Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
~ WELCOME TO KOP THIS.....SIGN UP TO HOLLYWOODS WORLD CUP PREDICTION LEAGUE AND WIN A BOTTLE OF RUM AND £1000 CASH!!!............FOLLOW THIS LINK: https://predictor.talksport.com/public/#/home .........YNWA. ~
Welcome to KOP THIS. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
TMreply
  • Pages:
  • 1
Henry Questions Stadium 'myth'
Topic Started: Jun 15 2012, 01:31 PM (488 Views)
John_Boy

Legendary Reds
Liverpool's principal owner John Henry insists it is a myth that a new stadium will transform the club's financial fortunes.

The lead figure in Fenway Sports Group has suggested a new-build in Stanley Park would most likely lead to increased ticket prices, quoting recent examples taken from the United States.

Henry believes the best way of improving the Reds' ability to compete financially is through worldwide commercial revenue streams and their long-term future is not dependent on the stadium issue, which casts doubt over whether the long-mooted Stanley Park project will ever come to fruition.

"A long-term myth has existed about the financial impact of a new stadium for Liverpool," the American wrote in an email to The Anfield Wrap website.

"A belief has grown that Liverpool FC must have a new stadium to compete with (Manchester) United, Arsenal and others.

"No-one has ever addressed whether or not a new stadium is rational.

"New stadiums that are publicly-financed make sense for clubs - I've never heard of a club turning down a publicly-financed stadium.

"But privately carrying new stadiums is an enormous challenge. Arsenal is centred in a very wealthy city with a metropolitan population of approximately 14 million people.

"They did a tremendous job of carrying it off on a number of levels but how many new football stadiums with more than 30,000 seats have been built in the UK over the past decade or so?

"New stadiums increase revenues primarily by raising ticket prices - especially premium seating."

Henry accepts there is a balancing act to be done when considering the worth of a new stadium against a redevelopment of Anfield, which presents numerous logistical problems.

"We've been exploring a new stadium for the past 18 months. At one point we made it clear that if a naming rights deal could be secured of sufficient size, we would make every effort to build a new facility," he added.

"Liverpool FC has an advantage in being a global club and a naming rights deal could make a new stadium a reality.

"It is something we are working on. There has been interest.

"Going in the other direction, many football clubs have successfully enlarged their seating capacity.

"LFC has had plans to expand the main stand at Anfield but this avenue has been very difficult for the club over the past couple of decades.

"There are homes behind the main stand. Expansion of the main stand would have to be a priority for the city, community and immediate neighbourhood in order for that to occur.

"This issue is vital to the neighbourhood's future but we cannot and will not act unilaterally.

"While a new stadium or an expansion of Anfield is beneficial over the long-term for the club, the financial impact of adding seats and amenities should be put into perspective.

"That's why I say that it is a myth that stadium issues are going to magically transform LFC's fortunes.

"Building new or refurbishing Anfield is going to lead to an increase from £40million of match-day revenue to perhaps £60-70m if you don't factor in debt service.

"That would certainly help but it's just one component of LFC long-term fortunes.

"Our future is based not on a stadium issue but on building a strong football club that can compete with anyone in Europe.

"This will be principally driven financially by our commercial strengths globally."
The ring master says the circus show must go on! 🎪
on profile PBquote top
 
bazaDred

Die-hard Reds
more excuses and bullshit they cant deliver just like g&h couldnt but hey lets give them a free ride cos they havent said anything about a spade in the ground <_<
off profile PBquote top
 
red machine
Member Avatar

Die-hard Reds
Total utter rcap from henry....totaly!!
The issue of houses has existed for years...there used to be two old sisters thwarting things...!!
no stadium..or even no redevelopment of anfield...nothing.
global lfc ..yes for now.
fsg are worse than hicks n gillete...we just havent seen it yet but it will unfold in time.
off profile PBquote top
 
fredflunk
Member Avatar
Supreme Red
i think it's a logical artical from henry
http://static.themetapicture.com/media/fun...ps-Xmen-art.jpg
off profile PBquote top
 
red machine
Member Avatar

Die-hard Reds
seems hes looking for excuses for lack of investment to myself fred.
wtf is he on about...yes london may have millions of people init but they dont all support arsenal.
If it was a case of no funds for stadium because the moneys going on the team..great!...but thats not the case at all.Commercial development...so if there is lack of commercial interest in a declining club then theres also lack of funds for players as its clear as day that they wont be using their own money.Henry is full of it..imo.
off profile PBquote top
 
fredflunk
Member Avatar
Supreme Red
red machine,Jun 15 2012
07:56 PM
seems hes looking for excuses for lack of investment to myself fred.
wtf is he on about...yes london may have millions of people init but they dont all support arsenal.
If it was a case of no funds for stadium because the moneys going on the team..great!...but thats not the case at all.Commercial development...so if there is lack of commercial interest in a declining club then theres also lack of funds for players as its clear as day that they wont be using their own money.Henry is full of it..imo.

give it over RM

NO MATTER WHAT HENRY SAYS OR DOES YOU'LL SLATE HIM

that's not meant to be a dig at you, i'll say it like i see it
http://static.themetapicture.com/media/fun...ps-Xmen-art.jpg
off profile PBquote top
 
Misty77
Member Avatar
Administrator
He's right in some ways though RM.

Being a ported city there are access limitations to a massive stadium. He's trying to point out the differences and problems that a "new" Anfield would propose compared to that of the Emirates in London.
Posted Image
off profile PBquote top
 
red machine
Member Avatar

Die-hard Reds
Absolutly fred...always say it as you see it..no problems with that.However i disagree and reading henrys statement again confirms it to me.
misty....yes ported with soon to be cruise ships regulary..
airport at speke with others close by.
henrys statement is very flawed and to try to use 14m londoners..which im not so sure is correct btw...how many of them suport arsenal...??
smoothing the way to deflate expectation.The council have him worked out now i think and the ultimatum they gave him is the reason for his statement...in readiness to say no new stadium will happen..fine..but neither will expanding anfield either.
so far as big hitters go in the financial world of football fsg are paupers.not good for lfc.they will soon enough replace brendan with some obscure guy from nowhere ,,,brendan is their puppet nothing more.
off profile PBquote top
 
fredflunk
Member Avatar
Supreme Red
red machine,Jun 15 2012
09:10 PM
Absolutly fred...always say it as you see it..no problems with that.However i disagree and reading henrys statement again confirms it to me.
misty....yes ported with soon to be cruise ships regulary..
airport at speke with others close by.
henrys sttement is very flawed and to try to use 14m londoners..which im not so sure is correct btw...how many of them suport arsenal...??
smoothing the way to deflate expectation.The council have him worked out now i think and the ultimatum they gave him is the reason for his statement...in readiness to say no new stadium will happen..fine..but neither will expanding anfield either.
so far as big hitters go in the financial world of football fsg are paupers.not good for lfc.they will soon enough replace brendan with some obscure guy from nowhere ,,,brendan is their puppet nothing more.

i think br will be backed in the market
http://static.themetapicture.com/media/fun...ps-Xmen-art.jpg
off profile PBquote top
 
red machine
Member Avatar

Die-hard Reds
I think he will be too but only from player sales.No hard investment from fsg.Imo they are just spinning lfc now ...for want of a better way to put it...ie. they have the lfc model and any funds that come to fruition will be from that model directly not from themselves.Totaly risk free investment for them.
off profile PBquote top
 
SpekeRed
Member Avatar

Super Reds
RM just to remind you and others!

FSG have always stated they're intention was to make LFC self sufficient!

Pay for itself so to speak!

They've come in cleared the vast majority of the clubs debt got the annual interest down to around £3m for servicing debt!

Brought in several new sponsors the main notable ones being the deals with Warrior and Standard Chartered which bring in around £40m a year by themselves!

I'm one of those who are grateful to have them here after all it was only 20 months ago we were hours away from administration!

As for the new stadium that's my only gripe with them up to now! Even though they have never promised that either!

Also after the PR fiasco etc last season people have also questioned FSG again because they sack a lot of backroom staff! Sorry guys but although the club was right to defend Suarez it was done in an embarrassing way and LFC ended up looking real bad! So changes were needed all round! Big-time!

Beside the hillsborough flame
I heard a kopite mourning
Why so many taken on that day
Justice has never been done
But there memory will carry on
There`ll be glory round the fields of anfield road.

Justice for the 96 RIP YNWA!!!
off profile PBquote top
 
bullybeef
Member Avatar

Super Reds
Sack the board! I mean, if they're stating the can't cough up hundreds of millions of their own money to either build a new stadium or renovate Anfield for the sake of ~20,000 extra bums, they clearly not rich enough for us.

[yes, I am taking the piss]!


No point in discussing 'opinions' with people either living in cloud cuckoo land, or whom are just looking to get a rise from people - it's starting to sound monotonous and that of a spoilt brat not getting the present they wanted for Xmas.


How many times do we have to say the club is finally owned by businessman whom aren't going to sycophantically bow to the whim of every (supposed) fan. If something doesn't make them money, it doesn't benefit the club, or anyone else concerned.
Posted Image
off profile PBquote top
 
John_Boy

Legendary Reds
didnt the previous owners sign up standard chartered?
The ring master says the circus show must go on! 🎪
on profile PBquote top
 
SpekeRed
Member Avatar

Super Reds
John_Boy,Jun 16 2012
11:36 AM
didnt the previous owners sign up standard chartered?

Think it was! My mistake! Was still a deal done by Ian Ayre though!
Beside the hillsborough flame
I heard a kopite mourning
Why so many taken on that day
Justice has never been done
But there memory will carry on
There`ll be glory round the fields of anfield road.

Justice for the 96 RIP YNWA!!!
off profile PBquote top
 
Aussiepool
Member Avatar

Elite Reds
Arsenal built a 60,000 seated stadium but since then have gone limp in the transfer market and nobody can say that they have become a better team either.

Being efficient, consistent in management and lucky in the transfer of players is more important right now in turning the club around than putting all the resources into building a newer and bigger stadium. Manchester United were winning league titles before they expanded their place.

off profile PBquote top
 
Misty77
Member Avatar
Administrator
Its a question of balance really.

No point in having a weak squad of players playing (and losing) on a 60,000 seater brand new stadium, and not having the funds to purchase any players because of the crippling debt that would ensue.

On the other hand we know full well that we cannot compete on an equal footing with the likes of Arsenal, Chelsea, and the manc sisters while we remain at Anfield. We lose millions upon millions of potential gate money while we continue to stand still on the issue.

So glad that that decision isn't mine to make.

Posted Image
off profile PBquote top
 
John_Boy

Legendary Reds
why does a midtable team need a big stadium? 1st let us concentrate on progressing to becoming genuine title challengers, then we can look at other areas we can improve.

people might say its catch 22, that we need money to challenge, but, we have proven we had money and spent it poorly. need to improve significantly in this area. the stadium is an unnecessary distraction at the moment.
The ring master says the circus show must go on! 🎪
on profile PBquote top
 
red machine
Member Avatar

Die-hard Reds
may well be true jb but the far bigger picture is that fans are being fed inacurate information regarding the intentions of fsg plans for lfc and fsg apear to be realy watering down lfc ambition whilst making jolly good speeches about were lfc are going...cracks are showing in their lies now imo and so far as investment has gone theres been none..only from player sales.Some say they cleared lfc debt..yes but at the same time it was the price of the club and buying the club for around 200m which was the debt was a steal ....they cleared the debt by buying the club all in same sale.
Besides this there is the big matter of the hundreds if not thousands of infested empty slums around anfield...whats the club doing about these and why arent they bulldozed with or without a new ground...its scandulous now!! :angry:
off profile PBquote top
 
SpekeRed
Member Avatar

Super Reds
red machine,Jun 16 2012
09:23 PM
may well be true jb but the far bigger picture is that fans are being fed inacurate information regarding the intentions of fsg plans for lfc and fsg apear to be realy watering down lfc ambition whilst making jolly good speeches about were lfc are going...cracks are showing in their lies now imo and so far as investment has gone theres been none..only from player sales.Some say they cleared lfc debt..yes but at the same time it was the price of the club and buying the club for around 200m which was the debt was a steal ....they cleared the debt by buying the club all in same sale.
Besides this there is the big matter of the hundreds if not thousands of infested empty slums around anfield...whats the club doing about these and why arent they bulldozed with or without a new ground...its scandulous now!! :angry:

What cracks and what lies?

Sources please!

1. They've always insisted they want LFC to be self sufficient.

2. They've never promised a new stadium.

3. All monies generated have been reinvested into the squad.

4. All avenues are being explored before a decision is made on the stadium.

My Source:

The words from John Henrys and Ian Ayres mouth!
Beside the hillsborough flame
I heard a kopite mourning
Why so many taken on that day
Justice has never been done
But there memory will carry on
There`ll be glory round the fields of anfield road.

Justice for the 96 RIP YNWA!!!
off profile PBquote top
 
red machine
Member Avatar

Die-hard Reds
I know what you mean speke...dont disagree on that with you...but break it down to understand it more..

1. self sufficient ...sink or swim for lfc with no life rafts from fsg own pockets.

2. no stadium...but how about anfield then..one or the other and delay after delay.

3.player sales reinvested and ,as i stated at the time to much derision,it was crucial kenny spent the funds well ..which of course he didnt wich led to this huge gaping hole fsg were not expecting... a hole that meant theyd have to put funds in as there was no real player sales .They wont do so and chose brendan as part of their watering down of ambitions as they knew hed be happy with a small budget.
off profile PBquote top
 
bullybeef
Member Avatar

Super Reds
I think we're wasting our time and energy on ppl whom clearly have an agenda.


If ppl believe FSG aren't making sense, ask your landlord, council, or mortgage provider to build you a new, bigger home, and charge you the same rate to inhabit it - I am sure they'll tell you were to go.
Posted Image
off profile PBquote top
 
red machine
Member Avatar

Die-hard Reds
..they may well ave an agenda bully..time will tell!!

you know funny you mention council,asking for new ground etc....as it occured to me today who fsg remind me of...
they remind me increasingly of peter johnson at everton...a bluffer that promised much but delivered nothing.
off profile PBquote top
 
red machine
Member Avatar

Die-hard Reds
wont be surprised at all to see deals within deals wheels within wheels with fsg soon.....
ie. deals like lfc increasing awareness in the american market and surprise surprise they are striking a deal with red sox but it will cost lfc 50m in advertising sponsorship etc...so red sox cream 50m out of lfc....these kind of deals.Their passion is baseball and always will be.Its like a football fan buying a cricket club...their first passion is football not cricket.
off profile PBquote top
 
SpekeRed
Member Avatar

Super Reds
red machine,Jun 16 2012
09:43 PM
I know what you mean speke...dont disagree on that with you...but break it down to understand it more..

1. self sufficient ...sink or swim for lfc with no life rafts from fsg own pockets.

2. no stadium...but how about anfield then..one or the other and delay after delay.

3.player sales reinvested and ,as i stated at the time to much derision,it was crucial kenny spent the funds well ..which of course he didnt wich led to this huge gaping hole fsg were not expecting... a hole that meant theyd have to put funds in as there was no real player sales .They wont do so and chose brendan as part of their watering down of ambitions as they knew hed be happy with a small budget.

you certainly are a glass half empty type of person RM.

why do you think they're looking for extra investment elsewhere?

lfc are one of the worlds biggest marketing brands and they'll be using this to bring in extra sponsorship.

you know full well any funds they've generated will go to the manager and again as you said it needs to be spent well.

what stadium delays or anfield development delays

they haven't said they'll do either

they've said they'll explore all avenues as to what will be the best to do regarding the stadium issue

they haven't come out and said as yet that they will build a stadium or redevelope anfield
Beside the hillsborough flame
I heard a kopite mourning
Why so many taken on that day
Justice has never been done
But there memory will carry on
There`ll be glory round the fields of anfield road.

Justice for the 96 RIP YNWA!!!
off profile PBquote top
 
bullybeef
Member Avatar

Super Reds
What exactly have FSG promised? Pls pass the source.
Posted Image
off profile PBquote top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
ZetaBoards gives you all the tools to create a successful discussion community.
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · LFC General · Next Topic »
TMreply
  • Pages:
  • 1