The New Anfield Stadium - Debate

now thats a good idea!!!

if we are expected to compete in europe we need to have a stadium thats at least on par with the top stadiums in europe.

Real Madrid - Bernabeu : 80,000
Barca -  Nou Camp : 100,000
Milans - San Siro : 90,000
Liverpool - Anfield : 45,000  

Liverpool dont need a loan or grants from the local council. They can get the dosh from the people who luv the reds the most; the fans. This is what Shanks would have wanted.

Its simple. Issue 1 or 2 million shares at £100 pounds each. Given the fan base and loyalty of the koppites, this will easily be oversubscribed. We'd easily raise £100 - £200mn without putting the club in financial debt. Most of it can go towards the stadium wiv a little left over for players.

No need to pay interest to the corporates or  be indebted to local politicians. David Moores can continute to be Chair knowing that the management and control of the club will continue to be run without any interference from the fans.

Come on Liverpool, give us a chance to own a part of something we love and cherish. U know it makes sense.

Well said redlozzels, let the fans help out for somehing we all love.

I'm not being funny, but why can't we bring in rich investor's to the club? I mean come on. We are one of the biggest clubs in the world. And we are finding it hard for shareholder support! Secondly, I think 60,000 would be a waste of time. Maybe 65 - 70 thousand would work. Look at Utd's ground, Arsenal's ground they are top quality stadiums. I don't think we will ever resolve the problem of getting a new stadium. So I can see us at Anfield for quite some time.

Interesting that in the list of richest clubs, Liverpool only makes the lower reaches of the top ten with an estimated value of 370 million pounds. MU and RM are top with a worth of over a billion each. Even Arsenal are way ahead of us with a value of nearly a billion.

Perhaps we should stop worrying about a new stadium at present. There's nothing drastically wrong with Anfield and--after all--that's were all the trophies have been won. Of course, we should get a top new stadium eventually--but only when we find the right investors. I wouldn't like to see the club overstretch itself and go the way of Leeds.

Aye you're completly right mate. No rush for a new stadium as of yet.

redlozells good idea shares as you say it would be over-subscribed but we would get the cash with no interest and there would be no chance of a situation like the one leeds had-----go for shares

A little short sighted to say that we should put the new stadium on the back burner for now. Planning permission was granted over 2 years ago now, and we are still, in my opinion, 5 years from moving at the earliest. To lose further time would be a disaster.

I understand the fears of "doing a Leeds" and the sentiment of Anfield, but as a Red working in London i can only look at what Arsenal have achieved with thier ground and wonder why cant Liverpool. I can actually see the Emirates Stadium from my office and have been fortunate enough to walk round the site a couple of months ago. If a club such as Arsenal can achieve this so must we. Just as an example of the benefits, if Arsenal fill every executive box on one match day it almost equals tha gate recipts of a match day at Highbury!! We live in an enviroment where, unfortunately, money goes a long way to buying sucess. Just think what Rafa could do with that kind of money!

Like the Shares option, other clubs have done similar.

Bring on the New Stadium (If only so that us Southern Reds can actually get a ticket!).

U's get more tickets than us u jammy buggers    It's still hard up ere too, thats why I agree with you Stevie mate. Bigger gates would draw in more fans, decrease the waiting time on the season ticket list (partially) and give the manager more dinero to build the team with quality players. It's a matter of keeping up with the times. The only other option would be to up the ticket prices, and we don't want that do we?

Yh its gona b around about 60,000 seater

60,000 is a decent size as it (should) shorten the season ticket holders waiting list. We could get the locals in who can't get tickets, and should get us a bit more money than what we got now.

Arsenal's ground looks superb.

Get the ball rolling Rick.

Message: I refer to your Editorial of 24th. August 2006, "Full steam ahead". http://www.anfield-online.co.uk/features/editor/240806.htm

You have skirted round the truth when referring to the lack of investment in Liverpool FC.Your comment "maybe we suffer because of our unusual management structure, we are at times a family club operating in a highly commercial world."
Oh dear! what a weak statement, which smacks of sycophancy.
Let's face it, Liverpool FC have failed to attract an investor because of the huge cost- probably in excess of £100 million, involved in buying out David Moores interests. Any Investor would demand overall control and that means removing the current Chairman. If he was so devoted to LFC Moores should offer to step down without such a massive pay off. After all his original capital input (provided by his family) in respect of his holding of 17923 shares cost him no more than £6 million.(Work it out!)
As for thinking we are a family club "at times" is another reason the club is in a time warp. Liverpool FC is a public limited company with approximately 1200 shareholders. A club which has lain in a metamorphosis for far too long and is currently five years behind our nearest competitors.  
Let the club issue it's 15177 unissued shares, with Moores agreeing to step down by selling (say) just 10,000 shares at a more reasonable price.
In this way a new investor could take control (with much more cash to come) and  most of the capital would accrue to the club and not Moores.
With respect you need much more research and original thinking on this question of investment. Supporters deserve it.

Your comments are valid.  The latest editorial was not written by me but by one of the site's co-editors.

It was not an attempt at a detailed discussion on the financial aspects of the club's ongoing power struggle.  To describe it as sycophantic is slightly over the top.

We are all acutely aware of the ongoing problems with not only the lack of commercial awareness at Anfield but also the stadium issue and the chairman issue.

The fact is since the turn of the century we have won 10 trophies, 5 more than Chelsea who are run by a Russian billionaire.

We have won the European Cup for the first time in 21 years, and added the Super Cup, Charity Shield and FA Cup in the past 12 months and dramatically improved in the Premiership closing the gap from over 30 to 9 last year.

Nobody can accuse the Liverpool management of not investing heavily in the transfer market. We have had sufficient expensive failings to prove that.  This summer we spent big again.

Yes, sure David Moores would make a lot of money from selling the club.  But he hasn't.  That suggests to me that money is not his prime motivation at Anfield.

As long as Liverpool continue to be succesful, as long as Liverpool continue to improve and give us days like Istanbul and Cardiff last year (and last week), then although the stadium issue is a concern it is not the most important thing on the radar.

I would rather watch Liverpool challenging for the title every year in a 45,000 seater stadium, than finishing in mid-table mediocrity in a three-quarters full 60,000 stadium.

I would imagine that the majority of Liverpool fans would feel exactly the same way.  

The board at Anfield might be accused of lots of things, but supporting the manager in the pursuit of continued football excellence certainly is not one of them.

Thank you JD for comments.
My main concern is the apparent inability to finance the new stadium.

I do not accept that the present ground is not the most important thing on the radar. My expectations seemingly are much higher particularly when upto the end of last season the club had already spent over £7 million capital on a new ground.
 
It is not just a new ground but the regeneration of the Anfield area via the development of the Anfield Plaza that would truly enable Liverpool FC to attract not only players but also  supporters.

Surely boarded up houses and barbed wire running on walls surrounding the current clubs ground is unacceptable?

As far as investment in new players, The club has reported upto the end of season 2004/2005 that over seven years £161 million has been payed for player registrations, with £74 million received as proceeds from player sales. A net expenditure of £86 million, or £12.2 million each year. Okay, but for Liverpools potential that outlay is not that heavy.
 I quote yourself
"Yes, sure David Moores would make a lot of money from selling the club. But he hasn't. That suggests to me that money is not his prime motivation at Anfield. "
Question, Then why has it been reported that he is seeking a payoff of £100 million?

This has been going on long enough. The board should get their finger out and find some further investmant. We are in serious danger of losing up tp 20 mill in grants if firm plans have not been presented by the end of next month.

The new ground has been on the planning board since well before the gunners even thought about leaving the terraced house called highbury and yet they've managed to do just that whilst we have even broken ground at a new site.

Moores has been a great chairman backing the managers every whim. we have won everything except the league with him as chairman so obviously hes doing something right.

What i cannot understand is why people want to invest in the like of villa and newcastle and not liverpool.....surely they can see they will have more chance of a better return given our massive fan base and our potential to win trophies.....am I missing something here?

I'd much prefer a shareholder buyout...there's enuf of us out there to raise enuf from a share issue wivout selling the heart and soul of the club established by shanks to the devil.

With clubs like newcastle pompey and villa investers can get them cheap compared to liverpool, splash 50m over 2 seasons on transfers and improving facilities then sell the club at a profit.

This couldnt happen at liverpool as we dont want a chairman whos sole interest is to make a profit, we want a chairman who will use his money inorder to improve the club on and off the field for the long term, like moores

The only person who i would get my vote to buy us would be Steve Morgan.

What about we get a gang together - hire a JCB and start some work on Stanley Park ourselves.

Liverbirds reference to Steve Morgan (whose investment offers were unfairly rubbished by the Liverpool Board) answers "redlozells" question "why is it people want to invest in the like of Villa and Newcastle and not Liverpool"?

Morgan in fact offered more than the recent offer than that made to Villa - with a promise of more to come.
He was correctly more prepared to invest in the club rather than inflate David Moores own bank account.

His investment offers were finally killed off by the club claiming they were investigating other better offers, and then other offers, and then other offers, ad nauseam

Suppporters are still waiting. What a dismal record on investment.

David Moores has been an excellent Chairman for the club but no one is bigger than Liverpool FC and if my premise is correct that the lack of investment revolves around his expectations then he should make a fair offer that suits serious investors.