• You may have to login or register before you can post and view our exclusive members only forums.
    To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

no new stadium

Forums Unread posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
It's all well and good saying had H&G announced this then there would have been uproar - but this view ignores to key points. The first being that H&G promised a new stadium when they arrived and spent a fortune of the clubs money on the architectural plans. FSG made no such statement of intent and were going to consider all options. The second is under H&G we were operating under an unsustainable financial model and therefore the pressure for a new stadium grew and grew to boiling point.

If Anfield can be redeveloped to around 60,000 then this has to be our first option. However I'll be slightly surprised if the Americans manage to pull it off.
 
Off the field, Liverpool have been given three months to announce their stadium plans.

Council chiefs this week granted an extension until July for the club to purchase a £300,000 lease on Stanley Park.

New owners FSG have still not told planners their intentions but the indications suggest they favour staying at Anfield.
Click to expand...
 
No offence Binny as you do a great job finding these articles and highlighting relevant bits, but if the article is 3 sentences long then it probably doesn't need bits highlighted 🙂
 
The long ones that have bolded bits are great and an invaluable service to the site!

But if it's 3 lines it's rather off-putting in my opinion.
 
[quote author=SaintGeorge67 link=topic=44038.msg1321102#msg1321102 date=1303667495]
No offence Binny as you do a great job finding these articles and highlighting relevant bits, but if the article is 3 sentences long then it probably doesn't need bits highlighted 🙂
[/quote]

Opps, removed the boldings, mate. Apologies cos it was from an originally longer article about our supposed summer kitty of 50m and I cut it off from there.
 
The Tagmeister just tweeted the same rumour that Redshrek posted a while back.

Now it MUST be true... ;D
 
[quote author=Hansern link=topic=44038.msg1321357#msg1321357 date=1303724561]
The Tagmeister just tweeted the same rumour that Redshrek posted a while back.

Now it MUST be true... ;D
[/quote]

Which rumour is that?
 
[quote author=SaintGeorge67 link=topic=44038.msg1321115#msg1321115 date=1303668337]
Don't worry about it, it's probably just me being grumpy anyway 😉
[/quote]

What an asset to the site and your complaining about bolding?? He even took the time to find an old thread to post this is... 99% of us would just start a new one.

Jeez... there is no pleasing some people!

Cheers Bin for the info!
 
[quote author=doctor_mac link=topic=44038.msg1321367#msg1321367 date=1303725053]
[quote author=Hansern link=topic=44038.msg1321357#msg1321357 date=1303724561]
The Tagmeister just tweeted the same rumour that Redshrek posted a while back.

Now it MUST be true... ;D
[/quote]

Which rumour is that?
[/quote]

Redevelopment of Anfield mate
 
If Binny posts a quote and it has no highlighted bits then I just don't read any of it 😛
 
LIVERPOOL face another year's delay before they get the OK for a £200m Anfield redevelopment.

And with a refurbishment of the stadium likely to take two years, the earliest Liverpool can hope to complete the construction is for the start of the 2014-15 season.

The club's American owners are in the midst of a fresh feasibility study to modernise the existing ground into a 65,000-seater stadium.

Owner John W. Henry said in November Liverpool wanted to make a final decision on the stadium "within a year", but it will take longer to get permission to build it.

Henry's Fenway Sports Group have consistently distanced themselves from the two plans already approved.

One, by Manchester based architects AFL is too old. The other Tom Hicks-inspired plan is too expensive.
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom