New Stadium

[Paul_LFC]

Here's a question regarding the new stadium.

 

Will Season Ticket Holders be given similar positioned seats in the new ground, like they have in the current ground? Will they just move and keep all the same blocks of people because as a seson ticket holder you get used to the same view every game, the people who have been seating near you all those years, and if we don't get similar seats etc, it would make the move a bit of a pain.

[Duncan Disorderly]

Any word on what it`s gonna be called or who any of the stands are gonna named after?

I think the new tunnel sign should say:

"Do not be fooled, this is still Anfield!"

[stressederic]

I'm hopeful that one of the stands will be named after me.

[Mono]

I heard some mention of a stand called the b****x Jaws Stand alright hahahaha....

Please pardon me I've been drinking :hic:

[Mr Makaveli]

I'm hopeful that one of the stands will be named after me.

 

 

I 2nd that.

[fyds]

Unless (as is still likely) a naming rights deal is done for a fixed term deal for big wodges of cash, the new ground will be called Anfield. Even if a naming rights deal is done, for the time of its duration we and most hacks without an axe to grind will still call it Anfield, which of course it will revert to once a deal is expired.

 

As far as 'like for like' seating goes re ST holders, although so far as I know nothing official has been publically stated, members of the OLSC I know reckon this will be the case as far as is possible, for those who want it.

 

All a bit previous at the moment anyway.

[reddragon]

From a manc on soccer24-7 forum:

 

"Have it on good Authority that the plans for your new Stadium has been canned.

 

The design was not what the new owners wanted.... so they've gone right back to the drawing board... literally.

 

 

The design that was originally agreed, was for a 60,000 capacity stadia, but Yanks being Yanks... wanted it bigger!.. they want 70K... and have asked an Architects firm from Texas who specialize in Stadium design to start all over again.... and they've bought an Architect practice in London to oversee the build.

 

So it will delay the start of it!

 

Not been announced yet.... but it will be."

 

 

Verified by rushscored4 [a man in the know apparently] on est1892:

 

"...about the new stadium I heard yesterday.

 

Apparently Statler and Waldorf (Hicks and Gillett) have sacked the Manchester-based architects Atherden Fuller Leng (AFL) and appointed another firm from London. And just to please all those of you out there that don't think 60,000 is enough, the new architects have been given a specific brief - increase the capacity to 70,000.

 

I've no idea how they will do that as I've always said the planning permission granted was based on 60,000 (or 61,000 to be more precise) being the maximum limit set after considering the infrastructure and the effect on the roads, etc, of an extra 16,000 fans at each game.

 

Anyway, I thought I'd pass on the news... "

 

[Guz]

So despite Gillet being in communication with the club for a few months before the takeover, the stadium being possibly the biggest commercial talking point for the club and the new owners claiming work will start this spring - we've scrapped all the old plans and decided to start from scratch? Odd if anywhere near true, although I'm sure changes will be made to the plans we've seen.

[New York Red]

I wouldn't be surprised.

 

The issue with the capacity was all limited by the infrastructure and accessability around the stadium. They may be willing to put more money into the whole project to make that extra capacity more feasible.

 

I can't see them, witht he ambitions they have for the club, be limited to 61,000. They want a global brand here, and they'll get it.

 

Don't be surprised if it is a 60,000 seat stadium without the expensive roof on it limiting the capacity. It may well be able to be expanded up to 70-74 thousand.

 

Also, weren't HOK the architects on it?

[Zoob]

I know nothing about the legality of this if it were true (i.e. if planning permission is for 61,000, would a whole new application be needed...) but economically speaking surely an extra 14,000 seats would make sense as it would bring in an extra 300-400k each home match.

[Guest Linton]

So despite Gillet being in communication with the club for a few months before the takeover, the stadium being possibly the biggest commercial talking point for the club and the new owners claiming work will start this spring - we've scrapped all the old plans and decided to start from scratch? Odd if anywhere near true, although I'm sure changes will be made to the plans we've seen.

 

 

I don't think this will happen. And another thing, we can't fill a 70,000 seater week in and week out. We don't have the same following (prawn sandwich brigade) as Man Utd.

[Falconhoof]

Its probably daft internet rumours but it would make far more sense for Gillett and Hicks to start the plans again rather than build a stadium thats a notch below the standard the club deserves.

[New York Red]

I don't think this will happen. And another thing, we can't fill a 70,000 seater week in and week out. We don't have the same following (prawn sandwich brigade) as Man Utd.

 

My guess is that George and Tom have a plan to change that.

[slapnuts]

I'm hopeful that one of the stands will be named after me.

 

 

The Bell End?

[Guest Linton]

My guess is that George and Tom have a plan to change that.

 

 

I hope you are right but it seems a bit unlikely.

[Zoob]

I don't think this will happen. And another thing, we can't fill a 70,000 seater week in and week out. We don't have the same following (prawn sandwich brigade) as Man Utd.

 

I don't know about that. And even if it weren't 70,000 for every home game of the season, having 15-20 games a year where we're selling an extra 14,000 tickets could add at least 5-10 million to our annual revenue.

[reddragon]

The Bell End?

[New York Red]

A big consideration for the Krafts was the value of the history of LFC and how that could be marketed to the world. Simultaneous to that having some value, it would attract more fans to follow us. It really made sense. You can't buy history, and the truth is, ours was under-utilized.

 

I think they are on board with that and that being the case, we may well be attracting more people from all over.

 

What they will have to make sure of is getting rid of those sc*mbags outside Anfield selling worthless pieces of paper to the Japanese.

[reddragon]

what - you mean them gerrard £50 notes??

[uppsala]

This rumour is probably true. The stadium plans origionaly had a 2 tier kop.

 

George and Tom have said recently they think it is important to retain the single tier kop.

[liverbird04]

would be interesting if we can get some confirmation that AFL have been got rid of

[magneto]

Wouldn't this need to go through a whole round of plan submission-NWDA getting involved-John Prescott approving etc.?

[Bailo]

Wouldn't this need to go through a whole round of plan submission-NWDA getting involved-John Prescott approving etc.?

Exactly what I thought - don't we risk losing the NWDA grant etc if we don't start buliding soon? And the other grant, "Europe 9" or something?

[Knox_Harrington]

With intelligent pricing and marketing we could fill 70k. But we would have to fill 70k pretty consistantly otherwise the atmosphere will be pretty shoddy. Nothing worse than an echoey stadium.

[Dublinred4ever]

The other side to that argument is that providing the stadium is well designed can you imagine how bloody loud a big european night might be with almost 30,000 more fans in the ground