• Liverpool Message Board

  • SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • Aaaah peace and common sense is restored.

      I agree there is more we can do and I also believe this is why FSG are taking more time over the decision. Expansion at some point may be way forward but not as some may think. It's pointless having a big big shiny stadium if people can't afford the seats or don't spend their money there. Most will enjoy a beer, a pint or two and have a look at egg cups. Maybe even purchase one. There's that whole side to expand as well.

    • This interview should have been better publicised. Most of us put 2 and 2 together and estimate a stadium build price then subtract the extra ticket prices over the course of a season and come up with a rough and fairly blind estimate of how much more profitable we will be.

      As far as I can see, the only viable options are
      a) Gain a stadium name sponsorship deal to fund the build (No doubt people are beavering away to explore this possibility)

      b) This should be unpopular and rather odd at the same time! Increase ticket prices to come into line with our competitors. How about a loyalty style scheme which would credit your next season ticket based on poor achievement. Say we finished 8th so you get a 10-15% discount the next year as an incentive?

      • 1 Reply to Hobitez
      • "a) Gain a stadium name sponsorship deal to fund the build "

        I don't entirely get the enthusiasm for this argument. I certainly get the enthusiasm to sell the name of your stadium for mega-wonga. But surely you can do this just as easily with Anfield as a new place. If so, a naming rights deal doesn't make a financial justification for building a new stadium although it might give your owners cash to blow, should they decide they want to blow it on pointless bricks and turf.

        Maybe that's what we'll do with Stamford Bridge in order to get around FFP. I'm sure one of Roman's friends would like us to be called the Dodgy Russians'R'Us Stadium for £100m a year.


    • Robert I do think the average ticket price is a major factor, but also the mix of tickets. That is the number of premium seats versus those for the regular football fan. It maybe a major reason why you’re also looking at a move, as you could actually do even better with revenue per seat.

      It’s interesting that the bid for the Battersea power station was I think for a 60K stadium, not the 75-90K some on here (okay just one person on here) think is required to be successful. I'm sure you could get a larger average gate, hence the increase from 40 odd to 60K. But the big advantage with a new stadium for you, is the ability to put in more luxury seats which come at a much higher price (many guaranteed via season ticket or corporate buys) which unfortunately the London market support while the Liverpool market cannot. That is not to say we cannot support premium seats at Anfied, but just not as many as Chelsea.

      Therefore we may always lag behind in terms of revenue per seat. We can do better than we're doing, but you can only charge what the market can support, and Merseyside is not W3 (or wherever Roman what’s to build his new palace!). But that also emphasizes the owners point. Doing something about the stadium is helpful from a financial standpoint, but it is not the silver bullet some think in terms of generating cash to improve the team. The commercial market is a much better area for us to play, as we're not limited by a local market, because on that stage we play to a global market.

    • yeah yeah yeah, ;o) Ole big ears. I seem to remember winning that one around about 5 times from memory. We've actually got a real one in the cupboard. One with the handles still intact too ;o)

      Yes I also think that everyone in the known universe is aware that Chelsea's ticket prices are the highest. But you make a very valid point on the more games you play the greater your revenue. I don't know how recent those figures in the article are but if they are from last season it clearly illustrates how beneficial cup runs can be.

      Cheers Robert

      Either way can you see Armchair that it's easier to maximise you revenue per seat in the short term irrespective how many seats you have, rather than a new stadium.

    • A lot of it is down to ticket prices. Chelsea's are the highest in the known universe. Known to me, anyway.

      We also play Champions League. That's a competition between successful European clubs. We get at least four home games out of that, on top of the 19 league games. Then there are guaranteed home cup games against lower division opponents (it's our condition for agreeing to play) adds a few more.

      But of those, only the CL knockout games are priced fully. The others are all about half-price. Somewhere around £25 an adult and £12 or £15 a child. I guess we also get revenue from playing at Wembley a lot. Semi-finals, finals and Charity Shields most years. Every little helps.


    • How about this then? The fans get a share ie.. if it costs £300m to build a new stadium then why not mske it an option for fans to buy the stadium?

    • I'm glad you've popped along Robert. Lokking at the numbers in the posted article Chelsea have a similar size stadium to Liverpool and yet earn significantly more per seat.

      Something tells me it can't all be down to ticket prices. You've also played more games so that will skew the figures.

      Can you shed any light?

      What I meant was how can we increase revenue per seat on what we have already makes far more sense than more seats. Now if we're talking about some pretty hefty devlopment in the whole area to increase your Anfield experience then that might be the time and place to increase seats.

    • Jason think of it this way then..

      LFC has won trophy after trophy and has won 18 titles.. yet we don't have a stadium that reflects that do we?
      FSG now have the option to correct that and have LFC a stadium it deserves.

      I suspect though that FSG won't do that.

      • 1 Reply to LFC_Armchair_Supporter
      • Each time you comment on this subject, despite what every single person explains and suggests, you respond with the same persistent and repetitive answer/rhetorical question.. I don't get it..

        FSG have been running the Red Sox for 13 years now. When they arrived, they were a last place perennial losing team that hadn't won the World Series in 86, yes 86, (86) EIGHTY SIX YEARS!!! In two years the Red Sox won the World Series and then another 2 years later. Over the ensuing decade they became the winningest team in baseball, the most championships in baseball, the 2nd highest spending team in baseball, and the #1 revenue generating team than WORLD WIDE GIANTs and rivals NY Yankees, all while playing in the same 100 year old stadium, Fenway Park. Fenway holds about 37k and maybe closer to 40 now max, after some refurbishments and expansions, while the yankees just spent nearly 1 Billion dollars on a new, high technology, fancy pants stadium with more press seats, luxury boxes, hd tvs, but less seats for higher prices... therefore losing money and still not winning a championship..

        What is this fascination with the stadium... wait wait, don't answer, we've tried asking so many times and you won't come off it, so let's try another scenario.. and keep in mind, since you keep tending to slate them for not being multi billionnaires and willing to fork out 600M to build a new stadium of their own cash, which not even the Sheiks at City would do simply because they already have a stadium that can expand to 60k already.. Please ALSO you just seem to forget, FSG have poured in around 400M of their own liquid cash already to wipe out the debts of H&G, inject money into the squad last summer, AND write off a faulty stadium outline project started by H&G that had to be destroyed because it was not feasible... What return have they seen on their 400M investment so far? A Carling Cup... so asking another 500-600M, totaling 1Billion dollars out of their own pockets to build this stadium is your answer...

        Would you rather, they increase revenues by striking big commercial deals and endorsements like Warrior, Standard Chartered and others, and re-injecting that money into the squad while developing plans to refurbish and add seats


        Just have have them take all endorsement deals and other commercial revenues and put it into a project that they can't afford at one shot, that is also a 5-7 year project and not invest any money into the current squad essentially, letting us become a lower table team so you can have your 60k - 70k seat stadium to frighten Barcelona who will never see it because we will be fighting off relegation..

        For the record, this post I started is the same FECKING article as the last one I posted in the last thread only it comes from the New York Stock exchange.. heard of it? The epi center of money and transactions for the modern day world. The article still reads the same goddamn thing... Henry after 2 years of research, a man much smarter than us, especially you, thinks the best option is NOT to build a new one for ample reasons and that the other ways of generating money are the way to go upwards..

        What is not registering with this all? You want to hear about a new stadium like a little kid before christmas day wants to hear about getting that red fire truck he's seen at the toy store for weeks and weeks, only it's not coming and won't be under the tree because his parents can't afford it..

        I feel like I'm going to have a stroke, black out, and shoot blood out of my ears from going over this each and every single time.. I'm 30 years old and your presistence on this matter, without accepting the facts is making me feel like a 99 year old man about to have a heart attack from high blood pressure!

        JESUS H CHRIST!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    • Having read it.. something struck me in particular and could be seen as worriying for LFC fans..

      He mentions about a new stadium may be good for longivity.

      Well that suggests to me that FSG are gonna cut and run as soon as they feel commercial aspects have been achieved..

      Thwy're not the owners who'll pump money into the club and make us great.. they'll just keep us above water and put in minimal amounts in.

      Yes they paid off the debt they also wrote off the old stadium plans. Don't kid yourself that they did these things out of generousity..They did them so it'll make them more money. As soon as LFC is making money and is a steady ship they'll sell up and go.. LFC is just an asset to FSG they have no love for LFC.. Just the fans do..