Jump to content


Photo

From The Liverpool Echo - Everton Challenge City Council To Find Stadium Alternative


  • Please log in to reply
29 replies to this topic

#1 Rubecula

Rubecula

    COFFIN DODGER

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,340 posts

Posted 08 Aug 2008 - 12:52

Everton issue challenge to city leader Warren Bradley over new stadium site
Aug 8 2008 by Luke Traynor, Liverpool Echo


EVERTON FC are ready to challenge city leader Warren Bradley to find the club a viable site for a new home.

They believe Liverpool council is largely to blame for the decision to call in the Tesco-led stadium scheme at Kirkby.

They now want Cllr Bradley to show them a viable alternative.

At present they feel there is nothing on offer to beat the £400m Destination Kirkby project which would bring the club a brand new stadium for £78m.

But there is no guarantee they will get the go-ahead for the ground at the end of a costly public inquiry which could last up to two years.

The club has yet to decide whether to ditch the Knowsley scheme or fight for it side by side with Tesco.

Everton have already dismissed as unworkable three sites proposed by the city.

A series of “sensitive” discussions have taken place over the past 48 hours between the Blues, the supermarket giant and Knowsley council.

But today well-placed sources revealed Everton are ready to take a second look at potential stadium sites in Liverpool.

Cllr Bradley, who has waged a long campaign to keep his boyhood club in the city, said he would meet Blues owner Bill Kenwright next week.

He told the ECHO: “This should finally release the shackles on the opportunity to have a dialogue which has been hampered by the exclusivity deal.

“I have had an informal discussion with Bill Kenwright and we will meet next week to talk about the club’s next steps.

“We should be trying to keep one of our oldest commercial businesses in the city. This is not blue-sky thinking.

“I’ve put locations on the table which are hard options. We need to sit round the table and see what we can deliver.”

As the ECHO revealed yesterday the decision to call in the Kirkby scheme could cost Everton £36m due to rising building and material costs and lost revenues.

The Blues are understood to be unable to cover that shortfall and Tesco today refused to say if they would meet those rising costs.

Corporate affairs manager Michael Kissman said: “It is too early in the process to accurately predict the full costs. We are at an early stage.

Reacting to the call-in news a Tesco spokesman said: “We are obviously very disappointed with the decision to call in the proposals for Kirkby.

“This project would regenerate the town centre, create over 2,000 new jobs in the region and deliver world-class facilities for Everton.

“In times of growing economic uncertainty, the case for this regeneration project has never been so clear, and it is viable only because it is a single comprehensive development combining the stadium, retail and leisure.

“We are pressing the government to fix a date for a public inquiry at the earliest possible time.”

Everton FC’s hastily-called emergency board meeting will be held early next week to discuss the Blues’ next move.

The date for the public enquiry is yet to be fixed but is likely to be scheduled before Christmas.

A Knowsley council spokeswoman said today: “The council remains fully committed to securing this regeneration in Kirkby, and is confident in presenting this argument to the public inquiry which it is hoped will be listed shortly.

“Kirkby is a prime location for development with excellent infrastructure.

“Knowsley is committed to redeveloping the town, and we still want this once in a lifetime development to be delivered because we feel it gives Kirkby the very best opportunities for the future.”

Kirkby Residents Action Group (KRAG) are due to hold a meeting in the next few days to plan its strategy for the public inquiry.

Spokesman Ian Morris added: “We raised 35 major points that we were concerned about like traffic, litter and the impact on schools and the environment.

“We are fully supportive of the regeneration of Kirkby town centre and we would welcome Tesco, but not a football stadium.”

Colin Fitzpatrick, spokesman for Keep Everton In Our City (KEIOC), said their key objection was transport.

“The stadium would be nine miles from the city centre and leave fans with 45-minute walks to the ground, being put in holding pens at Kirkby station and queue at the park and rides.”

* WHAT now for Everton – and Liverpool? Former Anfield club secretary Peter Robinson tells Paddy Shennan why his controversial ground share idea still makes sense . . .

Despite Everton and Liverpool having kicked the always-controversial idea into touch at various times since the 1960s, it continues to be brought back into the public domain.

Mr Robinson said: “People are entitled to their opinions, but I do think the majority of fans, if a shared stadium ever came about, would quickly accept it.”

Just over two months ago the shared stadium idea was given yet another airing, this time by sports minister Gerry Sutcliffe and culture secretary Andy Burnham.

Mr Burnham, a Blues season-ticket holder, said he believed the idea was “highly attractive”.

Mr Sutcliffe said: “It is important all options are carefully considered.

“Nothing is ruled in and nothing is ruled out. It is a matter for the two clubs.”

Five years ago, a high-profile Merseyside businessman and football fan said: “If there are one or two solid ingredients in place, a ground share could be a valid option.”

He added: “Although it is not ideal in terms of timing for the clubs because they are at different stages of development (this was in 2003) one thing I have learned in business is that if a good opportunity comes along you just have to take it.”

The businessman in question? Sir Terry Leahy, special adviser to Everton and chief executive of Tesco.

Is opportunity still knocking?

Split reaction over stadium inquiry decision

KIRKBY residents are divided over the decision to call in the stadium plan.

Dot Reid, 58, lives in Spicer Grove, one of the roads that may be cleared to make way for the development.

She is a member of the Kirkby Residents Action Group which opposes the development, and is delighted there will be a public inquiry.

She said: “This is what we’ve been fighting for. They’ve got to listen to the Kirkby people now before a final decision is made.”

Sharon Murphy, 37, who lives on Rowan Drive near Kirkby station, said: “I just worry that there will be more trouble with rowdy football fans at the station, so I’m glad it might not happen.”

Jean Keen, owner of Trevor’s Card Shop on St Chads Parade, said: “If anybody has any sense, they will stop the plans. We won’t survive if a Tesco comes here.”

But others think the development would be positive for the town and are concerned about the inquiry.

Among them is Laura Newman, 21, from Northwood. She said: “ I wanted the stadium.

“We need regeneration in the town centre and it’ll bring more people to Kirkby.”
  • 0

#2 Louis

Louis

    Dixie Dean

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,612 posts

Posted 08 Aug 2008 - 14:25

Good news all round..

Everton have a few options

A. Pull out of Kirkby project because of increase in cost
B. See what Liverpool City Council are offering before committing to the project
C. Carry on regardless of call in and pay the increase in cost (£9-15million)

They've done the right thing in choosing to speak to LCC before committing themselves.
  • 0

#3 Randomness

Randomness

    My Last Avatar Was Cursed

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,375 posts

Posted 08 Aug 2008 - 15:03

LCC will no doubt say

SHARED STADIA
  • 0

#4 Louis

Louis

    Dixie Dean

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,612 posts

Posted 08 Aug 2008 - 19:02

Depends on whether Liverpool will say work has began on theirs already (I've heard that it's only drainage work going on on the site and stadium construction has not started)

Do you see a shared stadium as a better option to Kirkby?
  • 0

#5 Everton_Worshiper

Everton_Worshiper

    David Moyes

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,337 posts

Posted 08 Aug 2008 - 19:24

Depends on whether Liverpool will say work has began on theirs already (I've heard that it's only drainage work going on on the site and stadium construction has not started)

Do you see a shared stadium as a better option to Kirkby?


Of course he will see it as a better option, it is in the city isn't it?........sorry, sorry, I know there I go again.

Personally, shared stadium is a mahoosive resounding NO. With a shared stadium we would have no presence or image. People may say it works in other countries but it would not work for this scenario.
  • 0

#6 DonKey

DonKey

    Tim Cahill

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 837 posts

Posted 08 Aug 2008 - 19:31

Works very well in other countries.

Best example I can think of is AC/Inter Milan, and the San Siro is cracking!
  • 0

#7 BLUE-TAC

BLUE-TAC

    Duncan McKenzie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 422 posts

Posted 08 Aug 2008 - 21:31

Of course he will see it as a better option, it is in the city isn't it?........sorry, sorry, I know there I go again.

Personally, shared stadium is a mahoosive resounding NO. With a shared stadium we would have no presence or image. People may say it works in other countries but it would not work for this scenario.



Works very well in other countries.

Best example I can think of is AC/Inter Milan, and the San Siro is cracking!


:lol: :lol: :lol: That couldn't have been scripted any better! :P
  • 0

#8 StevO

StevO

    Blagging on the basis of knowledge

  • Cyber Steward
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,037 posts

Posted 09 Aug 2008 - 09:07

Personally, shared stadium is a mahoosive resounding NO. With a shared stadium we would have no presence or image. People may say it works in other countries but it would not work for this scenario.


im not for or against a shared stadium, but i was impressed with the design i saw, i was lucky enough to see a bit more detail that the cartoon looking pics that went around. but still not sure if id like it or not. but if your gunna make a statement like this then back it up, give us an opinion why? why is our scenario different to milan?
  • 0

#9 iggy

iggy

    Trevor Steven

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,081 posts

Posted 09 Aug 2008 - 12:21

I think that if a shared stadium had been a serious proposal in the 70's or early 80's it may well have got the go ahead, but the divide between the two sets of fans has been growing ever since and there would be an outcry of epic proportions.
From a purely financial perspective it would make sense for both clubs.
  • 0

#10 DangerMouse

DangerMouse

    Trevor Steven

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,091 posts

Posted 09 Aug 2008 - 19:47

We couldnt share a "TENT" FFS........ and you all went mad over that......
  • 0

#11 StevO

StevO

    Blagging on the basis of knowledge

  • Cyber Steward
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,037 posts

Posted 09 Aug 2008 - 20:57

We couldnt share a "TENT" FFS........ and you all went mad over that......


who went mad?
  • 0

#12 DangerMouse

DangerMouse

    Trevor Steven

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,091 posts

Posted 09 Aug 2008 - 21:10

ive heard plenty of KEIOC supports using it as part of their "KW is out of touch with supporters" pitch
  • 0

#13 StevO

StevO

    Blagging on the basis of knowledge

  • Cyber Steward
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,037 posts

Posted 09 Aug 2008 - 21:44

i was actually expecting names of TT member from you
  • 0

#14 Louis

Louis

    Dixie Dean

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,612 posts

Posted 10 Aug 2008 - 12:14

Hardly anyone on here was bothered about who the 'Marquee' was rented out to on non-match days. It was more money for the club (£500k per annum in fact) and the person who was responsible for the deal was not Keith Wyness however Wyness did give it the all clear. It was Everton's "head of public relations/external affairs" and Bill Kenwright who put a stop to it because they didn't want the 'bad press' even if it made financial sense.
  • 0

#15 DangerMouse

DangerMouse

    Trevor Steven

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,091 posts

Posted 10 Aug 2008 - 12:29

Exactlty.... so my point being....... we couldnt even share a tent..........................
  • 0

#16 Louis

Louis

    Dixie Dean

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,612 posts

Posted 10 Aug 2008 - 12:33

We could have though and been half a million richer but Kenwright chose not to because of fear of fan remarks.

That's pretty much the parallel for a ground share, we'd be financially better off sharing a stadium but some fans wouldn't want it.
  • 0

#17 DangerMouse

DangerMouse

    Trevor Steven

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,091 posts

Posted 10 Aug 2008 - 12:35

Id agree with that... it makes sense doesnt it from a financial point of view...... Its just not going to happen.... Im not to sure myself..... im undecided
  • 0

#18 StevO

StevO

    Blagging on the basis of knowledge

  • Cyber Steward
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,037 posts

Posted 10 Aug 2008 - 12:36

im not knowledgable about the san siro, but does anybody know if there was problems then? or did they both set out from the ofset in that stadium?

edit

just looked it up, was built and owned by milan, inter have been tenants ever since it was built

Edited by StevO, 10 Aug 2008 - 12:45.

  • 0

#19 Sporting4ever

Sporting4ever

    Andrei Kanchelskis

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 488 posts

Posted 10 Aug 2008 - 12:53

im not knowledgable about the san siro, but does anybody know if there was problems then? or did they both set out from the ofset in that stadium?

edit

just looked it up, was built and owned by milan, inter have been tenants ever since it was built



Yup. u can check it here, if u're curious: San Siro

I can relate to this discussion, since we had a similar one a few years ago here. Sporting was set to build a new stadium, and we started financing and all that ever since around 2001. when we got the euro2004, there was talks about a shared stadium in lisbon for sporting and benfica, and possibly also belenenses, another city club, but that got turned down for a multitude of reasons, sporting already had it's own stadium planned, and a good portion of the funding taken care of, and it's highly doubtful we would see eye to eye in a shared stadium. milan's san siro, since it's been around for ages now, is hardly a good example. I doubt 2 city teams, with a big rivalry as you (and we) have would ever consider building and sharing a stadium, even with all the financial benefits that would be gained.
  • 0

#20 Louis

Louis

    Dixie Dean

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,612 posts

Posted 10 Aug 2008 - 12:58

It's kind of different here because LFC were formed in EFC's wake, there's no social or religious divide between the fans and the history of the clubs are closely intertwined. I think it would work but there would be teething problems.

Bristol Rovers are currently doing their own ground up and approached Bristol City to see if they could share, they were told no and now Rovers have to travel 40miles to Cheltenham to play home games. Seems a bit unfair and in situations like that I think the FA should step in.
  • 0

#21 Sporting4ever

Sporting4ever

    Andrei Kanchelskis

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 488 posts

Posted 10 Aug 2008 - 13:09

i agree as well. and i think, i the future, we may see a change in that regard, but not now. there's a sence of independence in having your own stadium, generating your own revenues, etc. a shared stadium would bring too much division, who pays for what, who gets a share of what.

small example, shared box seatings... how can you handle that? i can easily imagine benfica fans leaving small "presents" for their sporting rivals the following week...

But i agree, i think higher autorities should intervene, FA, city officials, etc. It's best for the city, it's best for the clubs, it allows for a place that neither could have on their own, so it should be done. but can it?
  • 0

#22 StevO

StevO

    Blagging on the basis of knowledge

  • Cyber Steward
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,037 posts

Posted 10 Aug 2008 - 13:14

in the case of who pays for what and who owns what.
it would have pretty much been everton owned two sides and liverpool owned the other two. they would be responsible for their own sides. it would have been two separate L shaped half stadiums really. not really one stadium shared, if that makes sense
  • 0

#23 Louis

Louis

    Dixie Dean

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,612 posts

Posted 10 Aug 2008 - 13:31

If it were to happen I could both teams buying a stake in the stadium and someone like the city council or a stadium trust owning the rest. The difficulties start when one team has financial problems and would have to sell their stake. Bayern Munich share with TSV 1860 München and there were rumours that TSV 1860 München would have sell their stake to ease their cash flow.

EDIT - They did sell their stake.

That's my biggest fear with a ground share, Everton selling their stake on to another party and having to rent it back as a short-term solution.
  • 0

#24 StevO

StevO

    Blagging on the basis of knowledge

  • Cyber Steward
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,037 posts

Posted 10 Aug 2008 - 13:34

with the current owners that would be the ideal solution to sell and buy back
  • 0

#25 Randomness

Randomness

    My Last Avatar Was Cursed

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,375 posts

Posted 10 Aug 2008 - 13:52

Depends on whether Liverpool will say work has began on theirs already (I've heard that it's only drainage work going on on the site and stadium construction has not started)

Do you see a shared stadium as a better option to Kirkby?



Well i'm with you, (in that what finally tipped me against kirkby was the Transport plan) so yes i would see a shared stadium as a better and more Viable option.
  • 0

#26 Bill

Bill

    Alex. Top player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,508 posts

Posted 10 Aug 2008 - 14:21

It's kind of different here because LFC were formed in EFC's wake, there's no social or religious divide between the fans and the history of the clubs are closely intertwined. I think it would work but there would be teething problems.

Bristol Rovers are currently doing their own ground up and approached Bristol City to see if they could share, they were told no and now Rovers have to travel 40miles to Cheltenham to play home games. Seems a bit unfair and in situations like that I think the FA should step in.



The second club who wont play any home games, the other one being Grimsby Town who play outside the city boundary at Cleethorpes.

Just a useless bit of info i thought you'd like to know, often pops up in pub quizzes. :D
  • 0

#27 Randomness

Randomness

    My Last Avatar Was Cursed

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,375 posts

Posted 10 Aug 2008 - 17:19

The second club who wont play any home games, the other one being Grimsby Town who play outside the city boundary at Cleethorpes.

Just a useless bit of info i thought you'd like to know, often pops up in pub quizzes. :D



thats the kind of knowledge along with Hull City are the Only Team In EPL you can't Colour In,


Didnt we have a pointless trivia thread?


what do you think the rovers board said to the city board?

Get Orff My Laaaaand! :lol: :P :D

Sorry but it was there to be done!


anyway back on subject i expect

1) Final Shared Stadium from LCC
2) Goodison Redevlopement Package
3) LCC and EFC to Co-ordinate for Scotland Road
4)LCC, EFC Sainsbury's Effort in WHP

Thats not My Preference Necessarily but it runs from chepest to expensive for the council (Scotland Road before WHP because if as Rumoured, Grosvenor Get Interested LCC Will press for that one First Surely)
  • 0

#28 JD in DC

JD in DC

    Mick Lyons

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 757 posts

Posted 10 Aug 2008 - 17:26

Shared stadiums can work if the people involved from both parties are willing and able to work together; it doesn't sound like they could in Bristol. There are plenty of other countries with clubs sharing stadiums. Italy is the most famous, of course, with several shared stadiums, but also Germany, Belgium, Turkey, Brazil, Mexico, Russia (CSKA Moscow, Spartak Moscow, AND Torpedo Moscow all share one stadium), and Greece (Panathinaikos, Olympiakos, & AEK have all shared the Olympic Stadium at various times over the last 30 years - Pana and AEK are both playing there this season), among other countries, all have top-flight clubs who are currently sharing grounds. Russia is especially ironic because Torpedo is officially the owner of that stadium, even though they're the only club out of the three that's not in the top flight!

just looked it up, was built and owned by milan, inter have been tenants ever since it was built


Partly correct. San Siro was originally built in 1926 and owned by Milan, but ownership was actually taken over by the city of Milan at some point before Inter moved there in 1949, and the city still owns the stadium today, not either of the clubs. In fact, all of the major shared Italian stadiums (San Siro in Milan, Stadio Olimpico in Rome, Luigi Ferraris in Genoa, and Bentegodi in Verona) are owned by their respective cities. I don't remember hearing anything in any shared stadium proposals about the city of Liverpool wanting to own this new stadium, although it might simplify things if they did.
  • 0

#29 StevO

StevO

    Blagging on the basis of knowledge

  • Cyber Steward
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,037 posts

Posted 10 Aug 2008 - 18:02

JD - truely the master of research
  • 0

#30 Rubecula

Rubecula

    COFFIN DODGER

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,340 posts

Posted 11 Aug 2008 - 13:47

Is the ground around the area of Clubmoor recreation ground in any options or is it too small a footprint?
  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users