Anfield or New Anfield

[Coro]

In 1999 John Henry (today the principal owner of the Boston Red Sox) purchased the Marlins from Huizenga announcing that if he couldn’t get public funds to build a new stadium for the team, that he’d fund it himself. Later that same year, Major League Baseball yanked the 2000 All-Star Game from South Florida.

 

John Henry’s time as owner of the Marlins was marked by dark statements about the future of the franchise if a new stadium was not built for the club. Of course he never followed through on his promise to privately finance it. On the field the Marlins were miserable and never posted a winning season during Henry’s ownership. The best players were routinely traded away for minor league prospects.

 

 

Fish or Cut Bait: A Miami Marlins Fan Blog: November 2005

[Guest San Don]

No, you are wrong.

 

My point is not the size of a new ARE, it is what it can offer. "Ends" are not popular hospitality venues. No major ground has premium matchday "End" hospitality/banqueting facilities in the PL.

 

The largest end in the country is the Holte End. It seats 13,500, but has no box or premium seating facilities whatsoever. It does offer a double storey internal banqueting suite, but those facilities on matchdays are offfered to ST holders and are more suitable for external conference/banqueting on non match days. If you bridged the AR you would lose the conference/banqueting space altogether. Although you could go higher, anyone who has sat at the back of the Holte End will tell you that the view is deteriorating as the cost of building is increasing.

 

Say what!? Missing the point spectacularly and incredibly wrong. As usual!

 

A bigger Anny Road end allows for more fans and if the build required, more hospitality boxes. Sure most people want pitch side views but goal end views are available at a number of grounds. Its a bit lame offering villa Park to back up your argument. The other end of Villa Park has boxes behind the goal and those boxes appear taken most matchdays. Even united and arsenal have boxes all around the ground. Blackburn have boxes behind the goal at one end.

 

Redeveloping the Anny Road also helps negate the lost of Main Stand seats when that stand is demolished and built from the ground up with bespoke hospitality suites.

[xerxes]

Say what!? Missing the point spectacularly and incredibly wrong. As usual!

 

A bigger Anny Road end allows for more fans and if the build required, more hospitality boxes. Sure most people want pitch side views but goal end views are available at a number of grounds. Its a bit lame offering villa Park to back up your argument. The other end of Villa Park has boxes behind the goal and those boxes appear taken most matchdays. Even united and arsenal have boxes all around the ground. Blackburn have boxes behind the goal at one end.

 

Redeveloping the Anny Road also helps negate the lost of Main Stand seats when that stand is demolished and built from the ground up with bespoke hospitality suites.

 

San Don, stick to what you know, the stuff on the pitch.You're embarrassing yourself unnecessarily.

 

The narrower configuration of ends squeezes the available hospitality space. Fact. Boxes in ends are the least popular (generate the least revenue) fact. The North Stand at Villa Park offers the cheapest boxes in the ground, and only 5,500 seats, fact.

 

This is not just about the provision of boxes, it is about the provision of hospitality and banqueting space behind. Providing that takes out circulation, amenity and concourse space which is at a premium in a narrower stand – that is the challenge in the Holte end. When you install a tier of boxes it lifts the roof, raising build costs and taking out rows of seats. In a side stand it works, in ends the economics are far more awkward.

 

Villa Park, far from being lame, illustrates the issue perfectly. The North Stand, with seats offers 5,500 seats, the Holte End 13,500 without.

The capacity of the ARE is currently 9,074. It is reasonable to assume that a new ARE will not be bigger than the Holte End at 13,500, an enhancement of 4,500 seats. If boxes are installed that will reduce that number.

 

My point is that a redeveloped ARE in practise makes a modest contribution to any redevelopment with the burden placed on the Main Stand which also has to offer improved Directors, player, and media facilities as well as improved hospitality and significantly increased capacity. Put simply a redevelopment which only includes the Main Stand and ARE inadequately addresses the needs of LFC in the 21st century.

 

The Main Stand currently seats 12,277. A redeveloped ARE would take capacity up to 49,000. the North Stand Old Trafford holds 25,500. That is the physical scale that would be required to deliver a 60k capacity at a redeveloped Anfield - the residents would go mad.

Edited May 24, 2012 by xerxes

[ternando_forres]

I know it's completely pointless posting this now, but that gillett and hicks stadium looked fantastic IMO, quite a big shame it's not being built. Found some different images/video of it on here Liverpool Anfield Stadium Project

[Horus]

I know it's completely pointless posting this now, but that gillett and hicks stadium looked fantastic IMO, quite a big shame it's not being built. Found some different images/video of it on here Liverpool Anfield Stadium Project

 

I agree. It looked sensational, and the fact we paid for the plans, and those cunts never got the opportunity to profit from it, made it a good choice.

[redasever]

San Don, stick to what you know, the stuff on the pitch.You're embarrassing yourself unnecessarily.

 

The narrower configuration of ends squeezes the available hospitality space. Fact. Boxes in ends are the least popular (generate the least revenue) fact. The North Stand at Villa Park offers the cheapest boxes in the ground, and only 5,500 seats, fact.

 

This is not just about the provision of boxes, it is about the provision of hospitality and banqueting space behind. Providing that takes out circulation, amenity and concourse space which is at a premium in a narrower stand – that is the challenge in the Holte end. When you install a tier of boxes it lifts the roof, raising build costs and taking out rows of seats. In a side stand it works, in ends the economics are far more awkward.

 

Villa Park, far from being lame, illustrates the issue perfectly. The North Stand, with seats offers 5,500 seats, the Holte End 13,500 without.

The capacity of the ARE is currently 9,074. It is reasonable to assume that a new ARE will not be bigger than the Holte End at 13,500, an enhancement of 4,500 seats. If boxes are installed that will reduce that number.

 

My point is that a redeveloped ARE in practise makes a modest contribution to any redevelopment with the burden placed on the Main Stand which also has to offer improved Directors, player, and media facilities as well as improved hospitality and significantly increased capacity. Put simply a redevelopment which only includes the Main Stand and ARE inadequately addresses the needs of LFC in the 21st century.

 

The Main Stand currently seats 12,277. A redeveloped ARE would take capacity up to 49,000. the North Stand Old Trafford holds 25,500. That is the physical scale that would be required to deliver a 60k capacity at a redeveloped Anfield - the residents would go mad.

 

Erm no. Not fact. Modern stadia are almost square - check out the Allianz Arena.

 

 

allianz-plan , on Flickr

 

 

Not that we need more boxes anyway. Premium seats make more money. Anfield’s premium seats range from £3,000 to £8,500 a season. Some of the more expensive ones are already in the Anfield Road End.

 

Big stands yes. Huge stands no. Nobody going mad.

 

As you say, stick to what you know.

[Guest San Don]

San Don, stick to what you know, the stuff on the pitch.You're embarrassing yourself unnecessarily.

 

The narrower configuration of ends squeezes the available hospitality space. Fact. Boxes in ends are the least popular (generate the least revenue) fact. The North Stand at Villa Park offers the cheapest boxes in the ground, and only 5,500 seats, fact.

 

This is not just about the provision of boxes, it is about the provision of hospitality and banqueting space behind. Providing that takes out circulation, amenity and concourse space which is at a premium in a narrower stand – that is the challenge in the Holte end. When you install a tier of boxes it lifts the roof, raising build costs and taking out rows of seats. In a side stand it works, in ends the economics are far more awkward.

 

Villa Park, far from being lame, illustrates the issue perfectly. The North Stand, with seats offers 5,500 seats, the Holte End 13,500 without.

The capacity of the ARE is currently 9,074. It is reasonable to assume that a new ARE will not be bigger than the Holte End at 13,500, an enhancement of 4,500 seats. If boxes are installed that will reduce that number.

 

My point is that a redeveloped ARE in practise makes a modest contribution to any redevelopment with the burden placed on the Main Stand which also has to offer improved Directors, player, and media facilities as well as improved hospitality and significantly increased capacity. Put simply a redevelopment which only includes the Main Stand and ARE inadequately addresses the needs of LFC in the 21st century.

 

The Main Stand currently seats 12,277. A redeveloped ARE would take capacity up to 49,000. the North Stand Old Trafford holds 25,500. That is the physical scale that would be required to deliver a 60k capacity at a redeveloped Anfield - the residents would go mad.

 

You really are intent at proving yourself to be a dullard.

 

Plenty of grounds have corporate \ hospitality facilities at the ends of grounds. Just because you dont get as many boxes as along the pitch doesnt mean there is no point, not enough space or no money in it.

 

As for the Anny Road end, making this a two tier structure will enable a bigger capacity, more corporate \ hospitality suites and if done sympathetically, enable a new top tier to be built from the park forward and still enable the lower tier to be used longer until the two structures are joined up.

 

The increased capacity and income from the behind the goal corporate \ hospitality suites, to lessen the impact of lost seating and income when the main stand is developed.

 

Of course the club could do it your way and find it has less capacity and less income etc, etc.

 

Good job you aint involved with it, isnt it (this is a rhetorical question)?

[xerxes]

As you say, stick to what you know.

Which is what I do.

 

Like a dazed grandfather at a Christmas party, unsure of what time, or even what day it is, you resurface, faculties still reeling, vainly hoping that somone will pay attention.

 

Of course we don't need any more boxes, we have plenty.

 

It's about premium seating is it? Really? Which is what the debate about the limitations of partial development/ banqueting was about.

 

A revamped bovril stall is all that is required.......................

 

Night, night.

[xerxes]

You really are intent at proving yourself to be a dullard.

 

Plenty of grounds have corporate \ hospitality facilities at the ends of grounds. Just because you dont get as many boxes as along the pitch doesnt mean there is no point, not enough space or no money in it.

 

As for the Anny Road end, making this a two tier structure will enable a bigger capacity, more corporate \ hospitality suites and if done sympathetically, enable a new top tier to be built from the park forward and still enable the lower tier to be used longer until the two structures are joined up.

 

The increased capacity and income from the behind the goal corporate \ hospitality suites, to lessen the impact of lost seating and income when the main stand is developed.

 

Of course the club could do it your way and find it has less capacity and less income etc, etc.

 

Good job you aint involved with it, isnt it (this is a rhetorical question)?

San Don your heart is in the right place, the detail isn’t.

 

Talk me through the English grounds which have significant hospitality facilities in End box stands – you will struggle. It is down to space.

 

The provision of boxes at Ends IS a problem, for reasons that I have explained. You will almost always get more revenue from the lost rows of seats than you will from the reduced number of boxes that an end can offer – and there is insufficient space to squeeze much hospitality space in amongst provision for the standard seating.

 

There is no question that the ARE can be successfully redeveloped. The issue is that the likelihood is that it will only be able to offer a maximum of 4,500 extra seats with box/ hospitality provision reducing that number. Physically there is a limit to what you can do – there isn’t a “my” way.

 

As for my expertise, this is my specialist subject. Mark my words any new ARE will offer no more than 13,500 seats.

[Guest San Don]

San Don your heart is in the right place, the detail isn’t.

 

Talk me through the English grounds which have significant hospitality facilities in End box stands – you will struggle. It is down to space.

 

Old Trafford, Emirates, Ewok Park for starters. They good enough for you!?

 

The provision of boxes at Ends IS a problem, for reasons that I have explained. You will almost always get more revenue from the lost rows of seats than you will from the reduced number of boxes that an end can offer – and there is insufficient space to squeeze much hospitality space in amongst provision for the standard seating.

 

Clearly its a problem for you to grasp. Let me elucidate. Expanding the Anny Road end as follows, presuming the club decides to redevelop and permission is forthcoming from the relevant parties.

 

A new structure is built on the site of the current food village (google it if you dont visit anfield) to within an aloowable distance of the park boundary. This structure can be built when the existing Anny Road structure is kept operational.

 

The new structure is built forward towards the existing stand until the existing roof needs to come off the the existing top tier removed. At this stage the stand becomes unusable so needs to be timed so a lot of this work causes minimal impact.

 

The two structures are then joined with double decked corporate \ hospitality boxes where the old and new structures meet.

 

In short, even with a single row of boxes, there is plenty of space for corporate \ hospitality suites. No one is saying you are going to get the same number behind the goal as you do pitchside (although double decked boxes will get close to this number).

 

question that the ARE can be successfully redeveloped. The issue is that the likelihood is that it will only be able to offer a maximum of 4,500 extra seats with box/ hospitality provision reducing that number. Physically there is a limit to what you can do – there isn’t a “my” way.

 

Think you'll find the current upper tier on the Anny Road added approx 3000 seats. A structure built forward from the park boundary will probably add another 6000 seats ie the same as the upper centenary. That's 1500 extra seats than you suggest plus income from, let's say 10 single tiered corporate \ hospitality boxes, more if we double deck them.

 

As for my expertise, this is my specialist subject. Mark my words any new ARE will offer no more than 13,500 seats.

 

Er, bullshit! In any even the current Main stand offers seating for approx 12,500. If this is double decked, even with boxes, the revised Main Stand should be capable of seating upwards of 15,000 - 18,000 depending how the design maximises the Anny Road and Kop Corners. Admittedly, engineering works on the Kop roof support would also be required at the Kop corner if the free area there now is utilied for seating.

[Fugitive]

Xerxes must be the most patronising cunt to ever darken this forum. The fact that 99% of the shite he spouts is wrong makes that last sentence pretty incredible.

[SpeedyG]

Nah!

[Guest ShoePiss]

speedyg getting jealous haha

[Block109'er]

Somebody should ask Dave Whelan what's going on with the stadium.

[xerxes]

Old Trafford, Emirates, Ewok Park for starters. They good enough for you!?...........etc

 

 

The Emirates has no end box stands.

 

Old Trafford has no hospitality facilities in the largest end – the East Stand. In the Stretford End it has the smallest suite – the International Club.

 

Ewood Park – the Blackburn and Darwen Ends have a capacity of 8000 only, both smaller than the current ARE.

 

My point was, and remains that a redeveloped ARE can only make a modest impact on an improved redeveloped Anfield putting all the pressure on one stand, a new Main Stand, which I do not think can offer enough extra for us.

 

The practicalities of expanding the ARE are agreed. The point in dispute is that you claim “there is plenty of space for corporate \ hospitality suites”- there isn’t, as i have demonstrated with the Holte End example. A maximum extra 4,500 seats , subtract for boxes. Lose ground floor banqueting/conference space if you have to bridge the ARE. If you double deck the boxes you will lose even more capacity- which is why no modern stand has them now. The last double decked end box configuration was the North Stand Villa Park – in 1977, thirty five years ago!

 

You cannot simply bolt on seats to the upper and lower tier working backwards. Your numbers don’t stack. You might, as a cost saving measure , be able to use the lower terrace, but that would be another compromise on the overall build, as you would be stuck with the existing profiling which may not be what you want for the overall structure.

 

The footprint of the Holte End is actually broader than the ARE .The stand wraps around onto the Trinity Rd bridging that road in a way that you would have to reconfigure the Centenary stand (which you can’t) to replicate. On the Witton side at Villa park as it is the seats in the extreme corner are rarely used because of restricted views. 13,500 will be as good as it gets.

 

On your own estimates for a maximum capacity for a new main stand at around 18,000 represents an extra 5,700 seats, which added to an extra 4,500 on the ARE increases capacity to around 55,000 ( which is what Morgan/Parry always saw as the liley redevelopment ceiling).

 

Is it worth demolishing two stands for an extra 10,000 seats? With limited scope to significantly improve hospitality, conference banqueting facilities ( as you are only doing half the ground). A new stadium may only provide an extra 5,000 seats, but corporate/hospitality provision can be doubled, and that provides 40% of match day revenue. The economics of redevelopment are not as straight forwards as some assume.

 

 

Will a capacity of 55,000 be enough to enable us to challenge? But here’s the catch, the new Trinity Rd (Main) Stand at Villa park has a capacity of only 12,954,( only 700 more than our existing Main Stand) even though it is triple tier. The reason for this is that the stand has to provide for player, media, directors, medical and hospitality facilities – as our redeveloped stand will have to. Now the upper tier wings of the Trinity Rd are cropped in a way that ours may not need to be, but that will only increase capacity by a few thousand.

 

In summary redevelopment, seen by some as a cheap, easy, effective answer, isn’t.

 

I'm on home turf here.;)

[redasever]

Which is what I do.

 

Like a dazed grandfather at a Christmas party, unsure of what time, or even what day it is, you resurface, faculties still reeling, vainly hoping that somone will pay attention.

 

Of course we don't need any more boxes, we have plenty.

 

It's about premium seating is it? Really? Which is what the debate about the limitations of partial development/ banqueting was about.

 

A revamped bovril stall is all that is required.......................

 

Night, night.

 

So, no comment on what's actually put to you. Again and as ever.

 

I'm always around mate. You were getting out of hand again. Get back in your box.

 

.

[redasever]

 

I'm on home turf here.;)

 

I couldn't give a monkey's fist for what goes on at your home turf or Aston Villa or at the Emirates. Rather than look at what was done, why not look at what can be done? But that's not your home turf is it?

.

[xerxes]

So, no comment on what's actually put to you. Again and as ever.

 

Bored? Tired? No-one to argue with? Have a lie down. Terry has you to a T.

[redasever]

 

Think you'll find the current upper tier on the Anny Road added approx 3000 seats. A structure built forward from the park boundary will probably add another 6000 seats ie the same as the upper centenary. That's 1500 extra seats than you suggest plus income from, let's say 10 single tiered corporate \ hospitality boxes, more if we double deck them.

 

Er, bullshit! In any even the current Main stand offers seating for approx 12,500. If this is double decked, even with boxes, the revised Main Stand should be capable of seating upwards of 15,000 - 18,000 depending how the design maximises the Anny Road and Kop Corners. Admittedly, engineering works on the Kop roof support would also be required at the Kop corner if the free area there now is utilied for seating.

 

...is more or less spot on.

 

A 16,500 Main Stand is achievable without considering the corners. In fact it could be a whole lot bigger within maximum recommended viewing distances but it just isn’t necessary.

 

Similarly each corner could accommodate 3,400 within viewing distances but it would be better to settle for about 1100 to the height of the back of the Centenary Stand (also less roof work all round).

 

The Anfield Road End can be of a very similar size to the Main Stand although 15,000 is enough (again without corners).

 

But some of the hospitality already in the ARE works out at more than £4,500 a head per season (19 games). 500 of those would do better than 10 or 20 (or even 40) boxes at £6,500 per head, be less expensive to build (for more return) and no doubt easier to sell.

 

You could expand the kop a little but it's maybe not worth the cost. This similar:

 

 

anfield_120512plan3 by Peter McGurk, on Flickr

Edited May 26, 2012 by redasever

[redasever]

Bored? Tired? No-one to argue with? Have a lie down. Terry has you to a T.

 

When you run out of argument you get arsey. It's your style. You have to live with it. Just once or twice try answering a question or responding to a point made. Anyone else might learn something... nah! - back in the box. Best to stay positive.

 

.

Edited May 26, 2012 by redasever

[lifetime fan]

[xerxes]

When you run out of argument you get arsey. It's your style. You have to live with it. Just once or twice try answering a question or responding to a point made. Anyone else might learn something... nah! - back in the box. Best to stay positive.

I reserve my time for those who seek more than an argument.

 

"Never wrestle with a pig, you both get dirty - but the pig likes it."

[redasever]

I reserve my time for those who seek more than an argument.

 

"Never wrestle with a pig, you both get dirty - but the pig likes it."

 

Ta-rah then.

.

[redasever]

Council presented three options to the residents of the the Rockfield Triangle last Tuesday (details here Rockfield Refurbishment Options - The Triangle - Supporting Local People ).

 

The club were also present (presumably as property owners). The local residents say that the club preferred option 3 (which was best for redevelopment). They also said that GVA Grimley has been putting offers to the locals on the club's behalf for properties in Lothair Road and Alroy Road - at least one of which has been accepted.

 

The residents also say a survey to assess rights of light is under way in the area.

.

[Guest San Don]

The Emirates has no end box stands.

 

So the emirates stadium has no corporate \ hospitality boxes behind the goals, eh?

 

Virtual Tour | Emirates Stadium | Arsenal.com

 

I guess the arse must have doctored this virtual tour of their stadium then to fool everyone!

 

What a dullard.

 

No point discussing the rest of your dullard inspired drivel if you cant get this basic part correct.