The Times - Stadium ready in two and a half years

[honourablegeorge]

Judging by this, the fact that Gerrard, Benitez and others have already met DIC. and all the positive sounds, i'd say this takeover is very, very close to being complete.

 

Times Article

[Tosh]

Parry says it isn't so.... it isn't

 

Despite every possible indication to the contrary

[AE]

Interesting because Carillion were the "original" constructors.

Mind you Laings were apparently "buying" loads of work in the North West all last year (don't work for a construction company anymore so I have lost my "sauces")

 

EDIT - I meant North West (not East)!!!

Edited December 14, 2006 by AE

[cymrococh]

"ok" then.

[Guest ziggystardust]

Interesting because Carillion were the "original" constructors.

Mind you Laings were apparently "buying" loads of work in the North West all last year (don't work for a construction company anymore so I have lost my "sauces")

 

EDIT - I meant North West (not East)!!!

 

 

i work for laings on paradise, would be ace if they got the contract. Doubt it mind.

[Guest PaulMcC]

I heard last week it was 95% certain to go through. Parry told my mate's boss. And Parry is meant to be really cautious when saying things like that.

Edited December 14, 2006 by PaulMcC

[Mike]

Interesting because Carillion were the "original" constructors.

Mind you Laings were apparently "buying" loads of work in the North West all last year (don't work for a construction company anymore so I have lost my "sauces")

 

EDIT - I meant North West (not East)!!!

 

its been laing orourke for a while...the thread on RAWK is months ahead of the game

 

I heard last week it was 95% certain to go through. Parry told my mate's boss. And Parry is meant to be really cautious when saying things like that.

 

what - the contract award or DIC takeover?

[Eskimo]

?In that sense it is a proposal not without risk, but we are all very excited about the long-term future of the club and hope we have found an ideal partner.

 

use of the word partner is interesting...

[Guest PaulMcC]

its been laing orourke for a while...the thread on RAWK is months ahead of the game

what - the contract award or DIC takeover?

 

Takeover.

[Rushian]

its been laing orourke for a while...the thread on RAWK is months ahead of the game

 

For once

[genghis]

I wonder if that article is as accurate as their description of our no.2...?

 

JK

Edited December 14, 2006 by genghis

[Guest anfieldanfield]

Is the stadium design on the official site the final, 'set in stone' design ?

[fyds]

No - it's flexible within the given capacity, footprint, height restrictions and H&S rules and regs.

 

In other words, they can't remove any of the facilities promised in the detailed proposal, nor can they 'just add' an extra 10,000 seats, make it bigger, higher - that kind of thing. But the configuration within the structure can be altered to a fairly significant degree.

[Guest anfieldanfield]

No - it's flexible within the given capacity, footprint, height restrictions and H&S rules and regs.

 

In other words, they can't remove any of the facilities promised in the detailed proposal, nor can they 'just add' an extra 10,000 seats, make it bigger, higher - that kind of thing. But the configuration within the structure can be altered to a fairly significant degree.

 

The stands look too far away from the pitch on that design, that's a massive worry for me.

 

I hope it doesn't look like the Emirates, horrible stadium.

[honourablegeorge]

Got a link/pic of the stadium?

[alext]

Does this mean that the drawings are set in stone then?

 

Don't like the idea of the new stadium being a bigger version of the Reebok.

[fyds]

Does this mean that the drawings are set in stone then?

 

Don't like the idea of the new stadium being a bigger version of the Reebok.

No - read what i posted above - only the footprint, overall height, agreed capacity (in terms of safety certification) and H&S regs are set in stone. The configuration thereafter is flexible.

[alext]

No - read what i posted above - only the footprint, overall height, agreed capacity (in terms of safety certification) and H&S regs are set in stone. The configuration thereafter is flexible.

Silly me. Completely missed that for some bizarre reason. Nice one.

[honourablegeorge]

 

 

It seems (and maybe it's just the pic) that the stands aren't very steep. I liek the idea of all the fans being right up close, whereas the pic seems to show the back of the stands being a logn way from the pitch.

 

Anyoen know how it compared to the stands at Anfield currently? Steeper? Is this limited by new safety regs, etc?

[spf]

It seems (and maybe it's just the pic) that the stands aren't very steep. I liek the idea of all the fans being right up close, whereas the pic seems to show the back of the stands being a logn way from the pitch.

 

Anyoen know how it compared to the stands at Anfield currently? Steeper? Is this limited by new safety regs, etc?

 

 

the angle of the stands would be controlled by the building regs re: stairs, so i would think that they are designed to be as steep as possible while still meeting these regs.

 

dont pay too much attention to those 3d visualisations, the perspective views for 3d models can be extremely deceiving once you move 'outside' the likes of a room or corridor. all to do with field of view etc. to be really pedantic about it, perspective doesnt really work at all, everything we see is curved - do a search for curvilinear perspective on google and it'll explain it all and show some examples. wrote my architecture dissertation about this madness, bends (ha ha, boom boom) the mind.

[Coyler]

I don't like the way they have the grass cut.

[CaptainXabi]

I don't like the way they have the grass cut.

I know, disgraceful.

[trowie]

I don't like the way they have the grass cut.

Would you prefer scissors or a philishave

[Boca]

Would you prefer scissors or a philishave

 

Gillett actually

[Jonesy]

Gillett actually

 

 

Not the best a Moores can get!