That New Stadium

[Ethan]

http://72.232.233.42/~tlw/forum/showthread.php?t=54158

[Guest Cardie]

And it's been on est 1982, and in an Oliver Kay report.

 

I'm sure that....

 

16 Dec, 2007 Liverpool vs Manchester United, Barclays Premier League, Kick Off - 13:30

 

...is purely coincidental.

[Sion]

I wouldn't mind that, if;

 

1) it's expandable

2) has a big one tier kop

 

If it puts us 150m less in debt.

[MFletcher]

So we're basically in the same position we would have been had Moores remained in charge?

 

Fan-f***ing-tastic.

[Guest Cardie]

So we're basically in the same position we would have been had Moores remained in charge?

 

Fan-f***ing-tastic.

 

I'm with you all the way, let's go f***ing ballistic and start riping s*** up, if we don't do it now we won't get a chance when actual evidence turns up.

[allez les rouges]

so all this comes from a man in the pub? next things its all round the internet, people are ready to burn the owners and throwing themselves of bridges.

 

jesus wept.

[Kahnee]

I'm with you all the way, let's go f***ing ballistic and start riping s*** up, if we don't do it now we won't get a chance when actual evidence turns up.

 

 

Bring pitchforks and burning torches. Meet at The Sandon at 1pm

[New York Red]

It was slid into a press release from the team making reference to "two designs" or words to that effect. It was in there in the middle of all of the furor over Rafa getting the sack.

[Maldini]

So we're basically in the same position we would have been had Moores remained in charge?

 

Fan-f***ing-tastic.

 

Not really, we're a year behind

[alias75]

Im not that bothered if the design is changed to save money as long as we get the big capacity we need and theres a dedicated Kop which will make the stadium ours. What bothers me more is that G+H took over promising to deliver the best stadium in the world and promised Rafa would have all the funds he needed to build the best team in the world, in a very short space of time that goal seems to have vanished and now it seems like we're trying to save money on the stadium and on the team.

 

I understand the credit crunch in the US effects things but they should be upfront about this otherwise they're going to lose the fans. At least over something like a stadium they can't hide it for long, its going to be interesting how they spin it if the plans are changed significantly.

[Maldini]

It was slid into a press release from the team making reference to "two designs" or words to that effect. It was in there in the middle of all of the furor over Rafa getting the sack.

which press release? I don't remember reading anything about that

[alias75]

Yeah there was something that mentioned 2 designs were being looked at, and a poster over at est1892 said he knew someone that worked for the first design company and they'd been contacted again (or something similar) i think it was towards the end of the week when all the Rafa stuff was happening.

[Ethan]

It could be George and Tom's first step out the door - If this is true they'll have lost any trust the fans have in them. Parry will be out too with Rafa being the last man standing

[columbo]

i heard the hks design was going to cost £400-500m. g&h wanted to get the price down to £300m. that wasn't going to happen, hence interest in original design and making it 70k seater.

[alias75]

Here it is....

 

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/foo...icle2982717.ece

 

"Stories that the owners have fallen out over plans for the new stadium also appear unfounded with the sources saying their partnership is closer than ever. There are two rival designs for the stadium not because Hicks favours one and Gillett the other, but because a pair of architect firms, Dallas-based HKS and AFL of Liverpool, were asked for competing designs in the interests of getting the best price."

[Guest JV]

I'll be livid as a cut snake.

[Guest Mohjo]

Here it is....

 

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/foo...icle2982717.ece

 

"Stories that the owners have fallen out over plans for the new stadium also appear unfounded with the sources saying their partnership is closer than ever. There are two rival designs for the stadium not because Hicks favours one and Gillett the other, but because a pair of architect firms, Dallas-based HKS and AFL of Liverpool, were asked for competing designs in the interests of getting the best price."

 

Aren't you supposed to do this BEFORE getting planning permission? They've already approved the HSK design, but what happens if we choose the AFL one wouldn't we need to get permission again?

 

Sounds like a bulls*** face saving spin story.

[MFletcher]

I'm hardly advocating picketing the stadium am I? Some people look for overreactions on here. Obviously this has to be confirmed before I start organising the burning of the American flag in front of the Kop.

 

On a more serious note, I would have serious questions about them. They would have f***ed about our manager, promised a grand new stadium and then reverted back to the bowl design that was woeful and, let's be honest, the CL run and additional TV revenue probably covered the increased spening in the summer.

 

They've only been here ten months. You'd think they'd have lasted slightly longer before they started to alienate the fans.

[Mondavi]

"Stories that the owners have fallen out over plans for the new stadium also appear unfounded with the sources saying their partnership is closer than ever. There are two rival designs for the stadium not because Hicks favours one and Gillett the other, but because a pair of architect firms, Dallas-based HKS and AFL of Liverpool, were asked for competing designs in the interests of getting the best price."

 

 

If that's an official release, it's one of the worst attempts at revisionism I've ever read. The "best stadium in the world" was unveiled as THE new stadium, and not one of two competing designs.

 

Could all be b****x, but the timing suggests it's not, and we are supposed to be less inclined to dwell on it with the Manc game on Sunday. By the time that game comes and goes, the initial reaction to the news should have calmed some ?

[Mr S]

This story could well be true.

I know for a fact (as I have very good contacts in the city ) that Hicks and Gillett have been hawking around trying to raise finance for the new stadium and it has been proving impossible. Indeed it is very difficult to raise finance for any kind of major project at the moment because of problems in the American money markets. Nobody wants to lend money for major projects. So, it would not surprise me if they have gone back to the drawing board and come up with something substantially cheaper that might stand a better chance of being financed.

It's not altogether their fault, they just happen to be looking for money at the wrong time. Nevertheless, I have never thought that they were really financially equipped to be running a major European football club.

Don't be surprised if they sell a stake in LFC to someone else.

[Maldini]

This story could well be true.

I know for a fact (as I have very good contacts in the city ) that Hicks and Gillett have been hawking around trying to raise finance for the new stadium and it has been proving impossible. Indeed it is very difficult to raise finance for any kind of major project at the moment because of problems in the American money markets. Nobody wants to lend money for major projects. So, it would not surprise me if they have gone back to the drawing board and come up with something substantially cheaper that might stand a better chance of being financed.

It's not altogether their fault, they just happen to be looking for money at the wrong time. Nevertheless, I have never thought that they were really financially equipped to be running a major European football club.

Don't be surprised if they sell a stake in LFC to someone else.

 

That's a throwaway line in a really badly written article that shows a lack of knowledge about even the most obvious on-the-surface facts, Northcroft is not somebody I'd trust to have insider info.

 

It may well be true, that's not proof of it though.

[Kite]

Most of these rumours are seemingly fueled by perverse wishful thinking and little else. That Times article says there are two designs. We know there's two designs, we always did. Whether G&H are realistically thinking now of reverting to the un-publicised, lesser one we don't know and the article certainly does not imply that is the case. As for the OP's source, the anti-parry league of gentlemen have been remorsely pushing various rumours for getting on close to a year now. It's probable they will eventually get one right but hopefully it isn't this one.

[New York Red]

They've already nailed down their financing with Wachovia. They had big budget concerns about the design right from the start and cut some really cool features out of the earliest renderings. That's gotten worse recently, to the point of receiving these very disturbing announcements.

 

It is the off-handedness that really bothers me. This casual comment about two designs like it was a well known fact was disturbing to say the least.

 

Obviously this announcement was a big deal but they've acted like this is of little relevance.

[Maldini]

They've already nailed down their financing with Wachovia. They had big budget concerns about the design right from the start and cut some really cool features out of the earliest renderings. That's gotten worse recently, to the point of receiving these very disturbing announcements.

 

It is the off-handedness that really bothers me. This casual comment about two designs like it was a well known fact was disturbing to say the least.

 

Obviously this announcement was a big deal but they've acted like this is of little relevance.

 

Where did G&H make the comment about two designs? Northcroft's article doesn't contain quotes.

[New York Red]

Where did G&H make the comment about two designs? Northcroft's article doesn't contain quotes.

 

That's true Maldini, but it is pretty emphatic. It does seem to be a little irrational in that the designs were approved already, but there is nothing to say that they can't come back in with a new impact statement just like they did last time.

 

They borrowed this money at a much higher rate than they had hoped. I think they thought that they would have their pick but it ended up being down to Wachovia and Goldman. Engineering and raw material overrides may well have made the costs skyrocket.

 

Let's just hope that they don't panic. If they start the stadium as it was originally designed with the contingency that it would be able to be expanded to its full capacity, then I'll be happy. The lending environemnt will be far different next year and the money can always be re-done.