blackchrist
09-25-2003, 02:57 PM
The attempts by some within Liverpool (city not club) to raise the spectre of ground sharing again has got me thinking about the conflicting needs of the two clubs. Liverpool need a dramatic increase in capacity to cope with a demand that could perhaps fill a 60,000 plus stadium. Everton don't need that capacity but they do require a more modern stadium than the present one which is delapidated and unsuitable for further development.
Liverpool are currently planning a 60,000 stadium in Stanley Park together with a hotel development on the current Anfield site. The stadium to be financed by borrowing of around £70 million repayable over 25 years.
Ground sharing makes some sense, the utilisation of the stadium increases and the running costs can be shared but there is a cost in marketing potential and the majority of the supporters want nothing to do with it. Besides, a stadium is about the only fixed asset a club can have and we have seen what has happened to the likes of Wimbledon once they surrender control of their own ground.
So here is the unthinkable idea, it would be painful but commercially it seems to make a lot of sense. Liverpool go ahead and develop their new purpose built stadium and sell Old Anfield to Everton. The hotel which was planned for Anfield can be built on the Goodison site.
Anfield is a modern stadium, it doesn't require money being spent on it and it could more than service the needs of the Blues in terms of capacity. Historically it was once their home which might help to sell it to the Blue fans, on our side we will have a superb new stadium to move to and the ability to reduce our debt exposure and therefore put more money into our squad. We would get a lot more money for Anfield as a stadium than as a site for a hotel - I can't imagine the land there is worth much at all.
Obviously the gates, the flagpoll and the memorial would have to be moved to the new ground (but this would happen anyway) and Everton would have to spend money on desecrating converting the stadium to a more fitting home for them. I can imagine the reactions as I write this and I share many of them myself. However, at least Anfield wouldn't be knocked down this way and would still be used as a football pitch (albeit of a lower quality football ).
Liverpool FC would get more money to ensure their future. Everton would get a ground perfectly suited for them for the next 25 years and the groundsharing problem would go away. I know it is very unlikely to happen and would be painful in its own right but what does everyone else think
Liverpool are currently planning a 60,000 stadium in Stanley Park together with a hotel development on the current Anfield site. The stadium to be financed by borrowing of around £70 million repayable over 25 years.
Ground sharing makes some sense, the utilisation of the stadium increases and the running costs can be shared but there is a cost in marketing potential and the majority of the supporters want nothing to do with it. Besides, a stadium is about the only fixed asset a club can have and we have seen what has happened to the likes of Wimbledon once they surrender control of their own ground.
So here is the unthinkable idea, it would be painful but commercially it seems to make a lot of sense. Liverpool go ahead and develop their new purpose built stadium and sell Old Anfield to Everton. The hotel which was planned for Anfield can be built on the Goodison site.
Anfield is a modern stadium, it doesn't require money being spent on it and it could more than service the needs of the Blues in terms of capacity. Historically it was once their home which might help to sell it to the Blue fans, on our side we will have a superb new stadium to move to and the ability to reduce our debt exposure and therefore put more money into our squad. We would get a lot more money for Anfield as a stadium than as a site for a hotel - I can't imagine the land there is worth much at all.
Obviously the gates, the flagpoll and the memorial would have to be moved to the new ground (but this would happen anyway) and Everton would have to spend money on desecrating converting the stadium to a more fitting home for them. I can imagine the reactions as I write this and I share many of them myself. However, at least Anfield wouldn't be knocked down this way and would still be used as a football pitch (albeit of a lower quality football ).
Liverpool FC would get more money to ensure their future. Everton would get a ground perfectly suited for them for the next 25 years and the groundsharing problem would go away. I know it is very unlikely to happen and would be painful in its own right but what does everyone else think