|
|
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 8,595
1st Team Squad
|
|
1st Team Squad
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 8,595 |
So increasing turnover won't help the club while not putting it under severe financial debt burden? Would you prefer if we did nothing “If it were to be done, better it were done well, or not atall” So yes, if it’s going to be mickey mouse, and it is, then it were better it were not done atall. It’s about missed opportunity, and the fact that we’re stuck with it for a generation. I’ve already said that if it’s going to be mickey mouse I’d prefer they didn’t do it atall, and let the next owners do it properly.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 22,926
Liverpool Legend
|
|
Liverpool Legend
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 22,926 |
Well red, in architectural terms (if you prefer that idiom/metaphor) I’ve seen many a lean-to that killed the architectural integrity of a building stone dead, and that’s what’s on offer here, a cheapie lean-to, so to speak, that’ll add little and look awful.
Just as amputating the wrong limb won’t cure the patient, and best not done, so too will building the wrong adjunct not cure what’s wrong with Anfield, and best not done. Have you seen the plans that make you so sure that it's going to look awful? Keeping the Kop is in itself a great achievement. Nothing is being amputated, we are just trying to reach our seats objective in the best financially sustainable manner, we are not in the business of having the most beautiful stadium but in the business of being the most competitive team. Would you prefer to have the most classy stadium but having to sell our best players every year and putting a wage cap that would make sure we win nothing in the next decade or so, as Arsenal with Emirates?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 4,307
Under 23 Player
|
|
Under 23 Player
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 4,307 |
So we fall further and further behind the other teams? We don't have the money to build a 70000+ stadium due to massive increase in marginal costs per seat. A 60000 stadium with far more extensive corporate seats should roughly give us a similar revenue to arsenal. I am happy with that and am glad to see some movement finally
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 8,595
1st Team Squad
|
|
1st Team Squad
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 8,595 |
Well red, in architectural terms (if you prefer that idiom/metaphor) I’ve seen many a lean-to that killed the architectural integrity of a building stone dead, and that’s what’s on offer here, a cheapie lean-to, so to speak, that’ll add little and look awful.
Just as amputating the wrong limb won’t cure the patient, and best not done, so too will building the wrong adjunct not cure what’s wrong with Anfield, and best not done. Have you seen the plans that make you so sure that it's going to look awful? Keeping the Kop is in itself a great achievement. Nothing is being amputated, we are just trying to reach our seats objective in the best financially sustainable manner, we are not in the business of having the most beautiful stadium but in the business of being the most competitive team. Would you prefer to have the most classy stadium but having to sell our best players every year and putting a wage cap that would make sure we win nothing in the next decade or so, as Arsenal with Emirates? Your stadium is a major part of what defines you as a club, and makes a statement to the world regarding how you see yourself and what your ambitions are. Is a 58,000 cheaply renovated stadium, in the context of the modern world the image we want to project for a generation to come?
Last edited by Hercules/AF 58; 09/06/14 04:05 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 7,446
1st Team Squad
|
|
1st Team Squad
Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 7,446 |
It would cause liverpool to go into financial meltdown if we had to service a £400m debt. How do we know this? Just look at the h&g ownership for more details.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 22,926
Liverpool Legend
|
|
Liverpool Legend
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 22,926 |
Well red, in architectural terms (if you prefer that idiom/metaphor) I’ve seen many a lean-to that killed the architectural integrity of a building stone dead, and that’s what’s on offer here, a cheapie lean-to, so to speak, that’ll add little and look awful.
Just as amputating the wrong limb won’t cure the patient, and best not done, so too will building the wrong adjunct not cure what’s wrong with Anfield, and best not done. Have you seen the plans that make you so sure that it's going to look awful? Keeping the Kop is in itself a great achievement. Nothing is being amputated, we are just trying to reach our seats objective in the best financially sustainable manner, we are not in the business of having the most beautiful stadium but in the business of being the most competitive team. Would you prefer to have the most classy stadium but having to sell our best players every year and putting a wage cap that would make sure we win nothing in the next decade or so, as Arsenal with Emirates? Your stadium is a major part of what defines you as a club, and makes a statement to the world regarding how you see yourself and what your ambitions are. Is a 58,000 cheaply renovated stadium, in the context of the modern world the image we want to project for a generation to come? Don't think any club is great because of their stadium, they are thanks to their results and trophies. United has been increasing their seats without paying much attention to the looks and even the comfort of their fans, some hardly have a good view apparently, does this prevent them having the biggest fan base, no. Results and competitiveness is what counts and in this modern world, financial sustainability. By the way, you don't even know how the renovated stadium is going to look like.
Last edited by vish LFC; 09/06/14 04:28 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 8,791
1st Team Squad
|
|
1st Team Squad
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 8,791 |
Well red, in architectural terms (if you prefer that idiom/metaphor) I’ve seen many a lean-to that killed the architectural integrity of a building stone dead, and that’s what’s on offer here, a cheapie lean-to, so to speak, that’ll add little and look awful.
Just as amputating the wrong limb won’t cure the patient, and best not done, so too will building the wrong adjunct not cure what’s wrong with Anfield, and best not done. Could you please describe what "architectural integrity" means. I have no connection whatsoever to architecture, but i am pretty sure that if the architectural integrity of a building was "killed" as you put it, the building would be deemed unsafe and would probably collapse. So please could you explain the term.
Sign Reus
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 8,791
1st Team Squad
|
|
1st Team Squad
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 8,791 |
Well red, in architectural terms (if you prefer that idiom/metaphor) I’ve seen many a lean-to that killed the architectural integrity of a building stone dead, and that’s what’s on offer here, a cheapie lean-to, so to speak, that’ll add little and look awful.
Just as amputating the wrong limb won’t cure the patient, and best not done, so too will building the wrong adjunct not cure what’s wrong with Anfield, and best not done. Have you seen the plans that make you so sure that it's going to look awful? Keeping the Kop is in itself a great achievement. Nothing is being amputated, we are just trying to reach our seats objective in the best financially sustainable manner, we are not in the business of having the most beautiful stadium but in the business of being the most competitive team. Would you prefer to have the most classy stadium but having to sell our best players every year and putting a wage cap that would make sure we win nothing in the next decade or so, as Arsenal with Emirates? Your stadium is a major part of what defines you as a club, and makes a statement to the world regarding how you see yourself and what your ambitions are. Is a 58,000 cheaply renovated stadium, in the context of the modern world the image we want to project for a generation to come? Nah, I would much rather project an image of brainless idiots who spent beyond their means and caused the downfall of a once great club. is that what we want for our club?
Sign Reus
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 27,628
Liverpool Legend
|
|
Liverpool Legend
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 27,628 |
With the new tv deals for premier league and CL mean that a clubs vast majority of income will now come from tv rather than the turnstiles. 60k seats with more corporate money coming in is fine and we don't have to spend £400m on it. . OUCH! I know someone who will not be happy about you saying his contributions from match days will mean less to the club whilst sofa fans will mean more. That aside, i think its a great day for Liverpool, club and city. Without the people making personal sacrifices to attend anfield you would have no club to watch on your TV . What a disgusting comment mocking the reds at the game maybe you would be happier for the stadium to be empty and the camera just followed the pitch itself like some computer game.
IF YOU WANT TO BE HEARD SPEAK SOFTLY - BOB PAISLEY
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2012
Posts: 5,205
1st Team Squad
|
|
1st Team Squad
Joined: May 2012
Posts: 5,205 |
Hang on,
Where has all this talk come from of it being a cheap, shabby if not poxy renovation?
From the plans I saw in the link it looks class - not to mention it takes us just beneath 60k. Did FSG come out and say "we'll increase the stadium capacity, but it'll be proper garbage"
Are there architectural views out there that say we're wasting our time - anyone got any links?
|
|
|
|
|
