One of the reasons for a new stadium is to allow us to compete once again with Man U and Liverpool. How are we ever going to compete with them if the stadium only extends to 60,000? We may as well put up a white flag to them. Why not make it extendable to 80,000?
Keep the initial capacity at 50,000 of course. Sure we're years off competing with them, but then this stadium is for the rest of our lifetime and our children's lifetime. So why put such a small lid on our ambitions?
No-one can envisage what football will be like in 20, 30, 40+ years' time, but it doesn't mean we shouldn't plan for it.
We may never need to even go beyond 50,000, but what would we have lost by building each stand with a foundation that will allow for an extra tier? Nothing. Have we not learnt anything by this move away from Goodison regarding regarding future expansion?
If we do ever achieve a period of domination and reach a point where we need to go beyond 60,000, will we all be voting on a move to Skelmersdale? Just because because we couldn't be bothered amending the design now.
There are also other advantages to making the stadium 50,000 extendable to 80,000. If and when we do need to expand we will have the choice on how we expand. For example if we wanted to extend to 60,000 we are not forced into adding four corners. We will have the option of retaining four indivual stands and adding a third tier to the side stands. Each new additional tier will have the added benefit of being fitted with the all the latest state of the art gadgets of the day.
At this point, we will have have a 60,000 stadium plus options on how to extend. The stadium can grow when Everton can grow. If we don't grow then the stadium doesn't have to grow.
Peter Benson, Posted 16/11/2007 at 16:50:50
Note: the following content is not moderated or vetted by the site owners at the time of submission. Comments are the responsibility of the poster. Disclaimer
1 Posted 16/11/2007 at 18:38:09
Also people are going to look at our capacity of 50,000 and liverpools of 78,000 and draw their own conclusions; its a massive difference.
2 Posted 16/11/2007 at 18:43:13
1. Billy Bullshitter has more chance of finding Atlantis than investment to pay for the extended seating as he’ll get the club up to its eyes to pay for the cattle shed
2. The prefab shed type stadiums only have a shelf life of 10-20 years max by then who is going to want to doll it up? GP has stood for considerably longer and as Tom Hughes has eloquently fought in many posts the debt we will get building this soulless shithole could be spent on GP, who will pay? Exactly the same people that will pay for the asbodome the punters buying tickets at the club as BK is potless.
3 Posted 16/11/2007 at 20:43:27
4 Posted 16/11/2007 at 21:01:53
However with more seating put in and other restrictions over the years the capacity has been reduced.
We were the kings of Liverpool in those days attracting very big crowds whilst the Reds were lingering in the second divsion with poor gates. But all taht was pre Bill Shankly.
The point is if we are successful and can keep it going we have massive support to fill at least a 60000 stadium.
I just hope the stadium is in the City of Liverpool for out children and grandchildren.
Always a blue
5 Posted 16/11/2007 at 21:13:07
Now Stuart is that more suitably phrased? By the way one comment from one person does not ring true over anyone besides you (JUST YOU) ignoring them.
6 Posted 16/11/2007 at 21:29:18
I cannot stand negative fans (I use to word loosely) like you. We are going great guns in Europe, have the best squad we have had in so many many years, a great young manager and a Chairman who loves Everton FC, he may not have russian billions and maybe has not been as astute in business as he could have been. but he is a blue like us.
So lets get behind him and the team, and for one I am just happy we are getting new stadium, for all the great history of GP, its falling down!!
7 Posted 16/11/2007 at 21:50:45
I and I am sure many other non negative true blues happen to totally agree with Gavin and I am a glass half full sort of person.
The team are doing much better now but that is no thanks to BK who also messed up the Fernades fiasco.
I often raise this question but if Billy liar only had a million to his name where do you think the 20 million to buy Johnson out came from and how did everton’s debt all of a sudden become 30 million?
He then stabbed his old friend Paul Gregg in the back by trying to blame him for the Kings Dock fiasco when all he was looking for was security for the 30 million he was being asked for to secure the deal.I for one will never forgive him for that.Look at the cowshed in an awful location compared to what we could have had at Kings Dock.That is the true measure of a Chairman.
8 Posted 16/11/2007 at 21:42:44
A few holes in your BK conspiracy theory. Do you actually have factual documentary evidence of BK feeding anti Gregg stories to the press, oh I see, you ASSUME that’s what happened. Now the Kings Dock fiasco, I seem to remember, that when it came to putting up the money, Paul Gregg was asked to underwrite the £35 million needed, but refused unless he had full control of the shareholding (This is the guy who wanted to sack Moyes don’t forget!). What makes me laugh about this whole ’The Board are liars’ theory, is how short some memories are. Remember Johnson, selling players behind the managers back? This board, without major investment, have moved this club foward from annual relegation strugglers, to regular European challengers and have continually backed Moyes, with funds for the promising young side we see today, that will only get better.
Doesn’t matter much what the facts are though, some people are just born miserable.
9 Posted 16/11/2007 at 22:21:32
You really should deal in facts.
We are not regular European qualifiers we have qualified for Europe twice in 6 years under Moyesy.Thats not to say he is not doing a decent job but I and many others see the weakness in our club and that is Bliiy liar and his mate Wyness neither of whom Ihave any trust in.
For the record All Gregg asked for was for HIS 35million to be secured on Kings Dock not unreasonable in my opinion but as usual Billy wanted total control using other peoples money so Gregg sought his only exit route.
I know quite a few people who know regg and they all say he is a very honorable man.Try to find anyone who says the same about Kenwright.
10 Posted 16/11/2007 at 22:38:46
11 Posted 16/11/2007 at 22:32:00
In the days before 78,000 crowds there was a massive walk up to the stadium ,many couldn’t get in but would soak up the atmosphere outside. Why were there so many? Because it wasn’t on Sky or Sultana and they probably had nothing better to do!!
12 Posted 16/11/2007 at 22:45:23
If everton move to Kirkby I would think a 30,000 seat stadium would do with the option to make it 25,000 in ten years time and so on.
13 Posted 17/11/2007 at 00:14:29
14 Posted 17/11/2007 at 04:56:52
I suppose you voted to move as well.
15 Posted 17/11/2007 at 11:42:46
16 Posted 17/11/2007 at 12:10:51
So as there’s no problem with building for expansion your argument must be against the starting capacity of 50,000, which is a separate issue to my post, I personally think that a 50,000 is a realistic starting point and does send out a bolder statement than if we only have a 40,000 capacity. Don’t forget we won’t need to sell out to make a 50,000 stadium worthwhile, anything over the current capacity of 40000 will make it worthwhile moneywise. I’m sure there will be matches below 40,000, but then we can revert to unreserved seating, always a great for atmosphere, Give away fans 3,000 tickets in a 5,000 area to make them look bad! Even reduce prices!
17 Posted 17/11/2007 at 12:48:18
Hopefully we will reach a stage where we will need a stadium more than 80,000, but at least we wil be 20,000 fans pw better off than if we only go to 60,000! Soyou’ll be wrong before I’m wrong
18 Posted 17/11/2007 at 15:02:59
Show me a season ticket waiting list with tens of thousands on like Man U, Arsenal and Liverpool and we can have grand plans for a futue super-sized stadium.
Until then, it remains the latest ploy in Wyness’ pathetic game to rule out any possible site in Liverpool.
19 Posted 17/11/2007 at 15:27:57
20 Posted 17/11/2007 at 15:39:16
"Just a quickie regarding the necessity for a "55k capacity stadium"....the last time we averaged above 40k was 1974-75. 33 years ago!! And then it was only 40,021. Prior to that it was 1970-71 when we were reigning champions, so we have to ask ourselves, why do we need a 55k arena? We haven?t managed an average over 50,000 since 62-63,the first season the Shite were in the (old )First Division. Does anyone honestly think our gates will improve in a Retail Park? Nothing is worse than a half empty stadium, with your shouts echoing around vacant stands. Remember 83-84 with an average of 19,288.....Goodison was an awful place to be.
21 Posted 17/11/2007 at 23:51:41
22 Posted 18/11/2007 at 10:34:39
23 Posted 18/11/2007 at 22:52:36
Over to you the board