Government set to reject Everton's Kirkby stadium plans
- Thread starter dee
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Status
[quote author=Richey link=topic=37438.msg1000095#msg1000095 date=1259324974]
Sharing a stadium would in theory make some sense, but not a lot. The costs of building would be split - and if Everton are even looking into having a new stadium they can't be THAT skint - and if you can afford it then during a recession is the best time for building,
There is the argument that I have heard as well that the running costs of the stadium would also be split, meaning that more money could be spent elsewhere, especially with increased revenue from ticket sales.
However, there are counter arguments of course. We would find it a lot easier to fill a bigger stadium week in week out than Everton would. So would they be that much better off than they are now, having to pay out half the costs for a stadium that they are not getting maximum return on in terms of ticket revenue?
The running cost argument is also slightly flawed in another way. Presumably the costs will be higher as the stadium will be used every single week. And what might sound like a minor point, but actually is far from it, is that this is bound to have a terrible effect on the state of the pitch. By the end of the season these days pitches often look a bit fucked so imagine what it would be like if they saw twice the amount of games?
Then there is the final point. We don't want to share with them and they don't want to share with us. Not the most logical of point one might argue, but a point nonetheless and probably the most important one ultimately.
[/quote]
Everton are boracic, mate. The only reason they could even dream about a new stadium was that Tesco (whose CEO is a blue) were willing to look at building them one. Nor do they have anything - ANYTHING - to offer the banks which would persuade the banks to lend them the money. In short, there is not the remotest prospect of that lot being able to pay their way on a joint project. We'd end up continually having to try and make up the difference, to avoid having wasted the money we ourselves had spent, only for that bunch of wasters to waltz in and claim a half-share at the end of it with the blessing of the NWDA and Liverpool City Council. Norfolk 'n' chance.
Sharing a stadium would in theory make some sense, but not a lot. The costs of building would be split - and if Everton are even looking into having a new stadium they can't be THAT skint - and if you can afford it then during a recession is the best time for building,
There is the argument that I have heard as well that the running costs of the stadium would also be split, meaning that more money could be spent elsewhere, especially with increased revenue from ticket sales.
However, there are counter arguments of course. We would find it a lot easier to fill a bigger stadium week in week out than Everton would. So would they be that much better off than they are now, having to pay out half the costs for a stadium that they are not getting maximum return on in terms of ticket revenue?
The running cost argument is also slightly flawed in another way. Presumably the costs will be higher as the stadium will be used every single week. And what might sound like a minor point, but actually is far from it, is that this is bound to have a terrible effect on the state of the pitch. By the end of the season these days pitches often look a bit fucked so imagine what it would be like if they saw twice the amount of games?
Then there is the final point. We don't want to share with them and they don't want to share with us. Not the most logical of point one might argue, but a point nonetheless and probably the most important one ultimately.
[/quote]
Everton are boracic, mate. The only reason they could even dream about a new stadium was that Tesco (whose CEO is a blue) were willing to look at building them one. Nor do they have anything - ANYTHING - to offer the banks which would persuade the banks to lend them the money. In short, there is not the remotest prospect of that lot being able to pay their way on a joint project. We'd end up continually having to try and make up the difference, to avoid having wasted the money we ourselves had spent, only for that bunch of wasters to waltz in and claim a half-share at the end of it with the blessing of the NWDA and Liverpool City Council. Norfolk 'n' chance.
"as patchy as Gavin McCanns' head".
LOLly mixtures.
LOLly mixtures.
The only benefit for us doing this would be that we'd get a new stadium built a few years earlier than expected + At a lesser cost.
Over the long haul we'd lose out big time.
Naming rights would have to be shared
Any revenue the stadium could bring in outside of football would be split.
The colour coordination just wouldn't work
The horrid thought of our home being their home too.
Plus many more inconveniences.
I'd rather wait and get a new ground which is 100% ours.
Over the long haul we'd lose out big time.
Naming rights would have to be shared
Any revenue the stadium could bring in outside of football would be split.
The colour coordination just wouldn't work
The horrid thought of our home being their home too.
Plus many more inconveniences.
I'd rather wait and get a new ground which is 100% ours.
- Status
