/12/2007 at 00:17:23

Report abuse

Have you seen the Audit Commission report on Liverpool City Council and behaviour at meetings. No change from the eighties. Keep Everton on Merseyside but don’t bother doing a deal with Dodge City Council....still a waste of space.
Tom Hughes
12   Posted 15/12/2007 at 12:13:45

Report abuse

Have you seen the number and size of developments taking place in "dodge" city at the moment? It’s the busiest Planning department outside London. Liverpool is on the up, whereas Knowsley is quite frankly nowhere on a world or even local stage.
That said, I’m not sure what the behaviour of politicians in meetings has to do with our club’s choice of location, especially as Kirkby generally contradicts the perceived wisdom regarding ideal location of Stadia.
Philip Bunting
13   Posted 15/12/2007 at 20:31:38

Report abuse

Tom, after reading and debating the conclusion i come to is, as you say, build a 15,000 seater stand at the Park end. Gradually over time buy up properties on the Bullins Road and Gladys street end, then develop these areas from here....

Thought iv always had was ’if Lcc were interested’ would they consider giving us land in Walton Park in exchange for Goodison as it sits. I imagine with a bit of thought Stanley Park could be extended into the present Goodison Park therefore regaining the land lost which liverpool will be building on. Could even help regeneration if you added a few apartment type complexes overlooking this new area. Anyway just a thought!
Terry Maddock
14   Posted 16/12/2007 at 19:36:16

Report abuse

Carney........are you Mulder and Scully in disguise?

All the suggestions put forward sound reasonable, apart from the loss of revenue over at least 2 seasons and the idea that the local populace is simply going to up sticks because we want to put seats where there homes are..!!!!

Also the cost (if available) of buying up the property directly behind the main stand, then tearing it down and replacing it with a modern 3 tier stand would, I believe, cost more than the whole of Evertons share of the new stadium (if of course Kirkby comes off).

I'm not against any of these ideas... REALLY! It's just that I dont see any of them as viable because we would not be able to hold our place in the transfer market if we were paying out for rebuiding whilst losing between 10 and 15 thousand fans a game....If anybody can show me actual proof that this can be done, I'll be the first to congratulate you... but I don't include in that speculation and figures pulled out of thin air.. the very things the board are constantly castigated for!

Rob Hollis
15   Posted 16/12/2007 at 20:52:59

Report abuse


All Liverpools development is now being driven by the private sector following a massive influx of European money to kick it all off. Liverpool was given this cash because it had become a bit third world by European standards and somebody had to do something. Sadly not the council. A new stadium would be a massive project that would recieve a lot of debate within the council and by the time the politicians had finished it would be 2020! I am not talking about the planners but the I am’s that seem to stand for election in the city decade after bloody decade.
Tom Hughes
16   Posted 17/12/2007 at 15:24:41

Report abuse

People are being displaced from their homes for the Kirkby project. It’s really not beyond the realms that similar cannot be acheived at GP if necessary. For a start one whole block facing the mainstand is semi-derelict and unoccupied already, and there is some speculation that the club own it. Another entire block facing the church end of the stand on Goodison Rd is already gone. Only the pub is in the way, and there is no reason why this could n’t be built into a development across that road if that was they we wished to expand. Similarly only 2 streets abutt Bullens Rd meaning infringement is minimal in that direction, and of course the Park end is a complete blank canvas. I can also show a sheme that will reach 50,000 seats without touching a single home, and with no significant loss in capacity for it to be achieved. These are not speculative soundbites but real drawn up to scale ideas.
Terry Maddock
17   Posted 17/12/2007 at 17:48:19

Report abuse

I'm sorry to sound like a stuck record..but again as much as i appreciate the thought and work put into alternatives..I reall y must repeat.

I?m not against any of these ideas... REALLY! It?s just that I dont see any of them as viable because we would not be able to hold our place in the transfer market if we were paying out for rebuiding whilst losing between 10 and 15 thousand fans a game....If anybody can show me actual proof that this can be done, I?ll be the first to congratulate you... but I don?t include in that speculation and figures pulled out of thin air.. the very things the board are constantly castigated for!

Tom Hughes
18   Posted 17/12/2007 at 15:38:44

Report abuse

I am not professing to be a business analyst at all and I agree most of the city-centre developments are private sector financed, but the process by which some developments have been enabled and investment secured is not dissimilar to that proposed for Kirkby. Similarly in terms of what is proposed by Bestway. If they can be allowed to interact with LCC and its planning office in the same way that Tesco have with Knowsley, especially given the scale and number of developments all around that site, and the desirability to fill that site, I cannot see why it cannot have a chance. New and successfull Downtown stadia have caused the biggest stadium building boom in the US in a century. But Bestway and LCC need a morsel of encouragement in the first place, otherwise they will find an alternative use for their land!!
Tom Hughes
19   Posted 17/12/2007 at 18:07:37

Report abuse

We need to find £80m+ for Kirkby, I’d say that’s going to make a sizeable dent in any transfer funds.

Secondly, where does 10-15,000 lost seats come from? Demolish the Parkend after last game of a season, Build a new 15,000 double decker some of it started behind the existing stand before end of season. Have lower tier in operation for the beginning of next season, meaning no loss in capacity, with upper tier commissioned during season, as achieved at Ipswich, and as at a more extrapolated method at Spurs. Capacity 50,000 by Christmas of the following season, cost £20-30m. There are a multitude of variations to take this forward in subsequent seasons. eg. Extend the Upper Bullens by 10-15 rows whilst still using that stand.... that will increase capacity by 2,600-3,900, but will necessitate a small pitch movement away from this stand to make these rows work..... ie 2-3 metres (cost £6-10m)
Following season demolish mainstand, new total capacity 42-44,000, again have lower tier in operation by early following season, capacity 50-53k..... etc etc. There is also the scheme I had drawn up which again never has a capacity below 39.5k, and increases upto just 57k. I could go on, the options are limitless, and can be done in phases unlike anywhere else, there also exists enough spare land at the Park end to think about enabling developments there to help fund the important first phase.

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.