Stadium Development Director appointed

[Louis]

Quote

Everton has appointed a Stadium Development Director to support the Club’s ambition of delivering a new ground at Bramley-Moore Dock.

The new role will be filled by Colin Chong, a construction industry specialist with more than 35 years’ experience in the development sector. He has successfully delivered a vast range of large-scale projects and has been involved at a senior-level in stadium redevelopment projects at Old Trafford and the Manchester Commonwealth Games stadium, as well as the build of the DW Stadium. Colin also delivered the build of the Park Stand at Goodison Park in 1994.

“I feel privileged to have the opportunity to play a key role in the delivery of what will be a great project, not only for Everton Football Club but also for the City of Liverpool,” said Colin.

“The Club has already done a huge amount of work to get us to our current position, spending millions of pounds to make sure that any scheme we develop is right for the Club and our fans, that the design principles are right and, crucially, that it’s affordable. 

“This is a long and complex process, but we have put together a well-resourced team of internal staff and consultants to ensure we are able to drive this forward effectively.”

Colin initially joined Everton from Laing O’Rourke in 2016 as Head of Estates at Goodison Park and has been appointed to this new post following a recruitment process spanning many months.

Chief Executive Denise Barrett-Baxendale said: “The appointment of Colin as our Stadium Development Director is an important step for us.

“Whilst we have made progress on our plans for Bramley-Moore Dock - as well legacy plans for the Goodison Park site - there is a lot of detailed and complex work to do to enable our move to happen.

“The fact that he has had some involvement in the project so far – albeit without being wholly dedicated to it – means he can really hit the ground running with an awareness of what needs to be done next.

“Colin has extensive experience in delivering stadiums and other large-scale capital projects and, together with our strengthened internal team and a best-in-class team of external advisers, we now have all the resource and expertise we need in place as we move towards the crucial planning phases.

“A key part of Colin’s remit will be to ensure that we consult fully with all groups on both schemes - including finalising designs and capacity and developing the best possible legacy for Goodison Park - and we are entirely committed to doing this. 

“I’d like to thank all fans for their support and patience to date and hope that they see this appointment as a positive sign of our ambition to move to Bramley-Moore Dock as soon as we possibly can.”

Over the course of the next few months, a period of engagement with local residents regarding the legacy for L4 will be undertaken and a project website containing key information about both schemes will be launched.

 

http://www.evertonfc.com/news/2018/08/13/stadium-development-director-appointed

[Finn balor]

Positive news 

[markjazzbassist]

[Gwlad]

Not showing intent then!

[Shukes]

Well that should shut Mr Burns up for a bit surely haha!

[Gwlad]

I thought that too Shukes!

[MikeO]

34 minutes ago, Shukes said:

Well that should shut Mr Burns up for a bit surely haha!

He's applied for the post of "Director of Stall Management" I understand. At the Farmers’ Market in University Square.

[markjazzbassist]

ironic timing

[Matt]

11 hours ago, markjazzbassist said:

ironic timing

Why so?

[Wiggytop]

13 hours ago, Shukes said:

Well that should shut Mr Burns up for a bit surely haha!

Well that's jinxed it, he'll turn up now and start posting more of inane shit, I wonder if he's one of those flat earth believers?

[Romey 1878]

3 hours ago, Matt said:

Why so?

The train lover comes on here saying the project has stalled etc etc and then this is announced.

[Shukes]

14 minutes ago, patto said:

I support John if the BMD isn'ttt big enough we should go to the bigger site. 

There is supposed to be complications with BM. 

That’s gotta be a yellow at least!

[Shukes]

No I agree completely. 

But lots of people have asked John for sources, as what we read on sites says something completely different... and he replies, just trust me!.

I am one of the ones guilty of engaging him earlier in one of the threads, by posting what we had actually been told to date. I asked why his informs him was different, and if it was factual and not just his view. He posted that it was all fact, by couldn’t put down any sources. 

That seems odd to me.

Im all for getting the stadium and site correct, but I dont agree that a 55k capacity is championship team. There are things he has said that if true, should be public knowledge. Yet no one knows any sources, other than John.... who can’t let be known his contacts.

All a bit 24, blacklist to me!

[Matt]

3 hours ago, Romey 1878 said:

The train lover comes on here saying the project has stalled etc etc and then this is announced.

Aaaah! Completely missed that, these 4am shifts are playing havoc with my head!

[rubecula]

8 hours ago, Wiggytop said:

Well that's jinxed it, he'll turn up now and start posting more of inane shit, I wonder if he's one of those flat earth believers?

well  if someone pushes him off the edge then we will know he was right all along.

3 hours ago, patto said:

I'm not against BM even at 55.000 but if we can go bigger we must but Dan Meis says it's landlocked to go above 55.000 surely then we need a bigger site so we can add other structures hotels etc. 

I can not understand why a 55,000  seat stadium is the maximum?  we have already seen it is big enough to hold a stadium of 5 times that size if we wanted to build it.  yes there is the infrastructure (offices and such)  but they are now able to utilise the Liver Building.  I simply can not get past the fact that before the stadia were all seater we had crowds that would dwarf anything that even Old Trafford could accommodate now.  So, my question is … what is wrong with a 60,000 seater stadium which would have the benefit of more fans at lower prices or more concessionary seating  for those that need it.  We already have  a full sell out of season tickets as it is  and getting to the match at the last minute is not something we can do anymore either,  so the more seats the better in my book.  I think 60,000 is an absolute minimum to be honest, and personally  I would like to see a lot bigger than that but I am just a voice in the darkness on this

Edited August 14, 2018 by rubecula
corrections

[StevO]

3 hours ago, patto said:

I'm not against BM even at 55.000 but if we can go bigger we must but Dan Meis says it's landlocked to go above 55.000 surely then we need a bigger site so we can add other structures hotels etc. 

When did Dan Meis say this? It’s not a quote I’ve seen before. 

In regards to other structures, we don’t need to worry about that. The whole Liverpool Waters development is what’s that’s for. Everton will not be building a hotel on the site that has been secured. 

[Shukes]

57 minutes ago, StevO said:

When did Dan Meis say this? It’s not a quote I’ve seen before. 

In regards to other structures, we don’t need to worry about that. The whole Liverpool Waters development is what’s that’s for. Everton will not be building a hotel on the site that has been secured. 

Mr Burns has hacked Pattos account!

[rubecula]

3 minutes ago, Shukes said:

Mr Burns has hacked Pattos account!

Or perhaps it was Smithers

[MikeO]

3 hours ago, rubecula said:

I simply can not get past the fact that before the stadia were all seater we had crowds that would dwarf anything that even Old Trafford could accommodate now.

Infinitely cheaper ticket prices back then, far more accessible/affordable for ordinary working folk. 

[markjazzbassist]

2 minutes ago, patto said:

So do you think we wouldn't fill a 60.000 stadium. 

With a new stadium I think we would fill it easily. 

it's not a contest of who's is bigger, it's a business decision.  gate reciepts are nothing, the real money is sponsorship and tv revenue.  they might feel they have better business opportunities at 55k than 60k with seats empty.  55k sold out each week is an easier sell to corporate types.

[MikeO]

1 minute ago, patto said:

So do you think we wouldn't fill a 60.000 stadium. 

Didn't say that at all, I was just saying that the days when "we had crowds that would dwarf anything that even Old Trafford could accommodate now" are from a different era when kids paid sixpence at the gate and all the men wore flat caps. More recently in 83/84 we were lucky to get 20,000 in unless we were playing Liverpool (18,000 for Spurs and 28,000 for United, less for lower teams down to 13,000 on occasion). Obviously now we sell out every game so the capacity discussion is valid but the historical argument is flawed.

[StevO]

32 minutes ago, patto said:

Probably about 9 months ago there won't be any hotels there because there's no room. 

Show me the quote, it didn’t happen. 

Why would the club need to build hotels on the site? That’s never been needed in this location. The Liverpool Waters development will take care of lots of redevelopment and Titanic is over the road. Please tell me how we would benefit from a hotel? We don’t even run our own shops or catering but you want a hotel. 

[StevO]

1 hour ago, patto said:

Ok forget it I'm a liar and we don't need hotels they are all sold out every week in  Liverpool they just make an absolute fortune but hey we don't need revenue  

 

 

I didn’t say you are a liar, but Dan Meis has never said there isn’t enough room for more than that capacity(certainly not in public anyway). He has said the last few thousand seats cost the most to build and that there will be an optimum capacity to suit the club.

Why would the club need a hotel though? Have you even thought about it?

say there is 200 room, at £200 per room per night. That’s £40,000 per full night in revenue, before any bills are paid. That’s a long time before you see any return on investment. Add into that the club hasn’t run a hotel before, so if there ever was going to be a hotel there it wouldn’t be the club doing it. It’s not as simple as make a business make a profit Patto. Surely you see that right? Fuck the amount of land there is there, the club building and running a hotel to make money is just a stupid idea. They get £100m+ from tv deals, why mess around with a hotel. 

The fucking cinema in Liverpool One is full every week, should the club open one of them too?

Come on Patto, think about it what you’re saying. The money a hotel would bring in over a weekend wouldn’t even cover a first team players wages, elite level football doesn’t operate in the same financial ball park as any other business. There is no other business that could financially support a club unless they were selling oil. They could play in an empty stadium every week, as long as it’s on tv they don’t need more money. 

[rubecula]

I still say the more seats in the stadium the cheaper they will be and therefore the easier it will be for less fortunate (financially) supporters to go to the game.   Or are we no longer to be able to call ourselves "The People's Club"  if not we may as well be the redshites anyway.

[Shukes]

The site isn’t just our stadium guys. It’s thw area around that is to be redeveloped as well. 

Plenty if room for hotels, cinemas and corporate level offices along with places to eat. 

We signed in principle for the land to build a stadium. It’s only part of the areas redevelopment.

[Makis]

50 minutes ago, patto said:

When you start playing in empty stadiums football is finished it nearly happened in Italy 

i wonder what the Chelsea village hotels bring in I presume the village was a waste of time

why build a new stadium ?

The biggest income I believe comes from increased number of executive boxes. GP has a ridiculously small amount of them. New stadium should also increase matchday sales of other things (refreshments, food, merchandise). And it should improve sponsorship deals. The extra money from the regular seats is really not that much in the grand scheme of things. If you get 10,000 extra seats sold out every week @25 pounds a pop, that's 250,000 per match, or in the range of 5 million per year. With the next TV deal Everton's revenue will be close to 200 million, so it would mean an increase of about 3%, say 4% including all other income from those fans. So while it's a nice thing to have it would mean the club can pay the wages for one star player more.

This is also why financially the gains from a 60k stadium as opposed to a 55k stadium is not very much. It would however increase build costs, possibly require more policing etc. Just to break even would require those extra 5k seats should be sold out for most games for the next 40 years.

[MikeO]

9 minutes ago, patto said:

Look a Liverpool they must be gutted they never built the new stadium they are now looking to add another 6.000 seats I wonder why they've just added 10.000 seats it's called revenue.

A pretty insignificant part of revenue is from ticket sales...

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/44850888

[markjazzbassist]

Honestly another aspect is after the stadium is finished you apply to have a Europa final or something there.  Probably not big enough for a CL final but Europa would bring us clout in the world.

[StevO]

5 hours ago, patto said:

When you start playing in empty stadiums football is finished it nearly happened in Italy 

i wonder what the Chelsea village hotels bring in I presume the village was a waste of time

why build a new stadium ?

I agree, we don’t need an empty stadium at all. But don’t think for one minute the people who pay for tickets make any real difference to the money available to the club. 

The hotel at Stamford Bridge is not owned and run by Chelsea, it’s Millenium Hotels. 

The new stadium is all about the clubs value, the way we look to the players, the rest of the world, the investors, the broadcasters. The point about it not making money wasn’t to say don’t build a new one, the point was that tv money runs the game. Nothing else comes close. 

[MikeO]

1 hour ago, patto said:

And what happens if the tv revenue went bust.

Then the whole of the PL would implode so we'd be in the same boat as everyone else, but in reality it's never going to happen is it so not really relevant.