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

The Deal of The Century... But For Whom?

By David  Thompson :  12/06/2008 :  Comments (64) :
Minutes of the Knowsley Planning Committee meeting on Monday are now available on their website, along with a few other gems. You are going to be truly astonished at some of these:
"Within six months of commencement of development the Club shall provide to the Council, for its approval, a programme that shall provide for the Council?s use of the Stadium. As a minimum, the programme shall allow for a maximum of 100 free uses by the Council of the Stadium facilities annually; use of the Stadium facilities at a discounted rate for all additional events above the free quota; and, a discounted rate on catering facilities.

"If an agreed programme for stadium use is not provided then the Club will be required to reimburse the Council its costs incurred in securing alternative accommodation."
Yes - we remiburse Knowsley if we can't fit them in for one of their 100 free uses.
"The Developer and/or the Club are required to pay the following contributions prior to commencement of Development:

3.1.1 Local Highway Improvement Contribution: the amount of £250,000.00 towards the cost to the Council of monitoring the impacts of the Development on local roads and the pedestrian network and the implementation of measures designed to mitigate any adverse impacts;

3.1.2 Railway Station Study Contribution: the amount of £50,000.00 which shall be used by the Council to review the means by which Kirkby Railway Station could be further improved to accommodate match-day demand beyond that currently predicted. The study shall report on the practical and commercial feasibility of any options for improvement.

3.1.3 Controlled Parking Zone Establishment Contribution: the amount of £1,000,000.00 which shall be used by the Council to establish a controlled parking zone scheme within the vicinity of the site. Members should note that in the event that the actual cost incurred by the Council exceeds £1,000,000.00 the Developer will be required to pay the difference to the Council;

3.1.4 Traffic Regulation Order Contribution: the amount of £25,000.00 which shall be used by the Council towards the promotion and establishment of any Traffic Regulation Orders and other traffic management measures necessary as a consequence of the Development;

3.1.5 Intelligent Transport Contribution: the amount of £150,000.00 which shall be used by the Council towards establishing an intelligent transport system in the vicinity of the Site;

3.1.6 Market Contribution: the amount of £250,000.00 which shall be used by the Council towards improvements to Kirkby Market;

3.1.7 Playing Fields Contribution: the amount of £100,000.00 which shall be used by the Council towards the provision of the playing fields to replace those lost as a result of the Development;

3.1.8 Developer?s Council Officers Contribution: the as yet uncalculated amount which shall be applied by the Council to fund the appointment of temporary staff.

3.1.9 Club?s Council Officers Contribution: the as yet uncalculated amount which shall be applied by the Council to fund the appointment of: one building control officer and one stadium management officer; and

3.1.10 Air Quality Contribution: the amount of £23,000.00 which shall be used by the Council towards the cost of monitoring nitrogen dioxide contributions on Bewley Drive for three years following the occupation of the Development.

3.2 The Developer is required to pay the following contributions prior to occupation of the Development and/or Stadium:

3.2.1 Travel Plan Contribution: the amount of £150,000.00 towards the cost to the Council of monitoring transport choices of those visiting the development and encouraging sustainable means of transport;

3.2.2 Controlled Parking Zone Annual Contribution: the amount of £200,000.00, to be paid annually, to the Council as a contribution towards the ongoing management and enforcement of the controlled parking zone scheme. Members should note that in the event that the actual cost incurred by the Council in anyone year exceeds £200,000.00 the Developer will be required to pay the difference to the Council;"

"The Stadium Travel Plan is required to include measures aimed at:

? promoting the use public transport and non-car modes of transport to/from the Stadium;

? the provision of off-street park & walk and off-street park and ride sites together with requisite shuttle buses to accommodate 16,500 visitors to the stadium;

? the provision of special event day buses to accommodate 6,800 visitors to the stadium;

? the provision of coaches and coach park to accommodate 5,100 visitors to the stadium;

? the provision of public transport arrangements to include sufficient train capacity to accommodate 3,800 visitors travelling by train;

? ensuring sufficient publicity for parking restrictions in the vicinity of the site;

? the assessment of additional traffic impacts;

? providing incentives for those travelling to the stadium by car to arrive early and leave late; and ? ensuring monitoring measures are in place.

4.4 The Stadium Travel Plan is to be amended, and submitted to the Council for approval, on an annual basis to take into account the projected average attendance at the Stadium and the projected modal share for the following season.

4..5 Members should note that in the event that the transport arrangements set out in the Stadium Travel Plan are not achieved, the Stadium capacity for a Major Event (ie. one that attracts 7,500 or more visitors) shall be reduced on a pro-rata basis. The Stadium is not to be occupied until a Railway Station Improvement Scheme has been completed to the satisfaction of Merseytravel and the Council. This scheme is to be agreed between the Developer and Merseytravel, the cost of which is to be borne by the Developer and shall not exceed £3,700,000.00."
And saving the best for last....from another report dated 4/6/08
6.1.3

The Council is in discussions with Everton about sharing non-football related revenues above those which are forecast in the Club's business plan. These discussions are also yet to be finalised."
Who is really making the money from this stadium?

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


Gareth Humphreys
1   Posted 12/06/2008 at 14:13:17

Report abuse

David, interesting reading and hardly surprising that KMBC wnat it to go ahead.

You would hope that none of the above costings have come as a surprise to Tesco or Everton and as such are already in their projected figures.

What it does show though is that it is hardly the cash cow that it has been portrayed.
Gerard Madden
2   Posted 12/06/2008 at 14:31:27

Report abuse

It’s a deal o’ the century for both Everton Football Club - a modern 50,000 extendable to 60,000 stadium at such small cost to meet our needs AND for Labour Knowsley Council - community uses, conference facilities etc. It will do wonders for attracting even further regeneration of North Knowsley and attracting more people to live there. Kirkby is a town of 42,000 (Skem has only 38,000) but the intention was for Kirkby to be 70,000 - I think there’s a great chance this particular part of scouseland will see a dramatic increase in population and investment in the coming decades with the stadium/retail being the catalyst.
Neil McKinney
3   Posted 12/06/2008 at 14:38:31

Report abuse

And your point is?

You have no idea what this really means or, as Gareth points out, whether this is a surprise to EFC or Tesco.

Leisure facilities will be/have been lost to clear the site, which as I understand it is why Tesco needed us as an enabler. The council then want something back for the loss. Yeh, really strange.

Destination Kirkby is a cheap design with many issues to debate, but this is just lazy. If you want to pick holes in the project then you’ll have to do better than this. Jeez.

COYB
Paul Jones
4   Posted 12/06/2008 at 14:51:34

Report abuse

Thanks Mr Ross I mean Mr Madden for the commercial interlude. You better get back to your job, dont let Bully catch you on the interwebs.
Gareth Humphreys
5   Posted 12/06/2008 at 14:53:37

Report abuse

Gerrard, as I have said many times before these threads are not about what is best for Kirkby but what is best for Everton.
The "deal of the century" line is probably more embarrasing to BK than KW himself.
The initial costing of £78m was being funded via the following routes :
(1) Sale of Goodions - problem - mortgaged to the hilt.
(2) Sale of Bellfield to developers - problem - site hugely downvalued due to planning problems.
(3) Rediculous value of naming rights for the new stadium by guess who.

I hope you can afford the hike in your season ticket price because banks are quite funny about wanting their money back.
Ray Lupton
6   Posted 12/06/2008 at 14:57:44

Report abuse

Gerrard

You consistently miss the plot don’t you. Yes it is a modern, extendable ground for a relatively small sum by today’s standards but this will be achieved by ripping the heart and soul out of our club.

Everton have consistently proved that they are inept at running the football club with constant ticketing and merchandising fiascos. Everton do not maximise the earning potential of the current ground, ticketing and marketing operations as it is. The money spent at Kirkby could be far better spent at GP, even just on 2 sides of the ground to redevelop the corporate and club facilities.

I for one pray Kirkby doesn’t happen, I will never set foot in the place if it does.
EJ Ruane
7   Posted 12/06/2008 at 15:09:16

Report abuse

When posts like this appear, I can imagine Gerard (the real Everton supporter and nothing to do with Tesco HONEST) Madden, being in the bogs and BK screaming ’Stop wasting time in there! Get back to your computer and say ’its all bollocks’ what they’re saying about Kirkby............AND WHERE’S MY PIES!?’ (cut to Gerard shuffling down a corridor, pulling up his kecks and sticking a rolled-up copy of The Sun into his arse-pocket)

Paul OHanlon
8   Posted 12/06/2008 at 15:13:50

Report abuse

Neil, I think David’s point is pretty damn good one. The whole point of moving is to increase revenue. We’re at least all agreed on that aren’t we?

So do you not think it’ll put a big dent in those increased revenues if we’re having to give away the stadium facilities for free 100 times a year and at a discounted price there after?

And what about "The Council is in discussions with Everton about sharing non-football related revenues above those which are forecast in the Club’s business plan".

After rising construction costs, higher interest rates, the bellefield money seemingly gone (or at least to be dramatically lowered) and the council now taking it’s share, how much of that supposed £10m additional funding will we have left?

Do you really think the shite will be letting LCC put these kind of stipulations into their planning application? HA!
Richard Harris
9   Posted 12/06/2008 at 15:31:29

Report abuse

"If an agreed programme for stadium use is not provided then the Club will be required to reimburse the Council its costs incurred in securing alternative accommodation."

So what are the Council doing for us ?? So it’s all aboard the EFC gravy train and us, the real fans, will end up paying for everyones nice little bonus and all the facilities that the Council would then claim that they are providing for the people !!
David Thompson
10   Posted 12/06/2008 at 15:41:21

Report abuse

Neil McKinney,

If you don’t get the point of my post, you’re way beyond redemption as far as Kirkby goes.

You mention that leisure facilities have been lost to make way for this development and the Council want something back. I think you’ll find that they plan to pocket £12M in pieces of silver for that bit of land (although it remains to be seen whether it should have been more)

The facilities that have been lost at Kirkby included areas for functions and weddings etc. Are Knowsley, with their 100 free uses, going to be in competition with Everton for the same business with them getting a discount on the food? If we are double-booked, are we going to pay for them to rent somewhere else to then rent on?

We found out last week there will be no concerts - cited by Wyness as a source of income. We now find we are looking to give away some of the non-football income if it’s not in the business plan.

Like I said. Deal of the Century. For who?

We are supposed to be the enabling development in all of this, but we are being led by the nose, by Tesco and KMBC
Tony Kibble
11   Posted 12/06/2008 at 15:46:08

Report abuse

the bit I especially like is the wording of:
3.2.2 Controlled Parking Zone Annual Contribution: the amount of £200,000.00, to be paid annually, to the Council as a contribution towards the ongoing management and enforcement of the controlled parking zone scheme. Members should note that in the event that the actual cost incurred by the Council in anyone year exceeds £200,000.00 the Developer will be required to pay the difference to the Council;"

" a contribution towards" but if it goes over 200,000 then we have to pay the difference. Doesn’t sound like a contribution to me, more pay the full amount whatever the cost.
tommy tank
12   Posted 12/06/2008 at 15:47:31

Report abuse

I can’t wait for this nonsense of a scheme to be called in for public inquiry and the subsequent press conference by BK announcing the end of the debacle once and for all and the parting of ways with the perpetually incompetent Keith Wyness, and that idiot that he employs to post propoganda on EFC websites, Gerrard Madden, will disappear like smoke.

happy days ahead.
Julian Evitts
13   Posted 12/06/2008 at 15:36:38

Report abuse

I not surprised by the various contributions required for travel and road upgrades, playing fields etc.

It’s good surely that the stadium can’t open until railway stations roads etc are ready?

What does concern me is that we have to let KMBC have 100 days a year free use. There was no mention of that before the vote.

If you deduct 30 home games in a year, we have to let KMBC have the stadium free 30% of the remaining time.

One of the reasons we are meant to need a new stadium is becuase we can’t generate enough revenue as the facilities at GP are inadequate. There is no point however in having better facilities if we have to hand 30% of the use of the to someone else.
Tony Cee
14   Posted 12/06/2008 at 15:34:09

Report abuse

I read that above documents last night and spent another sleepless night questioning the (in)sanity of it. How long can this ridiculous charade carry on for ? Does the club not consider the turmoil it is putting the fans through ? Everything, absolutely everything about this project has been about deceit and lies, from the vote to the glossy bloody brochure which had so many of us swooning until now, that most of us realise what a terrible idea it the whole nonsense actually is. I pray every day that this nightmare is over with soon and we see what should have been Plan A from the beginning, redeveloping Goodison Park. Im sick of hearing that it cant be done when it quite clearly can and im sick of hearing that Wyness is an expert in his field and we shouldnt question what he does, but it seems to me that he is totally incompetent at his job. He surely surely has to go before he destroys our history, heritage and our club, then walks away smiling, probably with a big fat cheque ( apt ) to carry on elsewhere. I despise him so much its not healthy.

GOODISON PARK = EVERTON FC
Paul OHanlon
15   Posted 12/06/2008 at 16:03:02

Report abuse

Hear hear Tommy Tank
Jay Harris
16   Posted 12/06/2008 at 15:58:28

Report abuse

Why are people still going on about expanding the stadium when it is quite clearly stipulated by KMBC that the maximum capacity will be 50401.

Wasnt KW’s reason for rejecting the loop that it could not hold 75000.

Ever more bullshit from the "Crime of the Century"
GavDavies
17   Posted 12/06/2008 at 15:57:59

Report abuse

This whole thing just gets worse by the day! But let’s be honest it was always going to cost us something regardless of what Bully and Bill were saying. What truely amazes me is this extra revenue nonsense! Who is going to use the stadium other than Everton? Concerts will continue to go to Manchester M.E.N and the C.O.M.S which really isn’t that far from Kirkby or if any concerts came to Merseyside you’ve got the Echo Arena and eventually you’ll have L~*erpools new impressive stadium actually in the Capital of Culture which incidently has no end of attractions to enjoy before and after a gig!

If your a business in Liverpool your corporate gigs will take place in any number of trendy hotels or Liverpools new ground. Same for Manchester. Why is anybody going to want to use Kirkby? It just doesn’t make sense to me.
John hughes
18   Posted 12/06/2008 at 16:03:21

Report abuse

I’ve said it before.....it’s not Evertons pockets that are being lined. Maybe someone who pretends to act in the best interests of EFC will be getting his pockets lined if it goes ahead. Destination Kirkby is about TESCO and KMBC, Everton are the makeweights. This article post just goes to prove it. Get Wyness out now while we still have a soul. Leave Kirkby the fuck alone and if there’s nothing available now we’ll wait. Doesn’t the best come to those who wait????
sonny phillips
19   Posted 12/06/2008 at 16:03:52

Report abuse

’’a programme that shall provide for the Council?s use of the Stadium. As a minimum, the programme shall allow for a maximum of 100 free uses by the Council of the Stadium facilities annually’’

If KMBC use their maximum they will be using our stadium TWICE a week. We will use it twice a month for league games, plus the odd midweek league game on top of that and home cup ties. When all the logistics of event management are taken into account how will they find time for all the non football events which we were told would make the whole thing a success financially for Everton?
John Walss
20   Posted 12/06/2008 at 16:02:12

Report abuse

I think I might just give up going the match cos the whole thing just does my head in. The game has been taken over by dickheads and SKY are to blame.
Tony Kibble
21   Posted 12/06/2008 at 16:25:43

Report abuse

Sonny, Everton will not be allowed to hold any non football related events at the stadium.

Another lie that eminated from the boardroom.
Steve Green
22   Posted 12/06/2008 at 16:24:07

Report abuse

Will the Council using the stadium twice a week have an adverse effect on the pitch condition and thus our standard of play? Please take this point this point seriously Tony et al and don?t come back with make no difference, ball always in the air, hoofball etc. This is important I feel. Will council utilisation be about other parts of the stadium rather than the pitch area?
Steve Taylor
23   Posted 12/06/2008 at 16:41:38

Report abuse

So they’re going to get use of it, presumably for meetings / functions / presentations etc - so what?

I don’t see the issue.

As for the other costs, are these not standard fare on a development of this nature?

Richard Harris
24   Posted 12/06/2008 at 16:58:00

Report abuse

I look forward to the Council stamping their feet and shouting "but we had the stadium booked first" when Sky change the fixtures at last minute !! Perhaps the Council will threaten to take their ball back and go home in tears. A bad joke just gets worse......
Roy Coyne
25   Posted 12/06/2008 at 16:59:07

Report abuse

I know it's wrong but that piece of low life shite Madden gets me that angry that I just cannot be bothered putting him in his place Maybe that's his plan ... any how, Tommy Tank, I?m with you mate.
Steve Taylor
26   Posted 12/06/2008 at 17:02:51

Report abuse

Where does it say that these cost are ;

a) Additional to what has already been agreed

b) Will fall on EFC to pay them - rather than the developers

David Thompson
27   Posted 12/06/2008 at 17:31:34

Report abuse

Steve Taylor,

It’s in the Planning Application:

2.5 EFC will meet all reasonable costs associated with establishing match day residents parking schemes across areas of Kirkby identified by the Council as requiring such
provision, up to a capped figure. EFC will also meet the reasonable costs of any future extension to the areas covered by such scheme, if it becomes apparent within 1 year of opening of the stadium that this is necessary to regulate parking or encourage greater use of Park and walk/Park and Ride facilities.

So that’s £1M up front and at least £200k per year. More from the managers transfer kitty.

They’re going to have to fill every seat, every week, just to finance the costs involved, and I still think they will fall short. All of the extra money-making potential is gradually being sucked out.

Thank God (Please God!) the whole thing is not likely to happen
Steve Taylor
28   Posted 12/06/2008 at 18:00:19

Report abuse

David - without knowing the exact running costs of GP - you can’t make a direct comparison.

You’re making an assumption that these costs will be higher at Kirkby.

There’s ongoing discussion (according to the document) re: the revenues from non football related stadium uses - which at the moment at GP is minimal.

Personally there’s nothing in that piece that’s IMO anything out of the ordinary for a development of this nature - most of those costs will be swallowed by the developers & the rest will have been discussed prior to the issue of this document - so the club will be aware of it’s liabilities - I don’t see it as another reason to have a bash at the Kirkby project tbh.

Jimmy Inson
29   Posted 12/06/2008 at 17:42:43

Report abuse

I cannot believe what these shitebags are doing. I feel physically sick.
Are they so incompetent that they don?t realise how incompetent they are?
Graham Atherton
30   Posted 12/06/2008 at 18:03:27

Report abuse

I think you will find a ’use’ of the stadium is everything from a meeting for 6 people to hundreds at a conference.
In a stadium that can cater for 3000 meals on matchday there is room for more than one ’use’ per day?
Karl Masters
31   Posted 12/06/2008 at 18:03:21

Report abuse

What strikes me most about this list is how much of it relates to Transport to and from the Stadium and how many Reports, Studies and Surveys will be carried out ( all at huge expense as well ).

Shouldn’t these have been sorted out already? Most amazing is the bit where it says that stadium capacity will be reduced if the trnsport plans are inadequate.

What a farce that would be: 15,000 empty seats because the Transport capacity is inadequate!

They’re just pissing in the wind and hoping it will be ok. A bunch of idiots.
Micheal Jones
32   Posted 12/06/2008 at 17:26:35

Report abuse

I would like to remind everyone of the contiuning hike in petrol prices and how it will affect the club.... I, (like alot of fans from Liverpool) travel a fair distance to home games and am unable to renew my season ticket this year because it really is too expensive for me to drive to Goodison Park every other week. This ground move will add yet move expense to the average Everton fan who will now have to commute outside of Liverpool to watch the match.

I know first hand of the detremental effect the cost of travel has on supporters. Would it not make more sense for LFC moved to kirkby and Everton having the Stanley Park site? A higher percentage of Liverpool fans travel from outside the city anyway!!!! PETROL PRICES WILL CONTINUE TO RISE - SUPPLY AND DEMAND!!!!!

I would also like to mention how much this ground move will effect future support for the next generation of Evertonians. Kids in our city will grow up knowing of only one club in Liverpool and, in my opinion, will eventually regard Everton FC as the club who play across the motorway on an overspill estate in Knowsley. SORRY KIDS - NO MORE WALKING TO HOME GAMES !!!!!!!!

Karl Masters
33   Posted 12/06/2008 at 18:25:21

Report abuse

Soooo right about the kids of the future Michael Jones.

With the average matchday attending Premier League fan now apparently aged 43, this is an issue all in itself.

We?ll pick up some local kids in and around Kirkby, but I reckon we?ll lose a lot in Liverpool, especially the South end.
Gordon Blair
34   Posted 12/06/2008 at 18:23:26

Report abuse

Here?s a cheery thought, who?s responsible for Staffing costs for KMBCs 100 free uses per year?

Are we not only being denied the opportunity to earn from the facility for 30% of the time, but also funding the staffing costs while KMBC have their jollies there instead.

And if we do somehow manage to make a profit from whats left of the none matchday potential, bearing in mind no concerts, only 6 large events a year etc etc, they then want a slice of that too.. no wonder they passed the Planning Application.
Brian Finnigan
35   Posted 12/06/2008 at 18:14:23

Report abuse

Does anybody have the minutes of the Liverpool Planning Committee relating to their granting to the RS the use of a large part of a Grade II listed Victorian Park? Will the Stanley Park stadium be made available to Liverpool Council for their use 100 times per year? Will the RS have similar expenses/restrictions to those outlined in the Knowsley document in sections 3.1.1 to 3.2.2?

Anyone reading the Knowsley document could easily imagine that Everton must be getting the stadium for nothing. We appear to be seen as occasional users of a Kirkby facility who should be grateful for being allowed to go there 20/30 times a year. I am still waiting for somebody who voted yes to explain to us all how 50,000 spectators are supposed to reach the stadium on a normal Saturday, nevermind a Sky Sunday, Setanta Monday or U.E.F.A. Thursday. Travel to and from the Kirkby stadium will prove to be a nightmare and act to limit the attendances to well below the required 50,000 per game.

All Evertonians should make it their business to complete the on-line petition in order to have this nonesense called-in and thereby called off.
Gavin Ramejkis
36   Posted 12/06/2008 at 19:17:24

Report abuse

Can someone please help me with something and I don’t mean that prick Madden/Ross/Bullyshitter or whoever he really is:

the provision of off-street park & walk and off-street park and ride sites together with requisite shuttle buses to accommodate 16,500 visitors to the stadium;

? the provision of special event day buses to accommodate 6,800 visitors to the stadium;

? the provision of coaches and coach park to accommodate 5,100 visitors to the stadium;

? the provision of public transport arrangements to include sufficient train capacity to accommodate 3,800 visitors travelling by train;

only adds up to 32,200 visitors or is this what they really expect? KW’s crime of the century really does mimic the Simpson’s monorail episode more and more every day
Gordon Blair
37   Posted 12/06/2008 at 19:25:20

Report abuse

Maybe we’re being a bit harsh, the club are bound to have seen this coming..

lets have a look at the DTZ Financial Statement that accompanied the Planning App...

Total Cost of Element Substructure and piling circa £5.8m
Frame, roof, floors and external surfaces circa £32.6m
Internal fittings, furniture and finishes circa £10m Internal mechanical and engineering and associated services circa £20.6m
External works and associated services circa £1.9m
Design, insurances and preliminaries circa £10.9m
Employer?s Provisional Sums circa £2m
On Cost and Contribution @ 4.5% circa £3.8m
PCSA circa £2.4m
Stadium Construction Cost at Q3 2007 circa £90m
Inflation circa £9.9m
Projected outturn cost circa £99.9m
Fit Out and moving costs circa £30m
TOTAL circa £130m

Nope, don’t see any of this new stuff in there...
Chris H
38   Posted 12/06/2008 at 19:34:49

Report abuse

It just sickens me the more I hear about the way we have sold out in this way. Who the fuck are KBC and like they give a shit about EFC. How can someone like Wynass come into the club and just wipe out our history, and put out future in jepordy, and the inept BK is allowing it to happen. And for what? The chase for a champs league spot. Like that is going to happen year on year, just by moving to Kirby. Lets get the twats out.
Neil Adderley
39   Posted 12/06/2008 at 19:42:22

Report abuse

For getting on almost two years to the day, enough people have been saying that Everton FC would not own this stadium - finally there it is in black and white. KMBC did their homework last year when a delegation of senior Cllrs and officials paid a visit to the City of Manchester Stadium, to see just exactly how Manchester City Council utilise the conference/banqueting/executive suites at COMS. It seems they took everything on board and more.

Not only will KMBC be using the stadium gratis for 100 days per year, any use above and beyond that would ’be at a discounted rate for all additional events above the free quota; and, a discounted rate on catering facilities.’ Ron Round and the rest of the Knowsley cabal will be rubbing their grubby hands as we speak.

Even though Tesco would own the land, (if the dodgy land disposal is completed) in order for;

"Tesco to attract capital allowances to make the deal viable and tax efficient, KMBC needs to grant a 999 year lease to Tesco which in turn will grant a sub-lease to Everton FC. In fact the terms of the sub-lease (in part the free quota of usage and further discounts and other conditions including the capping of capacity, no concerts, no fancy searchlights etc, etc.) are being negotiated directly between the Council and Everton FC."

As David Thompson says; ’Deal of the century - but for whom?

It is not to late to do something about this scandal. Lobby your local MP/Cllr. Write with your concerns to GONW and request a public inquiry.

NIL SATIS NISI OPTIMUM
Jay Harris
40   Posted 12/06/2008 at 20:41:17

Report abuse

I dont know about a public enquiry maybe the fraud squad should be called in because someone has been had here and at the moment its "The People".
James Tunstead
41   Posted 12/06/2008 at 22:52:42

Report abuse

So Steve Taylor doesnt think it out of the ordinary that KMBC will be getting 100 free days use per year of our stadium for meetings, presentations, functions etc. He doesnt see it as a problem. Well Steve, most people Ive spoken to see it as a huge problem. When KMBC will be making money out of our facility, we wont be able to. How can this not be a problem for us financially? What happens over the Christmas period when we want to rent out bars and restaurants for parties but KMBC want to use them too? We will have to compensate them of course for finding and using an alternative venue. Not out of the ordinary for a development of this nature you say. Extraordinary, unbelievable and bordering on the farcical I prefer. You say revenues from non football related stadium uses are minimal at GP anyway, at least all the money made there is ours. From what weve seen from the proposals recently It is likely that we will make even less money than what we do from GP. No music concerts, jeez, couldnt believe we signed up for that one. Getting us to pay the minimum 1 million quid for parking (Did someone just think of a number and double it), thats got to be a p*ss take surely. Theyll make enough ticketting any fan who dares drive into Kirkby on a matchday as it is. Is there anyone out there who still thinks this is a good idea?
Tom Hughes
42   Posted 12/06/2008 at 23:21:52

Report abuse

I find it slightly alarming that the more this thing unravels the more some people will find excuses for each newly revealed gem.....

We can’t afford anything and it’s costing us nothing, gave way to...."£78m is a bargain, we’ll easy get that selling stuff and naming rights!"

It’s got a motorway next door and will be the most accessible stadium in the country became...."The transport plan is a work in progress, it’ll all be alright on the night" after each revision and park and ride was laughed at by the authorities.

It’s going to be a world class stadium is now..... "I like the look of the stadium, mid-level or not it looks good to me."

We can’t have the Loop its too small and can’t be expanded to 75,000 yet this can’t exceed 50,419 due to planning restrictions and transport/parking issues that they can’t resolve.

The stadium will have multi-revenue streams and concerts/conferences and all sorts, is now "so what if KMBC wont allow concerts and will have free access for for all manner of fund raising events and will charge us for it. Why shouldn’t they?"

.......... etc etc! I could go on!

Taken individually, some may be almost plausible..... Combined their meaning is pretty undeniable. It stinks to high heaven. People have got to start taking a step back, look at ALL the falsehoods, poor decisions, lack of honesty and stop making excuses for this debacle of a process before we’re lumbered with its outcome. Not the best option for EFC, but the only one sold to them by the man from Tesco so that’ll have to do!
Jim Lloyd
43   Posted 12/06/2008 at 23:09:02

Report abuse

Dear God,
This all sounds like a nightmare to me. I think I’ll get slagged by the supporters who think Kirkby is the place to go but I’ve got to say that this whole episode is just frightening for so many reasons. I look at my club, Everton Football Club and its like I’m looking at some kind of modern day opera by Wagner. He wrote about the twilight of the Gods and all I ca see is the twilight of our club.
This stadium will provide us with nothing. It will not spread our name anywhere, it will not get droves of new supporters to fill it and it will have left its own city in the vain hope that we could compete with the big boys.
This is my fear. There is nothing that I’ve heard from our board which has allayed these fears (in fact, there’s nothing that I’ve heard from our board at all, they seem to be remarkably quiet lately.)
I don’t want to argue any mopre with the likes of Gerrard Madden, (I’ll be generous and say that "he too is one of the brotherhood of Evertonians" I just think he is sadly taken in by the promise of messrs Kenwright and Wyness.
All I can see is, if we don’t DO something pretty quick, our club has had it. We will be consigned to the sidelines, while you know who, will go from strength to strength.
Would anyone have a plan, idea, rallying call to fans who want to oppose this bloody lunacy?
Christine Foster
44   Posted 12/06/2008 at 23:51:36

Report abuse

I am afraid it no longer amazes me the length to which the club has gone to make this deal happen. as more FACTS concerning the upfront costs, the ongoing liability to Knowsley it is quite apparent that this deal has been put together without any thought for the consequences or such.

Where is the clause in the deal that states that if revenue from events / concerts etc are not allowed or limited, then proportionately so is EFC commitment to the free days? Otherwise they leave the club without the ability to generate revenue whilst allowing free use ofthe stadium to generate income for the council (or cut their costs more like)

Its quite a sell out but then the deal of the century was always going to be that because you never get a free lunch (unless its at the invitation of council courtesy of EFC)

Its disgraceful. Somebody is selling our souls.
Jim Lloyd
45   Posted 13/06/2008 at 00:03:05

Report abuse

Tom, I don’t know how you keep so patient !. Is there something that ordinary blues can do to register our disgust/horror at what’s happening. Sorry to lump this request on you but I believe we need to get organised to oppose this terrible move. Any ideas?
Michael Emerson
46   Posted 13/06/2008 at 00:13:45

Report abuse

Is Mr Kenright really going to sacrifice Goodison Park for an 10,000 extra seats and a few more corporate boxes? Will Everton fill those extra seats against the likes of Fulham, Wigan or Hull? Will they fill the corporate boxes on a glamarous Wednesday night in Kirkby? Who else will Everton persuade to hire out a venue of that capacity which is located so far from the City Centre? Will they still serve warm pints at half-time? There are FAR too many negative drawbacks to this ground move and a massive sense of unease from many many supporters around the football club!

Listen, people, my dad watched Everton from the Boy?s Pen in the Gwladys St and so did my Grandad. I would love for my son to be able to watch football at Goodison and know that he?d be the 4th generation of our family to have watched Everton Football Club on the same very ground for over 100 years. It?s more than just a football club, it?s a tradition and it?s our history and it?s part of the heritage of Liverpool. Moving to Kirkby won?t make things better, it will put us in the same boat as all the other football clubs with flat-pack stadiums!

Pete Hampsted
47   Posted 13/06/2008 at 01:13:26

Report abuse

How about everyone stood together outside Goodison for the whole of the PSV game?
Jay Harris
48   Posted 13/06/2008 at 04:04:23

Report abuse

Pete
that’s something we’re not good at unlike the RS.

It took death threats through the mail to get Johnson out.

Now I’m not advocating that but it would be a good idea to gang up on the main entrance before the PSV match with a chorus of "We’re not going to Kirkby" and to let the media know beforehand so there’s plenty of coverage.

Also does anyone know Kenwright’s NEW email address so we can bombard him.
from the heart
49   Posted 13/06/2008 at 09:28:37

Report abuse

A Great Idea! I think the best thing Pete and Jay would be to email the people at keioc.net and ask them to rally a protest. I’m sure if they can fly planes over goodison every week they can sort somthing out because somthing has to be done about the Kirkby madness!!!
Steve Taylor
50   Posted 13/06/2008 at 10:15:49

Report abuse

James Tunstead - that was my opinion - end of.

I’m not pro-Kirkby - I’m anti doing fuck all apart from moaning about it!
All I see from most of the no lobby, is people looking for angles to pick holes in the project - this piece being the latest.

With the exception of Tom Hughes, I don’t see anything constructive i.e. other options to provide a challenge to the project & a REAL alternative.

Let me ask a question - if this same stadium was being built with the same conditions & the same costs, on Walton Hall Park - would anyone be harping on about these side issues?

My opinion is - you wouldn’t give a shit.

Also, if it goes pear shaped & we end up in Speke (10 miles from Goodison) would that be acceptable - given it’s within the sacred boundary line?
Jay Campbell
51   Posted 13/06/2008 at 10:46:25

Report abuse

Steve Taylor you’ve answered your own question if the new stadium was in the city limits then this arguement wouldn’t exist.

This is what has got every fucker up in arms!!
Peter Howard
52   Posted 13/06/2008 at 10:38:43

Report abuse

The REAL action can be taken by the shareholders. I’ve mentioned this before and was shot down by Michael who crassly said I was being boring and that EFC would win because they would get better lawyers. What a mature attitude!
Tom Hughes
53   Posted 13/06/2008 at 10:39:03

Report abuse

Steve,
I could walk to all the proposed sites in Speke from my home, but I would be equally against it for all the same obvious reasons. Anyone who has tried accessing the retail park there on a busy Saturday or any rush hr period will know why. It is grid lock and only really capable of taking a regular steady flow of customers over a whole day, not 50,000 in a 2 hr window. There is no extra public transport laid on for this retail park, as there is not for Kirkby’s. They are car-dependent peripheral facilities, end of, and can never justify these additional services. From a green point of view it is a disaster, but that’s perhaps another story. I can understand your reluctance to "do nothing", but the process by which we have arrived at the Kirkby "option" at the exemption of all others has been shown to be questionable from day one. This article just shows one of a whole litany of damaging and contradictory hidden detail that has been known about for months. Do you really think that if all the "truths" now connected with Kirkby had been included in the voting pack instead of the lies that we would even be having this debate? IMO it wouldn’t have got anything like the vote it received, and converesly the No-vote would have been greatly boosted! We were sold an image by some of the best marketing people in the business...... shame it isn’t what it says on the tin!
Peter Howard
54   Posted 13/06/2008 at 12:08:07

Report abuse

Tom, if the Loop wasn’t good enough for the RS how come it is good enough for us?
Paul Lally
55   Posted 13/06/2008 at 12:21:17

Report abuse

Posting on all TW stadium related threads -

Goodison gone - club shop moved -

ALL TRACES OF EVERTON REMOVED FROM CITY OF LIVERPOOL

Yes voters, you have had your ballot, which you keep quoting was fair and a mandate.

( I was entitled to 2 votes in my household and did not receive ballot papers).

Plus you have the EFC marketing machine on your side.So no problem then.

To EVERYONE who believes Kirkby is a very, very bad decision then please find email info.

Send to as many people as you can so that our voice is heard.

Below is the list of e-mails.
I have sent the template from KEIOC ( I simply opened up the template then copied and pasted into an email

blearsh@parliament.uk

contactus@communities.gov.uk

gonwmailbox@gonw.gsi.gov.uk

michael.ashton@gonw.gsi.gov.uk

b.viner@independent.co.uk

boothg@parliament.uk

daveprentice@liverpoolecho.co.uk

neilhodgson@liverpoolecho.co.uk

sport@liverpoolecho.co.uk

sutcliffeg@parliament.uk

tony.livesey@bbc.co.uk

valwoan@liverpoolecho.co.uk

warren.bradley@liverpool.gov.uk

I could not find Andy Burnham?s email but his assistant is - CALVIN.MULLINGS@Culture.gsi.gov.uk

?GET UP, STAND UP ! STAND UP FOR YOUR RIGHT ! DON?T GIVE UP THE FIGHT !?


http://youtube.com/watch?v=oUgdK3C-2GY
Gerard Madden
56   Posted 13/06/2008 at 13:53:30

Report abuse

I remain supremely confident it wont get called-in because the "ace cards" held by the applicants are that Kirkby is in dire need of regeneration with all its poverty and worklessness and the fact you find those Kirkby wards usually at or near the bottom of the economic league tables locally, regionally and nationally. The fact it is a Labour stronghold that has thumped it through by 20-1 and it will be a Labour Government deciding whether to back (or not!) one of its own deprived heartlands is another good thing. I remain supremely optimistic because Labour Knowsley council and the Labour Govt are well within their rights to conclude in their ongoing discussions that "economic and regeneration" considerations outweigh the aspects of "Planning and Town Centre" considerations the plans don't fully comply with.
Gareth Humphreys
57   Posted 13/06/2008 at 14:04:40

Report abuse

Gerrard, this is about Everton not Kirkby. Do you still not understand that?
Gerard Madden
58   Posted 13/06/2008 at 14:57:52

Report abuse

But Gareth its about the ground move and it gets a ’ground move debate’ answer. ;)
Morgan Tarr
59   Posted 13/06/2008 at 15:41:47

Report abuse

Madden, you’re a fool. We’re getting a basic, mid-ranged stadium (after being promised a world class stsadium, coinscidently before the vote of course) and the transport situation has proven to be not good enough. The proposals openly ’clash’ which regional and national policy, which is why the numerous councils have objected, and because if this, i fully expect this project to be called in for the inquiry, which will of course kill the project. Even if it is not called in, Everton cannot afford to pay the £78 million, and that is the cost as it stands, with no delays. With the development on Bellfield being rejected, that’s £8 million the club can’t use.

This stadium is not good enough for this football club
Tom Hughes
60   Posted 13/06/2008 at 15:50:51

Report abuse

Peter,
Where does anyone say the loop is not good enough? LFC secured a site that they preferred, right next door to the existing one....... and they didn’t go to the expense of having the world’s leading stadium design company doing an assessment of the Loop or any other site. Their criteria were also for 70,000-80,000 seater not 50k. I would be far more inclined to listen to HOK than a quick overview of multiple sites that is barely a few lines.
Peter Howard
61   Posted 13/06/2008 at 16:14:14

Report abuse

Tom, you gave me to understand from an earlier post that the "overview of multiple sites" was prepared by the RS and simply regurgitated by EFC .
Tom Hughes
62   Posted 13/06/2008 at 16:38:29

Report abuse

Peter,
It was, that list is still available on TW I believe and is several years old.
James Tunstead
63   Posted 13/06/2008 at 18:19:54

Report abuse

Steve Taylor, of course you are entitled to you opinion, this is not Communist China. You were entitled to say you thought there was no problem with these proposals and I was just pointing out that the problems are startlingly obvious to many of us. I?m not doing fuck all and moaning about it either. I?ve written to my MP and the Government Office for the Northwest and have signed the petition. The options available aren?t looking too good at the moment but things could change. We could just wait and bide our time rather than jump into something that isn?t at all right in so many ways, GP wasn?t about to fall down the last time I looked. Clubs in the Premier League are being bought out, we are one of the few remaining that hasn?t been. I think people would kick up a fuss if we were building a stadium on Walton Hall Park and LCC had free use of it for 1/3rd of the year actually. That?s just my opinion though.
Andy Crooks
64   Posted 13/06/2008 at 19:31:25

Report abuse

I?m totally opposed to Kirby but, and here?s the problem, (Tony Marsh I would love to hear your views on this )how far do we go? Do we never set foot in Kirby? I really think that our loyalty is about to be exploited.

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.