Billy Hogan, Managing Director of Fenway Sports Management, has told Bloomberg that Liverpool have yet to decide over whether a move to a new stadium at Stanley Park is the best option. They are still researching the naming rights issue which would accompany a new stadium:
“We see Liverpool as a truly global proposition from a marketing standpoint and a naming rights partnership with Liverpool Football Club is really unlike any other thing there is out there. It’s something we’ve seen some interest in and we’ll continue to have those conversations.”
Hogan also said that any final decision will “rest on which opportunity allows us to keep generating revenue to compete with the rest of our competition in the Premier League.”
Most believe that Fenway Sports Group favour staying at Anfield and redeveloping as they did with Fenway Park in Boston, but the decision over the stadium for Liverpool FC is quite rightly taking a long time because of the various financial considerations.
Greater Seating, greater corporate revenue, brand new facilities as well as the naming rights issue are all points that have to be considered. Many of these things could be included (except for naming rights) in the redevelopment of Anfield, but the crucial thing that Hogan mentions is that the option they choose must be able to generate revenues that can help the club compete with the rest of the Premier League.
Unlike in the MLB where there are rules and regulation which limit certain franchises becoming overly dominant, the Premier League is far different, and to compete with the likes of Manchester United and Arsenal in regards to match day revenues, the new stadium option has to be considered more seriously than it was for the Boston Red Sox. Match Day Revenues are one of the biggest areas where the Reds lose out to the traditional top four competition.
Manchester United (£100.2m) and Arsenal (£93.9m) currently take in over double what Liverpool (£42.9m) do on match days. Increased seating will help but it is the corporate boxes and conference rooms which are crucial. While Anfield only has 32 boxes, Arsenal has 150 and Man U has 200, and a redeveloped Anfield may only have up to 80, still half of the Reds closest rivals. To address this balance, a redeveloped Anfield may see FSG having to increase ticket prices; something they did at Fenway Park.
It’s a difficult decision to make as FSG are aware of the history of Anfield and what it means to the club. Financial and sporting reasons are in play but a decision may have to be made more quickly than anticipated. A 999 year lease option on Stanley Park expires next month, and some sort of decision of going forward with the new stadium may need to be made by then. They may also be able to negotiate with the Council to extend the time to take up the option but let’s wait and see what the next month brings.
Follow us on twitter @live4Liverpool or like us on Facebook
Live4Liverpool is recruiting columnists. For further info contact the site editor at live4liverpool@snack-media.com
This week it is LFC WAG Clio Zenden!
————–
CLICK ON THE IMAGE OR HERE TO GET TO THE GALLERY
The facts speak for themselves we need a NEW BIGGER STADIUM. If we had one we would be up there with Utd and Arsenal with match day sales figures, wouldn’t need to rely on our owners wealth as we would be bringing in a good amount of income to manage. The sooner its sorted the better, its gone on for far too long
I agree Zahid!
I personally would like a new stadium, but want to know what will happen
to anfield. I heard that the new stadium to be called Bill Shankly
would be a good idea despite the lucrative naming rights,
there are many other ways to use the auspices such as those put
in the stands (in the emirates stadium emirates fly there in ads
all the steps, which is very lucrative I suppose).
if anfield will be collapsed as Highbury Stadium, then I am opposed
outright. anfield has to be transformed into a museum where
build a new stadium or be re modeling.
Sorry John but I think that is a rather unrealistic option (even if I agree). A new stadium would need naming rights as it would probably pay 20% of the total cost of the stadium. In this day and age (i.e. – where business rules) it is the only way it can be done. Sad but true…
Why sad? We have to keep pace with the changing world; around 50-75mn is a lot of money, which can be reinvested into the squad or academy. The new stadium can be named as ******* Anfield, even at Stanly park. Personally, I wish to stay in a refurbished Anfield, but that structure is already 100 years old.
What ever, where ever, we need a stadium with 75K+, may be even 80K+ capacity with 150+ corporate boxes. Liverpool is one of the fastest growing city & once we start to stamp our authority back into EPL & Europe, even 80K capacity ‘ll not be sufficient.
I like the idea that they are taking there time because it shows they are thinking of every different possible scenario!
I really think the stadium needs to be around 60 – 70 k minimum and there is no use making Anfield only 55k as it will be a waste of time…
If they can re vamp Anfield to 60k minimum then i would suggest that!
Down Under is correct but I dont believe it can be done.
A new stadium will b a welcome option 4 me cuz of d revenues it will generate 2 make us compete with d likes of man u n arsenal in d premier league..YWNA