Liverpool Supporters' Union - Anfield, An Asset of Community Value

[SpiritOfShankly]

Anfield, as a stadium and what it represents, is incredibly important to both Liverpool supporters and the local community. It matters to so many people - be it those who attend football matches, those who work there or those who live within close proximity. This week, the Liverpool Supporters’ Union have submitted an application to Liverpool City Council to have Anfield, and the immediate area surrounding the football stadium, designated as an asset of community value. What this means is that Anfield the stadium would be prevented from being sold without supporters having an opportunity to purchase it. Given that any sale of the stadium would feature as part of the sale of the football club, it would provide the Liverpool Supporters' Union with a window of opportunity to put together a suitable bid for the stadium should we wish to do so.

 

More information on our application can be read here : Anfield – An Asset of Community Value - Spirit of Shankly

 

Liverpool Supporters Union

[kalasoma]

Just saw the news that Liverpool City Council approved the application today.

[SCOUSE TAPAS]

Will Coro be doing the sandwiches and vol au vents for the interval ?

[Neil G]

I'm happy to stand corrected if I'm wrong, but I don't think this means a great deal. My understanding of the law that governs this (the Localism Act 2011) is that if a building is listed as an asset of community value, the seller is under no obligation to sell to the highest bidder. So even if the fans were somehow able to get together enough money to make an offer for the ground itself, FSG if / when they sell can simply ignore it. Which they would, as there is no way a buyer would buy the club if it didn't own Anfield.

 

The principal idea behind this part of the Act is to give community groups a chance to buy community buildings (day centres, pubs etc) that are being sold off. When an asset of community value is put up for sale, there's a 6-month moratorium period before it goes to auction, to give community groups time to find funding to make a bid that's competitive on the open market. Something that simply wouldn't be achievable or practical with Anfield.

 

Fair play to SoS for doing this, but as far as I understand it this is essentially a symbolic gesture.

[shanks69]

so any owner of lfc can move the club to a new stadium,yet someone can buy anfield and have no club to put in it.

[Coro]

Statement following the news that SD member, Spirit of Shankly has successfully applied to have Anfield listed as an Asset of Community Value.

 

SD’s Head of England, Tom Hall, said:

 

“This is great news for Spirit of Shankly, the Supporters Trust Movement, and for Supporters Direct. Two of the great homes of fan culture, Old Trafford and Anfield, have joined Oxford United and Nuneaton Town’s grounds in being protected. These successful listings are demonstrating that our premise that clubs and their stadiums should be seen as community assets and not simply as part of an investment portfolio is beginning to be accepted.”

 

CAS Trust would like to congratulate Spirit of Shankly and indeed MUST on their successful applications. As predicted Asset of Community Value’s growth continues in English football.

[Guest Numero Veinticinco]

I'm happy to stand corrected if I'm wrong, but I don't think this means a great deal. My understanding of the law that governs this (the Localism Act 2011) is that if a building is listed as an asset of community value, the seller is under no obligation to sell to the highest bidder. So even if the fans were somehow able to get together enough money to make an offer for the ground itself, FSG if / when they sell can simply ignore it. Which they would, as there is no way a buyer would buy the club if it didn't own Anfield.

 

The principal idea behind this part of the Act is to give community groups a chance to buy community buildings (day centres, pubs etc) that are being sold off. When an asset of community value is put up for sale, there's a 6-month moratorium period before it goes to auction, to give community groups time to find funding to make a bid that's competitive on the open market. Something that simply wouldn't be achievable or practical with Anfield.

 

Fair play to SoS for doing this, but as far as I understand it this is essentially a symbolic gesture.

 

Yeah, that's the way I read it. Further more, and this is just a hunch, if the stadium is owned by Liverpool Football Club and Athletic Grounds Limited, and remains owned by Liverpool Football Club and Athletic Grounds Limited, it surely doesn't matter who owns the parent company. I'd say there's probably a few ways around it if the owners wanted to skirt any issues. Like creating another level of ownership - like H+G had - and then selling that, rather than Liverpool Football Club and Athletic Grounds Limited.

 

Still, can't hurt. I just doubt it actually means much with regards to any sale.

[Tony Moanero]

Will Coro be doing the sandwiches and vol au vents for the interval ?

 

Butties and fucking vol-au-vents? Get to fucking fuck. I'd expect nothing less than cheese and pineapple hedgehogs, pieces of cheese and silverskin pickled onions on cocktail sticks, and bowls of Wotsists.

[Neil G]

Yeah, that's the way I read it. Further more, and this is just a hunch, if the stadium is owned by Liverpool Football Club and Athletic Grounds Limited, and remains owned by Liverpool Football Club and Athletic Grounds Limited, it surely doesn't matter who owns the parent company. I'd say there's probably a few ways around it if the owners wanted to skirt any issues. Like creating another level of ownership - like H+G had - and then selling that, rather than Liverpool Football Club and Athletic Grounds Limited.

 

Still, can't hurt. I just doubt it actually means much with regards to any sale.

 

 

I've had a look at the relevant part of the Act to try and find out what happens when a private company that owns a designated ACV changes hands, but it's in proper legalese and I'm fucked if I'm spending time trying to decipher it. I'd guess the most likely way we might find out is if a community group tries to buy their local pub which belongs to a brewery chain that's being sold, on the grounds that the pub itself is effectively up for sale.

 

If a change of ownership does mean that community groups can bid for assets, then this move might be of some use after all. If at some point in the future the club is on the verge of being sold to a buyer that fans' groups have serious concerns about, they could potentially trigger the 6-month moratorium and use the time to build a public campaign against the sale. Something like that would have been a godsend when Moores sold to H&G.

 

If that's a non-starter, the only other scenario I can think of where this would have some practical use is an AFC Wimbledon / FC United type situation, where fans are so disgusted with a future owner that they want to set up a new club from scratch. If the owner wants to build a new stadium and is looking to sell Anfield to a developer, fans' groups could trigger the moratorium and try to buy Anfield as a home for the new club.

[Neil G]

Statement following the news that SD member, Spirit of Shankly has successfully applied to have Anfield listed as an Asset of Community Value.

 

SD’s Head of England, Tom Hall, said:

 

“This is great news for Spirit of Shankly, the Supporters Trust Movement, and for Supporters Direct. Two of the great homes of fan culture, Old Trafford and Anfield, have joined Oxford United and Nuneaton Town’s grounds in being protected. These successful listings are demonstrating that our premise that clubs and their stadiums should be seen as community assets and not simply as part of an investment portfolio is beginning to be accepted.”

 

CAS Trust would like to congratulate Spirit of Shankly and indeed MUST on their successful applications. As predicted Asset of Community Value’s growth continues in English football.

 

 

The grounds aren't protected though. If a future owner of LFC wants to build a new stadium and sell Anfield to a developer to turn into houses / flats / shops, there'll be nothing to stop them doing it. The only obligation that the Localism Act places on them is to wait 6 months between announcing the sale and going to auction, to give fans' groups time to put a bid together. Even then the owner wouldn't have to accept the bid.

 

I'm not trying to piss on anyone's chips here, I'm just curious as to what the fans' groups are hoping to achieve with this.

[xerxes]

I have long been a supporter of SOS, who in their halcyon days were the touchstone of Red support.

 

Neil G is right to say this does not amount to very much. The spirit of it is fine, although I think it is misguided.

 

At the heart of this is the thorny stadium issue, one on which hard facts have been notoriously hard to come by.

 

The status of Anfield as a place of legend for Red support for decades is unassailable. Is it a community asset? Of course. Is the area surrounding the stadium a community asset? No. It is in desperate need of investment and regeneration. This is acknowledged by both the existing planning consent for Anfield Plaza as part of the Stanley Park new stadium consent and the current, but as yet unpublished, plans for the regeneration of the area around the stadium which are council driven.

 

It remains to be seen whether FSG’s proposals represent a community asset, or a botch job on the cheap. The new stadium would certainly have ben a community asset, as were the plans for A.nfield Plaza.

 

My own view is that this is simply pandering to the sentimentality that all of us feel towards the existing stadium whilst offering nothing for the future.

[ronnie38]

I pressume they believe/hope it will give them a way into gaining a dialect with the club, although I very much doubt FSG will play ball. Just hope this doesn't effect the possibility of serious money coming into the club from serious backers which is a rumour doing the rounds.