Liverpool and Everton 'must' share new ground - The Observer

[Imy]

I'm going to get slated for this but I don't see the problem with it.
Inter and AC share the San Siro and I would rather sell 75,000 every other week (which we could imo) and compete with Utd on revenue generated from ticket sales than struggle on as we are.
Utd sell 30,000 more tickets than us for every single home game, 30 ****ing thousand at what, average price of £30?? so approx 1 million more every home game after including merchandising/drinks/etc...

The 'Liverpool Way' may have worked in the 70's & 80's. The 'Utd Way' is the only way to have sustained success today and moving forward unless a rich Russian or Arab gets involved with us and there were plently of opportunities for anyone with enough money to do that before these 2 dicks took the plunge.

I read an article where Milan (may have been Inter though ) were talking about how they can't compete with the English clubs, and one of the points was the fact that they share a stadium - they have to share revenue also sharing puts off advertisers as their product is associated with that particular club and because of the ground share is not on show 24/7 as such.

It's not a good idea.

[Scratch]

I read an article where Milan (may have been Inter though ) were talking about how they can't compete with the English clubs, and one of the points was the fact that they share a stadium - they have to share revenue also sharing puts off advertisers as their product is associated with that particular club and because of the ground share is not on show 24/7 as such.

It's not a good idea.

Revenue from match day will not change tho, and with electronic advertising advertising can be club specific at the press of a button...can't see any revenue being lost, unless it's through having to share "tourist" money, but even then???

[dww]

What would the potential be for using any proposed new stadium for concerts/conferences/other non-football related events? If there was significant revenue to be had through that then sharing it would be a potential loss.

I think a large part of the objection to sharing is emotional. However what is left in terms of the point of supporting a team if you eliminate emotion.

From a pure footballing perspective a shared stadium would result in a worse surface and hence be a bad thing as well.

Also the fact that it would be an unequal partnership seems to make the initial arrangements difficult to make fairly. Obviously it could be sorted but I'd much rather we found a way to get our own stadium.

[Matt]

What would the potential be for using any proposed new stadium for concerts/conferences/other non-football related events? If there was significant revenue to be had through that then sharing it would be a potential loss.

Plenty of potential for non-football events but I wonder how often a stadium of that size would actually be needed? Old Trafford doesn't host much really, the Super League grand final springs to mind but I was under the impression that most of the massive gigs are at the cricket ground.

[dww]

Plenty of potential for non-football events but I wonder how often a stadium of that size would actually be needed? Old Trafford doesn't host much really, the Super League grand final springs to mind but I was under the impression that most of the massive gigs are at the cricket ground.

It's not just the stadium itself but depending on the infrastructure we are forced to create we could have exhibition rooms etc. to make use of transport links/car parks built as part of the project for little extra cost (%age wise at least). I have no idea about how much use they would get though.

I guess there are very few events that require a stadium of great size. The OT comparison is valid and I guess a good guide to realistic expectations as they have a big 'brand' and seem very business savvy.

[The Birdman]

Revenue from match day will not change tho, and with electronic advertising advertising can be club specific at the press of a button...can't see any revenue being lost, unless it's through having to share "tourist" money, but even then???

From a financial point of view I honestly can't see any reason not to do it, less cost, probably a bigger grant from the government, more advertising opportunity for the stadium as companies could advertise in the stadium rather than be a liverpool or everton associated company.
Our advertising and branding will get a bigger exposure, Liverpool will get the chance to host European Finals and we get to laugh as Everton play in front of a 50% capacity every other week and moan that their ****e results are down to a lack of atmosphere!

I would guess that what would be our Kop end would be the away end when Everton play at home.

[Exiled_red]

From a financial point of view I honestly can't see any reason not to do it, less cost, probably a bigger grant from the government, more advertising opportunity for the stadium as companies could advertise in the stadium rather than be a liverpool or everton associated company.
Our advertising and branding will get a bigger exposure, Liverpool will get the chance to host European Finals and we get to laugh as Everton play in front of a 50% capacity every other week and moan that their ****e results are down to a lack of atmosphere!

I would guess that what would be our Kop end would be the away end when Everton play at home.

I would imagine that too would be a stumbling block, we would want a large Kop stand, with a very large capacity, Everton fans probably wouldn't want to sit on a Kop stand but wouldn't want a the Kop centre piece being the away end.


Also speaking of stumbling blocks there's other issues like pitch size that both clubs would have to agree on, as we have different styles of play we'll have different requirements.


As for the advertising I could imagine companies would pay more to advertise at a stadium that was used twice as often, but I doubt they would pay twice as much.

[dom9]

AC and Inter each have their own end. In fact, each have their own name for the stadium. Inter use the official name Stadio Guisseppe Miazza (I think - named after one of their ex-players). AC fans, predictably call it the San Siro (the previous name).

They have to replace the pitch 4 times a year, at a cost of 200,000 euros each time. This is split between them.

Inter are seriously looking into building their own stadium.

All of this info has come courtesy of the stadium tour I went on last month (museum is shared too).

Juventus are also looking into building their own stadium.

[TheStig]

AC and Inter each have their own end. In fact, each have their own name for the stadium. Inter use the official name Stadio Guisseppe Miazza (I think - named after one of their ex-players). AC fans, predictably call it the San Siro (the previous name).

He played for both Inter and AC.

[Darkon]

I am a bit split on this subject. If it proofs to be the only way we will get a bigger and more modern stadium, then I think it is a viable option. Also we should be able to only serve half the costs of running the stadium.

As an example of a very good job at this is Bayern Munich and 1860 Munich that shares the allianz arena. A capacity of 70.000 and the stadium can actually change colour depending on which team plays, so it looks blue when 1860 is at home, red when bayern plays and white I think when Germany plays there.

But my first option would still be having our own stadium with capacity as other major clubs. It just feels more correct somehow, and sharing with neverton just seems wrong. It might just be for the first while though, and we might get used to it quite fast.

[Matt]

It's not just the stadium itself but depending on the infrastructure we are forced to create we could have exhibition rooms etc. to make use of transport links/car parks built as part of the project for little extra cost (%age wise at least). I have no idea about how much use they would get though.

I guess there are very few events that require a stadium of great size. The OT comparison is valid and I guess a good guide to realistic expectations as they have a big 'brand' and seem very business savvy.

I think more than anything else a new stadium will kick-start the regeneration of the area and hopefully link it nicely into the city centre. What with the new transport links, road systems and necessary demolition of derelict property it could be a real boost for the area. It won't do the club any harm either.

We must push ahead with plans for our stadium. Years have passed and millions have been spent without a shovel even touching the ground.