Jump to content


Photo

Wallasey Tunnel Site - Why I'm Excited


  • Please log in to reply
46 replies to this topic

#41 MikeO

MikeO

    Scars are tattoos with better stories.

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 39,478 posts

Posted 16 Aug 2007 - 16:45

Well done Mike, where do you keep these snippets of Information. ?? :)


:huh: too much time on my hands...my mate Google holds them for me :) .

Have to say though that..

"And the reason they gave you the vote was because they can blame you when it all goes wrong. "

...is a bit of a stretch for me. That's like an unsuccessful government going back to the electorate and saying, "It's your fault, you voted for us!" Doesn't happen.

Said it before and I'll say it again, the paranoia is getting out of hand.
  • 0

#42 MikeO

MikeO

    Scars are tattoos with better stories.

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 39,478 posts

Posted 16 Aug 2007 - 16:51

Copied from WSAG...in the interest of balance.

15 replies to 15 reasons

By general zod
Date: 14/8/2007

This isn't a dig at 'Chris Multesanti'. I just don't think The Loop is the answer and here is why.


Point 1 - Directors Duty: (note to Bill Kenwright and Keith Wyness):
The Loop isn't a suitable site. Since 2003 when the Kings Dock fell apart Liverpool City Council have been "trying" to find us a suitable alternative whilst giving up Victorian green space over to Liverpool FC.
Speke is further away than Kirkby and despite reports stating unsuitability a year ago, imagine the horror of a Boro-like hole no where near anything. Long Lane doesn't provide great access roads or rail wise - remember this is about moving forward - not just sticking a Goodison replica two miles down the road.


Point 2 - It is geographically feasible:
Handful is the key here. We need more than a handful to generate footfall and cash and that means space. It doesn't mean Everton being kept inside its little box by Liverpool City Council who have bent over backwards to help the other lot.


Point 3 - Ownership:
Which goes hand in hand with being sued by any of the firms who suspect they will feel the pinch. Can anyone begin to imagine the tunnel entrance / exits effectively being shut for shoppers every two weeks (not to mention any work before hand) & Grosvenor not doing a thing about it? At any rate the site is too small.


Point 4 - Tesco are the driving force behind Kirkby:
Kirkby isn't the easy option. Voting No and staying put is.
I think its obvious that a central city site either isnt suitable, available or Liverpool City Council haven't done enough work. The Loop would appear to be the only viable option for Liverpool City Council or KEIOC. And by the way I admire KEIOC - this isn't slagging them by any means - I just think they are wishful thinking about The Loop.


Point 5 - Not being beaten:
Liverpool City Council give up Stanley Park, then tell Liverpool they can't increase their capacity and so then decide to look at a smaller site?? We haven't the resources to beat them in terms of mentioned above. FACT.
Lets turn Kirkby into EVERTON F C. Stuff Liverpool - let's become the biggest team in Merseyside.


Point 6 - Club's status and image:
We cant build an unrivalled site here. Look in your A-Z. It's too small.


Point 7 - Attendances:
I can't disagree that we will lose some of our local support but I believe that if we did the vast majority would be prepared to travel that extra 3.5 miles. I also believe that the people of Kirkby, Ormskirk, St Helens andeven Wigan will come because of easier access to the Kirkby site. I know that last bit was controversial but even when Kings Dock was mooted there were some of us who opposed it and threatened to never go again. It is about growth, being prosperous andbeing real challengers again.
In the Skysports world I can't see that again unless we change with the times.


Point 8 - Access:
The East Lancs, M57, M58, the other road I cant remember the name off, Merseyrail andeven (possibly) the tram might just argue that point.
Where ever we move there would be those who are affected. When I lived in Tuebrook I walked. If it were Scotty Road I'd drive. At the moment I get the train, if it's Kirkby I'd walk. Speke I'd drive. Everyone will be affected - end of.


Point 9 - Earning power:
Spot on. Thats why land is at a premium and that site isn't big enough.
It's going to be a lot easier to convince partners with low cost business taxes andregeneration grants, etc. in Knowsley where they'll keep more of the profits and will be fairly unchallenged for market share rather trying to complete with the largest building / shopping development in Europe a mile away.


Point 10 - Being proud of our club:
I am always proud of my club. The Loop is an elevated, land-locked roundabout.


Point 11 - Brand:
I admit the words may sound hollow to some but we need to focus on our future. I would love to see a realistic solution near to Goodison Park, St Domingo's and all that. But there isn't unless Liverpool City Council are keeping that for their preferred club.


Point 12 - Loss of identity:
Tell Alan Stubbs that. Kirkby as Scouse as any part of Liverpool.


Point 13 - Football clubs progress but stay true to their roots:
I am now just typing the same thing over again. The Loop doesn't fit our needs andonly suits Mr Warren Bradley's who, although a Blue, should resign over this, Summer Pops andThe Matthew Street Festival.


Point 14 - LCC will support it:
And in three years' time when we've hit the umpteenth stumbling block and look no nearer to moving anywhere, The Loop will still be too small for our needs.


Point 15 - Today I LOVE Goodison Park:
I love Goodison Park. I will never love anywhere as much. From that point of view The Loop, Kirkby or Speke may as well be in the North Pole.
For the record I would prefer to redevelop Goodison Park. That isn't going to happen andour board, players and David Moyes are asking for a mandate to take the club forward and they assure us that, for them, that means Kirkby.


The Loop's 11th hour appearance caused me to look at the facts presented by KEIOC andL iverpool City Councils actions in the last 4 years. I only see The Loop as a washy politician's attempt to gloss over the councils ineptitude and bias.


Because of this I reluctantly voted for the move.



  • 0

#43 Bill

Bill

    Alex. Top player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,505 posts

Posted 16 Aug 2007 - 18:42

One persons opinion which he is entitled to, so am i, Stevo, Ruffrob, Liam, and even yourself.

Has the club ever asked us to vote if we should buy Baines, or if we should sell Beattie.?? in fact have they ever asked us to vote on anything, not at all. But suddenly heres something thats likely to cost 200million pounds and they ask you to vote on it. :o

First they tell you its because they want to know how the supporters feel, and if you want it or not, then they do everything in their power to make you vote for it, telling you the club will Collapse if you dont vote for it, blackmailing you into a yes vote, very desperate measures.

On the subject of it not being big enough, its a ten Acre site as opposed to Goodisons 7 acres, so i think he would be wrong on that point, but thats his opinion.

But my opinions are all over this site now and i seem to be repeating myself all the time, so this is my last post on the Subject.

Cheers peeps. :)
  • 0

#44 MikeO

MikeO

    Scars are tattoos with better stories.

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 39,478 posts

Posted 16 Aug 2007 - 18:47

One persons opinion which he is entitled to, so am i, Stevo, Ruffrob, Liam, and even yourself.

Has the club ever asked us to vote if we should buy Baines, or if we should sell Beattie.?? in fact have they ever asked us to vote on anything, not at all. But suddenly heres something thats likely to cost 200million pounds and they ask you to vote on it. :o

First they tell you its because they want to know how the supporters feel, and if you want it or not, then they do everything in their power to make you vote for it, telling you the club will Collapse if you dont vote for it, blackmailing you into a yes vote, very desperate measures.

On the subject of it not being big enough, its a ten Acre site as opposed to Goodisons 7 acres, so i think he would be wrong on that point, but thats his opinion.

But my opinions are all over this site now and i seem to be repeating myself all the time, so this is my last post on the Subject.

Cheers peeps. :)


I too have been rendered speechless by that reponse :huh: . However that's probably not my last post on the subject :D .
  • 0

#45 Leadline

Leadline

    Roy Vernon Penalty King

  • Members
  • 95 posts

Posted 16 Aug 2007 - 19:52

Copied from WSAG...in the interest of balance.

15 replies to 15 reasons

By general zod
Date: 14/8/2007

This isn't a dig at 'Chris Multesanti'. I just don't think The Loop is the answer and here is why.
Point 1 - Directors Duty: (note to Bill Kenwright and Keith Wyness):
The Loop isn't a suitable site. Since 2003 when the Kings Dock fell apart Liverpool City Council have been "trying" to find us a suitable alternative whilst giving up Victorian green space over to Liverpool FC.
Speke is further away than Kirkby and despite reports stating unsuitability a year ago, imagine the horror of a Boro-like hole no where near anything. Long Lane doesn't provide great access roads or rail wise - remember this is about moving forward - not just sticking a Goodison replica two miles down the road.
Point 2 - It is geographically feasible:
Handful is the key here. We need more than a handful to generate footfall and cash and that means space. It doesn't mean Everton being kept inside its little box by Liverpool City Council who have bent over backwards to help the other lot.
Point 3 - Ownership:
Which goes hand in hand with being sued by any of the firms who suspect they will feel the pinch. Can anyone begin to imagine the tunnel entrance / exits effectively being shut for shoppers every two weeks (not to mention any work before hand) & Grosvenor not doing a thing about it? At any rate the site is too small.
Point 4 - Tesco are the driving force behind Kirkby:
Kirkby isn't the easy option. Voting No and staying put is.
I think its obvious that a central city site either isnt suitable, available or Liverpool City Council haven't done enough work. The Loop would appear to be the only viable option for Liverpool City Council or KEIOC. And by the way I admire KEIOC - this isn't slagging them by any means - I just think they are wishful thinking about The Loop.
Point 5 - Not being beaten:
Liverpool City Council give up Stanley Park, then tell Liverpool they can't increase their capacity and so then decide to look at a smaller site?? We haven't the resources to beat them in terms of mentioned above. FACT.
Lets turn Kirkby into EVERTON F C. Stuff Liverpool - let's become the biggest team in Merseyside.
Point 6 - Club's status and image:
We cant build an unrivalled site here. Look in your A-Z. It's too small.
Point 7 - Attendances:
I can't disagree that we will lose some of our local support but I believe that if we did the vast majority would be prepared to travel that extra 3.5 miles. I also believe that the people of Kirkby, Ormskirk, St Helens andeven Wigan will come because of easier access to the Kirkby site. I know that last bit was controversial but even when Kings Dock was mooted there were some of us who opposed it and threatened to never go again. It is about growth, being prosperous andbeing real challengers again.
In the Skysports world I can't see that again unless we change with the times.
Point 8 - Access:
The East Lancs, M57, M58, the other road I cant remember the name off, Merseyrail andeven (possibly) the tram might just argue that point.
Where ever we move there would be those who are affected. When I lived in Tuebrook I walked. If it were Scotty Road I'd drive. At the moment I get the train, if it's Kirkby I'd walk. Speke I'd drive. Everyone will be affected - end of.
Point 9 - Earning power:
Spot on. Thats why land is at a premium and that site isn't big enough.
It's going to be a lot easier to convince partners with low cost business taxes andregeneration grants, etc. in Knowsley where they'll keep more of the profits and will be fairly unchallenged for market share rather trying to complete with the largest building / shopping development in Europe a mile away.
Point 10 - Being proud of our club:
I am always proud of my club. The Loop is an elevated, land-locked roundabout.
Point 11 - Brand:
I admit the words may sound hollow to some but we need to focus on our future. I would love to see a realistic solution near to Goodison Park, St Domingo's and all that. But there isn't unless Liverpool City Council are keeping that for their preferred club.
Point 12 - Loss of identity:
Tell Alan Stubbs that. Kirkby as Scouse as any part of Liverpool.
Point 13 - Football clubs progress but stay true to their roots:
I am now just typing the same thing over again. The Loop doesn't fit our needs andonly suits Mr Warren Bradley's who, although a Blue, should resign over this, Summer Pops andThe Matthew Street Festival.
Point 14 - LCC will support it:
And in three years' time when we've hit the umpteenth stumbling block and look no nearer to moving anywhere, The Loop will still be too small for our needs.
Point 15 - Today I LOVE Goodison Park:
I love Goodison Park. I will never love anywhere as much. From that point of view The Loop, Kirkby or Speke may as well be in the North Pole.
For the record I would prefer to redevelop Goodison Park. That isn't going to happen andour board, players and David Moyes are asking for a mandate to take the club forward and they assure us that, for them, that means Kirkby.
The Loop's 11th hour appearance caused me to look at the facts presented by KEIOC andL iverpool City Councils actions in the last 4 years. I only see The Loop as a washy politician's attempt to gloss over the councils ineptitude and bias.
Because of this I reluctantly voted for the move.



This point stands out the most:
Point 7 - Attendances:
I can't disagree that we will lose some of our local support but I believe that if we did the vast majority would be prepared to travel that extra 3.5 miles. I also believe that the people of Kirkby, Ormskirk, St Helens andeven Wigan will come because of easier access to the Kirkby site. I know that last bit was controversial but even when Kings Dock was mooted there were some of us who opposed it and threatened to never go again. It is about growth, being prosperous andbeing real challengers again.
In the Skysports world I can't see that again unless we change with the times.

I Live in Warrington but go to every Everton Match I can (when work allows) going to Kirby doesn't bother me at all where ever Everton go I will go. It just sounds to me like most of these KEIOC nob eds live in Walton and are to lazy to fart let alone support their club fuck em!
  • 0

#46 Bill

Bill

    Alex. Top player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,505 posts

Posted 16 Aug 2007 - 20:28

It was going to be my last post but HEY Leadline, this has been a friendly and open debate from both sides SO FAR, but then you come in and start calling them "nobheads too lazy to fart so fuck em". Nice one mate.

For your information I, and Mike O Travel long distances to support the team, so neither of us are too lazy to fart, neither of us are nob eds, and compared to the distances we travel Warrington is just around the corner for you, so fuck you too. :angry:
  • 0

#47 StevO

StevO

    Blagging on the basis of knowledge

  • Cyber Steward
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,032 posts

Posted 16 Aug 2007 - 20:58

i find it a bit unfair to be calling out KEIOC like that, they are fans like you and me, they want the best for the club. they are just going the extra mile to try to make sure its done right. i dont 100% agree with them all the time, but i hold respect for them and their efforts.
  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users