Interesting news...

[bazza76]

Is it possible that they may be looking at expanding anfield?

I doubt it very much

[Dhav]

The original design could've been seen as unimaginative but also it wasnt expandable

Personally I think thats a key point in the stadium move, it has to be expandable if we are to continue to grow over the coming years

Maybe thats why the original architects were sacked

Right there is reason enough to sack the architects and the board for going this far down the line with something that would be so limiting. No only is the stadium design generic and completely uninspiring, it was also non-expandable?

I say if the yanks can afford it, they should just scrap this project right now, start from scratch with a stadium that will be expandable and will have the highest possible capacity that the exisitng infrastructure will allow. If this is 61,000 fine, as long as we get a stadium that is befitting the club and not just an Emirates clone.

The incompetence and mismanagement of this whole thing is astounding.

[anfieldanfield]

We've got 30,000+ on the season ticket waiting list and a combined 10,000 fancard holders get turned away on the phones, e-season ballot and online sales.

I still think 60,000 is too small for us, I think we would fill a 70,000 seater stadium for most games..

[bazza76]

Right there is reason enough to sack the architects and the board for going this far down the line with something that would be so limiting. No only is the stadium design generic and completely uninspiring, it was also non-expandable?

I say if the yanks can afford it, they should just scrap this project right now, start from scratch with a stadium that will be expandable and will have the highest possible capacity that the exisitng infrastructure will allow. If this is 61,000 fine, as long as we get a stadium that is befitting the club and not just an Emirates clone.

The incompetence and mismanagement of this whole thing is astounding.

I cant say im supprised, i know Parry and Moores eventually did the right thing, and made an inspired choice of manager in Rafa. But their vision in a business sense was very limited.
Parry is an accountant and Moores was a rich man with LFC as his main must have asset. I dont doubt their love for the club, but I have always doubted their ability to do what was best for LFC commercially.

[bazza76]

We've got 30,000+ on the season ticket waiting list and a combined 10,000 fancard holders get turned away on the phones, e-season ballot and online sales.

I still think 60,000 is too small for us, I think we would fill a 70,000 seater stadium for most games..

Parry was quoted before as saying that GH was a big reason the capacity was the size that it is planned to be. because he wanted more money to spend on players.

[desertscouser]

Parry was quoted before as saying that GH was a big reason the capacity was the size that it is planned to be. because he wanted more money to PISS UP THE WALL on SH1TE players.

Amen to that

[Dhav]

We've got 30,000+ on the season ticket waiting list and a combined 10,000 fancard holders get turned away on the phones, e-season ballot and online sales.

I still think 60,000 is too small for us, I think we would fill a 70,000 seater stadium for most games..

It certainly is, if we're talking of that being the capacity for the life of the stadium. Limiting to 60,000 permanently is absolute lunacy. That won't be enough to keep up with the Scum

[Dhav]

I cant say im supprised, i know Parry and Moores eventually did the right thing, and made an inspired choice of manager in Rafa. But their vision in a business sense was very limited.
Parry is an accountant and Moores was a rich man with LFC as his main must have asset. I dont doubt their love for the club, but I have always doubted their ability to do what was best for LFC commercially.

I'm not surprised either, but the fact that it is has taken us this long to get investment not only means we have fallen a couple more years behind the Scum and Chavs, but also means we've have gone so far down the route of this stadium fiasco and we're going to get stuck with a white elephant.

If we wanted to bring in Hicks for his stadium expertise, why do it only 2 months before work was due to start? The amount he could do would clearly be extremely limited within some pretty rigid confines.

The whole thing is a shambles.

[bazza76]

Amen to that

here it is anyway if any of ya want a read from a few years back:

Liverpool unveil new stadium

Liverpool have revealed plans to quit Anfield and move to a new 55,000-seater stadium at nearby Stanley Park.

The club have presented plans to Liverpool City Council and they hope the stadium - which will cost between £60m and £70m to build - will be ready for the start of the 2005 season.

Liverpool choose realism over romance

Liverpool insist the new stadium will still be called Anfield, and will be only 300 yards away from the current ground.

Liverpool's original plan to build a 70,000 capacity stadium was rejected after it was felt the projected cost of £120m might affect manager Gerard Houllier's team-building plans.

Chief executive Rick Parry told Liverpool's official website, liverpoolfc.tv: "What we don't want to do - and what we won't ever do - is lose the focus that the team comes first.

Parry has revealed ambitious plans

"We always want to ensure the revenue is available for the manager to strengthen his squad.

"That is one reason why we haven't pressed ahead with our original plan for a 70,000 stadium. We don't want to have a huge financial millstone hanging around our necks.

"Our view is that this stadium is right for our needs. There is still a lot of work to do though and a number of obstacles to overcome yet. It will take time but I hope all of the fans are excited by what they can see."

Should Liverpool move? Have your say


The logistics of redeveloping Anfield are just massive
Liverpool chief executive Rick Parry

Parry added: "Now that we have settled on this as our preferred option we have to take the plans into the local community. This is a very important part of the process.

"We have worked closely with the local residents so far and that will continue. The stadium will still be called Anfield."

Liverpool felt it was impossible to further improve the current Anfield, but they will incorporate the Hillsborough memorial and The Shankly and Paisley Gates in the new site.

Parry added: " It would be very difficult to increase the size of the current stadium to what we want.

Liverpool will provide transfer cash for Houllier

"We are very short on space and the implications of re-building the Main Stand would be considerable.

"Of course we would cope and we would get through it, as we did when we re-built the Kop, but we would be looking at three years of disruption as the building work was carried out.

"Re-building the Main Stand would be a much bigger job than re-building the Kop because of all the facilities and the dressing rooms within the Main Stand. We would have to considerably reduce the capacity within the stadium for a long period of time."

"Also, when we were building the new Kop we weren't playing European football and there weren't as many midweek games as there are today.

"It was a case back then of the builders doing the work during the week and then handing the stadium back to us for weekend games. That just wouldn't be possible today and the logistics of redeveloping Anfield are just massive."

Also, as far as i am aware, the target was once at 77,000 for the new stadium.

[bazza76]

I'm not surprised either, but the fact that it is has taken us this long to get investment not only means we have fallen a couple more years behind the Scum and Chavs, but also means we've have gone so far down the route of this stadium fiasco and we're going to get stuck with a white elephant.

If we wanted to bring in Hicks for his stadium expertise, why do it only 2 months before work was due to start? The amount he could do would clearly be extremely limited within some pretty rigid confines.

The whole thing is a shambles.

[bazza76]

and wait till ya check this out:

LIVERPOOL have slashed the capacity of their proposed new stadium to guarantee transfer funds for boss Gerard Houllier.

The Reds have scrapped plans for a 77,000-seater at Stanley Park for a cheaper 55,000-capacity arena.

Anfield chief executive Rick Parry explained the smaller option would mean more spending power for Houllier.

He said: "We won't ever lose the focus that the team comes first at Liverpool.

"We always want to ensure the revenue is available for the manager to strengthen his squad.

"We don't want to have a huge financial millstone hanging around our necks.

"Our view is that a 55,000-seat stadium is right for our needs. It will cost us between £60million and £70m to build."

Liverpool hope to kick off the 2005 season at their new home, which will keep the name Anfield.

The present Anfield has been the club's home since 1892 and seats 45,362 fans.

Parry added: "It would be very difficult to increase the size of the current stadium.

"We are very short on space and the implications of rebuilding the main stand would be considerable.

"We would be looking at three years of disruption as the building work was carried out."

Parry also assured Liverpool fans that everything would be done to incorporate the Hillsborough Memorial and the Paisley and Shankly gates at the new Stanley Park site.

Boss Houllier will be delighted by news the development will not force him to trim his transfer budget.

He knows he must sign top talent to turn his team from Premiership runners-up into champions.

He is still chasing Auxerre's £18m-rated striker Djibril Cisse, 20, and also has his eyes on Blackburn's Republic of Ireland winger Damien Duff, Feyenoord's Australian Brett Emerton and Senegal's World Cup captain Salif Diao.

Les Lawson, secretary of the Merseyside branch of the Official Liverpool Supporters Club said: "I will be leaving Anfield with a very heavy heart.

"But you have to look to the future - and if you want to be successful and want to compete, this is the right road to take.

"We have to increase capacity. At the moment we are being left behind by other clubs.

"Manchester United have a far bigger ground. Newcastle and Sunderland also have bigger attendances than ours.

"Arsenal also have plans for a big new stadium.

"If Liverpool stayed at Anfield we would have to increase the prices - and we have always prided ourselves on having some of the cheapest tickets in the country."

[Maestro]

Liverpool unveil new stadium

Liverpool have revealed plans to quit Anfield and move to a new 55,000-seater stadium at nearby Stanley Park.

The club have presented plans to Liverpool City Council and they hope the stadium - which will cost between £60m and £70m to build - will be ready for the start of the 2005 season.

Liverpool choose realism over romance

Liverpool insist the new stadium will still be called Anfield, and will be only 300 yards away from the current ground.

Liverpool's original plan to build a 70,000 capacity stadium was rejected after it was felt the projected cost of £120m might affect manager Gerard Houllier's team-building plans.

[bazza76]

I think GH spent similar to that in his time in charge.

[Dhav]

I wonder how Everton might feel about a possible ground share?

[bazza76]

I wonder how Everton might feel about a possible ground share?

Oi less of that