Incidentally, all the furore over the Olympic Stadium has buried the fact that Spurs have been offered public money towards a new stadium in Tottenham, rather than move out of their borough.

London is where the money and the power is, so that's why things like this happen.

Isn't it crap for footy anyway some seats being 24 miles away from the pitch?

Be fascinating to see if it makes any difference to attendances and prospects after the first novelty season.

From what I can see, West Ham pay 15 towards the fitting out etc for the stadium. The seats will roll over the track so the seats are near the pitch.

Btw, Everton had the chance for a world class stadium for 30 million. It was called Kings Dock. But Kenwright messed it up. Still, he's a great blue isn't he!

The West Ham freebie is just another in a long line of twin fingered salutes to the majority of tax payers - keep paying your taxes and funding this one sided shithole.

The numbers would surely work for all parties, with the added bonus of the landlords being able to stage large concerts etc.

£10m per season rent from the two clubs,(this could be easily made up in corporate takings) plus a percentage of match day revenues, there has to be a deal there,and I am sure the Council would be able to chip in. Along with naming rights, the possible returns for private finance are very attractive.

God knows where we'd be right now if we had got the money and got into the 55,000 centrepiece of excellence. That was our genuine shot at the big time...

That still sickens me.

The reduction in corporation tax rates and reduction in top rate personal tax (at a time when foreign neighbours are increasing) will continue to fuel London's growth. This government and the previous one don't have a regional strategy.

Maybe Spain have some answers as some of the cities on their network were hardly boom towns but got their place due to some... money changing hands.

So yes, I have read that reducing commuter time is not necessarily good for the local company, it's just the capital sucking the remaining bits left. I am trying to think of the countries mentioned, it wasn't the cat napping spaniards though.

I said: "Mountains."

I live in London and it's got to be one of the most introverted, self-absorbed cities in the world. There is a genuine debate here about Bozo Johnston being the next Prime Minister and not one person ever mentions how he's pissed off the inhabitants of virtually every other city in the UK. And, frankly, the place is a shithole.

The FA have ignored their owns rules regarding stadiums. Apparently there is a rule against a club moving into the catchment area of another club. I'm not sure of the details but, as far as I know, this is what Barry Hearn was using to try to block it.

I'm not a fan of the shared stadium idea but with each decision like this adding new revenue streams and increased revenue to our competitors and with Everton and Liverpool getting desperate for redevelopment, it's almost becoming a no-brainer that we build a super stadium in between us.

BTW, I can see the high-speed rail links pushing up the house prices in the nicer areas they serve until local people are almost pushed out. I don't like to think this way but London is parasitic.

I also agree that if any major 'freebie' development were to spring up in Liverpool then the Red Shite would have their snouts in the trough faster than BK could mention the word 'halcyon' and leave us counting our magic beans and looking at a curly tail.

I'm in my 30s so someone might be able to correct me, wasn't the Albert Dock going to be filled in and turned into to a car park before Heseltine pushed for an alternative?

He seems to be the kind of politician who actually takes an interest in what is going on in the country, which is a fucking rarity. Maybe someone should inform these Eton/Oxford parasites that an octogenarian member of the aristocracy is more in touch with the country than they could ever hope to be.

Anyway, I feel I must congratulate Trevor Brooking. There was obviously no bias involved. I just can't wait until Neville Southall is given control of football in this country — maybe then we'll get a new stadium too.

A consortium led by Liverpool corporation looks forward to the next 100 years (that's what people with vision do – like a King of old planting forests of oak so that his great grandson can build a navy) and takes out a 100-year mortgage.

They raise and spend £500 million on a stadium in Stanley Park, to be shared by both clubs. The clubs get a 99-year lease paying £2m or £3m a year (both also handing-over their current grounds to be converted into community facilities – parks/memorial gardens – or sold to developers), the council also sells naming rights etc. and stages concerts/events (maybe in linked facilities).

Outcome: both clubs get a state-of-the-art stadium, the city gets jobs and secures its football heritage. A pound or two on the price of a ticket and a few bob on a pie/programme/tea pays the rent.

Interest rates are at a record low. Why not?!

Be careful what we wish for, lads... Blue Bill has the fans' best interests at heart. [Even writing those words makes puke appear in my mouth.]

I don't wish to be in any way political but how you can blame Margaret Thatcher for our stadium predicament is truly astonishing!

Does anybody know if West Ham will be allowed to sell off Upton Park and keep the cash? What did Man City do with Maine Road?

This is what would annoy me the most. If West Ham get to keep the proceeds from any sale of their old ground then they would be in a serious position of strength.

That said, no government has really had a strategy why businesses should locate their business outside of London & the M25. Liverpool is obviously a massive labour heartland, although I can't recall much government help for Liverpool from Blair or Brown.

We should remember too that this stadium wasn't ever supposed to hold a football game. It was a dedicated athletics stadium, the organisers were very clear about that. You know, sometimes, I get the impression that the people who are paid to govern and manage us don't have a clue what they're doing.

A small but popular club that is going places, with gradual but consistent progress in the 6 years I have lived in the area; only to have West Ham move in around the corner. Orient's ground is literally visible from the Olympic site!

They should at least be allowed to groundshare. It's not unfeasible and not without precedent.

Even if the move is purely looked at in financial terms, you think that more than £2M a year in rent could have been charged if there were two tenants instead of just one. Orient could have been asked to also contribute something towards the cost of making the ground football ready. If the ground is being used every single week for home games because there are two teams using it, there will also be more revenue generated in terms of catering, club merchadising shops and stalls and in terms of paying for stewards, police overtime and everything else associated with a football ground on game day.

Orient may well go out of existence. The cost to local businesses if they do will be a negative consequence that could easily have been avoided. Having two sets of fans in the area means that the local business community would benefit every single Saturday during the season. One team plays at home this week, the other plays at home next week. It just seems counter productive in terms of regenerating the area if you aren't maximising what the stadium can do for the area.

If you were one of those stinking rich Arab predators, you would be crazy for not having a look at West Ham. A fantastic stadium already in situ, no-brainer! The Spivs who currently own the club will be rubbing their hands together... You could be looking at another Man City. The ones I feel sorry for are dear old Leyton Orient.

Be assured I have no affinity with The Hammers but I can't help feeling that, if we had a half-decent ground, we would not be scratching around for new investors to kick out the bunch of short sighted amateurs we've had to suffer for far too long. COYB

The same also goes for that shower across the park.

LCC gave extension after extension to us in relation to the Kings Dock while Kenwright fannied around fighting Paul Gregg and securing the 'services' of Earl and Green to allow him to get shut of the Greggs. In the end, LCC got pretty pissed off — rightly so in my opinion — and withdrew our Preferred Bidder Status.

LCC have also afforded the other lot numerous extensions with relation to the £9 million of ERDF funding originally allocated; again the blame lays squarely at the door of their respective Board over the last 8 years.

No, if you want to look for those responsible, look no further than the Everton Boardroom!!

1. Man Utd
2. Arsenal
3. Newcastle Utd
4. Sunderland
5. Man City
6. Liverpool
7. Aston Villa
8. Chelsea
9. Everton.

Worrying...

You worry about ground capacity but if you look at Newcastle in 3rd and Sunderland in 4th they are in the lower reaches of the Premier League table. As far as I'm concerned you could have a ground capacity of 250,000 but if you don't get the results it's a waste of expense as you wouldn't fill most of the ground.

I wonder how that table would stack up if we went for 'Most Obstructed Views in the Premier League'..... We'd be right up there on that one surely?

The majority of the grounds above are also either new or had major investment, while we steadily slip further and further behind....

If they get their teams right. Newcastle and Sunderland will have a potential income stream from attendances well in excess of the Blues which will reinforce the differential in income. More money equals better players.

Ray #374, you're right but we'd getting higher attendances if x% of the ground wasn't behind a pole.

The reason that we haven't been taken over is that the new owner would have to deal with the issue of a new stadium well before investment in players. If West Ham get taken over after 2016, it would be ideal as the stadium has been dealt with so they could concentrate in other areas.

We would all love a new stadium but just don't think it will happen within a decade as Collymore was told by the source on TalkSport. We are in decline and, until Bill and his cronies have left, we will continue in this way. West Ham had a golden opportunity to move to the Olympic Stadium and took it, whereas we have had many opportunities: Kirkby, Kings Dock and Bill messed them up each time. I bet that if we were the team who had the chance to move to the Olympic Stadium rather than West Ham, the board would have messed up.

Well done to Gold and Sullivan for taking an opportunity to move West Ham forward. Something Kenwright and the Board have cocked up on many an occasion.

West Ham is not on your table, so we become 12th if I'm correct.

As Ross (#381) has stated and as I have repeatedly over the last few years, we are doomed due to Goodison Park. from the No 1 club ground in 1966 (hosted World Cup Semi-Final) to the wreck of the Premier League.

The problem was that we were still trying to recapture our 1984-87 glories with absolute stupid player purchases just as the PL was coming along; some rose to the opportunity and grew and we failed miserably. Years and years of wasted monies on players and no thought about club management, infrastructure and club assets.

Maybe for American football? That was tried and failed at Wembley. Football? Two clubs nearby: West Ham and Leyton Orient, both need a new stadium. Orient's average attendance is so small, they would have a problem filling 1/15th of the new Olympic stadium. West Ham's average would fill half the stadium. But, at £2 million year rent, is not fair to the tax payers of the UK who funded the stadium.

So the problem of fellow West Ham supporters using stadium is one of cost The rent should be closer to £15-20 million, which is a good deal. Considering, that the stadium cost £500 million to build, it should justify rent of £25 million based on 5% return annually on investment.

Man City were reportedly sold for circa £80 million and Bill is asking £125 million — it's a no-brainer.

The hilarious thing about all this is the transformation of Man City means that is now the model: don't spend big money on Liverpool, Man Utd or Arsenal — pay relative buttons for a large fanbase and off you go.

Bill, the quicker you suss this, the quicker we can move on.

I take that to mean they've cobbled together £15 million to buy Andy Carroll... or they're trying to hoodwink the fans disgruntled by watching shit negative football as it's season ticket renewal time.

What kind of club would employ those tactics!

Would have been the straw that broke the camels back for many if we hadn't hit the ground running - dodged a massive bullet there - never forgive Bill for that treachery, greedy get.

I live in Coventry and know from friends who support the club that the location of the move has a lot to do with small attendances. Everyone seemed to prefer the old ground (Highfield Road) where the fans were closer to the pitch and within walking distance of the City Centre.

Of course the mis-management by the company that owned the club (Sizu I think) has put fans off and I can't blame them as It looks like they've been taking the piss but I see a lot of parallels with Everton as this board tried to do something similar with the ground move and all their lies and spin over the years.

Did you also know there is a big fuck off Tesco next door to the Ricoh Arena?

:Reading are promising Di Canio significant spending power this summer if he becomes manager. Every other PL club seems to have greater spending power than us, even those with much smaller average attendances.

We are in serious decline and in danger of becoming a small club. Selling to buy is not sustainable in the long term. The current board seem incapable or uninterested in addressing any of these current problems.

1. Redevelop Goodison. My favourite — but can we do this without evicting local residents? Is is possible? I would be made up if we could but if we started with CPOs on local homes then this would be one ex-Everton fan.

2. Build a new stadium? Everyone says this is too expensive but others manage it. So what is the difference with us? What is the unseen factor that makes us untouchable? I struggle to see it as just being the price existing shareholders want.

I think that any option faces a bigger hurdle. My pretty uninformed view, for what it is worth, is that the existing board are scared. I think that, as well as not wanting to personally lose too much money (fair enough), they are very worried about selling Everton to a buyer who ruins the club. And for every Blackburn type story the fear will grow.

I think it is silly to paint BK as just a money-grabbing git with no love for the club. That is clearly nonsense. But equally the 24/7 search is also misleading as I think whoever they find will not overcome their fear.

And what would the new stadium do for us? I struggle to see our attendance rise much; I wonder who will inhabit rows and rows of expensive corporate boxes and do not see this as a way of us becoming a big player in transfer market.

Our solution and the solution for most clubs lies with reform of world football financial rules. But I do note that, despite the growing admiration for the German league, it is dominated by Bayern Munich.

To see both Manchester clubs sat on top of the league, getting Champions League football regularly, and both Liverpool clubs scrambling around in 6-7th is very sad indeed and I would do anything to change it. If the likes of Rome, Milan and Munich clubs can do it, why can't we?

Coventry were stitched up good and proper with lies and a ridiculous plan when they relocated. An article many moons ago talked about this on here... Look at the aerial photos and notice a trainline running right next to it but they were refused point blank to get a station there — sounds like the sort of hairbrained scheme Billy Bullshitter had with his most accessible cow shed in the country with cram packed trains, buses that didn't exist and of course the sight of thousands cycling in.

Be careful what you wish for? We've already got worse than we can dream of.

It is in their interests to see us descend into a terminal decline... not just to satisfy the desires of their fans but to enjoy the benefits of being the only PL club in the city.

They are developing to 60k seats with a shitload of corporate. They have no interest in sharing with us.

They have an enormous waiting list and will fill it no problem.

They have shown a credible plan which has council assistance/endorsement.

They may fuck their finances up if they over do it trying to keep up to speed with no champions league, they don't look in great shape financially and their wage bill is nuts. If they don't make the stadium happen ultimately they will end up in a slightly less worse position to us.

But if they make it happen then the gulf will became a chasm, unbridgeable.

Our preferred option is to share with them!!!

Feeble, out of ideas, nothing to offer.

We drift closer to the iceberg year on year. When we fall we will fall hard.

Ultimately, long term, there is no future for this club in top flight football with this board.

And they have made it extremely difficult for any new owners to buy the club and then push it forward.

Does anyone know if Tony I'Anson ever published the results of his initial survey, specifically supporters feelings on purchasing Finch Farm?

I seem to recollect Tony asking if, and how much, supporters would be willing to put in to purchase but don't know if it was ever published.

I have no desire to share with the fuckers and yes their increased capacity will leave us for dead, but they are not arsed about us it's the others and that increased attendance will still leave them miles behind who they are chasing, they need more what they are planning, they may end up with a capacity similar to Arsenal but corporate wise there is no amount of patch up that can match what they have either.

"After the inquiry, we investigated alternative solutions to Everton's stadium problem. Myself and Trevor Skempton produced quite a substantial document looking into the possibilities of a shared stadium and presented it to both the leader of the council and the leader of the opposition group in the leaders office. It was an interesting exercise, sited in the area around Liverpool Waters, it was purely a design concept that addressed the potential problems of a shared stadium in many innovative ways.

"Two problems with the concept were relatively insurmountable. Firstly Bradley took the concept to John Whittaker at Peel and he had no interest in a stadium whatsoever. The second problem is that Everton and Liverpool have such diverse target markets that it would be relatively impossible and completely undesirable to accommodate such a potentially compromising situation, particularly for Everton.

People who unthinkingly state that a shared stadium is the best solution for the City are complete idiots in my opinion." [Empasis added]

Has anybody seen this document? Has it ever been published?

I think that in terms of the north west, Manchester may already have received the majority of any funding of it's type for the stadium City now occupy. I can't see there being a lot of availble sports funding for the area in the foreseeable future. Urban regeneration has a lot of different aspects to it and I can't see money in the middle of a recession being spent on professional level football stadia.

LIVERPOOL FC SEASON TICKET PRICES FOR 2013-14
Tier 1 (central sections of Centenary Stand, Main Stand and Paddock): adults £850, over-65s £637.50
Tier 5 (central sections of the Kop): adults £725, over-65s £544
Tier 6 (end sections of the Kop): adults £710, over-65s £532.50

The Liverpool waters intrigues me. This is following London docklands blueprint but without the financial service firms to move in. I'd love to know who Peel think will fit it with?

How reliable? Mate at work plays golf with the husband of a woman who is a good friend of Steve Round's wife. She says it's all done.

The idea of Karen Brady saying to Moyes, "Give me a Powerpoint presentation on Monday about how you're getting us into 4th with flow diagrams and a mission statement," seems fanciful at best.

Unless she promised to wear heels and flash her knicks.