KopTalk.com Forums Football Liverpool FC Forum Time for new owners ?

well if you consider yourselves proper fans would'nt that mean you want whats best for the Club and if that means a groundshare so be it, why let petty pride get in the way if it will make your Club stronger and more competative against it's rivals, we need to start pulling away from your Stoke, Fulham and West Brom's and concentrate on somehow trying to match your Everton and hopefuly one day Spurs and a groundshare might enable us to do just that...

The Milan clubs seem to be happy sharing their ground. Plus I know that bayern share their ground and they have one of the most amazing stadiums built.

What is the area that Goodison park like? Maybe they could rip it down and build a bigger stadium there since an field seems to be more bother than its worth.

Goodison is a no go as it's hemmed in by houses and a school, it's probably worse than Anfield as for being land locked. I think Stanley Park would be better if push came to shove but best of the lot would be a shared stadium just outside Liverpool on the motorway, Rail and Airport Links, building stadiums in City's is definately not the way forward...

100,000 shared stadium with all the mod cons rail and road access plenty of parking . Stanley Park is the ideal location. If not there then on the outskirts near road, rail and airport access. suggestions for the latter please.

unfortunately stanley park is a terrible location, it uses exactly the same road, rail and ifilstructure of the present ground, current Anfield cant really cope with 45k never mind 60k, we needed to move outside the City where there was plenty of room to expand, this chance looks to be lost now unfortunately...

I would never be happy with a ground share,i wouldn't bank on building a bigger stadium just because we may share half the cost with Everton,they are financially worse off than us so where will they get half the cost a massive stadium from? Also the land may not support that size stadium,Everton may not have as many fans to fill that stadium it will be half empty,how will that look? Besides all that there is no guarantee a shared stadium will bring us more success.Either way i would never be happy for a club like ours to be made to share a ground,why should we no one else is.The mouth pieces shouting out for ground share IE Purslow are just waiting in the wings to stand on their soap box and say ground share is great,i told you so.I'm sorry guys i simply would hate selling our soul.Maybe they want us to feel so desperate we will agree to anything? I would come to terms with it if it has to move just outside the city to achieve the space needed but i would never be happy with something that isn't even ours to call our own.Pride is an essential part of supporting a club, an irrelevant question but would UTD share with city???. Sorry but i feel strongly about it.

First, the owners get abuse for not buying players. Then they get abuse for buying the players that BR wanted when they turn out to be rubbish! They HAVE to buy who BR wants (otherwise they are acting as D.o.F/Scout/Assistant Manager/Manager) - do they know enough about football to be able to advise and veto a move for a player? No - they just check his facebook page to make sure he's under 24!

For what it's worth I don't think BR would do any better with different owners. We need to get rid of FSG AND BR or we will be stuck in 7th-10th until we get overtaken.

How often do we sell out a match? IF we expanded to 60-70k would we fill it enough (apart from the 'big' games, to justify the cost?

If you look at the present top clubs (I almost wrote "the other top clubs" but changed it - because we are clearly not a top club anymore) you have:

Manure
Citeh
Chelski
Spuds
Arse


What is their common denominator?

They all come from either London or Manchester: big cities - a lot more people live in the regions where these clubs come from than in Liverpool. Manchester has around 2.5 Million inhabitants whereas we have around 1.4 Million.

Just because they can manage to fill their stadiums (which they hardly do) doesn't mean that will happen for us.

And just because everyone else is doing bad business doesn't mean that we will have to jump on the same train (but many years later) as them.

I think groundshare is not an option for our current owners just because they have listened to us fans who have stated we don't want anything to do with it. But it doesn't fill me with any more belief we are doing the right thing by upgrading Anfield.

I'm torn here. I clearly don't want to leave Anfield, but I don't want to see us do bad business by avoid leaving Anfield either. The Infrastructure just isn't right in the Anfield area. How will that problem be addressed? It's probably not possible to do much about it, which means we will throw a large stack of money on a project that will not be good enough for the club in the long run.

On the other hand: How much time would it take to get a joint venture with Everton up and running? Will that take 5 years more than revamping Anfield? Are 5 extra years worth waiting for a bigger joint stadium?

I agree its catch 22 really.As much as we all love Anfield i think we need to leave it but the only option is find new land somewhere.I would feel better if it was as near to the city as possible. A revamp may take say three years(estimation only)but to wait for Everton to find an investor,then hire the architects to design the stadium etc so on and so forth its all too long.Even to revamp may take years again to get the residents on board? The revamp is the lesser of all the evils in this mess but is by no means the solution in the long run,we are stuck it seems.