Liverpool FC Forum

[Reg]

What if they do decide to refurbish Anfield and build extensions (how tacky....) and true to form teh Yanks sell naming rights to pay for it.

Have folks considered the impact of renaming Anfield. Rename a new stadium ok, but rename Anfield. Now that would be vulgar.

[the lone wolf]

What if they do decide to refurbish Anfield and build extensions (how tacky....) and true to form teh Yanks sell naming rights to pay for it.

Have folks considered the impact of renaming Anfield. Rename a new stadium ok, but rename Anfield. Now that would be vulgar.

Can't really see them getting away with re-naming Anfield - (it's not St James Pk (Newcastle) and even they manage to keep the stadium's essence even if the original name is gone).

STILL - can't see ANFIELD getting re-named - it could mean a lot of lost revenue.
NEW STADIUM = New name (to pay for building it)
RE-DEVELOPED ANFIELD = SELLING THE BRAND GLOBALLY as they are currently doing...

Possibly?

[the lone wolf]

OH YEAH - IT WOULD BE VULGAR..!

[D___C]

Build extensions.... "how tacky"?

What "tacky" like Old Trafford?

I will have some "tacky" please.

[Ben Patrick]

What if they do decide to refurbish Anfield and build extensions (how tacky....) and true to form teh Yanks sell naming rights to pay for it.

Have folks considered the impact of renaming Anfield. Rename a new stadium ok, but rename Anfield. Now that would be vulgar.

I would rather stay at anfield and have it renamed than move.

We would all still call it anfield.

[Reg]

Build extensions.... "how tacky"?

What "tacky" like Old Trafford?

I will have some "tacky" please.

The Anfield site is too small, the roads don't allow proper expansion, the local infrastructure don't allow it and all you're doing is cobbling together a temporary solution that'll need addressing again in 15 years when the surveyors announce after 75 years there are major structural issues with the Kop foundations etc...  I don't understand why the club is afraid of committing to a new stadium, the LFC 'brand' we hear about is rocksolid and will maintain a firm consumer cashcow in for the next 100 years. The only downside is successive incompetent owners and managers who have failed to build a properly structured financial base for expansion. We cling on to Anfield when we should be in the best stadium in the country.

[the lone wolf]

Build extensions.... "how tacky"?

What "tacky" like Old Trafford?

I will have some "tacky" please.

The Anfield site is too small, the roads don't allow proper expansion, the local infrastructure don't allow it and all you're doing is cobbling together a temporary solution that'll need addressing again in 15 years when the surveyors announce after 75 years there are major structural issues with the Kop foundations etc...  I don't understand why the club is afraid of committing to a new stadium, the LFC 'brand' we hear about is rocksolid and will maintain a firm consumer cashcow in for the next 100 years. The only downside is successive incompetent owners and managers who have failed to build a properly structured financial base for expansion. We cling on to Anfield when we should be in the best stadium in the country.

I agree with some point you make. The only problem (IMO) with a new stadium is creating the the same atmosphere. Arsenal being the prime example. City don't fit into this as they are new to winning titles as they are packing a new stadium... We'll see what the conclusion of City will be in 5-10 years.

IDEA: I've always thought - why don'y they just dismantle THE KOP and re-locate it in stanley park, brick by brick. This is very feasable, as they did this with a pub in Manchester after the bombing. Then design 3 new 21st century stands to go alongside it?

Benefits:
1. The new 3 tiers would be built whilst the club remains at anfield.
2. Once new stands have been completed - we move - capacity 40,000
3. The Kop is then re-located bit by bit - week by week. - taking capacity upto 60,000 (the Kop could even under-take slight design improvements, but still look the same)

SOUNDS OUTLANDISH - but i've not heard anyone speak of this as a rational option? And before we think - it's not rational - my answer would be - Well, wheres the new stadium then..? 300 MILLION +

Let's have a whip around...

LW

[Reg]

What is there to take from the Kop apart from concrete dust and rubble? Rebuild the same design but lets not take broken bricks and ***** sodden concrete dust for heavens sake. You lads are all sentimental, the Cardiff stadium where we won many key games is a cracker and relatively cheap, I'd be made up with one like that.

[Ola Mr Benitez]

A new stadium is a very expensive way to add approx 15,000 seats to what we already have.  and this is the problem for Fenway.

They would need to spend £300 million pound for a 60 k stadium when we already hae a 45k stadium in full working condition. It makes no financial sense whatsoever.

I havent seen how much the redevelopment of Anfield is planned at but it would be able to be done over a number of seasons having a much lowder cost per season and should not be too hard to find space for another 15k to 20k.  Not sure what it would look like but this is definately the way forward if we are keen on spending money on the team in the coming years.

[Reg]

So why did Arsenal build a new stadium?

The post-Taylor capacity of Highbury was limited to 38,419, while Arsenal's success during the 1990s and 2000s meant that virtually every home match was filled to near capacity.[22] Restrictions, such as the East Stand's status as a listed building and the fact the stadium was surrounded on all sides by a residential area, made any future expansion of Highbury difficult and expensive.[23] Eventually Arsenal decided to leave Highbury and construct a new stadium, the Emirates Stadium in nearby Ashburton Grove, which opened in July 2006. Arsenal's offices were moved to a new building, Highbury House, which was named in commemoration of the former stadium.[24]

The Emirates, is an association football stadium located in Islington, North London, England. It is the current home of Arsenal Football Club. At a capacity of 60,361, the Emirates is the third-largest football stadium in England after Wembley and Old Trafford and fourth-largest in the United Kingdom.

Anfield's capacity is only 7,000 more than the old Highbury.  We need a 60-65,000 seater and Arsenal had the same local community issues we have etc..

I don't buy into this 300 million for 15,000 seats Sh*t, either people have the vision to see what you can achieve with a new stadium or they haven't.

I

[D___C]

Reg clearly has his head in the sand and hasn't bothered to read the numerous accounts from those in the know. In terms of cost/benefit analysis, the financial benefits of redevelopment dwarf those of a new stadium.

Regarding Arsenal, they give excellent argument for redevelopment. They have spent a fortune on a soulless, generic bowl that could belong to any team in the world. Highbury had an identity. The bowl has none. Also they have spent over 7 years paying for it and had to quality for the CL every single year to do so as well as sell their best players, and they are based in London with all the huge financial advantages that brings (corporate income/greater ticket prices). Also, costs have risen rapidly since they built their stadium. It would take us two decades to pay for our generic soulless bowl.

No thanks.

[Reg]

The Emirates having no atmosphere is a design flaw and nothing else.

As to head in the sand, well I guess thats your opinion which you're entitled to.

[ethanr]

Taking Anfield apart brick by brick and rebuilding it would have a few problems:

Used materials aren't as strong as new ones.
It would literally cost at least twice as much as building a new stadium because of the labor involved in safely removing everything from Anfield.
We would have no stadium for the entire time it would take to take apart and reassemble the stadium, plus make add-ons (Probably between 5-10 years because of the removal)
It's not realistically possible.


I think it's clear we need to build a new stadium, but I don't like the 60k cap.  If we are building a new stadium, we don't want to run into these problems again anytime soon, so why not push for a 70k cap, or an 80k cap.  I've never been to Anfield, but what I've heard is that it's nearly impossible to get tickets if you're from outside Liverpool.  We sell out pretty much every game?  We are coming to a point where there are a lot of games in the season considered bigger or more important.  I figure games that would sell out every time would be:

United
City
Arsenal
Chelsea
Spurs
Everton
Newcastle?

That's 7 of 18 games right there.  Then you have clubs that can often put up a fight or are entertaining to watch that will probably get close to selling out.  There will be more away seats available obviously, and those will be automatic sellers for every club because everybody wants to watch their club play away at Anfield.

I know having a 70-80k seat cap stadium may not be realistic because it would cost significantly more, I don't know about sizing either, and the worry we wouldn't be able to sell the seats, but I know there's a long line to get season tickets, and I don't want our club regretting only making a 60k stadium in 5 years when we're selling out every game again.

Just a thought I guess, from somebody who knows f*ck all about the current stadium situation.

[Ben Patrick]

Reg i am slightly confused by how if we move to the park beside anfield how the access to the stadium would suddenly be so much easier ?

Or am i being stupid ?

[Reg]

Its not my words mate, the council have refused LFC permission to expand Anfield as local infrastructure isn't sufficient according to 'elf and safety' to cope with the increased numbers. The solution the council and the club came up with to suit the townplanners was to move to the park.

That was 5 years ago so I struggle to see how the owners can now talk of redevloping Anfield unless they've compromised on capacity. ie a redeveloped Anfield can only hold 55,000 against a Stanley Park stadium would receive permission for 70,000 etc...