New stadium update...

[ntto]

I don't know anything about the Chelsea stadium fiasco in the 70s, but that was a different time and different era, and they're Chelsea, we're Liverpool, and as long as we're in the CL will always have a steady income we can rely on.

And from where I'm sitting, this stadium fiasco gives me cause to be concerned at the yanks business' acumen. Firstly why publicise the designs with all that fanfair when funding wasn't in place for it and they knew it could be an issue? Secondly, are these guys the only ones who didn't foresee the credit crunch and economic downturn? Lots of people in the last year have been disposing of assets because they knew it was the right time - what did they see that the yanks missed?

we cant unfortunately guarantee on this - especially if platini has his way and reduces the english allocation to 3 teams

[Kopite_Colin]

So how come Arsenal have surpassed the Mancs as "the world's richest club" (c Deloittes who base it solely on turnover) with a 60,000 seater stadium?

Arsenal Top Rich List

Becuase their ticket prices are so much more. I would be sceptical about them selling more shirts than Utd too - esp in the Far East.

[Jayesh87]

New stadium decision in new year

Dec 18 2007 by Tony Barrett, Liverpool Echo

LIVERPOOL will make a decision on their new stadium early in the new year after ditching their most recent plans because they were too expensive.

Chief executive Rick Parry today insisted: “The objective on day one in building the new stadium was to generate more cash to fund the team and we must never get away from that objective.

“We remain confident we can achieve that and still produce a very impressive solution.”

Tom Hicks and George Gillett are now considering plans submitted by two rival firms of architects, both of which offer a cheaper and more viable option.

Dallas architects HKS – handpicked by Hicks for the original design which was unveiled with great fanfare in July this year – have revisited their initial submission and scaled it down in a bid to make it more cost effective.

Meanwhile, Manchester firm AFL – who came up with the design for a 60,000 capacity stadium which Hicks rejected as “obsolete” after taking over the club – have submitted a new set of plans which are also under consideration.

The fact that plans for a 76,000 stadium have now been shelved is a blow to Hicks and Gillett who had pledged to create “a world class stadium” to help Liverpool to “compete with the Manchester Uniteds, Real Madrids and Barcelonas of the football world”.

But club insiders insist the decision was taken for all the right reasons as costs threatened to spiral out of control and had Hicks and Gillett refused to go back to the drawing board it could have burdened Liverpool with a stadium which was not cost effective.

Having launched their revised plans with such fanfare in July the decision to abandon them now is something of an embarrassment for the Americans but the ECHO understands it was the only sensible option left open to them as the costs threatened to rise to more than £450m.

When it became clear that the club was not in a position to pursue the HKS design, Hicks asked the Dallas firm to come back with a revised set of proposals which were within the club's budget.

AFL were also commissioned to come up with an improvement on their initial 60,000 capacity stadium plans and they have done so.

Both sets of plans are for a stadium with a capacity of around 70,000 and the club will make a final decision on which option they wish to pursue early in the new year.

http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/liver...0252-20264829/

[CAD]

I just refuse to believe that he won't be able to sell. Ridiculous.

Makes no sense what so ever from a business perspective either.

Riise and Crouch only have 18 months left on their contracts. Value decreasing with each month.

Momo is sought after, and can raise a fair deal.

Carson can be cashed in on, and it would not affect our squad at all as we have Charles and Martin.

And so you should. It's so stupid that I'm surprised that even a journey would come up with bull**** like this. It makes absolutely no sense from an owners point of you. Of ****ing course we will be active in the window.

[Kopite_Colin]

Call me a bluff old traditionalist, but shouldn't all this be worked out before any plans are released? Surely you weigh up all the options, cost it all out, then make a decision and make it public. Not release the plans, get everyone excited and then say ‘oops, we can’t afford that one’.

Just seems so incredibly amateurish.

Spot on Shags. We've made ourselves look stupid / slow / old-fashioned getting this far. These new developments are not helping at all.

[Scratch]

Spot on Shags. We've made ourselves look stupid / slow / old-fashioned getting this far. These new developments are not helping at all.

Not really, when the plans were released i'm sure they were within budget. However, the rise in price of steel has been astronomical, and far beyond predictions, so the cost of the new HKS stadium, with all it's extra cladding etc has risen dramatically as a result, until it has reached a point where it is no longer a cost viable option.

If reports are true, then the two stadiums we are now considering are both significantly cheaper, and both capable of holding 70,000 fans (no mention of any expansion is possible, so it would seem not) which is still 25,000 more than currently, and 10,000 more than Emirates. The stadium revenue generated would more than pay for itself, so even if the debt is put against the club (ie the stadium etc) then it is not a financial risk in the slightest, and is not dependent on CL qualification, but on a continuous fan base, and would leave us with a healthy transfer kitty.

[Venton]

Spot on Shags. We've made ourselves look stupid / slow / old-fashioned getting this far. These new developments are not helping at all.

These construction projects depend on circumstances being exactly as they are when they are first drawn up and staying that way for a few years (the duration of the contract). Higher costs of borrowing and rising construction costs all affect the project significantly.

This was taken from a trade journal in December 2007:

THE STEEL PRICE TIMELINE

At the beginning of the War in Iraq in March of 2003, steel prices shot up past $100 per ton. By January 2004, a ton of heavy melt steel averaged $161.62. Wild price swings characterized 2004, which ended with the price hovering around $250 per ton.

Prices plunged through early and mid-2005, falling as low as $125 per ton in July. But by December of that year, a rally had pushed prices back up to $250. Prices hovered or fell for most of 2006 and then came back up in 2007, ending November at $265 per ton. Since Sept. 11, the price of steel has more than tripled.

The futures for steel have risen even more so the betting is that the project will be even more expensive. You can't see everything coming unfortunately. Lots of people thought sub-prime would be a problem but no-one saw it being as bad as the credit crunch.

If they are seeing the costs going up and up and they are acting to stop that now then I am glad of it.

[sonsofthedesert]

Not really, when the plans were released i'm sure they were within budget. However, the rise in price of steel has been astronomical, and far beyond predictions, so the cost of the new HKS stadium, with all it's extra cladding etc has risen dramatically as a result, until it has reached a point where it is no longer a cost viable option.

If reports are true, then the two stadiums we are now considering are both significantly cheaper, and both capable of holding 70,000 fans (no mention of any expansion is possible, so it would seem not) which is still 25,000 more than currently, and 10,000 more than Emirates. The stadium revenue generated would more than pay for itself, so even if the debt is put against the club (ie the stadium etc) then it is not a financial risk in the slightest, and is not dependent on CL qualification, but on a continuous fan base, and would leave us with a healthy transfer kitty.

Spot on mate.

[paulcooper4]

I've not spoken to my mate again yet (hopefully this week) but I've just been on RAWK to see if I've had a grovelling apology yet (I haven't ) and found the picture below. Apparently when AFL were first approached to design a new stadium they gave Parry & Moores three versions:

1. a 55,000 seater bowl with no seats in the corners
2. the 60,000 "Parrybowl" we've all seen and had planning permission for
3. a 70,000 version that looks like a smaller Wembley with twin arches above

The last one sounds just like the way my contact at AFL has described the revised plans although he did specifically comment that there would be a bigger, curving Kop end. Perhaps, however, this pic might give us a hint of what the revised AFL plans could look like:



Hopefully, as I've already said, I'll try to find out more in the next few days...

That one looks better than the over-priced space ship thingy anyway

[PLY]

As long as I can still afford to go I'm not overly arsed about what it looks like from outside

[tomasjj]

That one looks better than the over-priced space ship thingy anyway

I don't think so, but if it enables us to also invest in the team - I am all for it.

I suspect you only like it because it looks like a proper old fashion stadium though...times are changing you know..

[bobbyfallon]

Spot on Shags. We've made ourselves look stupid / slow / old-fashioned getting this far. These new developments are not helping at all.

surely the longer we leave it the more expensive it becomes.

inflation is a cu-nt but unavoidable.

when the new stadium was announced i would have thought that contractors suppliers etc would have been tied to contracts and put in place. with bonuses etc for early completion and penalties for late completion..??????????

[paulcooper4]

I don't think so, but if it enables us to also invest in the team - I am all for it.

I suspect you only like it because it looks like a proper old fashion stadium though...times are changing you know..

It DOES look like a proper footy ground though, far better than that americanized space-ship looking pile of ****e that we were OBVIOUSLY never gonna be able to afford, and even if we had of built it, wed have been paying for the cunt for about 8 trillion years so the extra revenue from seats would have bean pointless anyway

[Guest]

It DOES look like a proper footy ground though, far better than that americanized space-ship looking pile of ****e that we were OBVIOUSLY never gonna be able to afford, and even if we had of built it, wed have been paying for the cunt for about 8 trillion years so the extra revenue from seats would have bean pointless anyway

The futuristic design wasn't bad ... but FFS, it's a football stadium in the end, not a candidate for inclusion into the guiness book of records.

[kemlynmoaner]

Has no one picked up that in the summer the stadium completion went back one year to 2010, and has now gone back to 2011?