KopTalk.com Forums Football Liverpool FC Forum What have FSG brought to the table ?

Another factor would a new build generate more income in corporate, naming rights and advertising space than anfield refurb that would go some way to negate the extra capital cost.

I have no facts or numbers but to me this would seem a possibility

Looking after the next 15 years is building a new stadium its not just 50 years hence. Once we revamp Anfield I wager in less than a decade they will be saying its too small. They are already saying it and we have not even laid a brick in the ground.

The plan was never to go beyond 60k seats even in a new stadium on Stanley Park.

Work on the facts and numbers then we talk though I am sure FSG have done it. There will be more corporate facilities as this is the priority and even with Anfield expansion there can be naming rights if they wish. Nobody knows about advertising and sponsorship better than FSG.

Do you think the same way every time you use a piece of paper, or switch on a light bulb, or buy beef? Cause its killing the planet...an institution which has been around a lot longer than LFC.

Just putting things in perspective. I don't think boxeys view is bad, it is a bit selfish buy its realistic and we all feel the same. Would you all be happy if we dropped to the conference for the next 50 years winning nothing, if it meant we would win the PL title in 51 years? Or would you prefer winning it in your lifetime? Selfishnes...i say its honesty.

And how do you propose I get the facts and numbers? You seem to be misunderstanding Koptalk this is a place where people express views and opinions. To me it seems logical a new build would attract naming rights and have more space for coroporate in the refurb you are limited to the design of the old ground which was never built for those purposes. If you want cast iron facts backed up by independant evidence on everything Vish might I suggest a football forum is not the place for you.

all in your opinion of course