Ian Ayre insisted yesterday that despite the Council's demands LFC cant guarantee the club will stay at Anfield. http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/2012...c-managing-director-ian-ayre-100252-31097237/ I guess FSG are stalling until the economy gets stronger and they get more value for their $'s.
i think it could be a case of the club just telling the council where to go.... Its patently obvious the club is stalling (for whatever reasons) but given the total lack of much that the council does for the area and how its not precisely helped anfield development I think ultimatums aint worth the paper they are written on
I don't think we should hold our breath for a new stadium! Have a feeling it might be another 2/3 years, maybe longer, until the economy picks up. Obviously we need it or a redevelopment asap, but I can wait a tad longer if at least we knew one was to be built!
haven't really been keeping a close watch on developments regarding the stadium. However, Ayre's statement sounds like a classic response to a quasi ultimatum. The economic situation will have a major effect upon what/where we do actually do about the stadium. In the meantime it is better to focus upon the team itself and accept the shortfall in gate receipts.
I'm surprised Liverpool fans seem so open to a stadium move considering how much history surrounds Anfield.
Billy, I think they may well be sitting tight in the short term. There are just too many unknowns at the present time to expose yourself to major risk. Our stadium is in Anfield for goodness sake so we would never have the same income flow from the sale/redevelopment of the old ground as Arsenal did should we move. The Council appear to want even more should FSG decide to re-develop Anfield which is obviously the cheaper option. We only have rumours so far regarding the search for an organisation to pay for the naming rights. As for the direction of the World economy then who knows! The decision to write-off the stadium costs incurred by H&G is interesting. Those plans still exist and have been worked-up to a very advanced stage. Hence FSG actually have something (that is still capable of amendment) to show to potential sponsors in terms of a new stadium as well as their own plans for re-furbishment of Anfield. Hence the package on offer has more value than normal. My thoughts are that it is the sponsor search that is driving what appears, at present, to be a stalling campaign.
Time to consider the unthinkable? Some of us, a minority of reds and bluenoses, have steadfastly been advocating a groundshare with the Shight. Swallow our pride, people.
Gotta agree with Lucaaas donga,give the blueshite **** all. And if we did agree to a groundshare with them we couldn't negotiate a ground naming deal that benefits us.
And if we did agree to a groundshare with them we couldn't negotiate a ground naming deal that benefits us. "The Joint Stadium of Liverpool"? Or, taking one word from each old stadium, how about "Anfield Park"? Now who could object to that?
I think he might have been getting at the financial side of naming a stadium. Obviously, if the naming rights were sold it wouldn't be Anfield, Goodison Park or a combination, it would be whoever buys the naming rights - ie, if it was Adidas then Adidas Arena? Like with Bolton and The Reebok etc or Newcastle of The Sports Direct Arena. The big question mark would come when splitting the income from selling the naming rights. With all due respect to Everton, Liverpool is a bigger name / product and can command a bigger pot so, IMO, a 50:50 split wouldn't be fair on the reds.
