Stadium Info

[Louis]

1 APPLICATION DOCUMENTS

 

CD1.1Planning Documents

 

1.1.1 Planning

application forms

 

1.1.2 Cover

letter ( 2 January 2008)

 

1.1.3 Planning

Statement (April 2008)

 

Planning

Statement - Appendix 1

 

Planning

Statement - Appendix 2

 

1.1.4 Summary

of the Planning Application (November 2007)

 

1.1.5 Broadway

Malyan: Kirkby Masterplan Documents 6

 

1.1.6 Case Summary

Report (April 2008)

 

1.1.7 Report

from the Planning Committee (9 June 2008)

 

1.1.8 Summary

note on Section 106 Obligations presented to the Knowsley Metropolitan Borough

Council’s Planning Committee

 

1.1.9 Minutes

and Resolution of Planning Committee meeting (9 June 2008)

 

CD1.2Retail

 

1.2.1 Retail

Assessment (November 2007)

 

1.2.2 Addendum to

Retail Assessment (April 2008), Town

Centre Health Checks , Retail

Assessment Appendices

 

1.2.3 Second

Addendum to Retail Assessment (May 2008)

 

Presentation

tables

 

CD1.3Environment

 

1.3.1 Environmental

Impact Assessment Volume 1: Non-Technical Summary, Volume 2- Main Report,

Volume 3- Technical Appendices (December 2007)

1.3.2 Environmental

Impact Addendum, Revised

Non-Technical Summary and Revised Technical Appendices, Summary of Construction

Effects (April 2008)

1.3.3 Environmental

Statement Addendum 2 and Revised Technical Appendices (May 2008)

 

1.3.4 Buro

Happold: Renewable Energy Statement (November 2007)

 

1.3.5 Buro

Happold: Flood Risk Assessment (December 2007)

 

1.3.6 Buro

Happold: Air Quality Update Report (May 2008)

 

CD1.4Design

 

1.4.1 Design and

Access Statement (April 2008)

 

1.4.2 Design

and Access Addendum (May 2008)

 

CD1.5Transport

 

1.5.1 Steer

Davies Gleave (SDG): Transport Assessment: Volume 1: Summary (December 2007)

 

1.5.2 Transport

Assessment: Volume 2: Retail (November 2007)

 

1.5.3 Transport

Assessment: Volume 3: Stadium (November 2007)

 

1.5.4 Transport

Assessment: Volume 4: Cumulative Impact (November 2007)

 

1.5.5 Transport

Assessment: Volume 5: Design (November 2007)

 

1.5.6 Transport

Assessment: Volume 6: Construction Impact Assessment

 

1.5.7 Transport

Assessment: Volume 7: Crowd Movement (November 2007)

 

1.5.8 Travel

Plan Framework - Volume 1: Town Centre Plan (November 2007)

 

1.5.9 Travel

Plan Framework - Volume 2: Stadium Non-Matchday Travel Plan (November 2007)

 

1.5.10 Addendum

TA: Volume 2: Retail (March 2008)

 

1.5.11 Addendum

TA: Volume 3: Stadium (April 2008)

 

1.5.12 Addendum

TA: Volume 4: Cumulative Impact (April 2008)

 

1.5.13 Addendum

TA: Volume 5: Design (April 2008)

 

1.5.14 TA

1^st Addendum: Crowd Movement (March 2008)

 

1.5.15 TA

2^nd Addendum; Volume 7: Crowd Movement, Valley Road/Whitefield Drive

Crossings (March 2008)

 

1.5.16 Transport

Volume 8: Other Matters (April 2008)

 

CD1.6 Stadium

 

1.6.1 Proposed

Stadium for Everton Football Club (November 2007)

 

1.6.2 Savills:

Stadium Usage Statement (March 2008)

 

1.6.3 Savills:

Delivering the Benefits of Everton in the Community (March 2008)

 

1.6.4 Savills:

Draft Stadium Management Plan (April 2008)

 

1.6.5 Savills:

Letter regarding Season Ticket Control Room (May 2008)

 

1.6.6 Savills:

Letter regarding Usage of Stadium Control Room (May 2008)

 

1.6.7 Everton: Letter regarding need to relocate (27 May 2008) (available on request)

 

CD1.7Financial

 

1.7.1 DTZ:

Financial Update (May 2008)

 

1.7.2 Deloitte: Letter regarding Financial Aspects

(May 2008) (available on request)

 

CD1.8Sustainability and Regeneration

 

1.8.1 Sustainability

Statement (November 2007)

 

1.8.2 Regeneration

Benefits Statement (November 2007)

 

Regeneration

Benefits Statement – Appendix 2

 

Health

Impact Assessment

 

1.8.3 DTZ:

Destination Kirkby: The Regeneration Case V7 (May 2008)

 

1.8.4 Hunt,

Dobson, Stringer: Crime and Disorder Impact Assessment (March 2008)

 

CD1.9Miscellaneous

 

1.9.1 Letters of Support from Bill Kenwright (EFC) and

Sir Terry Leahy (Tesco Stores Limited) (December 2007)

 

1.9.2 ECA: TV

Survey (December 2007)

 

1.9.3 Waterman

CPM: Updated Bat Survey and Assessment (May 2008)

 

1.9.4 Loss

of Playing Pitches: Analysis and mitigation (April 2008)

 

1.9.5 Summary

of Construction Effects (April 2008)

 

1.9.6 Consultation Responses (available in hard copy

on request)

 

1.9.7 Letter

regarding Reduction in Floorspace (May 2008)

 

1.9.8 Broadway

Malyan: Sunlight and Daylights Study (November 2007)

 

1.9.9 IMPACT:

Health Impact Assessment (April 2008)

 

1.9.10 Letter

regarding Development of Securities Acquisition (April 2008)

 

2 development plan: Regional policy guidance and

supporting documentation

 

CD2.1Regional

Spatial Strategy for the North West

 

CD2.2Draft

Replacement Regional Spatial Strategy for the North West

 

CD2.3RPG13: Regional Planning

Guidance for the North West

 

CD2.4Partial

Review of Regional Planning Guidance for the North West (RPG13) including EIP

Panel Report

 

CD2.5 The

Second Local Transport Plan for Merseyside 2006-2011

 

 

3 development plan: local policy GUIDANCE and

supporting documentation

 

 

CD3.1Knowsley

Replacement Unitary Development Plan 2006 (UDP)

 

CD3.2Kirkby

Town Centre - ASDA Environs Site - Development Brief

 

CD3.3Kirkby

Town Centre Draft Interim Policy Statement

 

CD3.4Greenspace

Standards and New Development Supplementary Planning Document

 

CD3.5Old Hall

Lane, Kirkby Conservation Area Appraisal

 

CD3.6Knowsley Town

Centre and Shopping Study 2002 - Only

available in hard-copy

 

CD3.7Kirkby

Retail Evidence Base Report 2007

 

 

 

CD3.8Kirkby

Town Centre Redevelopment: Economic, Social and Cultural Impact Assessment

 

CD3.9Knowsley

Open Space Audit (copy with maps available on request)

 

CD3.10 Knowsley

Guide to Development

 

CD3.11 Knowsley

Community Plan 2002-2012

 

CD3.12 The

Knowsley Crime and Disorder Reduction Strategy 2005-2008

 

CD3.13 The

Statement of Community Involvement for Knowsley

 

CD3.14 Knowsley’s

Sustainable Communities Strategy 2008

 

CD3.15 Knowsley’s

Economic Regeneration Strategy

 

CD3.16 Knowsley’s

Employment Skills Strategy 2005

 

CD3.17 Destination

Kirkby: Socio Economic Regeneration Impacts (Roger Tym & Partners 2008)

 

CD3.18 Kirkby

Town Centre Provision of Retail Advice (Roger Tym & Partners 2008)

 

CD3.19 Housing

Strategy and Housing Needs Assessment 2007:

 

Housing

Needs Survey 2007

 

Knowsley

Housing Strategy 2004-10

 

Knowsley

Housing Needs Survey: Balancing Housing Market Report 2007

 

CD3.20 Environmental

Statement Review FINAL REPORT (Bureau Veritas April 2008)

 

CD3.21 Environmental

Impact Addendum Review (Bureau Veritas April 2008)

 

CD3.22 Committee

Report Working Draft Appendix A (Bureau Veritas 28 April 2008)

 

CD3.23 Kirkby

Environmental Statement Air Quality Briefing note (Bureau Veritas 29 April

2008)

 

CD3.24 Air

Quality Update Report (Bureau Veritas 1 May 2008)

 

CD3.25 Kirkby

Town Centre Bat Survey (Merseyside Environmental Advisory Service 12 May

2008)

 

CD3.26 ES

Addendum - chapter 10 Assessment of the Effects of the Development on Noise

(Bureau Veritas 27 May 2008)

 

CD3.27 Review

of the Impact of the Non-stadium Elements (JMP May 2008)

 

CD3.28 Review

of Stadium Issues (JMP May 2008)

 

CD3.29 Briefing

Report on Controlled Parking Zones (JMP May 2008)

 

4 call-in documentation

CD4.1Statement of case - Knowsley Metropolitan Borough Council

CD4.2Statement of case - Tesco Stores Limited

 

ACCESS TO DOCUMENTS

 

A complete set of documents listed above is held at the Knowsley offices in theKirkby Suite. Please contact the Programme Officer Yvonne Parker.

[scouse]

Hey Louis any chance of a synopsis on it

[thescore]

this is on KEIOC website

 

Wednesday, 01 October 2008

We have received a number of enquiries from Evertonians in relation to the meeting with Everton Football Club that took place on Tuesday 23rd September 2008. KEIOC would like to confirm that members of the group were in attendance at the meeting but would like to clarify that the group made no presentation during the meeting. The meeting centred around a presentation made by Trevor Skempton and Tom Hughes concerning a brief appraisal of potential alternatives to the proposed Destination Kirkby development and a subsequent discussion ensued over the commercial viability of the redevelopment of Goodison Park and the Scotland Road Loop Site.

 

The discussions were amicable and KEIOC are encouraged by the initiative shown by the club to facilitate such a meeting and hope that further dialogue will be continued after the public inquiry. The club was represented by Robert Elstone (Acting CEO), Alan Bowen (Stadium Operations) and Ian Ross (PR & External Affairs) with consultants David Keirle (KSS) and Chris Potts (Savills), who are already committed to the Destination Kirkby proposals, providing the club with their professional opinion.

 

Unfortunately, in the absence of a detailed business plan, the club do not see a viable alternative to the Destination Kirkby project at this present time, however it was clear that this does not mean that the club would dismiss potential alternatives to Kirkby, if deliverable, in the future. KEIOC believe that the club must free itself of the restrictive exclusivity deal that is preventing other interested parties from committing resources to put in place a fully researched, costed and developed business proposal to rival that currently on offer at Kirkby. KEIOC believe that the club must take a proactive lead to engage with interested third parties to ensure that other opportunities are thoroughly investigated.

 

Having observed Trevor Skempton's presentation and listened to the response of the clubs consultants; KEIOC would like to confirm its intention to provide details to the public inquiry that will challenge the findings of the club and their advisors. It is KEIOC's intention to demonstrate that alternatives to the Destination Kirkby scheme are both technically possible and financially viable.

[Bill]

http://www.liverpooldailypost.co.uk/everto...64375-21962943/

 

Isnt this cutting their own throats ??, while they are shopping in Manchester, Kirkby shops will lose money and Close down, its going to go on for a long time this stadium issue, cant see the shopkeepers in Kirkby being very happy.

[Louis]

With regards to the meeting, I don't understand why the Savills and KSS guys were needed as they are contracted to Destination Kirkby. In KSS' case, a near £30million contract is at stake so they are naturally going to deter alternatives as its a lot of money to lose out on. KSS are the 'interior architects' for the Kirkby stadium i.e. they design the lounges etc. My understanding is he didn't know much about C-Values (spectator viewing distances and angle to the pitch) and the architect and engineer who attended have said they believe fans will be shocked by how far away from the pitch they would be in Kirkby!

 

The whole KRISP group is fishy in my opinion - why have they took so long to form? Their chairman is a former Knowsley Labour councillor(and close friend of George Howarth) who are supportive of the scheme. If he genuinely believe it's for a better future for Kirkby then good luck to him, if its a stunt to get him back in council then shame on him.

 

The guy they quote David Dodd, is from Kirkby Small Firms Forum - it's a massive own goal on his behalf by taking people out of Kirkby to the Trafford Centre. It may even backfire for the residents who go who see the scale of the shopping complex and think "I don't want something that size on my doorstop".

[thescore]

this was on everton website

 

the more infomation the better but quality info

 

New Stadium's Cash Boost

Details of the massive financial benefits a ground move would provide were presented to Everton's shareholders on Wednesday night.

 

Acting CEO Robert Elstone provided details of the issues facing the Club thanks to the limitations of Goodison Park during Wednesday night's EGM at the stadium.

 

He also highlighted why a move to a proposed new home in Kirkby would be financially lucrative for the Club.

 

He said: "We will fund The Kirkby Project through a mix of funding sources - from stadium naming rights, the sale of Goodison and Bellefield and potentially from some longtime bank or secured debt. We can confirm that those will be the funding sources. We may use some or all of them. The final decision has not yet been taken.

 

"Cashflow is monitored by this club on a daily basis. We have exceptionally strong financial reporting systems and we monitor cash every single day.

 

"We are monitoring the business plan for Kirkby and the funding mix is looked at on a day-to-day basis. There are clearly commercial sensitivities in that mix. We don’t think it’s wise to talk about how much we expect to earn from stadium naming rights. We don’t think it’s wise to talk about how much we expect to earn from Goodison.

 

"As a result of that the mix is still not yet crystallized. What is true is that going beyond the £78m mentioned in the DTZ report will be challenging. We all know the stadium has been called in.

 

"That has triggered a delay of one more season at least. The DTZ report suggests costs will be increased by £6m excluding fit-out costs. We believe that probably is accurate, but that additional cost has not yet been crystalized, nor has it been agreed who will fund those additional costs. Those discussions are ongoing with our partners

 

"One of the key benefits of the project is the £52m from Tesco. That is at risk in its entirety because if the inquiry fails then we will lose that and the stadium will fall over. But there is no risk of them granting a lower amount. If the project is accepted (by the Government) the £52m will be granted in full."

 

The cost of the stadium under The Kirkby Project plan, coupled with the additional revenue the stadium will realise, is in stark contrast to the existing revenue levels Goodison Park provides.

 

The Acting CEO explained: "We have made fantastic signings, we are managed by a manager who is delivering great results, way above where our wage level suggests we ought to be. Information from the latest published accounts show that we are the ninth-ranked club in terms of wage spend, and in that season we finished sixth. We did even better last season, punching even higher above our weight.

 

"Our wage bill of £38m [sourced from the latest available report] is £10m below the Premier League average. It is something like £25m less than Newcastle. We have to do something to catch up that gap. The area we have to do the most work on is matchday revenue.

 

"Every time we open the gates at Goodison, we generate about £800,000. Every time Arsenal open the Emirates, it’s £3.3m. The differentials over the course of a season are phenomenal.

 

"We would have to play an additional 62 games over a season to match Arsenal’s matchday revenue.

 

"To move up to a level around Tottenham, we would have to double our matchday revenue. That would mean an average attendance of 74,000, paying the same ticket price or an attendance of 37,000 paying double the ticket price."

[Louis]

I was in attendance when Mr Elstone gave his presentation.

 

A few points to consider..

 

Everton earn £800k per home game whilst Arsenal earn £3.3million - in layman's terms, less than a quarter of what Arsenal gain now.

 

Everton have said that we can expect £11million more revenue incoming per season at Kirkby. This is not just from home games, this is everything all together.

 

Let's look at this over the course of a season with league games only on a like for like basis.

 

For Arsenal it's 59.4m per season

For Everton, it equates to £15.2m per season at Goodison, add the entire 11million for Kirkby and it comes to £26.2million.

 

This would mean Everton income at Kirkby is £1.3million per home game at best - still £2million behind Arsenal per game which is more than double the income at Kirkby or £38million a season on league fixtures alone.

 

I don't think the board would admit it but the Kirkby plan isn't the springboard to success they'd try and have us believe. I keep banging on about this but we need to look at other stadium options.

 

Also I find it worrying that Everton have committed "less than £2million" to the project already when they are expecting prices to rise due to the public inquiry but they don't know who are expected to pay for the excess.. Everton say they can't afford more than £78million.

[dark]

I was in attendance when Mr Elstone gave his presentation.

 

A few points to consider..

 

Everton earn £800k per home game whilst Arsenal earn £3.3million - in layman's terms, less than a quarter of what Arsenal gain now.

 

Everton have said that we can expect £11million more revenue incoming per season at Kirkby. This is not just from home games, this is everything all together.

 

Let's look at this over the course of a season with league games only on a like for like basis.

 

For Arsenal it's 59.4m per season

For Everton, it equates to £15.2m per season at Goodison, add the entire 11million for Kirkby and it comes to £26.2million.

 

This would mean Everton income at Kirkby is £1.3million per home game at best - still £2million behind Arsenal per game which is more than double the income at Kirkby or £38million a season on league fixtures alone.

 

I don't think the board would admit it but the Kirkby plan isn't the springboard to success they'd try and have us believe. I keep banging on about this but we need to look at other stadium options.

 

Also I find it worrying that Everton have committed "less than £2million" to the project already when they are expecting prices to rise due to the public inquiry but they don't know who are expected to pay for the excess.. Everton say they can't afford more than £78million.

 

Some good points in there, but there's still something not right about Kirby. Will Ambani help us out should he take us over?

[Louis]

I think the Ambani rumours are just that sadly!

 

http://www.eufootball.biz/Clubs/0210084-Everton...n-takeover.html

 

Here's food for thought... the £11million revenue is to be initially £10million.. meaning that the new stadium in Kirkby will bring in less revenue than Liverpool currently earn at Anfield and they're looking to move out because it's not making enough money! That's one reason why a groundshare would be more lucrative for Everton.

[Madmatt]

but were not as big as Liverpool or arsenal louis...

 

we need to be realistic with our stadium and are targets. 11million isnt a great amount, however we are also the peoples club. We dont charge £50 a game! £30 a game is one of the cheapest in the premiership still! would you want this to be increased?

[Louis]

The answer lies with the corporates.. Arsenal have 150 corporate boxes. Everton will have 38 in Kirkby (they wanted a minimum of 60 according to Savills - their representatives).

 

It also supports the need for a groundshare

[Everton_Worshiper]

I was in attendance when Mr Elstone gave his presentation.

 

A few points to consider..

 

Everton earn £800k per home game whilst Arsenal earn £3.3million - in layman's terms, less than a quarter of what Arsenal gain now.

 

Everton have said that we can expect £11million more revenue incoming per season at Kirkby. This is not just from home games, this is everything all together.

 

Let's look at this over the course of a season with league games only on a like for like basis.

 

For Arsenal it's 59.4m per season

For Everton, it equates to £15.2m per season at Goodison, add the entire 11million for Kirkby and it comes to £26.2million.

 

This would mean Everton income at Kirkby is £1.3million per home game at best - still £2million behind Arsenal per game which is more than double the income at Kirkby or £38million a season on league fixtures alone.

 

I don't think the board would admit it but the Kirkby plan isn't the springboard to success they'd try and have us believe. I keep banging on about this but we need to look at other stadium options.

 

Also I find it worrying that Everton have committed "less than £2million" to the project already when they are expecting prices to rise due to the public inquiry but they don't know who are expected to pay for the excess.. Everton say they can't afford more than £78million.

 

Louis, it is all well and good for those against Kirkby to make the move appear negative but why not do a realistic comparison. We are based in the North West (different economic climate to London) so why not base your comparison on a North West team - why not Liverpool, Wigan etc?

 

Oh and by my calculations, £800k to £1.3m per home game represents an increase in income - are you now trying to set a benchmark for what that increase should be regardless of the fact it has increased at all?

[Louis]

I was going to compare with the rest of the Premier League but Deloitte only compare the reknown European Clubs so I wasn't able to find any data about Bolton, Man City, Wigan etc. This is what I found the other day.

 

These are from the 2006/7 season (the latest figures released)

 

Arsenal 3,300,000

Chelsea 2,483,333

Everton (Goodison Park) 800,000 - Robert Elstone's figure.

Liverpool 1,324,137

Manchester United 3,189,655

Newcastle United 1,158,621

Tottenham 1,030,000

 

Everton (Kirkby in 2010) 1,326,316 <-- That's slightly high because I added £10million predicted additional revenue and divided by 19 for the league games only, if it was divided by 22 (the number of home games in 06/07) it would be £1,254,545.

 

I know it's an increase but it's still predicted to be less than our rivals were three years earlier. Don't get me wrong, based on the 2006/07 results it would be the fifth highest matchday revenue in the league but it's still near half of what third place is - sod the other 15 teams for now, this is why we are relocating to try and bridge the gap with the 'big four'. Liverpool are moving out of Anfield because they are wanting to increase matchday revenue meanwhile Everton are wanting to move to Kirkby to earn less than what Anfield brings in. It seems we are limiting our future income not having a higher number of hospitality boxes.

 

Man City have 70 boxes - http://www.conferences-uk.org.uk/conferenc...ester%20Stadium

White Hart Lane has 120 - http://www.sportandtechnology.com/features/0249.html

Aston Villa have 105 - http://www.chooseyourevent.com/aston-villa...spitality-venue

 

I couldn't find how many Newcastle United have, but Kirkby will have 38, Goodison falls way short of that with 9.

[Everton_Worshiper]

It is OK Louis, you have answered my question and proven what I was getting at. It doesn't matter how the negatives are applied to Kirkby, fact remains we would benefit from a 59% increase in matchday turnover (approximately of course). This of course would never be highlighted by opposition groups or those who sympathise with such groups.

 

Now there is no way that we will be able to instantly bridge the gulf that lies between us and the big earners by simply moving stadium without financial rewards of being successful on the pitch. You can't run before you walk and without significant investment we won't be running anytime soon so lets make the most of the walk (and gain the stamina to run). This doesn't mean I am settling for 2nd best but making the most of what is achievable.

 

EDIT: I will admit lack of corporate boxes is disheartening but why build 100 if we are only going to fill 30. Are there any current figures released for corporate box sales? i.e. are they in demand currently?

Edited October 6, 2008 by Everton_Worshiper

[Bill]

Just as a matter of interest, How many Corporate boxes do we have now. ???

 

 

By my reckoning our 40,000 stadium gives us a yearly average of 36.000, if we moved to a 50,000 stadium wether it be it in Kirkby or anywhere else we would only have a seasonal average of about 43.000 and that makes for an extra income of only £210.000 ..... 7.000 multiplied by £30 the average ticket price. And of course that seasonal average will only make it if we are playing attractive and winning football. So for the season you are looking at an extra income of £3.5 million, a lot less than the Ten million the club said it would bring in just for Daveys Transfer budget. I dont think the new stadium will provide the resources to go out and spend big Money on the type of players that will win consistently, i have always said if we are getting a new stadium Think Big, it should be at least 60,000 and if we cannot afford that, then we should be looking at the groundshare option.

Thats my view of it tho i must admit i dont know all the facts, just what i've picked up on this forum.

[Louis]

Goodison apparently has 9 corporate boxes all in the main stand.

 

Interesting you say that about the £10million additional income Bill! I've seen a spreadsheet from a fan who calculated it and attempted to work out ticket structures etc. and he couldn't get the numbers to add up. He took it to a financial editor of a Liverpool Daily newspaper who agreed with him that it doesn't add up.

[BlueBird]

I have seen a lot recently with the old credit crunch debacle about re-opening the ground share idea...best bet as far as I am concerned as long as it is a relationship of equals (that would pee the shite off no end

[StevO]

i think it needs to be noted, the move would indeed increase match day revenue, but remember matchday costs are also vastly increased as are debts to be paid. so any old increase just wont do. it has to be significant.

[Jimmy the blue]

Louis, you assume that the club will continue to charge the same admission prices at Kirkby as they do now, I assure you there will be a hike in price, especially under new owners. Its at that point a 'Bring back Billy' campaign will start when some realise what a bloody good deal you get under that guy now.

 

By the way does Super Kev still own one of the corporate boxes at Goodison

[Bill]

i think it needs to be noted, the move would indeed increase match day revenue, but remember matchday costs are also vastly increased as are debts to be paid. so any old increase just wont do. it has to be significant.

 

I think it might increase a little bit (the big 4 might bring a few more into the ground) but i dont think it would increase significantly. There was only 33.000 at the game for Newcastle, and a miserable 14,000 for the league Cup against Blackburn, and i'm sure that if the ground had been out in Kirkby it might have been a lot less.

Any significant increase is going to be based on getting into the top 4, Champs league every season, and to do that we have to have a takeover to spend a lot of Money.

Anybody who took over this Club would want a better return for their money than our support can provide, as i have said in another post just because we have a bigger ground does not guarantee it will bring any more than the 36,000 hardcore fans we have now, and its all based on performances on the field which wont come overnight.

I think all plans for a new stadium should be scrapped and let the people who take over design and build a new stadium to the size they require, and in an area which will potentially increase the drawing power.

 

As Jimmy as also said, any takeover or new Ground will result in higher admission charges, Fooked if we do and fooked if we dont.

[Jimmy the blue]

I think it might increase a little bit (the big 4 might bring a few more into the ground) but i dont think it would increase significantly. There was only 33.000 at the game for Newcastle, and a miserable 14,000 for the league Cup against Blackburn, and i'm sure that if the ground had been out in Kirkby it might have been a lot less.

Any significant increase is going to be based on getting into the top 4, Champs league every season, and to do that we have to have a takeover to spend a lot of Money.

Anybody who took over this Club would want a better return for their money than our support can provide, as i have said in another post just because we have a bigger ground does not guarantee it will bring any more than the 36,000 hardcore fans we have now, and its all based on performances on the field which wont come overnight.

I think all plans for a new stadium should be scrapped and let the people who take over design and build a new stadium to the size they require, and in an area which will potentially increase the drawing power.

 

As Jimmy as also said, any takeover or new Ground will result in higher admission charges, Fooked if we do and fooked if we dont.

 

Bill we will also experienced the City effect, new money, big signings and suddenly packed houses and I know there is no certainity for success but fans are fickle. A citeh fan I know, he sells cheese at Ormskirk market, says that the place is full of new scarf's and new hats fans from out of nowhere who actually know fuck all about the club, we'll get the same thing

[Everton_Worshiper]

i think it needs to be noted, the move would indeed increase match day revenue, but remember matchday costs are also vastly increased as are debts to be paid. so any old increase just wont do. it has to be significant.

 

Pointless statement without quantifying the "increase in matchday costs".

[Louis]

Jim - I don't know why you are assuming that I've even taken season tickets into account for my figures. Robert Elstone said that Goodison brings in £800k per matchday in matchday revenue. He also said that the club can expect Kirkby to bring in £10million more than Goodison.

 

More staff will be needed on a match day including police, stewards, caterers, bus drivers and petrol costs so SteveO does have a point. That's before you realise that the club will be taking up to £78million (at this time, final fee expected to be higher) worth of debt on for the stadium and the outgoing payments will be increased. I'll see if I can get the spreadsheet up to share with everyone.

[Everton_Worshiper]

Jim - I don't know why you are assuming that I've even taken season tickets into account for my figures. Robert Elstone said that Goodison brings in £800k per matchday in matchday revenue. He also said that the club can expect Kirkby to bring in £10million more than Goodison.

 

More staff will be needed on a match day including police, stewards, caterers, bus drivers and petrol costs so SteveO does have a point. That's before you realise that the club will be taking up to £78million (at this time, final fee expected to be higher) worth of debt on for the stadium and the outgoing payments will be increased. I'll see if I can get the spreadsheet up to share with everyone.

 

Please explain to me why there will be an increased number of stewards & police than we currently have on a match day. Somehow I do not think we will be doubling the number of police or stewards.

 

Another thing, even if we redevelop Goodison we will have increased debt for the redevelopment (more than £78m) so not sure what you are getting at? Whether we stay or whether we go we get increased debt.

[StevO]

Pointless statement without quantifying the "increase in matchday costs".

 

how can i possibly quantify it? im sure even the club cant put a specific figure on it? why do you find the need to even make that comment that it is pointless? you said that an increase in turnover is still and increase in turnover. that is a pointless statement when the costs need to be considered.

 

more turn styles - either increased man power or increased maintenance of machinery.

more toilets - increased costs of water bills and cleaning costs

more food/drink stands - increased cost of staff and machinery

larger capacity - increased cost policing, trafficing, stewards, cleaning.

 

there is obviously an increase in costs, i dont see how its a pointless statement at all to be honest. do you not under stand - turnover minus cost equals profit?

 

Please explain to me why there will be an increased number of stewards & police than we currently have on a match day. Somehow I do not think we will be doubling the number of police or stewards.

 

Another thing, even if we redevelop Goodison we will have increased debt for the redevelopment (more than £78m) so not sure what you are getting at? Whether we stay or whether we go we get increased debt.

 

there has to be so many police per fan, so if the capacity can reach 50k there has to be police for 50k, we currently pay for policing upto 40k. there has to be so many stewards per fan also, and they dont work for free.

 

hes not getting at the point that the debt wont increase at GP, the point is the revenue will on increase enough. we still wont compete with spurs and their little 36/37k seater stadium, due to us not having enough corp boxes. have you actually read his posts or have you just gone "oh look someone picking on kirkby again, must defend regardless"

[Everton_Worshiper]

how can i possibly quantify it? im sure even the club cant put a specific figure on it? why do you find the need to even make that comment that it is pointless? you said that an increase in turnover is still and increase in turnover. that is a pointless statement when the costs need to be considered.

 

more turn styles - either increased man power or increased maintenance of machinery.

more toilets - increased costs of water bills and cleaning costs

more food/drink stands - increased cost of staff and machinery

larger capacity - increased cost policing, trafficing, stewards, cleaning.

 

there is obviously an increase in costs, i dont see how its a pointless statement at all to be honest. do you not under stand - turnover minus cost equals profit?

 

No, the increase in turnover was quantified by Louis - £800k to £1.3m albeit approximate costs.

You are saying there is an increase in costs to try an depict a bad increase in costs yet the increase could only be £50k per matchday (nothing to worry about) or £500k per matchday (something to worry about). IMO all you are trying to do is turn things negative when in actual fact they are not that bad.

Again, redeveloping Goodison would increase these costs so either way (Kirkby, Goodison) they increase - hence I stand by my pointless comment.

Edited October 7, 2008 by Everton_Worshiper

[StevO]

No, the increase in turnover was quantified by Louis - £800k to £1.3m albeit approximate costs.

You are saying there is an increase in costs to try an depict a bad increase in costs yet the increase could only be £50k per matchday (nothing to worry about) or £500k per matchday (something to worry about). IMO all you are trying to do is turn things negative when in actual fact they are not that bad.

Again, redeveloping Goodison would increase these costs so either way (Kirkby, Goodison) they increase - hence I stand by my pointless comment.

 

the point is we need to increase income by more than that. they say it will bridge the gap with the top 4, but it wont even bridge the cap with spurs! do you still believe all the crap KW told you? surely not, take a look at the published figures, they dont add up, yet you just think its people being negative.

 

 

and i stand by your pointless comment, every single one of them.

[Everton_Worshiper]

the point is we need to increase income by more than that. they say it will bridge the gap with the top 4, but it wont even bridge the cap with spurs! do you still believe all the crap KW told you? surely not, take a look at the published figures, they dont add up, yet you just think its people being negative.

 

 

and i stand by your pointless comment, every single one of them.

 

So, how exactly are we supposed to bridge the gap...? (I wait with anticipation to your masterplan.)

Unlike a lot of the sheep who follow opposition groups, I have formed my own opinions - something we will never agree on.

[DangerMouse]

This "masterplan" as worshiper put it is ecactly what im looking to see.... Any idiot can pull up huge land spaces on google maps and plonk Goodison park on it.....

We can all discuss the financials of this move untill the cows come home but to be honest none of us has a clue......

 

if there is some masterplan.... and if your all aware of the facts I want to see it too...

 

and sorry i wont settle for "the loop" as an acceptable master plan......

[Bill]

This "masterplan" as worshiper put it is exactly what im looking to see.... Any idiot can pull up huge land spaces on google maps and plonk Goodison park on it.....

 

Isnt that exactly what Wyness did. ??

 

I agree with that, but several things have come to light since the early days which the club cannot dispute.

Didnt this start off as a Deal of the Century, a stadium that was only going to cost 20 million with a gift of 50 million from Tesco, who have since said that the 50 million was to buy the land for the tesco store, but you can have some of it to build your stadium on if you help us get permission to build our store, it seems to me that tesco were only looking after their own interests and using EFC solely for that purpose, and being in the mess we are in, they jumped in with Both feet.

Now theres talk of it costing 78 million, so again you should ask yourself 78 MILLION for a football stadium, i dont think so, more like £278 million for a half decent stadium so we would have obviously had to mortgage ourselves up to the neck to borrow that, as if we are'nt deep enough in debt already.

 

 

"We can all discuss the financials of this move untill the cows come home but to be honest none of us has a clue".

 

 

If your financial knowledge is not good enough to see that a stadium increase of only 10.000 people cant bring in the extra 10 million pounds that EFC claimed it would , then i suggest you keep a close eye on your bank balance mate, cos some people could be milking you dry and you wouldnt have a clue.