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

And now from Kirkby ?

By Rob Bentham :  08/01/2008 :  Comments (35) :
At last... some stated figures to play with.

Planning Statement (Document 4):
6.7 The cost of the proposed new stadium is in the region of £130M at September 2007 prices, including basic facilities, required to achieve appropriate operating licences.

6.8 The only likely source of funding the Club would be able to generate in the short term would be a combination of naming rights and sponsorship deals relating to elements of the fit out along with debt. Early discussions that the club has had with some interested parties suggest that naming rights and sponsorship could potentially raise a significant contribution towards the costs of the new stadium. This would leave a shortfall of approximately £55M.

Proposed Stadium for Everton Football Club (Document 13)
8.9 Basic fit out would cost anywhere between £5 and £15M. A more extensive fit out would costs considerable more, anywhere between £16M and £40M.

Planning Statement (Document 4)
6.9 Up to £50M - £55M of the shortfall is met from the proposed developments south of Cherryfield Drive through the increase in the value of the land that would occur once planning permission has been granted for the enabling developments (Tesco is buying the land at current use value).

6.10 This funding package guarantees that a combination of naming rights and sponsorship deals plus a small increase in debt along with enabling development would enable the mid-level stadium to be delivered.

This breaks down like this:

  • Total cost of stadium £130M
  • Naming and shirts £75M (Figure for the build last quoted by KW)
  • Land £55M (Land partially swapped with KMBC and leased back to EFC)

The £55M shortfall might be said to be fictional as it is merely what the land will be worth. They call it enabling development. It makes it look like Tesco are giving us this money when they are not, they appear to be giving it?s value to KMBC.

Compare the figure for the naming rights and sponsorship deal. It is almost identical to Arsenal?s deal which breaks down like this; Arsenal are scheduled to receive: 

  • £72M (average £9M per year) 2004-2012
  • £18M (average £2.25M per year) 2012-2020.
  • From 2006-2014 this includes £5M per year (£40M) for Arsenal?s shirt sponsorship.
  • That?s £50M for the naming and £40M for the sponsorship.

The biggest such deal in UK history and one of the biggest in the world.

If I?ve read all of this correctly this means we will be getting a mid-level stadium for £75M which we will need to take a loan secured against the joint sponsorship deal. Or more likely a mortgage paid using the annual sponsor money, bearing in mind that on top of the £130M (£75M) there will be £5M to £40M for the fit out. That means a mortgage for between £80M and £115M.

?And now from Kirkby the quiz of the week?... ? Deal of the Century ???

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


Erik Dols
1   Posted 09/01/2008 at 07:09:21

Report abuse

"Basic fit out would cost anywhere between £5 and £15M. A more extensive fit out would costs considerable more, anywhere between £16M and £40M. "

Am I the only one who thinks that the extra £1M to £35M are a small investment if that gives us a ’better’ stadium where we could be more proud of? This could be our home for years to come...
Ajamu Mutumwa
2   Posted 09/01/2008 at 07:59:01

Report abuse

No Erik, you’re not the only one, When compared to the red herring called the "loop" which could effectively leave us with a smaller stadium than we have now (but it’s within the city boundary so that doesn’t matter!*$%?) and little possibility of getting real investment to re-develop Goodison it get’s my vote as a good deal.

I am still waiting for the usual Bestway, Cllr Bradlley statement of "Bestways offer the best possibility for Everton" which normally comes out within a day of Kirkby related statements from Everton.

I wonder why I am still waiting?
Erik Dols
3   Posted 09/01/2008 at 09:40:56

Report abuse

Don’t get me wrong, I’m against moving to Kirkby, but if we do it anyway, I just want the Kirkbydome to be the greatest stadium possible and not some "basic outfit"-stadium.
Will Mitchell
4   Posted 09/01/2008 at 10:29:05

Report abuse

That?s exactly what we?re getting Eric...
a ?basic?, ?mid-level? stadium for £150m to £200m.
Will Mitchell
5   Posted 09/01/2008 at 10:32:58

Report abuse

At Stamford Bridge last night facilities no better, in fact probably not as good as, Goodison. All this conjecture about Goodison being a shit hole makes me sick. We should knock down the Park End and build a massive stand to increase capacity, refurbish the rest of the ground and be proud of the one of the game?s greatest stadia.
Phil Martin
6   Posted 09/01/2008 at 10:31:56

Report abuse

Ive posted so many comments regarding this debate.
I have to agree with Erik. If we have to move to Kirkby lets have at least have a class stadium. If the loop is too small and LCC cant offer us any alternatives. Then ok Kirkby is the way forward.
However I catergorically refuse to see EFC move from a true football arena (as dilapadated as Goodison is) to a Tesco Value stadium.
I’m not being funny or stubborn. But a cheap build furnished with cheap materials does not equal NIL SATIS NISI OPTIMUM....as a wise man once put it - you cant polish a turd.
Ed MacDonald
7   Posted 09/01/2008 at 10:51:07

Report abuse

. . . and Stamford Bridge was built by KSS!

As was COMS which Man City acknowledged they should have done better - poor atmosphere and only part full DESPITE success on the park

These are KSS 2 flagship projects
Ajamu Mutumwa
8   Posted 09/01/2008 at 11:32:59

Report abuse

Ed MacDonald:

You can call me stupid, even silly but I liked the Chelsea ground. It was the first time I had visited Chelsea’s ground, and apart from the well crap so called jumbo tron (more like a little TV in the corner) I liked it.

The shops around it reminded me a bit like Watford - though Watford ground is where I’d ideally like to see Everton, a definite separation between town centre and football club, so apart from that this is what I would expect.



Goodison is past being a world class stadia and if the finances could be found (North West Development Agency anyone?) I’d love it to be rebuilt to a world class stadium. In the real world, I suspect that this won’t happen, thus the rationale to move

In relation to Kirkby, For me, transport is the key, and if they can’t solve that issue that would put me firmly in the "no" camp, as proved last night where a reasonably efficient transport public system got people away from the stadia without having to wait around for hours.

Getting to and from the stadia is part of the whole football experience.
Damian Wilde
9   Posted 09/01/2008 at 12:50:33

Report abuse

People keep going on about how it will be an average stadium. I’mI sure the facilities will be a whole lot better than Goodison (not hard). If it isn’t as posh as Arsenal’s or whatever, so what, you’re only going to the match! What it gives us, is bigger capacity, more boxes - more money, etc. We have to move, Goodison is falling apart. People say if we move, let’s spend loads and make ita great stadium, etc. Okay, if you boys want leather seats and carpeted concourses, pay for it yourselfs. Let’s not make it more expensive than it is, we’re not the richest club you know!
Craig Ashford
10   Posted 09/01/2008 at 13:36:28

Report abuse

Damian Wilde i have to say I totally disagree. I am an NO voter but am resigned to the fact we’re moving regardless as KW wants us too. BUT as we are moving lets not move for the sake of moving lets make it a awe inspiring atmosphere where the players feed of the buzz of the rows and rows of blues who have nice seat with nice views and nice facilities that offer nice beer to full our bellies. If you want to just watch the match go to Stanley park and stand on the side-lines or watch Everton on the box from you’re living room.
Phil Martin
11   Posted 09/01/2008 at 12:58:33

Report abuse

Damian,

you miss the point. I dont care about leather seats or gold plated handles on the toilet doors. When people say a class stadium they mean. Not an out of the box, bog standard design. The Kirkby plans have not an ounce of creativity or character about them. Symmetrical stands that could be anyone’s stadium if it weren’t for EVERTON embalzened on the stadium images. Just imagine when we seel those naming rights and EVERTON is removed in place of WALKERS or TESCO
It is just sterile.
I think you must realise that many more people would be happier to move to Kirkby if the stadium captured the imagine of the supporters.
We all know we havent got a big budget and cant build a San Siro but there must be a happy medium in between that and the Reebok Stadium-esque drivel currently being touted.
Ed MacDonald
12   Posted 09/01/2008 at 15:15:31

Report abuse

Good design doesn’t have to cost more!
Damian Wilde
13   Posted 09/01/2008 at 16:11:43

Report abuse

I haven’t seen the close up details of the stadium, but what I saw from the brochure I got sent, it looks decent (particularly lit up at night). I like the way the stands will be, as it means we can have 4 ends, rather than just one circular stadium. We can name the different stands then. I hear it was modelled closely on one in Germany, where the atmosphere is great. I think out design will give us that, rather than the poor atmosphere in these bowl stadiums. Our stadium will be far better than Bolton’s. I don’t think anyone can really comment until they’ve been in it.

As for removing the Everton name, don’t be so ridiculous. Of course it might say ’Chang Stadium’ or whatever, but are you seriously telling me it won’t have our crest and name on it and ’home of the blues’ all that, etc.? Typical comments, stirring up bull on toffeeweb. IIf you offered some of the people in falling down terraced house around Goodison a new modern house, do you think they’d say ’oh the new, more spacious, cleaner, more comfortable, easier access to, etc. house won’t do for me, as it has less character? I’m sure with time, they get used to it and love it and don’t miss all the constant repairs, etc. Yes, we might lose a bit of character, but it’ll have our crest, name, phrases ’people’s club,’ colour and fans in it and with time it will feel like home. Let’s make it ours!!

As so many have said, we’re going, that’s the design, get used to it and make the most of it. Anyone who doesn’t like it, don’t go and please stop MOANING about it!!! At least we won’t have obstructed views, which we have approx. 10 000 of at GP. I feel sorry for people who have to pay nearly £30 to have a post in their way, ridiculous. I for one look forward to seeing it and I’m sure it’ll be grand.
David Thompson
14   Posted 09/01/2008 at 18:08:33

Report abuse

Firstly, the figures above - where does £75M for shirt and naming rights come from. I have never seen this figure mentioned before.

Shirt sponsorship is already part of the turnover, and so cannot be considered as part of the new stadium revenue.

Secondly, Damien, do you live in cloud cuckoo land?

You like the pictures of the stadium in the brochure they sent you, particularly at night? What was it? The batman search lights?

You do know that the stadium design submitted with the planning application is different from those ’artists impressions’ and that the original ’modelled on Koln’ stadium idea has long since been abandoned, except maybe for the fact that there are four sides.

You probably think there will be car parking for all the fans, too eh?

Goodison isn’t falling down, so your analagy of someone in a house around Goodison being offered a nice new house doesn’t stack up. If they were being offered a house for free, you might think beggars can’t be chosers, but ask them to pay for it, and see where it goes. They would either decide they could afford it, and move, regardless of whether it was quite what they wanted, where they wanted and as good as they wanted, or they could decide that can’t afford it, and stay where they are, doing their house up bit by bit as they go along.

But then again, you probably think Kirkby is a debt-free, deal of the century.
Neil Pearse
15   Posted 09/01/2008 at 18:18:22

Report abuse

I am a little baffled again by many of the comments here on Kirkby. And of course I am about to repeat myself for the nth time on this subject, but can’t resist.

Okay, so it looks like we are going to get a ’mid range’ stadium outside the city centre which does not have the same level of fit out and amenities as the Emirates. Here’s two hypotheses for you to consider as to why this is so.

(A) Kenwright and Wyness prefer to have a less than top range stadium outside the city centre because they think this is the best thing for Everton and anyway just like it better that way.

(B) We can’t afford to build the Emirates in the centre of town.

You choose.
Dave Thompson
16   Posted 09/01/2008 at 18:40:16

Report abuse

Neil,

Why do we have to chose between those options. The vote was taken for a ’world-class’ stadium - did you ever see ’mid-range’ or ’basic’ mentioned on the voting document. No, because it would have been laughed out of town.

If we can’t have what was offered, let’s drop out and stay at Goodison. It’s not falling down, and another option will come along.
Neil Pearse
17   Posted 09/01/2008 at 18:51:58

Report abuse

Dave, which other option will come along? Anyway, we are already behind most of our competitor clubs in moving to a stadium which will generate the revenues we need to continue to compete. We cannot afford to wait.

Personally, I am not at all surprised by anything about the ’mid range’ nature of the Kirkby stadium, and I still voted Yes. In fact I am pleased that at last they have come out and said what was blindingly obvious. Of course the Everton management put the best face on it, but Yes voters I know were not naive enough to think that we were going to get a top end facility. Or that we were moving to Kirkby even though we could have afforded to build on Stanley Park.

It is also worth noting that the RS Chief Executive and extremely wealthy owners are currently having a crisis meeting in New York to discuss how they are going to scale back their stadium plans so that they can afford them. I doubt now they will be build anything as good as the Emirates either.

Of course we should continually press to have the best possible stadium that we can afford. But I think that most of the criticisms of Kirkby amount to a desperate cry of frustration and disappointment that we cannot afford better. Me too, but that doesn’t change what we can afford.
Dave Thompson
18   Posted 09/01/2008 at 22:08:11

Report abuse

Ok Neil, but the extra revenue generated at Kirkby (if any) will now have to go to offset loans to pay for it, not for teambuilding.

According to the planning application, the cost has already risen by £30M from the figures quoted 5 months ago.

For that money, we could be re-developing Goodison.

We didn’t get the Kings Dock, but something else came along. Why wouldn’t it come again?
Kevin Mitchell
19   Posted 09/01/2008 at 22:16:15

Report abuse

Neil Pearse. The fact that you and a lot of other yes voters are happily content with this basic, mid range call it what you like piece of shit in the outback says everything abot the amount of thought you put into making your vote.
Didn’t you realise that a majority no vote would have made Kenwright think about something better.
Neil Pearse
20   Posted 10/01/2008 at 01:31:51

Report abuse

Kevin, I am not "happy" about Kirkby, as I have repeatedly said on this site. I would be much happier, as we all would be, if we had got King’s Dock or were building on Stanley Park. Of course. (Just in case there is any doubt, I would also be happier if we had Cech in goal, Fabregas in midfield and Torres upfront.)

However, when I made my vote I also took into account the reality of what, not being a very rich club, we can actually afford. Kenwright can "think of something better" all he likes; the problem is that he and we can’t pay for it.

Since you obviously did a lot of thinking before making your No vote, I would love to hear from you how we can afford the more expensive options than Kirkby that both of us (and no doubt Bill as well) would prefer.
Rob Bentham
21   Posted 10/01/2008 at 08:59:23

Report abuse

David

Document 4 of the planning application states "The only likely source of funding the Club would be able to generate in the short term would be a combination of naming rights and sponsorship deals relating to elements of the fit out along with debt. " after stating that the the total cost would be starting at £130m leaving £55m shortfall. The £75m is what the club believe would be funded by naming, sponsorship and an increase in debt.
Of course we won?t get £75m! Our profile is not as valuable to an investor as Arsenal?s. Emirates wanted to be "the Coca Cola of Airlines" (their words) so they paid a premium for that deal. Arsenal are not getting that money up front, but it does help to pay their mortgage.
The interesting wording here is that the stadium is being funded by an increase in debt. We will not get money up front for sponsorship or naming and tesco are not giving us £55m for a stadium. We are funding our own stadium by taking on more debt.
We could do that anywhere. It?s just a matter of how much mortgage we want to take on.
Bill Dean
22   Posted 10/01/2008 at 11:10:49

Report abuse

Mid level stadium, basic facilities, lack of parking, park & ride !!! Christ, is this really what you yes voters wanted ? On the transport assessment 1.20 they even reckon 2% 1,045 will go to the match on pushbikes !! and 1.18 says 4% by taxis which will mean 180 friggin taxis trying to drop off. The whole thing stinks and has done from the very start only some couldnt see it. Dave Thompson, spot on.
Phil Martin
23   Posted 10/01/2008 at 12:57:11

Report abuse

Damian, How can you get excited about drawings of an evening match with flood lights? Surely that isnt enough to decide if the stadium is going to be any good.
Mid range is basically the cheapest of the cheap. ERC cant say bargain basement level but that is what we are going to get for "free". Surely we can redo the parkend at twice the size with a load of exec boxes. Not a long term proposal but it would be completed in a year or two (max) and would boost the coffers in the short term considerably. While we look at a more long term solution. Kirkby falls short on so many levels but we seem to be taking the bait from KW and BK that this is last chance saloon.
There is always other options and maybe we shouldnt be rushing to build a cheap lego stadium out of town -under the pretence that if we dont, EFC will turn into a NForest or Sheff Wed.
We arent in that situation and redevelopment of the Parkend allowing us to generate a short term cash boost would allow us to make a decision that isnt being rushed through.
Damian Wilde
24   Posted 10/01/2008 at 14:13:49

Report abuse

All these experts on redeveloping parts of Goodison, hey. Why don’t you offer your services to BK and the industry? People keep going on about we should do this, do that, without any real expertise in the area. How can they possibly say something will be okay when they don’t all the information about the different variables involved. Maybe that’s one thing the club should do, give us more detail about all of the issues.

I don’t really know about building or redeveloping stadiums, so I’m happy to leave it to Everton. Why would they do something which isn’t right? Why would they stitch up a club that they own and love? They’re trying their best, some people are just so NEGATIVE. I suspect I’ll be seeing some of you in my out-patient clinic at some point. At least BK is a Blue, so he has the club at heart and has on board all the nescessary Professionals, who actually know the ins and outs of finance, construction, etc. What will be will be.

PS Dave Thompson - get a grip will ya lad.
Michael Kenrick
25   Posted 10/01/2008 at 15:01:07

Report abuse

Ah, Bless, Daimien. That is really sweet.

The trouble is, in the real world away from your NHS-funded waiting room, there’s this thing called the Money Trail. That might, just might, affect some of the "good of the club" thinking and planning that is ging on right now.

Just a thought... FWIW!
phil Martin
26   Posted 10/01/2008 at 15:48:40

Report abuse

Look noone is claiming to be an expert. But a lot of fnas dont believe missing out on Kirkby will damage the club. Kenwight may well be a life long Evertonian but that doesn’t make him competent.He’s strugled to bring in investment since his reign began.
KW is however another proposition. His bonus are based on money the club generates. So far he’s asset stripped the club and he is the driving force behind the Kirkby move. All i say is be careful that these people in power do not always no best and not always have the same motives for moving as the average fan.

Why cant we improve the Parkend cheaply to increase the capacity to 45,000 with lots of new exec boxes? As i mentioned before this isnt a long term solution but surely it would take the pressure of finding a new home immeadiately. The whole line of ’we must move now or we are finished’ is BS. Yes we need to move but surely if we can increase capacity a little sooner (than building a brand new stadium) and increase our turnover in the short term. Its just extra breathing space while we wait for the right opportunity to move. Kirkby fails to his the mark on so many requirments. I just dont understand the mentality that we have to move NOW or we are doomed.
Bill Dean
27   Posted 10/01/2008 at 15:52:57

Report abuse

Damien. I’m a Surveyor with a local authority. When our authority decides it wants to purchase properties and we inform them there is nothing wrong with them they tell us make it so in the report. Thats exactly what KSS have done in their Goodison report. A load of crap. And why do so trust our loving leader ? This is the same man who insisted the Kings Dock must be called "the new Goodison" thus waiving any naming rights, just how many companies world wide would have liked their name emblazoned on one of the greatest waterfronts ? Then we have Fortress Fund debacle and the NTL fiasco ! It just goes on and this from the man who said, I quote, " I dont want to be known as the man who sold Wayne Rooney, and the man who took us out of Liverpool". Get in the real world.
Robert Carney
28   Posted 10/01/2008 at 19:36:59

Report abuse

Bill Kenwright has admitted he first spoke to Leahy many years ago. That is why we are stuck with the prospects of going to a shitty stadium with no access or pulic transport.

Was it at this point a cheif exeutive left without explanation ?And then was replaced by Wyness.

He may stick to his words with Leahy (very loyal to him), fuck the rest of us.

We are only paying customers. The man is so economical with the facts he is becoming to look like the alleged liar many on this site think he is.

Is the true reason why no-one else has come in.

Kevin Mitchell
29   Posted 10/01/2008 at 19:24:38

Report abuse

Neil. Why can’t we finance the redevelopment of Goodison much like the Kirkby project? With a new Goodison surely we can sell the naming rights and sponsorship just like Kirkby for even a better price since it would be in the city.
Bottom line for me Niel is that Kirkby dosn’t tick any boxes at all. Location, stadium, transport.. Why would we want to destroy 130 years of history, most of it good for something that simply is not good enough and never will be.
Philip Bunting
30   Posted 10/01/2008 at 20:43:26

Report abuse

Reading through these comments the fans are def split 50/50 on the stadium issue and i must admit i swing both ways on the issue. But what unites us all at the moment is how well the team is doing and how we are progressing on the field with our style of play. During the summer we managed to secure Arteta, Cahill and sign Yakubu all on long 5 year contracts....ask yourself why? because of the promise made by the club to make progress, the players are excited and these should be good times....I feel the fans have no option or we will end up like Notts Forest.
Dave Thompson
31   Posted 10/01/2008 at 22:25:15

Report abuse

Damien..,,apologies. You clearly don’t live in cloud cuckoo land.

More like Never Never Land.

Trust the board? They know best?

Oh! Ok then....
Mark Stone
32   Posted 10/01/2008 at 22:15:10

Report abuse

Actually Phil there’s a split there too. Read Tony Marsh’s laughable article.
Jim Lloyd
33   Posted 10/01/2008 at 23:48:19

Report abuse

Rob, I tried to keep up with all the technical stuff but have to admit to being a duffer. But if I’ve got a reasonably near idea, it means we end up with a mediocre stadium, after giving up our birthright and leaving Liverpool.
Damian, I’ve read your posts and, with the gratest of respect, do you really know what you are are talking about?
We seem to have the decision taken away from us now, but miracles can happen, and the debate is beginning to take the shape of what kind of stadium are we going to have in Kirkby.
Well, I can’t help but think that if we leave liverpool, it won’t really matter what kind of stadium we have. We will have made the biggest mistake in our history. Sounds really dramatic doesn’t it. That’s because it is dramatic.
I’ve followed the Blues since I was a kid, and that is many years ago now. I was privileged to watch some great football in the sixties, with players like, Young, Vernon, Coolins, Ring, Parker, Kay, Scott. My god, it was poetry in motion. I’ve also seen some absolute dross over the years. All in all though, I aways felt that it was my team; and my team were the true guardians of great football in this city.
I’ve seen the other lot slowly overtake us, so in the past thirty years or so, we have almost disappeared, except for two or three great years in the eighties.
Now, we are creeping out of this city which I am proud of; and we are leaving it to another team. For God’s sake don’t tell me we are almost in Liverpool, or that it doesnt’t matter anyway. The way I see it, we will have left this city to the reds and it breaks my bloody heart.
We might end up with a reasonable stadium but my guess is that it will be "functional" at best.
I’d rather play in Stanley Park with the goals made up of coats down, than leave Liverpool.
Still, what do I count, or the 10000 who voted No.
Mr Kenwright, in my humble opinion, will never give give up the chairmanship of Everton, and if you ever get down to the Echo arena and see what could have been, then ask yourself why Gregg left!
Ben Dyson
34   Posted 11/01/2008 at 11:38:32

Report abuse

Why not form an Everton Militia to invade Kirkby and annex the proposed stadium site as part of Liverpool? Then KEIOC could become MKPOOC - "Make Kirkby Part Of Our City". I’ve got a job lot of pitchforks for sale at very special prices if anyone is interested.
Rob Wilkinson
35   Posted 16/01/2008 at 22:45:41

Report abuse

I'm sorry to keep the whole Kirkby debate going but I thought that a Saturday night drunken conversation needed to be raised to hear some sober views! If the move does go ahead (I for one hope it doesn't) when we do finally win some silverwear, where will the bus driver's tom tom be pointing? Kirkby Town Hall? Kirkby's also in a totally different county to Liverpool so this shows we are going to totally loose our identity... aren't we???

Add Your Comments

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

Log in now

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



© ToffeeWeb
Menu
OK

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