Season 2011-12
The Mail Bag
What price a new stadium??
30 Comments: Quite a shock that LFC are writing off the cost of a stadium that never happened as £50 million!
Not one spade entered the earth.
Kind of puts those who claim we can have a new stadium for £150 million in perspective doesn't it?
How much did our Board of Directors write off? About £5 million over 3 years over Kirkby? Maybe they are not THAT useless...
Thomas Lennon, Posted 04/05/2012 at 14:38:48
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
Erm, didn't quite a bit of enabling work get done to keep the planning permission alive? They may also have entered land deals and other deals which are either written off or incur a loss. But I am pretty sure that a spade did enter the earth. Also, Everton's costs were in engaging professional advisers etc. in getting to the public inquiry stage. Liverpool had planning permission, we never received it.
And of course they could be "burying bad news".
But other than that, an entirely reasonable comparison.
And of course they could be "burying bad news".
But other than that, an entirely reasonable comparison.
Or perhaps, comparing approx 35m to 5m shows the quality/ lack of quality for the stadium designs?
either way alot of money has been spent on designs that didn't happen.
either way alot of money has been spent on designs that didn't happen.
I am pretty sure that the NWDA also gave Liverpool £9 million on the assumption that, if they didn't build a new stadium, the money had to be returned.
I think the money from the NWDA was in conjunction with the improvement of the area surrounding the ground. Maybe that's why Liverpool are saying that they will make a decision when the time is right, to delay paying back the £9 million...
I think the money from the NWDA was in conjunction with the improvement of the area surrounding the ground. Maybe that's why Liverpool are saying that they will make a decision when the time is right, to delay paying back the £9 million...
And we were going to build a 'world class stadium' for 78m.
My Arse?
Not that useless indeed.
My Arse?
Not that useless indeed.
But hasn't the Goodison safety certificate expired?
No???
Oh that's right, because it was a lie spread by our fave board member, Blue Bill.
This board isn't useless ? it's fireproof.... and don't they know it.
No???
Oh that's right, because it was a lie spread by our fave board member, Blue Bill.
This board isn't useless ? it's fireproof.... and don't they know it.
Could a toffeewebber who in real life is involved in construction, please explain how in the name of Jesus you can lose £35 mill on a stadium that wasn't built?
The contract was with a NUFC and the amount written off was MR A CARROLL on the ledger, whatever that was...
David, it's probably just a tax dodge. Possibly falls under the heading 'Other Operating Costs'.
Ahhh remember that old chestnut Barry ! the audacity of Kenwright when being interviewed prior to a Europa League game unfucking believable !
David Hallwood, I work for a consultant engineer consultantancy, we do a lot of big construction. That does seem like a awfully high figure if it is indeed spent on Architect fees.
If so, I'm in the wrong business.
If so, I'm in the wrong business.
We don't need a new stadium. We need new owners.
Yup, what he said.
Boils down to one word sooner or later: Share.
What puzzles me is why Fenway Sports are pouring money into our neighbours. They must expect to make a profit on their investment? My guess is that, somewhere down the line, those lovable Kopites will be digging deep.
David (#775) my reading of it is that they are burying as much of the costs as they can before Financial Fair Play monitoring starts with effect from their following accounts (which will include the £110m they spunked on players).
My understanding is they haven't killed off the new stadium project per se, but they are killing off the design from HSK or whoever. A new stadium represents "sunk costs", therefore if it isn't built, get the losses off the books as ultimately you'll be putting an asset in there.
As a local example, I believe during the "Big Dig" in Liverpool, Merseytravel carried out a lot of enabling works for Merseytram to avoid disruption in the future. At the time the Govt had tipped them the nod for £190m towards the capital costs, only to withdraw it when it came to finalising the contracts. The costs incurred were around £55m if I recall. It could be justified on the grounds that they couldn't have foreseen the govt U-turn. And believe me I've seen far larger amounts lost in developments that never come to pass.
My understanding is they haven't killed off the new stadium project per se, but they are killing off the design from HSK or whoever. A new stadium represents "sunk costs", therefore if it isn't built, get the losses off the books as ultimately you'll be putting an asset in there.
As a local example, I believe during the "Big Dig" in Liverpool, Merseytravel carried out a lot of enabling works for Merseytram to avoid disruption in the future. At the time the Govt had tipped them the nod for £190m towards the capital costs, only to withdraw it when it came to finalising the contracts. The costs incurred were around £55m if I recall. It could be justified on the grounds that they couldn't have foreseen the govt U-turn. And believe me I've seen far larger amounts lost in developments that never come to pass.
Ground development costs are not included in the UEFA financial fair play legislation so,as Matt says,it`s become a big temptation for clubs to hide `other operating costs`under that heading.
Even Chelsea are at it this morning with their `feasibility study` over Battersea Power Station which will come to nothing.
Expect some off the wall `development study` to be announced by EFC as soon as they wake up to the possibilities.
There,I`m getting as cynical as everyone else on here!
Even Chelsea are at it this morning with their `feasibility study` over Battersea Power Station which will come to nothing.
Expect some off the wall `development study` to be announced by EFC as soon as they wake up to the possibilities.
There,I`m getting as cynical as everyone else on here!
groundshare.
Did the fact "king" kenny blew 115 million on players not get factored into their losses?
Steve (#900) there is an economic argument for a groundshare, but wider economics and club economics are so far apart and it is this what kills it, putting aside partisan fan opinion.
Very soon, Liverpool's commercial income alone will outstrip Everton's total turnover. We already know they would have a need for a 65-70k stadium, and we'd be 10-15k behind that, probably on a reduced ticketing pricing strategy.
I give kudos to LFC's management for giving the fans the bird over their opposition to the Fox TV deal (they still watch Sky no doubt as it suits them), and whilst the Suarez affair showed they still need to adjust to the victim mentality, I really don't think they would pitch this idea as an equal share joint venture - which is what it would need to be otherwise Evertonians would be up in arms - those that could countenance the idea of sharing.
So groundshare's whilst nice in theory offer a whole lot of consequences that just make it difficult. And don't quote Italy or Munich as examples. The fans hate it with a passion.
Very soon, Liverpool's commercial income alone will outstrip Everton's total turnover. We already know they would have a need for a 65-70k stadium, and we'd be 10-15k behind that, probably on a reduced ticketing pricing strategy.
I give kudos to LFC's management for giving the fans the bird over their opposition to the Fox TV deal (they still watch Sky no doubt as it suits them), and whilst the Suarez affair showed they still need to adjust to the victim mentality, I really don't think they would pitch this idea as an equal share joint venture - which is what it would need to be otherwise Evertonians would be up in arms - those that could countenance the idea of sharing.
So groundshare's whilst nice in theory offer a whole lot of consequences that just make it difficult. And don't quote Italy or Munich as examples. The fans hate it with a passion.
Just for argument's sake, let's say a groundshare does get the go-ahead as both clubs cannot afford to build from scratch in the current economic climate. It would be the best stadium in the country (maybe in the world/Europe at least ? not in terms of size but rather facillities). a
And imagine how many billionaires/finance consortiums would suddenly be interested in buying Everton, wiping off the debt with all the commercial appeal of a brand new super stadium. Everton would suddenly seem an attractive proposition.
Surely its the assets... or lack of assets (GP) that is the main stumbling block at the moment. I kind of feel that a shared stadium is the only way we will attract that billionaire banker that we need.
And imagine how many billionaires/finance consortiums would suddenly be interested in buying Everton, wiping off the debt with all the commercial appeal of a brand new super stadium. Everton would suddenly seem an attractive proposition.
Surely its the assets... or lack of assets (GP) that is the main stumbling block at the moment. I kind of feel that a shared stadium is the only way we will attract that billionaire banker that we need.
Matt, to be honest I don't think we would be up in arms.
It would be more like ' Bill tried his best to get us the best deal, and at least he's one of us'
It would be more like ' Bill tried his best to get us the best deal, and at least he's one of us'
John, the main stumbling block is Bill.
John (#922) you are spot on.
I feel that a groundshare is the best solution to getting our "billionaire owner" as they won't have a ground to subsidise so their money can go straight into other aspects of the club including the team. Making us a much more attractive proposition! Make it so, money men.
I feel that a groundshare is the best solution to getting our "billionaire owner" as they won't have a ground to subsidise so their money can go straight into other aspects of the club including the team. Making us a much more attractive proposition! Make it so, money men.
John #922, okay so let's set aside the fact that a shared stadium would be even more divisive than Kirkby ever was.
Your plan is that we will attract new owners by owning 50% of a world class shared stadium. Great, I'm sure Bill will happily write out a cheque for his share of the costs in the knowledge he'll get a return on his investment.
Ah, I can see a problem there.
Peter #958, we have a lot of fans who redefine partisan - as do RS - and they won't give Bill a pass if we went down the shared stadium route. There are as many obstacles as there are benefits.
Your plan is that we will attract new owners by owning 50% of a world class shared stadium. Great, I'm sure Bill will happily write out a cheque for his share of the costs in the knowledge he'll get a return on his investment.
Ah, I can see a problem there.
Peter #958, we have a lot of fans who redefine partisan - as do RS - and they won't give Bill a pass if we went down the shared stadium route. There are as many obstacles as there are benefits.
A classic and proper use of project management to assess whether or not the business case can still be justified. Unlike BK and his bunch of merry clowns the yanks have realised the business case for the new stadium in line with their current operating model no longer stands so instead of continuing to piss away money on it they've pulled the plug. A loss of the expenditure to date yes but a halt to future expenditure they could no longer justify. Hundreds if not thousands of fatally flawed projects drag their sorry carcasses across the finish line at massive losses because no one had the cojones to put them out of their misery - look at the lions share of government funded projects over the years.
Ah!!! the shared stadium panacea.
Why lfc would want to share a 38k capacity stadium seems bizarre to me.
Why lfc would want to share a 38k capacity stadium seems bizarre to me.
Gavin #968, I'd normally agree with you, but I'd throw in the crystal ball gazing that is the EPL.
There are 3 streams of income - matchday, commercial and broadcast.
Right now EFC is too dependent on broadcast as a total proportion of income. The pessimist may see this as the most risky (will the current negotiations for the TV deals see more, less or about the same?)
Stadium and its facilities has a direct impact on both matchday and commercial income. The optimist would say that commercial remains the growth area, particularly in new markets, tied to the overseas deal.
Then you have the whole bunch of what deals can be done on land, grants etc. to help control the cost. What secondary revenue can be derived. Do you go for enabling development, if so retail (DK), commercial or housing (Arsenal) or a combo (Chelse - Battersea)?
With a stadium you take an extremely long view. That's why it can't happen with the current board - they are not in a position to take that view when they are struggling to keep trading.
And that's why EFC is at the optimum time to be sold (for the right price) to allow a "new broom" approach, and not simply getting a "mid tier" stadium by hook or by crook just to boost up the value of your shares.
There are 3 streams of income - matchday, commercial and broadcast.
Right now EFC is too dependent on broadcast as a total proportion of income. The pessimist may see this as the most risky (will the current negotiations for the TV deals see more, less or about the same?)
Stadium and its facilities has a direct impact on both matchday and commercial income. The optimist would say that commercial remains the growth area, particularly in new markets, tied to the overseas deal.
Then you have the whole bunch of what deals can be done on land, grants etc. to help control the cost. What secondary revenue can be derived. Do you go for enabling development, if so retail (DK), commercial or housing (Arsenal) or a combo (Chelse - Battersea)?
With a stadium you take an extremely long view. That's why it can't happen with the current board - they are not in a position to take that view when they are struggling to keep trading.
And that's why EFC is at the optimum time to be sold (for the right price) to allow a "new broom" approach, and not simply getting a "mid tier" stadium by hook or by crook just to boost up the value of your shares.
Matt I think the broadcasting deal as the one most worrying as broadcasting is heading web based, I wouldn't trust the current incumbents with a fucking broom never mind a business; even if its in black and white in front of them they miss the boat.
The stadium has been overlooked by them wanting to cash their chips in and get out of dodge but they fucked that up too and are now hanging on like a rotting corpse stinking the place out looking for too much for what is a broken business without a plan to remedy itself. Yes its prime for the taking but the closed shop of majority shareholders will simply vote for an unreasonable price if a buyer appears.
The stadium is a core element of a football team as even if they were to get a mega broadcasting deal it would simply look shite on a TV/Computer screen as it would be half empty of dishevelled.
Commercial ventures offer some gains but again its down to the negotiator and the selling of the product - just what is on offer? The cl;ub have done nothing to expand non-match day revenue and the non-match day calendar is massive in comparison, the right venue with non match day options, hotels, leisure, conferencing etc - all basic stuff but no vision to do it.
The stadium has been overlooked by them wanting to cash their chips in and get out of dodge but they fucked that up too and are now hanging on like a rotting corpse stinking the place out looking for too much for what is a broken business without a plan to remedy itself. Yes its prime for the taking but the closed shop of majority shareholders will simply vote for an unreasonable price if a buyer appears.
The stadium is a core element of a football team as even if they were to get a mega broadcasting deal it would simply look shite on a TV/Computer screen as it would be half empty of dishevelled.
Commercial ventures offer some gains but again its down to the negotiator and the selling of the product - just what is on offer? The cl;ub have done nothing to expand non-match day revenue and the non-match day calendar is massive in comparison, the right venue with non match day options, hotels, leisure, conferencing etc - all basic stuff but no vision to do it.
Gavin, I agree but I would also assuage the concerns about the broadcast deal somewhat. Sky has spent billions building up its model, and it isn't about to let it go down the IPTV route.
Some of the overseas markets may go that way, but only markets like China where, believe it or not, it's very difficult to extract a premium for content due to state control of most broadcasting. I'm not kidding when I tell you Singapore (population 5.6m) pays more for it's EPL, World Cup rights etc. than China does.
I agree about the multiple use aspect ? ironically what KD was supposed to offer ? as a means of supplementing income.
I do think people underestimate the scale of commercial deals ? a direct result of the overseas broadcasting expansion. Branding is seen as cheaper and more effective than pure advertising, and there's big opportunities out there if you have the right people in place to exploit it.
Shit. Carroll. 2-1. Come on Chelsea!
Some of the overseas markets may go that way, but only markets like China where, believe it or not, it's very difficult to extract a premium for content due to state control of most broadcasting. I'm not kidding when I tell you Singapore (population 5.6m) pays more for it's EPL, World Cup rights etc. than China does.
I agree about the multiple use aspect ? ironically what KD was supposed to offer ? as a means of supplementing income.
I do think people underestimate the scale of commercial deals ? a direct result of the overseas broadcasting expansion. Branding is seen as cheaper and more effective than pure advertising, and there's big opportunities out there if you have the right people in place to exploit it.
Shit. Carroll. 2-1. Come on Chelsea!
Add Your Comments
In order to post a comment to the MailBag, you need to be logged in as a registered user of the site.
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
-sm.jpg)
-sm.jpg)
-sm.jpg)
732 Posted 04/05/2012 at 16:45:52
Report abuse
Very hard to compare to Kirby move especially with the assertion our board did better. Definite luck more than any judgement.