Louis Posted November 23, 2008 Report Share Posted November 23, 2008 David Moyes: “I know why people are against it but anyone who has seen Bayern Munich share with 1860 Munich can see how it’s done. One week it’s red, the next week blue. “There are a lot of plusses.” Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jabber The Blue Posted November 23, 2008 Report Share Posted November 23, 2008 The last thing we should do, is share with then horrible bastards.... Don't go to bed with the devil!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wakeyblue Posted November 23, 2008 Report Share Posted November 23, 2008 jabber i could not have put it any bettter myself Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Posted November 23, 2008 Report Share Posted November 23, 2008 Its the only way we could get a half decent stadium. If we have to go it alone we will end up with a corrugated tin pot, cheap and nasty, so called Stadium. I'm all for it in Stanley Park. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dark Posted November 23, 2008 Report Share Posted November 23, 2008 There may be some plusses from the groundshare but there could also be a lot of negatives. The rivalry will get worse and the bitterness would increase, we would be in the same stadium that hears 'You'll Never Walk Alone' each week and we would be sharing our seats with die hard Liverpool season ticket fans, we would be like one big club which is not what we want. Instead of having Dixie Dean outside the stadium he would be joined by Kenny Dalgliesh, Ian Rush, Steven Gerrard statues. Imagine that? On a matchday having your stadium decorated with Anfield legends. What colour would the seats be? Everton's ground with red seats? Imagine the vandalism that would take place, Liverpool fans would damage the Dixie statue more than they have already and vice versa. In my opinion the groundshare would create more problems that it solved. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Louis Posted November 23, 2008 Author Report Share Posted November 23, 2008 Dark, the major plus point for a groundshare is it would be cheap. A company would be able to build the stadium and let both clubs use it for free (and pay their own costs such as policing) as it would be bringing 120,000+ fans to the area most weeks to spend money on their supplementary businesses (selling food, hospitality, hoteliers, parking etc.). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue 250 Posted November 23, 2008 Report Share Posted November 23, 2008 Speaking as a person who shared a bedroom with a red ....then to be honest a stadium wouldn't be a massive problem! Sure I'd rather not!....you know a fantastic stadium in the Goodison footprint would have been my first choice.Other than that a nice new stand alone stadium in the "right place" would be ok! I can only imagine that any shared stadium design would have to allow for the fact that one team couldn't have more of the limelight than the other, ie every thing would have to be equal. A new (even shared) stadium for Everton would mean possible investment under the watchfull eye of Mr Kenwright. Some have said why build a 55,000 seat stadium when we don't get 40,000 very often! Remember that a luckypool devoid of Gerrard and luck would lose a lot of their glory hunting fans, and after a couple of seasons outside the top 4 they might get less fans in than us! Dixie Dean will look on with pride at whatever ground he's placed outside....safe in the knowledge that no one ever burnt shirts because of his attempts to get away from the place he loved. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StevO Posted November 23, 2008 Report Share Posted November 23, 2008 i dont see why rivalry would get worse. why would either set of fans vandalise it when its their home too. its the only way out for both clubs in the current financial climate. white seats id imagine, with red and blue lights all round to change the image of the place on match days. its all been talked about before. theres no reason other than big headed pride with no forward view on stadiums and finance. as moyes said, it was done in germany, thats more a realistic comparison than the san siro. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duncanmckenzieismagic Posted November 23, 2008 Report Share Posted November 23, 2008 There may be some plusses from the groundshare but there could also be a lot of negatives. The rivalry will get worse and the bitterness would increase, we would be in the same stadium that hears 'You'll Never Walk Alone' each week and we would be sharing our seats with die hard Liverpool season ticket fans, we would be like one big club which is not what we want. Instead of having Dixie Dean outside the stadium he would be joined by Kenny Dalgliesh, Ian Rush, Steven Gerrard statues. Imagine that? On a matchday having your stadium decorated with Anfield legends. What colour would the seats be? Everton's ground with red seats? Imagine the vandalism that would take place, Liverpool fans would damage the Dixie statue more than they have already and vice versa. In my opinion the groundshare would create more problems that it solved. In an ideal world I would much prefer our own stadium, somewhere like the Kings Dock would be nice :-) !! However we are a million miles away from the ideal world. We blatantly cant afford to go it alone so its a straight choice between Kirkby/Tesco or a shared stadium. I cant see how a shared stadium would effect the rivalry or the bitterness and seriously doubt that vandalism would be an issue. The technology exists for us to have a "blue stadium one week or a red stadium the next at the flick of a switch" according to the article which kind of rules out all of your points! I personaly would prefer o share a ground in Liverpool with The Shite than to move to Kirkby, not that I am totally against that idea either! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Louis Posted November 23, 2008 Author Report Share Posted November 23, 2008 I think (ok.. know.) there's bound to be a few more options available than the ones you've listed, the choice is more varied than Kirkby/Tesco or Groundshare (there's Goodison for a start). The biggest obstacle in my opinion is the exclusivity deal, if that was not in place, the club could advertise that they are looking to enter a business agreement with a hotelier and/or events company (for example). There are a few companies sniffing around at the moment following on from Echo Arena's success (there's a site next to that actually) who believe that larger capacity events are commercially viable in Liverpool and may be willing to help Everton with a multi purpose stadium (as SFX were in 2004). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duncanmckenzieismagic Posted November 24, 2008 Report Share Posted November 24, 2008 I think (ok.. know.) there's bound to be a few more options available than the ones you've listed, the choice is more varied than Kirkby/Tesco or Groundshare (there's Goodison for a start). The biggest obstacle in my opinion is the exclusivity deal, if that was not in place, the club could advertise that they are looking to enter a business agreement with a hotelier and/or events company (for example). There are a few companies sniffing around at the moment following on from Echo Arena's success (there's a site next to that actually) who believe that larger capacity events are commercially viable in Liverpool and may be willing to help Everton with a multi purpose stadium (as SFX were in 2004). Admittedldy I am only going from what I have heard in the media but it does seem that redeveloping Goodison is a definite non starter. How could we pay for it and can we really improve it that much anyway? Where would we play while the work was being done? If you enough but I dont see ant reason why the club/BK would lie about it. Yes I would prefer to stay in Liverpool and yes I would prefer our own stadium but Im just being realistic. The longer we stay where we are the further we will fall down the pecking order. The benefits of a shared stadium are obvious and I cant honestly think of a single logical reason why anybody would be against it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jofanon Posted November 24, 2008 Report Share Posted November 24, 2008 I'm all for it. It makes a lot of sense I can't think of many reasons why not to. Yes I'd prefer us to have our own stadium but removing emotion from it, and as a business decision, it makes financial sense. I don't believe any of this loss of identity nonsense. I do worry though if we can't fill 36k then how are we going to fill 70k?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
troy8 Posted November 24, 2008 Report Share Posted November 24, 2008 My only concern with the groundshare is that to majority of the world, it would NOT be our ground it would be Liverpool's home ground, with nobody knowing who we are. Unfortunately with Liverpool being so well known around the world, having a groundshare with them would in a sense decrease our appeal to the greater global community, as they are the more prominately known team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Everton_Worshiper Posted November 24, 2008 Report Share Posted November 24, 2008 I'm all for it. It makes a lot of sense I can't think of many reasons why not to. Yes I'd prefer us to have our own stadium but removing emotion from it, and as a business decision, it makes financial sense. I don't believe any of this loss of identity nonsense. I do worry though if we can't fill 36k then how are we going to fill 70k?? Liverpool fans with season tickets might get reduced price tickets and vice versa. Either set of fans might want to watch a football match between Manure and Everton or Liverpool and Real Madrid, it would work like the tickets do now, 1st Everton season tickets holders, 2nd Evertonia, 3rd General Sale, 4th Liverpool season ticket holders (maybe reduced rate???). I would rather have Liverpool season ticket holders there for £20 and spending another £10-15 on food/drink (assuming matchday revenue goes to the team who is playing) than having empty seats. I am actually all for a shared stadium. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Everton_Worshiper Posted November 24, 2008 Report Share Posted November 24, 2008 (edited) My only concern with the groundshare is that to majority of the world, it would NOT be our ground it would be Liverpool's home ground, with nobody knowing who we are. Unfortunately with Liverpool being so well known around the world, having a groundshare with them would in a sense decrease our appeal to the greater global community, as they are the more prominately known team. It may have the opposite affect in promoting Everton due to Liverpool's success. Champions league games played at Stanley Park, "home to Everton FC & Liverpool FC". Edited November 24, 2008 by Everton_Worshiper Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul Posted November 24, 2008 Report Share Posted November 24, 2008 Why are people assuming that just because you share you are guranteed a good stadium? Companies will always look to cut costs. There's no guantees it would be goodso can we nip this theory in the bud until plans are made please? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duncanmckenzieismagic Posted November 24, 2008 Report Share Posted November 24, 2008 Why are people assuming that just because you share you are guranteed a good stadium? Companies will always look to cut costs. There's no guantees it would be goodso can we nip this theory in the bud until plans are made please? Are you for real??? If the 2 clubs do decide to share it will half the costs and therefore it stands to reason that a better ground would be more affordable Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Everton_Worshiper Posted November 24, 2008 Report Share Posted November 24, 2008 Why are people assuming that just because you share you are guranteed a good stadium? Companies will always look to cut costs. There's no guantees it would be goodso can we nip this theory in the bud until plans are made please? You don't have to comment or read the thread you know. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Romey 1878 Posted November 24, 2008 Report Share Posted November 24, 2008 A while ago I'd have been dead set against a groundshare but re-developing Goodison seems out of the question (unless we get our own billionnaire) and the Kirkby stadium move is all wrong IMO and it has a cheap and nasty design, so for me, sharing with the shite is the lesser of two evils and I'm all for it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dark Posted November 24, 2008 Report Share Posted November 24, 2008 ^That post has kinda' convinced me. If we look at the costs and looking at how much we could save then it would be good for both clubs. I suppose that the whole idea of being at Liverpool's ground would be forgotten after a few days there and once everyone has settled in then it would be a good thing to have. I know that there are a lot of downsides to this, the biggest being that we are sharing seats with Liverpool there are some plusses that have to be accounted for. We should look to either redo Goodision (which isn't going to happen) and Kirby just sounds worse and worse, even though the poll was won to move to Kirby I just don't see it going ahead. I think that the best thing for both clubs would be to groudshare. I'm on the fence, but I'm swaying to the majority. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jesse11 Posted November 24, 2008 Report Share Posted November 24, 2008 If we keep playing like we did today we should be looking for a groundshare with Tranmere to host our League 1 battles. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sprooly Posted November 25, 2008 Report Share Posted November 25, 2008 i agree mate that was so bloody bad Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul Posted November 25, 2008 Report Share Posted November 25, 2008 Are you for real??? If the 2 clubs do decide to share it will half the costs and therefore it stands to reason that a better ground would be more affordable That still doesn't mean that they won't find ways to make the stadium cheaper does it? So that both clubs can save money again. Until you see plans don't assume that it will be a great stadium. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StevO Posted November 26, 2008 Report Share Posted November 26, 2008 Until you see plans don't assume that it will be a great stadium. works both ways mate, until you've seen any dont assume it wont be great. the only plansso far have come from trevor skempton, and they were pretty impressive and individual to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duncanmckenzieismagic Posted November 26, 2008 Report Share Posted November 26, 2008 That still doesn't mean that they won't find ways to make the stadium cheaper does it? So that both clubs can save money again. Until you see plans don't assume that it will be a great stadium. It does make it a lot less likely though. If the costs are split between the 2 clubs it means they have more money to spend also if they were intending to cut corners they would have to run it past both boards and i cant see that happening Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul Posted November 26, 2008 Report Share Posted November 26, 2008 works both ways mate, until you've seen any dont assume it wont be great.the only plansso far have come from trevor skempton, and they were pretty impressive and individual to me. The point is, is that people are trying to sell this groundshare on the basis that it will be a great stadium when there is no evidence to back this argument up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Everton_Worshiper Posted November 26, 2008 Report Share Posted November 26, 2008 The point is, is that people are trying to sell this groundshare on the basis that it will be a great stadium when there is no evidence to back this argument up. To reiterate what StevO said, there is no evidence to the contrary. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul Posted November 26, 2008 Report Share Posted November 26, 2008 To reiterate what StevO said, there is no evidence to the contrary. Which is why I'm saying, why use quality as a selling point in favour of the argument? Is it therefore acceptable for me to argue against the groundshare under the assumption that it will be total rubbish? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StevO Posted November 26, 2008 Report Share Posted November 26, 2008 the point is paul, to sell it to both sets of fans it would have to be spectacular Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joemac92 Posted November 26, 2008 Report Share Posted November 26, 2008 The people who are for the groundshare obviously arent scouse Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.