VIEW FROM THE BLUE
How to keep Everton in the city
Envision, if you will, a home for Everton in the district where the club was formed 129 years ago and in which the old Roundhouse in the centre of its famous crest still stands. The floodlights of the stadium are visible as you exit LIme Street Station or walk down Scotland Road from the direction of Walton. As you drive out of the Wallasey tunnel, the home of Everton FC is the first thing you see. The roar of 50,000 fans is audible from the city centre.
Everton back home in Everton at the heart of Liverpool.
It's been derided as the "reddest of red herrings" and a desperate, eleventh-hour bid by Liverpool City Council to save face, while being seized upon by those who want to keep Everton in the city as the answer to their prayers. There is no question, however, that as fans prepare to make arguably the most important decision of their Everton-supporting lives, the "Loop" off Scotland Road deserves to be explored as the potentially viable alternative to Kirkby so glaringly lacking on the upcoming ballot of fans.
The whys, hows and wherefores of how we got to this point — there's probably more than enough blame to go around all parties — are largely irrelevant to any examination of the possibilities that exist at the Tunnel Loop location. What is important is demonstrating that the site is, by Keith Wyness' definition, "deliverable" in both logistics and funding.
Of course, the former is the easy part; the latter is where, again, possibilities can be presented but it will be up to LCC leader, Warren Bradley, and the local authority over which he presides to prove that they can assemble the right package of property and commercial partners to rival what is on offer in Kirkby from Knowsley Borough Council and Tesco.
It's worthwhile prefacing a fuller examination by addressing the common assumption and potential misconception that we are talking about a mirror of the Kirkby project with the "Loop" alternative. In other words, it's highly unlikely to be a case of simply exchanging one retail giant for another where Bestway would help fund the actual construction of the stadium and a cash and carry would be integral to the final development. What is more likely is a Kings Dock-style scheme — a partnership between the local council, a regeneration agency, Bestway, a host of commercial partners, and Everton FC — where cooperation, mutual benefit and urban renewal for North Liverpool are what drive the funding behind the project as a whole.
When 38,000-odd Everton supporters are given the opportunity in the coming month to vote on the future location of one of English football's oldest clubs, they will be faced with a simple enough question but, in reality, Hobson's Choice. Vote for the Everton Board's Plan A or choose nothing and, the club's Chief Executive, Keith Wyness, will have you believe, face inevitable stagnation and the potential for Goodison Park to be unusable within a decade.
On the face of it, Wyness' logic is straightforward. Goodison is ageing, requires increasing annual maintenance costs, offers far less in the way of corporate facilities than comparable stadia and, with an average attendance that is probably artificially suppressed by the 4,000 obstructed views inside the ground, is not able to provide sufficient revenue to enable the club to compete in the current financial climate of the Premier League.
So, with turnover close to a maximum provided by the current stadium and no wealthy benefactors in the boardroom, Everton Football Club is unable to fund either the redevelopment of Goodson Park or a new stadium development elsewhere without significant assistance from the local authority and commercial partners.
In that sense, the three-way partnership between Knowsley Borough Council, Tesco and Everton FC that would provide Everton with a 50,000-seat stadium is a workable solution but not an attractive proposition to a sizeable chunk of the fanbase: those who believe that the club should do everything to remain in the city of its birth; and those who accuse the current custodians of the club of dereliction of their duty for having brought the club to the point where through their own failure to bring any inward investment ito the club, that one unpalatable option is the only one left on the table.
Since the collapse of the much-heralded Kings Dock stadium project four years ago, Liverpool City Council have put forward a number of alternative sites inside the municipal boundary — from Gillmoss to Speke, Switch Island to Aintree — but without a heavy-hitting commercial partner to share the cost burden, the suggestions were effectively moot.
Facing bitter accusations themselves from Evertonians for appearing to favour Liverpool FC and their own quest to build a new home in their own back yard and then sit on their hands while Everton locked themselves into a long-term exclusivity agreement with Knowsley, LCC, led by another Evertonian, Warren Bradley, have stepped up their action in recent weeks to try and prevent its oldest professional football club from leaving the city.
On the day that Everton confirmed that they would be balloting its core support on the Kirkby Project, Bradley announced that the will was there on the part of the City Council to find a viable alternative within Liverpool and that three sites — four if you include the redevelopment of Goodison — were proposed: one on the main council housing depot in Long Lane, Aintree; one at the new car holding compound next to the New Mersey Retail Park at Speke and the site off Scotland Road in cooperation with Bestway (Holdings Ltd).
The last option was the one Bradley felt was the most promising, not least because of its location actually in Everton ward and the presence of Bestway as willing partners in a wider urban regeneration and commercial development scheme.
A "Loop-hole" in the "no alternative" argument
The proposed site inside the tunnel loop off Scotland Road is currently owned by the Bestway Group, the second largest cash and carry operator in the UK with annual turnover in excess of £1.7bn, and houses the Liverpool depot of Batley's which the company acquired in January 2005.
While the location currently serves Bestway well, sitting as it does at the mouth of the Wallasey tunnel and near the main arteries leading into the city, as urban regeneration projects transform Liverpool's inner city, it's open to question whether it would make sense to have a retail depot in such proximity to Liverpool city centre in 10, 20, 50 years' time.
The area immediately to the north will undergo complete transformation in the next few years as part of "Project Jennifer", a mixed-use retail, residential and commercial regeneration project, while a large tract to the south on the other side of the Kingsway is part-owned by Liverpool City Council and has been earmarked for regeneration.
So, while Bestway's retail division had no requirement to leave the site, the approach by the LCC offered the opportunity to become part of a large-scale commercial development — one that might leverage capabilities in the Bestway Group beyond their retail operation — that would augment the Project Jennifer development and transform a gateway to the city has obvious attractions.
In terms of size, Bestway's Head of Property, Malcolm Carter, is confident that the "Loop" site would accommodate a 50,000-seat stadium and he says that his firm is already in discussions with a stadium contractor to work up designs and a proposal that would confirm that the location is viable.
Scotland Road was one of the sites proposed by Architect and Designer Trevor Skempton in Pt II of his "Rebuilding Goodison" analysis published on ToffeeWeb earlier this year
Initial reaction to the possibiity of the Scotland Road site has ranged from unbridled enthusiasm to outright derision, the latter mostly as a result of the dimensions of the area in question. Much has been made of the fact that Goodison Park fits only snugly inside the "Loop" — albeit with room to spare on either side for the kind of open walkways and plazas depicted in Everton's proposed designs for the Kirkby stadium — but the viability of the site is not dependent on how much space is around the stadium and the structure's own dimensions at its widest are not hidebound to the size of its footpint.
Consider the following:
- The stands could quite feasibly extend over the surrounding roadways by a few feet, either by horizontal extension, gradually at and angle, or by natural curvature in a dome-like structure
- Alterations to the existing thoroughfares around the loop have been considered as part of the plan but may not be necessary
- There is the potential to tunnelise one or more of the roads by building over them entirely — Grand Prix fans, think of the roadway that runs under the Loewes Hotel in Monte Carlo — but, again, may only be necessary if Everton decide or require at some point in the future to significantly increase the capacity of the stadium
- An underground car park could be built under the stadium itself
- A series of pedestrian bridges could provide access by foot over Scotland Road to the west, the loop to the north and Great Homer Street to the east
- A wide concourse similar to "Wembley Way" could replace the existing walkway that links the area south of the Kingsway at St Anne's Street with the loop site, linking new commercial properties to the stadium.
In other words, imagine a scenario whereby the boxes of footprint, parking and access are all ticked. You have a stadium 10 minutes' walk from Lime Street Station linked directly to a brand-new commercial development that could house bars, restaurants — Planet Hollywood, Mr Earl? — a cinema, a hotel and apartments... basically all the extra-football revenue generators that made the Kings Dock such a wonderful opportunity.
Not only that, it could be argued that the stadium itself would attract far more in the way of year-round use than would one located on the edge of a retail park next to the M57 in Kirkby. From concerts and conventions to wedding receptions — if you live in Liverpool, get married in Liverpool and just have to have your reception at the home of the Blues, would you want to travel to Knowsley for your reception? — and corporate parties, it would all be there in close proximity to the beating heart of Liverpool, part of the Liverpool City Centre experience.
The "retail/business park experience" provided by the new crop of purpose-built stadia like Derby's Pride Park and Reading's Madjeski Stadium is soulless by comparison, the latter sitting adjacent to B&Q and junk food outlets and surrounded by corporate buildings and industrial properties.
With the match-going experience so woven into the fabric of many fans' lives, the idea of pausing to contemplate for what they would be trading their Goodison rituals by voting in favour of the Kirkby option is not something to be casually dismissed.
One of the chief arguments put forward in favour of the proposed relocation to Kirkby is access, the natural assumption being that because it is right next to the M57 and within 10 minutes' walk of Kirkby rail station, the stadium would be ideally situated.
It's certainly true that given the high proportion of fans who reside within a walk, cab or bus ride from Goodison Park, it's conceivable that thousands of fans will elect to take the train to Kirkby on match days. In reality, it's hard to speculate how many would opt for the train over the bus or a cab from the city but there is some question whether the single rail line that serves Kirkby would be able to cope with the potential demand.
Assuming it can, the bigger problem may be those fans arriving by car, especially when you throw Saturday shoppers at Tesco into the mix.
Paradoxically, in the case of motorway access with few tributaries, it's often close proximity to a major artery that causes the most problems because cars leaving the slip road often hit upon congestion immediately, potentially causing the backlog to extend back onto the motorway itself.
The Madejski Stadium, similar to that proposed for Everton in Kirkby in that it is a retail/commercial/business-park stadium, is a case in point. The ground is visible from the M4 and fed from that motorway and the town centre by the A33. With it being miles from the core residential areas, the vast majority of match-goers are coming by car, taxi or bus and that can lead to gridlock around the ground on match days.
[My personal experience was one that I fear could become a problem in Kirkby where the stadium and potential attendance would be twice the size of the Madejski even accounting for those fans coming on foot from Kirkby or by rail. The A33 crawled from the M4 all the way to the ground before the game and, with everyone jumping into vehicles at the same time after the final whistle the whole area was gridlocked for what was close to an hour, if I recall correctly.]
By contrast, the tunnel loop location is within easy walking distance of Lime Street as well as Moorfields, James Street, Central and Brunswick stations, multi-story car parks, a ferry terminal, major bus terminals and is effectively served by every major artery that feeds central Liverpool itself.
Aerial view of the tunnel loop looking southwest
Critics of the Scotland Road option cite potential traffic congestion as one of the biggest reasons why it's a non-starter, but it's conceivable that conditions on the roads would be little different from the typical experience in Walton — although, granted, the Wallasey Tunnel could bear the brunt of any increased congestion. Goodison Park has one of the fastest dispersal rates of any Premier League ground, owing mostly to the fact that a large majority of fans walk to the ground. In fact, according to a survey a few years ago, more fans walk to Everton's home games than any other top flight club.
With the tunnel loop just 2 miles from Goodison, it's hard to see those habits changing. Throw in the fact that all of Liverpool city centre's pubs and restaurants — plus any that might spring up as part of or as a result of the stadium development — would be just a few minutes' walk away and you could have an overwhelingly high percentage of fans arriving at and leaving the ground on foot.
This is all, of course, speculation and a detailed assessment of the impact on traffic would probably be required to confirm or deny the objections of those who have been quick to write the "Loop" site off as not viable. Naturally, the same goes for Kirkby.
Where's the "sugar daddy" to pay for it?
Head and shoulders above any obstacle to the "Loop" proposal is funding. It's a given that with no liquid capital with which to play and only one major asset remaining — Goodison Park itself — Everton FC cannot even remotely fund the construction of a new stadium by itself... hence the need to use Knowsley Borough Council and Tesco as crutches in order to deliver the Kirkby Project and the absence of a Plan B on the impending ballot.
As already established, Bestway (Holdings Ltd) have now emerged as a potential partner in a large-scale commercial development after Warren Bradley approached the company with a proposition involving a stadium for Everton on the "tunnel trumpet" site. In Bradley's words, the site "fits like a glove," an observation based on much more than just the physical dimensions of the site. Here was the potential to deliver to Everton Plan B.
Unlike the Kirkby Project, which appears to be being driven by Tesco, with Knowsley and Everton the willing beneficiaries, where the "Loop" project is concerned it is the council who want to lead the scheme and funding would likely come from a conglomerate of commercial partners (Everton included), the Council and might — one would guess — attract external funding from the EU or government quangos all working towards a wider regeneration and commercial development.
According to Bestway's Head of Property, Malcolm Carter, Bestway are "participating" rather than driving the proposal but have been central to the initial announcement because they own the proposed site and have taken the lead in opening discussions with a stadium contractor to pull together an appraisal of the viability of the site. LCC have appointed a dedicated internal resource to manage the proposal and the investigations into its viability.
Suggestions that Bestway are in it to make a quick buck with a swift land sale are countered by Carter's vision for how the proposal is likely to work. He uses a "pot" analogy whereby various assets are put in and taken out of the pot to help fund the scheme.
By way of examples: Bestway could give up the "Loop" site in exchange for LCC-owned land somewhere else in the city; Everton ostensibly get the land inside the "Loop" at no cost to the club because Goodison Park itself is likely to be redeveloped at some point, possibly by the very scheme which would provide the stadium at the tunnel loop.
The key to the scheme is this potential urban regeneration and commercial development scheme of which a new stadium for Everton at Scotland Road would be just one component, albeit a major one. There, once again, are the parallels with the Kings Dock which required a relatively small contribution from Everton for what was a wide-ranging project.
And the club would be entering into a partnership not simply focused on the tunnel loop and the area immediately to the south — although that would be the primary focus — but one that could involve new developments elsewhere in North Liverpool, be it half a mile away or two miles away.
Act in haste, repent at leisure
As foreign billionnaires flock to the Premier League looking to capitalise on the boom economy — or at least the impression of one — of the English game and the transfer market inflates to ridiculous levels as a result, Everton's apparent inability to compete with the spending habits of even the likes of Wigan and Fulham this summer has been brought into sharp focus.
It has also served to instill a sense of panic among supporters who fear that the club could be surpassed this coming season by clubs of smaller stature but bigger transfer budgets and eventually left behind in the race to remain on the heels of the "big four".
While the rhetoric emanating from the club in the run up to the vote on the Kirkby Project is seeking to prey on those fears — Keith Wyness has issued warnings that Goodison Park could be unusable within a decade while Mikel Arteta's assertion that the possibility of a new stadium was one of the reasons why he elected to sign a new contract is also being used in the propaganda war — it's tempting for fans to believe that Everton are in a do-or-die, now-or-never situation.
But we act in haste and jump at what bears the hallmarks of a short-term fix rather than an enterprise focused on long-term gain at our peril. Wyness projects that the relocation to Kirkby would bring in an additional £10m revenue per year based on increased attendances and the sale of executive boxes but there has been no in-depth risk analysis on the impact the move would have on attendance levels beyond the typical honeymoon period of the first few years after the stadium opens its doors.
An inner-city stadium at a location like Scotland Road would offer the same potential for a 10,000 more fans per game while potentially proving a bigger draw for corporate sponsorship and the sale of executive boxes. More importantly, by remaining part of one of Europe's biggest urban renewal projects and anchoring itself at the heart of a thriving city, the club stand to reap far bigger rewards in the longer term. At a time when, on the back of the award of European Capital of Culture status, Liverpool is undergoing unprecedented transformation and funding initiatives are flooding into the city, it seems unthinkable that one of its oldest and most famous institutions could be leaving to set up home in the next-door borough.
With the club's exclusivity agreement with Tesco and Knowsley, LCC have been able to suggest alternative sites within Liverpool but have not been able to bring potential commercial partners to the negotiating table. Now, with time running out and the stakes as high as they could possibly be, Warren Bradley has demonstrated that the will to keep Everton in the city is there and has promised the fans that an alternative to Kirkby will be put forward by the time it comes to vote.
Evertonians owe it to themselves — and the club owes it to the supporters — to give any plan for the Scotland Road site full consideration before condemning Everton FC to a lock, stock and barrel departure for Knowsley. Logistically, the site is viable. And if between LCC and Bestway a workable funding initiative can be proposed then the brakes need to be applied on the "Kirkby Express" with immediate effect. If the Everton Board won't do it, it behooves the fans to do it for them by voting an emphatic no when it comes time to cast their vote.
Note: the following content is not moderated or vetted by the site owners at the time of submission. Comments are the responsibility of the poster. Disclaimer
1 Posted 30/07/2007 at 07:32:17
2 Posted 30/07/2007 at 08:05:53
3 Posted 30/07/2007 at 07:56:44
This article provides a clear, detailed account of one possibility if Kirkby goes ahead, which preserves the important symbolic position within the city and gives - it seems to me - a more realistic assumption of growth.
Alas, whereever we end up, the main obstacle to growth, BK, will still hold the keys to his toybox and the amount of extra revenue generated by ANY move is likely to be insignificant set against the inward investment enjoyed by so many other premiership outfits.
4 Posted 30/07/2007 at 07:54:20
I believe that the voters may though opt for "definites" fearing that a "no" vote may mean a further period of stagnation, and with the Kings Dock debacle still quite fresh in the memory in the recent past.
If "The Loop" is to become a viable and, (love the word or hate it) deliverable, option then a lot of people have to get a lot of fingers out very quickly.
I firmly believe that if it is PROVED viable AND deliverable then the vote would be a resounding and overwhelming NO to Kirby.
5 Posted 30/07/2007 at 08:03:52
6 Posted 30/07/2007 at 07:57:51
7 Posted 30/07/2007 at 08:00:21
8 Posted 30/07/2007 at 08:07:08
I also can’t shake the nasty feeling that Kenwright & Wyness have already made their minds up, despite the upcoming vote. I’d have liked to have seen a vote which included at least one alternative option (such as the Loop site) instead of just "Kirkby - Yes or No?". It implies that it’s either Kirkby or nowhere.
9 Posted 30/07/2007 at 08:31:31
Nvertherless a great analysis.
10 Posted 30/07/2007 at 08:37:18
11 Posted 30/07/2007 at 07:58:31
12 Posted 30/07/2007 at 07:54:31
Whilst the "Loop" solution is worth investigating, I believe that had this been a serious or viable option, it would have been put on the table a long time ago. Why has the council waited until Everton has announced its intention to hold a ballot to provide this information/solution? Is it because they want to derail the proposed move to Kirkby and influence the outcome of the vote?
The move is an important decision and one, which every eligible Evertonian should take seriously. However, before we vote we should judge for ourselves the merits of the proposed move rather than allowing us to be influenced by the council?s spin stories.
I remain sceptical about the move to Kirkby and wish to have more substantive information before I decide. However, I will not be influenced by false propaganda by the council. If the ?Loop? is a viable option, let them explain how the grounds will be funded. How much would Everton be expected to financially contribute? What obstacles are there? Etc. Maybe then we can make a more informed decision about our beloved club.
13 Posted 30/07/2007 at 08:40:59
14 Posted 30/07/2007 at 08:50:30
Too little.too late I’m afraid, just a desperate attempt by Bradley to save his face. If it ever happened, it could take 7-10 years to come to fruition, how far behind as a football club would we be behind the others by then?
I thought the article was incredibly naive in it’s content and simply too simplistic.
15 Posted 30/07/2007 at 08:53:41
Bestway seem ready to swap sites at no cost to themselves. They aren’t putting money in.
Delay Kirkby while we wait for funding partners to come forward?? There must be a time limit on this.
16 Posted 30/07/2007 at 09:06:47
NO MONEY = NO OTHER OPTIONS!!!!
why can’t you get that through your thick skulls?
17 Posted 30/07/2007 at 08:40:33
18 Posted 30/07/2007 at 09:03:05
19 Posted 30/07/2007 at 09:14:33
Everto have dealt with LCC for over a year and no sites came forward all of a sudden three arrive at once. The Long lane site even being dismissed by LCC’s own officers due to traffic congestion i.e. dead at birth. Quite clearly the loop side is a desperate attempt by a desperate politician trying to save face. It some respects I would like the vote to be a NO just to see these options disappear in to the ether one the vote is announced. DON’T BE FOOLED BY A POLITICIAN - QUITE CLEARLY VOTE YES TO KIRKBY - If you want the Blues to have any future.
20 Posted 30/07/2007 at 08:12:05
21 Posted 30/07/2007 at 08:19:20
22 Posted 30/07/2007 at 09:25:00
23 Posted 30/07/2007 at 09:09:40
I’d love to see this come to fruition, I don’t want to see Everton leave the city and relocate to a nowhere place. Sadly, I think there’s an air of inevitability about it unless someone comes up with something definite rather than just speculative before the ballot.
24 Posted 30/07/2007 at 09:26:13
25 Posted 30/07/2007 at 09:32:38
We’d all love a stadium just outside the city centre but unless there is actual money it can’t happen.
I think this is just another muddy the waters article written by someone who will say no to Kirkby regardless.
26 Posted 30/07/2007 at 09:23:32
The only downside to this stance is a feeling that there needed to be a plan B for those of us that don’t support plan A.
Since reading the Daily Post article a few weeks ago detailing the alternative sites put forward by LCC, I have become fixated on what to me is a no-brainer plan B - The Loop.
Before we argue on practicalities such as access, finance, footprint etc we need to win the hearts and minds of the tens of thousands of loyal Evertonians that we dare not alienate with any proposed move.
Tesco Town is a million miles away from achieving that objective. To many, myself included, it just ’feels wrong’. This is in addition to the many objective issues it raises.
The Loop, on the other hand, feels dead right. Talk about symbolic!
Vote NO to Tesco Town and let’s get some real momentum behind not just ’keeping Everton in our city’, but let’s take Everton ’home to Everton.
27 Posted 30/07/2007 at 09:34:07
28 Posted 30/07/2007 at 08:47:19
29 Posted 30/07/2007 at 09:27:54
30 Posted 30/07/2007 at 09:33:04
31 Posted 30/07/2007 at 09:25:11
32 Posted 30/07/2007 at 10:21:45
Nothing but the BEST is good enough.
The BESTWAY stadium has got a ring to it hasnt it.
33 Posted 30/07/2007 at 10:27:02
I am all for this loop site, it seems big enough and id in a good location in terms on access.
I hope we do get it and end up stayin in OUR CITY!! COYB!!
on a different note,
I have been informed that Alan Smith is staying in the Marriot in Town for the week while he completes his swith to us.
My friend is a DJ and was DJ?ing at Jermaine Pennants party on Sunday night and Alan Smith was there.
My friend asked him why he was down these ways and he told him that after 3pm today, he will be an Everton player.
I have made my friend swear on everyones life under the sun, that he?s not winding me up. He assured me 100% that he is telling the truth and he has heard it from the horses mouth.
Check the website after 3pm!!!
He also told me that Beattie will be leaving and its agreed!!
34 Posted 30/07/2007 at 09:53:07
It makes one realise now why Sir Terry was asked to be a business consultant approximately two years ago- about the time it takes to put together a project like Kirby.
I remember the quote from Kenwright about being "20 minutes" from signing a deal with NTL. He was on the board when Johnson was around and presided over Fortress Sport and Kings Dock.
In my view the problem lies with the Kenwright factor if LCC can overcome that even the finance could be resolved.
35 Posted 30/07/2007 at 10:17:54
36 Posted 30/07/2007 at 10:17:02
Three sites mentioned by Bradley; Long Lane, even his own council dismissed that one out of hand due to traffic problems.
Switch Island, errr just how long has that been within the city boundaries then? If it’s ok for there, why not Kirkby? Apart from which, have you seen the traffic congestion there on a good day? Never mind the added match traffic.
The Loop? Oh do behave, it’s a shit-hole with crap access and comunication links.
I am leaning towards Kirkby but I would prefer a proper, open debate with the council putting forward sensible and viable alternatives. They have had long enough to persue this agenda (and forget the period of exclusivity, they could easily have been working behind the scenes to to find any potential investors) Give the council a month to offer up any proposals, a month too short? Well if they hadn’t been sitting on their hands doing nothing then they are not competent and do not deserve any better.
37 Posted 30/07/2007 at 10:42:06
IT is time to bite the bullet and except change is inevitable, We all love Everton and want them to be successful and compete with the Mancs and chelsea’s but to ignore this opportunity to take the club forward would be a disastrous Wake up you fellow blues and smell the coffee!
38 Posted 30/07/2007 at 09:53:29
Even if a little short on the funding front, the main thing is that there ARE alternatives and I’m sure even more would emerge once this Kirkby nonsence is put to bed once and for all.
The Loop ticks all the right boxes in my opinion. It’s in Everton, close to all the city centre amenities and retains the present match-going experience (ie. being able to have a pint with your mates and not forced into taking the car in a there-and-back-home scenario) and above all keeping our presence right where it needs to be felt. In the heart of OUR great city and not on some out-of-sight-out-of-mind periphery of it.
KW talks of Goodison being not fit for purpose in 10 years time so even if the Loop project doesn’t materialise we’ve still got plenty of time to come up with a better site than Kirkby anyway, so what’s the rush?
Vote ’No’ to Kirkby or it’s your grand kids and your great-grand kids who will end up wearing red!
39 Posted 30/07/2007 at 10:20:51
To be honest I feel a postponement would be a more reasonable course of action & would prevent Kenwright etc from crying "foul" at a later date. "Act in haste. Repent in leisure" Too Right!
40 Posted 30/07/2007 at 10:46:37
past the magnificent stadium of the
reds for the next 10 years as we
go to watch the Blues ply their trade in the Championship.
Vote YES and at least we have a chance of competing in the Premiership - Kirkby is not ideal,
But it is a REAL project - not just a
thought provoking article filled
with nice words and ’Ticking all the boxes’.
41 Posted 30/07/2007 at 10:38:18
This has the potential to plant Everton FC firmly where it belongs in a Cardiff Arms style set up (think of those steep terraces and fantastic atmosphere) walkable from the city centre. This could be a showpiece stadium capable of generating much additional revenue via non-football activities than anything out in Knowsley. Far more attractive to a foreign investor than the out of town cowshed
I’m no Mystic Meg but I believe fans will vote against the Kirkby proposal in any case
42 Posted 30/07/2007 at 10:52:51
The terms of the exclusivity agreement state clearly that should a third party become involved via Everton during this period, Everton -solely- will legally be obliged to cover costs incurred by Knowsley council, including compensation for losses incurred.
Money wise, we can only speculate how much this would cost Everton, but it doesn’t take a mathmatician to see why we do not appear to be pro-actively exploring the loop.
43 Posted 30/07/2007 at 11:23:11
I cant help feeling though this is diversion tactics from LCC to make us vote no, then they will gives us the price on there terms after Kirkby is gone.
Good article Lyndon, but until LCC and Bestway say "here is the stadium design, here is how it is funded" then to me it doesnt exist.
I urge any fan groups who have even the slightest ability to put pressure on LCC to come up with figures and guarentee’s prior to the Kirkby vote. You can hardly blame us for being sceptical... nothing from them for 5 years and then low and behold here is a great option for us 3 weeks before our big vote.
44 Posted 30/07/2007 at 11:06:54
SCOTLAND ROAD WILL GET MY VOTE !!!.
NIL SATIS NISI OPTIMUM.
45 Posted 30/07/2007 at 11:04:24
46 Posted 30/07/2007 at 11:30:26
47 Posted 30/07/2007 at 11:31:36
The Loop is tiny.
And so we build, say a 50,000 seater stadium. Great. But IF we needed to expand, we’d be shagged.
And already we’re sitting in a stand that goes out over a main road!
John Charles, spot on - ’Good article Lyndon, but until LCC and Bestway say "here is the stadium design, here is how it is funded" then to me it doesnt exist.’
48 Posted 30/07/2007 at 10:57:42
I don’t feel the site is big enough and your description of overhanging stands and curved structures make me think you feel the same. I don’t believe the access to a stadium on what is essentially the worlds biggest roundabout would be as easy as you suggest. I think it is going to cost a lot lot more to complete and EFC’s contribution will be greater (money we don’t have) especially without the sale proceeds of GP. That is if there is actually a realistic opportunity there in the first place (which I am not convinced of).
However if Bradley as you say is going to put more meat to the bones of this thing over the current month then I think the club should postpone the vote on Kirkby for a month or two and at least look at it. As you say, the club has to be seen to be doing the right thing and examining all the options for the long term future of the club. I don’ feel the loop can be done but it’s up to the club to confirm that through discussion before they finally conclude that Kirkby is the only option.
49 Posted 30/07/2007 at 10:27:14
50 Posted 30/07/2007 at 11:07:41
51 Posted 30/07/2007 at 11:58:40
Two things would have to happen for us to move there - 1) The loop road would have to go somehow and 2) If not then we can forever forget about a possible 60,000 or more stadium for us. Far too small and landlocked.
52 Posted 30/07/2007 at 12:20:43
For what its worth, I’d be happy for the club to go into more debt to secure a city centre site than get a freebie on the outskirts.
53 Posted 30/07/2007 at 12:40:08
54 Posted 30/07/2007 at 11:50:35
55 Posted 30/07/2007 at 12:17:05
56 Posted 30/07/2007 at 12:11:55
The loop is stuck between the Kinsway tunnel, Scotland Road and Great Homer Street and is a relatively small piece of land.The site is also below the level of the surrounding roads, it won’t be the roar of 50,000 Evertonians that will be heard in the City Centre, but the sound of 50,000 coughing and spluttering from the pollution from the gridlocked roads. The roads will be jammed, because how can you expect a site at the tunnel entrance to cope a vast influx of fans between 1pm and 3pm?
If Bestways leave this site, who would possibly want a gridlocked site below the surface of the road? It wouldn’t be bought by a propety developer because everybody knows pollution tends to settle at the lowest points and who would buy a house in a smog bowl?
I think the idea of this appalling site being used the house a 21st Century arena is a bit far fetched.
57 Posted 30/07/2007 at 12:07:33
Any possible alternative should be looked into and the Loop option on paper looks good. The Kirkby option ’on paper’ looks dodgy to me.
How many supporters do they reckon are going to make the those extra few miles? But imagine how many walk or get off at Lime Street for the Loop?
I’d love us to stay and revitalise Goodison Park (and am saddened tho accept the fact that it is past it’s glory days) but I would rather have more than one option shoved down my throat those with a financial gain involved . .
58 Posted 30/07/2007 at 12:30:32
59 Posted 30/07/2007 at 13:00:07
60 Posted 30/07/2007 at 13:01:28
61 Posted 30/07/2007 at 12:34:07
62 Posted 30/07/2007 at 13:05:57
63 Posted 30/07/2007 at 12:09:10
You put an atractive case together but where’s the money coming from and how long will it take to put the deal together? The Stadium issue has been going on for 10 years or more. How much longer will we have to wait? another 5 years maybe whilst we get the funding ,planning etc.
Every year we delay puts us further & further behind our competitors. Don’t forget the club is skint, we need to do something now. VOTE FOR KIRBY!
64 Posted 30/07/2007 at 12:52:39
Why is there no money? This has yet to be answered, how come we’re the only paupers in the world’s richest league?
Kenwright has showed himself to be an out-and-out liar and the club has not moved on one iota under his tenure despite Moyes pulling his tripe out.
Make no mistake,a move to Kirkby would kill Everton FC as soon as the gloss wears off the new "identikit" stadium and the fans drift away, tired of struggling to get to the middle of nowwhere. I’m sure Tesco will be alright though.
People have got to look past the pathetic performance of the city council; we won’t be getting at them by moving to Knowsley, we’ll be cutting off our nose to spite our face and it will cost us in the long run.
65 Posted 30/07/2007 at 13:13:23
66 Posted 30/07/2007 at 13:18:54
Too many responses talk about Kirkby being the only option. You should rememeber that BK and KW are not forever, but they want to saddle us with something that will outlive you and your children.
We even have one response that shows the poster has been taken in by the Nutty Professor, Tom Cannon. ’Say No to Kirkby and certain relegation waits’. Learn to think for yourself FFS!
Is this a definite starter? Not without much investigation, but that’s precisely what the club must be prepared to do.
67 Posted 30/07/2007 at 13:31:51
As for fans walking to the ground, building regs dictate that you have to have sufficient car parking. Bolton tried to be clever after they got their planning permission and part of their car park was sold off, officials reduced capacity at the Reebok by about 2000 as a result!
Who will pay - that remains the major stumbling bloack.
The question is asked of Everton - how do they know their projected attendances and corporate attendances etc are acurate - well how sure can you be that corporate people would want to walk from Lime Street (not the pretiest of areas) or struggle with delays in an underground car park.
68 Posted 30/07/2007 at 13:43:57
69 Posted 30/07/2007 at 13:44:28
70 Posted 30/07/2007 at 12:47:45
Firstly I agree with the comments about the loops central location will utilising existing transport infrastructure in the city and similar to goodison.
However the issue of building new infrastructure structures (bridges, walkways, tunnelling roads, underground car parks etc) as part of the loop scheme and maintaining them is underestimated.
These are always extremely expensive and often go way over budget with many examples locally and nationally. If the above is needed its likely to make this scheme hard to deliver in a short/medium time period.
Kirkby should be able to mitigate such long delays with its much better high capacity road links compared to the Reebok and Reading. Its rail capacity should be able to cope by running longer trains and the proposed electrification to Headbolt Lane (in as a possible scheme in the Mersey LTP) would help. Without all the traffic info I wouldn’t want to predict too much.
A New Anfield side note, while not a total no-goer, the use of the Bootle Freight line for passengers to allow for a ground expansion is going to take a long time and lots of money to happen if at all. Expect the Yanks to get very frustrated; they?ve never worked with a company with Network Rail before.
From the outside it looks like Transport-wise LCC have let LFC get away with alot.
71 Posted 30/07/2007 at 13:23:22
2. Warren Bradley assertion, that Goodison would fit like a glove into the loop is claptrap. I find anything this shister has to say difficult to believe in the least. This is thev man who claimed in the press that he was being frustrated in his efforts to talk to Everton because of the exclusivity period, and then happened to mention over 20 meetings in 18 months, prior to dropping his dummy out of the pram with his ’Cowshed’ remarks. This man is a political posturer out to save face. LCC have long since had there own city regeneration programme and agenda marked out before Capital of Culture. Everton FC does not fit in to that masterplan
3. Where oh where are the access points to this stadium? completely surrounded by dual carriageway, it would take a public enquiry lasting 18 months to 3 years before any decison was reached regarding rerouting roads in the area, added to this the 3-4 years for construction, our revenue streams would continue to suffer and the big 4-6 would continue to get away from us.
4. Who pays for the construction of the stadium? Once again Tesco are driving the Kirkby project, because they will be financial beneficeries from the building of a superstore that will be aided by the redevelopment of the area as a whole. If Everton’s ’new’ ground fits snugly into the loop, where is the room for the development of commercial partners, alongside that would drive the project and the area, so reducing the cost of the £150-200 million that Everton would have to pay for the stadium?. No? didn’t think so.
All in all, I am convinced that there are to many ifs buts maybe’s and grasping at straws. There again is no factual evidence to support Lyndon’s theorys, with regard to this project. This has nothing to do with being for or against Kirkby, it’s about giving false hope to supporters over a project that will never see the light of day in a million years.
72 Posted 30/07/2007 at 13:21:44
As an Evertonian it is logical and right
As a regen consultant it is place relevant and hits several buttons. I can see some traffic issues but these are resolvable with good design. This could include expanding over existing road cuttings
As an urbanist I would hope to see great urban design, and a stadium that connects to the City Centre and Everton. The latter is one of the poorest performing wards in the UK. It needs life going into it, not being sucked away. Adjacent brownfield land could be used for support activities including commercial, leisure, community, and even football use
Location wise, it?s far better than Kirby, and offers the chance to emulate Portsmouth, Liverpool, and numerous other world stadiums by introducing cutting edge architecture and design. If Goodison must be rebuilt, the club should make a statement about its past and future through a great and original stadium. This is a journey and it has to include the fans, and represent a City. It must have a wow factor and create pride for Evertonians and indeed Merseyside
As a businessperson, I have little time for Tesco and their pernicious methods of delivering brand and market share. Hence far better for the club to build with clean hands and free of any partner, with the possible exception of the current site owners and local authority. I don?t know how they would finance this, but there are Directors, and others close to the club, who regularly make the Times rich list. Then there are naming rights and other assets to sell, plus range of corporate finance opportunities to explore
I don?t accept Kirby as the only options. Businesses succeed of fail because of projects, and projects should always include options. Even doing nothing is an option. Therefore it?s a case of mobilising some ?blue? sky thinking and not just seeking a quick fix, that could in time prove to be a huge own goal
73 Posted 30/07/2007 at 13:55:00
74 Posted 30/07/2007 at 13:35:18
Just arch stands over busy roads?
Just enough room to fit goodison in as it is?
No room for car/coach parking facillities?
The fact is that to build a modern stadium you need much more room. The reebok has a similar footprint to Goodison and is comparable in size, if not in capacity. Just loo at the emirates, three times the size of goodison but only one and a half times the capacity.
Stop clutching at straws, no-one even brought moving to Kirkby up as an issue when we voted yes to a ground move in the late nineties. It is the anti Kirkby movement which is utilising propaganda, not vice versa.
Goodison was not within the boundaries of Liverpool when we moved there, and furthermore niether was Anfield when we moved there! We have never moved to a site within the city!
This is all sentimental bull.
75 Posted 30/07/2007 at 14:03:23
The site it too small, and there is no way yet of funding it.
And, yes, it has come from the LCC at the eleventh hour as a desperate way to save their political arses.
So: site too small, no viable funding, a nakedly political deception.
Yes, apart from that, it’s perfect.
76 Posted 30/07/2007 at 14:06:53
77 Posted 30/07/2007 at 14:08:36
78 Posted 30/07/2007 at 14:31:56
79 Posted 30/07/2007 at 14:31:21
Apart from the Kirkby promises being made by Tesco and Kirkby council instead of Bestway and LCC, what?s the difference?
Apart from one being a well structured and costed business plan that’s taken months to plan and the other just a haphazard scheme cooked up by deceitful chancer (yes YOU Bradley you useless prick!) keen to get in the Echo?
80 Posted 30/07/2007 at 14:38:32
This is, bullshit of the highest order forgrt for now Billy Bullshit welcome to the new owner of said title Bradley Bullshit.
81 Posted 30/07/2007 at 14:50:25
Down the league onward,
All in the valley of death
Rode the 500 club:
?Forward the people?s club!
Charge for the board he said:
Into the valley of Death
Rode the 500 Club.
?Forward the Moyes Brigade!
Even tho were dismay?d
Not tho? the young fans knew
Some one had blunder?d:
Theirs not to make reply,
Theirs not to reason why,
Theirs but to do & die,
Into the valley of death
Rode the 500 club.
Chairman to right of them,
Chief Exec to left of them,
Tesco in front of them
Volley?d & thunder?d;
Storm?d at with shot and shell
Boldly they rode and well,
Into the jaws of Death,
Into the mouth of Hell
Rode the 500 club.
Why did their glory fade?
O the wild charge they made!
All the World wondered.
Honour the club to stay!
Honour the Moyes Brigade
Not towards Kirby way
For the 500
Say ?no? to the move!!
82 Posted 30/07/2007 at 14:40:36
Sound stupid? Of course it does, just think how stupid it sounds when you say the same about Kirkby.
If you don’t want to follow the club then that’s your choice, just do what the other shower did, stay at the old ground and form a new team, you could even play in red if you want, in fact, it would probably suit you.
83 Posted 30/07/2007 at 14:58:03
84 Posted 30/07/2007 at 16:07:12
85 Posted 30/07/2007 at 12:17:48
You are trusting the spin about Kirkby put forward by the board who have dragged us into this mire in the first place.
Did you never query why the board were asked to ignore all other possible opportunites for "exclusivity"? If there (supposedly) weren’t any other options then Leahy had nothing to worry about. Tesco are just in this for the money and when the vote comes back NO they will make millions from another venture on the site.
They DO NOT CARE what happens to OUR football club in 20 years time - when all kids in Liverpool schools will be wearing red.
The Loop may not be the future but it is at least a suggestion of something other than Tesco Town. Any Everton fan who votes yes should hang their head in shame as they condemn us to being no better than Bolton/ Wigan/ Boro/ Reading etc
A NO to Kirkby is a NO to Kenwright/Wyness and a YES to the future of EFC.
86 Posted 30/07/2007 at 10:31:32
87 Posted 30/07/2007 at 16:18:15
Thank you for presenting with obvious care , a positive alternative to the Kirby plan.
Finance is all over everything about football today and sadly our beloved Blues are run by an owner and executive who are simply BAD MANAGERS OF THE RESOURCE THAT IS OUR FOOTBALL CLUB !
In any walk of life it is surely dangerous to place your confidence in somebody with a very poor track record in Management when that person offers you Hobson’s choice and admits lacking the simple wit to devise a plan B.
Just a final thought on reading Lyndon’s piece , will a No vote to the Tesco plan lead Bill Kenwright closer to looking for a buyer for the club ?
I sense the No voters might just be seeing the tide turn their way !
88 Posted 30/07/2007 at 16:40:58
http://www.elpais.com/articulo/espana/lago/parque/175000/metros/cuadrados/edificables/elpepuesp/20070730elpepunac_4/Tes, Aletico Madrid are planning a move from their current motorway/river locked ’Vincente Calderon’ stadium to an adapted athletics stadium which will be co-financed by ’Mahou’ (beer) and a redevelopment of their existing stadium...increasing from 48,000 to 73,000 capacity stadium... the current stadium looks a lot like your proposed loop option!!!
89 Posted 30/07/2007 at 17:01:34
90 Posted 30/07/2007 at 17:51:43
If we’re to come up with a ’plan B’. let’s at least make it a sensible one.
A stadium in the middle of a traffic island ? Heavens above !
91 Posted 30/07/2007 at 17:44:26
"Everton in Everton" has a wonderful, appealing ring to it. And it excited me at first, but then I read Lyndon’s article a second and third time and the flaws started to appear. They are self-evident, as already listed by others.
This whole proposal smacks to me of a spoiler ahead of the stadium vote. The Kirkby nay-sayers accuse the club and supporters of a move of waging a propaganda war to influence the yes vote. I actually believe the club is being incredibly passive given what is at stake.
And therein lies my deepest concern. The Loop proposal ticks all the boxes, says Lyndon. It doesn’t - not by a long way. But the hope of it may be enough to scupper the one and only genuine regeneration and financial package the club has received in a decade - a package that could vastly improve EFC’s fortunes within three years.
The loop proposal is a vaporous one, but it has a strong enough emotional pull to torpedo the Tesco/Knowsley deal and potentially leave the club with... nothing.
Like you Chris, I am genuinely close to tears over this.
92 Posted 30/07/2007 at 18:07:12
93 Posted 30/07/2007 at 17:09:56
94 Posted 30/07/2007 at 18:22:25
95 Posted 30/07/2007 at 18:26:45
96 Posted 30/07/2007 at 18:28:25
97 Posted 30/07/2007 at 18:10:28
98 Posted 30/07/2007 at 19:05:23
99 Posted 30/07/2007 at 19:00:38
100 Posted 30/07/2007 at 19:19:50
1.No car parking
2.The site simply isn’t big enough!
3.Where’s the cash coming from?
If people vote no to Kirkby in the vain hope that a scheme like this will replace it within months - they’re completely deluded.
If the ardent No voters win the day - don’t say that you weren’t warned - it’ll be a disaster for the Club’s long term future.
Carry on - vote no, because it means cathcing a bus, finding a new alehouse to have a pre /post match pint in! Because if truth were told, many are basing their view solely on petty self interest. Sad, but true
101 Posted 30/07/2007 at 19:22:24
Wyness is just formulating an application in advance of his ’dream job’ at Man U or Chelsea.
They will both jump ship when their personal targets are met. An empty Tesco under a half empty stadium, in Kirkby.
We need time to source funds and partners for any alternative, the Kirkby stadium will NOT be ready in 2010, it will go overbudget without a doubt: our debt will be larger than the ’ten or fifteen million’ mentioned by Wyness for the fitting out of the stadium.
We can compete on the pitch if nowhere else so why not do that first and think about an extra 15k seats when we need them.
102 Posted 30/07/2007 at 19:53:26
103 Posted 30/07/2007 at 19:30:49
We’re desperately short of information on the Kirkby proposal but this alternative is even more sketchy (funding!) and didn’t even exist a couple of days ago.
I need more solid information on both proposals before I can vote with any clarity. Please let’s have the vote postponed if there is any prospect of this alternative seeing the light of day. What good would a "yes" to Kirkby be if this alternative can be made viable and, equally, what good would a "No" to Kirkby be, if this remains a non-starter.
104 Posted 30/07/2007 at 20:03:22
I never claimed to have all the answers — as a mere fan, how could I? — but there is a logic to what is being proposed by LCC and Bestway even if you have doubts it could ever be funded.
A more detailed response to your comments can be found here.
105 Posted 30/07/2007 at 19:02:55
Thanks mate, for the thought and effort you so obviously put into this, you should be applauded by all.
If only the " kirkby’s the only option " brigade were prepared to put in an ounce of the time you have.
I expect some to disagree, but feel utter disgust at the "cant even be arsed listening to alternatives" stance these people have adopted
To thousands of us, a move to Kirkby represents our biggest nightmare.
How can fellow Everonians be so dismissive is completely beyond me
106 Posted 30/07/2007 at 20:23:14
Traditionally, Kirkby is believed to have been founded circa 800 AD. The first direct evidence of a settlement dates from 1086 and the Domesday Book, with a reference to Cherchebi - population 70.
107 Posted 30/07/2007 at 20:27:33
108 Posted 30/07/2007 at 20:05:47
109 Posted 30/07/2007 at 18:42:06
There is also the question of the much mentioned retail partners. Everybody needs food, washing powder, toilet paper etc... & Tesco is the countries biggest grocer. The site in Kirkby would attract people from the surrounding area to spend money both at Tesco & the other proposed retail outlets (something similar to Cheshire Oaks I’d imagine). The plan mentioned here is for more leisure based companies to help fund the ground. As much as we all like to, people don’t need to go to bars, restaurants & cinemas. And personally I don’t see people leaving the city center, with all it’s established bars & night life, to come to an artificial leisure area. Please don’t take offence at the next point, but North Liverpool is not the most affluent of areas. I don’t believe the majority of the population could provide enough business to keep the proposed leisure area at a level where it could compete with the city center. I’m not having ago at North Liverpool or it’s population, it’s just an assumption based on what I know of the area having lived most my life around Seaforth, Bootle & Walton.
A retail park would not work here either. In the city center a massive shopping district is being built attracting major retailers. Which retailers would be attracted to a less glamorous location so close to the one being built at the heart of the city?
This area just doesn’t work. A better option would have been the Long Lane, Aintree suggestion. Not as desirable I know, but a retail park would have more chance to succeed there. Meaning retail partners would find it attractive & be more likely to help in building a stadium.
I don’t know what it is about the Kirkby site. Forget, if you can, that it lies outside the city boundaries. It might tick all the boxes but it doesn’t feel right. In the same way moving to Speke wouldn’t feel right (even though that area is in the city). The main problem is this issue should have been looked at & discussed after the Kings Dock fiasco. New site’s should have been identified then when more locations were available. Now, with the biggest decision on Everton future in the balance, it seems some parties are desperately trying to make it look that alternatives are available.
Far too little & way too late.
110 Posted 30/07/2007 at 20:03:09
The whole idea is a red herring, and I’m willing to bet that ten years from now it will still be a roundabout.
Just a quick reality check for Ray. Tesco are a hell of alot bigger than we are, and certainly do not need us one little bit.
111 Posted 30/07/2007 at 21:33:50
112 Posted 30/07/2007 at 18:40:58
113 Posted 30/07/2007 at 21:52:33
it just feels right
114 Posted 30/07/2007 at 22:08:00
great article lets hope it can happen wyness wont be with everton in 5 yrs he out 4 his quick buck of tesco PLEASE VOTE NO 2 KIRKBY OR U WILL KILL A GENERATION OF EVERTON FANS WE WHERE BORN IN THE CITY AN HERE WE MUST STAY !!!!!!
115 Posted 30/07/2007 at 21:35:10
116 Posted 30/07/2007 at 22:39:04
117 Posted 30/07/2007 at 17:24:29
And who has caused all this division at our club,The showman and his dog muttly.Im afraid he has failed as Evertons chairman because he has failed the fans.Does anyone for one minute believe Lfc would go to Kirkby.Not a chance.Well why did our board not give it the short rift the very notion it deserved.
Lyndon Loyds article has excited me and thats what our ground move should do.Well done and well presented.I feel there could be hope for us all very soon.,because this has been the worst summer as an evertonian since Rooney left thanks to our board,when it should have been one of the best for years entering a european competitian with a quality football team we have and some smashing footballers to watch with the pride they have all shown in wearing that royal blue shirt.Cheers for ruining my summer pal.
So calling all Evertonians to stay together on this and say no no no to Kirkby and march a few hundred yards up the road to our spiriual home by the roundhouse.At least lets put our weight behind the best proposal we"ve all heard in years.And pray to god it can be achieved,cos i for one dont want to resent another evertonian for putting me in where i didnt want to be.All for one ,one for all.come on all you blues.Say no!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.
118 Posted 30/07/2007 at 21:28:50
Did the same for the Reebok, longest dimension 210m. OK, you could do a few things to up capacity beyond the 28K of the Reebok, overlapping tiers etc, and the extra 5m each side is another 7 rows, i.e. 5K or so seats. So maybe 35K, maybe 38K, but definitely nowhere near 50K. (Assuming Google Earth is remotely accurate).
So sorry, lads, it’s an absolute none starter, which makes me wonder about Bradleys motives.
As for overhanging the tunnel slip roads, of course it can be done, e.g. One Side of Landsdown Park, One side of Celtic Park, One End of the City Ground (though the North Stand at OT is a bit of a red herring). You can’t get behind one of the sides at Hillsborough either iirc. The difference is here we’ll be taking about 3 sides, and you’ve got to provide for circulation, unless we put all our turnstiles at the SW corner! So what the stands need to pricipally overhang are the pedestrian routes around the ground, to the tune of 10m or so(?). Anyway, the point is we’d be nowhere near 50k and hanging a few rows over the tunnel sliproads wouldn’t alter that. The worrying thing is, if this is the Best the city can come back with, Kirby here we come.
119 Posted 30/07/2007 at 23:35:04
120 Posted 30/07/2007 at 23:31:08
Shame on you kenwright, shame on all of you for even considering taking this ""SCOUSE TEMPLE away from us. I’m disgusted to be associated with you. You are all rats as far as i am concerned
121 Posted 30/07/2007 at 23:47:57
I for one will be watching the blues wherever we go.
122 Posted 30/07/2007 at 23:45:33
123 Posted 31/07/2007 at 00:00:53
124 Posted 30/07/2007 at 23:51:12
125 Posted 30/07/2007 at 23:41:09
Location is everything - can you imagine 45,000 trotting out to Kirkby for a mid week game in November against Wigan? They don’t do now so why would Kirkby guarantee extra income? If the new stadium was in the heart of the city - it’s obvious for so many reasons that attendances would be higher generating extra revenue.
Just one thing though - where’s the funding coming from for this? Its all too late; Evertonians have furrowed brows from the disappointments of the past - this option would have to be fully costed before the voting deadline in order to get a fully supported ’no’ vote, even if this is a ’viable’ plan B. I think Evertonians will vote ’yes’ to Kirkby because they know its the only thing that will keep this old lady alive - which is extremely sad. For me the ballot is about two options - turn into Nottingham Forest or turn into Bolton/Middlesbrough. God help us. Only the Loop can make us truly great.
126 Posted 31/07/2007 at 00:30:15
127 Posted 31/07/2007 at 00:47:04
128 Posted 31/07/2007 at 05:01:53
129 Posted 31/07/2007 at 04:55:58
130 Posted 31/07/2007 at 05:45:46
However, make no mistake, that does not mean that I will vote for Kirkby either!!
Why is that?
1." The Kings Dock money is ring-fenced" BK quote = Lies
2." Goodison may not be able to get a Safety Certificate in 10 years time" KW quote = Lies and scare mongering.
3.What has new director Robert Earl brought to the party, apart from Sylvester Stallone?
4.We are being told that if we don’t move to Kirkby the club will "stagnate" Where have these people been for the last 20 years??
5.Chang beer is shite = FACT (Sorry couldn’t help myself)
6. If we stay, 38,000 people will still turn up every week. Will that still be the case in 10 years time if we are in Kirkby, watching a team that has failed to progress due to the boards failure to invest money in the team?? Don’t think so.
New seasonticket arrived today and it is grey and un-interesting just like BK, and speaks volumes for the way in which the people who run our club are thinking.
131 Posted 31/07/2007 at 07:01:21
Steve, I don’t hate Kenwright, not even close, and I bear him no ill will whatsoever. I can empathise with him, actually, and I don’t envy him in the slightest.
What I’m backing here are the calls to at least give the loop site some due consideration. If it turns out that it’s bollocks, not feasible and a logistical non-starter then that would be that.
All I can say is that I have been told its do-able based on preliminary impressions but a full feasibility study will make a case for it one way or the other.
132 Posted 31/07/2007 at 08:13:28
133 Posted 31/07/2007 at 08:36:09
Lyndon I love your energy and devotion to Everton but get a life man - it simply does not stack up.
In 12 years time all the baby blues - from all four corners of our mighty City - will carry on the traditions of our great club - just as today and wonder what the fuck all the fuss was about!
Two things to remember here: firstly once the new stadium is complete (in Kirkby) and the Club is debt free it makes us a massively attractive investment opportunity. There’s absolutely no need to invest in infrastructure because somebody else did that for us. This offers REAL financial return potential and could act as the catalyst to expansive player development.
And two: Kirkby is spelt Kirkby not Kirby. How poor a debate is it if some doubters cannot even get the name right.
Everton: Whereever and whenever they play.
134 Posted 31/07/2007 at 09:47:10
135 Posted 31/07/2007 at 11:20:06
Paul get a life.
Get it into your heads there are no other alternatives because we are skint.
People who want to develop goodison are clinging onto a fading dream
136 Posted 31/07/2007 at 11:22:17
137 Posted 31/07/2007 at 12:19:21
Ignore the critics, its an article based on passion and logic. To be told by Wyness and Co there are no alternatives is an insult to this great club and its loyal supporters. Vote no to Kirkby
138 Posted 31/07/2007 at 12:26:03
Delaying the move just makes the managers task harder, getting new players is an overall package, which includes other than European football, it includes competative salaries, good condiitons etc and the move will help this.As hard as it is to leave home, we all do it eventually and you never know we might just like it.
139 Posted 31/07/2007 at 12:59:45
140 Posted 31/07/2007 at 18:48:00
141 Posted 31/07/2007 at 17:31:09
142 Posted 31/07/2007 at 19:22:41
Check out the above post from Jon....was I that far away from the truth? I’m not suggesting that’s the driver behind ALL no voters - just a %age.
The obsession with the city boundary issue is the one that makes me smile - it’s not as if the suggested site is in Wigan or St Helens - it’s Kirkby FFS, hardly the end of the Earth...
Even if the Loopy Loop was financially viable - I’d still choose Kirkby over it - as it’s not a good site for a new stadium, when there are other alternatives.
143 Posted 31/07/2007 at 21:56:29
144 Posted 31/07/2007 at 22:33:27
145 Posted 01/08/2007 at 11:27:22
To all the NO voters use your head not your heart... Its only 4 miles away for fuck sake!
146 Posted 01/08/2007 at 16:34:57
I hate to say it, but red Stanley is right, we have the option wait until proper investment comes along and finds us a site in the city. It has not happened because of Kenwright.
147 Posted 01/08/2007 at 16:37:47
148 Posted 01/08/2007 at 16:42:20
This particular debate is about whether Everton should take new resisence outside our city boundary yet the only chunks you can spurt refer to attendence figures.
Granted the murderer comment earlier was uncalled for; but what gives you the right to start waffling on about how mighty your club is (in your mind only) and how poor our friendly attendences are (in your mind only). You just hate the fact we are a people’s club (irrespective of the numbers). Thank God tits like you don’t follow my team.
As for your investment arguement I refer you back to my comments posted here earlier.
149 Posted 01/08/2007 at 17:55:18
Oh ye and about the comment:
Add Your Comments
In order to post a comment to Column articles, you need to be logged in as a registered user of the site.
Or Sign up as a ToffeeWeb Member — it's free, takes just a few minutes and will allow you to post your comments on articles and MailBag submissions across the site.